I think they are making a mistake. It makes absolutely no sense for the Jews - who mostly lived in Alexandria - to have went all the way down to modern Cairo (240 km).
Indeed I have never understood how all the reports from the tannaitic period - some clearly witnessing a functioning Jewish temple in Alexandria - which say that Jews were sacrificing on an altar in Alexandria and were working out whether or not this was a serious problem, could all be clueless about matters here.
The way scholars reconcile the differences between the rabbinic tradition and Josephus is by saying that the Tannaim 'meant' Egypt when they said Alexandria.
Why isn't it equally plausible that Josephus or later editors of Josephus's writings developed the claims about Heliopolis from Isaiah 19:18?
I mean even scholars who accept only Josephus's testimony understand what is at stake here. All we have to do is turn around the sentence in John Joseph Collins' work "[i]f Onias had wanted to set up a temple that would be a center for Egyptian Jewry and rival Jerusalem, he would have had to set it up in Alexandria."
Yes but that's the whole point isn't it. Our whole idea about 'what is Judaism' and 'what is Christianity' is based on a fairy tale-like simplicity involving ONLY the Jerusalem temple, the Jews and the claims of the Acts of the Apostles (where Christianity is seen as an offshoot of an acceptable form of monotheism connected with the Jewish temple).
In order to achieve this simplicity we have to ignore or demonize the Samaritan tradition and Alexandrian Judaism. Yet it is clear from Clement of Alexandria that he was very much dependent on the writings of Philo. Could there have been something more here that has never before been even considered?
We know that the Jewish temple in Egypt was not destroyed with the events of 70 CE. The rabbinic sources from the tannaitic period tell us that this building was still functioning in the second century.
So much for the simplicity of 'what is Jewish' and 'what is Christian' especially in Egypt.
And then when I look at the writings of Philo I can't help but feel that he was somehow involved with a temple like the one described as being present in Alexandria in the writings of our rabbinic sources.
Take this example from Philo's Second Book on the Special Laws. Scholars want to just 'make it conform' to the inherited idea that Philo was only loyal to the Jerusalem temple. In order for that to be true we would have to believe that all that is described here in his account of the Harvest Festival is going on in Jerusalem rather than in Philo's 'hometown' of Alexandria:
There is, besides all these, another Festival (Deut 26:1} sacred to God, and a solemn assembly on the day of the festival which they call castallus (= "a basket with a pointed bottom") from the event that takes place in it, as we shall show presently. Now that this festival is not in the same rank, nor of the same importance with the other festivals, is plain from many considerations. For, first of all, it is not one to be observed by the whole population of the nation as each of the others is. Secondly, none of the things that are brought or offered are laid upon the altar as holy, or committed to the unextinguishable and holy fire. Thirdly, the very number of days which are to be observed in the festival are not expressly stated.
Nevertheless, any one may easily see that it has about it some of the characteristics of a sacred festival, and that it comes very near to having the privileges of a solemn assembly. For every one of those men who had lands and possessions, having filled vessels with every different species of fruit borne by fruit-bearing trees; which vessels, as I have said before, are called castalli, brings with great joy the first fruits of his abundant crop into the temple, and standing in front of the altar gives the basket to the priest, uttering at the same time the very beautiful and admirable hymn prescribed for the occasion; and if he does not happen to remember it, he listens to it with all attention while the priest recites it.
And the hymn is as follows:--"The leaders of our nation renounced Syria, and migrated to Egypt. Being but few in number, they increased till they became a populous nation. Their descendants being oppressed in innumerable ways by the natives of the land, when no assistance did any longer appear to be expected from men, became the supplicants of God, having fled for refuge to entreat his assistance. Therefore he, who is merciful to all who are unjustly treated, having received their supplication, smote those who oppressed them with signs and wonders, and prodigies, and with all the marvellous works which he wrought at that time. And he delivered those who were being insulted and enduring every kind of perfidious oppression, not only leading them forth to freedom, but even giving them in addition a most fertile land; for it is from the fruits of this land, O bounteous God! that we now bring you the first fruits; if indeed it is a proper expression to say that he who receives them from you brings them to you. For, O Master! they are all your favours and your gifts, of which you have thought us worthy, and so enabled us to live comfortably and to rejoice in unexpected blessings which thou hast given to us, who did not expect them."
This hymn is sung from the beginning of summer to the end of autumn, by two choruses replying to one another uninterruptedly, on two separate occasions, each at the end of one complete half of ten years; because men cannot all at once bring the fruits of the seasons to God in accordance with his express command, but different men bring them at different seasons; and sometimes even the same persons bring first fruits from the same lands at different times; for since some fruits become ripe more speedily, and others more slowly, either on account of the differences of the situations in which they are grown, as being hotter or colder, or from innumerable other reasons, it follows that the time for offering the first fruits of such productions is undefined and uncertain, being extended over a great space. And the use of these first fruits is permitted to the priests, since they had no portion of the land themselves, and had no possessions from which they could derive revenue; but their inheritance is the first fruits from all the nation as the wages of their holy ministrations, which they perform day and night. [Special Laws II.34.215 - 37.223)
I know that a superficial reading of Philo will simply ascribe this entire description to the temple in Jerusalem owing to a lack of imagination on the part of most scholars but let's look a little closer at the evidence.
The first thing that stands out in the passage is the Greek terminology to describe the harvest festival. κάρταλλος is indeed a basket with a pointy bottom. Already the presence of a Greek name for a Jewish festival should raise eyebrows.
Yet the hymn sung by the priests which follows is the clear give away. Let's look at how Philo describes the hymn:
and if he does not happen to remember it, he listens to it with all attention while the priest recites it. And the hymn is as follows: The leaders of our nation renounced Syria, and migrated to Egypt. Being but few in number, they increased till they became a populous nation ...
The LXX reads:
And the priest shall take the basket out of thine hands and set it before the altar of the Lord thy God; and he shall answer and say before the Lord thy God, My father abandoned Syria, and went down into Egypt, and sojourned there with a small number, and became there a mighty nation and a great multitude ...
The Masoretic text reads 'Aramaean' rather than 'Syrian':
The priest shall take the basket from your hands and set it down in front of the altar of the LORD your God. 5 Then you shall declare before the LORD your God: "My father was a wandering Aramean, and he went down into Egypt with a few people and lived there and became a great nation, powerful and numerous ...
Philo is clearly citing THE EXACT HYMN that is sung in HIS temple during this festival. If the word was 'Aramaean' he would have said 'Aramaean.' I am sure with a little more investigation I could identify ALL the variants with Philo's LXX text.
But the thing which pushes my suspicions over the edge is the conclusion where Philo mentions the antiphonal singing during the psalm. There is absolutely no evidence of any such practice in the Jewish religion OUTSIDE OF Alexandria. However if we look at his account of the Therapeutae it seems to be a definitive characteristic of Alexandrian Judaism.
Could it be then that 'the temple' where Philo reports seeing the offering of the first fruits and the hymns taken from the LXX is a reference to an ALEXANDRIAN JEWISH TEMPLE? More to follow ...
