‫ הפולמוס הכיתתי בימי הבית השני על אודות מחצית השקל לאור ההלכה הקראית הקדומה

During the Second Temple period, three different interpretations were current for the pentateuchal commandment to offer a half-shekel to God, which was to serve as "atonement money" (Exod. 30:11-16). Oneviewpoint was that of the rabbinic sages. They ruled that the half-shekel donation was a commandment for the generations, to be performed yearly, with the donation slated for purchase of the animals for the daily burnt offering, which functioned as a communal sacrifice. A second viewpoint was the Sadducean one, attested in the scholium to the first date in Megillat Ta`anit. The Sadducees opposed the use of the half-shekel donation for public sacrifices, arguing that these should befunded by individual donations. In the third, Qumranic perspective, the half-shekel donation was seen as a commandment for all generations, but the requirement was that each male had to offer it only once in his lifetime, after age twenty (see 4Q159 [Ordinances a]).This paper focuses on aspects of early Karaite halakhah that shed lighton this ancient polemic. The Karaite sages were unanimous in theiropinion that the half-shekel commandment had no connection to the sacrifices. Based on his understanding of the biblical text as indicatingthat the Israelites in the wilderness paid the half-shekel only once in their lifetimes, the proto-Karaite Benjamin al-Nahawandi stipulated that, although the half-shekel donation was a commandment for thegenerations, Jewish males should pay this tax only once in their lifetimes, after reaching age twenty. Karaite and Muslim sources mention that Benjamin was influenced by the "caves sect", which was active in antiquity. With this in mind, the similarity between Benjamin's halakhah and Qumranic halakhah on the issue of the half-shekel is apparent and serves as but one example of the influence of Qumran sources on hishalakhic interpretations. Early Karaite circles that were influenced by Qumranic halakhah argued that, after leaving Mount Sinai, the Israelites did not offer sacrifices in the wilderness. It appears that the Qumranites also used this scriptural argumentation as a precedent for not offering sacrifices at theQumran site. Given that the Qumranites did not offer sacrifices at the Jerusalem Temple, this meant that, for them, the half-shekel donation for sacrifices would not have been an issue. Furthermore, like the Karaites at a later date, the Qumranites saw no connection between the half-shekel and sacrifices. Another halakhah of Benjamin al-Nahawandi is his determination that, until the building of the Solomonic Temple, the Israelites ate only "desired meat" (Deut. 12:20-23), which was slaughtered on the "altar of stone" (Exod. 20:25). This halakhah sheds light on the cult that was developed by the Qumranites as a substitute for sacrificial worship in the Jerusalem Temple.