l. 29, where, according to the Hebrew text, Ben-Sira speaks of those
who attended his _Yeshibah_, i.e. lecture-room or academy; there can be little doubt that Ben-Sira’s book (Ecclesiasticus) formed part of the instruction there given.[274] But as Ben-Sira speaks of the _Yeshibah_ as a well known institution we may be sure that others existed.
In one way or another, then, men became acquainted with and were influenced by the contents and teaching of “books”; and when a distinction had come to be made between “books” which were permitted and “books” which were forbidden, a strict vigilance was kept by the religious authorities in order to suppress unorthodox “books.” Among these unorthodox “books” there was one class which was regarded as very dangerous, and therefore strictly forbidden, viz. those which dealt with the subject of Apocalypse; to these some attention must next be devoted.
SUMMARY
The Hebrew root _gānaz_ and the Greek word _apokryphos_ must be properly understood if the subject of canonical and uncanonical books is to be discussed. Originally, _gānaz_ meant “to store up,” and then “to store up in secret,” thus “to hide,” and especially to hide secret wisdom from the masses; later, it came to have the technical sense, in reference to books, of “withdrawing from use.” The Talmudic use of the term is important; when there used in reference to books it means that such books, on account of their heretical teaching, must be withdrawn from public use; the word is never, in the Talmud, used of canonical books themselves nor of the books of our Apocrypha.
The Greek word _apokryphos_ had in its origin, as a technical term, a meaning somewhat similar to _gānaz_ in its early, though not in its later, connotation; it was used of books containing secret teaching only to be communicated to the initiated. _Apokryphos_ was, therefore, used first in a good sense; the “hidden” character of “apocryphal” books consisted in their being hidden from the outside world for which they were too good. But in its later usage _apokryphos_ also corresponded to the later usage of _gānaz_; both were used in reference to uncanonical books; but these books were not merely uncanonical, they were also heretical, namely those which we now include under the term “Pseudepigrapha”; neither term was originally used of the books of our Apocrypha.
It was not until the fourth century A.D., and in the Greek Church first, that a distinction began to be made between canonical books and books which, though not canonical, were nevertheless to be read for edification, i.e. the books of our Apocrypha. But even then the term “apocryphal” continued to be used only in reference to heretical books, and not to those of our Apocrypha.
The fundamental change in the use of the term apocryphal was brought about by St. Jerome; owing to the influx, during the fourth century, of a number of religious writings from the Eastern Church, many of which it was thought better to withhold from the faithful, St. Jerome drew a sharper distinction than had obtained hitherto in the West between the canonical and other writings; he now applied the term “apocryphal” to the books of our present Apocrypha, and though this new connotation of the term did not at once become general, it was by degrees adopted and has continued ever since.
There were many uncanonical books, in addition to the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha, the reading of which was not forbidden prior to the formation of the Canon; but later, all books outside the Canon, with the exception of some belonging to our Apocrypha, were forbidden; they were called books “that are without.” Many _data_ regarding the existence of books, apart from Scriptural ones, among the Jews in pre-Christian times are available; from these it is evident that there must have been much literary activity. As these books were varied in character and did not by any means necessarily always contain orthodox teaching, the fact of their existence illustrates the need of the discrimination which the Jewish religious authorities saw fit to exercise.