This comparison between the religious standpoint of the writer of Tobit and that of Ben-Sira shows that there is much affinity between the two, and leads to the conclusion that, in the main, though not in all respects, both belong to the same school of thought. We have seen that Ben-Sira represented the point of view of those who may be regarded as the precursors of what developed into the Sadducæan party after the Maccabæan struggle. The writer of the Book of Tobit approximates to this standpoint upon the whole, though in some respects he inclines to other directions. Loyalty to the Law and belief in Providence, as we have pointed out in another chapter, are not incompatible with the Sadducæan position; the prominent stress laid on almsgiving and its efficacy (iv. 10, xii. 9) does not differ from the teaching of Ben-Sira on the subject. In his universalistic attitude, though like Ben-Sira an ardent Israelite, the writer of Tobit follows in the teaching of the greatest prophets, and in this differs fundamentally from the standpoint of those who, later, developed into the party of the Pharisees. That there is no teaching on the resurrection in passages where one would justly look for it had such a doctrine been held, points in the same direction. On the other hand, the developed teaching on the transcendental character of God, the angelology and demonology, and the slight indications of the beginning of eschatological teaching, point away from the position indicated. This fact is full of interest as showing that prior to the Maccabæan struggle no hard and fast lines were drawn between different schools of thought, although definite tendencies were distinctly observable. We are inclined to see in the writer of the Book of Tobit a thinker whose natural tendency was to follow in the wake of the old conservative school, but who was not uninfluenced by the rising thought of the Apocalyptists (see xiii. 1-18, xiv. 3-7), and who felt that much of what was taught by the _Chassidim_ was of permanent value. In _Chassidism_ were contained the germs[387] of what before long developed into the Apocalyptic Movement and Pharisaism; as long as these only remained tendencies there was nothing fundamentally antagonistic in either, and in the writer of the Book of Tobit we see this exemplified. This helps us, by the way, to understand why we find later specifically apocalyptic _traits_ in Pharisaic teaching, and specifically Pharisaic _traits_ in Apocalyptic teaching; and this in spite of the pronounced antagonism which in course of time arose between the two. This fact is to be explained not so much on the assumption that one influenced the other, as that both descended from the same ancestor, viz. _Chassidism_. V. THE DATE OF THE BOOK, ITS INTEGRITY, AND PLACE OF ORIGIN