64 The coincidence of the name with the Arabic _masjid_, “place of bowing down,” mosque, is hardly a sufficient reason for suspecting Moslem influence, as Dr. Schechter does, who thinks it possible that the word was introduced by a later (Falasha?) scribe as a substitute for the original term.—Elia Bashiatzi (Adereth Eliahu, p. 58), a Karaite writer of the 15th century, gives _Beth hishtaḥawīya,_ together with _Beth hakeneseth_ and _Beth hamidrash_, as the three names of the place of worship. Moslem influence can here hardly be questioned; in a later chapter Elia describes the postures of prayer quite after the Moslem pattern, alleging Biblical authority for all of them. 65 The opinion that after Josiah’s reform, or after the restoration of the temple by Zerubbabel and Joshua, Jerusalem was the only place where Jewish sacrifices were offered is refuted by an accumulating volume of evidence from various regions. See D. S. Margoliouth, Expositor, 1911, pp. 40 ff. 66 Cf. the accusation against the orthodox Jews (5 6): “They defile the Sanctuary in that they do not separate according to the law,” etc.—It is possible that the prohibition quoted above applied, not to the inhabitants of the city, but to persons who visited it for the purpose of worship, as is the rule for pilgrims to Mecca. 67 The holy spirit in them. Dr. Schechter adduces parallels in Jewish writings. Cf. Jubilees 1 21, 23, “Create in them a clean heart and a holy spirit.” 68 Dr. Schechter conjectures that the author wrote _Sar ha-Panim_, the Prince of the Presence, but the passages from Jubilees which he quotes in support of this opinion are hardly convincing. 69 See Slavonic Enoch 42 5; cf. 9. 70 So far as may be argued from silence, this is an important difference from Jubilees. 71 See 7 2; cf. Slavonic Enoch 50 4: “When you might have vengeance, do not repay either your neighbor or your enemy. For God will repay as your avenger in the day of the great judgment. Let it not be for you to take vengeance.” (ed. Charles, p. 67); cf. Ecclus. 28 1. 72 That Zadok was the name of the “interpreter of the law,” the founder of the sect, is a much less probable opinion; the name stands in no connection with the origin of the sect or its legislation, but with the bringing to light again of the Pentateuch. The author cannot have supposed that the _written_ law remained unknown till the second century B.C.; the reforms of Josiah, based on another recovery of the book by Hilkiah, would preclude such a notion. 73 The coincidence of names does not count for very much. Abul-Fath names two Samaritan “Zadokite” subsects among the later Dositheans alone.