isaac m. wise - forgottenbooks.com · wandering jew, ’ and “paul a nd the ... the wise man....

Selected Writings

of

Isa a c M. Wise

W ITH

A B IOGRAPHY

BY THE ED ITORS

David Philipson and Louis Grossmann

Publ ished under the a uspices o f

THE ALUMNAL ASSOCIAT ION OF

THE -HEBREW UN-ION COLLEGE

C IN C INNAT I

THE ROBERT C LARKE COMPANY

1900

COPYR IGHT ,1900 ,

B Y THE ROB ERT CLARKE COMPANY.

PREFACE .

At a meeting of the Alumnal As socia tion of the

Hebrew Union College , held at Richmond , Va . ,in

the month of December,1898 ,

i t was resolved that

the alumni celebrate the eightieth birthday of their

teacher,the President of the Hebrew Union Col

lege,by publishing a volume of selections from his

writings . The task of editing the book was in

trusted to the two members of the alumni who are

resident in Cincinnati . They were also requested

to write a biography of the master as an introduc

tion to the volume .

It was hoped that the book would appear on the

day of the celebration ,March 14 ,

1899 . A number

of untoward circumstances,however

,prevented

this . In the meantime , the great leader has been

called to his eternal rest . This volume , therefore ,

assumes the form of a tribute to the memory of

their beloved teacher from his disciples , the gradu

ates oi the College .

The first part of the biography (pp . 1—58 ) is

from the pen of David Philipson,a nd Louis Gross

mann has written the second part (pp . 59— 1 1

( iii )

4 2 82 48

iv PREFACE .

The editors have the consent of Prof . Dr . M .

Mielziner to print his appreciation of Dr . Wise ’ s

li fe and work . They feel that this is the most

fitting close to the biography .

In makingtheir selections from the mass of materia l written by Dr . Wise during his long career

,

the editors have been guided by the purpose of giv

ing permanent form to such productions as contain

his characteri stic thoughts . Three of the papers

included,

“Moses,the Man a nd Statesman

,

” “The

Wandering Jew,

’ and “Paul a nd the Mystics .

”

were lectures delivered in various parts of thecountry ; the essay on The Law” was published

in “The Hebrew Review ,

” the organ of the Rab

binica l Literary Association ,now out of print . All

the remaining selections are taken from the columns

of “The American Israelite,the weekly paper

which Dr . Wise edited for over forty -five years .

The edi tors take this opportunity of thanking

their colleagues of the alumni for the confidence

shown them by intrusting them with the work of

preparing this volume,in which they have a t

tempted to include the leading thoughts of the man

who was the most potent factor in the history of

Judaism in America .

CINCINNAT I , May ,1 900 .

TABLE OF CONTENTS.

B IOGRAPHY.

Ances try,Ch ildhood a nd Youth

Ea rly Days in America— Jewish ConditionsThe Ra bbi of Alba nyThe First Movement for a Union of the Jewish Congregations of the United Sta tes

Cincinna ti 1854— 1855W ise a nd Reform .

W ise a nd the Ra bbin ica l ConferencesThe Union a nd th e Co l legeI sa a c M . W ise a s a n Author

I sa a c M . W ise a nd Congrega tion B ’ne Yeshurun

An Apprecia tion by Prof . Dr . M . Mielziner

LECTURES AND ESSAYS .

The Law .

Moses,the Ma n a nd Sta tesma n

The W a nder ing Jew

The Sources of the Theology of Juda ismThe Outl ines of Juda ismThe Apologetics of Juda ismAphor isms on Eth icsReformed Juda ism

TAB LE OF CONTENTS .

SELECTIONS .

UnionEstablishment of the Union of America n Hebrew Con

grega tions

The Congrega tionThe Ra bbiAn Appea l for a CollegeAddresses a t Opening of Hebrew Union Col lege , I

I I

Women a s Members of Congrega tionsLetter to a Gentlema n who with h is FamilyW ishes to

Embra ce Juda ism

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS .

I s a a c M . W ise (Aet . 60 ) FrontispieceI sa a c M . W ise (Aet . 35 ) Fa cing pa ge 54

Plum Street Temple 10 1

I sa a c M . W ise (Aet. 80 )

Hebrew Union Col lege

CHAPTER I .

ANCESTRY,CH ILDHOOD AND YOUTH.

It is well known that the medical profession ha snumbered many Jews in its ranks at all times . Upto the close of the eighteenth century

,i t wa s the

only higher calling open to the Jews of Europe,

excepting,of course

,the rabbinical and pedagogical

ofiices within Jewry itself . Therefore , the greatmedical schools

,especially those of southern Europe

,

counted numbers of Jews among the students . Oneof the most noted of these schools was that of Salerno in southern Italy . Among the students a t

tending there in the middle of the eighteenth century was a young man by the name of Leo

,who had

come all the way from western Bohemia . Uponfinish ing his studies he returned to his native land

,

and was called by his co- religionists,Doctor

,also

by its Hebrew equivalent,chakham

,the wise

man . This term was later germanized into Weis ,which became the family name . This Leo becameKurarzt at the famous watering place

,Marienbad ;

however,as no Jews were permitted to live there

,

he settled in the village Durmaul,near by

,but

practiced his profession in the health resort . H isson Isaiah followed in the father ’ s footsteps

,and

also adopted medicine as a profession he too wentto Italy to study

,not to Salerno however , but to

the nearer Padua . Upon his return to his nativeland he settled in Durmaul likewise ; he practiced

2 I SAAC M . W I SE .

his profession by day,but devoted his evenings to

studying the volumes of Hebrew lore . His sonLeo received Talmudical and rabbinical training atthe hands of the father and became a schoolmaster ;he settled in the village of Steingrub a nd performedthe duties that fell to the lot of the public religiousfunctionary of a small Jewish community in thosedays

,reading the prayers at the services

,teaching

the children,a nd the like .

Thisi

village of Steingrub lay on the Bohemian

Saxon-Bavarian frontier,being one mile distant

from the Saxon and three miles from the Bavarianline ; hence it was rather. cosmopolitan i f such aterm can be applied to so small a place ; the differentelements of the population

,Catholic and Jewish

,

German and Bohemian,lived on amicable terms .

Here on the thi rd day of Nisan ,corresponding with

the twenty-ninth day of March,in the year 18 19 ,

there was born to this schoolmaster,Leo Weis and

his wife Regina,their first son

,but second child

,

Isaac Mayer ; the couple h ad seven children , threesons and four daughters

,and was wretchedly poor

,

the father ’ s earnings scarcely sufiicing to provide

the bare necessaries of li fe .The father conducted a school for the Jewishchildren of the village in his house ; the child Isaacbegan to attend this school at the age of four ; hereceived private instruction from his father besides;when he was six years old he commenced the studyof the Talmud ; at the end of three years , increa s

ing cares prevented the father from giving the boy

that special attention which his talents merited , andhis eager thirst for knowledge required . He was

ANCESTRY ,CH ILDHOOD AND YOUTH . 3

now,at the age of nine , sent to his grandfather , the

Doctor Isaiah mentioned above . In the daytime hevisited the Jewish school or cheder ; here nothingbut the Talmud was studied day in

,day out , except

on Friday afternoon when the Pentateuch with theTargum or Aramaic translation and the commentaryof Rashi formed the theme of instr uction . At nighthi s grandfather instructed him in the Talmud andallied subj ects ; at ten the boy was invariably sentto bed

,but the grandfather sat up till midnight

poring over huge tomes . These midnight vigils

excited the boy ’ s curiosity , especially as he ha dnoted a large wooden box which was never opened inhis presence

,but from which he had seen his grand

father take books when the child was supposed tobe abed and asleep the mysterious box was meddledwith and one day yielded to manipulation ; i t wasfound to be filled with cabalistic works with themysticism of which the physician occupied himselfin the still hours of the night .When the boy was twelve years old his grandfather died . He was now thrown upon his own re

sources . His father was burdened with a large

family and was too poor to do anything for him . Hehad already determined upon a professional career .The great center of Jewish learning in Bohemia wasPrague

,the capital city ; Prague ha d long been a

Jewish metropolis,i t had a large Jewish population ,

many schools and synagogues and rabbis of note ;i t was the magnet that attracted the BohemianJewish youth who were desirous of receiving a

rabbinical education .

With his bundle in hi s hand and twenty-seven


kreutzer in his pocket the ambitious boy set out onthe long journey afoot ; on the way he stopped atthe town of Mies

,where dwelt a cousin who gave

him five florins,a nd in the city Of Pilsen he looked

up an uncle,an artillery officer

,who encouraged

him in his laudable undertaking and gave him tenflor ins as an earnest of his good will . As soon ashe arrived at the capital he attended the session ofthe Beth Hammidra sh >l< situated next door to thecelebrated synagogue

,the alt-neu-schul . 1

"

But how was he to obtain the means of subsistence ? Fortunately he ha d relations in the city whoshowed him frequent kindnesses . Rabbi B eza lel

Ronsperg,who had been dayan ]: in the Jewish

community of Prague before his death,was an

uncle of his mother ; his widow was still living ;she welcomed the boy to her house

,where he

took his meals occasionally . A fortunate circumstance which had a n unlikely beginning

,brought

him the patronage of a rich and l iberal manby the name of Moses Fischel . Like many richJews

,the ambition of this man was to have a

learned son - in - law . Therefore,when a certain

youth who was represented to be a young man ofgreat parts asked for the hand of his daughter

,the

consent was readily given . In such a case i t wasusually the custom that on the Sabbath afternoonpreceding the wedding

,the bridegroom gave an ex

ample Of his Talmudical learning a nd his casuistical

School .

TSee the a uthor ’s Old Europea n Jewr ies (Ph ila delph ia ,

p 104.

AN CESTRY, CH ILDHOOD AND YOUTH . 5

powers before an assembly invi ted for the purpose .

Young Wise and several companions in passingby a synagogue on a Sabbath afternoon and hearing the familiar accents expounding a Ta lmudi

cal subj ect , entered the building . In a Spirit ofyouthful exuberance they tried to confuse the

speaker by a number of questions . The groomwho was really an ignoramus

,but ha d learned his

lesson by rote , grew embarrassed , stammered andfinally was forced to acknowledge his inability toanswer the questions . Fischel

,chagrined beyond

measure,accosted the interrupters angri ly

,and

losing all self control boxed the ears of Wise,the

chief offender . The next morning,to the boy ’ s

great surprise,for he was but thirteen years of age

at the time,the rich

,respected

,influential Moses

Fischel called at h is lodging place and humblyapologized for his hasty action . So great was therespect of the Jews of those days for learning thatwhen Fischel

,upon inquiry

,discovered that these

youths were among the most promising students inthe Beth Hammidra sh

,he begged pardon for the

insult offered . The action speaks for itself and re

quires no commentary . The rich man insisted uponthe student ’ s becoming a frequent guest at his housefor meals and the generous sum of money that hefound invariably beneath his plate went far towardsenabling him to pursue his studies .He studied at the Beth Hammidra sh in Prague between two and three years . Only Hebrew lore wasimparted here . The youth was so fortunate , however

,as to form the acquaintance of Prof . Moses

Koref,a teacher of mathematics in the Normal


School Of Prague . Koref took a fancy to the keenwitted la d and offered to give him private instruc

tion in the evening,in arithmetic

,algebra , a nd

geometry . This was the first taste he had of non

Talmudical studies .From the Beth Hammidra sh he went to the yesh

ibah >l< of Rabbi Loeb Glogau,also known as Loeb

Schlesinger,the district rabbi (Kreisrabbiner) of

the Braun di strict ; he remained a year here .

Thereupon he attended,also for a year

,the main

rabbinical school of Prague,the yeshibah of Samuel

Freund,the rabbi of the SO-called Zigenner Schul ,

the greatest Talmudical scholar of his age .

The most celebrated yeshibah in Bohemia at thistime was that of Jenikau

,presided over by Rabbi

Aaron Kornfeld,a man of great learning and

wealth . This yeshibah had in 1835 , the year thatWise entered it

,one hundred a nd fifty scholars .

He remained here for two years,until the new gov

ernmenta l edict was issued in 1837 , to the efl'

ect

that no one could enter upon the rabbinical Officethereafter unless he ha d

‘taken the prescribedcourses at the gymnasium and university . The oldedict had been much more lenient

,and ha d required

only that the candidate should be declared to havesuffi cient rabbinical learning by a Beth Din ]

L com

posed Of acknowledged authorities in rabbinical lore .

One morning,shortly after the promulgation of the

new edict,Rabbi Aaron entered the yeshibah

,a nd

without uttering a word sat down upon the ground

High school Of Jewish lea rning .

TCourt Of lea rned men,usua l ly th ree in number a t lea st

,

AN CESTRY ,CH I LDHOOD AND YOUTH . 7

and acted as though mourning for some great a fii iction that had befallen him . The impression madeupon the assembled students was deep and painfulthey knew not what had occurred . After a time thevenerable rabbi arose and told them of the edict

,

saying that it dealt the death-blow to his yeshibah .

This proved to be the case the yeshiboth began to

decline from that time .

While at Jenikau,Wise received his first knowl

edge of German literature,a nd that from the most

unexpected source . The local rabbi of Jenikau wasRabbi Jonathan Altar

,a bitter opponent of Rabbi

Aaron Chorin,of Arad

,*one of the early reform

ers . Chorin was mercilessly persecuted by therabbis of the old school

,and by none more than by

Altar . This rabbi of Jenikau had two sons whohad studied at the university . They were infected,as were so many young ‘Jews of that period

,with

the belletristic spirit ; the German poets , Schiller ,Goethe

,Herder

,were the obj ects of their devotion

through these two young men,sons of the rabbi

,

Wise was introduced to the masterpieces of Germanliterature and . with their aid began the study ofpure German . They undertook privately a translation of the Ma chzor j

L wherein he assisted them .

Upon the announcement of the edict by RabbiAaron Kornfeld

,thirty of the students of the yeshi

bah,of whom Wise was one

,determined to go to

Prague to enter the university there . Before thiscould be done

,the examinations had to be passed .

See Leopo ld Loew,Gesammelte Scriften ,

I,25 1fi

'

.

1'The Hebrew Prayer Book .


None of these young men had ever attended the

gymnasium they were all nineteen years of age orover , too Old to enroll themselves as pupils of theopening class of the gymnasium . They received adispensation from the government excusing themfrom the gymnasium a nd permitting them to makethe examination for the university without havingattended the preparatory school . This meant closea nd severe private study in German

,Latin and

Greek . Besides,Wise acted as house tutor in the

home of Leopold Jerusalem . At the age of nineteen he passed successfully the examinations ofthree classes of the gymnasium .

His studies in Prague were now interrupted bythe untoward circumstance of the death of hispatron

,Jerusalem ; the boys who had been under

his charge were sent to school and Wise was com

pelled to look elsewhere for his livelihood . Notsucceeding in finding a similar position in Prague

,

he accepted a house- tutorship in the village of Grafenried

,in the family of Herman Bloch

,a merchant .

While here he formed a profitable acquaintanceshipwith an assistant of the Catholic priest of Wasser

suppen,a town near by . These two— the Jewish

and the Catholic students— met every evening,the

candidate for the priesthood giving the rabbinicalstudent lessons in Greek and receiving in returninstruction in Hebrew . At the end of a year anda half Wise returned to Prague with Joseph a nd

Edward Bloch,the sons of his Grafenried patron ,

in his care ; the boys were to attend school in themetropolis . Wise registered as a regular studentat the gymnasium

,and after an attendance of six

ANCESTRY ,CH I LDHOOD AND YOUTH . 9

months passed the examination of the fourth andfifth classes .He was now elected teacher by the Jewish community of Ronsperg on the recommendation ofSalomon Judah Rappaport

,the great scholar

,who

was rabbi in Prague at that time . True,according

to the law,no one could be appointed a teacher nu

less he had passed the examination for the univers ity but there being no Jews who had fulfilled thisrequirement

,Wise was given the commission by

the government,since he had successfully passed

the five classes of the gymnasium . He remainedat this post one year

,and then went to Pressburg

in Hungary,in order to make his final examination

at the gymnasium for entrance to the university .

The reason for this was that in Austria no onecould graduate from the gymnasium and receivematriculation papers for the university unless heactually attended the classes of the upper gymna

sium for a full year . In Hungary the law was notso strict ; after Six months ’ sojourn in Pressburghe passed his examination and Obtained the covetedmatriculation papers . While in the Hungarian

city he attended the yeshibah of the celebratedrabbi

,Moses Sopher .

Returning to Prague at the age of twenty-one,

he registered at the university,which he attended

for two years . He lived in the house of Rappaporthe gave instruction in various branches a nd copiedmusic for a living. At the end of two years hedetermined to go to Vienna to attend the universitythere . Fortified with letters from Rappaport

,

Samuel Freund,M . L . Landau , the editor of the

I O I SAAC M. W I SE .

Aruch >l< of Nathan of Rome,a nd several professors

Of the university , he made his way to the Austriancapital . Immediately upon arriving in the city hewent to the house of Isaac Noah Mannheimer

,the

celebrated Jewish preacher,who received him very

kindly and insisted upon his remaining at hi s houseuntil he found permanent quarters . He arrived inVienna in the year 1840 ,

and during his stay oftwo years in that city he dined every Saturday atthe house of Mannheimer and every Sunday at thehouse of the equally celebrated cantor

,Sulzer . A

few days after his arrival he registered at the university . While pursuing his studies there he wasteacher in the family of the wealthy Herr von

Werthheimstein,in whose palatial house he lodged .

While in Vienna he wrote several novels,one of

which,

“ Die Belagerung von Mailand,

” appeared inthe columns of the Bohemia

,a newspaper published

in Prague . At the end of the two years he travcled through Italy with youngWerthheimstein

,and

shortly thereafter made a second tour of that landas the companion and tutor of a young Christian

baron .

He returned to Prague,taking up his quarters as

before in the house of Rappaport . He now,at the

age of twenty - three,passed his rabbinical exam

ina tion before the Beth Din,composed of the Rabbis

Rappaport,Freund

,and Ephraim Loeb Teweles ,

who conferred the Morenu ]L upon him . He was

well equipped for his work in life ; he had received

A Ta lmudica l dictiona ry.

1‘ The ra bbinica l title .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

I 2 I SAAC M . W I SE .

special service should be held on the birthday ofthe Emperor Ferdinand . Police spies were sent tothe ; synagogue . Instead of preaching a fulsomea nd flattering sermon

,the young rabbi merely

stated that this was the birthday of the emperor,

and then proceeded to give vent to some radicalutterances . He was summoned before the Kreishauptmann ( the governor of the district) in Pilsen ,the seat of government . This functionary accostedhim with the words

,Is he not a loyal citizen ?

The question remained unanswered . The questionwas repeated twice as before , no answer was forthcoming . Finally the rabbi said

,

“Whom are you

addressing ? I am not a His boldness wasnot punished the officer addressed him now in thesecond person and he gave satisfactory proofs of

his loyalty .

Another cause of friction with the governmentarose from the fact that the young rabbi marriedall Jewish couples who applied to him

,even though

they did not possess the familia ntrecht .

” In BO

hemia,as in someother countries of Europe

,the in

human law was in force to the effect that only a cer

tain number of Jewish families could dwell in a

town . Those who enjoyed this privilege possessed

What was known as the familia ntrecht,

” the au

thoriza tion to found a household . Hence,i f a young

man wished to marry he had to wait until a vacancy

was created by the death of a holder Of this privilege . There were always a great number on the

waiting list to receive the authorization . Many ,however

,did not wait

,but married according to

AN CESTRY,CH ILDHOOD AND YOUTH . 13

Jewish The marriages were not recognizedby the state ; the wives ha d to be registered ascooks and housekeepers

,and the children of these

unions were illegitima te’

in the eyes of the law .

Wise,being a governmental functionary

,committed

a misdemeanor ( in truth ,i t was a penal offense) in

marrying such couples as had not the authorization .

Summoned before the district governor at Pilsen,

he declaimed against the iniquity of that regulation

,and declared that he would continue to marry

those people,and would rather go to prison than

refuse to do so . He was summoned to Prague before Count F

'

urstenberg,a member of the imperial

council and the referee for Jewish affairs,who

questioned him a nd asked,among other things

,

why the Jews had so many illegi timate children .

The rabbi explained to him the iniquitous regulation . The count promised to direct his efforts toward having it repealed ; and in truth shortlythereafter the barbarous

“

restriction disappeared

from the statute books .

He also came into confl ict with his rabbinical superior. BohemiaWa s divided into twelve districts

,

each of which was presided over by a district rabbi,

The local rabbis ha d to Obtain permission from himto perform any local function

,such as officiating at

marriages,funerals and the like . The rabbi of

Radnitz did not ask for this permission,but did not

come into open confl ict with his superior until

he granted a divorce to a woman , a relation of

See Kompert’s touch ing ta le

,

“Ohne Bewill igung,

” in

Gesammete Sch r iften ,I,238 .


the district rabbi , Abraham Kafka , who for somepersonal reason had refused to give the bill of divorce . The district rabbi summoned him before

the district court,but Wise wa s acquitted . This

rabbi now sought to make matters as unpleasant aspossible . Wise had published a small hymn andprayer-book ; he had omitted a prayer for the em

peror ; this was made the basis for another summons before the district court .Because of all this unpleasantness

,and on a c

count of political chi canery,he determined to leave

the country . His ideas were radical . He felt,too

,

that he would be hampered in teaching and preaching Judaism as he conceived it . He had attended asa visitor

,not as a delegate

,the rabbinical conference

at Frankfort in 1844 ,and he returned to his post

with strong sympathies a nd predilections for thereform movement ; furthermore , his political leanings were all toward democracy . He had pickedup in a book store in Prague several volumes of theFederal Farmer

,an American publication ; he had

also read Fenimore Cooper ’ s novels in the originalhe had a fair knowledge of the English language .

His eyes 'were directed toward the Uniied States ,the land where he could indul ge his democraticsympathies and livein a free religious atmosphere .

At the time he was contemplating this step a friendtried to induce him to goWith him to France , as thatcountry was the freest in Europe . France

,how

ever,was not far enough advanced for him

,nothing

but the United States would satisfy him ;“ I had

the American fever,

” as he once expressed himselfto the writer . When he had made all his prepara

AN CESTRY ,CH I LDHOOD AND YOUTH . I S

tions to leave,he applied for a passport to Count

Furstenberg,which this ofli cia l refused with the

remark,Do you think we opened schools for you

to take your learning to America ?” Nothing wasleft for him to do but to attempt to leave withoutthe passport . He succeeded in crossing the frontierinto Saxony at Leipzig he found a well- intentioned

Officer who supplied him with the necessary papers .While in Leipzig he sought out the noted schola rs

there . Once , when in the company of BertholdAuerbach

,Julius Fuerst and Franz Delitzsch

,the

conversation turned on Austrian affairs . A movement was then on foot to erect a statue in Viennato Joseph II .

,the liberal-minded emperor who had

been the first ruler of Europe to take steps towardthe emancipation of the Jews . Turning to Auerbach

,Fuerst asked : Dr . Auerbach ,

what Biblical

verse would you suggest for this statue ?” ! uickas a flash Auerbach answered “ Joseph recognized

hi s brethren but they did not know him ”

(Gen .

xlii i,

Instead of proceeding directly to Bremen,where

he was to embark for New York,the young rabbi

spent several weeks traveling in Germany,chiefly

with the Obj ect of meeting some of the men prominent in Jewish life . In Breslau he met AbrahamGeiger

,the foremost Jewish reformer ; in Ma gde

burg he spent some time with Ludwig Phil ippson ,

perhaps the most widely known Jew in Germanyowing to his organ

,

“ Die Allgemeine Zeitung desJudenthums in Frankfort he associated withLeopold Stein

,the poet rabbi ; in Berlin with

Sachs , the eloquent preacher ; there he also met


Bernstein,Stern

,and the other leaders of the re

form movement which was j ust then agitating Berlin and culminated in the formation of the Juedische Reformgeminde in 1847

Several days before the Feast of Weeks he arrived a t Bremerhaven . While there he was re

quested to preach on the holiday at B remerle,a

town near by . A day later he set sail for thepromised land

,and after a voyage of sixty-three

days landed in New York on the 2 3d day of July ,1846 , with his wife and chi ld . He set foot uponthis soil animated by high ideals and aspirations .The germs of greatness lay within him

,i t required

only the occasion to develop them ; the conditions

of Jewish life in the United States offered the oppor

tunity— he rose to it . The man and the opportu

nity met,and the man has so impressed his person

ality upon the development of Jewish li fe duringthe past half century

,that without detracting from

the fame rightfully attaching to any of the othergreat leaders

,i t may indeed be said that he stands

easily first among American Jews for what he hasaccomplished . Per a spem d a

’a stra ; the difficulties

were many,but he triumphed ; he aspired and he

achieved . The following pages will attempt to recount briefly the story of thi s ’ aspiration and this

achievement .

EARLY DAYS IN AMERI CA . 17

CHAPTER I I .

EARLY DAYS IN AMERI CA— JEW ISH COND ITIONS .

In the years 1874—75 the subj ect of this Sketch

published a series of interesting reminiscences ofhis early li fe in America in the columns of hisnewspaper

,

“ Die Deborah . The writer has been

compelled to draw upon these reminiscences occa

s iona lly,for in them the thoughts and plans of the

newly-arrived rabbi are indicated clearly . What

his expectations in comi ng to America were isgraphically outlined in a vivid description of adream that he dreamt shortly before his arrival

,

and to which he has often referred in later years assymbolical Of the hopes he harbored . It is given

here in his own words,as a fitting introduction to

the tale of his future struggles .

“ On the 2 oth of July the captain informed methat wewere about fifty miles out at sea oppositeBoston

,and that i f the wind continued favorable

we would be in New York ere long . It was late atnight when he imparted this information . I wassitting solitary and alone

,and surrendered myself

entirely to my emotions . How foolish and daringit is

,thought I

,to have left home

,friends

,position

and future prospects,to emigrate to a strange land

,

without means or expectat ions ! My imaginationnow played upon the possibilities hidden in the lapof the veiled future . While meditating , I dropped


ofI to Sleep a nd dreamed the following unforgetta

ble dream“ I dreamed that a great storm

,which drove the

Ship toward the land,had arisen . Every one trem

bled,feared

,prayed ; the inky waves rose moun

tain high and broke into seething masses,only to

give way to other watery heights . Convulsively Iembraced wife a nd child and spoke words of calmand comfort . It then appeared to me as though ahigh

,steep

,rocky mountain hurried toward us and

threatened to crush us . ‘Here we must land,or

we Sink,

’ cried the captain,with quaking voice .

Scarcely had these words been uttered,ere the ribs

of the ship,which had been hurled on the rock

,

cracked . I took a daring leap and stood on therock with wife and child . The ocean still roared ;a wave seized the ship a nd cast it far out into theseething waters ; in a few moments it was swa l

lowed up in the night and disappeared from my

gaze . So then , here we were on a rugged rock atour feet the waters

,agitated by the wild storm

,

raged ; above a nd about us rose forbidding rocks ,While the darkness added i ts terrors . Finally , after

a long interval,morning dawned

,and revealed the

dangerous situation .

‘However steep this mountain appears

,we must ascend it

,

’ said I to my wife .

I took my child in one arm,tremblingly my wife

clung to the other,and then

,

‘ forward,in God ’ s

name .

’ It seemed to me as though an inner voicecalled : Up

,up ; above there is help .

’ Withdifliculty we clambered from rock to rock , higherand higher

,constantly

,untiringly . Then , as though

the measure of woes was not yet full,hollow-eyed

,

2 0 I SAAC M . W I SE .

smaller numbers in various cities . There was asmall native element

,whose ancestors had come to

the country during the preceding century or earl ier .These consti tuted the so-call ed Portuguese Jews

,

and were considered the aristocracy of Jewry .

They had formed congregations in Newport,New

York,Philadelphia

,Richmond

,Charleston

,Savan

nah and New Orleans,and worshiped according to

the Sephardic ritual . These American-born Jewswere for the most part highly cultivated

,a nd held

themselves aloof from their brethren in faith who

had lately emigrated to the country from Germany,

Poland,a nd other European lands . The great Ger

man immigration dated from about the year 1 830 .

The Jews who came to America from Europeemanated mostly from small towns and villages ,where they had lived the cramped and oppressedlife to which the Jews were subj ected everywhere .

Naturally,the great maj ority settled in the cities

on the eastern seaboard,although a considerable

number had drifted westward even during the early

years,SO that in the fifth decade of the century

there were larger or smaller communities in Albany,

Syracuse,Buffalo

,Rochester

,Pittsburg

,Cleveland

,

Cincinnati,Louisville

,Chicago

,St . Louis and other

places . The animating hope that lured these pio

neers of the Jewish communities was an improvement of their material condition . America meantfor them opportunity . There was an outlook forbetter things

,as far as worldly fortunes went . But

as regards religious matters,they merely trans

planted the expression Of Judaism as they had

known it at home,and continued here the local

EARLY DAYS I N AMER I CA . 2 1

German or Polish customs . When congregationswere formed— a nd to the credi t Of the early Jewishsettlers be it said that as soon as a sufficient number ha d gathered in any place

,they associated

themselves into a congregation for religious worship— these were organized on traditional lines .The same abuses that ha d led to the inaugurationof reform in Germany

,existed here .

In 1 846 Jewish religious life in America was notsuch as to fill the breast of the new-comer wi th highhopes . Wh en he entered the synagogue there wasthat same indecorum with which he had been buttoo familiar abroad . Faint beginnings there were

of reform ; the congregation of Charleston , S . C. ,

h a d taken the first steps,and beside this there were

two small congregations that had been organized asreformed congregations— the Har Sinai

,of Balti

more,in 1842 ,

and the Emanuel,of New York

,

in 1844 . But with these exceptions,orthodoxy

held complete sway . There were but - few men

of light and leading at the head of the congregations

,of which there were not yet very many . The

metropolis had nine ; Philadelphia three , a nd Baltim ore three . There were about twenty-five othersfrom Boston in the East to Cincinnati in the.West

,

from Cleveland in the North to New Orleans in theSouth . There was no communal Spirit among theJews whatsoever . They h ad no public institutionsbeside their synagogues . The public religious in

struction of the young was almost entirely neglected . In 1838 Rebecca Gratz had organized in

the city Of Philadelphia the first religious school,


or Sunday-school , as it was called ; in the yearwhereof we write there were Jewish schools in butseven cities of the country

, viz in NewYork, Phila

delphia,Baltimore

,Richmond

,Charleston

,Albany

,

a nd Cincinnati . There was but one Jewish publication

,The Occident

,edited by Rev . Isaac Lesser

,Of

Philadelphia . The first Jewish Publication Society,

organized in Philadelphia in 1 845 ,was maintaining

its existence with great difli culty. The prospectsdid not appear very bright . But the man whose indomitable energy was to change all this ha d arrivedupon the scene

,a nd i t was not long ere the enliven

ing eflect Of a real leader made itsel f felt a nd a newchapter in the history of Judaism in America wasopened .

The feeling that dominated the young immigrantduring the early days of his soj ourn in New Yorkwas that now he was a free man

,and no longer a

Bohemian S /zutz -j ude. He was fully appreciativeof the change

,and gloried in the opportunity for

free development . In Europe he had experiencedall the petty restrictions

,the intolerable interfer

ences,of government in the a fl a irs of religion and

conscience not one step,be it ever so trivial

,could

be taken at variance with the established order ofthings

,unless some functionary was at hand to call

the daring innovator to account . The position ofthe Jew a nd Judaism was particularly annoying to

a man of independent spirit ; the mediaeval conditions still held sway ; the Jew was only tolerated ,

or worse Judaism itself,in the Austrian communi

ties,ha d lost all creative vigor . What bliss a man

Of Wise ’ s temperament must have experienced at

EARLY DAYS IN AMER I CA . 2 3

the change can be imagined . No impertinent interference any longer on the part of government in re

ligious a fIa irs ; complete separation of church andstate ; one religion equal to every other before thelaw . I f there was much in the status of Judaismitself that was di sheartening

,i f he found but little

improvement in Jewish conditions,i f he was disil

lusionized in his hope of meeting with a progressiveSpirit among his co-religionists

,he conso led himself

with the thought that all this was voluntary,that

the state did not compel these things,and that

changes could be wrought from within i f desired,

without fear of prohibitions emana ting from thecivil power . He breathed the atmosphere of freedom ; he was in a blessed land where he restedunder no disability because he was a Jew ; he wasat liberty to work out his own future as his powersenabled him

,and so

,God willing

,he would .

He had come to the New World with a numberof letters of introduction in his possession . Thefirst that he delivered were addressed to two Jewishphysicians . When in the course of conversationthey learned that he intended to follow the rabbinical calling

,they advised him strongly against it .

They pictured the affairs of the synagogue in darkcolors ; they described their co-religionists in anybut flattering terms

,and counseled him to have

nothing to do with them,but to devote himself to

peddling or to learning a trade . Thoroughly disheartened by this pessimistic portrayal

,he returned

to his lodgings,looked through his remaining let

ters,and determined to present but one other , and

that to a man whom he felt was able to advise h im


intell igently . The relationship between him andDr . Max Li lienthal was so close during the nextthirty-five years , up to the very day of the latter

’ sdeath in 1 88 2

,that the occasion of their first meet

ing is of more than ordinary interest . Dr . Lilienthal had arrived in New York in 1845 from Russia ,where he had labored in the cause of the education

of the Jews Of that empire . He was the first German r abbi who had enjoyed a university educationto come to this country . At this time there werethree German Jewish congregations in New YorkCity

,beside the Emmanuel congregation already

mentioned . These three congregations had , shortly

after his arrival,elected Dr . Lilienthal as their

rabbi,with the understanding that he was to preach

in a different synagogue each Sabbath . Of all people in New York

,this man was

,without doubt

,best

acquainted with Jewish religious affairs . His coun

sel ha d best be sought . “ In the morning I wentto Eldridge street

,stopped at a small house and

rang the bell timidly . A man.

in a dressing-gown,

with a black velvet cap on his head,opened the

door .‘I would like to speak to Dr . Li lienthal . ’

I am he ; step in .

’

We stepped into the back room which was hislibrary .

‘I came from Bohemia ; here is a letterfrom Dr . W .

— your school friend,and here are

some of my papers . ’ Dr . Lilienthal read the letter

a nd the first Of the twelve papers I had given him

when he went to the door and called .

‘Wife , bringcoffee and cigars . I have received a guest turningto me he gave me a friendly and hearty Shalom

EARLY DAYS IN AMER I CA . 25

Alechem .

‘Hold up your head ! courage ! ’ cried

he,

‘you are the man,we need you .

’

J Thus began the intimacy that lasted through somany years . Lilienthal spoke the first encouragingwords to the aspiring young idealist

,and strange to

say their labors were intertwined ever after . A briefdigression will be pardoned here to Sketch hurriedlytheir united and reciprocal working . As will berecounted shortly

,Wise ’ 5 first opportunity for public

service wa s'

owing to Lilienthal . And on the otherhand when the latter temporarily abandoned therabbinical profession to devote himself entirely to

the education of the young,i t was Wise who

,hav

ing assumed charge of the B ’

ne Jeshurun congregation in Cincinnati in 1854 , advised the B

’

ne Israel

congregation of that same city to call Dr. Lilienthal to their pulpit ; in 1855 Lilienthal arrived inCincinnati and for the ensuing twenty-seven yearsthe two great Jewish leaders toil

'

ed hand in hand .

As co-edi tors of the Israelite and Deborah in theearly years they lent their high gi fts to the instruction of the people . Wise was seconded and supported earnestly by Lilienthal in his untiring eflorts

at bringing about the Union of American HebrewCongregations and founding the Hebrew Union College . Both devoted their talents a nd gave theirservices to the college without stint in the strug

gling years of infancy . In all good works for Judaism and humanity they were a t one . And who

,

that was presen t at the service held in memory ofMax Lil ienthal can ever forget the pathetic incident

Reminiscences , Debora h , Vol . XXVI I I . ,NO . 2 .

26 I SAAC M . W ISE .

tha t took place when in speaking of his friend,

Isaac M. Wise could scarcely proceed,and

,with

stifled voice and streaming eye,struggled with his

emotions . This beauti ful friendship will ever standin the annals of Judaism in America as a noble expression of intertwined efl

’ort in the common cause

of religious progress,educational eflort and com

muna l labors . It is a precious memory to be cherished forever .But now to the interrupted thread of our story .

Much cheered by Lil ientha l ’ s friendl y reception and

encouraged.

by his advice,Wise determined to take

up the work for which he had prepared himself.In hi s visi t to the synagogue he saw and heardmuch that dissatisfied him ; the ignorance of Jewishlore on the part of men who posed as leaders wasappa l ling but for all that his choice was made

,his

work in life marked out . The first public function

he performed in this country was the dedication ofthe synagogue at New Haven . Dr . Lilientha l hadbeen requested to come

,but being unable to respond

to the invitation,he asked Wise whether he wished

to go in his place . The Ofler was most welcome .

Upon his return Lili enthal informed him that,i f he

so desired,he could go to Syracuse on a similar

mission ; the new synagogue there was to be dedi

ca ted on the Frida y preceding Rosh Ha shana . On

his j ourney to Syracuse he stopped at Albany overthe Sabbath and preached there the officers of the

congregation asked him to return to oflicia te duringthe holidays . This he did and made so profoundan impression on the congregation by his sermon on

the New Year ’s Day that he was informed that i f

2 8 ISAAC M. WI SE .

CHAPTER III .

THE RABBI OF ALBANY .

The eight years of Isaac M . Wise ’ s ministration in Albany may be Considered the crucial periodof his existence . It wa s during this time that heconceived the proj ects which he carried to suchsuccessful issue later . But it was also his stormand stress period . Time and again he was beset

by doubts as to whether he should continue in thework . The Obstacles were so many

,the diffi culties

SO great . Friends importuned him frequently todevote his talents to a more grateful field ; at onetime he was asked by William H . Seward whetherhe would not accept a chair in a college of which hewas trustee : again ,

through the recommendationof friends

,he was oflered a position in the Library

of Congress by President Fillmore,and again he was

strongly advised to enter the legal profession . Butthe doubts passed and despite obstacle and difli

culty he remained true to the cause in which he had

enlisted .

When he came to Albany he found afla irs in achaotic condition

,as they were everywhere . Two

thirds of all the Israelites of Albany and of Americabefore 1848 were uneducated and uncultured . TheirJudaism consisted in a number of inherited customsand Observances ; the less these were understoodthe holier were they considered . Everyone made

THE RABB I OF ALBANY . 9

things as easy a nd as convenient as possible inpractice people did not Observe the Sabbath ,

theyate Trefa and did not lay T ’

fill in Taway from home ,but at home and in the synagogue everything hadto be conducted in the most orthodox fashion

,z'

. e. ,

in the manner in which everyone had seen it in hisearly home . Moreover the people came from alllands

,everyone had his ownMinhagim i and every

one wanted to have these Minhagim observed genera lly.

”Hence arose a Babel-like Hewent to work earnestly to eflect changes for thebetter . The great part that he was to play inAmerican Jewish education began with the schoolwhich he established immediately upon coming toAlbany in the fall Of 1846 . He took steps also toimprove the public service and to remove the abusesthat had crept into it . He induced the congregation to introduce a mixed choir at once . The

Jewish prayer book had become over-burdenedwith liturgical poetry

,much of which was meaning

;less accretion

,and did not aid in fostering the spirit

of devotion . The rabbi began his reform of the

services by excising the piutim ,kinnoth and se

liehoth § from the ritual . The disorder attendantupon the sale of mitzwoth fl soon became a memoryowing to his energetic activity .

Forbidden food. TThe phyla cteries . I Customs .

Deborah,Vol . XXI I I

, ,NO

, 9 , p . 2 .

! Liturgica l poems,lamenta tions a nd suppl ica tions .

TIThe custom used to be genera l in Jewish houses of Wor~

sh ip,a nd stil l holds in orthodox synagogues , to sell to the

h ighest bidder certa in rel igious functions connected withthe public worship .

30 ISAAC M . W I SE .

Although this was individual work in an individual congregation yet it was part of a larger planwhich he was maturing in conj unction with a fewother kindred spirits . This plan had been suggestedby Dr . Lilienthal . It was the establishment of aBeth Din

,an advisory council for the congregations

of the country without hierarchical assumption .

Lilienthal had advocated the measure in a sermon in1846 ; he had named Wise ,

-Felsenheld and Kohlmeyer as the members of the Beth Din

,at the head

of which Lilienthal himself was to stand . It wasthe first attempt at co-operation in the history Of

Judaism in America . The preliminary work to be

done by the Beth Din was -the preparation of booksfor use in school a nd synagogue . Lilienthal undertook the preparation of a Jewish history for use inschools ; Felsenheld ,

the catechism ; Kohlmeyer , aHebrew grammar

,and Wise was appointed to re

vise the ritual and present a plan for a MinhagAmerica . This was in line with his practicallabors in his congregation during that winter . TheBeth Din was to meet in the spring of 1847 , after

Passover,when each member was to s ubmit his

work . Wise went to New York with his manuscript prepared . In the published report of the

meeting it is stated that “Rabbi Wise proposed a

Minhag America for divine service . He had beencharged with such a work because experience

teaches that in most places di fferent congregations

are set up,and the strength of the Israelites is di

vided because every emigrant brings his own Minhag from hi s home

,and the German will not give

way to the Polish,nor he to the English

,nor the

THE RABB I OF ALBANY. 3 1

latter to the Portuguese Jew . Such a cause fordissension would be obviated by a Minhag America ,which would promote the harmonious developmentof the young congregations . The proj ect of theMinh ag as introduced by Dr . Wise treats of the

Tefillah according to the DIN ,upon scientific prin

ciples and the demands of the times , and showsplainly that the new Minhag must be based onthose three pillars to be entirelyHe read his manuscript to the meeting

,and a

resolution to lay the matter over till the next meet

ing in order to give the other members time to consider the suggestions was passed . However

,no

other meeting of the Beth Din was held,and the

plan of a Minhag America , a union prayer-book forall the congregations of the country slumbereduntil it was revived nine years later at the Cleve

land Rabbinical Conference . The suggestion madeat this meeting in 1847 found its triumphant reali

za tion in the adoption of the Union Prayer-Book bythe Central Conference of America n Rabbis in 1894 ,

well nigh half a century after it was first broached .

Much disappointed at the fact that the Beth Dindid not take active steps toward fulfilling hischerished ideas

,he returned to Albany and ex

pounded his thoughts on the ritual in a circle offriends . One of these sent a communication embodying these ideas to Isaac Leeser

,the editor of

the Occident , Leeser published the communication

with notesrj‘ This is worthy of record because i t

was the first encounter between the men who repre

Occident , Vol . V. 1 10 . TOccident , Vol . V ,106

,158 .

32 ISAAC M . WISE .

Sented the two wings of J ewish thought . Leeserwas the leader of the orthodox party ; Wise wasthe rising protagonist of progressive Judaism . Thecommunication stated that Wise held that “ wehave no reason to pray for the restoration . of thesacrifices

,wherefore all prayers having allusion to

such a restoration ought to have no place in ourliturgy .

” Leeser annotated this remark wi th thestatement we must emphatically obj ect to anysuch form of prayer

,which

,as proposed by Dr .

Wise,should exclude the petitions for the rebuild

ing of the temple and the re-establishment of the

A private correspondence followed , butthere was no further public discussion of thematter.Our rabbi ’ s first public appearance before the general community a s a defender of Judaism was verydramatic . The societies for the conversion of theJews were very active . The English society had

its agents in all parts of this country . The - Jew ,

even as is the case to-day,was considered a fit sub

ject for conversion ,as though he were heathen .

Throughout his long career Dr . Wise has exposed

at every turn the methods of the convers ionists ,

a nd he permitted no opportunity of expressing hisopinion on the subj ect to pass . He performed incal

culable service in exposing the rascals who haveadopted Christianity for revenue only

,and have

made dupes of pious Christians . At the timewhereof we are writing the conversionist craze waspart icularly rampant . A society known as the

Occident, Vol . V ,158 .


American Society for the Melioration of the Condition of the Jews ,

” had been formed with the express purpose of bringing them to Christianity .

The editor of The Occident had found it expedientand necessary to publish Diaz ’ Lettersf l< a series ofletters considering from a Jewish standpoint the

claim of the Christians that their faith was superior to Judaism . All this was extremely humiliating the Jew was regarded as an inferior creature

,

in need of the light of Christianity for his guidanceand salvation . The convers ionists were active inevery community

,and Dr . Wise had not been in

Albany very long before the opportunity arose todeal them a telling blow .

One morning a notice appeared in the AlbanyArgus to the effect that “ The Rev . Rabbi Cohn ,from Jerusalem

,a missionary of the London Soci

ety for the Improvement of the Condition of theJews

,will speak this evening in Dr . Wykoff ’ s

church,for the purpose of forming a branch organ

iza tion for this gr eat and holy purpose . The lower

floor will be reserved exclusively for the clergy,the

church officers and their ladies . The general pub

lic will be accommodated with seats in the gallery .

The rabbi attended the meeting . The pastor of the

church opened the exercises,speaking in the usual

stock phrases of the pitiable condition of the Jews,

and the great need there was of missionary workamong them He was about to introduce the missiona ry when the rabbi arose and asked for the

*Occident, I . 145 , 196 , 296 , 393 , 444 ,605 ; 300 , 343.

359, 491 , 598 ; 10 2 , 149, 20 2 ; IV. 46, 100 . 350 .


floor . This could not be refused him . It was thefirst time that a Jew had spoken before a Christianpublic on that subj ect . The large congregation

,

not prepared for this unexpected episode,were all

attention .

“ I surrendered myself completely to my emotions ,

” he wrote later in describing the incident ;I analyzed the subj ect from the moral standpoint

I chastised with all the powers at my command thecovetous affectation and the hypocritical SympathyOf piety I refused determinedly all monetary support for the Jews

,because we ourselves provide

for our poor,our widows and orphans

,etc . ,

and

rear our children ; there are no robbers , streetwalkers nor gamblers among us we need no help

,

and accept none . I had determined to treat the

subj ect also from the theological standpoint,but the

repeated applause from the gallery convinced me

that this was not necessary . I contented myselfwith stating that the Jew could be converted toChristianity neither by gold nor persuasion

,neither

by force nor persecution ; but that I considered itunnecessa ry to do so at any k ngth at present .

I then moved that the meeting adjourn s ine

die.

This was done,and never again during his stay

in Albany were active propaganda made towardthis end . He had met the convers ionists on theirown ground and routed . them . This was the be

ginning of his public servi ce for his co-religionists .

H is voice and pen have never failed when there

Reminiscences , ” Debora h ,Vol . XXI I I , NO. 8 .


of the Bible upon which he was then at work ;from both these men he received interesting in

formation about Dr . J . M . Rapha ll , who had ar

rived from Birmingham,England

,in October

,1849 ,

and had taken charge of the B ’

ne Jeshumen con

grega tion ,New York . Rapha ll had achieved a

reputation both as writer and speaker he had pub

lished a work on the history of the Jews , and haddelivered lectures on Hebrew poetry . Wise had

not yet met him,but an interesting encounter be

tween the two men was to take place during thistrip . From Phi ladelphia the Albany rabbi continued his j ourney to Washington , where he met

his friend,William H . Seward , Daniel Webster and

other men of national prominence . Seward took

him to the White House to meet the President,

General Taylor,which visit was promptly announced

by the newspapers under the caption,The First

Rabbi to Visit a President . ” He remai ned inWashington eight days . It was there that Seward

offered to use his good ofl‘ices in procuring him a

chair in the college of which he was trustee .

While in Washington he received an Official invita tion to preach before the reformed congregation

of Cha rlestion ,S . C . He telegraphed his accept

ance >l< notably as his attention had been called tothe fact that Dr . Rapha ll was j ust then engaged inattacking the reform movement publicly in thatvery city . One or the other spoke nearly every

Th is wa s the sermon on the subject “ The Effect Of B ibl ica l Theo logy ” wh ich wa s publ ished in the Occident

, Vol .

VI I , p . 2 17.

THE RABB I OF ALBANY .

day in defense of hi s stand point . The controversyaroused much attention

,but it was to have a re

markable ending . Before Wise ’ s arrival in Charleston

,Rapha ll and Poznanski , the ministers of the re

IOrmed congregation , had agreed to hold a public

debate . Wise attended this meeting as an auditor .During the course of the debate Rapha ll turnedfrom his opponent and addressing Wise personally

,

asked him,Do you believe in the coming of the

Messiah? do you believe in the bodily resurrectionof the dead ? to both of which questions the answer

,

no was at once returned . This closed the meeting . Rapha ll and his party rushed from the hall .But the incident was destined to become historic aswill appear in due time .

During one of their conversations , Mr . Poznanskihad informed Dr . Wise of his purpose of retiring fromthe pulpit and had hinted that i f he would expresshis willingness the congregation would elect him ash is successor . Wise gave no response , but he wasnot surprised when

,Some days after he had left

Charleston,completely restored to health

,he was

informed that he had been elected rabbi of the con

grega tion . He accepted and handed his resignation to the board of trustees of the congregation at

Albany . Again,as before

,his opponents made fair

promises and in conj unction with his supporters

urged him to remain ; he withdrew his resignationand recalled his acceptance Of the Charleston offer

,

a step which he had cause to regret bitterly notlong thereafter .

*Occident , Vol . VI I I , p . 257 .


Louis Spanier who h a d been a friend of the rabbifor years had been elected president of the congre

ga tion . For some reason or other his friendshipchanged to implacable enmity . Shortly after the

Charleston rencontre,Rapha ll had published a bill

of excommunication against Wise and had followed

this up with articles against him and reform .

Spani er urged these arguments as the cause Of his

change of heart . Now began a seri es of petty an

noyances . Charges and counter-charges were made

by the orthodox and reformed elements in the con

grega tion . The congregation was in a state of constant turmoil for four months . The climax came

at the service on New Year ’ s morning. The choir

had sung Sulzer ’

s hymn En Komocho when therabbi moved to the ark to take out the scroll of the

law . The president without say ing a word , steppedin his way and smote him with his fist so that his capfell from his head . Instantly there arose a terribleuproar . The congregation was wildly excited . Theservice for that day was over . The breach was now

The rabbi ’ s friends met for service the

following morning at his home . It was at this j unc

ture that non-Jewish friends importuned him to retire from the ministry with its trials and tormentsand enter the legal profession . Chief Justice Woodoffered to take him into partnership as soon as hewould pass the examination and be admitted to thebar . He wavered

,but his love for his chosen call

ing conquered,and he declined the flattering prop

*Occident , Vol . VI I I , p 424 ; see Ibid . , Vol . I X ,p . 166 ,

for the fina l outcome of the diflflcu lty.


osition notably when he was called upon by thefriends of reform to lead their cause

,the next act

in the exciting drama .

On the evening following the second New Year ’ s

Day,a friend appeared at his house and requested

him to attend a meeting . He found a number ofthe members of the congregation assembled , who

informed him that after what had passed they

could no longer remain members of the Bethel congrega tion and that they had determined to organize

a new reformed congregation on the condition that

he would co-operate with them and serve as their

rabbi . He consented . The Anshe Emeth congre

ga tion was organized , and the first service of thenew congregation was held on the Day of Atonement . “ That day was one of the most touchingof my whole life . The room was crowded all daylong a new spirit seemed to dominate all . A bandof courageous and spirited

‘

champions of progressiveJudaism

,poss essed of indescribable enthusiasm had

arisen out of the defeat whi ch we had suffered . Onthat Yom Kippur day I saw American Judaismarise out of its grave to go forth to ever newtriumphs , and it has not deceived me in my expec

The new congregation consisted ofseventy-seven members , fifty-six of whom hadseceded from the Beth El congregation .

Let me continue in a few words the history ofthe young congregation . Enthusiasm ran high . Alarge church was bought and converted into aSynagogue . The dedicatory exercises took place

“Reminiscences , ” Debora h ,Vol . XXI I I , NO . 23 .

40 I SAAC M . WI SE .

on October 3 , 1850 . Dr . Lilienthal delivered theoration in German . The rabbi of the congregation explained the new movement in his sermonwhi ch was Spoken in English . The fourth Jewishreform congregation to be organized in the UnitedStates now had its permanent home . The congre

ga tion at once introduced family pews , the firsttime that this had been done in a Jewish house of

worship .

0

Peace was now his . NO more annoyances,no

more wrangles,within his own immediate com

munity . But the Opponents had a clear field as far

as the press was concerned . A new journal,the

Asmonean,had been published in New York Since

1849 ,by Robert Lyon this

,as well as the Occident

,

espoused the cause of orthodoxy ; the progressiveparty had no organ . Wise felt this want greatly .

He had no opportunity to give public utterance tohis Vi ews and principles . An Offer came to him

from an unexpected source . Shortly after theorganization of the new congregation he visitedNew York

,Philadelphia and Bal timore

,for the

purpose of collecting funds for the congregation .

On the way from Albany to New York,he met

Horace Greeley,who asked him for an account of

his late troubles in Albany,and

,after being in

formed,inquired why he did not answer the charges

that his opponents made in the public prints . B e

cause I have no organ,

” answered the rabbi .Greeley thereupon Offered him the columns of hispaper

,the New York Tribune . Write whatever

you want to have the public know,and I will see to

it that it will be read .

” The cordial offerwa s thank

THE RABB I OF ALBANY . 4 1

fully accepted,but as it chanced did not have to

be taken advantage of . After his return to Albanyfrom this trip

,during which

,by the way

,through

the intervention of influential Albanians,a position

in the Library of Congress was offered him by

President Fillmore,Whom he saw when in Wash

ington ,he received a letter from Robert Lyon

,the

publisher of the Asmonean,offering him

'

the edi

toria l department of his paper . This was an op

portunity as welcome as unexpected . He accepted ,and week upon week set forth his progressive ideasand his proj ects for reform in undisguised fashion .

His career as an.

editor was begun his articleswere the feature of the New York weekly Jewishjournal . He now gave to the public the frui ts ofhis learning

,thought and study . Besides his edi

toria l articles proper he wrote learned dissertationsupon subj ects such as The Bath Kol

,

” The Con

stitution Of Judaism Based on the Code of Ma imoni

des,

” The Biography of H illel,the Precursor of

Jesus . He also published translations of important Jewish writings that had appeared in Germany

,

such as the cha pter on the Book of Chronicles,from

Zunz’ Gottesdienstliche Vortra ege der Juden

,

Geiger ’ s Diwan des Jehudah Halevi,Frankel ’ s

Beweisfuehrung ,etc . In addition

,he published

extracts from the Talmud or Midrash every week .

However,he felt that j ournalistic writings were

but ephemeral . He determined,therefore

,to de

vote himself to the production of some permanentwork . The history of the Middle Ages was a verycongenial subj ect to him

,and he resolved to write

this hi story with particul ar reference to the signifi


cance of Jewish thought and Jewish thinkers inmediaeval times . But this was not to be . A number of friends who had learned of his intent to devote himself to hi storical studies importuned him todirect his attention to the production of a historyof the Jews from the earliest times . They urgedupon him the necess ity of such a work from thepen Of a Jewish scholar . Their arguments provedpowerful enough to convince him

,a nd he began

the studies which resulted in the appearance of hisfirst book

,

“ The History of the Israelitish Nationfrom Abraham to the Present Time

,Derived from

the Original Sources,

” Volume I (Albany ,The book

,owing particularly to its rationalistic

treatment of the Biblical miracles,aroused a storm

of hostile criticism . Since this was the feature ofthe work that aroused the greatest attention

,i t is

necessary to quote from the introduction the a u

thor ’ s statement of the principles that guided himin this radical departure from approved methods .He wrote as followsThe difl‘

i cul ty'

which we encountered at thethreshold in the writing of this volume was thi s

The facts preserved in scriptures are surrounded bydoctrines and miracles so that i t often becomes

difli cult to say which belongs to the province of

history . The facts are sometimes but touched uponby the inspired speakers and often narrated in twoor three different ways

,so that it is difficult to

choose . We have proceeded on the following prin

ciple : H istory is distinguished from religion andtheology as the ideas Of knowing and believing .

H istory records what is established by the criteria


commonly held by Jews and Christians were un

tenable .

The work met with a most unfavorable reception

in many quarters,Jewish and Christian the stand

point taken was too unconventional,too different

from accepted views . The author was bitterly a ttacked ; yet he did not quail , but defended theposition which he had taken upon long and studious consideration of the subject .

>I<

Events were taking place during the time ofthe publication of this volume that were to ef

feet a great change in his life . H is work inAlbany was coming to an end . The scene of hisactivity was about to be shifted . His great powerswere to find a field large enough for their exercise .In Albany he had won his spurs . As preacher

,

as reformer,as editor

,as educator

,as author

,as

staunch defender of Judaism,he had already made

himself felt . Along these lines he was to broaden,

so that his career in Cincinnati,the western me

tropolis , one of whose Jewish congregations calledhim to its pulpit in the fall of 1853 ,

was the mostremarkable of any Jewish leader in the UnitedStates

,not only for the length of time that it con

tinned,but for the great and lasting good that hewrought for the Jewish cause . Strong a nd master

ful,he was a leader in very truth

,toiling unremit

tingly and unceasingly,so that

,looking back over

the years that ha d passed,he could in truth say

,

I have achieved .

For the controversy tha t raged a bout the book cf . Oecident, Vol . X I , 613 , 614 ; Vol . X I I , I 6, 23, 2 7 , 33 , 79 , 3 15 , 398,40 1 , 455 , 549 , 553 .

FI RST MOVEMENT FOR A UN ION . 45

CHAPTER IV.

THE FIRST MOVEMENT FOR A UN ION OF THE

JEWISH CONGREGATIONS OF THE UN ITEDSTATES .

The importance of the matter to be set forth inthi s chapter is so great that it has -been thought

a dvisable to treat it by itself , even though it interrupt the chronological continuity of the narrative .

Ever since he had studied the conditions of Jewishli fe in the United States

,Dr . Wise had been im

pressed by the fact that the great desideratum wasa union of the congregations of the country . Herecognized that i f Judaism‘was to become a force

,

united action on_

the part of the organizations that

represented the faith was a prime necessity . Withcharacteristic energy ,

he proceeded to carry thisidea into realization . In the fall of 1 848 he con

ducted a correspondence with Isaac Leeser in refer

ence to the subj ect . The orthodox leader enteredheartily into the plan and advocated it in many anarticle in his magazine .

( It was agreed that Dr.Wise should I ssue a call for a meeting of ministersand laymen to form a union of the congregations

of the country 'This document,the first appeal

for united action on the part of the Jews of the country

,is historical

,and is therefore reproduced here .

It appeared in the December number of the Occident

46 I SAAC M . WISE .

of the year a nd was headed To the Ministers and Other Israelites . ” It is as follows

“ To my brother Israelites in North America,I

call in the name of my God, may pmm pm,

‘Be firm,and let us strengthen each other in behalf

of our people .

’ TheRev . Editor of this periodical hasgranted me the favor to give publicity to my viewsabout the association of Israelitish congregations inNorth America

,to produce one grand and sublime

end— to defend and maintain our sacred faith,to

the glory of God and for the benefit of Israel andall mankind .

Brethren,though I am a stranger among you

,

unknown and unimporta nt— though I am awarethat there are men among you much better than

mysel f , "31mm 7131) amp,‘whose little finger is

thicker than my loins ’— though my years are butfew in number

,and among you are men gray-haired

and highly experienced— notwithstanding all this,

I make use of the Rev . Editor ’ s permission to express publicly my views on this important subj ect

,

because I think with Elihu,son of Barachel

,the

Buzite of old , men “It? h a lf/31 WIN : mum iDN,

‘Verily it is the will in man ’

( that renders himable to speak and to act) ,

‘i t is the spirit of theAlmighty that gi ves understanding to them (whohave a good will devoted to God and virtue)— or

i f I shall express the same idea in a Talmudi c form

Of speech ,I may say I trust wa s“: Nflvmn,

‘in the

help of heaven .

’

It is one of the holy demands Of our religion,

Vol . VI , pp . 431-435 .

F IRST MOVEMENT FOR A UN I ON . 47

to walk in the ways of God . God isa unity

, fins 7 1, wherefore all mankind will one daybe united for one great end— to worship in truththe Most High

,to adore His holy name with

,hu

mility and purity . Then will also be fulfilled,

“INN 1mm,

that God ’ s name will be one . To bringabout this sublime unity

, God has selected thepeople -of Israel from among all nations to be thebearers of divine truth

,and to diffuse the bright

light of religion among mankind . Wherefore we

may justly say,our cause is the cause of man

kind— c ur elevation and success are the elevationand success of the human family— our fall i s alsothe fall of all society ; since every one must admitthe fact that true religion is the basis of civi lization .

There is perhaps not a single Israelite among myreaders who is not fully inspired with the inclination to share in the mission of his ancient people

,

as the voice of God called to each individual ofIsrael

,without exception of either sex

,or age or

Spiritual abilities : ‘But you shall be unto me a

kingdom of priests . ’ Now ,in order to fulfill our

sacred mission,to send our important message to

mankind,i t behooves us to be united as one man ;

to‘

be linked together by the ties of equal viewsconcerning religious questions— by uniformity inour sacred customs

,in our form of worship and re

ligious education . We ought to have a uniformsystem for our schools

,synagogues

,benevolent so

cieties— for all our religious institutions . This weneed to have throughout the world

,i f we are to be

considered as the same descendants of Israel,the

same disciples of Mosheh- if we are truly to fulfill


our sacred mission . Our fathers,whilst living in the

Holy Land,were commanded to appear three times

every year at the place selected by God himself .This commandment had not for its sole obj ect theprescribed sacrifices

,but chiefly it was calculated to

uphold a friendly union— a religious uniformityamong all Israelites .

Let us now direct our attention to the countrywhere we live and the circumstances in which weare placed . The majority of our congregations in

this country have been established but a few years

back ; they are generally composed of the most

negative elements from all the different parts of

Europe and elsewhere ; they have been foundedand are now governed for the greater part by menof no considerable knowledge of our religion

,and

generally of no particular zeal for our commoncause . The consequence of all this is that manycongregations have no solid basis

,no particular

s timulus to urge on the youth to a religious life ,and no nourishment for the spiritual Israelite .

This naturally produces an enormous amount ofindifference and each congregation pursues its own

way,has its own customs and mode of worship

,i ts

own way of thinking about religious questions ,from which cause it then results that one Jew is astranger in the synagogue of the other Jew . It isa pity to observe that any man who is so happy asto have a license (015373) to slaughter from someunknown person

,can become the minister of a con

grega tion ,and the teacher of the youth without

any proof of his knowledge of religion , and in theabsence of any evidence of his conduct as a Jew . I

FIRST MOVEMENT FOR A UNI ON . 49

will be silent about what is called DJ EWNNW— I willbe silent about the P7 ,

though our wise men teach

armypopm SN riff-rmrun me: 73: 1? l 113 53 ,

‘Whoever is not thoroughly acquainted with di

vorces and marriages , shall not have anything todo With them .

’ I will be silent about the wholecasuistic theology

,and ask only the community at

large j What will become of our synagoguewhat of our youth ? You see we have no system forour worship

,nor for our ministry and schools

,and

we are therefore divided in as many fragments asthere are congregations in North America . It is

lamentable,but true

,that i f we do not unite our

selves betimes to devise a practicable system for theministry and religious education at large— i f we donot take care that better educated men fill the pulpit and the schoolmaster ’ s chair —if we do not stimula te all the congregations tOestablish good schools

,

and to institute a reform in their synagogues on

modern Jewish principles,the house of the Lord

will be desolate,or nearly so

,in less than ten years

,

and the zeal of the different Christian missionaries

will be sufli cient to make among us a large numberof unprincipled infidelSp It needs no propheticspiri t to read this horrible future in the presentcircumstances . I lay down these lines before thethrone of history as a solemn protest against thespirit of separate action and of indifferentism whichhas taken hold on so many noble minds of our

brethren,and I proclaim before the whole world ,

before the present and future,my sincere conviction

that now something must be done to defend andmaintain our sacred faith . Nor is i t too late ;


everything can be done i f we are all united before

God .

But who are the men that shall lay the cornerstone to this reunion ? Are not the ministers ofIsrael those who must take the first step ? Is notthe spiritual welfare of Israel intrusted into theirhands ? Are they not responsible for it

,i f coming

generations should be corrupted through their neglect ? Are not included in this class the pious laymenwho sigh over the downfall of the ancient customs

and forms,without the establishment of the modern

ones ? Shall we not inciude those learned laymen

who mourn to see how some people in their ignorance sancti fy the profane but profane the holy?Yea

,i t is the duty of all those to unite themselves

a nd work for the union of all the congregations .I call on you in the name of our God :

‘Be firmand strengthen yourselves for the sake of our

people .

’ Arise,ye men of piety and wisdom

,ye

shepherds,ye fathers of Israel ; let us al l meet

“my: N5 was let us first take counsel what shouldbe done

,a nd how it must be done let us amicably

consider what we ought to do as men and Israelitesfor the spiri tual welfare of the present and coming

generations let us earnestly deliberate on a plan tounite all Jews to defend and maintain their sacredreligion for the promotion of the glory of God andthe bliss of Israel ! I call upon all my honoredfriends

,both ministers and laymen

,and all who

have an interest in the promulgation of God ’ s lawcome

,let us be assembled in order to become

united Exercise all your influence on your friends

a nd acquaintances , to bring together all men of zeal


The editor of the Occident,the Rev . Isaac Leeser ,

wrote a number of powerful editorials in advocacyof the plan .

*Laymen in various parts of thecountry declared their enthusiastic sympathy

,not

ably A . A . Lindo,of Cincinnati

,who wrote five

lengthy communica tionsTin support of the schemewhich he ha d d iscussed with 3Dr . Wise a nd Mr .

Leeser before the appearance of the call . The twoleading ministers of New York

,Dr . Max Li lienthal

and Rev . S . M . I saacs, I declared their hearty co

operation,as did the Revs . J . K . Gutheim and

Jacob Rosenfeld,of Cincinnati . With character

istic cordiality,Dr . Lilienthal invi ted his Albany

colleague to occupy the pulpit of one Of the threecongregations over which he presided in order thathe might have the opportunity to explain and ad

vocate the plan . In a German sermon preached on

March 3 ,I 849 ,

from the pulpit of congregation Shaare

Shomayim ,Dr . Wise set forth his Views . Isaac

L6 eser,who was present

,was so impressed by the

sermon that he asked for the manuscript and volun

teered to translate it for publication in his magaAt the close of the sermon the boards of the

three German congregations promised to'

lay the

matter before their congregations with their in

dorsement . Much elated,the rabbi returned to

Albany . The date for the convention was set forthe eleventh of June

,1849 ,

in the city of New

Ibid. , Vol . VI , pp . 42 1 , 5 29 , 577 ; Vol . VI I , p . 61 .

TIb id . , Vol . VI , pp . 565 , 604 ; Vol . VI I , pp . 43 , 94 , 134 ,

203, 258 .

TOccident , Vol . VI , p . 511 .

[IOccident, Vol . VI I , p. 12 .

FI RST MOVEMENT FOR A UN I ON . 53

York . However,but one congregation Of that city

,

the Shaare Tefillah,Of which the Rev . S . M . Isaacs

was the minister,chose a delegate . Eight other

congregations ha d chosen delegates,

viz : the

Mikveh Israel of Philadelphia ; the Beth E1 ofAlbany ; the B

’

ne Yeshurun of Cincinnati ; theNefuzoth Jehudah and the Shaare Chesed of New ‘

Orleans ; the Beth Shalom of Richmond ; theShaare Shomayim of Mobile and the Ada th

Israel of Louisville . Owing to the opposition en

gendered in the New York congregations,the con

vention did not take place . It was felt that unlessthe congregations of the metropolis

,the place where

the meeting was to be held,supported the plan en

thus ia stica lly and unanimously , it would not be successful . Thus failed the first movement for a union

of the congregations of the country . However ,though defeated

,the prime mover in the matter

did not despair. He bided his time . In seasonand out of season he continued to advocate thenecess i ty Of union until finally persistence and perseverance were rewarded by the formation of theUnion of American Hebrew Congregations . Theseed planted in 1848 came to fruition after a lapseof a quarter of a century .

“ Everything can bedone if we are all united before God

,

” Isaac M .

Wise had written in his first call for union . Thissentence sounds the key note of his activity andstriving ; of it his life is the commentary ; by tha tSign he conquered .

5 4 ISAAC M . WI SE .

CHAPTER V .

CINCINNATI,1854

— 1855 .

In August,1 853 , the rabbi of the Anshe Enseth

congregation Of Albany,received a letter from

Jacob Go odheart,of Cincinnati

,asking him whether

he would accept the position of rabbi of the B ’

ne

Yeshurun congregation of that city,and upon what

conditions . After due consideration he answeredthat i f the congregation would elect him for life hewould accept the position ; he stated further thathe would not preach a trial sermon and would not

be able to enter upon his duties until after a lapse

of six months . Five days later he received a telegram to the effect that he had been unanimously

elected rabbi of the congregation on his own terms .He resigned his position at Albany and requestedhis friends to make no attempts to keep him

,as he

had fully determined to go to Cincinnati . H isfriends respected his wishes a nd accepted the resignation

,it need not be said

,with feelings of pro

found regret .Toward the close of December he visited Cincinnati

,where he preached several times and aroused

great enthusiasm . Upon his return to Albany heresigned his editorship of the Asmonean . Hishopes Were now all centered in his new field of

labor . He felt that in the western metropolis hewould have the opportunity to work more freely

CINCINNATI , 1854—1855 . 55

and unrestrictedly than had hi therto been thecase . On the last day of Passover , April 19 , 1854 ,

he preached his farewell sermon at Albany . Thefollowing morning he departed for Cincinnati

,where

he delivered his inaugural sermon on April 2 6th .

In this sermon he laid down his standpoint clearly

and unreservedly . He at once began to introducereforms

,such as the excision of the piutim from

the ritual,the abolition of the sale of mitzvoth

,

and the formation of a mixed chair for participa

tion in the service .

During the very first month of his residence inhis new home he took steps towards procuring apublisher for a newspaper

,which was to be the

vehicle of his views . He recognized that i f he wasto wield influence he required an organ . In Junehe issued a prospectus

,which was brief and to the

point . He declared that it was his purpose to conduct a j ournal in the interest of progress ive Juda

ism . On July 6 , 1854 , the first number of the

Israelite appeared with the motto ,"me an!

“Letthere be light .Through his paper he addressed a large constitu

ency every week,afid by means of it he has exercised

a most far-reaching influence and brought to bear thepower of his personality upon the solution of themany questions which arose in the course of the development Of Judaism in the United States . Hisj ournal was the weapon wherewith he fought thefight of his long

,agitated and successful career .

Always full of energy and optimism ,he enli sted in

every proj ect in which he was interested the fullmeasure of his hopeful strength . The characteristic


note of his edi torial activity is the unquenchable enthusia sm with which he approached every problemthat presented itself in the field of Judaism and thereligious li fe . The anecdote which he has told of hisfirst meeting with Salmon P . Chase

,later Chief Jus

tice of the Supreme Court of the United States,well

illustrates this . Shortly after his arrival in Cincinnati he was a guest at a banquet at which Mr . Chasewas also present . During the course of the eveningMr . Chase asked him ‘in what school have you beeneducated ? In the school of li fe

,like father Jacob

which I frequented for eight years in Albany,

was the reply .

“And you have rescued so much enthusia sm out of that school ?” said Mr . Chas e , Icongratulate you .

”

At the time of his arrival in Cincinnati the otherlarge congregation

,the B ’

ne Israel , was without a

minister . On November 5 , 1854 , he was elected.minister of that congregation also . For about sixmonths he offi ciated as rabbi of both congregations ,preaching in the one synagogue on Saturday morning and in the other on Saturday afternoon . Hecontinued this until the B ’

ne Israel congregation

succeeded in bringing his friend,Dr . Lilienthal , to

Cincinnati as their rabbi . The close and intimate

relationship between the two great leaders has been

spoken of above .

The lamentable condi tion of the American Jewishpulpit had been a source of much concern to him

ever since he had been in this country . The menof lea rmng in the pulpit were few and far between . He felt that one oi the greatest needs

Of Judaism was competent leaders . He began

58 I SAAC M. W I SE .

s ion in the voice a nd pen of its originator,and at

last came into being with the opening of theHebrew Union College .

In that year— 1855— he had the threads of his

activity well in hand ; those threads he spun intothe web of a

'

full,useful , honored life , great in good ,

rich in achievement . What a faithful. commentary

is his career of the fine lines of the poet,for truly

he was,

One who never turned h is ba ck but ma rched brea st forwa rd,

Never doubted clouds wou ld brea k,

Never thought , though righ t were wor sted,wrong wou ld

triumph .

Held we fa ll to rise,a re ba ffi ed to figh t better , s leep to

wake.

W I SE AND REFORM .

CHAPTER VI .

W I SE AND REFORM .

The history of Jewish Reform in the United Statesis yet to be written ; but Whatever be the point ofView from which it will be regarded ,

one fact is certain : the historian will have to reckon with the lifeand doings of IsaacM. Wise . Without these his a c

count will lack unity,and also a standard of valuation .

Isaac M . Wise declared that we must work outour reformation in this country on lines wholly our

own . He was the first one to insist on an American Judaism . Believing in the continuity of Juda

ism,he felt that , a t the same time

,Judaism has

greatest scope in this country . He taught Judaismas an American patriot

,and not as a denominational

zealot . This marks him off from all of his contem

pora ries . These,whether unconsciously or not

,

strove for alien things . German reformers like

Einhorn or Hirsch,and Anglicised conserva tives

_

like

Isaacs or Leeser,seemed alike incapable of natural

iza tion . There was need of an intelligent understanding of the American conditions and of sympathywith them . Wise said as early as 1858 :

“We needEnglish preachers

,and we must become American

Jews as speedily as possible . For the first time inmany sa d centuries we are given an opportunity toannounce Juda ism

'

without fear and to be a part ofthe world . We cannot afford to continue as aliensone day longer .

” It was the fatal error of the


German reformers who settled here,that they failed

to realize this .The Jewish community in this country had beenin a formative condition for at least fifty years .There was as yet no homogeneity

,which is essen

tial for stability . The communities were of a com

posite constituency . A large part of the misunderstanding and conflicts which pass under the name

of Reform difli culties,must be charged to the fact

that the local organizations were composed of mutu

ally exclusive elements .‘ The Sephardim lacked

self-assertion,the very quality that made their an

cestry illustrious . They were scattered through theEast , in Newport , New York ,

Philadelphia,Charles

ton , Savannah and Richmond , and were impotent

despite their afliuence and numbers . This decadent

element was a source of much reactionary influence .

It was intolerant of progress,being half conscious

that it ought to lead in accordance with its received

dignity , but also that it could not lead . They had

one or two somewhat helpful men— SJ M . Isaacsand Sabato Morais

,but no

'

person of first magni

tude,and no congregation as a “Mother in Israel . ”

(A smonea n,I,NO . 10

,p .

Charleston was the only congregation among thesewhich contributed in some degree to the furtheranceof Reform in this country . It had the leaven of Re

form as early as 1848 ; it provided for an improvedpublic worship

,and it made an independent state

ment of its articles of faith . But the attempt ,under the frown of the conservative Spanish

,was

soon reduced to insignificance . Only the episodeof Wise ’ s election in 1850 and the brave words

W I SE AND REFORM . 6 1

he uttered there have saved Charleston reform fromoblivion . Reform has become a force in American Judaism because of the German element

,and

eminently because of such Germans as constitutethe leading congregations still to-day. These or

ga n ized the religious and benevolent institutions of

the Jews in this country .

Equity demands that we state that there wassomething logical and plausible

,and surelv honest in

both conservatism and Reform ; but the same equityentitles us to say that reformers like Einhorn

,

Chronik,Samuel Hirsch and orthodox irreconcile

ables,like Leeser and Morais

,were tolerant of

those who differed from them and had sympathywith men

,not according to the measure of the sin

cer ity of these , but according to the degree of reinforcement they believed these gave them .

I t is his frank appreciation of everb dy which

marks off Isaac M . Wise from his ctherwise notuntalented He was at oncethoughtful

,

and.fai r . He could be a severe op

ponent,but he was never an implacable one . In

the depth of his heart,he reserved a fellow- feeling

for even those who offended much against him . He

consented,as soon as he could

,to reconciliation

with those who had not scrupled to go beyond thel imits of

.fair polemics . He forebore with the de

nuncia tions of the “S ina i

” and forgave the on

s la ughts of Hirsch ,whose passion was genu ine but

undisciplined . Isaac M . Wise had a militant man

ner,but only against opposition that was gratuitous

and mean . Makeshifts he scorned and obstinacy hebrushed aside but he stacked his arms as soon as


he caught glimpse of a disinterested motive . An

other point of difference between the Reform ofWise and that of his contemporaries , both Germanand American

,is his democra cya m He did not

’

pro

pose to reconstruct American Judaism in accordancewith the “Science of Judaism

,

” but in accordance

with the needs of the people .

“The people ,” he

said,

“must be taken Care of ! (Debora /z, May 14 ,

“The reform idea need not be brought tothe people

,that has come from its heart ! ” (De

bor a h,June 4 ,

Wise maintained that Reformmust proceed not from the study Of the Rabbis

,

”

but primarily from the heart of the community .

They did not know,

” Wise says of the GermanAmerican reformers later

,

“ that it will not do to

impose anything on the people . Reform grew froma necessity within . (Debora /z

,June 4 ,

Wise did not rest in philosophy,he pursued aims

,

and in summing up this period of storm and stress,

he took pride in the fact that “American Judaism haspreserved its own ideals. (Debora /z

,June 4 ,

1

Wise pursued no policy of mere expediency his .

mind was constructive . I t e ma ttered , li ttle —to -him

yvha t disposition was made of statutes which had

become inoperative . The Rabbinical law or the

ology or meta physics or the Science of Juda isniwere not involved half so miich as the destiny of i

the people . He could truthfully say,

“The voice

of t he people is in our favor ! ” ( l sra eliz‘e,Vol . I

,

No . 5 , p . 39 , August 1 1 ,Only a month be

fore he took formal charge of Congregation B ’

ne

Yeshurun ,he wrote “For the

’

America niza tion ofJudaism (Asmonea n

,March I 0 ,

a nd he

W I SE AND REFORM . 63

meant by that no mere adaptation,but a native Ju

da ism. In Europe he .was -understood by Geiger

and JelliHék ,but in this country by none . This

naturalization is being accomplished in Germany

now through the constraint of Anti-Semitism . We

have been spared this scandal in this country by the

prevision’

of Isaac M . Wise .

Reform and orthodox’ pa rted on questions ,

of ex

pediengys The introduction of family pews and ofa choral service (by men and women j ointly ) andthe uncovering of the head and other innovations

,

were onerous to the Jewish puritans of those dayswhom Lilienthal described well

,when he spoke

of their “masterly inactivity” ( I sra elite, February

6 There was a demand for a revisedritual

,but a ritual cannot be revised from the

point of View of expediency alone,for it i s the ex

pression of the religious . li fe . The Jewish prayer

books which were then in use seemed to hide ratherthan to reveal the genius of Judaism . The “

Ge

belma e/zerei” of that day,of which Wise says that

i t furnishes material for‘

a hi story of liberalism(Debora /z

,May 4 ,

laid down the followingrules : “

The prayer-book must imply no belief iii

a ‘personal ’ Messiah,no Corporea l resurrection , no\

return to Palestine,no restoration of the sacrificial

cult,no duplication of holidays

,and finally

,no :

cabalistic notions . ” It was the positive side,BOW-r i.

ever,which provoked differences

,which sometimes !.

seem irreconcilable . The prayer-book controversy,

in fact,has a place in the history of the organiza

tion of Jewish communities rather than in Jewish

theology , for the favorite prayer-books divided the


country geographically more than doctrinally .

prayer-books of_

Huebsch or Of

Einhorn had their prestige through congregationalpolitics much more than through inner jfiStifi

cation . They failed equally to respond to the needs

of American Judaism . There was but one man inthe United States who saw that this matter of ritualwas a life question

,and that man was Isaac M .

Wise ( I sra el ile, July 2 0,

He declared himself not for a Wise prayer-book

,but for a Min/l ag

Amer ica . .The Jews of America,he said

,must be

brought together to form a homogeneous community .

Thev will persist in a restrictive theology for aslong as they are provincial . He charged the Rabbiswith a want Of large views

,a nd with retarding unifi

cation,and

,said he

,

“ this separateness is un-Jewishand against the destiny of Judaism in this country .

The future of Judaism in this country depended on

the solidarity of the Jews . The prayer-book is ameans for social reconstruction ; local favoritism must

yield,as much as local prej udice

,to all -round neces

sities,and each must sacrifice his preferences for the

sake of an homogeneous Jewish people . We must establish a moral union

,before we can hope to have a

final ri tual . Wise did not express in his Mznfiag

Amer ica a new theology,but a renaissant Jewish

people . The prayer-book was to give not doctrine

but life,and it wa s to bring to an end the inte

’

rnecine

Struggle that was going on between German Jew a nd

Polish Jew,Eastern Jew and

‘Western Jew ,Reform

Jew a nd orthodox Jew,the Jew who clings to his

favori te Rabbi a nd the Rabbi who holds the fort ofhis congregation and pulpit . Wise had introduced


been tolerated will be tolerated no longer,not only

in spite of religion,but in the name of religion

.

Td this Lilienthal retorted with sa neneSS' “

Un

na thra l leaps are of no avail in history— in historyas in nature all things are confined within a process

which works by degrees— opposition to this eternallaw brings failure .

” But Einhorn persisted thatthe ethics of the Talmud is exclusive ( engherzig) ,that it lacks the world -encompassing spirit of the

Bible , that the letter , into which it forces everything

,i s its finality and that it accentuates correct

ness of deed,however external

,and the semblance

of holiness so much that it interdicts rationalthought on religious law . Such “Reform” could

be met by peremptory challenge alone,a nd Wise

gave it forcibly to the Feuerba efi of Baltimore

( l sra elile I ],No . 32 ,

Einhorn himself

reduced his attack to futility by admitting that“The Talmud is one of the most important movements in the development of Judaism . It has ledit safely through the calamitous epoch of Jewish

history and ha s enriched it in many ways . In'

fa ct

i t must be acknowledged as a high merit of the

Talmud that it has broken the inflexibility of theBiblical letter ; i t has , though unconsciously , re

formed the Mosaic law in its most Vital aspect , withrespect

,namely

,to the demands of time W ithin and

W ithout . ” Lilientha l’

s fair resumeof the contro

versy i s this :“I f i t i s admitted that the Talmud

was itself a reform ,why should not the principles

which justified that reform be searched for?”

*Sina i I 1 .


( I sra elite I I , February 15 , Wise flung himself into the controversy in his own way .

“TheSanhedrin

,he said

,

“was empowered,being in

s tituted by Moses and being maintained by Talmudie authority

,to m eet emergencies ; i t could

suspend Biblical laws,i t could provide for new

conditions . It could take care that the letter of the

Bible be pervaded by the creative power of life”

( I sra el i le, March 7 ,“Reform

,

” he added,

“will not advance a s some radicals may wish ,but

i t will take deeper root and occupy a larger field

than a reform restricted to a few a nd separate Con

grega tions .

"‘VV

e convened the Conference inCleveland

,he explained

,

“ to bring life into allCongregations

,so that the ones may not remain

stagnant while the others,reforming head over

heels,break with the history of our people”

( I sra elile, March It is characteristic of

the statesman like views_

Wise had of the conditionsthat his Minha g Amer ica was published W ithout his

name on the title page . It is the first revised bookfor Jewish devotion in America wi thout an editor ’ sname . Wise , who would assert himself very emphatically

,contented himself with a noble self-denial

when the people ’ s holy right was involved . Lilienthal gave the coup deg race to the opposition . Hetold the extremists

,who took their cue from the

Reform Verein in Berlin and Frankfur t am Main

that “Reform in Europe,though nearly one thousand

years old , did not take root in the community ,”

a nd in reply to Leeser ’

s belated attacks,he de-

i

“

cla red that reform is ‘a‘n effort to raise to

the highest efficiency ,”and that as at the time of


Mendelssohn,reform is a movement for the ad

mission of Jews into the brotherhood of universalcivilization .

The details Of the reforms are easily recorded .

In 1846 Wise introduced the fi rst mixed choir anddrilled i t himself. In 1850 the scruples as to theplaying of the organ on the Sabbath

,vainly rein

forced by the Cha cham of London , were overcome .

On June i 3th , 1856 ,Wise confirmed his first class

of boys and girls,and the ceremony not only gave

an added significance to the Shabuoth,but became

also a religious event in the Congregational li fe .He disposed of the custom of “calling up to theThora

,

” and brushed aside its commercialism,as

well as its impropriety,by the very moral po int that

“ the female sex was disfranchised by it . (Deb

ora lc,May 14 ,

He abrogated the seconddays of Holidays on October 2d

,1859 , though the

Observance of the second day of Rosh Ha shana lin

gered on until 1873 . It was not until 188 1 that the

German language was practically crowded out ofJewish worship .

“Wise ’ s Hymn Book,

” pub

l ished in 1868,had still to compromise with the

conditions,and had a German as well as an English

division . The Min/mg America prayer book re

duced the German part to a minimum . Its Seelenfeier survives because it is classic in feeling and

stirs by its unique pathos . In 1873 a resolution ofK . K . B . Y . made it “not unlawful to attend divine service with uncovefed head

,

” and three yearsafterwards the temple was made free for “ the func

ral of any one deceased in the family of members . ”

Modifications of the adopted Min/l ag became neces


sary in the course of time , for a native Americangeneration was being recruited into the JewishCongregations . Ths yea rs between 1880 and 1890

were years of intellectfia l regeneration,a nd Wise

Wa s not slow to r espcnd’

t'

o the new needs . A re

vised formof Service was beC‘

dmiii’

g IICCessa ry. In

View of the steady organization of the Jews of thiscountry into a Union of Congregations and theiridentification of interests

,and the entry of an

American ministrya

lwh ich Wise was sending out , a

Union Prayer Book!was a logical and moral need .


CHAPTER VII .

WI SE AND THE RABB IN I CAL CONFEREN CES .

Wise was central in the history of the AmericanJewish communities

,but he was also the organizer

of the Jewish ministry of this country . His life

long efforts in this direction culminated in theestablishment of the Central Conference of American Rabbis . I may state at the outset that in the

forty -five years , which constitute the history of

American Conferences,Isaac M . Wise was the lead

ing Spirit,and that they owe their significance to

his genius . The Philadelphia Convention of 1869

is the only one which was dominated by his op

ponents ; but that one is the only one which waswithout appreciable bearing upon the developmentof Reform . It accentuates the fact which Wise

,in

deed,had declared on all occasions , that ultra—rad

ica l ism is mere petulant idealism ,from which noth

ing helpful can ever come . In all others of the firstfour Conferences

,and in the nine regular

,and one

special,sessions of the Central Conference of Amer

ican Rabbis his personali ty was dominant .It is not within the province ‘

Of a biographer to

render a verdict on what he records ; his task is

merely to assign the facts within the developmentof the career . I shall therefore describe di sputesabout which the reader will be perplexed ; but he

need not wonder so much that changes were made

WI SE AND THE RABB IN I CAL CONFERENCES . 7 1

as that the reforme rs ma de them in so indirect a

manner .Isaac M . Wise did not follow the law of his

zeal ; in fact , he devoted many of his best years toparalyzing the passion of men who

,in the words

of Lilienthal,strove to “ li ft the globe like Atlas”

( I sra elite II , No . 4 1 , p . Wise believed in thecontinuity of history and in the continuity of Jew

ish history especially . When Einhorn declared thatthe Talmud had no standing in Judaism

,he replied

“This signifies no Bible ! This trust of his in the

historical forces was tantamount to religious con

viction . It is in the light of this that the declara

tion of the Cleveland Conference Of 1855 , which wasthe first in America

,can be appreciated .

I proceed to sketch it . From August 10 th to October i 5th ,

an appeal for a Conference appeared in

Tlze I sra elite. Its purpose,as Lilienthal put it in

a later review,was “ to prepare the way for future

Synods” ( I sra el ite II , No . 1 7 , November 2,

The principles of Judaism as defined by the Conference

,are as follows :

“The conference of the rabbis and congregational

delegates,assembled in Cleveland

,actuated by the

earnest desire to preserve the union of Israel and

its religion by mutual understanding and union,

a nd convinced that the organization Of a Synod is

the most effi cient means to attain this sacred aim,

whose legality and utili ty is taught in the Bible,

Talmud and history— consider i t their duty

To convene a synod,and call upon the American

Jewish congregations in an extra circular,to send

their ministers and delegates to the said synod .


The Conference also feels obliged to give utterance to the following points on which they unanimously agree as the leading principles of the futuresynods .

1 . The Bible as delivered to us by our fathers andas now in our possession

,is of immediate divine

origin and the standard of our religion .

. 2 . The Talmud contains the traditional , legal and

logical exposition of the biblical laws which mustbe expounded and practiced according to the comments of the Talmud .

3 . The resolutions of a s ynod in accordance withthe above principles are legally valid .

4 . Statutes and ordinances contrary to the lawsof the land are invalid .

”

It is easy to misunderstand these declarations .The Bible is an inviolable source for Jewish doctrine and the Talmud is a tradition on the lines of

it . A revision of this tradition is necessitated by thechanged environment

,but it must be undertaken

with reverence and on the ground of its own logic .

There is in this nothing we would not now-a-days

assent to . Even Leeser accepted this declarationfor the truth of Jewish tradition

,and only after his

return home did he j oin in the protest against the“Cleveland platform

,

” which had been instigated

in his neighborhood . Wise,ignoring the incon

sistency of the Philadelphia conservative,urged

‘I S i t right or wrong that the Cleveland Conferencerefused to depart from the historical basis ofJudaism pointed out by three thousand years ofhistory ? ( I sr a elite II , December 2 1 , 185 Ein

horn,the other extremist

,also contesting the Cleve


the community of Israel,a nd does not absolve him

of his duties as such,Resolved , that the circum

cis ion of proselytes be not required as an act of

initiation . (See“P roto/eolle a

’er Ra bbiner -Con

f erenz ,a bg eha lten zu Pbila clelpbia ,

com 3 bis zum

6 November,

New York,1870 , pp . 39

This proposition of Wise ’ s was adopted not earlierthan 1895 . Two years after the Philadelphia Conference

,a meeting Of Rabbis took place in Cincin

nati,the radicals lurking from afar for an oppor

tunity. This came through a chance conversationoutside of the sessions . The “personal -God” question was current at that time . It had originatedamongst Christians and had point in a decadentscholasticism . At an unofficial gathering duringthe week Of the session

,some one

,touching upon

the subj ect of a personal God ,had expressed

himself hastily . This casual remark was deemedsuffi cient for a protest against the Conference and

to the responsible things it had done at its officialmeetings . It is not clear j ust What the protest

meant to attack . It had been issued by SamuelHirsch

,who

,as author of an Hegelian philosophy

of the Jewish religion ,cannot have meant seri

ously to defend the proposition that God is“per

sonal,real

,and substantiated But Wise was com

pensa ted amply for the scandal that had been pre

cipita ted .

“In the east,

” he says,

“ the incident

Showed that the Rabbis are not leaders,and it in

duced me to abandon the hope of ever findingsympathy with them . I stopped bothering aboutthem

,and I resolved I would appeal to the people !”

An equally abtruse and an equally alien subj ect was

WI SE AND THE RABB IN I CAL CONFERENCES . 75

broached in 1880,in the Rabbinical Literary Asso

cia tion, which had been organized the year before .

It was a discussion on “The God of Judaism and

the God of Science .

” This controversy was asbitter as i t was superficial

,and it drew public atten

tion away from the positive and clarifying thesiswhich Wise had presented at the same meeting .

(See Hebrew Review,pp . 1 2—32 ,

and this vol .,pp .

2 5 Wise maintained that the traditional law

is to be recognized only to the extent in which it

reflects the Mosaic spirit,and he declared that

the elaborate Mosaic dispensation is reducible to

the simple principles of the decalogue . It wasthe annunciation of a real truth . It was hotlycontested

,but i t cannot be denied that the legis

lation of Moses does converge toward a primeval

revelation,which gives to Jewish history unity as

well as a divine sanction .

In 1887 , a number of Rabbis convened at Pittsburg

,and elected Wise as president . The Con

ference adopted a Declaration of Principles withenough “ liberalism” in them to meet an artificialconservatism which had just then a fresh but hope

less reawakening . But this Declaration was not ofa

’

kind to enthuse Wise,for Judaism gains nothing

from opportunism . It is not felici tous to put Juda ism on a level with “attempts to grasp the infinite

,

” “ the consciousness of the in -dwelling of

God in man , and “conceptions of the God idea

spiritualized by Jewish teachers . ” Such phrasesdo not do justice to the uniqueness and thegenuineness Of Judaism . Nor can the statement“We recognize in the Bible the record of the con


secration of the Jewish people to its mission,be

taken as an avowal of revelation . It is certainly nottrue that “ the Rabbinical laws originated under the

influence of ideals altogether foreign to our presentmental and spiritual states . ” In D ebora /z

,August

13 ,1896 ,

Wise says : “The Conference at Pittsburg did not intend to restore genuine unanimity .

The prime motive in calling it together was to givesupport to the reformers of the East against theRabbinists of the East . ”

To those who know the strenuous oppositionWise offered to the Sunday-service movement

,

which is largely opportunistic,i t is inconceivable

how Isaac M . Wise can be claimed for the Pittsburg platform

,which asserts that “ there is nothing

in the spirit of Judaism or of its laws to preventthe introduction of Sunday services in localities

where the necessity for such services appears or i s

felt . ”

It was this sort of time-serving that induced himto provide for a stable basis . In July 9 ,

1889 ,a c

cordingly,he organized at Detroit

,Michigan

,the

Central Conference of American Rabbis . The his

tory of this Central Conference is the history of thebest in American Judaism during the last elevenyears . H is annual messages to this body are re

plete with intense feeling and sagacity . The Con

ference has published a number of LYea r Books ,which contain treatises on important subj ects affect

ing Judaism and Jews,and its d iscussions have an

acceptable tone of moderation . Finally,i t has sup

plied a long- felt want for a national ritual . The

Union Prayer Book,published by the Conference ,

W I SE AND THE RABB IN I CAL CONFERENCES . 77

may fall short in point of cla ss icity of style , andmay not reflect the genius of Judaism as a Book ofCommon Prayer should

,but as a form of worship

common to all American Congregations,i t is a moral

force that cannot be overestimated . Wise had held

to the hope for manv years that the sacred subj ect ofprayer might be rescued from the anarchy to which

it had lapsed . When the Conference was ready

to take up the work of a revision of the liturgy , hedeclared he was W illing to yield up his Min/l agAmer ica

,then the most popular Jewish Prayer Book

in the country . Wise ’ s fine acumen is manifest in

what he said at the Conference session of 1896 onthe subj ect of a proposed Union Hymn Book“We want not only a text

,but a Jewish text ; not

only a text for Jews and by Jews,but also a Jewish

standard of the spirit . ”

It would he profitable to excerpt from the pro

ceedings of the Conference the thoughts he munifi

cently scattered in them . Each presidential address

teems with suggestions for the upbuilding of Judaism and for its stabil ity . One principle he insisted

upon : Judaism is inviolable as a revelation ; i t i sMosaic and Sinai tic

,or it is nothing . At a time

when Biblical criticism,like every new science

,

shifts its standards and is open to the false lights ofincomplete research , a check is an act of wisdom .

We cannot be too grateful to the man who declinedto j eopardize American Judaism and upheld itsproven facts . Literary valuation is

,after all

,not

equivalent to the verdict of history . Still he did

not impose upon the Conference his vi ews as to the

authentici ty of the Pentateuch or the historical


character of the revelation on Mount Sinai . He

presented these upon many occasions,but never

with any purpose to urge them ; though it is well

known that he took them very seriously .

There was another principle of which he had asimilar certainty . He believed in Congregational

autonomy . Every local Jewish community , he held ,i s free to arrange its household in accordance withits own needs , and he insisted that each be given

freedom of conscience as well . It was this convietion that led the Union of American Hebrew Congrega tions ( of which we Shall speak later on ) todeclare in its constitution that each Congregationwas free within its own scope

,and the history Of

the Union and the uninterrupted development of

American Judaism through it,prove how wise it i s .

In the Conference of Rabbis,however

,this tolera

tion of differences has become indispensable . The

respect for personal convictions has enhanced,and

has not hindered,the deliberations . Wise has thus

spared American Judaism much harrassing . It hadsuffered long enough from excessive individualism .

In the earlier years mere insistence was oftentaken for strength

,and personality was accentuated

easily in times of excitement . Wise closed in with

his opponents,not so much on the ground of dogma

as on the ground of character . On the one Sidewere those who were trained in German schools andhad come from a German environment ; on the otherside he stood alone

,in more senses than one

,the

heart of a new and an American Judaism pulsatingwithin him

,and conscious that his work and word

were its work and word . This feeling that he

W I SE AND THE RABB IN I CAL CONFERENCES . 7 9

represented the cause of the community made himboth humble and assertive . When he organized

the Central Conference,Wise declared it must con

sist of “men of national conceptions,without local

prej udices,without sectionalism ; also without self

ish ambition or private interests” ( Yea r B oo/é for

1898—99 , p . or

,as he expressed in his original

draft : “The obj ect (of the Conference ) is to lay the

foundation of a central authority of American Judaismon democratic principles

,the autonomy of the

Congregations,the personal and the offi cial right of

every Rabbi in oflice ;” and it shall represent “ the

collective W isdom and enthusiasm,learning a nd

practical sense .

” We think that the best that can

be done by the present generation for the future ofJudaism in this country must be done by a solid

union of its best intelligence,by the co -operation of

all,by respecting each individual factor “the wis

dom of the many is superior to the wisdom of any

one ;” “ the elevation of the representation is syn

onymous with the elevation of the cause .

” In the

Debora h of August 13 , 1 896 ,he describes the Cen

tral Conference thus : “ Independent,self-emanei

pated,self-governing Judaism in accordance with

the freedom and the liberalism of this country .

”

I SAAC M. W I SE .

CHAPTER VIII .

THE UN I ON AND THE COLLEGE .

When cm July 4 ,1 854 ,

Isaac M . Wise publishedthe first number of “ The I sra elite” and 0 11 Febraary 9 a nd March 2

,1855 , announced the

“Debora h

,

”

there existed already a number of Jewish weeklies .But these were uninfluentia l

,the Occident excepted

,

which persisted for some time . Wise had contributed to the Occident and A smonea n from Albany

,

and in the first year of his incumbency at Cincinnati

he still edited in the latter a department of theological

and philosophical subj ects . Seeing that the Jewish

press was of no avail for the constructive work he hadin mind he established an organ of his own

,with the

motto Let there be light !” The new weekly was

not to compete with its effete contemporaries . Itwas to oppose them . It was to speak emphaticallyfor reform

,and its purpose was to cut a way for re

form into the heart of the people . After forty-sixyears we may say,

that this obj ect has been a c

complished . Reform , however , was not an end initself for Wise ; i t was a means only for the re

generation oi Judaism (Debora h,November 5 ,

The “I sra elite,” was as unlike the “

S ina i” of Balti

more,which was schismatic because of the a cknowl

edged impulsiveness of its editor . Wise had his power

under control . He did not scruple to meet opponentsin a free field

,but he treated them not as personal

enemies,a nd never in spite . During ,

the j ournal

I SAAC M. W I SE .

on technical matters of ritual a nd the like crowdedout the thought as to more essential questions .But in all these lay hopeful germs of a larger li fe

a nd of a sound American Judaism .

On October 10,1872 ,

Congregation E ’

ne Yeshu

run appointed a committee of twelve to convoke aConference with the Congregations of the west

,

south and south-west in order to form a Unionof Congregations

,the obj ect of which Should

be : “The establishment of a Jewish TheologicalFaculty for the education of Jewish ministers and

teachers . ” On March 30 ,1873 , the first session Of

representatives of all Cincinnati Congregations washeld

,a nd the first Convention

,

“ representing Con

grega tions west a nd south ,

” took place at MelodeonHall

,Cincinnati

,on July 8 th of the same year— the

Roll Of Delegates showing that twenty-eight citieswere represented . Very appropriately Isaac M .

Wise closed the historic proceedings with prayer .On February 13 ,

1873 ,Henry Adler addressed a

communication to Congregation B’

ne Yeshurun,

Offering to deposit for the endowment for a“Jewish Theological Faculty . The nucleus forthe necessary funds was thus assured

,the rest could

be left to the awakening conscience of the Jews inthis country .

It would be a mistake to suppose that the inauguration of the academic work at Cincinnati wasall that Isaac M . Wise meant to achieve by histireless agitation . Already in 1865 he h ad said“We shall never be silent until we have roused theCongregations of Israel to a consciousness of theirduty .

” A college could not last long without the

THE UN ION AND THE COLLEGE . 83

moral support of the public . The logic in the or

ga niz ing movement demanded that the Congregations be first brought into an alliance. Wise wasthe man who could bring it about

,for he had faith

in the loyalty of the Jew .

The Union of Congregations was more thanmerely formal

,it was to promote distinct needs .

The sol idarity of the Jews of the United States

must become a forceful fact . The American Jewswere up to 1 873 the only denomination withoutcohesion

,and it had

,therefore

,no acknowledged

standing . The first mallet stroke at the initial

session of the Union of American Hebrew Con

grega tions in Cincinnati , July 8 ,1873 , changed this .

American Judaism awoke to self -respect and rose inthe estimation of the American people .

Discord and words had been flung about formany years by conservatives and orthodox ra nd re

formers in an interminable warfare . In the interestof the real Union

,therefore

,every question of doc

trine was excluded and the absolute autonomy ofthe Congregations indorsed ( Proceedings of theCincinnati Convention in the P roceeding s of the

Union of Amer ica n Hebrew Cong reg a tions , Vol . I ,1873

—79 ,p . The local communities were to be

guaranteed an unhampered development and ahealthful life . The time had come when it wasno longer true that American Judaism is “episodic”

( I sra elite, May 18,

but it became more thanever true that “ Israel lives in its Congregations”

( I s ra el ite, July 2 9 ,

The regeneration was not complete,however , un

t il it came from within . The ca lLof the Cincinnati


Congregations declared that the establishment Ofa Jewish Theological Institute is of the highestimportance a nd necessity

,

” and that in it “ the

future advocates of our religion shall be educated .

”

This was a reassertion of what Wise had prophetic

ally said in 1 854 :“Learning saved Judaism before

a nd i t will save it again” ( I sra elite I I,NO . 3 1 ,

p .

This is the place for a sketch of an attempt Wisemade towards the foundation of a college . In hiscall of 1848 already he speaks of the

“great wantof schools

,a nd on September 8 ,

1854 ( I sra elite I ,No . he said :

“We wish to see men in office

who are educated for it and trained for their call

ing . I f our schools should flourish,we must have

teachers who have studied the art of instruction,

a nd know how to apply it ” At the ClevelandConference he had submitted a proj ect for the es

tablishment of Zion College , in which he was supported by several Congregations .

At first he planned the foundation Of boarding

schools— he called them Universities— where Jewishyouths

,including girls

,may be under Jewish influ

ence and acquire a knowledge of Judaism . It wasnot a feasible but a timely scheme . The publ icschools

,at that time

,were sectarian

,and Isidor

Bush ’ s plea in The A smonea n,

” for patronage ofthem by Jewish parents

,quite right in itself

,was

met by the fact that the schools were dominated bythe missionary spirit . The subj ect had been con

s idered at the Cleveland Conference and had beenreferred to a Committee , but nothing came Of it .On November 2 7 , 1 854 , Wise organized a Zion

THE UN I ON AND THE COLLEGE . 85

Collegiate Association,and a board of Officers was

elected . He himself served as Recording a nd Corre

sponding Secretary , and was succeeded by Bernhard

B ettmann,whose identification with all these move

ments i s a matter of history . The Associationexisted only one year

,but the experiment made

i t manifest that the Jews of Cincinnati and those ofLouisville

,New York

,Baltimore and Philadelphia

,

could co-operate . Zion College had no ulterior

Obj ect to train Rabbis , but was to have provided ageneral Jewish culture . Wise had pleaded for themoral and religious upli ft of the people and for

nothing else . He addressed assemblies in Baltimore and other cities

,and Temple Emanuel in New

York indorsed the movement . At a meeting whichhe addressed there

,

“one hundred and twenty-five

men,twenty-five ladies , and also ten youths , . be

came members of a local Zion Collegiate Association .

“We have thrown this sacred enterprise,

” hesaid

,

“ into the arms of the people,and we shall be

greatly mistaken i f the people do not support it .“We hope that we shall at no distant day see onegrand and complete Israelite College for all thestates of the Union . Many petty institutions mightflourish

,but a University worthy of the talents

,

lofty conceptions and practical sense of the Jewishmind requires the support of all . ”

A proj ected consolidation of the Zion CollegiateAssociation and the Jewish Theological Seminary

,

which had been chartered in 185 2 ,came to naught .

Maimonides College of Philadelphia,which was

never more than a local insti tution,had to close

because of its fruitless sectionalism . (Proceedings


Of First Council of American Hebrew Congregations

,p .

These tests gave Wise an insight into the condition a nd convinced him that only by a union of the

congregations could his cherished hope of’

a Rabbinica l College be realized and something be donefor American Judaism . Wise had brought home tothe Jewish public the fact that its naturalization

was going on,that a native strength was now mani

festing itself,and that the current of the new life

was in the direction of his high-going aims . The

congregations had put up with alien teachers,and

alien methods,and alien language

,and an alien

Spirit long enough . They felt themselves American,

and they demanded American Rabbis and Americanteachers for their American-born children . Theywould tolerate no longer an incongruity betweenhome and synagogue

,and

,while they had regard

for the irreproachable men who had served to the

best of their ability,they had a duty to the new

generation .

On October 3 , 1875 , the Hebrew Union Collegewas opened

,and American

.

Judaism became areality . It is tempting to tell of the unique triumph

the records of the Hebrew Union College havebeen to Isaac M . Wise , and to the men who havebeen with him in his ideals a nd in his labors . But

we leave that to the verdict of history . There waspathos in the struggle

,integrity in the work

,and

deep-sightedness in the purpose . Above all,Wise

and his confreres responded to the necessities of theday . About himself he said modestly “ I thank

the Almighty that I am deemed worthy of co

THE UN I ON AND THE COLLEGE . 7

operating in this work of Israel ’ s resurrection

(Report of President H . U . C . ,September 10

,

1876 , p . 3 19 . Also Annual Report,July

,1877 , p .

337 )The stri fe was ended

,the West could afford

to cease its provoking independence and the Eastits hostili ty and truculence . A joint report ofthe Board of Delegates of American Israelites

,and

Of a Committee of the Union of American HebrewCongregations at the session in New York

,Febru

ary 1 1,1887 , agreed on establishing a Preparatory

School for the Hebrew Union College in the City

of New York,and at the Fifth Council of Mil

waukee,July

,1878 (Report , p . the Prepara

tory School of Temple Emanuel was declared apreparatory school of the Hebrew Union College .

The Sixth Council of New York made the first appropriation for its maintenance (Proceedings , p .

The school,however

,lingered ineffectually

for some years and was eventually abandoned . The

center of American Judaism henceforth was uncontestedly in Cincinnati .Isa ac M . Wise was President of the Hebrew

Union College for twenty-five years , from the

moment of its establishment to his death . He gaveit the morale it has

,and if its graduates may be said

to have brought about a renaissance in AmericanJudaism

,i t is because he gave them training and

zeal . Their careers have been inspirited by an

emulation of the example he has set them . H is reports to the Board of Governors of the Collegeteem with avowals that the Law is sovereign andthat learning is sacred . He does not tire to reiter


ate that the Rabbinate of the future must not slipinto routine , that it must strive to be creative . His

pains- taking lectures on the Theology of Judaism,

on the Immutability of the Law,on Jewish Phil

osophy,on Apologetics

,and on other subj ects

,a p

peal to his pupils with force . They feel that what

he said has more than class-room significance . Hewas a man such as youths with impulses and ideals

must a dmire and love,and he entered the lives of

his pupils in every forceful sense .


met . He proposed to make it clear that Judaismdoes not contradict the valid claims of science . Hehimself h a d “plunged into the whirlpool of philosophy

,as he says in the preface of “The Cosmic God

,

”

and had “come out of i t unharmed and invigorated .

Wise ’ s “The Cosmic God” is an answer to thosewho harassed Judaism along with all religions

,and

i s a defense of faith against those who had become

enslaved by the “Zei tg eist.

” It is the pathos of rel igion that it must close in with any one whom it

listeth to provoke a quarrel . “The Cosmic God ”

rendered a distinct service,by setting an example

of good sense as well as courage,for it met the

Skeptics on their own ground . Isaac M . Wise wasthe first Rabbi in the United States who saw the

duty of the hour . Congregation E ’

ne Yeshurun,

on the other hand,was the only congregation in the

land which indorsed its Rabbi in his lectures on atechnically untraditional subj ect . It appreciated thefact that a Rabbi ’ s thought must not be restricted

,

and that i t i s his distinct function to repel attacks onwhat is dear and forever true to the heart Of man .

The second kind of Wise ’ s literary work also metexisting conditions . In 1868 he published “The

Origin of Christianity and a Commentary on the

Acts of the Apostles” ( 8vo , 535 pages) ; in 1874,“The Martyrdom Of Jesus of Nazareth

,a Histor

ico -Critical Treatise on the Last Chapter of theGospel” ( 134 pages) ; in 1883 ,

“Judaism a nd Chris

tia nity,their Agreements and Disagreements”

( 1 2 3 pages) , and in 1889 ,

“A Defense of Juda

ism versus Proselytizing Christianity” ( 1 2 9 pages) .

Cincinna ti,1876, 181 pages .

I SAAC M . W I SE AS AN“AUTHOR . I

Each assigns to Judaism a definite position towardthe Christian denominations , which were urgingclaims for conversion .

“The Origin of Christian

ity,

” however,has a scholarly purpose besides that

of a pologetics . Wise dedicated it to the “FreeReligious Association , and declares (Preface , p .

iv) that he wrote it“with the utmost regard for re

l igion a nd for the Bible, with due reverence forChristianity

,the important factor in the history of

civilization,and with a profound regard for the re

ligious feelings of all‘

good men .

” He set aright

the historical value of the New Testament records .Of course

,a refutation with regard to that would

in consequence invalidate the canonical characterof the New Testament . Wise went out of thebeaten track and availed himself of the Talmudic

sources . A Jewish treatment of the schism,

a t

the time of the origin of Christianity,seems ob

vious nowadays , but it was not that thirty years

ago . We may not subscribe to Wise ’s identificationof Acher and Paul

,and it may be that he

is not altogether confirmed by recent authorities on

the authorship of the gospels in his thesis that therewas a lingering Judaism in both Pauline and PetrineChristianity ; but this much is incontestable : Wise

’ sanalysis in the “Origin” is the first serious attempt

on the part of a Jew to approach the problem in

other ways than those of polemics . He was the firstRabbi who wrote on the origin of Christianity as a

historian without passion . To Christians his book

suggested that the Jew ; too , had something to contribute

,and that from the Jews might be had the

genuine light upon the origin of their faith . Jews ,


on the other hand,were told for the first time that

the appreciation of Christianity was also a Jewishduty .

A translation of Adolf W isclecenius,B ibel f ur

a’enhena

’e L eser ( I sra el ite, and still earlier

,in

1858—59 and 1863 , a number of essays on the New

Testament , in 1869 an essay in ten chapters on“Jesus Himself , and a number of critical articles

on Bible passages which have an alleged bearing onthe Messianic doctrine of Christianity

,and in 1873

“Three Lectures on Jesus,the Apostles and Paul

( reprinted in this volume ) were followed in 1874 by

the “Martyrdom of Jesus of Nazareth .

” In the

last Wise declared : “The crucifixion of Jesus wasnot decreed by the Almighty

,his martyrdom was

not necessary for the salvation of mankind,and the

dogma of vicarious atonement is immoral (p .

Wise was forced to a campaign into the heart of

Christendom through zealots and missionaries whohad swarmed over the communities of the Jews .The fiction that the Jews had crucified Jesus had

then still the force of a doctrine,and gave sanction

to fanaticism and traditional resentment against

them . I t was with a wider outlook into the futurethat Wise undertook to vindicate scandalized Juda

ism . His book was “A Defense oi Religion in

Behalf of Truth and Christianity .

”

“Judaism and Christianity,their Agreements and

Disagreements” i s a fuller treatise on “ChristianEvidences .

” Judaism and Christianity are not

competitive religions,but . supplementary to one

another.

“Christianity in its primitive and original

form was a Jewish sect” “The Sinaitic revelation


ume he had published in Albany (See pp . 42—44 of

this book ) , and as a text-book for the Hebrew UnionCollege . It deals with the period from Zerubabel

to the Fall of Jerusalem,and he declared himself

on the origin and composition of almost every bookof the Bible

,of the Apocrypha of the Old Testa

ment,of the New Testament

,on the Great Synod

and on Jewish jurisprudence . It is the only comprehensive text-book of Jewish history written byan American Jewish author for American Jewishstudents

,and is also the only attempt made to treat

Jewish history as an organic whole . He comes tothe following conclusions “

1 . Exodus and Leviticus were edited after the death of Moses— from theoriginal documents— and contain few of the edi tor ’ sadditions and many omissions (perhaps also exag

gera tions ) in the historical portions . They mayhave been edited any time after the Conquest andnot later than the time of Deborah . 2 . Numberswas edited later

,from fragments omitted by the for

mer and parts originally belonging to Deuteronomy .

3 . Genesis and Deuteronomy are the original works

of Moses,with some very few later additions in

Deuteronomy . 4 . Numbers bears the imprint of

the prophet Samuel,by whom ( and his School ) i t

must have been edited . The additions to

Deuteronomy also do not reach beyond the time

of Samuel . ” (“Pronaos

,p . He assigns

the book of Ruth ( see , however ,“Pronaos ,

” pp .

1 2 0 Jonah,some of the Psalms

,such as 19 , 10 3 ,

104 ,1 19 ,

1 2 7 , 137 ,and the book of Job , to the

Medo-Persian period ; the Song of Songs , Esthera nd Ecclesiastes , Psalms 49 , 50 , 5 2

—4 , 7 1 , 73 , 74

-

9 ,

I SAAC M . W I SE As AN AUTHOR . 95

along with Daniel,the Wisdom of Jesus ben Sirach

and the Wisdom of Solomon to the Grecian period,

a nd,finally

,Psalms 46—8 ,

66,67 , 7 1 , 106

,1 15

— 1 19 ,

144 ,146

— 150 to the Revolutionary period . Wemay believe that his critical hypotheses are not yetverified

,but we must acknowledge that Wise ap

pealed to what must remain the arbiter in everyquestion of criticism

,namely

,the character of the

literature which reflects the temper of the time,the

soul of the people .

From November 1 2,1886

,to March 18

,1887 ,

Wise published a series of articles on Essence of

Religion,

” “The Elements of Theology,

” “On Judaism

,Abrahamism and Mosaism

,

” “The Covenant,

“The Sources of the Theology of Judaism,

” andThe Thora of Moses . These were followed byApologetics of Judaism

,

“That God is andWhat He is

,

” “The Theology of Moses,

” “Revelation

,Inspiration

,Prophecy

,and a large number of

other essays on kindred subj ects . In these he showedthat Judaism is essentially an elaboration of therevelation on Mount Sinai

,and that the Ten Com

mandments contain germinally the theology andmorality of the Mosaic and post-Mosaic phases of

Judaism . The series culminated in several articleson the Authenticity and Last Edition of thePentateuch

,

” the main argument of which consti

tu tes the closing chapter of his “Pronaos” ( 193pages) . This book appeared in 189 1 .

The Pronaos” attacks “negative criticism,in

order to “ save the records whicho

establish Bibletruth . Wise ’ s defense of the integrity

,as well as

the primitivity,of the books of the Bible was not


like that of a conservative Christian whose faithwould collapse

,i f the Canonical substructure of it be

impaired,and who rej ects in every sense the a scer

ta ined methods of criticism ,which Wise respected .

In fact,Wise acknowledged that there is a caleu

lable good in the New School of Biblical criticism,

for— however much the critics may diverge in detail— they share in the conviction that the fountainsof Judaism are not stagnant . It was their accountof Bible history

,however

,which he rej ected

'

as

untenable . He resented on that account the a d

vanced school of Kuenen and of Wellhausen asvehemently as he protested against the moderatecriticisms of Geiger a nd Graetz . He refused to ally

himself with such as put suspicion on the documentswhich were very sacred to him .

.The genius of the

Jewish faith,he felt

,must be rescued from the reach

of a new skepticism,as in his “Cosmic God” he had

tried to save i t from the old skepticism . Whence

comes that force of li fe,of adaptability

,by which

the Jewish people has evidenced that it is chosen ?

An act of God fixed the destiny of the race ; notman nor men of genius

,not even prophets . The

divine truths a nd the illumination they give have

come from God himself , who is at the center ofthought as of li fe . The Thora is , accordingly , the

repository of the revelation of God ,a nd the un

alienable source ( a nd standard ) of Judaism ( Pronaos

,p . The critics and evolutionists in re

ligion have no such positiveness ; they cannot explain Judaism except in terms of opportunism .

There are Jews,who justi fy Rabbinical legalism in

some such way . And there are Christians as well


a translation of Johlson’

s Lehren der mosaischeReligion ,

” Philadelphia,

1830 . But while theswere in a certain degree faithful to the Jewisspirit , they were , in the main , disputa tiona l an

partisan . American Judaism would have been exposed to incalculable mischief , i f a tone of disput

would have been introduced into the schools . Mostof the school-books that were extant were withoutan inner unity

,some of them aff ected conservatism

,

a nd some suggested extremist Views ; all of themwere flagrant violations of the principles of educationa l science . Wise has given us the first hint a t

the possibilities with regard to religious text -books .He avoided apology and polemic and was scrupulousabout pedagogic form . Is it too much to hope thatthe religious school-books of the future will notviolate the elementary laws of teaching ?

In 1866,Wise prepared the second volume of Min

hag America,

” for Congregation B’ne Yeshurun ,

and it was in use throughout the country until theappearance of the second volume of the Union

Prayer Book . It will be remembered mainly for

the impressive Seelenfeier i t contained . This bea u

tiful piece of impassioned devotion is a classic in

American -Jewish literature . Two years afterwardsWise published his “Hymns

,Psalms and Prayers

,

”

“as an expression of our religious feelings,hopes

and wishes in the language most acceptable and in

the form most agreeable to our age ” (p . MinnaKleeberg

,Maurice and Nathan Mayer

,Isidor Ka

lisch and Wolf Rothenheim contributed to this vol

ume,but he proj ected it as a suggestion for an Amer!

ican-Jewish liturgy , a nd in the conception of this he

I SAAC M . WISE As AN AUTHOR . 99

was alone . A liturgy is an essential condition foredifica tion

,and worship is something more than text

and melody . Many “ independent” congregationsstill tolerate a promiscuous service , according to the

taste of organist and singer . Wise here again is a

pioneer,and it is to be regretted that the interval of

thirty-two years,since he introduced his “Hymns

,

Songs and Prayers,

” has not brought us any reformaccording to his conception .

All of Wise ’ s books,the historical

,the contro

versia l , and the educational are so many avenuesalong which his personality reached out .From theology

,Biblical criticism

,and liturgic and

pedagogic reform,we may finally turn to romances

and novels,for such

,too

,Wise wrote . Wise never

trifled ; he wrote these last with as much earnestness as he wrote on Revelation and the Synod .

Jewish writers to-day ought to make use of thewealth of moral life

,of tragedy and of pathos

,

that lies in . the history of the Jews . No alien

can quite succeed in getting near to the Jewishheart . We must return to our own hearthstones

,and the reformation amongst us

,which has

been largely formal,must now become moral .

Wise may have been premature in his novel writing

,but he saw very early that there should be a

revival of pride in our beautiful history,and that

the virtues of our ancestry have a Vi talizing powersuch as the story of all heroism has . Wise tookhis subj ects out of Jewish history and treated themwith psychological tact . In this

,too

,he showed a

high order of ability . I mention the following : “TheConvert

,

”1854 ;

“The Jewish Heroine,

”1854 ( trans

OO I SAAC M . WI SE.

lated from the Spanish ) ;“The Catastrophe at Eger

,

a narrative of the Sixteenth century ; “The Shoemaker ’ s Family

,1855 ;

“Resignation and Fidelity,

or Life a nd Romance , 1855 ;“Romance

,Philosophy

and Caba la h , or the Conflagra tion at Frankfort o . t .M.

,a narrative of the last century

,1855 ;

“TheLast Struggle of the Nation

,

” “The Combat

of the People,or Hillel and Herod

,1858 ; and the

“First of theMa ccabbees ;”

Tand a number of others

throughout the earlier volumes of the I sra elite.

In German he wrote :“Die Juden von Lands

huth ;“ Der Rothkopf Oder des Schulmeister ’ s

Tochter ;“Baruch und sein Ideal” and others ,

all of which he published serially in D ieDebora h .

”

”Tra ns la ted into French by Ra bbin Dreyfous , Of Mulhouse ,

a nd published in “L e l ien d ’I sr a el .”

TDrama tized in Hebrew by Dr . Bl iden a nd J . Epstein ,

Jerusa lem, 5654.

PLUM STREET TEMPLE .

CONGREGATI ON B ’

NE YESHURUN . 10 1

CHAPTER X .

I SAAC M . W I SE AND CONGREGATI ON B’

NE YESHU

RUN .

W ise,entered upon his Rabbinate in Congrega

tion B ’

ne Yeshurun on April 2 6,1854 ,

and occupiedit till his death

,March 2 6

,1900 ,

nearly forty- sixyears . His ministerial labors are as typical of hischaracter as we have thus far found his other a ctivities were . The Congregation was already in 1848

one of the most thoughtful in the country . It hadindorsed Wise ’ s appeal of that year by a formalresolution and by the appointment of delegates toattend the proposed convention . H is words hadevoked admiration , and the response given to themby the Congregation was as prompt as it was hearty .

B’

ne Yeshurun was a homogeneous community,

without that admixture of elements which hadbeen the cause of disturbances in other Congregations . There Were sturdy men in it who hadbrought with them from their European homes agenuine love for Judaism and a considerable degree

of culture . Above all,they had honest convie

tions,and appreciated that they bore grave re

sponsibilities toward the future of Judaism in thiscountry . It does not diminish the credit of hisleadership

,i f we assert that Isaac M . Wise would

not have achieved success,

'

despite his acknowledgedgifts

,without the intelligent sympathy and the sub

s tantia l assistance his Congregation gave him . His


torica l j ustice awards to Congregation B ’

n'

e Yeshu

run a position of honor in American Judaism byreason of its record as a “Mother in Israel . ”

In the latter part of 1853 , Wise was invited to

come t o Cincinnati and to meet the people of theCongregation . These had watched him from thedistance

,and had admired him for his strong words

in behalf of Union and Progress . They fpund inhim

,on meeting him personally

,the qualities of a

man of first caliber,and at once offered him their

pulpit and their hearts . But Wise,conscious of the

responsibilities implied in the call to the Congre

ga tion as much as to himself,deferred the negotiat ions

,so as to give time to both Sides for delibera

tion instead of yielding to impulse . After the lapseof several months , he offered to release the Congregation from the Obligations they had assumed

,i f they

believed that they had risked their corporate interest by his election . But the Congregation insistedon its call

,and

,accordingly

,he was duly installed

,

April 2 6,1854 . Congregation B ’

ne Yeshurun was

evidently eager to enter with him upon the cam

pa ign of reform . It has,indeed

,given him sus

ta ined devotion and co-operation for fifty years,and

we know now that the pioneer members had beenfar- sighted

,for they had indeed secured the right

man . From the moment of his arrival in Cincinnati

,B

’

ne Yeshurun and Isaac M . Wise were iden

tified in every public-spirited enterprise,and their

names are linked together inseparably .

It will be my task in this chapter to narrate what

Wise did as Rabbi and the services he rendered tohis Congregation . These more local labors have


opened for Dr . Max Li lienthal , whose friendship withWise from that date ‘was uninterrupted up to the latter ’s death

,in 1882 . The Louisville Congregation de

cla red i t would ask for no more than a sermon once amonth . This , too , was declined . But the last of thecalls

,to which a number of others could be added

,

might have been crucial . It was given Wise by Con

grega tion Anshe Chesed ,in 1873 , when he was in his

prime and harbored great plans . This Congregationelected him for life

,and offered him lucrative emol

uments,and

,what was very tempting to him

,great

possibilities for a Rabbinical College in the wealthy

East . His rej ection of this call marks a turning

point in Wise ’ s life,and it brought about also that

the Cincinnati community roused itself up to hisstandard of earnestness and capacity for sacrifice .

On August 24 ,1866

,Wise dedicated the magnifi

cent Temple oi Congregation E ’

ne Yeshurun withimpressive ceremonies and the writer will never for

get the fervor with which Wise once pointed up tothe great dome Of this Temple and asked that the

sons , for whom the fathers had built i t , turn theireyes heavenward with equal piety . In a communi

cation which Wise addressed to the Congregation atthe time when the building of the Temple was be

ing planned,he decl ared it was about time “Juda

ism welcome the light of day and deck i tself withbecoming pride !” Since that day ( and many times

before) Wise offi ciated at the dedication of syna

gogues , so that it i s likely that he dedi cated everyJewish house of worship in the United States westof the Alleghenies a nd many in the east Of them .

He witnessed not only the rearing of palatial

CONGREGAT I ON B ’

NE YESHURUN . 10 5

structures,but also the rise of Jews to self-respect and

to gladness in a faith that can afford to stand in the

light of the world .

We have already spoken of the point of viewwhich Wise had in his large-scoped reform of Jewish

American affairs,and we have said that he scorned

mere surface- improvements and that he strove to putthe germs of l ife into them . He desired to securefor the Jews such conditions as would insuregrowth and a healthy religious life . H is rabbinicalrecord is replete with evidences that it was wiseand practical . He was no opportunist

,and he was

uncontroled by either his own whims or by the

whims of others . He had but little opposition athome as compared with the hostility he encounteredelsewhere

,but he was-understood by those who

came into touch with him,and it took a long time

for others to perceive that he wa s prompted bysingleness of purpose . Congregation B ’

ne Yeshu

run wa s spared the turmoil through which othercongregations had to pass

,largely because the

character of its Rabbi was a guarantee that What he

said and proposed to do was genuine . Thus i t ‘

came that the abrogation of a number of customswhich had lost meaning was not accompanied byany disturbances of the congregational peace

,and the

innovations Wise made offended nobody . It will bed ifficult to find a parallel in this respect . Startingwith the current orthodoxy of the old days

,Con

grega tion B’

ne Yeshurun has gone through all thephases of the Reform Movement into a religiousstatus which is the highest and the most vital .

B’

ne Yeshurun has uniformly reflected the spiri t

10 6 I SAAC M . WISE .

of the day. When Wise made his first attempt togive Jewish worship a modern form , and published

his Minhag America,his Congregation adopted it

forthwith,and encouraged him by requesting a sec

ond volume for the holidays . His “Hymns and

Prayers” was received with similar favor in 1868,

and when,in 189 2 ,

the Central Conference of American Rabbis edited a “Union Prayer Book ,

E’

ne

Yeshurun accepted it upon Wise ’ s recommendationrather than upon any proven effi ciency of it .

He introduced the right of confirmation on hisfirst Shabuoth in Cincinnati . Though he had confirmed boys a nd girls already in Albany and several before in Germany

,he is original in the in

terpreta tion of confirmation . It was not to be asacrament

,but an educational discipline . In the

Talmud Yelodim Institute,which had been estab

lished as a parochial school in 1849 ,he applied

this thought of his with regard to religious education . The Institute had had its origin in the failure

of the Public Schools to be j ust to the fair claimsthat the citizenship of all faiths had equally . UntilI 868 the schools were sectarian . TalmudYelodim In

s titute ceased as a day school as soon as zealotry cameto an end in the Public Schools

,and Congregation

B’

ne Yeshurun adopted it then as a religious Sabbath School

'

The Institute had served substa n

tia lly in the educat ion of the Jewish youth ,but re

ligious training began to be an issue by itself . Forthis the formality of Confirmation was of course

,

insuffi cient . Wise addressed himself to this newquestion with his usual acumen a nd industry . An


the Aged and Infirm in Cleveland,Ohio . At

the Conference in that city,a year after he ha d

arrived at Cincinnati,he proposed that “a Com

mittee be appointed to lay a plan before thenext Synod to establish a Widows ’ and Orphans ’

Asvlum in some central location of the United

States , accessible to all individuals and supported

by all congregations . ” In 1855 ,he appealed to

President Buchanan for his intercession for the en

franchisement of the Jews in Switzerland by W ith

holding his approval of a treaty proposed by thatgovernment , and , assisted by Lilienthal and severalothers

,he was successful . A similar timely inter

view with James G . Blaine,then Secretary of State

,

went far toward ameliorating the May laws of 1882,

by which Russian Jews who had become Americancitizens were assured their rights in Russia . Hewas a loyal democrat and evinced his fidelity to his

party in almost the last editorial he wrote . During

the days of the Emancipation Struggle,he was

nominated for the State Senatorship,but declined

it because of his distaste to the excitements of apolitical campaign . I t will surprise no one who

knew the intensity Of his cosmopolitan nature , i f

I record here the fact that he traveled with Kossirth

for some time,and had a share in that patriot ’ s

historic appeal to the free American people . He

was the first Jewish Rabbi who Ofli cia ted as Chap

lain of a Legislature . Two of the prayers heOffered in this capacity in the State Capitol atAlbany are printed in the “

A smonea n” of January

30 ,1 852 . In the days of the stalwart independents

CONGREGATI ON B’

NE YESHURUN .

in both Church as well as of State,Wise was a

friend of the most famous of them,Thurlow Weed

,

Horace Greeley,William H . Seward

,President

Fillmore, .W ill iam C . Bryant

,Governor Seymour

,

the Beechers,and later also of O . B . Frothingham ,

and he was Vice-President of the Free ReligiousAssociation of Boston . In short

,Wise was in

the current of life,and allied himself with all

men and every movement for political and moralj ustice .

Wise ’ s emphatic defense of the Sabbath is wellknown . He was an uncompromising upholder ofits sanctity . He invested it not only with doctrinal

importance,but made it also useful . In the winter

of 1866,he began to deliver lectures on Friday

evenings,and continued these till his death . He

treated of profound and of current matters ; he

spoke of creeds as well as of practical matters . Weare indebted to these courses of lectures for manyof his books . It was in the pulpit

,in fact

,where

Wise,forceful on many occasions

,was circumspect

at all times . His style was simple and direct,his

manner natural,betokening certainty and self—con

control,and his thought was clear and methodic .

He stated his text and subj ect without elaborateintroduction

,and submitted his conclusions with

severe singleness of purpose . Few were more con

vincing than he , though it would have been easy to

be more ornate . He was the first American Jewishpreacher who took his sermons seriously as appeals

and not as academic disquisitions . His sermonswere engines of warfare into the heart of his

I SAAC M. W I SE .

auditors,j ust as his lectures were battering- rams

against materialism and intolerant Christendom .

The files of the “Amer ica n I sr a el ite

” are filled withhis pulpit addresses

,and testify to the fact that his

eloquence came from his manhood and not throughart . (Debora h

,April 2

,

I have narrated elsewhere what part Congregation B

’

ne Yeshurun took in the formation of theUnion of American Hebrew Congregations . Itgave the impulsive and took the initiative in it

,and

it has been its sponsor for twenty-five years . Thefirst President of the Union and the only President

of the Board Of Governors of the Hebrew. UnionCollege

,during the entire history of the College

,

and the leading men who have borne the brunt ofthe struggle and are bearing still the burden of the

responsibilities,are men from B

’

ne Yeshurun . It

is plain that Dr . Wi'

se would have been impotentwithout the sympathy and assistance of these .

Providence has done in this instance what i t does so

often when a great cause is at stake : i t brings kindredspirits into co-operation . In the establishment andthe management of the College

,Wise a nd B

’

ne

Yeshurun were also fellow-workers,and may share

honors and gratification . When in 1 873 Wise wastempted by Congregation Anshe Chesed

,of New

York,to remove from Cincinnati

,he hoped that set

tlement in the metropolis would bring his proj ects to

speedier fulfillment . But Congregation B ’

ne Yeshu

run reassured him of i ts sincere support , and it hasmade these promises good to the fullest extent .The history of the Hebrew Union College may,

I I 2 I SAAC M. W I SE .

already he felt what that would He was thena young man , full of zeal and ardor . His illustrious career

,which is now complete

,has confirmed

his own prognostication . He was,indeed

,a prophet

with power from God,one of the classics .

On March 2 6,1900 ,

he was bedded to rest in the

Jewish Cemetery on Walnut Hills,and he Sleeps

near the chapel in which he had spoken many aword of comfort . We carried him to his grave in

pride,a nd we passed away from it in tears .

You a nd I rema in ; ou r pa th is pla inThe ra nk from out of wh ich he stepped

,we fil l .

His sa cred ca use,we

’

11 cherish it,ma inta in ;

God bless ed h is l ife : He will defend us stil l T

.Dmns Dm‘m; i s mBn mm rpmm‘hp

inns mS‘an u rns

.m ‘i mm rs

55p‘a m 15m me i

‘m‘Dfl‘J’J DEW” 7 1

*Alba ny,April 29 , 5610 ,

in A smonea n ,Vol . I I , No . 2 , May

3, 1850 ; a l so ,in I s r a el i te , May 2

,1856 .

TB . B ettma nn,in “History of Congrega tion B

’

h e Vesh ~

urun,

”1892 .

AN APPRECIATI ON .

AN

BY PROF . DR . M . M IELZINER .

Know ye not that a prince a nd a great manhath fallen this day in Israel ?

”

( 2 Sam . i i i .These were the lamenting words of King Davidafter the funeral of his greatest general

,whose

death threw all Israel into the deepest gloom . Andthe very same words may be applied to him whosedemise we are mourning . Dr . Isaac M . Wise wasa prince a nd a great man in Israel . He was a

prince,a spiritual prince

,a trusted leader

,not only

of his congregation,but an acknowledged leader in

Israel also . And more than this,he was a great

man,distinguished by the noblest qualities of mind

a nd heart,which made him beloved a nd revered by

all who knew him,by all who came in touch with

him . And,therefore

,his death is felt

,not alone

by our community of this city,but also by all Jew

ish congregations in this country, .a s was evidenced

by the numerous rabbis and representatives thatcame from near and distant ci ties to Show the lasthonor to the prince a nd great man that has fallenin Israel .Eulogies in honor of the deceased great leader

a nd teacher will soon be delivered from the pulpitsof all temples a nd synagogues of this country . But

Memor ia l Addres s del ivered a t the Hebrew Union Coll ege , Ma rch 3 1 , 1900 .


i t was found to be proper that already to-day at there opening of our interrupted sessions a memorialservice be held here in our Hebrew Union College .

For who has more cause to honor the memory ofthe departed great leader than this college ? Thisinstitution was his beloved ch ild

,which he fostered

and brought up,and to which he devoted his best

time a nd power , aye , his very last activity in life was

the instruction he gave here on last Saturday j ust

before having received the warning stroke that theend was near . I know ,

students,that you loved and

revered him as dutiful sons do love and revere their

fathers,a nd you have reason to lament : We are

now orphaned,for our spiritual father is no more !

Addressing you on this occasion,i t is not my in

tention to deliver an oration in which to review theli fe and work of our lamented President . For thispurpose the time is too limited

,and my innermost

being is still too much agitated by the grief overour great loss to be able to do j ustice to it . I shallrestrict myself to point out in a few plain words

some characteristic features of the work and themerits Of our departed friend and teacher .My friends

,we a re told in the Talmud that when

R . Joch a na n ben Zaccai , the most distinguished

teacher of his time,was about to die

,he was sur

rounded by his disciples,who asked for his last

admonition a nd blessing,a nd on this occasion they

addressed him with the words

.pmn wins

,men-1 may, saw as

Thou a rt the l ight f or I sra el , the r ight-ha nd pil

la r,thepowerfu l hammer .

”-(Ta lm . B era choth


Ghetto in former times of oppression a nd persecu

tion,which could not harmonize with the spirit of

this land Of liberty and freedom . The prospect of

maintaining and developing Judaism on this blessed

soil of freedom was dark and gloomy . But Dr .Wise ’ s endeavors were at once directed towardbringi ng l ight into the existing darkness

,order a nd

harmony into the prevailing disorder and imminent

dissolution .

With the motto,Let there be light

,he pub

lished a paper devoted to religious instruction andenlightenment

,which paper ever since from week

to week has spoken to the minds and hearts of our

people to the remotest parts of the country .

Through this paper as well as by the power of hiseloquent word

,which resounded in almost every

synagogue and temple in the United States , and

everywhere instructed , edified and enthused largeaudiences

,he exercised a wonderful influence upon

our congregations,near and far

,and succeeded in

rej uvenating Judaism by freeing it from notionsa nd practices of the Ghetto

,from dead and obsolete

forms and ceremonies,a nd by bringing its mode of

worship and its'

appea ra nce more in harmony withmodern thought and culture and with the happiercircumstances under which we are living here in

this free a nd enlightened country .

And also as author of several important literaryworks on Jewish history

,on philosophy and the

ology,he proved a light for Israel

,as thereby he

spread knowledge of Israel ’ s glorious history andsublime mission a nd teachings

,not Only among our

own people,but also among our non -Jewish fellow

AN APPREC IAT ION . 1 I 7

citizens,and thereby secured a better understand

ing and estimation of the Jew and his religion .

R . Jocha na n is further called by his disciples ,The right-hand pillar . ”

What does this mean ?

In the porch of King Solomon ’ s temple wereerected

,as you know

,two pillars . The pillar on

the right Side had the name Of f a chin ,which word

means he establishes .

” By calling Jochanan b .

Z .,the right-hand pillar allusion was made to his

undying merit of having established an institution

which proved a mighty pillar for the support of

the temple of Judaism . I do not need to tell you ,my

friends,to what institution I refer . When the Ro

man general granted the request of R . Jochanan b .

Zaccai to be permitted to establish an academy atJabneh

,he could not foresee that by this Judaism

would be saved for from that academy went forththe great master minds that developed Israel ’ s lawand secured its continuation for future generations .And so also Dr . Wise established institutions for

the maintenance of Judaism in this our promisedland . I shall not speak of his great merit of having

,through his influence

,established the Union

Of American Hebrew Congregations,which ha s

proven a powerful factor of promoting the cause ofJudaism

,nor of his merit as founder and effi cient

president of the Central Conference of AmericanRabbis

,which comprises almost all the rabbis of

the United States . I only refer to his meri t asfounder of the Hebrew Union College for the cultivation of Jewish knowledge and literature and forthe education of rabbis and spiritual leaders of

1 18 ISAAC M . W I SE.

American Hebrew Congregations . TO his foresighta nd W isdom

,to his unti ring labors and undaunted

energy we owe the existence of this college,which

some twenty years ago seemed to be an impossibilityhere on American soil . Even those who from the

beginning discouraged the undertaking of establishing i t

,and for a long time even antagonized it

,ad

mit now willingly its necessity,i ts usefulness and

its great blessing for the maintenance of Judaism inthis country

,especially since graduates went forth

from this college who occupy the pulpits of some of

the largest congregations throughout the country .

He was not only the founder of this college,but

ever since its foundation until his last moment its

president a nd one of its most effi cient professors .You students were daily witnesses of the faithfuland self-denying devotion and fatherly care which

he,in spite of the increasing disabilities of old age ,

and in spite of his other arduous labors and duties

as Rabbi of one of the largest congregations and aseditor of two religious papers

,uninterruptedly be

stowed upon this institution and its students andtheir studies . Verily

,to him

,too

,applies the epi

thet,The right-hand pillar . ”

Finally,R . Jocha nan ben Za cca i

’

s activity wasalso characterized by the attribution that he was a“ strong

,powerful hammer .

The same master of old who,when he once pro

pounded to his disciples the question , What should

man endeavor most eagerly to obtain ?” gave hisapproval to the answer of the one who said

,Man ’ s

best possession is a kind and noble heart,

— thesame master who was of so kindly a nd gentle a dis

1 2 0 I SAAC M . WI SE .

forms,he took care to replace them by new ones ,

more and better answering to their purpose,more

appealing to mind and heart .My friends

,i t i s a Talmudical saying A sage

who dies can not be replaced .

“ The harmoniouscombination of excellent qualities and virtues found

in one sage can not easily be found again in another .

Also,Dr . Wise can not be replaced .

“ Oh,for

those who are gone and can not be replaced . Hecan not easily be replaced in our college

,neither in

our community nor in American Judaism .

The last blessing that R . Jocha nan b . Z . gave tohis mourning dis ciples was : May the fear of God

( that is , true religiousness) influence all your a c

tions .

”

Your master,for whom you are mourning

,left

you a similar blessing and admonition in that Psalmverse which

,as we were informed in the funeral

oration,he had selected as his li fe ’ s motto

,and

which he himself had selected as text for his funeral

sermon ; i t is the verse“Who is the man who feareth the Lord ? Him

shall God instruct'

the way that he shall choose ”

( Psalm xxv . That is,true religiousness influ

ences our actions,leads us the right way on which

to go .

Take,my young friends

,the lesson of thi s Bible

verse to heart . Make it your life ’ s motto . Followin the footsteps of yori r departed master ; take his

noble virtues as your model . Thus you will proveyourselves to be his true disciples . Thus you will

honor his memory .

AN APPREC IATION . I 2 I

May God in His mercy send consolation to all

who mourn over the master who is no more .

May God in his mercy send the balm of consola

tion to the wounded hearts of those who were bound

to the departed by the most tender ties of love andaffection .

Let us how to His divine ‘

will .

Amen .

LECTURES AND ESSAYS .

I SAAC M . W ISE .

ception that the Pentateuch is the exclusivebasis ofJudaism

,a nd the standard by which the rest of Scrip

ture must be understood . Among the pre-Ta lmudical rabbis only the Pentateuch is called Scripture

(ZhDZ’L‘t mm) ; the other books Of the Bible are

called the received or traditional material (unmetIt was the opinion of both Rabbi Jonaha n and Simonben Lakish that in future the authority of Prophetsa nd Hagiography will cease

,but that of the five

books of the Law will never cea se .T This Viewis substantiated by a rational study of the wholeBible . The body of law and doctrine is the Pen

ta teuch,expressed o r implied . Therefore

,those

expounders of the Law who place themselves uponthe standpoint of those critics who maintain thatthe five books of Moses

,or portions thereof

,were

written by prophets after Moses,must admit that

those prophets recorded in the Pentateuch thequintessence of their religious and ethical knowledge . Judaism must be studied in the Pentateuch .

The post-biblical expositions on doctrine areca lled Hag a a

’a ; those on law are called Ha la cha .

The Hag a a’a,in i ts various forms

,expounds

,mostly

homiletically,passages of the Bible

,especially nar

ra tives , and is therefore called Hag a a’a,which sig

nifies that which is narrated . The Ha la cha, liter

*See, for insta nce ,tha t very ancient pa ssage in S z

’

p/zr z‘

Shela ch, WDJTIJ, Sec . 2 12 .

TYer usha lm i Megillah I . jf7 fny D’a m D’NJDJH

mm“: 3mm: m: min nan nwcm SumsTrips m

‘mnmm . The pa ssage in B a bl i,N iddah ,

6lb,refers to a future sta te of existence. Dea th a bsolves

man from a ll obliga tions of the law.

THE LAW . 1 2 7

ally the path or walk,expounds the laws Of Moses

,

and extends their application,either on scholastic

grounds.

or to meet new emergencies . The Ha la cha

relies for i ts authority (WNW) only on the laws commanded after the Sinaitic revela tion .

>l< Laws establ ished before that event

,and adopted by Israel

,are

supposed to have been repeated on Mount Sinai(”JDD Any Ha la cha not based uponan express law of Moses is supposed to be basedupon a mere suggestion ( tt h) , for which rabbinicalauthority only is claimed . Any Ha la cha logicallyimplied in a law of Moses

,a nd derived therefrom

by any of the thirteen rules of rabbinical ha rmeneu

tics,is

,in the opinion of the rabbis

,of authority

equal with that of the law of Moses itself,because

it i s logi cally contained therein , except in penallaw

,where it is the rule that reasoning from analogy

gives no authority to impose any fine or punishment

(pm It: T’WJW rs ) . In cases of doubt as to

the Mosaic perm ission or prohibition of an act(xnfifi x

‘rP50) , i t was considered prohibited by the

law itself,according to some casuists

,or by rabbini

cal law,according to others . Hence the rabbis of

the Talmud maintain that they added nothing to

the laws of Moses .They did a dd

,however

,and did take away . In

the first place,they adopted as a part of the legal

system,besides customs and enactments

,also the

mm rim e rs ar ch RS n‘npfi r mmmr m

I'fi lfl TDD DWIP 3 11332? NWPDDSee Kitzur Kela le Haggema rah .


traditional laws ("JDD Pitt/1D? in regard to .

which all authorities agree that these"are laws

whi ch have no foundation whatever in the laws ofMoses . In the second place

,the hermeneutical

rules themselves,upon which the whole structure

rests,are additions to the laws of Moses . Moses

did not ordain them as laws,not 'even the [ ( a l

Vechomer rule ; and the most conservative expounders of rabbinism claim for them the authori ty

of tradi tional law only In the third place,there

is a discrepancy in those hermeneutical rules themselves

,a difference of opinion between Rabbis Ish

mael and Akiba in regard to the rules-

Of I i’

ela l Up’ra t

and Ribbui Umiut; i t i s therefore undecided whichof the two was handed down traditionally fromMoses to the rabbis . And yet the Talmud containsHalachoth based on either of those confl ictingrules

,one class of which

,like those based on the

rule of Semichuth , must be additions to the laws ofMoses . In the fourth place

,every Halacha con

structed by any scholastic method or authority is anaddition to the laws of Moses

,because the law

(Dent . xvii , 8 ) authorizes , besides the prophet ,only one body to expound the law

,the Seventy

Elders,to which alone and exclusively the law of

"11cmN5 refers : “ Thou shalt not depart from theword

,which they shall tell thee

,to the right or to

the left . ” This authority,in after times

,could be

claimed bythe Sanhedrin alone . Moses Maimonides also admits , in the preface to his flI is/zneh

Th e same m ight be sa id Of a l l l aws ba s ed on the rule of

mu mu:

130 I SAAC M . W I SE.

time . They established that other rule that a ll

commandments relating to the land are obligatoryin Palestine only . To say nothing of details , thesegeneral points prove my contention . Besides

,the

well-known admission of the Talmud,how in sev

eral ca ses , mph nnpip msn,“ the Halacha super

sedes ‘ Scripture ,I can point to other passages of

the same import . In Talmud Babli (Ma hhoth 24a )Rabbi Jose b . Chanina states that four l ater prophets abrogated four Mosaic decrees i l< On the samepage in the Talmud is the celebrated homily ofRabbi Simla i , which sta tes that Moses gave sixhundred and thirteen commandments . David re

duced them to eleven in Psalm xv . Isaiah reducedthem to six (xxxiii , and then again to two

( lvi , I ) . Then came Micah and reduced them to

three (vi , Amos to one,

“ Seek me and live ”

(v , and so also Habakkuk,

“ The righteousliveth by his faith ” ( i i , A simi lar passage occurs in Yebamoth

, 49b ,where it is reported that

Simon ben Al zai said “ I have found a genea logical ( secret) scroll in Jerusalem ,

in which it wa s

written,etc . ,

King Mena sseh slew Isaiah . Rabasaid that he proved the law against him and slew

him ,

” etc . Then three cases are quoted,in which

Isa iah contradicts Moses .TIn the light of these quotations

,we ask how

those savants understood the repeated commandments of the Bible (Deut . iv , 2 ; xii , not to

re

gs : 6mm"‘711 um mm: “

in mm; ups-1s

13191521 cum : nun s

T'l'l wa s muan wa s mm:

THE LAW . 131

add to nor diminish from the law? We repeat thisquestion to the Jewish metaphysiciansOf the MiddleAges

,who were certainly aware of the abrogation

of quite a number of laws : How could they defend the eternity of the law (mmm111mm) , and

make it a dogma of Judaism ? Moses Maimonides,

for instance,maintained it (PerushHamMishnayoth,

Cheleh) as the ninth dogma of rabbinical Judaism ;

and in hisMoreNebuchim ( Part III , chapter xxxvii)he puts a number of the laws of Moses under the

heading of "f"?minor: Trim— “ To protect againstthe errors of Paganism Maimonides

,like all

other Jews,believed in the final disa ppearance of

Paganism ; .hence he must have believed in thetransitory nature of all laws of Moses relevant to it .I t would be vain to contend that the rabbis of the

Talmud did not mean to say that nothing must beadded to (or taken away from) the Six hundred andthirteen commandments of Moses

,although Abra

ham Ibn.Ezra

,in one instance

,maintains that

Thou shalt not a dd,

” etc .,refers to the laws

against Paganism,when they themselves repeatedly

tell us that any addition,even like one blessing

added to the three-fold bless ing of the priests,or

even a change in the Tephil in ,etc .

,is a violation of

that law . It is certain that the Jewish metaphys i

cian s of the Middle Ages insisted on the eternity ofthe law as a dogma

,because this is a cardinal point

in rabbinical orthodoxy . How . then , is that con

tradiction to be solved ?

This question becomes still more perplexing,i f

one takes the law itself before the judgment-seat ofcommon sense . How could any legislator impose


the obligation upon his constituency not to add tonor diminish from the laws he prescribes for them

,

when he must acknowledge that laws must be a ccommoda ted to the needs of successive ages ? Howcould

,especially

,the author of Deuteronomy utter

such a law of limitation on one page,and the law

of a supreme tribunal to decide cases not providedfor in this law

,on another page ? (Deut . xvii ,

The problem is not solved even i f we should admitthat Deuteronomy was written much later thanother parts of the Pentateuch . The diffi culty is

the same,whether d irected against Moses

,Samuel

,

Jeremiah,Ezra

,or Simon the Just . Besides

,i t

cannot be ‘denied that the author of Deuteronomy

intends to supplement and amend laws recorded inother parts of the Pentateuch

,and assumes the a u

thority of Moses ; consequently , his prohibition toadd or diminish refers also to the other parts of thePentateuch . On the contrary

,such an admission

would only complicate the question still more .How could an intelligent legislator

,a thousand

years after Moses , put on record such a law of lim

ita tion ,when he himself amended the laws of

Moses ? Nor is the di fficulty to be disposed of bythat Vi ew which interprets the inj unction Thoushalt not add

,

” etc to mean interpolations anderasures and not incorporation of new laws ; for , inthe first place

,Joshua did embody his covenant

with Israel D’n58 mmWED: “ In the book of theLaw of God .

”(Joshua , xxiv , Samuel did

incorporate a royalistic constitution ( 713157311 mama)B a ssepher ,

“ into the book ”

( I Samuel , x ,

which,orthodox critics agree

,refers to the Book of


ments,

” which is a misnomer for its laws are cate

gories , its doctrines are fundamental principles ; ini ts logical order it is a unit

,and in its totality it

comprises the entire substance of theology and

ethics ; no new category of law can be added to i t

and none can be taken away from it without destroying its unity and perfection .

Secondly . The body of law contained in the Pen

ta teuch is called Tora th Mosheh,

“ The Law ofMoses , which reduces to practice the fundamental

concept of the Decalogue,provides the means to

enforce it,and expounds and expands its

Thirclly. The Law of Moses is constituted of

( a ) Mitzvoth, commandments with a direct obj ect ;(b) Chuhhim,

ordinances of a ritual character

(Leviticus , ix , 8 and ( c) Mishpa tim,statutes

of a j udicial character (Exodus , xxi) ;T the twolatter classes have an indirect Obj ect . The doctrines underlying these laws

,and reduced to prae

tice by them,are conta ined in the Decalogue

,and

,

like it,are eternal ; while special laws are tempo

rary applications of those doctrines to meet emer

gencies , and are therefore of a temporary character .Fourthly. Inasmuch as the Mosaic doctrines were

ideally implicit in the Decalogue before they took

Th is idea is expressed in the Ta lmud (Neda rim, 38a ) by

R . Chama b . Cha nina ,thus

mmS ‘m' 311191091: N’m momwormN

‘?

TEdoth ,a term used in Deuteronomy ( iv, 45 ; vi , 17 a nd

a nd then in other books Of the Bible,a nd P ikkudim ,

occurr ing ch iefly in Psa lms,ca nnot be ta ken a s cla sses Of

laws,beca u se they a re not u s ed in th is sense in the Penta

teuch,nor in a ny prose pa ssage of Scripture .

THE LAW . 35

form in special provisions,a nd inasmuch as the

Decalogue was given to Israel through the agencyof Moses (

“ I standing between God a nd between

you to tell you the word of God ,Deut . V

,

every law of the Pentateuch,whenever

,wherever

,

and by whomsoever written,may j ustly be termed

a law of Moses,as the whole Torah may j ustly be

styled the Law of Moses .I offer the following proofs in support of these

propositions

I . PROOFS FROM THE PENTATEUCH .

The fact that the revelation of the Decalogue ispresented in so elaborate a nd sublime a setting suggests that this revelation was regarded as the mostimportant event in Israel ’ s history .

*The thoughtful reader of the nineteenth chapter of Exoduscannot but feel that something of importance willfollow . The Deca logue is the picture ; the narra

tive of the revelation is its frame .

The next points to be taken into considerationare these The Bible represents the Decaloguealone as direct revelation of God to Israel all other

T"The revela tion on th e rock (Exodus , xxxiii a nd xxx iv) ,a lthough directed to Moses only,

is a lso surrounded with a

ma rvelous solemn ity,beca u se it expounds the doctrine of

divine mercy (HEW/Tm373 ) a s a nnounced in the Th irdComma ndment

,without wh ich (D’Dfl

'lfl DVD) , a s the

Ta lmud correctly rema rks,the world

,or ra ther the huma n

family,could not , exist . The laws Of expia ting sa crifices

,the

Day of Atonement included,a re the Chukkim

,reducing to

pra ctice this doctrine , to wh ich the Penta teuch refers aga inin Numbers

,x iv a nd xvi

,a nd especia l ly in Deuteronomy,

iv.

29—31 ; vii , 9 , 10 ; xxx ,

1—10 ; a nd elsewhere .

I SAAC M . WI SE .

known revelations are represented as indirect,made

through Moses or the other prophets . Again,the

obj ect of the Sinaitic revelation is to establish thecovenant between God and Israel (Exodus , xix , 5 ,

6 ; xxxiv , 6 this importance is attached to noother portion of Scripture . Therefore , the secondIsaiah characterizes the Sinaitic revelation thus :“And I

,this is my covenant with them

,saith Jeho

Vah ; my spi rit which is upon thee , and my words( the Decalogue ) which I have put into thy

°

mouth

( revealed directly) shall not depart from thy mouth ,and from the mouth of thy

.

seed,and from the

mouth of thy seed ’ s seed,saith Jehovah

,from now

to evermore ” ( Isaiah ,l ix

,This certainly

says that God,in order to perpetuate his covenant

with his chosen people,expects that it shall never

forget the directly revealed words,the Decalogue

, ,

a nd never swerve from the divine spirit resting

upon it in consequence of that holy law .

The covenant which makes Israel a kingdom ofpriests and a holy nation

,a covenant people and a

light of the nations,according to Isaiah ’ s statement ,

depends,besides the spirit

,on the Decalogue exclu

s ively. And yet Isaiah only repeated that whichhe found in the Pentateuch (Exodus , xxxiv ,“And Jehovah s aid to Moses , Write thee downthese words ( the Decalogue) , for by Virtue of thesewords I have made a covenant with thee and withIsrael . And then Scripture narrates : “And hewrote on the tables the words of the covenant , the

ten words . ”

I think no further proof is necessary to convincethe Bible reader that the covenant of God with


“

in: un‘nwas any

-um

,And thou shalt make

them known to thy children and thy children ’ s

children ;” he enjoins upon his hearers . Here is

the divine law,the eternal law

,the unalterable

law,to which nothing can be added

,and from

which nothing can be taken away . But in the

verse immediately following we are told :“And

Jehovah commanded me (Moses) at that time to

teach you ordinances and statutes ( BUDDY/mmph ) ,to do them in the la nd to which you are passing

over to possess it . Here is indirect revelation

with the limitation of space,hence also of time

,to

be Observed byyou in the la na’ of Ca na a n . Nothing

could express an idea more clearly,more directly

,

and more intelligibly than this passage,which says

that the law of the covenant , the Decalogue , i seternal

,and the law of Moses was given to Israel

to be observed in the land of Canaan,subject to

emendation as prescribed in the seventeenth chap

ter,8— 1 1

,and the eighteenth chapter

,15

On the other hand,Moses is never represented in

the Pentateuch as claiming any law to be his own

production . He says : “And Jehovah commandedme at that time to teach you statutes and ordinances . The words "‘a t that time ” certainly

refer to the time of the Sinaitic revelation . Hislaws are introduced by the words “ God spoke ” or

I n th e Ta lmud (Neda r im, 38a ) R . Jose b . Ch a n ina express es

the idea thus 1mmma ins RSNmmmm N5

Smurf s mm mm. Then R . Ch isda po ints to Deut . iv ,

5—14, to

“

come to the conclus ion : UJ27 "JR"! 7113 "DIN.

He migh t h ave pointed a l so to Dent . v,28

,a nd vi

,1 .

‘THE LAW . 139

said to Moses commanded or calledhim

,and the like . In whatever manner we may

understand those solemn introductions to the variouslaws

,they plainly suggest that Moses made no laws

of his own,but embodied the doctrines of the Deca

logue in laws a nd institutions,in order to reduce

the divine theories to practice for the people ofIsrael in the land of Canaan . And i f other legislators or legislative bodies after him did the samething

,they were j ustified as well in introducing

their enactments with the phrase “And Jehovahspoke to Moses

,saying . Hence all the results of

criticism do not invalidate these statements of thePentateuch

,even if Moses ha d written no laws ;

although it cannot be doubted that the Pentateuchcontains many a chapter of law which could have

been written by Moses only .

May I b e permitted to refer briefly to the twofacts of history

,that the prophets

,with the excep

tion of one case in Jeremiah,never reproved the

Hebrews for the transgression Of laws other than

those of the Decalogue and that the people,a l

though they did not do “ all as written in thi s

book,

” as King Josiah said,were well aware of and

thoroughly acquainted with the Decalogue and itsdoctrines ? The proper distinction being made between the eternal law and the Law of Moses

,i t will

be found that the Hebrews,in the age of the

Judges and even during the kingdom of Israel,also

knew the law and observed it as the law,the consti

tution and religion of Israel,with the exceptions

incident to their time . It appears that the historyof the prophetical period is a continuous proof that


the eternal law was considered unalterable,and the

temporary laws were set aside or amended , owingto various circumstances

,on the very principle laid

down in this essay .

II . PROOFS FROM EZRA AND NEHEM IAH .

That the Hebrews in the captivity knew the eternal law as the divine law is evident from Ezekiel

,

Daniel,

and especially from the second Isaiah,

Zachariah,Haggai

,and the Psalms of that period .

That they did not observe the whole Law of Mosesi s also evident . Thus

,for instance

,the holidays

,

with the exception of the First Day of the SeventhMonth ,

a nd perhaps the Day of Atonementf !< had

been forgotten,because they were not observed .

The same,i t appears from Ezekiel (xliv , was

the case with the laws of forbidden food,which he

considers obligatory upon priests alone . It was notbelieved that the Law of Moses must be observedin a foreign country

,or by Israel in the dispersion .

Therefore,when the exiles returned to Palestine un

der Zerubbabel,they knew a nd revered the eternal

law,rebuilt the temple

,re - introduced the ancient

cult,were intensely religious and patriotic still the

whole Law of Moses was not introduced till the timeof Ezra and Nehemiah

,eighty or ninety years later .

It is useless to advance the theory that Ezra was theauthor of the Pentateuch

,when the Samaritans

,

who were his arch-enemies,had the same Penta

teuch all the prophets a nd historians up to Samuel

Compa re on th is subject I sa ia h,lviii ° Ezekiel

,xl

,Ezra

,

iii ; Nehemiah,vi ii ; a nd Josephu s , Antiquities , I , iii , 3 ; a nd

Ezra,vi

,19—2 2 ; Nehemiah

,viii

,14—17 .


which,as Nachman Krochmal maintains correctly

,

was added much later by the compilers of theprophetical canon ; here the Hebrews are solemnlywarned to remember the Law of Moses

,which God

had commanded him at Horeb for all Israel, Chuh

him and Mishpa tim ,referring distinctly to that

passage in Deuteronomy,

“And Jehovah commandedme at that time

,

” etc .,and to the existing opposi

tion to those Chuhhim and Mishpa tim . To this

a ttitude is referable the radical differences between

the Hellenists and Chassidim in the second century

B . C. ,as well as in the building of temples on

Monnt Gerizim and in Egypt . I can think of no

theory to explain these facts,except the one ad

va nced , viz .,the distinction made and universally

acknowledged in Israel as obtaining be tween theeternal law expressed and implied in the Decalogue

,

a nd the Law of Moses in its Chuhhim and Mish

pa tim .

It must be stated here,that my views in regard

to Ezra and Nehemiah are not new they are sub

stantia lly stated in the Talmud . In Yerusha lmi

Shebi’

ith,vi

,1,we find the following addition to

S iphr i , Re’ eh

,Section 59 : From here (we know)

when they were exiled they were free ( from the

Law of Moses) . It is written ( in Nehemiah ) ,‘And all the congregation that came from thecaptivity made

'

taberna cles , a nd dwelt in taberna

cles,the like of which the . children of Israel had

not done from the days of Joshua,the son of Nun

,

to that day .

’ Why is Joshua mentioned here ? R .

Hillel,the son of Samuel B . Nachman , explains ,

the righteous man in the grave is abused on account

THE LAW . 43

of the honor of ( another) righteous man in histime . Their coming into Palestine under Ezra isthus compared to their coming thither under Joshua .

As coming into the land under Joshua they werefree (of the Law of Moses) , and were then obligedto observe it

,so also in the time of Ezra they were

free (of the Law of Moses) , and were then obligedto observe it . ” This opinion is never controvertedin the Talmud . The question is

,by what authority

were they obliged to observe again the Law ofMoses ? R . Jose b . Chanina thinks the law itselfcontains a provision to this effect . Rabbi El iesa r ,however maintains that it was done voluntarily

,as

he says : Tfl’s’ND

III . PROOFS FROM THE TALMUD .

Having thus been led into the Talmud,I beg

leave to quote a few passages from the rabbinicalwritings in support of my thesis

,though I believe

this is superfluous,as the proofs from the Bible may

be considered sufficient . When the people of Israel

lost its independence and its country,i ts temple and

its government a second time , the Law of Moses , asin the Babylonian captivity

,lost obligatory force .

The same was the case with the enactments of Ezra

and the Sanhedrin . This is partly affirmed in the

rabbinical maxim , V3: m yh is: This“; mun: r m$3

,“Dwelling outside of the land ( Palestine ) is like praeticing idolatry ;

” because there one is not commanded

mm: mi n: rm wa s W 161emmW : TNN

‘D qs inwnmi m mice werenummi m T

‘WIDD


to observe the Law Of Moses . A broad admissionto that effect is made in S iphr i , Ekeb , Section 43 ,a nd quoted by Rashi to Deuteronomy

,xi

,18

,viz

“Although I exile you from the land to foreigncountries

,ornament yourselves with the command

ments,so that when you return they shall not be

new to you . This is like to a king , who was angryat hi s wife and sent her back to her father ’ s househe said to her ‘Ornament thyself with thy j ewels

,

that they be not new to thee when called back,

’

Thi s is the key-note . Historical Judaism,in

as far as it is not contained in the Decalogue,in the

eternal law,is rabbinical

,practiced on the authority

of the rabbis based upon the Messianic bel ief

,the national restoration of Israel to its own

country,and the idea of Ezra

,that with the restora

tion the authority of the Law of Moses is re-estab

l ished . The laws and customs , in as far as they

are not contained in the Decalogue,are observed

,

“ so tha t i f you return ( to Palestine ) they be notnew to you . The intelligent reader of the Talmud

can see in a moment the forced D era sha h ( exposition of Scripture) by the ancient rabbis to

p nn n‘ps

,Deuteronomy

,xii

,I S iphr i Re

’ eh , 59 ;

Yerusha lmi ,‘

Shebi’

ith vi , 1,and B a bli Kiddushin

37a ,which is intended to make certain laws of

Moses obligatory ( rpmmzin) , while the laws depending on the land Of Palestine are declared inob

ligatory.Because they could find no passage in the

muff in: m V535 min-15 Dans n5m use D

'IJ’R

Due-m D35 WT

"N5 Dnm anew: mam:


rai sed to the Decalogue only,in which these laws

are contained ; hence he considered the Torah

(mmmns unis D”‘72FD) and the Decalogue iden

tical .Some passages of particular force must be quotedhere . In the temple at Jerusalem the divine servicewas opened daily with a benediction

,and then the

Decalogue was read before the Shema (Tamid V ) .

Maimonides remarks to this Mishna “ Becausethey ( the ten words) are the principles of the lawand its beginning .

” Then he points to Yer usha lmi

B era choth i,8 . There we are informed by R. Levi

that Shema and Vehaya h were read daily , because

the Decalogue is contained in them . Furthermore,

that the ten words should be read daily also out

s ide oi the temple , and it is not done on account ofthe secta riansfi!< in order that they may not say this

alone was given to Moses on Sinai . Here,i t ap

pears,it is intimated that the Decalogue only was

read at the beginning of the divine service until theparty which maintained that the Decalogue is theTorah h ad

'

to be silenced ( after the destruction ofthe temple) ; then the Shema was selected instead

of the Decalogue,because i t i s supposed to be con

ta ined in it .

Chananiah ,the nephew of R . Joshua b Chana

niah,said ( Yerusha lmi Shekalim vi ) : Between

every word of the ten there are the suggestions andletters of the law

,filled like Tarshish

,like the great

sea .

” R. Simon b . Lakish ( in Shir Hash-shirimRabbah it is R. Jochanan) , in commenting on this ,

Ma imonides cha nges the DU”) into DWJJDD.

THE LAW . 147

said Beauti fully did Hanania teach us,as in

this sea there are between every two large waves

many smaller ones,so there are between the words

( of the ten ) the suggest ions and letters of the law .

The picture is beauti ful and the lesson true . It

tells the old,old story

,that the Decalogue is the

Torah .

The same book reports (Megillah iii , 8 ) a halachacontradictory to the Mishna ( ibid . iv , that a ccording to one authority he who is called to readthe Torah in public

,should recite the benediction

before and after reading the passage of the song ofthe well according to another

,all the songs in the

Pentateuch should be distinguished by those benedictions ; but according to R . Joshua b . Levi , thosebenedictions should be recited only on reading theSong at the Red Sea

,the Decalogue

,and the im

preca tions in Leviticus and Deuteronomy . Of thisR . Abahu sa ys : I have not heard this ; i t appearsright : in connection with the Decalogue namely

,

that it should be distinguished more than any other

passage of the law . This halacha with RabbiAbahu

’

s remark has been accepted literally inMesecheth Sopher im xii , 5 ,

6 ; hence it was adoptedby the Geonim .

Another passage to th is effect occurs in Pest/eta deRab Kahana (Lyck edition , I O3a ) . R . Huna com

pares the Torah to the state carriage of a princess,

which , when appearing in the street , i s preceded a nd

followed by men bearing swords a nd arms . “SO

i s the Torah,laws precede her (Exodus , xv ,

‘there he ordained Choir and Mishpa t,’ and laws

follow her ( ibid . xxi,

‘a nd these a re the j udg


ments,

’ etc . Here no doubt i s left that the Decalogue is regarded as the Torah .

Ever since the Feast of Weeks has been observed,

i t has been called by all Isra el 13mm TN : 3m,

The time Of the giving of our law . Throughout

Mech ilta,Pes ikta

,the Midrashim

,in the li turgy

and in the theological writings, 7mm int) ;

“ the

giving of the law ,

”and "Ji b an

"1mm, standing

at Mount Sinai,

” are identical ; hence the Decaloguemust be the Torah . By the force of circumstancesand the authority of progressive history and legislation

,sanctioned by Moses

,the ancient rabbis

(Tana’im) assumed supreme authority in Israel

when the Hebrew state was dissolved and its laws

abrogated ; they reduced to practice , in the newstate of affairs

,the doctrines and principles of the

eternal law,expressed or implied in the Decalogue .

They held semi-annual meetings at Jamnia,Usha

,

Tiberias,or Sepphori s , and then at Neha rdea

,Sura

,

Pumba ditha ,etc .

,and called them Sessions of the

Sanhedrin . The opinions and decisions of author

ized savants replaced the oracles of the prophets .They maintained even Rum ! TH}: D3 71, The sa

vant is superior to the prophet . ” They based theirauthority to protect the eternal law among the dispersed Israelites on the old principles , and main

ta ined that the last enacted are more precious than

the ancient ones ("137 th 5m"D’WDID Timur.

mm) . They sought to preserve the historical

thread of development,not only by seeking in the

Pentateuch a support for every law and customwhich they sanctioned or enacted

,but also by a d

justment to it of post-biblical enactments and opin


Torah , and that the eternal law is contained therein ,expressed or implied . Saadia is the first to make thisstatement . Ambng the many authorities that quotehim is also Rashi to Exodus

,xxiv

,1 2 . He says

All the six hundred and thirteen commandmentsare included in the Decalogue . Our master

,Saadia

,

in his Asha roth ,explains that the principle of every

word (of the ten ) is in the commandment depending on it . ” The rabbis maintain that the Deca

logue consists of six hundred and twenty letters,

on account of the six hundred and thirteen Mosaic

and seven rabbinical commandments which it con

tains .This idea of Saadia was elaborated by RabbiEliezer ben Nathan

,the grandfather of Rabbenu

Asher,in the thirteenth century

,in a book called

Ma ’ amer Haskel (Roedelheim,This book

subsumes all the commandments of the Pentateuchunder the ten categories of the Decalogue . Theauthor does not succeed in every instance in provingthat a particular commandment embodied a doctrineas implied in this or that law of the Decalogue .

Still he succeeds well in illustrating the main idea

of Saadia,that the Decalogue is the Law .

The prince of Hebrew poets, Jehuda Halevi , wa s

an opponent of philosophy and an uncompromisingdefender of rabbinical Judaism and of historical

evidence,which appeared to him all-sufficient . Still ,

in his a l -Cha za ri , i i , 2 8 ,he admits in plain words

,

W ith Abra h am Geiger , I am not certa in tha t the Ara bicM idra sh on the Deca logue ,

publ ished by Wilhelm E isensta edter

,Vienna

,1868

,is identica l with Sa a dia ’

s Asha roth ,

mentioned by Ra sh i .

THE LAW . 5 1

8m WWR WIN:"IPDJD 717331117 w-nw Wu

‘s DDS

mm mum's-151m Di an

-mmay cm 3571 mam"31 n

‘

imn,

“ It is true that the foundation of allwisdom was laid down in the ark , which represents

the heart,and that is the Decalogue and i ts logical

consequences,which is the Torah ,

” etc . This i s

clear language,to which David Cassel remarks

in a‘

note : “ Universally and j ustly the Decalogueis acknowledged

,not as the mere

'

quintessence orfoundation

,but as the sum , the totality of the en

tire law .

”( Compare Baehr , Symbolik I , p .

Abraham Sabba,in Zeror ha -Mor to Jethro

, 78b ,

edit . Venet , states :“ Behold

,in this Decalogue is

contained the whole law,as ancient authorities

have placed the commandments in their order,in

their books on the commandments,

” etc .

Joseph Albo opposed the Views of Jehuda Halevi ,and still

,I hha r im

,i ii

,2 6

,he says the same thing of

the Decalogue . So does B a chya ,in his Choboth

Ha lleba both ,i,I . So do all of them .

But I stop here,lest I prove too much

,as I verily

believe I have established my thesis . I will onlyadd that when these metaphysicians argue for .theeternity of the law

,they mean the eternal law con

ta ined in the Decalogue , expressed or implied . Ido not refer to modern authorities

,or I would

quote Leopold Stein,David Einhorn , S . L . Stein

heim , and qui te a number of . others .This , I believe , is the historical basis of reform ,

progressive and law-abiding . The only problem tobe solved is

,who shall decide for the community of

Israel which law or custom is an embodiment of a


doctrine contained in the Decalogue,which one

should be preserved and which amended . For the

individual,the Decalogue

,conscience

,and reason

must decide,and guide him to salvation by right

eousness .


theology . We a bstract the spirit of men and worksof the past , and systematize that essence into stand

ards by which to measure the events and demands

of the age . It is that which we call learning andpractical wisdom

,science and art .

However humiliating the confession may be,i t is

nevertheless true that,with the exception of the

natural sciences and the mechanical arts of experi

ence,experiment and observation

,we a re the pupils

of the men of gray antiquity .

Not only that those ancient men lived moreclosely to the lap of mother nature than we do ,but the themes of their thoughts also were moresublime than ours . They concentrated their cn

ergies upon themselves , sought to solve themysteries of human nature

,and elaborated the

great themes of man,conscience

,right

,goodness ,

beauty,God ,

and man ’ s relations to the Almighty .

Their minds grew under the influence of these in

vigora ting themes . In our phase of civilization,

however,man has become obj ective , science is ob

jective ,invention is Obj ective

,the occupation of the

man and the text-book of the lad are obj ective themind is absorbed in matter and its changes ; thoughtdoes not reach beyond that lower region , its themes

a re heavy and unelevated .

An old violin upon which an artist has played,

can not be imitated by the most skillful artisan .

The mellow notes,the sweet melodies of the maes

tro,dwell mysteriously in the instrument . The

beautiful moral and intellectual themes too whichare played upon the Chords of the mind

,leave their

sweet echoes in human character . The violin does

MOSES,THE MAN AND STATESMAN . 1 55

not improve in tone because it records no vivi fyingmelodi es . We have no Moses , Solomon and Isaiah ,

Plato and Aristotle , Homer and Virgil , Caesar andMarcus Aurelius . We can merely convert the goldthey have left to us into small change , and we dis

tribute this among our fellowmen , that they maypartake of the heritage of man . If it is admittedthat in the arts we are in advance of the ancients

,

and that in the subj ective sciences they were our

superiors , i t must be equally admitted that theywere grander characters , men and women of a more

sublime and a finer type . For it is by thoughttreasures that the character is formed

,the will

invigorated,and the energies stimulated to glo

rious deeds , to outpourings of immortal truth .

We catch fire from their fire,and we borrow light

from their light . We speak of great men,there

fore,as patterns of superior humanity as we speak

of distant suns .Among the documents of ancient genius theBible occupies a pre-eniinent place on account of the

sublimity of its themes , the depth of its conceptions ,the simplicity of its language and the exquisitebeauty of human character which it presents to us .

It is certainly the most ennobling and most enlight

ening book we possess . It presents greatness andgoodness in life-size figures . It removes the veil

from heaven ’ s dome and permits morta ls to gaze

into the mysteries of existenceand the glory of thespi rit . Again , in the Bible of the Hebrews oneclassica l and colossal figure over- towers all others .It is a veritable giant cedar among

’ the trees,a

snow- capped Baker of the Rocky Mountains,a


sun among the planets . This colossal figure is theson of Amram and Jochebed— Moses

,~ the “ serv

ant of Jehovah ,” the redeemer and legislator of

Israel,the man who with his stylus of iron en

graved upon the rock of a ges the truth as to theduties and destinies of the human family

,to which

,

as he said , nothing should be added , from whichnothing should be taken away .

I regard Moses as the grandest man in history.

You must not think that I have selected this subj ect

for this lecture because it is maintained that there

was no Moses , that he is a mythical character to

whom posterity ascribed deeds,laws a nd institutions

that now pass under the sanction of his name . To

assertions so unhistorical and unphilosophical,I do

not care to address myself . I have determined to

speak Of him,because I think he is the greatest

man of an tiquity . I wi sh in the first place to say afew words of

THE MAN MOSES .

Whatever Grecian writers up to Josephus,the

Rabbis and the Mohammedans reported of the li fe

of Moses in addition to the notices found in the

Pentateuch has value for the thoughtful student ofhistory

,who may learn how posterity is prone to

exaggerate ; but outside of what the Pentateuch

gives we know nothing as to the life or character ofMoses . In fact , even what the Pentateuch says of

the master is meager . Its aim is not to narrate whatMoses did or suffered but rather what God did forIsrael . Moses occupies so small a space in theBooks of Moses that his authorship can hardly bedoubted . I f that work had been written by some

I SAAC M . W I SE .

We are told with the utmost brevity that Moses,

born to Amram and Jochebed,in the time of oppres

sion and servitude,was doomed to die by the king ’ s

cruel mandate,and that he was rescued by an in

eident which at once gave him back to his mother

and afforded him the golden opportunity to acquire

an education at the royal court . This little chain

of accidents , so necessary to transform the Hebrewinfant into the man Moses

,i s delineated with sim

plicity,but the read er can not tell whether the

writer intended to convey the idea that Providenceso designed and executed in order to make

o

the in

fant Moses the redeemer and lawgiver,or whether

he merely records the natural incidents by whichthe waif could become a powerful man . Asidefrom the delicate dramatic touches of a mother ’ s

anguish and a sister ’ s devotion,the whole story is

simple and natural and can not be doubted . It istoo plain and unadorned to be poetry . If it hadbeen written at any time after Moses

,hosts of stars

and angels,shepherds and kings

,miracles and su

perna tura l demonstrations would have been call edinto requisition to furnish the frame for so impor

tant a picture as the birth of a redeemer and law

giver .Having thus been informed of the birth and first

experiences of Moses,the records are silent as to

his education . We imagine that he was well instructed in all the arts and Sciences of Egypt andwe imagine this by inference alone

,for we have no

direct information . It is certainly false to main

tain that Mos es was an Egyptian priest , for besides

MOSES , THE MAN AND STATESMAN . 159

the king,none

,unless born of priestly parents , was

ever eligible for such a position .

Moses appears again on the stage of life , not asan Egyptian commander and the conqueror ofEthiopia

,as the ancient legend had i t , but after he

had reached maturi ty and was in the habit of going

among his brethren while they were in abj ect servi

tude . Then he slew a taskmaster who had smittena Hebrew slave . Mora l ists may cry out in horror atthat rash act

,though they would hardly feel as in

dignant at John Brown for having killed a Virginiataskmaster under similar circumstances . It was a

rash act,perhaps unworthy of the lawgiver Moses

,

though the text leaves it uncertain whether theEgyptian taskmaster had not killed the Hebrewslave ( in both instances the same term is used ) .

But it certainly was not unworthy of the youthful patriot to descend from the height of the royalcourt to his brethren in distress

,and to feel out

raged by the taskmaster ’ s brutal conduct . It was

certainly a case of strong provocation,which

,in the

hands of a capable pleader , would constitute an a c

ceptable plea before any criminal court , to clear anordinary defendant .Thi s incident

,however

,shows that Moses could

tolerate no wrong nor could he be an idle specta

tor while wrong was being perpetrated , as anotherincident shows . When a fugitive in the wilder

ness,he witnessed how rude shepherds took advan

tage of some girl shepherdesses at the well of water .

He protected those shepherdesses,one of whom

afterward became his wife Zipporah . Here we havethe trait of the lawgiver Courage a nd love Of j us


tice . The man of stern j ustice resents every wrongdone to his fellow-creatures ; and only such a man

can be a lawgi ver . Whoever commits a wrong , or

sees others commit it with impunity,cannot be

come an apostle of j ustice . Now,I think this

chivalric conduct of Moses toward Zipporah in

the wilderness ought to contribute somewhat to

ward conciliating his opponents and lead them to

condone the “ mistakes he is alleged to havemade . At any rate it is certain that Moses was aliving reality

,for he went to the house of Jethro

,

married Zipporah,begat children and became a

shepherd ; all this is decidedly unusual in the

hero of a myth . And the critics might feel assured that these incidents were not penned by anadmirer of a later date ; he would certainly nothave passed unchallenged the statement that thedistinguished “ Servant of the Lord ” had married

the daughter Of an Arabian sheikh ,not of the

house of Israel,and that he did not circumcise his

sons until his wi fe reminded him of this duty,in

rather an unkind manner,by the way

,and that he

heeded the advice of his heathen father-in-law inthe important matter of organization . A laterwriter

,priest or prophet , would certainly have im

proved upon these incidents,especially one Of the

days of Ezra and Nehemiah , to whom interma r

riage with Gentiles was an abomination . The factthat Moses

,setting out on a foreign miss ion

,took

his wife and children with him ,although she wa s

but a plain shepherdess,and returned with them to

Egypt,is proof positive that he was a good husband

a nd father .


and a man of another tribe is his successor in office .

Those who have made man and men their study

know how rare such unselfishness is , even among

the greatest and best of the human race . Few haveever risen to that moral height that they would say

,

as did he,I wish all the people of Jehovah were

prophets,and Jehovah would put his spirit upon

them .

”

Moses lived for a cause,to which his life and

energies were devoted with the utmost honesty of

purpose,and he was entirely unselfish . He em

braced it when he was a youth and a prince ; headhered to it as a shepherd in the wilderness ; he

brought i t to a successful issue under great diflicul

ties in Egypt he never doubted its final success despite the trials of the wilderness ; the rebellions ofthe multitude , the frustration of his hopes , thedeath of comrades and fellow- sufferers about him

,

could not shake his faith in God and H is promises .You know the story of the mice that conspiredone day to undermine the rock of Gibraltar ; theygnawed and gnawed with thei r little teeth till they

were dead,but the rock is there still . Exactly so

do those appear whose petty business it is to findfault with Moses . Where are men of like unsel

fishness and of stern honesty of purpose to be found ?

There is but one standard by which to measure thestatesman ’ s and the legislator ’ s moral character

,and

to determine how much j ustice is embod ied in hislaws

,how much unselfishness he has manifested

and how much honesty of purpose has characterized

his ca reer . It is easier to die in a moment thanto live one hundred and twenty years for a great

mosa s ,THE MAN AND STATESMAN .

cause,beset by trials and storms . It is a mo

mentary inspiration to die for a cause ; i t impliescontinuous inspiration and resoluteness to live for it .

No prophet has yet risen in Israel like Moses .But we must not forget that Moses was of a san

guine temperament ,

PASSI ONATE ,RASH AND IMPETUOUS .

He slew the Egyptian task-master in a passionate mood . He shattered in a moment of wraththe two tables of stone

,the most precious gi ft he

had been given to bestow on his people . Im

petuously he smote the dumb rock that it pour

forth its water,though he had been commanded

to speak to it,and he addressed hi s own people

and disciples in anger,Hear now

,ye rebels . ”

In the most trying events recorded in the Penta

teuch,which momentarily arrested the career of

Moses and threatened to end it,he proved the im

petuosity of his character . I refer to the incidentof the “ golden calf the uproar in the camp afterthe return of the spies from Canaan

,and the revolt

of Korah and his conspirators . In the first in

stance Moses saw the imminent destruction of thefoundation upon which he had reared the gorgeous

s tructure of Israel ’ s redemption . He perceived the

curse of Egyptian idolatry triumphant over that

pure monotheism which was hi s mission,his cher

ished hope,his faith . The work of a li fetime and

the hope of Israel and of mankind seemed to collapse . He hurls from his arms the two tables ofstone and breaks them ; and he hears the voice ofGod , “And now let me alone

,that my anger wax

164 I sAAc M . W I SE .

hot against them,and I consume them , and make

of thee a great nation . Consume— utterly anni

hila te at once— the deluded multitude . How pas

s iona te | In the second instance Moses perceivesthat his hope of organizing a people in the Holy

Land and of making it real,is frustrated by the cow

a rdice of men . The returning spies had incensedthe people to revolt so that it refused to go up toCa naan and demanded to be led back into Egyptian

slavery . The entire fabric of redemption was at

the point of destruction . Moses was wroth— andhe heard the voice of God saying , How long shallthis people provoke me ? And how long yet will

they not believe in me , with all the s igns whi ch Ihave shown in the midst of them ? I will smite

them with the pestilence , and root them out , and I

wi ll make of thee a nation greater and mightierthan they .

” And the third instance was perhapsno less serious than the two former . Korah andhis conspirators revolt and attempt to overthrowthe polity of the growing theocracy ; and also inthis Moses hears God say :

“ Separate yourselves

from the midst of this congregation,and I will

make an end of them in a moment . ”

In his wr ath and passion,Moses imagined that

the utter annihi lation of the rebellious would

be j ustice . The degenerate people,he felt

,was

unfit to realize his sublime scheme of salvation .

But in all these cases Moses prays like a father forhis children

,and God forgives , and the threatened

evil isobviated . Take all those narratives li terally,

and God is represented as the angry despot,ready


wiser . If Thomas Carlyle had written a biography

of Moses , he would have summed it up somewhat

as follows : “ This man ’ s intellect was powerful,

his moral principles were correct and his deedsmighty .

” Moses is the most exalted personal

i ty in ancient history,

” says L . von Ranke (Welt

geschichte , I , page Ordinary causes are inadequate to produce extraordinary effects . Neitherthe gigantic intellect he had nor his passions

,nor

his intense love of liberty and of j ustice,account

for his unique character and work . Think of a

man who was educated at a royal court,spending

the greater part of his li fe as an obscure shepherd

in the wilderness without relinquishing the greatobj ect of his li fe

,the redemption of his people from

bondage,and establishing a model nation on the

principles of monotheism,moral law

,freedom

,j us

tice and equal ity,while all around the world was

submerged in polytheism and slavery . Had heever abandoned that obj ect

,he would not have be

held the vision of the burning bush . Think of aman who comes with a stafi before a mighty kingand demands in the name of an unknown God the

liberation of hundreds of thousands of slaves ,carries his point unaided by natural means

,and

even leads a people out of its land into a desertagainst its will

,and overcomes Pharaoh despite

his power and overwhelms him . The miracles re

corded in the Pentateuch are not half as wonderfulas is this simple fact . A nation was born

,a free

people was organized out of a horde of slaves ,notwithstanding the relentless opposition of thegreatest power on earth . Think furthermore of

MOSES ,THE MAN AND STATESMAN . 167

the man ’ s organizing talent displayed in the campmasterfulness which astounded even the heathenprophet Balaam a nd led him to bless where he was

called to curse . Think of the man ’ s patience,for

bearance and resistance,though he saw his proj ects

blocked,his comrades perish and his end approach .

Think of all this and explain it i f you can .

There is a mystery at the root of this characterwithout precedent or parallel in history , and we are

bound to feel that Moses was in possession of truth,

the whole truth,the deathless

,everlasting truth .

He ha d faith in the maj estic power of truth ; he

was convinced that he was the servant of God , themessenger of the Most High

,the man of destiny

,

the apostle of Providence . Whatever views peoplemay hold with regard to Provi dence , miracles , in

spiration,revelation and kindred conceptions

,one

thing all must admit,Moses verily trusted in the

only true God and Providence,and believed that he

was commissioned by the one and true God to sayand to do that which he did say and do . He was

not disconcerted when Eldad and Medad prophesiedin the camp

,and in the hour of distress he could

address his God thus Behold thou hast said untome

,bring up

'

this people and thou hast not madeknown to me him whom thou wouldst Send withme , a nd thou hast said , I have distinguished thee

(known thee) by name , and thou hast al so foundgrace in my sight . ”

This conviction and this faith make the basis ofhis character and complete the sketch we are ableto draw of the man Moses of whom it is reportedin holy writ God said My servant Moses is au


thentica ted in all my house . This point,how

ever,leads us directly to another division of this

essay,namely

,to the consideration of

THE WORK WH I CH MOSES ACCOMPLISHED .

The historian whom I have quoted,says

,

“ Theidea of the extra-mundane and intellectual God wasconceived by Moses a nd

,as it were

,embodied in

the people he organized . The incarnationof anidea cannot be accomplished in purity

,still i t radi

ates from everything which the legislator ordained,

and one might say that he was the teacher of hispeople .

” This is the j udgment of impartial his

tory . ! uibbling cannot change it , cannot impair

it . History is j ust despite quibblings . Moses leftto posterity in the Five Books a five-act drama

,

unapproachable in grandeur,in sublimity insurpa s

sable,in beauty incomparable

,incarnating the great

est subj ect ever thought of by man,the birth a nd

organization of a free and sanctified nation,the

birth and triumph of Heaven ’ s truth,Shekinah

upon the earth . Moses was the greatest of allartists . Painters and sculptors have failed to portray the grand work of this Creative genius . He

was himself ‘ the greatest of sculptors,and he has

left to posterity that imperishable statue of truth ,

hewn out of the solid rock tracing the weal and woeof ages and generations : i ts pedestal is the earth ,i ts head reaches heaven ’ s dome : the name of thatinimitable colossus is Israel , the immortal , a nation

graced by the choice of God .

7o I SAAC M . W I SE .

A WI SE AND JUST LEGI SLATOR .

In the presence of the universal principles which

opened the era of man ’ s history with the Mosaicdispensation

,the reign of the spirit of holiness

and love,it is false to call Moses a mere re

former . The Mosaic dispensation is the spiri tualcreation of a genius or it i s the greatest gift of revelation ; Moses was either the

“ Servant of theLord

,

” or a divinely-gifted genius,and these terms

may be synonymous . For “ to behold the similitude of God

,

”and to speak with God “ face to

face,

” are perhaps identical with genius,engaged

with the holiest themes .Take a cursory survey of the Mosaic dispensation

,and you wi ll find this : the ineffable Jehovah

leads you through the whole Mosaic system of doctrine and law . It is supposed

,by some

,that mon

otheism was the original form of religion,and that

it degenerated into idolatry . The Bible admits this,

and documentary evidence supports it to a certaindegree . Upon this alleged fact is based the theorythat Moses adopted the monotheism of the Egyptianpriests

,and that the Jews adopted it from the east

ern nations . One theory is as good as another .The monotheism of Moses differs from that discovered under the debris of crushed idols

,among the

ruins of temples and in the myths of primitive menas

”

much as the sun differs from the candle light .

The idea of Spirit and spiritual ity , of freedom andholiness

,i s absent from ancient mythology and

theogony.The idea of a controlling intellect in

nature (Nous , the spirit) was unknown to the

MOSES , THE MAN AND STATESMAN . I 7 I

Pagan world p rior to Anaxagoras , in the fifth

pre-Christian century . The god of the ancient na

tions was an abstraction of concrete nature,and the

gods were abstractions of natural energies , personified in celestial bodies by Sabians , in natural ob

jects by fetishists , in deified men and women by

Greeks and Romans,and have not the least simi

la rity to the Living God of Israel .The monotheism of Moses

,expressed in the term

Jehovah,means an all-producing

,all-pervading

,all

controlling,all-possessing

,self-conscious

,all-know

ing,infinite

,free and almighty spirit

,revealed

in the material universe,which does not encompass

him,and reflected in human reason

,which cannot

comprehend him,omnipresent in nature and history

without being absorbed by them . The Living God

of Israel,Moses taught in substance

,and no mere

abstraction . He is li fe and love,reason and free

dom,the will and the power

,and not a symbol of

concrete,dead matter under necessity . He is God

,

the absolute and necess ary existence to whom nature has relative existence alone

,and of whose wis

dom,power

,goodness and holiness it is the mere

reflex . This is Mosaic monotheism,which

,apart

from the elements handed down by the patriarchs,

is original a nd unique . Moses alone could comprehend this wonderful revelation

,as genius alone com

prehends its mighty creations . We understandthereof only that which laboring talent can grasp

,

much or little,never in its completeness and unity .

This is the key to the Mosaic dispensation andlegislation . In the light of that monotheism

'

the

material universe appeared to be the work of the


Great Architect , a cosmos , with design and ultimatepurpose

,in which things co-ordinate and subordi

nate themselves .Man is the image of God

,a reflex of the universal

intelligence,will a nd love ; he rose from the insig

nifica nce to which paganism had degraded him to

the lofty position of creation ’ s ultimate end,God ’ s

representative on earth,and became a free

,moral

and intellectual agent . This is the first result of

that sublime principle of monotheism : Man isgodlike and free . This is the postulate of Moses

,

upon which rises his system of ethics,having free

dom and equality at its base,the preservation and

happines s of the human race at its apex .

“ YeShall be a kingdom of priests

,

” he announced to

his people— every one a priest,every person one of

the highest class and caste— none to be superior

and none inferior before God and H is laws— onelaw and one statute for all

,the native and the

alien . This announcement of equality was original

with Moses,j ust as is his proclamation of liberty

,

of Sabbath-year and Jubilee-year . It was the a t

tendant fact of his monotheism .

In Egypt,as in India

,society was broken up

into castes and classes slavery was the lot of all,as

the gods themselves were the slaves of blind andrelentless fate and iron necessity . The chief of a

pagan nation was a god or demi-god ,whom every

person had to obey under penalty of death . Thechief of the Mosa ic government is the prophet

,to

whose teachings every person was commanded tolisten ; but none could be punished by human a u

thority for non -obedience to the prophet . The law


the progenitor of fanaticism,inj ustice and impurity .

As you forsake God ,so wi ll He forsake you ; as

you desert truth and reason,so will they abandon

you . No man can worship God a nd feast with thedevil . But the pagans did . Religion and morals

were with them two different factors . Morals ap

pea red to them as a social compact and a political

necessity . The pious among them were no betterby the fact of religion than the frivolous . The

idea of holiness as a form of religious worship is of

Mosaic origin .

If you cast a glance upon the entire Mosaic leg

isla tion as the prophets understood and expoundedit

,you will find these thoughts at the foundation

thereof . Dietary laws and the laws of purification are

,in the first place

,sanitary laws

,invested

with the symbolic significance of spiritual holiness .Take care of the exhausted and the wounded

is a Splendid martial law . Care for the poor,

the needy,the stranger

,the widow and the or

phan,said Moses

,and his poor laws are without

parallel . They stand above all Similar laws anddoctrines of antiquity , inasmuch as with Moses

they are means of worship,means o f atonement

and redemption,making possible the release of the

soul out of the bonds of selfishness . Learn tomake sacrifices in order to overcome your undue

attachment to the dust of earth ; but let yoursacrifices be to God for holiness and to man for

goodness,for the preservation and happiness of the

race.In peace

,Love thy neighbor as thyself

“And ye shall love the stranger,

”z’

. e. , you Shalllove man

,he isGod ’ s child

,created in His image .

MOSES,THE MAN AND STATESMAN . 1 75

In war,slay not the defenseless

,fight not with those

who offer you peace a nd submission , protect femalechastity against violence ; destroy not property

wantonly,destroy no fruit tree when you besiege

an enemy ’ s city,and force none of your brethren

to go to war . Let the law govern , and not theviolence of passions ; let the courts decide and thebailiffs execute

,have cities of refuge to protect the

manslayer,take cognizance of the innocent blood

shed in your land a nd accept no ransom from the as

sassin . Take him even from my altar to put him todeath . Be j ust

,fair a nd upright in all your doings

and dealings . To what end ? To be holy , to dothe will of your God ,

to preserve intact the humanrace according to God ’ s covenant with man

,to se

cure happiness for man and holiness for yourselves .So the whole Mosaic dispensation and legislation

arise out of monotheism,as heat and light emanate

from the sun . In order to correctly understandMoses as a legislator

,and to comprehend him ' fully

as a man,one must study

,first and foremost

,his

theology,his monotheism

,for i t i s truly his

,and it

is the foundation of his character and his dispensation .

No,I am not going to review thewhole magnifi

cent structure of religion ,law and ethics in the

hour that is allotted to me . It is too vast,too

grand,too sublime

,to be surveyed in so Short a

time . Moses was the author of the great principlethat the governments and religions of nations mustbe built upon the same ba s is of truth as is individualcharacter . There can be no two kinds of ethics

,

one for the nation and another for the individual


no two kinds of religion , one to please God andanother to advance prosperity and happiness amongmen ; no two kinds of human beings , the chosenones and the pariahs

,before God and man ; there

is but one God ,one truth

,one j ustice

,and one

human family ; every individual is God’ s own

child . You have before you the organon of revelation .

‘ For Moses informs you Not I,but your

God , has spoken to you , and announces to you thedecrees of heaven

,the duties and hopes of man .

Not I,Moses

,he says

,but the Almighty Himself

,

has taught you the highest and surest standard ofrectitude to guide you safely to prosperity

,happi

ness,immortali ty and eternal bliss ; to erect upon

it government to protect you and religion to ele

vate you . Not I , Moses , but the Almighty Himself

,has revealed to you the universal dominion of

truth a nd j ustice , of freedom and love His benign

Providence watches over all and each of you ; Hismercy and forbearance with your weakness andshortcomings His will that you

,all of you

,be holy

,

immortal and forever blessed . In accordance withall those grand precepts and principles and under the

guidance of the same God,I legislate for you and

erect for you a stru cture of free government and atemple of imperishable religion ; I am the mere

servant and messenger of Jehovah,who is your

God a nd your Father . Thus did Moses speak,and

thus did he act . He built up the chosen people,the

ideal nation,the eternal nation

,which is and exists

whether it have a land or it have none,a govern

ment or none the people which has seen the rise,

decline and fall Of ancient empires , has stood at the


Was Moses a statesman,a law-giver

,a teacher of

righteousness a nd a servant of Jehovah ? The civilized world testifies that he was . Was Moses areality

,an incomparable fact ? That which poets

cannot imitate,loftiest genius cannot duplicate

,no

other nation has reproduced,must be truth and fact .

WAS MOSES A GREAT MAN ?

Sometimes i t appears to me as i f Moses were still

standing upon Mount Sinai , above the mists of thisearth

,within the benign light of divine truth

,

among the seraphs of purity,pointing heavenward

a nd looking forward,and he appears to me then in

viting the nations to ascend toward the glory-crownedheights of righteousness

,purity and holiness

,liberty

and equality,j ustice and peace

,in

'

the name of the

One Eternal God a summit,alas

,which the human

family,in spite of all efforts and struggles

,has not

yet reached ! Then all persons a nd things appear

small and insignificant to me,and I feel as i f nature ’ s

productive energy h a d become exhausted in the mind

of that one great man,who encompassed the economy

of God on earth , and opened its mysterious avenuesto the gaze of man . He who legislated in the wilderness for the nations and who has established the

only immortal nation among them— he who taughtus about God and freedom

,equality

,righteousness

,

purity a nd holiness— was evidently a supreme manand the herald of God ’ s own day .

THE WANDER ING JEW . 79

THE WANDER ING jEW

I

INTRODUCTION .

In my historical studies I have discovered atime when Jews were not persecuted

,when no

missionaries were hired to convert them, when

no sentimental parsons lamented the fate of the

poor lost souls this was in the time of fatherAbraham . The pope or bishop of that classic time ,whose name was Ma lchizedek

,was a clever man .

He offered bread and wine to Abraham,and mean

while took taxes from him in the form of tithes,

a nd everything was pleasant . But soon the troublebegan . When Isaac , the son of this same Abraham ,

raised good crops in the land of the Philistines,he

was commanded to leave— the Jew was getting toorich . Isaac

,however

,began to dig wells , and was

prosperous,and high-born lords of Philistia courted

his acquaintance . This brought to my mind the storyof the Wandering Jew

,and i t occurred to me that

possibly this was the beginning of it . With the exception of the poisoned wells , bleeding hosts , slaugh

tered infants,Christian blood

,witchcraft

,usury and

other accusations preferred against the Jews in theMiddle Ages

,the two stories look quite alike . I am

of the conviction that the legend of the WanderingJew has grown up on Christian soil . But among themiraculous stories in the New Testament I found

no Ahasverus,no Wandering Jew

,no accursed

18o I SAAC M . W I SE .

shoemaker , before whose door Jesus , bearing thecross

,wanted to rest . I found that Jesus did not

bear the cross at all , that Simon of Cyrene bore

it . I discovered ,moreover

,to my surprise

,that

the Jews did not crucify Jesus , and the academyof France has confirmed my discovery . The origin

of the legend of the Wandering Jew can not befound in the Gospels .

DER EWI GE JUDE .

A poet and journalist of the last century,Chris

tian Frederick Daniel Schubart,who for ten long

years was supported by Christian charity in the

penitentiary at Hohena spurg ,because he had said

and written things which priests a nd princes did

not like— wrote also that beauti ful poem Der Ewige

Jude,and po inted back to the thirteenth century

,

A . C . E .,for the origin of this myth . This poem is

the source fromwhich Eugene Sue took his idea ofLe Jui f Errant .It was

.

in the civil war between Adolph of Nassauand Albrecht of Austria

,towards the end of the

thirteenth century,that under the leadership of a

fiend called Rindfleisch ,more than Jews

were slaughtered in Southern Germany,and the

death of all was threatened who would not embracethe cross . Then , i t is supposed , the myth of the

Wandering Jew origi nated ,because the violence

of mobs,priests a nd princes could not succeed in

exterminating the Jew . Der Ewige Jude,the eter

nal Jew,

” he was called the indestructible Jew,in

deed . This outlawed Jew could not possibly a t

tain to felicity in God how could a man be happy


misery a nd death in the estimation of the Christian priest .

SKEPTI CI SM .

It is true that the Jew is the spirit of negation,a

protest against the dogmas of creeds a nd the question is , can the human family reach civilization with

out some skepticism ? I say,no . Without helpful

doubt , a nd therefore without the thoughtful Jew ,

the human family cannot advance . Let us examine

the records of history they will,I believe

,sub

s ta ntia te my proposition .

In our days the word skepticism has lost much ofthe stigma formerly attached to it . It is a legitimate

philosophical term . The old- fashioned devil has

become,in the hands of Goethe

,Mephistopheles .

The bottomless pit is not as deep,hell not as hot a nd

sulphurous,as it was in the old days . We have not

burned any witches for a long While . Everything haschanged .

OLD TESTAMENT HEROES .

But now to the records of history . I will notdwell long on the Old Testament heroes themselves

,

who were Wandering Jews,as i t were

,carrying far

a nd wide doubt in the verity of heathenism . Theprophets carried their messages to all nations aboutPalestine . Elisha appointed a king of Damascus .Jonah preached repentance and righteousness in thedistant Nineveh . Daniel brought two mighty kingsto their knees before the God of Israel

,and forced

them to worship the God of the people they hadconquered . These ancient prophets were everywhere

,it appears , in Persia a nd Ethiopia , Armenia

and Egypt , China and the Ionian Islands , centuries


before the Christian Era . How did it come aboutthat the ancientHebrews became the oracles of kingsand of nations ? It was because ideas from Sinai

a nd Moriah had been carried by their messengersfar away and had been brought to the enlightenedGentiles . It wa s made known that there is a loftierintelligence in Israel

,law

,justice , freedom , right

eousness , virtue , and to these kings and nationsbowed with reverence . Was not this , however , an

importation of doubt into the pagan world till i t dis

s ipa ted belief in the gods by the light from Sinai and

Moriah ? Skepticism was carried into the paganworld by the Jew ; i t was the mission of the Wandering Jew .

UNJUST CR ITI C I SM .

It is,perhaps

,proper to observe here that modern

critics are often as unjust to the ancient Hebrews asRussia and Roumania are to modern Jews . Theyare always at work to point out what the ancientHebrews might have learned from Egypt

,Phoenicia ,

Assyria,or Persia

,and never tell us what those na

tions must have learned from the Israelites . Cen

turies before the Ptolemies , the Hebrews were infriendly contact with the Egyptians . Cannot theinfluence have been reciprocal ? It is rarely takeninto consideration that Zoroaster may have learned

from the widely dispersed Jews,although the Jewish

element in his teachings cannot be ignored .

THE CAUCASIAN RACE .

Al exandria is the starting point . There the

Wandering Jew first began to dispose of Greco

Roman idolatry and the civilization based upon it .

I SAAC M. \VI SE .

THE HEBREWS ’

SECOND COMMONWEALTH .

The Hebrews established their second commonwealth in Palestine in 536 B . C . E . The Book of Jobtells the story of the nation ’ s culture and enlightenment . In the year 33 1 , Alexander the Great conquered the Medo -Persian Empire

,and died in the

city of Babylon .

After his death,however

,and after twenty years

of warfare,his generals divided the empire among

themselves . Palestine was first an Egyptian and then

a Syrian province up to 165 B . C . E . ,when the Mac

cabean rebellion broke out,culminating in the inde

pendence of Palestine . The Hebrews had been incontinuous contact with Gentile nations five hun

dred years,and had given birth to cosmopolitan ora

tors and writers,such as the second Isaiah

,the a u

thors of the books of Jonah , Ruth , and Job , and of anumber of Psalms like the one hundred and fourthmen of broad

,humane a nd universal principles .

Previous to the conquest of Persia proper,Alex

ander had conquered Asia Minor , Syria , PhoeniciaPalestine

,a nd Egypt . In Egypt he selected the

site for a commercial metropolis of the world,

which was built and called Alexandria . He a nd

his successors invi ted to Alexandria merchants a nd

artisans of Greece,Macedonia and Palestine

,a nd

guaranteed them equal rights . The Jews accord

ingly came into Egypt , a nd many of them settledin Al exandria a nd other maritime cities . They

flourished there . In the second century B . C . E . theybuilt the gorgeous Onias Temple , in imitation of

the one at Jerusalem . Their synagogue at Alexan


gay boy,the Hebrew a grave and earnest man .

The Greeks were men of the world,the Hebrews a

people of priests . Therefore when they met theycould not understand each other . Equa lly repre

senting the highest intelligence,they learned from

one another . In Alexandria modern history begins

,in science and cri ticism

,as well as in ethics

and theology .

THE BEGINN ING OF MODERN H I STORY .

Modern history does not begin with the adventof Christianity

,for this is itself a product . It be

gins with the translation of the Hebrew Bible atAlexandria . Since then all reformations have commenced with translations of the Bible such as thosemade by Hieronymus

,Saadia

,Luther and Mendels

sohn . The spirit of inquiry a nd learning progressedin Egypt . Palestinian Jews laid down their ph ilosophy in the translation now called the Septuagint .New literature in the Greek language was pro

duced . All species of poetry,lyric

,epic a nd dra

matic,were called into requisition to produce Jew

ish ideas in the Grecian form Homer a nd Orpheuswere interpolated in hexameters

,as if the ancient

poets had already taught the doctrine of monothe

ism and had heralded the praise of the Hebrewancestors . Jews and Gentiles were engaged in

writing Jewish history,culminating in the master

works of Josephus Flavius . Jewish philosophy , aswell as the teachings of Plato , Aristotle , Zeno a ndEpicurus

,was reproduced in pompous Greek at last

came Philo,the Alexandrian Jew . SO the Wander

ing Jew threw the torch of skepticism,that is

,of


new ideas , into the Greek literature , which was formany centuries thereafter the medium of culture .

DISSEMINATI ON OF JUDAI SM .

About the same time the Jews came in largenumbers to Greece and Italy

,especially to Rome

,

most likely also to Spain,France and Belgium

,as

the successors of the ancient Phoenicians and Ca r

thagenians in the world’ s commerce . In Rome

,for

instance,they had become so numerous that thou

sands of them wept at the urn of Caesar whenhe was slain

,for he had been their friend and

patron . In the time of Augustus,when Herod ’ s

will was read in Rome,8,ooo Roman Jews protested

a gainst its stipulations . The Emperor Tiberiussent Roman Jews as soldiers to Sardi nia .

Along with the Jew,Judaism also went to Rome .

He had no apostles and evangelists,and yet he made

numerous proselytes . In the East,the conversion

of ! ueen Helene , her husband and two sons indicate how far Judaism had penetrated . I ts progressin Rome and the provinces was still more rapid . Itencompassed all classes up to the palace of theCaesars

,so that the Emperor Domitian

,in protec

tion of the state religion,enacted stringent laws

against Roman proselytes to Judaism . One ofthem

,Aquila

,made a new Greek translation of the

Pentateuch,and another

,Clemens

,was of consular

dignity,and his wife a near kinswoman of the

Caesars . The Jews added to their daily prayers onefor the righteous proselytes (P7 2 fi J) . Tacitus ,Juvenal a nd other writers were astonished that somany Romans

,a nd especially the women , believed in


the Jewish God , observed the Sabbath a nd Jewishceremonies . Paul , the actual author of GentileChristianity

,on his j ourneys met everywhere de

vout Gentiles , who believed in the Jewish Bible asthe final authority .

OR IGIN OF CHR I STIAN ITY .

So the Wandering Jew traversed the Roman empire . He Spread Skepticism among the pagans

,

aroused doubts in the reality of the gods worshiped,

the effi cacy of the observances a nd the veracity of

priests and priestesses . Thus the soil had been pre

pared by the Jew'

s Skepticism . When the Jew wasdisabled by the fall of Jerusalem

,the first teachers

of Christianity stepped in with their policy of con

ciliation a nd accommodation . Whatever merits

there may be in primitive Christianity,its spread

was made possible by the preparatory work done by

the'

Jews in the pagan world . It was the first great

service of the Wandering Jew . He was cursed a nd

hated by the ancient Greco-Roman orthodoxy,be

cause he had spread Skepticism and ha d undermined the old state religion . The work was done

by the Jew,but Christianity reaped the fruits .

JEWS I N WESTERN EUROPE .

Democratic Palestine,after a heroic struggle of

two hundred years,was vanquished by Rome . Je

rusa lem was laid in ruins , i ts temple and palaces

were destroyed,and the Jew was buried under the

ru ins of his country . The land once flowing withmilk and honey became a waste . The sycamore

190 ISAAC M . WISE .

of Zion , the hopes of mankind as one great familyand he spoke in Oriental poetry

,in the language of

fire , which northern hearts had not yet learned to

understand— it was unintelligible to the sons of theforest . He praised a God too sublime and spoke of

ethics too humane for the worshipers of Thor andWodan .

The Jew had ‘ done the work but the Christianmi ssionary reaped the benefit . Chri stianity was

planted upon Jewish culture and Jewish sentiment .The people

'

, though Christians , continued to live in

peace with the Jews,kept the Jewish Sabbath and

observed Jewish ceremonies . Jews a nd Christiansintermarried . But then came the councils a nd prohibited Christians from observing the Jewish Sabbath

,and practicing Jewish observances . They re

pea tedly interdicted intermarriage between Jewsand Christians . Then came princes a nd dispossessed the Jew of his landed property

,robbed him

of his treasures,and forced him to become the

trader,merchant and physician . Still the people in

clined to Jewish doctrines and practices more than to

those ordained by Rome,and then the cry was raised

against the Jew He cr ucified Jesus . ” The priestsknew it was a falsehood

,but they also knew i t

would succeed in making the Jew odious,a nd that

it would sow the seed of hatred between Jew andChristian . But this proved ineflectua l in numerous

instances ; then refuge -was sought in the myth of

the Wandering Jew . The Wandering Jew Spreadsmisery and death

,they cried down with the Jew

The Wandering Jew brings progress,reformation

,

intellectual advancement ; he brought Christianity

THE WANDER ING JEW . I 9 I

to the Eas t and to the West ; without him youwould stagnate

,responded the genius of history ;

and,lo and behold the Jew , crucified a thousand

times and always resurrected , became Der EwigeJude

,the eternal

,

” and invincible Jew,the immor

tal principle of progress . This is the second act

of the long and spectacular drama of ignorance andfanaticism .

ORI GIN OF I SLAM .

While thousands of the exiled Jews went westward

,others went eastward to their brethren on the

Euphrates and Tigris,on the Indus and Ganges

,

into Arabia a nd Parthia . There,between the Cas

pian Sea ,the Indus and Western Arabia

,were a h

cient Hebrew colonies Since the days of Sha lmanezer .

For nearly a thousand years they had existed there

as a separate community,under a chief of the house

of David,with the title of Resh Gelutha ,

“ Princeof the Captivity .

” There were seats of Jewish learn

ing,the celebrated schools of Sura

,Neha rdea

,Pum

B aditha and Ma chusa . There learning was systema tized the results thereof we have in the BabylonianTalmud . Reciprocal influences were active betweenHebrews and Arabs . Theselatter gave currency tomany Jewish tales and tradi tions a nd adopted Jewish laws while the Hebrews accepted many Arabicteachings a nd preserved legends concerning devout

Arabs and Arabian prophets .Here we see the Wandering Jew perform a won

derful task,especially from the second to the end

of the sixth century.The thunders of Sinai re-echoin Arabia

,the heathen temples are Shaken

,their

altars are overthrown,the Wandering Jew has sown

19 2 ISAAC M . W I SE .

the seeds of skepticism and cultivates progressand reform . Again a new world grows out of theold . As l ittle

,indeed

,as you can imagine the New

Testament without the Old ,so little can you think

of the Koran without Jewish lore . The one like the

other is the offspring of the Jewish mind . The Wandering Jew stood sponsor for both . He has sownthe seed a nd others have reaped the harvest . Hehas fought the battles and others have earned the

laurels . He has received ingratitude and scorn ,where he has showered blessings with mun ificent

hand .

L HE M IDDLE AGES .

But the drama is not yet finished,there is another

act as wonderful . Progress and reform ,like evolu

tion and thought,cannot stop the Wandering Jew

must proceed a nd I must ask you to bear with himjust a little longer .The followers of Mohammed and the Koran first

appeared on the stage of history as irresistible warriors and conquerors

,forcing upon the nations the

religion of the Arabian apostle . The Orient yieldedto the crescent

,and this was carried in triumph into

Constantinople,into Spain

,to the very doors of

France,where the Pyrenees and Charles Martel

checked their further advance .

The Arabs settled down to civilized li fe and cultiva ted the arts of peace . Gradually they rose in

the scale of culture . They studied the Greek classics . Soon they became independent thinkers , philosophers and scientists , especially in medicine , math

ema tics , a stronomy and physics , and their schools

became famous .


studied carefully what the Jew Avicebron (SolomonIbn Gabirol ) or R . Moses of Egypt (Moses Maimonides ) , had written , and quoted and expoundedthem for the benefit of the church . Popes andpo tentates had their Jewish translators engaged toreproduce in Latin what Jews had written in He

brew or Arabic . The Jew carried books and learning from land to land .

It was an anomalous state of society . The civi l

ized world was broken up into two hostile factions,

Christendom on the one side and Mohammedanism

on the other . In Christendom ignorance and op

pression increased from century to century,and

freedom of thought was not permitted . The scienceand learning of the Mohammedans were useless to

the Christian,for none dared to read the books of

the infidels,none ventured to learn the language of

the enemies of the cross .

OR I GIN OF THE REFORMATI ON .

It was again the Wandering Jew who was themediator between the hostile factions a nd becamethe agent of progress and reform . He brought tothe Christians philosophy

,science

,letters

,arts and

industries from other countries . Christians beganto study Hebrew

,to read and to imbibe new ideas .

The Wandering Jew had sown the seed of Skepticism once again . The soil was prepared

,the

seed was sown,a nd out of that soil rose Martin

Luther a nd the Protestant Reformation . AS little,

indeed,as the New Testament or the Koran could

have come into existence without the long and

consistent labors of the Wandering Jew,so little

THE WANDERING JEW . 195

could the Reformation have possibly evolved outof Christian soil without the labors of IbnGabirol

,

Maimonides,

. Ibn Ezra,Kimchi

, Gersonides , andmany other Jewish th inkers

,whose free and un

trammeled research and range of philosophicalthought

,whose conciliation of faith and reason by

making faith philosophical and philosophy religious ,cleared the dogmatic atmosphere .

‘ I f it had not

been for these Jewish thinkers , theology would haveremained a divine comedy . As is the theology of apeople so are its polity

,social institutions and life .

The Jew ’ s revenge for all this,however

, was

characteristic of him . He destroyed the gods of

his persecutors . He dissipated the illusions,ex

posed the superstitions , battled against ignorance ,protested against slavery , demanded freedom of belief

,thought and speech

,and raised his voice against

prej udice and oppression . He carried Skepticismand learning from land to land

,gave the impulses to

the world ’ s progress and stood at the cradle of every

idea of light and freedom . That was the Jew ’ srevenge .

MODERN PH I LOSOPHY .

Where is the Wandering Jew of the modern day ?Is he again hunted down by persecution

,or intimi

dated by the well-known Christian love ? Yes,he

was hunted down in Germany,France

,Poland

,but

he wakes up in Amsterdam in the shape of BaruchSpinoza

,the most formidable of all enemies of dog

ma tism . He upset the whole host of gods . He brokethrough the fine scholastic spider-webs of theology

,

claimed freedom of research and word,and became

the father of modern philosophy . He was another

I 96 I SAAC M . WI SE .

link in the chain of Jewish reasoners from the Eu

phra tes to the North Sea , beginning with Saadia in thetenth century ,

a nd ending— where —yes,where ?

All modern philosophy turns about Spinoza . Twothirds of all modern philosophers and scientists

have become Wandering Jews . Our Christianneighbors themselves have become Wandering Jews .The Puri tans and Presbyterians are the Phariseesof old . The Episcopalians are the aristocratic Sad

uceeS of days gone by . Our ! uakers are theEssenes of old. They are Judaized and do notknow it . Little more is left for the WanderingJew to do . Still he has no rest . He must live onuntil there Shall be no superstition

,no ignorance

and no intolerance,no hatred , no self-delusion and

no darkness among sects .He must wander on till the end of woe and miseryhas come

,till the earth shall be one holy land , every

city a Jerusalem,every house a temple

,every table

an altar,every parent a priest

,and Jehovah the

only God till light and truth Shall have dominionover all

,every land be a home of the free

,every

government the guardian of liberty,and mankind

one family of equal rights and duties . Then thecurtain will drop on the drama of the Wandering

Jew . Then a good morning will have risen upon

the world .


synthetically ; hence they~ are revelations , or , inother words

,Intuitive knowledge . I f We admit

that some or all of those conceptions are conveyedinto the mind by other men

,then

,as an infinite re

gress ion of cause and effect is unreasonable,we

must admit that at some time or other they wereoriginally conceived by some man or some men

,and

were then and there revelations . Well did Maimonides say

,With his reason man can distinguish

between truth and falsehood,

” and adds to it,

“Andthis existed also in Adam in its completeness andentirety . (Moreh ,

i,

It is no less evident,however , ' tha t thep logl must

subj ect its material to constructive philosophy , inorder to be a

~ “

science . Again,as all human con

ceptions consist of thesi s and antithesis , there arepossible true a nd also false conceptions of the DeityThere are also possible false conclusions from trueprem ises

,false or even true conclusions from false

premises,which in the case of theology affect the

truth or error of the hopes,expectations a nd fears

of man,and his conceptions of duty . Therefore

,

i t is also evident that theology must subj ect itsmaterial to discursive philosophy . So far and nofarther theology depends —on p hi losofihy. The -ma

teria l or the facts of theology are received from thedire intui t ive knowledge of the,

human discovers them in himself . It

5 5125? no difference by what inner or outer in

fluence those conceptions were raised from thesphere of the unconscious to that of the consciousin the mind— as recorded in the books which are

believed to contain tho&revel a tions conceived by

SOURCES OF THE THEOLOGY OF JUDA I SM . 199

persons in former days . That which was revealed

Could not be revea led again ,a nd words recording

this revealed truth are only the agent which raisesthat truth from the sphere of the unconscious tothat of the conscious . .The same is the case withverbal instruction . It must always be borne inmind that the intellect will accept nothing for whichit does not possess an innat°e capacity , that is , Simila r though unconscious idea types . Education andinstruction mean development of those types

,or

raising them from the unconscious to the conscious

sphere .

Judaism relies for its material upon the revela

tions in the threefold covenant recorded in the

Torah of Moses . Judaism constructs its theologyby accepting that material a nd subj ecting it to theprocess of discursive and constructive reasoning .

Therefore we define thus : The Tlzeologyy of j udo

75 777 is t/7e science of Me 7077747 770775 of Dez'

fy t/ze

77777777777 mind a nd tlzeir log i'

ca l segi7e777es , eo77fo757'

77°73/7'ea so.77 , a s la id down 777 t/ze

Tora lz of Moses,expounded,

expa nded a nd reduced

70 pra ctice a’zfi

'

erent forms , a ! 777177 7 7 777 7’7°

777es,by

Moses,flee prophets , llze il7e sages

77 7771 7‘17e la wf ul bodies !be co77g reg a lz°

o77 of I sra el .

The teaching a nd commandment ” (msmmm)of the threefold covenant is the immovable centerof Judaism as the positive and universal religion .

Doctrines and precepts,which are the logical se

quences from any principle laid down in theteaching and commandment of the covenant

,

a re naturally of equal value and authority with theprinciple of which they are logical sequences . In


stances thereof occur in Exodus , xxxiv ; Leviticus ,xix ; Numbers , xv , 14

— 16 ; Deuteronomy , vi , x ,

1 2— 2 2 xiii,

1- 6 ; xvii , 1- 13 ; xviii , 9—2 2

,and

many more passages in the Pentateuch which are

either taken directly from the “ Book of the Covenant

,

”Or expound and expand the “ teaching

and commandment ” of the covenant . All lawsof Moses which define and reduce to practicethe law of the covenant are Special

,national a nd

temporary ; they are the law of the land of Israelas long as such circumstances or emergencies pre

vail,to regulate or counteract which the laws were

originally intended . Their positive value and a u

thority lie in the doctrine or precept which the lawembodies

,and not in the letter thereof . Inasmuch

as such doctrine or precept is naturally containedor implied in the “ teaching a nd commandment ” o f

the covenant . it is Of equal value and authori tywith the provisions of the Covenant . Instances .

thereof are all laws of Moses defining the right ofpossession and inheritance

,the laws regulating the

mutual relations of servant and master,the pro

visions for the protection and support of the poorand other weak and unprotected parties

,the laws

of traffic ; also the laws regulating marriage anddivorce and protecting the rights of the family andthe purity of the race

,the sanitary laws in all their

ramifications,the laws regulating the culte

,and

the entire penal code ; all of these contain eternal

and universal doctrines or precepts,and are in let

ter national,temporary a nd transitory , hence Moses

himself provided for neces sa rv amendments a nd

substitutes . (Deuteronomy , xv11, 8 Again,

0 2 I SAAC M . WI SE .

i t in his introduction . Josephus (Contra Apion , i ,8 ) mentions it a nd gives the number of the sacred

books to be twenty- two . The Tana im frequentlymention it in the Talmudic and pre-Talmudic books

,

and give the names of the books belonging to each

part in Talmud B a b/7°

,Baba B a thra

,I 4 and I 5 .

The books have retained the same names precisely,

except that I and II Samuel , I and II Kings , I andII Chronicles

,Ezra and Nehemiah were each but

one book,hence there would have been altogether

twenty books ; but the five Megilloth,Ruth

,Song

of Solomon,Ecclesiastes

,Lamentations and Esther

,

now counted one book,were then counted five ;

thus the Scriptures ever since the final compila

tion of these books consisted of twenty- four books,

divided into five books of Torah ,eight books of

Prophets ( the twelve minor prophets were alwaysconsidered one book ) and eleven books of Hagi

ography. Josephus , i t appears , included Ruth inSamuel and Lamentations in Jeremiah

,therefore he

speaks of twenty-two books of Sacred Scriptures .The subdivision of Samuel , Kings and Chronicleswas made by the Greek and Latin translators

,and

like the prevailing division,

into chapters,was im

posed upon the Hebrew Bible a t a later date .

These three divisions of Scriptures were not con

S1dered of equal holiness and authority by the an

cient expounders of the laws ; the Christians and

the Karaites accept the whole Bible as the word of

God . In the synagogues and the academies , as far

back as the records reach,to and beyond the time

of the Maccabees , the Torah of Moses was read fourtimes every week as well as on the national feast

SOURCES OF THE THEOLOGY OF JUDA I SM . 2 03

a nd fast days . The congregation was not to re

main three days without reading from the Torah .

The duty of the Israelites , i t was held , was to readsome portion from the Torah every day , and it was

the special duty of every one to write a copy of theTorah for himself

,a nd of the kings to write two

copies thereof. (Maimonides , [ f ile/70717

etc . ,vii . I and Neither of these duties was

prescribed in regard to the other books of the Bible .

Sections from prophets were read in the synagogues

and academies on Sabbaths , on feast and fast days ;divine service was closed with them and they served

a s texts for the preachers and translators (Rappaport ,Erech Millin , Art . mas ) but this could be done onlyafter reading from the Torah . The prophets wereconsidered inferior to theTorah

,and theHagiographa

inferior to the prophets in holiness and authority .

Those of the ancient Rabbis who believed in plenaryinspiration claimed it only for Moses

,and not for any

other prophet . God said what was before the mind of

Moses ; to this society is to be trained by practicallegislation . Also in this very rational department ofhis legislationMoses claimed no perpetual authorityfor his laws only the underlying principles are di

vine . Laws are expressed words , and words must beexpounded . They change in significance from timeto time

,the circumstances and emergencies which

made such laws necessary and beneficial Change andpass away

,and the law becomes a dead letter .

Moses established a high court of law in Israel

(Deuter . , xvii , 8—13) with the prerogatives of thelegislative and judiciary sovereignty

, viz . : to ex

I SAAC M. WI SE .

pound the eternal law in particular cases or emer

gencies a nd thus to meet the dema nds of every age

he told his people “ according to the Torah which

they will teach thee ,” i f i t be or be not written in

the Torah in your possession,

“ and according to

the j udgment which they will tell thee,thou shalt

do , whether i t be or be not according to your

j udgment and whoever rebels against that decisionmay be punished with death . No death penalty fora ny political offense is threatened in the Mosaiclaws , not even for non-obedience to the prophet

,

the highest authority of the theocracy ( Ibid . ,verse

This solemn injunction tells forcibly that only

the divine principles are eternal,the letter of the

law embodying any of them is subject to change by

the authority established under the law . The postbiblical legislation among the Hebrews is based uponthis provision of the law . Any law embodying adivine principle

,enacted by lawful authority

,has

the sa nction of Moses .

The diflerence then between the laws of the covenant and the laws of Moses is that the former areeternal in letter and spirit , the law of universal

empire ; and the latter a re eternal in spirit onlywhere they embody an eternal principle . Theprophets

,as well as the later expounders of the law

,

guarded this doctrine .

Whether all the laws of Moses were written byhim in various scrolls

,or some of them were pre

served traditionally and written down at some later

date,i s in fact of no v ital importance . However ,

we have the authority of the book itself to the effect

2o6 I SAAC M . W I SE .

been written,i t still remains the most ancient com

mentary on the covenant in our possession . The

expression “ and Moses repeated ( every word ) andwrote ( it) , is used of Moses only . The ancients

went so far in this distinction between Moses a nd

all others that they ordained,Prophets and Hagi

ographa must not be placed upon the Thorah .

”

Up to the time of Rabbi Judah Hanna Ss i i t washeld that Torah , Prophets and Hagiographa must

not be written in one Scroll,lest they appear of

equal holiness . (Mas . Sopherim ,i i i . ) This is still

the case in the synagogue .

The higher authority of Moses is evident fromthe Torah itself ; as is written ,

“ He is a uthentica ted in all my house ” (Numb . xii

,and the

Torah closes with the words,

“And no prophet rosein Israel like Moses ” (Deut . xxxiv , a state

ment which none of the prophets ever contradicted .

On the contrary,the last of the prophets admon

ished his people , Remember the Torah of Moses,

my servant ” (Mal . i i i ,The Judaism of hi story never deviates from theprinciple that its authority is based upon Moses

,

whose authority i s founded on the Sinaitic revelation

,a nd that all prophets a nd hagiographists after

Moses expounded and expanded the words of God

laid down in the Thorah , admonished the people toknow

,understand a nd observe the ‘laws of God

,

predicted evil to the rebellious and happiness to theobedient person or nation in the spirit and according

to the words of Moses . Moses Maimonides , in hiscompendium . of the Talmudical law and doctrine

SOURCES OF THE THEOLOGY OF JUDA I SM . 20 7

known as Mishneh Torah ,otherwise called Yad

Ha cha zakah,formulates this historical belief . He

points out the superiority of Moses over all other

prophets in inspiration . and authority (Yesode

Torah,vi i

,6 ; viii , 1

,in support of the article

of faith that the Torah is of eternal authority , inwhich all ancient expounders of the law agree .

(Cf . Introduction to Chelek . ) In the second partof his Moreh Nebuchim

,Maimonides expatiates on

this subj ect . There ( chapter xxxv) he refers towhat was laid down in his code

,and adds

,that in

this treatise he refers exclusively to the nature ofprophecy as attaching to the men called prophetsin Sacred Scriptures

,and not to Moses

,whose pro

phetica l powers and words are of a different and of amuch higher degree than those of the other prophets . The name Nabi or prophet . is given , according to his opinion

,to Moses

,and also to others

,by

equivocation,

e.,they have very little i f anything

in common . He returns to this subj ect in thethirty-ninth chapter

,and there he states concerning

all the prophets after Moses :“ But as regards

the prophets that arose after Moses,thou knowest

already the idea of their words ( teaching) that theyperformed

,as i t were

,the function of warning the

people and exhorting them to Observe the Torah ofMoses

,threatening evil to him who forsakes it

,and

predicting good for him who trains himself to followand observe it . Then again

,in the forty-fifth chap

ter,Maimonides Shows that there are different de

grees of prophecy,as there is a marked difference

among the wise and intelligent in general one is su

2 08 ISAAC M . WISE .

perior to the other,which is also the case among

prophets . He counts there ten degrees Of prophecy,

and gives us to understand that not all passages of theBible are of equal authority and divinity . All Spanish Arabic reasoners on the religion and theology ofJudaism , grounding their opinions on the statements of Talmud and Midrash

,are of the same

opinion in this matter,so that it is perfectly correct

to maintain

( 77 ) The Judaism of history accepts the Torah

of Moses as its primary source and unalterable a u

thority in all matters of religion , ethics and the

ology .

( 7) In the Torah of Moses are the doctrinesand laws of the covenant , the immovable center ,and the Law of Moses is the first important com

mentary,eternal in Spirit and subj ect to change in

letter .

( 7 ) The prophets and hagiographists are the

next most important expounders of the covenant,

its documents and laws , because the whole house ofIsrael accepts them as God- inspired messengers oftruth and righteousness .

(d) All post-biblical expounders of the Torahor any other portion of Sacred Scriptures

,be they

persons or authorized bodies,no matter whether

their researches and decisions are laid down in therabbinical

,philosophical or poetical literature of the

Hebrews,possess authority in the degree that they

j ustly and wisely expound , expand , or reduce topractice the doctrine a nd law of the covenant in

harmony with the postulate of reason .

( e) I t follows , therefore , that the sources for the

2 10 I SAAC M . WI SE

ever penetrated . What any or all men ever said ofand about God is either false or else it merely expounds and expands the indestructible words of

Moses .

Inasmuch , however , as all true teachings of re

l igion ,ethics and theology can be but logical resul

tants of our true conceptions of Deity a nd,further

more,inasmuch as the Mosaic knowledge of God is

the highest and holiest,beyond which human reason

cannot go,it necessarily follows that the Mosaic

ethics for the individual,the human family and

society,as well as the theology of Moses

,must be

the highest and holiest which man can expound,ex

pand,apply

,or reduce to practice in constitutions

,

laws and institutions . No religion after Moses hasadded an iota to the Mosaic ethics , nor in the nature

of things can anything be added to the Decalogue as

expounded,expanded and reduced to practice by

Moses himself . The entire obj ect of philosophical

ethics is to systematize and , of late , to build up asystem independent of God , an effort doomed -tofailure .

The greatness and glory of the prophets in Israelconsist chiefly in the following points :

( 77) Their unshaken and invincible faith in theteachings and predictionS of Moses , and their incomparable devotion to and patriotism for Israel a nd

i ts cause,which they knew to be the most sacred

cause of the human family .

( 7) The brilliancy of their minds and their moralfortitude

,guided by the firm purpose to see a nd

j udge correctly the errors a nd misdeeds of their re

spective generations , kings , priests or people , to

SOURCES OF THE THEOLOGY OF JUDA I SM . 2 1 1

point out the inevitable consequences according tothe predictions of Moses , and yet not lose their

faith in the future triumph of truth and righteous

ness,the indestrrictibility of Israel and the three

fold covenant,and the final redemption and frater

n iza tion of mankind,exactly as Moses had pointed

this out before them . They expounded , expandedand illumined the divine revelation but for all that

,

“ all prophets received their prophecy from MountSinai . ”

2 1 2 I SAAC M . W I SE .

THE OUTL I NES OF JUDA ISM.

AN ARGUMENT BEFORE THE CONVENTION OF THEFREE RELIGIOUS ASSOCIATION ,

” BOSTON ,

MASS . ( 1869 )

What is Judaism ? This is the question I am to

expound before this venerable body . The time i s

short,the subj ect vast ; I must

°

limit my remarksto meager outlines . I represent this cause here on

my own responsibility,and am delegated by none .

Twenty-five years in the pulpit , and twenty years’

connection with the Jewish press,are my creden

tia ls,the diffusion of truth the purpose of my pres

ence on this platform .

I will expound Judaism in its essence ; that whichis called orthodox or rabbinical Judaism involves

matter additional and accessory . I speak of thesubstance .

Judaism is the doctrine and the law ; i t is the

ocracy,or the kingdom of heaven . It comprises

three sciences,viz . ; theology , based on Jehovah ;

ethics derivative from this,Man is the image of

God ; and politics,

“ God is the King .

” These

form the integral facts of Judaism .

Law is the incarnation of doctrine ; it is theoryreduced to terms of practice . Doctrine is the soul

,

and law the body of Judaism . Doctrine is advis

ory . Liberty of conscience is the birthright ofman . Belief and conscience are beyond the con


have to convey the meaning not only of passive being

,but also of causation . There is no such term

in the English nor in any other language,except

the Hebrew , so far as I know . The Jehovah conception is uniquely and characteri stically Hebrew .

Jehovah is an absolute and infinite being,and

the cause of all finite beings and of their modifica

tions . He is the first cause,without which no

effect is conceivable . The universe is the effect,

depending forever on the divine cause for i ts existence . God is independent

,the universe is not .

All eff ects are regulated by laws which are themanifestation of sovereign wisdom and power .

This definition of Godhead makes it eo ipso impossible to concieve the essence of the Deity . No

man can see me and live .

” The human mind can

not form an adequate conception of eternity or ofendless space . It has no exhaustive knowledge ofsubstance

,force or matter . How can the indi

vidua l ized understanding encompass the cause ofthe universe and the nature of that cause ? The

Deity,the substance of being , is beyond the hori

zon of human understanding . All speculationson the essence of Deity

,theological or metaphys

ical,dualistic

,trinitarian or polytheistic

,spiritual

istic or materialistic , are not only as absurd as isatheism itself

,but they are also blasphemy . They

attempt to press the infinite Deity into narrow in

dividua lized understanding . They attempt the imposs ible . Please

,ye doctors of all ages and zones

,

confess your inability ; you cannot add one iota tothe word of the Decalogue ,

“ I Jehovah am thy

THE OUTLINES OF JUDAI SM . 2 15

God . He is,and therefore all things are . The

things are,and therefore he must have been first

This is the limit of human reason .

We know not the essence,but we know some of

the manifestations of the Dei ty in the physical

universe a nd in the history of mankind , in thereason and conscience of man . In all these de

pa rtments the perpetual revelations of God are ob

servable . This i s the cleft of the rock in whichwe stand

,hidden by the hand of the Almighty ,

till he has passed . We behold Him as He revealsHimself in facts

,in the finished creations

,in the

universal harmony of the world . We can see and

admire , perceive a nd worship . This is the basisof theology , and the Decalogue points it out clearly .

The precept,Ye shall walk after Jehovah your

God , means , search first,and then emulate .

The observable mani festations of the Deity showthat He is omnipotence

,sovereign wisdom

,supreme

justice,and incomparable goodness . God reveals

himself as the ideal of perfection . Religion is thati nnate and divine impulse which prompts man tosearch after God

,to think His ideas

,and to imitate

His perfections to walk after Jehovah your God,

”

as Moses expresses it . The prophets and psalmists

have embellished this idea with poetical imagery andsublime enthusiasm . Moses

,however

,like a legis

lator,spoke in clear terms : “ Ye shall walk after

Jehovah your God .

” “ Thou shalt be perfect with

Jehovah thy God .

” Ye Shall be holy,for Jehovah

your God i s holy .

” Thou shalt love Jehovah thyGod with all thy heart

,with all thy soul

,a nd all

thy might . ” Such expressions point to God as the


ideal of perfection , as also do the words of the Dec

alogue , To those who love me and keep my com

mandments .

” These are the three fundamental

principles of Jewish theology : God IS , 'GOd manifests himself

,God is the ideal of perfection .

ETH I CS .

The la st paragraph leads us to ethics and its first

principle . I f man is required to try to realize the

ideal of perfa ction in himself , he must possess the

requisite capacities . These capacities are,indeed

,

the characteristics of human nature,to which scrip

ture alludes in the words,

“ He made man in the

image of God,

”e.

,man is gi fted with God-like

capacities,free will

,understanding

,consciousness

of duty,and hope of immortality . These capaci

ties are characteristic of human nature,because no

other creature possesses them . They are God-like,

because apart from man,they are di scoverable in

God alone .

The Decalogue starts from this principle of ethics : All men ,

women and children met at the footof Mount Sinai . This is in i tself proclamation ofequality . All heard and understood the word ofGod ; thi s vindicates understanding for every individual . All

,without exception

,were required to

perform the four duties of man ,and this points to

the consciousness of duty as being innate in everyhuman being . Rewards are promised and punish

ment threatened— a n acknowledgment of man ’ s freewill . God speaks and man listens and understands .God is near to man

,man ’ s nature is heaven-born and

immortal . could address his words to such


science its expounder , and love its eloquent pleader ,A study of the Decalogue lea ds to the convictionthat Moses was right in saying

,

“ Thou shalt notadd nor diminish . Neither Christianity

,Islam

nor Philosophy has been able to add to the Decalogue one principle on which human happiness

,

either here or hereafter depends . The diffi culty is,

that the words are brief and Simple therefore they

are not studied sufficiently , and are not quite under

stood . The commandments of the Decalogue arecategories of the moral code

,a nd require patient

and exhaustive thought . The Greco-Roman phantasm of religion led the masses out upon the boundless sea of imagination , far , far away from therealities of human nature . In theology

,specula

tions on the essence of the Deity obscured humanreason

,and led it astray . In ethics

,too

,imagina

tion created a phantasm,and prescribed impra cti

ca ble laws , forgetting the real man . To man as he

is , to the free moral agent , the citlzen of thekingdom of heaven

,the Decalogue teaches a com

plete system of ethics .

POLITI CS .

These outlines of theology and ethics contain the

germs of theocratic politics . I f all men are bornequal

,free and with the consciousness of duty

,then

none is entitled to govern and none is born to obey .

The misunderstanding of human nature and trans

cendenta l speculations on the essence of the Deitybrought God and man so far apart that priests and

saints had to be invented to intervene . Likewisein pol itics it was held that man could not govern

THE OUTLINES OF JUDAI SM . 2 19

and protect himself . God had to delegate tyrantsand despots

,

“ by the grace Of God ,” to govern

his helpless creatures . In Jewish ethics , however ,man is the image of God

,hence , as respects

politics,Judaism says

,God alone is the king

“ Thou shalt have no others gods before me .

Though the Jews placed kings over themselves , theyrevolted often enough . God is king ; this implies

not only democracy,but also the reign of absolute

j ustice,not only as far as the earth is concerned , but

also with regard to the kingdom of heaven on earth .

Nobody has the right to govern another but neitherhas anyone the right to legislate for others . Ab

solute j ustice is king,supreme and sovereign . The

mandates of the king are incarnations of principleswhich have their point in absolute j ustice . No

man , and no body of men can make them ; theyrest in reason and conscience they are announced

in the Decalogue . Theymay be expounded to meet

emergencies and applied to existing circumstancesbut every other k ind of legislation is unwarrantedand an assumption of unsanctioned authority . Aslong as there are rulers

,men are slaves as long as

there are laws contrary to the principles of absolutej ustice

,men wlll be wicked . It is the duty of a

theocratic government to protect the people,that it

be not misgoverned,but that it govern itself , so that

true j ustice reign and nothing impede the free de

velopment of human nature . It is the duty of atheocratic legislature to expound the laws of eternaljustice and reduce them to general formulas for pra ct ical purposes . It i s the duty of the citizen in the

kingdom of heaven to obey God,in strict compliance


with the dicta of h is reason a nd his conscience. I,

Jehovah,am thy God

,

” is the first principle in theology the first in ethics

,for he is thy God

,because

thou art his image and the‘

ff rst in politics,for God

is king . So theology ,ethics and politics are in

separable in theocracy . This is Judaism . Nothingcan be added

,nothing be taken away without dis

turbing the harmony .

You expected me to set forth only the outlines

of Judaism,no evidence

,no application

,no illustra

tion,therefore I am done . I f I a dd that this is the

kingdom of heaven which Jesus of Nazareth preached,

i f I add that in the estimation of Jesus of Nazareththe Jews are the best Christians

,you may not agree

with me . I f I Should venture the assertion , of which ,

like the prophets of old,I am morally certain

,that

l/zis is i/ze relig ion of coming g e77e7'a i io77s

,my bold

ness might Shock you . But I may say this The hap

piness of mankind depends on no creed and 011 nobook . I t depends on the dominion of truth

,which

i s the redeemer,the savior and the messiah . I un

dersta nd that the attainment of truth is the obj ectof the Free Religious Association

,therefore I am a

member of it a nd will Support it as long as honestsearch for truth shall be its guiding star .


ten his Leben Jesu and Die Christliche Glaubenslehre .

”

The apologetics of Judaism begins with the last

book of the Bible . The book of the Prophet

Malachi is,perhaps

,more polem1ca l than apolo

getic ; still it contains the main point of which theauthors of the Book of Job and Koheleth (Ecclesiastes) treat . Job discussed the question of truerighteousness and the j ustice of Providence

,and

Koheleth defends r eligion and revealed doctrinesagainst the current skepticism of his days . In the

apocrypha of the Old Testament the wisdom ofSolomon might be called apologetic ; i t defends the

doctrines of Judaism indirectly . Josephus ’ “ Contra

Apion and Philo ’ S report of the embassy to Caligulaare historical apologies rather than polemics . Inthe Mishna

,Talmud and Midrash quite an amount

of polemic li terature is preserved,but no attempt at

apologetics i s extant . Judaism appeared so selfevident to those ancient teachers that any apologyof its tenets appeared superfluous to them .

After the revival of letters among the Arabs,

classical,philosophical and scientific studies had

become general,and in consequence of this intel

lectual revival , skeptics increased in numbers andinfluence . Traditionalists were compelled to writeapologies in defense of the Koran . The Jews

,too

,

began to produce apologetic li terature in behalf ofJudaism . The Gaon Saadia of Fayyum

,who lived

during the first half of the tenth century,is the

oldest writer from whose pen a book of that kindi s extant His Emunoth ve -Deoth

,of which

we now possess also the Arabic original,i s per

APOLOGETICS OF JUDA I SM . 2 2 3

haps more polemical than apologetic ; he arguesagainst philosophical skeptics as well as againstChristiani ty and Mohammedianism ,

still his obj ect

is apologetic he defends Judaism,wards off attacks

and establishes his own tenets . The Jewish-Arabicliterature after Saadia

,despite its opulence in phi

losophy and poetry , science and theology , has only

two eminent apologists,Judah Halevi

,the eminent

poet,in his a l -Cha za ri ,

” a book of dialogues between the King of the Cha sa rs and a Jewish savant

,

a nd Moses Maimonides , whose Moreh Nebuchim isentirely apologetic .

After Maimonides only three Hebrew writers belong to this class

,viz . ,

Leon de Banolas (335author of MilChamoth Hashem ; Joseph Albo , theauthor of Sepher Ikka rim ; and Isaac Aba rbanel ,among whose numerous works Rosh Amanah

,Ater

eth Zekenim,Mipha loth Elohim and Mashmia

Yeshuah are purely apologetic . With them the fifteenth century closes , and the medieval time beginsfor the Jews . It is a long night

,interrupted only

by Mena sseh ben Israel , Baruch Spinoza and others

in Holland ; Azariah dei Rossi , Judah di Modenaand the Del Medigos in Italy and Candia ; David

Gans and a few others in Austria,and the few fore

runners of Moses Mendelssohn in Germany .

Moses Mendelssohn reopened this kind of literature with three of his books

, viz . ,Pha edon

, Jerusa

lem and Morgenstunden . In the latter he attemptsto give the evidence for the existence of Deity inPha edon he seeks to establish the doctrine of immortality of the soul , and in Jerusalem he defendsthe dogmatics of Judaism . H is followers were few .


Besides S . Formstecher (Die Religion des Geistes) ,Samuel Hirsch (Die Religionsphilosophie

.

der Juden ) , Nachman Krochmal (Moreh NebucheHazze

man ) , S . L . Steinheim (Die Glaubenslehre der Syn

agoge als exacte Wissenschaft ) , Ludwig Philipson

(Die Israeli tische Religionslehre) , Luzza to ,Bena

mozegh and Grueneba um on the ethics of Judaism .

Why are there so few apologetic wri ters ? There

are several causes

I . The Jew considered Judaism impregn able,

built upon the highest philosophical and most profound ethical thoughts which man is capable of eu

terta ining ,and looked with disdain upon every

attack made upon it or accusation advanced againstit . They appeared to him as waging war against

common sense . This needs no self-defense and no

apology .

2 . Apologetic writings demand systematic , philosophical study

,logical or a prior i evidence , historical

and comparative researches,a nd the Jew

,except in

the Arabic-Spanish period and the modern Germanic period ( Philo among the ancients and Baruch

Spinoza excepted) , never was a scholastic philosopher his mind does not submit to formulas

,

methods and technicalities of any school philosophy.

He moved energetically in the Sphere of commonsense

,but there he stopped .

3 . Ever since the fourth Christian century i t wasnext to an impossibility for the Jew to defend his

religion properly . Among all the e ngs infl icted

upon him was also the humiliation imposed on his

religious beliefs . It was deemed indispensablynecessary and indisputable in Christendom that

2 2 6 I SAAC M . W ISE .

he does not like to offend his neighbors . Hewishes consideration for himself

,and feels under

obligation to bestow Similar considerateness uponothers

.Therefore

,he does not yet feel quite at

liberty to speak out freely . This is a kind of un

manly weakness,a nd perhaps even treason to his

religion— surely a restraint upon his best convic

tions . Prudence may dictate such caution for the

sake of mutual good understanding and peace but ,after all

,i t is a truce .

Many of our modern Jewish scholars Since thetime of the scientific revival have been drawn awayfrom Judaism and its philosophy . They seek theirreputation

,along with their livelihood

,in science

a nd art,in financial a nd commercial pursuits

,and

cannot reserve much attention from these for theproblems of religion . Rabbis are interested in his

tory,archeology and philology ; they preach pra c

tical sermons on current topics and cultivate asmuch theology and philosophy as is absolutely necessary . They are thus alienated from studies andfrom the zeal requisite for a thorough apologetics of

Judaism .

And yet it appears that this is the time when

Judaism can arise from lethargy and can establishits claim as the universal religion . It has been the

mother of all religions,i t has nurtured the religious

ideas . This it Seems to me is the opportune timeand occasion for a compari son of the ideals of Judaism with the pretensions of the world . Thousandswill be glad to hear the honest truth . Before themaj esty of truth we may abandon all ungenerousconsiderations .

APOLOGETI CS OF JUDA I SM . 7

The only thing that may make us hesitate is\ the

question,

“Are we able to do i t ? Can we do j ustice to this important problem ? But this can bedecided by an intell igent community ; and that itmay be enabled to decide we must submit the mat

ter clearly . We may begin , then , upon an Apolog'etics of Judaism .

” It is a discipline in the theology of Judaism for us and for the public . Jointly

we will be competent to solve the problem . Surelyafter our first effort some one wi ll be found who cancontinue . He will avoid our errors

,he will supply

our deficienc1es , and will come nearer to the truth

but as for us,let us seek it

,and announce honestly

whatever is found .


APHOR ISMS ON ETH ICS .

I .

That man is free and moral is presupposed by allsystems of law

,human and divine

,for law would be

ineffective i f subjects were not credited with moralfreedom .

It is maintained in scripture that this moral freedom is not acquired ; i t is innate , for Adam andEve obeyed and disobeyed command s of God .

Reward or punishment as the consequence of

obedience or disobedience , i s j ust only when the individual is addressed as a free moral agent . From

the very beginning all nation s considered it j ust to

reward the obedient and to punish the disobedient .Scripture records a l ike attitude by God towardman himself . Man ’ s moral freedom is recognized

in a l l law,divine and human . Compulsory agen~

cies coercing men to act contrary to law ,divine or

human,are contrary to the facts of human nature ;

therefore,without val idity .

Responsibility i s the necessary consequence ofthis freedom . Man is responsible for his commissions and omissions toward h imself , toward his fel

lowmen and toward his God .

Conscience is undeliberate reason,i t has the in

tuitive discernment that the right and the good arethe right and the good and ought to be done

,and

that the opposite of these ought to be shunned be


struction . The child,although moral by birth

,

is unconscious of morality,and it becomes con

scious ly moral in the same progressive manner as itbecomes intelligent . Morality conditions the exist

ence of society and the li fe of the individual within

i t , i t must accordingly be taught effectually . Con

sisting of rules of action,i t ought to be taught by

practice ti ll each rule or law becomes lodged in the

consciousness and becomes a habit . This , how

ever,is impossible for the teacher in his limited

sphere of influence,and it is the offi ce of the re

l igious educator to establish what is the moral duty

of man .

It is the duty of every one to get to knowhimself

,for self-consciousness is the supreme

fact of life ; to know what his relations and hisduties to his fellow-man and to his Maker are . This

self-knowledge embraces the recognition of our

faults and shortcomings and the desire to overcome them . This is moral self-training . Anearnest person must strive to become wiser andbetter with every passing day . The daily improvements Shall grow virtuous habit . This is selfculture .

He that knows h imself , his relations and dutiesto his fellow-man and to h is Maker

,and has over

come the faults and shortcomings of his nature is ,in the language of scripture

,holy . Holiness is the

highest degree of moral li fe . In a holy person vir

tue has become constant .The contents of the science of morality consist in

definitions of what is right and good and what is

otherwise . Morality will always have to be incul

APHOR I SMS ON ETH I CS . 2 3 1

ca ted for the majority in every generation is immature

,a nd their reason is ' not adequately developed .

When a definition of a moral fact h a s obtainedthe consent of the best of men

,i t becomes a moral

law and when it has obtained the consent of a com

mnnity,it becomes public law . Such moral laws

and public laws constitute the foundation of ethics .But this is the weak feature of ethics . There exists

no fixed and final authority for moral or public law .

“ The consent of the best class of men,

” or the

consent of a community,or of the maj ority in it

,

”

are indefinite conceptions . In the early days of

humanity definitions of morality were accep ted as

facts of superhuman reason,as revelations

,as mes

sages of inspired men . This gave them recogniza

ble authority . Revelation is the only authority ofethics now

,as it was then every other basis is in

adequate for the superstructure .

We acknowledge but one revelation as genuinethe Torah . I t is the paramount duty of con

scientious Israelites to learn from the Torah toknow ourselves

,our relations and duties to our fel

low-men and to our Maker,and to teach these con

s tantly and diligently . If,understanding our own

,

a nd comparing it impartially with ethics constructed upon another basis

,we should find ours

inferior,we are obligated to learn the better from

others . But if ours is proven to be superior , theduty would devolve upon us to teach that . Thisis the plan of the investigation which we wouldurge .

2 32 I SAAC M . W I SE

II .

The most reliable commentaries of the Torah aretwo books especially

,viz .

:

Psalms,which expounds the theology of Moses

in the most beautiful a nd most convincing form,in

more effective manner than philosophical or scientific treatises have done a nd

Proverbs,which expounds the ethics of Moses

clearly and directly,in a form almost childlike

,ad

dressed to my son,

”e.

,to intelligent youth

,

still not unprofound in spiri t .None can speak intelligently of the ethics of our

Torah without referring to Proverbs ( rules of pru

dence,too

,are part of the moral code ) . Let us

read but four verses of the second chapter“ My son

,i f thou wouldst but accept my words

,

and treasure up my commandments with thee

To let thy ear listen unto wisdom ( i f) thou

wouldst incline thy heart to understanding .

For i f thou wilt call after intelligence ; i f after

understanding thou wilt lift up thy voiceIf thou wilt seek her a s silver

,and search for her

as for hidden treasures . ”

Here are two statements given of the moral li fethe first is subj ective and the other obj ective , and

together they sum up the good which morality hasin its keeping .

This is also the proper division of morality it isideal or subj ective

,a nd real or obj ective . Both these

elements are laid down eo 77550 at the very beginning

of the Mosaic account ; they are expanded in the

2 34 I SAAC M . W ISE .

commandment was additional to the consciousnessof man . A commandment presupposes a moralsignificance . Commandments in their totality constitute the moral code they may be amended along

with the progress of reason by the accumulation of

experience the legislation of Moses itsel f offers the

proof for that it owes its existence to moral truthsinherent in human nature .

So much for the principle,and now a few words

as to the two sides of it : the ideal or subj ective,

and the real or obj ective . The ideal morality ofMoses

,defined in Proverbs

,was beautifully formu

lated by Rabbi Akiba eighteen hundred years ago .

He said (Aboth ,i i i

,Beloved is man (Adam )

for he was created in the image ( of God ) . It i s

superior love to have made him conscious that hewas born in that image

,as said ( in Holy Writ ) that

He made man in the image of God .

In this resides ideal morality . It is the consciousness Of man that he is the supreme being onthis earth

,the only one created in the image of God ,

the only moral and intellectual being on earth . He

is the reflex of the eternal Deity ; little lower than

God on earth ,crowned with honor and glory

,as

David said ( Psalm vi i i ) . With this consciousness ,Adam found no helpmate

,

” not one like himsel f inthe beauti ful population of Eden he named the a n

ima ls,but none could name him

,he was alone in

the primeval world .

In this sublime consciousness which distinguishesman lies the first law of nature— self-preservation .

The Self,the Ego

,i s human ; to preserve himsel f ,

ma n must maintain the c onsciousness that he is the

APHOR I SMS ON ETH ICS . 2 35

image of God . This Moses refers to when hespeaks of the special blessing which was bestowedon man . In this preservation of the human sel f

lies ideal or subj ective morality . Upon this rockMoses builds the most complete system of idealmorality known to man .

He tells you first what God is whose image you

are . He is “ merciful,beneficent

,long-suffering ,

abundant in grace and truth ”

(Exodus , xxxiv ,and these are the various elements of his sublimelove .

“ He is holy,

” that is,he is the highest

degree of purity and virtue,free from that which is

repugnant to truth a nd j ustice . He tells you God is

the highest wisdom,j ustice

,truth and faithfulness

the highest ideal of perfection which man can con

ceive .

Then he tells you that since these are the a ttributes of God

,of whom you are the image

,i t follows

of necessity that you . possess the capacity to attain

Similar qualities . This is the point of self-preservation

,viz . : the consciousness that you are the image

of your Maker . In this development of yourself,

in all the changes which you undergo from thecradle to the grave

,you can preserve this conscious

ness only i f your capacities grow by steady practice .

You look to the highest ideal of which you arecapable

,as David says : I have put God before

my eyes continually,because he is at my right hand

I cannot be moved from the right path .

” Therefore,

Moses commands :“ Ye shall be holy

,for I

,the

Lord your God,am holy .

” “And ye shall sancti fy

yourselves and become holy,for I

,the Lord your

God,am holy . Then again

,Ye shall be perfect


with the Lord your God,and also , Ye shall

walk after the Lord your God,

” which the Talmudalready explained

,as God is merciful so Shall ye

be,as God is beneficent , so ye Shall be emulate his

moral attributes .

” Thus the consciousness of the

god- likeness of man prevails ; this is the preserva

tion of his Self,a nd this is the highest reach Of ideal

morality . No man can do more than approximatethe ideal of perfection . No system of morality or

ethics can propose higher aims none ever did , none

ever will .Thus Moses places man above the position which

was ever assigned to him by philosophy and science ,and demands equality for all human beings before

God demands that the self- respect of none be discouraged ,

not even of the needy,the helpless and

the unprotected,and puts the criminal also under

the aegis of the law . We shall discuss this underthe head of obj ective morality . Here we wouldcall attention to the character of Bible morali ty andthe history of Israel that verifies it . If i t must be

admitted that these biblical characters are superior

to all we know of,it must also be admitted that this

moral system is the highest known to man,a pow

erful educator of a race .

III .

Ethics is a lso obj ective . It refers to the actionof man toward himself

,toward man and toward

other animate beings . Love thy neighbor as thyself is the highest moral law . It w a s announced

not only by Moses,who uttered i t first , but also by

H illel,who formulated i t as the so-called Golden


tistica lly ( see Spinoza’ s Ethics) , a re by no means

necessarily moral .According to this aspect

,Moses proceeds to lay

down the fundamental principle of real or obj ectiveethics thus God blessed the an imal creation (Genesis

,I,

“ be fruitful and multiply,

” etc . ,which

consecrates the instinct of self-preservation andtherefore of the race

,and man ’ s regard for animate

creatures . Then he reeords ( i , 2 7 ) the superiorityof man over all other creatures . He is created inthe image of God . Then ( i , 2 8 ) he records that

God bestowed his blessing on man,and repeats this

in the covenant with Noah (Genesis , ix ,i ) . The

second bless ing contains much more than the first

i t contains in the briefest terms the declaration thatman is moral .The blessing bestowed on man

,l ike that bestowed

on the animals,declares

,

“ be fruitful and multiply

,but adds

,

“ and fill the earth .

” Man is acosmopolitan being

,he can prosper in all zones and

climes . Man,despite his weaknesses

,in contrast

with animals,will fill and populate the earth .

“ Be fruitful and multiply ” was understood a l

ready by the a ncient rabbis to be the first command

ment of the Law, viz . : the race was to be pre

served ; every individual , being part of the racehas a part in this common obligation . We maynow look upon the conditions expressed in thatblessing These are expressed in two Hebrewwords

,subdue her ( the earth) and have domin

ion " over fish,bird and beast . The preservation

of the human racea nd the individual,the distribu

tion over the earth,depend on certain conditions.

APHOR I SMS ON ETH I CS . 2 39

The prosperity and happiness of each and all,

°

a s

Well as li fe and health ,will always be commensurate

with the fulfillment of these conditions . In these

two words i s implied the fundamental principle of

real morality .

In order to subdue the earth and to have dominion over animate beings

,the first requisite is labor

hence it is man ’ s duty to work,to perform such

tasks as Shall give man dominion over the earth,i ts

elements and forces . This comprises useful labor,

physical and menta l , secular and spiritual , laborproductive of the means of preservation . It ismoral to work . It is immoral to do nothing

,to be

a parasite . Adam was placed in the Garden ofEden

,not to enj oy the luxuries of a’olee f a r 777

°

e777’

e,

but “ to till i t and to keep it . God himself

worked,he says (Genesis , i i , and when He had

finished,the earth was for man to work on .

“ Six

days shalt thou labor and do all thy work ” is a

paragraph in the constitution of humanity ; i t isnecessary for the health and happiness of the

individual,the preservation and the progress of

the race . The patriarchs labor,and Solomon

apotheosizes labor ; so does the Psalmist , who says

( cxxviii ,“ If thou wilt eat the labor of thy

hands thou shalt be happy,and it shall be well with

thee .

” The ancient rabbis say this means happi

ness in this li fe and well—be ing in life eternal . The

Mosaic code is chiefly a regulation of labor ; thevery worship of God is connected with labor

,a nd

the injunction of rest is for the further effectfulness of labor (Leviticus , xxvi , 34 and TheHebrews were an industrious people in a small and

40 I SAAC M . WI sE.

mo‘

untainous country their commerce was not extensive and their chief occupation was agriculturefThe religious documents of old

,the New Testa

ment , the Koran and the sacred books of the Eastgive no similar law of sturdy morality . Modern

literature and modern ethics do not inculcate i twith equal preciseness . Moses alone gives it con

secra ted significance . Labor and Slavery are synonymouS in many places

,idleness a divine boon

,Nir

vana” felici ty on earth and bliss in heaven .

IV .

When we Speak of moral law,we designate two

different subj ects,and we may mean either of them

,

v iz .

°

I . The innate moral principle , the quality of

the human mind known as conscience or the sense ofduty . It necessitates a man to acknowledge and to

do that which is good and right,and on account of

its obligatory character it is called a law . 2 . Thedefinitions of reason as to what special sentiments

,

desires,doings and omissions are moral or immoral

,

are called moral laws ; but on the whole , morallaw as a

'

product of reason,has no compulsory

force ; therefore , men in various periods of history

a nd under different circumstances agree as to the

first,but disagree as to the second kind of moral

law . Every man has a conscience , but not all

agree in the interpretation of the dicta of con

science .

History furnishes numerous illustrations of this .

We select from the Talmud : Two friends traveltogether a nd lose their way in the wilderness . Oneof them carries the scanty provisions

,which are


Moses . It is the voice of God,as it was interpreted

by Moses in the five books which we call theTorah . It has been adopted in part or in wholeby all civilized nations . It is agreed that theMosaic definitions of what is right and good and

what is the reverse emanate from a reason higherthan man ’ s

,and they must

,therefore

,be accepted

by all men . History proves this . As the bistorical books of the canon record the historica l evidencethat the dispersion of Israel was the consequence

of a departure from the divine standard,so the his

tory of the modern nations offers the undoubtedevidence that all their sufferings

,failures

,woes and

miseries are traceable to a departure from thatstandard of morality . Nay , according to the de

gree of the neglect of i t was the misery . For in

stance,the miseries that came upon the French

people at the time of the French Revolution were aretribution for the willful abandonment of the divine

law of right . Again,to speak frankly as well as

boldly,our nation had to pass through the great

ordeal of the Civil War because we ha d ignored andviolated the law of God— his j ustice , which none

can ignore or violate with impunity .

It is difficult to argue our thesis against the assumptions of popular theology . Cardinal Manninghas said (Nineteenth Century , p . It is in

deed true,that we are not bound by a divine enact

ment to give a tithe of all we possess . That wiseand expedient law was abolished by the higher lawwhich has created the Christian world . We are free

from the law of Israel,but we are not free from a

APHOR I SMS ON ETH I CS . 43

more perfect,searching

,constraining and even tem

pora ry law ,which is the law of liberty .

” This sounds

like sarcasm . There is a mass of irresponsible wealth

in the world,there is the poverty and degradation

among millions . The law of liberty is not sufli

cient . Dogmatists may Sit at the loom and weave

creeds,they may declare the law of Moses abro

gated,but after all ! 7OO ,

OOO,OOO are in the hands

of responsible men,while next door to them are

milli ons of miserable paupers . The law of tithes ,as ordained by Moses was never charged with thelike condition .

Nations cannot be educated by abstraction,by

the abstract law of liberty . Nations consist of a

majority of immature persons,the ripe and strong

minded are in the minority . The first must be

trained by concrete provisions institutions embodythe principles of morality . But the Mosaic dispen

sation represents these eminently .

The Israelites observed the law of tithe for fif

teen centuries ; i t became so forceful with them ,

that now philanthropists must admire the munifi

cence a nd the efficiency of Jewish charities . Concrete law a nd a forethoughtful institution has edu

cative power and makes for virtue,the law of

liberty has not . So also the abstinence,the frugal

i ty,the energy of the Jew are deducible from the

discipline of Mosaism . The law of liberty cannot

replace the law of Moses .Take another example . The laws of Moses

,start

ing with the standard laid down in the first chapter ofGenesis (which we have discussed above) , declareemphatically for personal liberty a nd for equality in


civil law of all persons before God (Exodus , x i i , 49Numbers

,xv , I 5 , No privileges are granted

,

not even to the priesthood,no person is exempt

from duty— the king no more than the laborer .The educational effect of this training is visible inthe character of even the modern Israelite in allparts of the civilized world— he is a citizen wholoves freedom and j ustice . For eighteen centuriesliberty has been agitated

,but the majority of man

kind is still enslaved and degraded princes,priests

and castes live on the labor of the disfranchised .

It took England and Holland many centuries toemancipate their kin . It took France still longer

to avail itself of the Mosaic doctrine of liberty,

fraternity and equality . It is but a few years sincethe serfs of Russia

,the negro slaves of America

,

the peasa nts of Austria and Hungary were emancipa ted .

Moses commanded,

“ Thou shalt love the stran

ger,

” extended to him the boon of chari ty,placed

him under the protection of the law and gave him

an equal standing with the rest under the law ofl iberty

,thousands were driven out from Protestant

Prussia during the last decade,and millions are

persecuted in Christian Russia and Roumania .

What of the vaunted doctrine of libertyMoses commanded (Deuteronomy , xxiii , I 6

,

Thou shalt not deliver unto his master the serv

ant which is escaped from his master unto thee ;and we

,under the benign protection of liberty ,

maintained till a few years ago the notorious fugitive Slave law . Then the law continues "He( the fugitive Slave , even) Shall dwell with thee ,


tion of individuals . Whatever shortens the life ofthe individual

,or deprives him of the means of suste

nance,or diminishes his capacity

,affects the race

,

and is a violation of its absolute law . On the otherhand

,whatever prolongs or protects the life

,health

a nd happiness of an individual,is consonant with the

best interests of the race , a nd is obligatory by thelaw of social as well as personal righteousness .The rabbis maintained

“Whoever saves ( the life of) one person has

done as much as though he had fulfilled the entirelaw ; for the maintenance of the race depends on

the preservation of the individuals that constitute it .You cannot preserve the race or the individualwithout preserving the characteristic Self

,the in

tellectua l and spiri tual quality inherent in theself

,which is the mark of the man . So also the

progress of the intellectual and spiritual qualitiesof man are the eona

’ifio s 7

°

77e 07777 77077 for the indi

vidual and for the race,according to Moses .

The Creator bestowed on man the blessing “ tofill the earth

,e. ,to increase steadily and not

cease on earth . He pointed out the adequate meansfor perpetual existence

,viz . : the subduing of the

earth and holding dominion over animate beings .This dominion can be attained by labor alone . Aswe have maintained before

,the effort to subdue the

earth and to hold dominion over animate creatures,

comprises the first category of man ’ s duties . “ Iti s moral to work

,and immoral to do nothing . In

a smuch,however

,as it is labor only which achieves

the prescribed ultimate,i t must be labor guided by

the human Self,consequently the progress of the

APHOR I SMS ON ETH I CS . 247

race is achieved through the advancement of indi

vidua ls . This is the second category of man ’ sduties .Man is disposed to labor by his constitution .

But he feels an aversion to forced and unremunera

tive labor . God punished Adam with that,

“ in the

sweat of thy brow shalt thou eat bread .

But self-control and the zest for invention overcome the distaste for even this kind of labor . One

of the sages of the Talmud speaks of this . Hepoints out how many different kinds of work the

first man must have done before be obtained amorsel of bread to eat or a garment to cover hisbody

,but now I find all these things prepared for

me when I rise in the morning .

” Human ingenuitycontrived instruments and implements (whatever youcan lay your hand on is man ’ s invention) , but before these labor was exhausting and hard . In our

century especially through steam and electricity,

and mechanical inventions,discoveries in physics

and chemistry ,labor has been materially reduced .

The preservation of the human race involves also

means for protection against the elements,against

degenerate members of the race (who have theirprototype in Cain ) , protection also against depravity

,aggravated by ambition protection of

li fe,property and honor . All this is done in the

organization of society,by intellectual labor

,by

the establishment of civil order , by government , by

international treaties , through courts of j ustice ,through penal laws and the suppression of crime ,a nd by the reformation of criminals , in Short , by thevarious agencies of the people to enforce the law,

a nd


to maintain peace . The human race is assisted in

subduing the earth and holding dominion over it,

as that Rabbi of old wisely - said : “ Pray for thewell-being of the government

,for i f it were not for

i ts authority one would swallow the other alive.

”

As a concrete example,let me cite the Constitution

of the United States,and the amelioration it has

afforded the millions . You will app reciate veryreadily the high v alue of intellectual effect .The second

,though not subordinate

,category of

ethical duty is comprised in the doctrine that we

must protect,and help along the human family in

i ts intellectual progress .

On these two fundamental doctrines Moses,and

after him the Prophets,and after them their ex

pounders,constructed Jewish ethics

,viz . : L a bor

a nd As regards labor we havequoted Moses before . In regard to intellectual progress you must consider that Moses said “Would

that all the people of the Lord were prophets,and

that the Lord would put his spirit upon them .

”

“ Prophet ” signifies a man of the highest intellectual culture . So God is reported to have told himthat all Israel Should become a kingdom of priests

,

every one a priest . “ Priest ” signifies a man ofthe highest and purest moral force . The priests of

Egypt were the savants . The uncompromising

resistance Moses made against idolatry was basedupon the idea that paganism “ retards intellectualprogress

,and history proves this to be true . Under

corruptive influences man deteriorates . The Mosaicorganization of state and society

,i ts laws and insti

tutions,are the precipitate of the highest intelli


the pleasure which follows the doing of the good,

a nd the remorse which comes after sin .

So also as to the spiritual side of human nature .

We define this as the instinct which leads man toseek an obj ect for veneration and worship

,and in

duces him to set up ideals . It is the religious sense,

and like the moral law a nd the desire for association,

i t is the source out of which doctrines,dogmas and

forms of religious practice rise . In all ages of history man has been engaged in forming a nd reform

ing gods,in establishing creeds and institutions that

have their spirit . Theories as to morals and as to

religion have been made to conform to the aspirationof society .

It must be correct,therefore

,to maintain that

the moral,intellectual and spiri tual qualities of the

soul— of that personality which Scripture calls

min 21a the spirit of li fe ” — are aspects of thesame fact . The moral aspect mani fes ts itself as willthe intellectual as j udgment

,and the Spiritual as as

pira tion . The preservation of this self demands

that these three qualities co- operate harmoniously .

Whatever is necessa ry for the self-preservation of theindividual man is indispensable for the preservationof the human family . The third category of themoral law

,therefore

,directs itself to preserve the

integration of the moral,intellectual and spiritual

li fe of the race a nd the individual . These threecategories

,which we have mentioned before

, viz .,

labor,intellect

,and the harmony of the soul quali

ties,constitute the foundation of the moral laws of

Moses . This is outlined in the first chapter of the

APHOR I SMS ON ETH I CS . 2 5 1

Bible Fill the earth a nd subdue it , and havedominion ” over its creatures .What do we mean by equilibrium , harmony ofthe soul ? Man has will , a nd i t appears as conscience— the good and right must be done because

it i s good and right,and evil must be eschewed be

cause it is not good nor right . The child , as soon

as it i s able to conceive an abstract idea,is conscious

of this law of its nature .

Reason also re-enforces , sooner or later , instruction a nd training . Our forefathers may have re

ceived light on moral facts by divine revelation ;but what made them accept it

,and what led them

to submit to it ? Besides,we may ask also

,what

induced millions of human beings to accept themoral code , though their forefathers received nosuch revelation ?

It is the Spiritual quality of the soul,in which

all human lives share,that has roused to reason

and awakened the will . When the first man,in

obedience to his spiritual impulse,began to con

ceive ,however crudely

,a being more perfect than

he himself,rea son

°

began to vindicate itself . Manwent higher and upward

,he sought an ideal

,he

went forth to worship . It makes no differencewhether fear of harm

,or hope of the good

,or the

natural impulse of his soul moved him,he did all

he did by a quality of the soul which he had incommon with every other human being . Thehigher an individual or nation has risen in the cog

nition of an ideal , the loftier the ideal is ; theloftier the God - idea is

,the more vigorously reason

operates and the more scrupulous j udgment is as


to the good and right,the higher its moral stand

ard becomes .The intellectual and spiri tual qualities are reciprocal— the more vigorous the reason

,the more forceful

the spirituality is . Sometimes , it must be admit

ted,this interaction is disturbed . The spiritual is

sometimes divorced from the intellectual,a nd then

it produces bigotry and intolerance . The wisestthen degenerates . The spiritual and the intellectual

must be in perfect harmony— this alone makes per

feet humanity .

This harmony invigorates also the third human

faculty,the will . The stronger the intellect and

the more i t is furthered for good by spirituality,

the more competent the j udgment becomes to define what is truly good and right , and the more these

invigorate the will to obey what reason declares .Spiritual disposition is a poWer . Man without spir

itua lity is predisposed to rebellion by the very factof rationalism

,and on the other hand

,without in

tellectua l control,he is likely to become ascetic .

But “ the beginning of wisdom is the fear of the

Lord ; or , as Job said ,“ behold , the fear of the

Lord,that is wisdom

,and to eschew evil

,that is

understanding .

” The spiritual li fts the soul aloft,

the intellectual gives the substance,and the moral

the sweetness .

VII .

The max im ora ez’ la bora

,pray and work

,

” i sa transcript of the passage in Psalms (xxxvii , 3)3m mowmm": ma: ( “ Trust in the Lord and dothe good Prayer primarily means trust in God

,


3 . It is a matter of common sense that moralitydepends on rationality . The ancient rabbis well

maintained,

“ the ignorant rustic cannot be

pious ,” simply because he does not know how . If

a man commits suicide we say he was demented,

that reason had lost its control over him . Rabbinical law regards the suicide as demented

,unless

positive evidence is produced to the contrary .

We know well enough that the maniac must°

be

watched a nd protected,so as not to harm himself or

others,because his reason has lost control over

his passions . Crimes committed suggest lack ofdi scretion

,the person lacks reason to comprehend

the magnitude of the wrong .

” The ancient rabbismaintained

,No man commits a Sin unless a spirit

of folly overcomes him If the lack of cognitionis the cause of immorality

,the increase of cognition

brings progress of morality . The level of morality

i s equal to the level of mind . Themental statesthat man attains

,the intellectual progress which

he makes,are a contribution to man ’ s moralization .

Thehigher we rise intellectually , the nearer we approach the ideal of ethics .It is true that many persons of the highestmental culture are immoral these

,however , are the

exceptions . After all,the most intellectual people

are also the most virtuous , and vice a nd°

crime areprevalent among those of the lowest mental condition .

APHOR ISMS ON ETH I CS .

VIII .

Laws and institutions for the moral culture of thecommunity were and always will be necessary

,insti

tutions such as the family,the church a nd the state .

Each of these has its authoritative usages and

laws,which are based either on experience

,reason

ing or on a divine standard . The latter alone isperfect . We claim this for the moral doctrinesof Moses

,as they are stated in the first chapter of

Genesis . The blessing of the Creator is there bestowed on man that he will fill the earth

,subdue it

and have dominion over all other creatures . Andthis involves the duty of each and all to do thatwhich contributes to the preservation

,the growth

and the moral , intellectual and spiri tual developmentof the human race .

Inquiring into the moral system of Moses,let us

ascertain the principles which underlie its institutions

,of the family in the first place .

It is not only the suppression of sensuality and

the sanctifica tion of matrimony which Moses strove

for,though he was the first to chasten marriage

( contrast the obscene practices in vogue in ancientreligions) . The seventh commandment and the

Pentateuchal laws allied to it are now the basis ofall respectable legislation . Moses did more thanthis he made the pure family the basis of the state .

Fathers and mothers have authority over theirchildren

,excepting in matters involving life and

death,which in all cases are referred to the legally

constituted courts of j ustice (Deuteronomy , xxi ,18 Pa rents must suppor t and protect their


children ; they must educa te them , and furthertheir intellectual

,moral and Spiri tual welfare (Ex

odus , xiii , I 4 ; xx ,10 ; Deuteronomy , vi , 7 xi ,

Children again are in duty bound to honor (Leviticus

,xix

, 3) and obey their parents . WhoeverStrikes or curses his parents commits a crime (Exodus

,xxi

,15 Al l this is fundamental ‘law in

Israel . Parents are the highest authority for thechild .

Upon thi s foundation the state is reared on thefollowing principles

( 77 ) The tribe is a family of families , and the stateis a family of tribes

,obedient to the father of them

all,God ; the duties of every child to his parents

are also the duties of every person to God and theTorah . The prophet who is the servant and mes

senger of God ( the priest and Levite in their oflicia l capacity are messengers of the people , Leviticus

,x

,8- 1 1 Deuteronomy

,xxxiii

,8—1 1 ) and

the interpreter of the law,and old men of learning

a nd probity,must be respected

,because they are

the special instruments of God (Exodus , xxii , 2 7 ;Leviticus

,xix

, 32 Deuteronomy,xvii

,8

( b) Personal freedom is‘the birthright of every

person ; i t extends to the fami ly , the tribe and thepeople

,encompassing aliens . It follows that the

state is representative,and though it is equivalent

to centralization,i t is not unlimited as to legisla

tion,nor is its authori ty arbitrary . In the Mosaic

scheme of government,the tribe is a federation of

family groups,governed by a Nasi and the heads of

the families ; the state is a federation of tribes gov

erned by the prophet and the seventy or seventy


Judges and bailiff s are lawfully appointed and a re

the arms of the law .

These four points in the ethics of the Mosaic dis

pensa tion reveal the purest conceptions of j ustice .

While i t cannot be denied that Moses admitteda l ien laws into his code ( chiefly Egyptian ) , i t must

s till be admitted that he transformed them to correspond with Mosaic principles . Wisdom dictatesto a legislator that he recognize existing condi tions

and tolerate prevalent customs,but he must en

deavor also to subordinate them to his spirit .The Mosaic code compromised with institutions

,

in accommodation to existing conditions ; but the

Mosaic legislation had two obj ects in view,first to

promulgate a universal religion,to establish uni

versal ethics ; and secondly to organize a nation

with existing habits,customs , organization and tra

ditions,and to train a model nation .

There are,to be sure

,ordinances in the Mosaic

code which would appear as contradictory to itsprinciples— the proceedings in the conquest of Canaan

,for instance , the treatment accorded to the

Midianites,the slaughter in the camp after the in

eident of the golden calf , the punishment of thewitch

,a nd the like . Still

,i t must be borne in

mind that contingencies require special treatment .We are speaking here of principles and not of ex

periences . On some other occasion we hope to treatof these apparent exceptions and contradictions toMosaic doctr ine . Here we can only point to ab

stract principles . These confirm our assertion thatthe Mosaic conception of ethics represents thehighest and most universal standard of right known

APHOR I SMS ON ETH I CS . 2 59

to us,and that this is evidenced by the Mosaic pro

visions as to the family and the state .

Look upon the world ’ s history from the standpoint of evolution

,and see how far below the

Mosaic ideal legislation and morals still are,how far

below the ideal of Moses the modern world is . Westill have autocrats

, privileged and non-privileged

classes,we have barriers of separation between na

tion and nation,we have standing armies recruited

from the flower of youth,we have mutual distrust

among nations and men ; think of the numerousvictims of crime and of criminal passion ; there i slevi ty and neglect of duty . How far behind thehumanitarian ideal of Moses the world is nowAdd to this the undoubted fact that the formation and development of character depend largelyon the influence of the state and of its institutions

,

and remember how many human beings are beingneglected and crippled by the unfair conditions thatprevail . The miseries of humanity are the conse

quences of the social arrangements as much as ofmischievous temper . The sufferings and miseries

of humanity date back to man ’ s departure fromthe standard of the Mosaic revelation . Think alsoof this before you argue against inspiration and

revelation .

n

I SAAC M . W I SE .

REFORMED JUDA ISM.

Change,universal and perpetual

,is the law of

laws in thi s universe . Still there is an element of

stability,the fact of mutation itself ; the law of

change changes not . This law lies in the harmony

of the spheres ; the mystery of truth in nature’ s

variegation ; the manifesta tion of the wisdom of theImmutable Deity . Progress and perfectibility are

the effect,and

,as far as reason penetrates

,the con

Scious aim of this cause . The geologist , as he

comes away from the lowest stratum into which hisresearches have gone along the crust Of this planet ,and the historian

,who returns from the study of

the li fe of humanity from the cradle of its birth to

the nineteenth century,see the chain of c onscious

piogress in form and idea , from the lowest to the

highest known to man,see the promise of perfecti

bilityeverywhere , and see permanent retrogradation nowhere . Wisdom boundless and ineffable ,and the revelations of Deity lie in this law of lawswhich God hath created to do .

”

Therefore,Reformed Judaism

,the subj ect of

this essay,acknowledges -no necessary stability

Oi - the form,but also no change of the pri neiple .

All forms change,adapting themselves to new con

ditions,and all changes proceed from the same


ancient mode of worship by the sacrifice of animalvictims and by a hereditary priesthood . He conSiders that phase was necessary and“ beneficial , inits time and locality

,but that it would be void of

all Significance in our age when entirely differentconceptions of divine worship prevail

,and it would

appear much more meaningless to coming generations . Thedivine institutions of the past are not

obligatoryOn the present generation or on comingages

,since the condit ions which rendered them ‘

necessary,desirable and beneficial have been radi

cally changed . Therefore,Progressive Judaism

would be a better designation than Reformed Juda

ism . But,on account of common usage

,the latter

term has been adopted as the caption of this essay,

and Should be understood in thi s spirit alone .

The term principle ” in this essay is intended to

signi fy the positive truth or truths of Judaism .

The form ” is the manifestation of the principle

as an organism is of laws , and a mode of worship isa regulation for man ’ s intercourse with the Deity .

The sun exists apart from the light and heat itemanates . Light and heat depend on the sun ’ s

existence,but not vice versa . In this sense

,the

existence of the sun is absolute,while that of light

and heat is relative . The same distinction must bemade in Judaism between principle and form ; the

former is considered positive,and the latter rela

tive . That truth which depends not on man ’ sthoughts

,deeds and relations is a principle of Juda

ism . The principle is expressed by doctrines and

the form by laws . Both terms are contained in the

REFORMED JUDAI SM . 2 63

Hebrew word Torah, , a s the law of Moses is called

in the Bible .

The distinction between principle and form,doc

trine a nd law,spirit and letter

,is as old a s the

Bible i tself ( see Deut . iv , 39 , 40 ; v ,. 2 6 ; vi , 13 ,

and parallel passages Psalm,xix

,8 to 10 Proverbs ,

vi , 2 3 ; Ezekiel , xliv , In the biblical books

which were written after the exile this distinction

is also frequently expressed ( II Chronicles , x1v , 3xix

,I O ; xxxi , 2 1 ; and Nehemiah ,

ix,

I 3 ,

The same is the case in the post-biblical literatureof the Hebrews

,especially in the Talmud . But ,

in all those passages,we have general terms only ,

without logical definitions .The ancient Hebrews were distingu i shed morefor their inspiration and intuitive knowledge thanfor philosophy . The Greek philosophized o

'

n

~

the

facts of the mind,which the Hebrews uttered

as self-evident truths . With the exception of the

Alexandrian school,represented by the works of

Phi lo,there is no evidence that

,in the strict sense

of the term, the Jews philosophized on their re

ligious books and traditions , previous to the periodof the Arabic philosophy ; although it cannot bedenied that the books of Ecclesiastes and Job areessays on philosophical

For th is very rea son Eccles ia stes a nd Job a ppea r to bepost-prophetica l books . As long a s a people ha s freshnessa nd vigor of fa ith a nd poetry

,such a s is exh ibited in the

Prophets a nd older Psa lms,it rea sons not philosoph ica l ly,

a nd h a s no room for Skepticism . Grecia n ph ilosophy begi n swith the decl ine of mythology. The same th ing preciselyis the ca se in Chr istendom . Some Psa lms

,therefore

,l ike

xiv a nd l iii,a re a l so of post-prophetica l origin .

ISAAC M. WI SE .

The statements of Josephus against Apion

( I , i , and of Eusebius (Pra ep. Evang . i,ix

,

3 ) concern ing ancient Jewish philosophers , havenot been sufficiently investigated to adopt or rej ectthem . When the Arabs began to cultivate Grecianliterature

,bestowing particular attention on poetry

,

philosophy,mathematics and medicine

,the Jews

living among them also cul tivated these studies .The Ca ra ites began them and the rabbinical Jewsfollowed . It was not till then that a ttempts weremade to es tablish the principle of Judaism with

logical precision . Proverbial philosophy was thefavorite wit and wisdom of the ancient Hebrews

,

until rabbinical hermeneutics replaced it in theOccident as well as in the Orient .The first clas sical figure of philosophical reflect ion among the dispersed Jews was Gaon Saadia benJoseph

,of Fayyum ( 892 to 942 A . A new

epoch of Jewish culture began with that man,who

was master in all branches of learning known tohis age ; and he opened to the Jewish mind avenuesof thought and research which had been closed tillthen . H is rabbini cal and liturgica l works

,as well

as hi s book on the Hebrew language , cannot bementioned here . He was the first to translate the

Bible into the Arabic,with extensive notes

,por

tions of whi ch are extant . S . Munk published hisArabic Isaiah in Paris in 1838 . Ewald and Dukes ,i n 1 844 , published Sa a dia

’

s Arabic version of thePsalms and Job from an Oxford manuscript . Butmost important to uS i s Saa dia as the theologicalphilosopher

,as he proved to be in h is polemical

books against the Ca ra ites,in his commentary to

2 66 ISAAC M . W I SE .

of philosophical books on Judaism ,and critical com

inenta ries of the Bible,partly in

'print and partly in

manuscript,have been

_

ha nded down to posterity,

Showing that repeated attempts had been made notonly to give philosophical expression to the principleof Judaism

,but also to harmonize religion and phi

losophy. This golden age of Jewishphilosophy , beginning in Asia

,migrating to Spain

,and then wan

dering to Egypt , culminated in the great rabbinicalauthori ty

,called Rambam

,

” the famous bodyphysician of the Kaliph of Kairo

,Moses Maimon

ides,called among his cotemporaries Rabbenu Moses

,

son of Ma imuni,the Spaniard ( of Cordova) . Two

centuries intervened between Saadia and Maimonides f l

< and these ' la id the foundation to Hebrew phil

ology,Bible exegesis and to Jewish philosophy

,and

on it Maimonides erected his superstructure . TheHebrew philologists , as such ,

do not interest us hereespecially , although they contributed to the develop

ment of Jewish theology . Whoever wishes to knowmore about them

,will find information in Ewald

and Dukes ’ B eitra ege zur Gese/zie/zie der a elz‘esien

Ausleg zmg ,etc . ,

Stuttgart,1844 .

The two oldest philosophers after Saadia are

On Sa a dia , see S . L . Rappoport’s Biogra phy of Sa a dia

in B ikkur e H a -I ttim,1828 ; Munk

,N otice s u r R . S a a dia

6 0 077,Pa ris

,1838, a nd a ppendix to the Commenta i r e de.

R a bbi Ta n/70 77 777,Pa ris

,I S43 .

The most rel iable da tes concerning Ma imonides , quotedin Azula i ’s Ma a r ec/zef/z H aggedol im ,

a re those written byh is gr a ndson ,

David, who sta tes tha t Moses Ma imonides wa s

born on the 14th day of N issa n,1 132 , a nd died Monday

night , the 2oth day of Tebeth,1 20 2 A . C .


B a chja ben Joseph , .of Saragossa , a nd Solomon ben

Gabirol,of Ma laga ,

°

both flourishing in the eleventh

century . B a chja’

s principal book is the Cbobol/i

Ha lleba boz‘b (

“ Duties of the the firstcomplete book on the ethi cs of Judaism . I i i tenmain sections

,each divided into an introduction and

a number of chapters,B a chja gave form to the ethics

of Judaism,enabling the reader to survey the field .

He starts out with a treatise of the belief in oneGod

,and closes with one on the highest virtue of

man, viz. ,

to love God. Between these two pointsis the compass of his system . The book was written in Arabic

,translated into Hebrew

,Latin

,Span

ish,French and German

,and was published

,be

tween the years 1490 and 1 856 , about fifty times .No polemi cs and no particular leaning to any of theGrecian philosophical systems are detecta ble in thebook . It is purely Jewish ethics

,taken from Jew

ish

Less influential than B achja was Solomon benGabirol . As a sacred poet he ranks among theprinces of song . H is compositions , preserved inthe various liturgical collections of the Portuguese

Jews,are classical . The largest poem extant is the

Kei/zer Ma le/777717,The Royal Diadem

,

” a metaphysical treatise On the Deity from the cosmologicalstandpoint of that century

,replete with poetical

beauty,grand in sublimity of conception and Sim

plicity Of diction . Solomon ben Gabirol had a

Bech a i ben Asher, who wrote a commenta ry on the Pen

ta teueh a bout‘ 1300 A . C ., wa s a pupil of Ra bbi Solomon b .

Abrah am b . Adereth,of Ba rcelona

,who wa s a n opponent

of ph ilosophy.


mystical turn of mind,which gives a charm to his

poetry and invests his philosophy with a touch ofobscurity . It was this element especially whichendeared him to Thomas de Aquinas and Albert theGreat , who quote largely from his book ,

Mebor

C/zayim,

“ The Fountain of Life,

” by its Latintitle

,

“Fons Vi la e.

" They call him Avicebron .

S . Munk has established his identity with Solomon ibn Gabirol . He also wrote a book on ethics

,

Tibbon Mia’a’07b Ha nnepbes/z,“ Correction of the

Soul ’ s ! ualities ,” from which he made an ab

stract called S/zelos/z E sreb Mida’ofb,

“ The Thir

teen Rules,neither of which has become popu

lar among Jews,although largely used by Chris

tian theologians of the Middle Ages,and well

known to his contemporaries and immediate successors.

The greatest and most important rabbi of the

eleventh century was Solomon ben Isaac,of Troyes

,

in France,known among Jews as Rashi or Yiz

chaki . He wrote commentaries to the wholeBible except Chronicles (Job doubtful ) , and the en

tire Talmud,excepting a small portion

,besides a

number Of j uridical and liturgical books . No com

mentary has been more extensively used amongJews and Christians than that known as Rashi , or

has been more frequently published and providedwith more sub—commentaries . He attained theage of sixty-five ( 1040 ,

to Thursday , the 2 9th

day of Tammuz , 1 10 5 A . wrote more thanany of his contemporaries

,ofli cia ted as Rabbi

and as head master of an academy , made extensive tours in France and Germany , and intro


Portuguese liturgy,a nd is the author of the philo

sophical work,called C/za zza r i . In the Platonic form

of dialogue (with Socrates) , a nd of Cicero (withCato) the C/za a z a r i contains a series of discussions onJudaism and ph ilosophy the king in the Cba za a rz

represents philosophy,a nd the Chabar “Associate ”

represents Judaism . The dialogue ends in the conversion of the king

,in the triumph of Judaism

,

therefore,over the philosophical opinions of that

age . The original title of the book was,The

book of evidence and argumentation in support ofdespised religi on .

” Grecian philosophy had madedeep inroads into religion . Plato a nd Aristotlewere to the learned higher authorities than eitherthe Bible or the Koran . The C/za zza r i i s directed

chiefly against that spirit of the age . The author

occupies the position of the rabbinical Jew,but

reasons only on the bag a da ,the ethical and theo

logical portions of the Talmud,without attempting

a defense on any ground of reason of the ba lm/777,

the law as expounded a nd elaborated by the rabbis .While he affords

,therefore

,a deeper insight into

the ethics a nd theology of the rabbis,he tacitly sac

r ifices rabbinical casuistics to the spirit of the age .

This book,written originally in Arabic

,was

translated into Hebrew,Spanish

,Latin and Ger

man,and was favorably

,received by all classes of

Jews,because it bore at least the semblance of

orthodoxy,and was written in a pleasant and in

Jehudah Ha levi ’s Diva n,Prague , 1840 . Diva n des Ra bbi

Jehudah Ha levi,Lyck ,

1864 . Germa n metr ica l vers ions byDr . A . Geiger (a lso of Solomon ibn Gabirol ) a nd by Dr . M .

Sa chs .

REFORMED JUDAI SM . 2 7 I

popular form . AS early as 142 2 a nd 142 5 A . C . ,

commentaries to this book were written,showing

its early popularity . Next to B a chya’

s Clioboz.‘

Ha lleba bot/z i t is most extensively extant also in

our days .More important

,more profound and more radical

than Judah Halevi was his contemporary Abrahamben Meir ibn Ezra , of Granada ( 1092 , died in Rome

1 167 , A . This remarkable man,who passed

through the then civilized world like a restlessvagrant

,from London to Tiberias

,and from Lisbon

to Rome,and Alexandria and Paris

,was

,never

theless,not only the most fertile writer of his

age,but also the wittiest

,most sagacious and most

liberal Jewish thinker of his century . Maimonides,

in a letter to his son,admonishes him to read and

study well the works of Ibn Ezra , whom he compares to the patriarch Abraham , Who was afraidof no man

,dreaded no crea ture , and j ourneyed

incessantly up and down the land ” The poet

B eda rsh i pronounced a grand and eloquent eulogyon Ibn Ezra . He says of Ibn Ezra

,

“ He excelledall before him in the conception of truth , and abided

at the gates of wi sdom,removed superstition

,

” etc .

Abraham ibn Ezra ’l< wrote a number of di stin

gu ished works on the Hebrew language , on mathematies

,on cosmogony and astrology ,

hymns,poems

He is not to be mista ken for the poet Moses ibn Ezra,to

whom Jehudah Ha levi dedica ted six of h is poems,a nd whose

dea th he memora l ized by a n elegy. Moses excelled in sa cred

poetry , especia lly in the S el ic/za b but not a s a philoso

pher . His ph ilosoph ica l book A r ug a t/z l i a bbos em wa s

never printed . See L . Dukes,Moses ben Ezra

,Altona

,1839 .


and riddles ( also a poem on chess) , which do notinterest us here . His commentaries to the Bibleand his book Yesoa’ Mora Vesoa’ T077 7717,

“ The principle of worship and the mystery of the law ,

”

especially the commentary , exercised a deep andlasting influence on the development of the re

l igious idea . He was the first to write a Hebrew

Commentary to the whole Bible ( Chronicles ex

cepted) from the stand-point of critical exegesiswithout reference to tradition or authority . In hiscommentary

,canons of criticism are laid down

,

which have not been further developed in our century of classical criticism . He had the boldness tooppose tradi tional hermeneutics

,and to carve out

for himself a new path for exegesis . His wit and

sarcasm are as spicy as his critical discernment isacute and profound . This has made him a favoriteof the student and a delight to the reader . WhatSaadi a

,B achya ,

IbnGabirol and Jehudah Halevi haveattempted to do in philosophy

,viz .

,to harmonize

faith and reason,Judaism and philosophy

,Ibn Ezra

has done in reconciling the words to the Bible to

the advanced intelligence of his contemporaries . He

was not without success in the province of purephilosophy . H is was published as

early as 1530 A . C .,and has been frequently repub

l ished with or without commentaries . It is ex

tensively quoted by the best writers but his place

in history is secure because of . his matchless com

menta ries , which open entirely new avenues to re

Dr . M . Creizena ch publ ish ed it , with a Germa n vers ion ,

Frankfurt a . M. ,1840 . I t wa s publ ished with Stern ’

s

commenta ry, Prag,1833 .


Saadia and Maimonides . The main object of Jewishphilosophers was on the one hand to defend Judaism

,

and on the other to expound Bible and Talmud in

as rational a manner as possible , in order to recon

cile faith and reason

III . FROM MAIMON IDES To ALBO .

From Moses to Moses,there was none like

Moses,

” his admirers said of Moses Maimonides .In him the learning a nd intelligence of his genera

tion culminated,a nd he laid the foundation of a

new epoch in the history of the progress of the mind .

All that had been achieved in literature,by Arab

or Jew,in philosophy

,science or law

,in Arabic

,

Hebrew or Talmudical lore,was ma stered

'

by thisgreat Moses

,whose mind was vast and deep .

Almost all the young Israelites of his days spent .

their best time in the Sixty books of the Talmud,

and neglected secular science and philosophy .

Therefore,Maimonides wrote three systematical

works comprising the main contents of the wholeTalmud . He wrote the Pera sbHammisbna b

,Com

mentary of the Mishna,

” on which foundation theTalmudical structure is rai sed

,in the Arabic lan

guage,to render this part of the rabbinical writings

easily understood . He wrote a general introductionto the Mishna and a special introduction to thevarious books of it . The whole work was trans

lated into Hebrew and Spanish,some parts of i t

into Latin and German . Being in Arabic,Hebrew

and Spanish,i t was accessible to all Jews in the

Orient and Occident who took hold on it with awonderful avidity . Pococke

’

s Latin translation of


portions of this commentary,published in Oxford

,

1655 ,introduced i t to Christian students .

Next Maimonides codified the laws Of the Talmudin

’

a“

systematical order,and in the popular—language

a nd style of the Mishna . He divided the codexinto fourteen books

,each book into chapters , and

each chapter into paragraphs,as the subj ect re

quired . Fourteen is represented in Hebrew by thelettersyoa

’

( 10 ) and 7la lia’ which together form

the word ya a’

,

“ hand .

” Therefore this code wascalled “ Ya d

,

” and afterward “Ya a’ Ha eba za ka /z,

”

or “ The Strong Hand .

” Maimonides called it“Misl me Tora b

, Review of the Law ,or Deuter

onomy. This being also the name of the fifth book

of Moses,the code was mostly called by that name .

The master mind of Maimonides alone could aecomplish the gigantic task of codi fying the mass oflaws and customs systematical ly and correctly . No

body before or after him has been able to do it aswell and as completely as he has done it . Thiscode brought the rabbinical law within a compassable limit to be mastered in a few years

,and under

a classification which enabled the student to findparticular laws or customs without roaming overthe interminable mass of rabbinical sources . Thushe afforded an opportunity to students to masterthe rabbinical laws and to save time for otherstudies . Not satisfied , however , with these achievements

,Maimonides wrote an Arabic text-book ,

witha comprehensive introduction

,on the 6 13 command

ments,as the rabbis found them in the Penta

teuch,divided and subdivided them in corre

spondence with the code , to afford an opportunity of

I SAAC M . WI SE .

knowing the laws of the Talmud without studyingthem . The reasons of the commandments werewritten by him also in Arabic and appended tohi s More N eb777/77777 . So Maimonides thought he

had relieved people of the Study of the Talmuditself a nd had saved time for the student to turn hi sattention to philosophy and science

.

No books have ever so rapidly become uni

versal authorities as did the rabbinical works of

Maimoni des (we have not named them all) among

his cotemporaries in Africa,Asia

,and Europe

.

From the Caspian Sea to the Arabian Gulf and theAtlantic Ocean his Mis/me Tora li became the rab

binica l code . Only one man,Abraham ben David

.

( died 1198 A . had the courage to attack it,in

his Ha s’

lzogotlz. The Jews of Yemen included Moses '

Maimonides in their daily prayers,and he was long

remembered in the prayers of the last day of thefeast . LThis ha d the effect that the Eastern Jews ,Spain

,Portugal

,and SouthernFrance

,studi ed Ta l

mud less a nd philosophy a nd science more ; and

rabbinical studies were limited mostly to NorthernFrance

,Germany

,and Italy

,although there were

exceptions on both Sides .The medi cal and other scientific works of Mai

monides do not concern us here . We must dwellon his theologico-philosophical activi ty . He wrotefor his contemporaries a treatise on Psychology (Ske777077e Pom /67777 ) , one on Logic (Milot/zba -bigg ayoa) ,another on Grammar and Rhetoric (which has notreached us) , a nd finally wrote his great theologicophilosophical book

,More N ebuelzim

,Guide of

the Perplexed . All these were in Arabic , but they

different forms , as a hymn called Yiga’a l and as a

confession called “A 777Ma

’

am7'

77,later writers in

troduced these thirteen dogmas into the synagogue,

and they are still retained in the orthodox prayer

books a nd catechisms . Those dogmas,however

,

strange to say,do not teach that an Israelite is

obligated to subscribe to rabbinical hermeneutics or

rabbinical laws thus a main point of the orthodox

creed is rej ected , and a remarkable concession is

made to reformed Judaism though oxthodox Jewscling to them as a test . In the More ZVebuc/zim

,

”

In which he subj ects the dogmas to a thorough

analysis,he modifies them considerably . But the

orthodox Jew says Maimonides is an authority inhis Mis/me Tora lz, though his philosophical workscontain his personal views . This is an

'

intimationthat Maimonides considered himself not at all o r

thodox . Much was written for and against himafter his death

,and to-day both orthodox and

reformer equally still appeal to his authority . Noman

,Since Ezra

,has exercised so deep and lasting

an influence on Jews a nd Judaism as has MosesMaimonides . His theologico-philosophical works

acquired an authority among the progressive think

ers equal to his Misb77e-Tora b among rabbinicalstudents . All Jewish thinkers up to date

,Baruch

Spinoza,Moses Mendelssohn

,a nd the writers of the

nineteenth century included,are more or less the

disciples of Maimonides so that there is no Jewish

theologico-philosophical book

,from and after 1 2 00

,

of which the ideas Of Maimonides do not form aprominent part .After the death of Maimonides controversy in


Spain,Portugal a nd the Provence

,in behalf and

Maimonides,did much damage

to literature .

“ Besides this the Caba lah spread its

pernicious influence among the Jews , the booksZohar and other mystical works were then written .

The Jewish mind was no longer occupied withmerely the solution of Talmudic polemi cs

,a nd

ceased to be satisfied with the rationalistic reasoning of Maimonides

,Ibn Ezra

,etc .

,the fancies of

the Caba lah and its beautiful poetry and mystica lobscurity . Still the numerous disciples of Maimon

ides adhered to the System and worked at its completion and perfection . Two great writers of that

century must be named here,Rabbi Moses ben

Nachman,called Ramban

,and Rabbi David Kimchi

,

called Redak . Ramban ( 1 194 to 1 2 60 A . C . ) was agreat Talmudist and Cabalist

,still a friend of Mai

monides and philosophy . His numerous works,

rabbinical,Cabalistical and liturgi cal , have been

widely circulated . His commentaries on the Pen

ta teuch and on Job Offer a peculiar combination ofsound wisdom and phantastic mystery ,

of thoroughlearning and research

,along with wild theories on

things supernatural . As a philosopher he is re

markable in Iggereth Musar on Morals I gger

eth Ha ramban,a defense of Maimonides ’ flfore

N ebuebibz against French rabbis,and I ggereth Hak

kadesh on Marriage . More successful in that century was David Kimchi

,of Narbonne ( I 1 70 to 1 2 40

A . the great grammarian,lexicographer and

exegete,the friend and defender of Maimonides .

His commentaries on the Pentateuch,Prophets

,

Psalms , Ruth and Chronicles are strictly independ


cut , and have found Latin translators at an earlyperiod . He is the only one of the great commen

ta tors who wrote against

The great successor of Ibn Ezra and Kimchi as

an independent expounder of the Bible, wa S

'

the ex

cellent Leon de Banolas , Rabbi Levi ben Gerson ,also called Gersonides

, or Ra lbag ( 1 2 99 to 1370

A . C . H is commentaries to the Pentateuch,Joshua

,

Judges , Kings , Proverbs , Job , Daniel , Ecclesiastes ,Ruth and Esther , are almost entirelyindependentof rabbinical hermeneutics . They are of particularethical value ; his notes , called Tbo-a lot/z

,added to

his commentaries,point out ethical verities . Since

B achya ,no one has done what Leon de Banolas did

for a proper understanding of Biblical ethics . To

the preacher a nd moralist these notes are of great

value . This highly esteemed sage of the fourteenth

century was the first great thinker who attempteda systematic elaboration of the ideas of Maimonides .In one of the largest and most complete ph ilosoph i

cal works Of that century, Sepbe7 Milebamoib

Ha s/70777,

“ Book of the Battles of the Lord,

” Leona ttempted a concila tion of faith and reason

,religion

and philosophy,entirely in the spirit of Ma imoni

des . Although the progress of philosophy wasthen inconsiderable

,Aristotle and Maimonides

being final and irrevocable authority,holding rea

son in bondage,still progress of thought character

izes the philosophy of Leon de Banolas,who would

These commenta ries h ave a dded grea tly to a free exeges isa nd a proper understa nding Of the Bible . K imch i is not a s

terse,bri l l ia nt a nd bold a s Ibn Ezra ,

nevertheless he is a

good gramma ri a n,ph ilologist a nd clea r-hea ded expounder .


and,falling back on revelation as the safest foun

dation of society,he attacked all philosophy by

means of philosophy . Cha sda i Crescas was thefirst one known to posterity who attacked the thir

teen dogmas of Maimonides . He distinguished between Ikka rim , fundamental pr1nc1ples on whichJudaism rests

,and without which it can not exist

,

and Kela lim , general principles ,

” which are deduced from the body of law . A religious Jew mustbelieve in the former and may hold to the latter .Crescas wrote also a work in Spanish on Christian

dogmas,which has not been printed

,however and a

work on the same subj ect,Kelima ib Haggoyim ,

”

with twelve chapters against Geronimo de SantaFe was dedicated to him ,

parts of which were

printed in Hamburg,1848 . His epistle on the per

secution in Spain , 139 2 A . C . is added to the Sbebel

j e/zua’a by Solomon ibn Verga (Edit . Wiener , Han

over,185

The obj ections of Crescas to the dogmas ofMaimonides were taken up by a disciple of the

former,Joseph Albo

,who wrote a book on the sub

ject , Sepber Ikka r im ,

” “ The Book of Principles,

in which he advances three cardinal principles ofJudaism

,God Revelation

,Rewar d and Punish

ment . This Rabbi Joseph Albo ( 1360 to 1444

A . was one of the twenty -five Jewish repre

senta tives at the celebrated Disputation of Tortosa .

Pedro de Luna,known as Pope Benedict XIII , by

advice of his body physician,the ex-Jew Joshua of

Lorca (Geronimo de Sante Fe) , convoked a congress of Christians and Jews to Tortosa

,to

.prove

to the Jews that the Messiah had come . The con

REFORMED JUDAI SM .

gress opened February 7 , 14 13 , held sixty-nine

sessions,and closed November 1 2

,14 14 . The pope

presided . Cardinals,arch-bishops

,bishops and

prominent noblemen took a part in it . The Jews

were represented by twenty of their doctors . amongthem also Joseph Albo . He finished his Book onPrinciples ” in 142 5 A . C . ,

at Soria . It is not only

one of the best written treatises on cardinal prin

ciples , but also a complete exposition on Judaism ,

and an acute polemic against Christology . Never

theless i t was translated into Latin twice ( Paris ,1566 , and Jena , Besides

,he wrote in

Spanish a controversy he had with a priest,which

had never been published .

These were the principal authors of the two

centuries from Maimonides to Albo . A number ofminor writers are grouped around these literary

centers,as the poet and translator Al cha ris i

Shemtob ,the opponent of Maimonides

,and

Ma heram Alhaker,who defended Maimonides

,Don

Joseph ben Tusan,Meir ibn Altaba

,and many

other writers of distinction . But we can mention

here only those whose influence in the developmentof the religious idea is well known . We will namehere Mordechai Nathan

,who wrote the first con

corda nce to the Bible in the year 1437 A . C .,calling

i t Ya ir N a ilzib,

” to which Isaac Nathan wrote

a lengthy introduction,showing how wide awake

those doctors were as to the systematic study of

the Bible .


IV.

— FROM ALBO TO THE CLOSE OF THE LITERARY PERIOD .

The fifteenth century was one of terror and per

secution to the Spanish Jews . From 139 2 to 149 2 ,

thousands of Jews were slaughtered and tens ofthousands forced into Christianity . But the mind

does not develop by oppression . It unfolds in theshade of freedom

,and under the palm of peace .

So culture declined in Spain,persisted only for a

while longer in Portugal,the Provence and in

Italy,but set finally into a long night of darkness

a nd ignorance .

After Joseph Albo,the disciples of philosophy

and criticism among the Jews were very few in

deed . I t was an age of retrogression . RabbiSamuel Carca , one of the philosophical minds of this

age,of whom nothing at all is known

,was con

demned to end his li fe on the pyre of the Inquisi

tion,because

'

he doubted the creation of matter .Some maintain that he was delivered to the Inqui

s ition by the court -rabbi of Castile , Rabbi Isaac

Campa nton ,

>I< who was a rabbinical authority in

Castile,though he was not distinguished for his

great lea rningfr Ma ta tia Yizha ri , of Saragossa ,bore a great name in his day

,is known to us only

by his flf ia’ra s/z A lp/7a B el/7077 7,added to Midra s/z

Th is a ppea rs to h ave been the title Of tha t ra bbi,a s ch ief

o fficer of the crown in Jewish ma tters .

TSee Yucha s in ,ed . Am sterdam 5407 A . M. ,

p . 10 1 b .

S ba ls /zelet/z ba -ka ba la b,p . 49 a Fragment of Ca rea

’s

Epistle,a dded to S izebet yel ma

’

a, Hannover

,1855 , p . 13 1 .


Isaac of Castile,was a great rabbinical

authori ty toward the end of the fifteenth century .

He has become popularly known to posterity by hisbook Me7zor a t/7 lza -Ma

’

or,containing the ethics of

the Talmud,in seven sections

,each divided in

several treatises,and each treatise subdivided in

chapters . The main obj ect of this book appears

to have been to Show that rabbinical ethics aremore profound and more natural than both thephilosophical and Christian ethics . The book issystematical and exhaustive . The author ’ s a c

quaintance with the Talmud is wonderful . His

choice of passages proves his refined taste and pro

found sensibility as a moralist . Translated intoSpanish and German

,i t became the favorite litera

ture of the Jewish people,and was read in almost

every home of the Ghetto . This book has largelycontributed to the good morals of the secluded a nd

oppressed Jews . It has been re—published,Kroto

schin,1846 ,

with a German translation by Fuerstenthal and B ehrendfrThe third of those rabbis was Jacob ben SolomonIbn Chabib ,

another exile from Spain in 149 2 ,who

Abrah am Sa cuto ,the a uthor o f the h istorica l record

,

ca lled Tue/7 7 min , wa s a pupil of I sa a c Aboab .

TB es ides th is book ,the Z e

’eu a lz u -Re

’ena lz, a homi

letic trea tise in medieva l Germa n on the Penta teuch,

Megilloth a nd section of the prophets a s rea d in the syna

gogue , by Ja cob ben I sa a c Germa nus of Prague (diedwa s most extensively rea d in the Ghetto a nd con

tributed la rgely to the preserva tion of rel igion a nd good

mora l s among the oppressed Jews . I t wa s tra ns la ted intoLa tin by John Sa ubert , a nd published a t Helmsta dt

,1660 .


went to Turkey,and died at Sa loni ch i . This student

undertook the task of compiling all the Hagadah

passages from the Babylonian Talmud and part of

the Jerusalem,together with notes by Rashi

,Ibn

Aderet,Na chmani

, Jomtob ben Abraham a nd Nis

sim,to which he added his own notes and trea tises ,

beginning always,The author says . ” Th is book

is Called E 77 j a cob, and is found in every rabbinicallibrary . It is a supplement to the code of Maimonides

,which necessarily excludes the Ha ga dah ,

or ethical portion of the Talmud , historical notes ,poetical fictions

,proverbs

,maxims

,fables

,etc . Ibn

Chabib’

s notes and essays are especially remarkablefor the author ’ s decided standpoint against thereality Of the Talmudical legends . Maimonideshad already maintained that the rabbinical legends

must not be taken as matter of fact ; still it was

always done,more or less . Ibn Chabib cut the Gor

d ian knot,and reasoned rationally and radically .

The great light,however

,with whom this

period closes,

“

was the Portuguese Grandee,the

king ’ s cOnfidant and minister,Don Isaac Abar

banel , who shared and described the exode ofthe Jews from Spain and Portugal in 149 2 ,

after

which he took up hi s abode in Italy . Thismighty prince of the mind furnished the mater ia l for a hundred Latin volumes . He was themost fertile writer of his age . Among his numerousworks

,two interest us here especially

,viz .

,the

commentaries and the Ros/7 Ama na b . Aba rbanel

wrote commentaries to Pentateuch,Joshua

,Judges

,

Samuel,Kings

,Isaiah

,Jeremiah

,Ezekiel

,the twelve

2 88 I SAAC M . WI sE.

minor prophets and Daniel . H is Hebrew diction

is elegant a nd clear . An orthodox in faith,he is

nevertheless led by hi s predecessors,and prefers

rational to traditional comments,especially in the

matter of miracles . He starts out in every chapterwith a number of critical queries

,proceeds then to

analytical definitions of the Scriptural terms,and

arrives finally at a synthetical solution of the proposed difli culties , so that the whole retains thecharm of polemica l discourse . H is commentaries

,

like those of Leon de Banolas,are of great import

ance to the preacher,although hardly less valuable

to the critic .

In his Sep/zer Ros/7 Ama na lz,the Book on Car

d inal Principles,

” Aba rba nel reviews the thirteendogmas of Maimonides

,the obj ection to the same

by Crescas a nd Albo,in the same style as in his

commentaries . He adds a number of hi s own ob

jections to those of Crescas and Albo ,analyzes

them all,

finally defends those of Maimonides .Proceeding in an argumentative style

,he has ample

opportunity for the reader to exercise his ownjudgment and to form his own opinion . He proposes many a query , to each of which he gives satisfactory reply

,a nd leads the reader to independent

reflection . This book was several times re-publishedin Hebrew

,and also in Latin

,Amsterdam

,1 638 .

His commentary to the More N eb77elz7°

777 was buried

in a library at Tunis,up to the year 183 1 , when it

was published in Prague .

During this whole period,from Saadia to Abar

ba nel ( 900 to the Jews of Northern France,

Germany,Italy

,Poland and the East

,with a very


end of the fifteenth century,we have actually three

schools in Judaism, viz . : the rabbinico-traditional

,

based on the Talmud ; the rabbinical-cabalistical ,B aiSed oiiT hE

‘

ZOha r and its expounders, . and ,

the

school,the mother of reformed Juda isma s

_ i tmow exists . These three schools did not excludeone another— none considered itself a sect apartfrom the others— still they differed widely from one

another in matters of great importa nce In theory,

though they agreed in practice .

The literature of these schools,as specified above

,

i s the source from which modern Judaism draws itsprincipal information . This same literature became

also the theoretical cause of the Christian reforma

tion . The theology of the reformers came from

this Same source , and from cabalistic books which

furnished symbols,types and mysteries ; SO that i f

the reformation had not stopped half way ‘ therewould be little difference to-day between Christian

and Jew . AS early as the thirteenth century,Jacob

Anatoli,of Naples

,translated Hebrew books into

Latin . Besides , the Christian priest , who wouldnot have dared to read Arabic

,was not prohibited

to read Hebrew,as we Shall see hereafter in this

So much about the origin of the literature fromwhi ch reformed Judaism issued in the nineteenthcentury . It remains now to be seen why the period

of reform remained uninfluentia l for almost three

centuries .

REFORMED JUDAI SM . 2 9 1

V .

-FROM ABARBANEL To MENDELSSOHN .

The last decade of the fifteenth centurywitnessedone of the greatest calamities to which the dis

persed children of Israel had been subj ected . They

were driven from Spain,Portugal

,Sicily

,Naples

a nd the adj acent islands , from the countries wheretheir fathers lived Since the day of the Caesars

,to

whose culture and civilization they had contributed

more extensively than the nationalities whose fa

na ticism had driven them from their homes , robbedthem of their property and cast them out into unde

scribable misery . Tens of thousands became pseudo

Chri stians to save their families from ruin ; others

perished before they had found new homes . Thesurviving exiles went to Northern Africa

,to Pales

tine and Syria,to Turkey and Northern Italy and

a few to other countries . It i s true,the year 149 2 ,

when the Jews were expelled from Spain,was the

same when America was di scovered and a new

world was opened to them but the new world was

Spanish,and therefore inhospitable to the Jew ,

andthe inquisition made a hell of it as fast almost as it

was settled by Europeans .The countries from which the Jews had been ex

pelled lost their commerce and were soon reduced to

political impotence,from which they have not been

fully reclaimed even in this latter half of the nine

teenth century . After the Jews were gone three wasnot even one physician in Spain . The Spaniards had

exiled commerce,science and literature . But the

Jews themselves , also , in this respect were no lessthe sufferers . The exile closed the period of Jewish


li terature,the outlines of which we have given

here . The doctors exiled from their homes continned their literary labors in foreign lands . I i i

the next generation some prominent men maketheir appearance

,especially in the families of Ibn

Ya chya ,Sforno

,Aba rba nel

,Ibn Tibbon

,Ibn Verga

,

Ahoah,Arama and others ; but then the sun set .

The Caba lah,on the one hand ,

a nd casuistic rabbinism

,on the

“

other overshadow the " h or izon’

Of

Jewish genius . The greatest,also

,of this class of

writers had made the Orient their homes and es

pecia lly Palestine ; few remained in Italy , and stillless in Poland and Germany . That spirit of re

search and reflection whi ch characterized the abovenamed authors was not free any more

,and remained

unfree to the,

end of the eighteenth century . I t

appears that the oppression of centuries had brokenthe Jewish spirit so that printing

,the revival of

letters,the reformation and subsequent confl icts

,

a nd immigration into America,left no trace on

the Ghettos . Here and there a brilliant mind

loomed up like a lone-star,without exercising an

influence on the masses . The great men of the

Del Medigo family,l ike Leo de Modena a nd Nar

boni,passed almost unnoticed . Baruch Spinoza of

Amsterdam,who

,in the time of B a chya ,

Maimon

ides or Albo,would have called forth a host

of writers,was gravely excommunicated by the

rabbis of Amsterdam,a mode of treating seru

pulous thinkers , they had learned from the Churchof Portugal . Mena sseh ben Israel , a noble souland an energetic man

,whose merits Cromwell

a nd Milton acknowledge , was scarcely noticed by


It is wonderful how ProvidenceWatches over thetreasures intrusted to the Jewish people . Before

the Jews were driven from Spain,Elias Levita

,

whom we have mentioned above,resided in the

house of Cardinal Egidio , as teacher in Hebrew lore

of the Italian magnate . Two of his disciples,Paul

Fagius and Sebastian Muenster , became advocates

of Jewish learning to Chri stian students in Italy ,where the culture of the century reached a highpoint . At the same time

,by an inexplicable

impulse,Johann Reuchlin

,of Wurtemberg ,

felt an

irresistible desire to know the language and lore of

the Hebrew . In 1487 he wrote to the learned Sebastian Muenster

,to obtain for him a copy of the

Pentateuch . But Muenster could find none,and

sent him a copy of Exodus . Happily,Reuchlin

was sent to the court of the Emperor Frederick

III . by the Duke of Wurtemberg ,where he made

the acquaintance of the emperor ’ s body physician,

Jacob Jehiel Loans,a learned Israelite and favorite

of the emperor,who became Reuchlin ’

s teacher inthe memorable year 149 2 . Reuchlin after that had

other Jewish teachers,and finally he came to Rome

in 1498 , where he met Obadiah Sforno , one of theprominent Hebrew commentators of the Bible

,

physician and philosopher,who became the last

teacher of Reuchlin . He returned and began to

teach Hebrew at the University of Heidelberg,

although the monks opposed it most fanatically .

The Duke of Saxony invited him to the University

of Wittenberg,as professor of the Hebrew

,but he

declined, a nd some years later he took this place at

I ngolssta dt , and afterward in Tuebingen . This


made the reformation poss ible , and from that time

the Christians cultivated the Hebrew language and

lore,up to Rabe

,DeWette , Gesenius , Hitzig , Ewald

and Delitzsch,while the Jews themselves neglected

and forgot their own treasures . So Providence

watches .We return to our main subj ect . In the middle

of the last century,when Moses Mendelssohn ap

pea red on the stage Of public activi ty , the Jewswere deplorably neglected . This neglect was most

visible in the following points

1 . Tbe D isa bili l ies . The Jews were disfranchised

politically and socially,not only by unfair laws and

still more ungenerous customs , but also by burdens

they imposed upon themselves in the form of thereligious duties they observed . To mention some

,

besides the weekly Sabbath , the Israelite observed

annually thirteen holidays,ten half holidays

,five

fast days,thirteen half days , whi ch ,

'

by the strict

ness of the rules governing them,exclude him a n

nua lly (with the Sabbaths) eighty-three days from

business and society . Besides,he observed in suc

cession six weeks,and then again three weeks

,of

mourning,during which he would not shave his

beard nor cut his hair . Similarly,for thirty days

after the death of one of s even relatives . So he

was half of his time incapacitated for society . Tothis must be added the laws of diet as to everything he ate or drank

,the pots

,dishes

,knives

,

forks and spoons used ,and the manner of salting

the meat . It was impossible for the religious Jewor Jewess to live in the midst of Gentiles without

doing violence to these scruples . Ignorance of sec


ular affairs and prej udice against learning except ofTalmud and Caba lah ,

intensified his disabilities,so

that no government in the world could relieve themmuch .

2 . Superstiz‘z’

on . The rabbinical laws,as they

had been spun out , affecting every emotion of thehuman being , ‘

man ,°

woman,or child

,produced

naturally a vast amount of superstition . The Cabalah added to this the belief in angels

,demons

,

a nd the spirits of the departed , attended by certain

observances and formulas . Religion itself became

for the Jew,as i t was for the simple peasant

,and

for the burghers among whom he lived , a caricature

of superstition,some rabbis in fact sanctioned it

,

in spite of the emphatic protestations of many .

3 . Public Worslzip. AS the seclusion continued,

public worship became more disorderly,more Of

fensive to good taste,more ludicrous —by i ts anti

qua ted observances , more burdensome by its length

and monotony,and more alien to the hearts of the

worshipers . Prayers and hymns were recited without bearing upon wants or circumstances

,elegies

had reference to sufferings long endured,and peni

tentia l confessions declared sins they had not com

mitted . Public worship became ridiculous in ap

pea rance ,and li feless within . Finally the sermon

also was abolished,and what remained of worship

was meaningless and hollow .

SO ,while the world progressed

,Judaism retro

graded . The political and social pressure without ,and the unsatisfactory condition within

,gradually

resulted in this,some adj ured Judaism

,and became

the enemies of their people , others rose above

2 98 I SAAC M . WISE .

ginning of the Sixteenth . The eighteenth century

j ustly boasts of a rare phalanx of the finest classical

scholars,poets , philosophers , critics , divines and

statesmen . Humanitarian ideals and the love offreedom exerted a mild and elevating rule . TheAmerican and French revolutions

,which swept

from the path of humanity the debris of medi

eval despotism and brutality , were the necessary ,

results of man ’ s roused consciousness as to his

dignity,claims and rights . Bolingbroke

,Voltaire

and Paine,like Washington

,Jefferson and Frank

lin cleared the thickets,that the light of the sun

may penetrate and man may walk on smoothground .

The nineteenth century,i t appears to me

,subsists

on the wealth of the eighteenth."With the exception as to natural science and mechanical arts

,this

is true .

°

Being almost exclusively engaged withli feless nature ( if there is such a thing) as its obj ectfor research

,the man of the nineteenth century is

cold and egotistical . He is submerged in thecosmos

,in which individual lives count

_

for little .

Man is a part of immensity , almost nothing. The

question urges itself afresh ,

“What is man thatthou Shouldst think of him

,and Adam ’ s son that

thou Shouldst remember him ?” Our respect forhuman nature

,our

.

love of freedom,our patriotism

and humanitarianism are the inheritance of theeighteenth century .

It would havebeen mar velous i f the genius of thecentury ha d not touched also the Jew . The mild

atmosphere , genially warmed by the rays of pro

gresfsive culture , melted the ice of centuries . In

REFORMED JUDAI SM . 299

the principality of Anhalt,and. in the town of

Dessau,thk first exponent _

of the new spirit among

thei l ewsxwa s born September 6 ,and Elul 1 2

,17 2 9 .

In the same year when Lessing and Reimaruswere born , Sarah ,

the wife of Mendel,a poor

scribe (Sopher) and schoolmaster , gave birth toher son

/ Moses . Mother Sarah died a few yearsafter the birth of Moses

,and father Mendel took

care of the feeble child . alone . Having received therudiments of education from his father , he wasplaced into the school of Rabbi David Fra enkel

,of

Dessau,where

,besides the Hebrew and the rabbini

eaLbooks , nothing else was taught and nothing elsewas tolerated . Still , it was not the Talmud exelusively

,though chiefly

,which was read in that

school ; the Bible commentaries and the theologicophilosophical books of the Arabic—Spanish school

,

a nd especially the More Nebuelzim Of Moses Maimonides were taught and expounded by RabbiFraenkel . Before ”he had reached

”

the age of

thirteen,Moses Mendelssohn was considered pro

ficient in the Talmud and in the More N ebuchim.

The father was too poor to give his son furthersupport

,and expected him to choose a trade

,as

others of his age had done . But Moses Mendelssohn had only one ambition

,and this was to study

on. Penniless and friendless,he a rrived at Berlin

in 1743 ,to begin a career of poverty and of resi gna

tion for the sake of learning . H is teacher,Rabbi

Fraenkel,had moved to Berlin a year before

,and

admitted é/Iendelssohn among his students. Hei

mann Bamberger gave him a room and a few meals

weekly . The rest of the meals were frugal,and

300 ISAAC M . W I SE .

frequently did not come at all . Nevertheless hewould not beg support , and preferred to suffer pri

vation in order to maintain his independence .

Polish rabbis controlled the Jews of Berlin,a nd op

posed with a fanatical i eal the introduction of other

studies than the Talmud , so that there was littlechance for a Jewish boy to learn anything else .

'

A

p09 ; and forlorn Polish Jew ,Israel Samoss , almost

excommunicated on account of his profane studies,

the_author of commentaries to the Ra a e/z ( ben and

the Cba zza r i,was known as a great mathematician

and was under the doubtful reputation of being a stillgreater infidel . This Israel Samosz instructed MosesMendelssohn in Euclid ( translated in Hebrew) ,which changed the talmudist to a profound ma thema

ticia n . By the help of this teacher,Mendelssohn

acquired a thorough knowledge of the ArabicSpanish philosophy of the Jews

,and became an

acute thinker and philosopher . A young physicianof Prague

,Dr . Kisch , domiciled in Berlin , gave

him for a year a quarter of an hour dailyinstructionin eL a tin . A volume of Cicero ’ s orations havingcome to his hands by accident

,Mendelssohn inter

rupted these studies and concentrated .his attention

upOn Cicero so long that he could recite every sentence and had made himself master of the language

and matter . Another Jewish physician of Berlin,

Dr . Aaron Gomperz ,a scholar of eminence

,took

Moses Mendelssohn in charge and introduced him

into the mysteries of science and philosophy . Healso acquired a considerable fami liarity in French

a nd English,a nd was thus prepared to enter public


a Metaphys ieia n ,which he wrote in company with

Lessing,and then by his translation of Rousseau ’ s

work On the original Inequality among men,

” with

an appendix by him In the form of an epistle a d

dressed to Lessing . He was introduced into thehighest circles of savants and also at court

,a nd

became intimate with men,especially with Lessing

a nd Nicolai , who were his ardent friends through

out their lives . Nicolai,and afterward also Rector

Damm,became Mendelss ohn

’ s teacher in Greek,

which he hadl ieglected in former years .From the tutor ’ s place

,he went over to the book

keeper ’ s ,‘

and he left that to become prOprietorof a silk factory . He was never wealthy

,for he

Spent too much for others , but , after this , he wasnever poor . In his thirtieth year he married a poorgirl at Hamburg

,Promet Guggenheim

,the blue

eyed girl,

” as he called her,with whom he had

fallen in love . Happy in his home,in business and

in the choice of friends,and respected as no Jew in

Germany ever was,he led an independent existence

,

living for philosophy and Judaism . Mendelssohn,

the philosophical a nd aesthetical writer,the man of

whom it is said that he brought philosophy from

heaven down to earth,

e.,that he popularized it

,

who helped build up German language and l iterature in opposition to the servile admirers of theFrench

,including the king of Prussia

,Mendels

sohn,the man and thinker

,known through

many biographies and encyclopedic Sketches,the

author of P lza ea’oa,Morg ens iuna

’en

,L eifers 077 Seni i

777e777,etc . ,

belongs to the world . But this sketchis l imited to Mendelssohn

,the Jew

,a nd what he did

REFORMED JUDA I SM . 303

for Judaism and of this we can give a brief reviewonly .

The most ant service which

to i t inl etter and _

i_

nmspirit . He dived- in a n

fi

unre

l igious time at the coiirt of Frederick II . TheFrem ere a higher authority thanthe Bible

,and the companions of Mendelssohn

,

Lessing and Nicolai,were not noted for sectarian

zeal . Instead of yielding to the prevailing spiri t,

he opposed i t energetically,especially in two books

,

Pba ea’on

,in which he proved the immortality of

the soul,and in the Morgenstunden ,

” in which he

proved the existence of God . In hisfi dey i t wa s an

app eciable disadvantage fi o _ _

be_

a Jew ; the law ,a .

soczigl v prejudiceh and sup erstition combined to _makethe li fe of an ambitipp sd l ej vd mi olerablef

—‘

Bemgintimate ‘wzchmot w onlyLheh mosg prominent au

thors, _

but also withfl the i pretentious aristocracy offi fi—a” M

” H a n sw

his and beingconti nua lly in touch with Christians , it woulE havebeen natural for a

- "

man less Mend

M

I nvestiga tion into 7‘I7e Evidence of Cbr islia niiy,

a nd had made a public attempt ( in 1 769 ) to convertMendelssohn

,he replied in a calm and philosophical

tone,a nd refuted the man severely . A host of

minor scribes attacked him on account of this replyof his to Lava tor , but they were discomfited by theequanimity

‘

a nd the conviction of the Jew,whose

fidelity they could not shake . WhW he year177 1 , hewa s elected member of the Berlin ACademy

304 I SAAC" M . W I SE .

of Seience ,and the king refused to give his con

sent to his admission,

.Mendelssohn remarked,i t

was strange the academy should have had even thenotion of electing a Jew . He remained a Jew ,

and

so he elevated his co-religionists in the estimation ofthe public

,and roused also -the self-consciousness of

the oppressed of the Jews themselves . It must notbe supposed that the Jews encouraged Mendelssohn .

They have never encouraged any of their champions

,and they did not encourage Mendelssohn .

He found stern opponents among the Jews,though

he l ived and worked for them with the love and theenergy of a great soul . He requited the Christian

world by writing for it some of the most eminentbooks

,and he educated for it Wilhelm and Alex

ander von Humboldt . He requited Germany bygiving i t the first readable prose

,and -

by savmg theGerman language from French domination . Her equited also the Jews by elevating them socially

,

politically and religiously .

VI . MENDELSSOHN AS A REFORMER , SOCIALLYAND POLITI CALLY .

In those days i t was important/to the Jews, in

Germany especially,to have standing in the better

classes of society . There was enlightenment in

the higher circles . The bulk of the people was

ignorant and prej udiced,but on the whole good

natured ; i t was submissive to king and priest ,though oppressed by noblemen and heavily taxed

by state a nd church . Although the universitiesflourished

,the common schools were few and inad

equate common j ustice was unevenly administered

306 : I SAAC M . W I SE .

The Jews constituted a helpless orphan in the worldof that day .

Christian scholars,however

,could not afford to ig

nore MosesMendelssohn and his friends , whose number increased as his reputation grew . The philosophic Moses ” was a wonderful a phenomenon

,no

scholar and no traveler of distinction visited Berlinwithout seeking an interview with the marvelousJew . Mendelssohn a nd Some of his Jewish friendswere in contact with the best element of Germanand French society . In a short time the Jews hadmany friends

,aside of Lessing

,Nicolai

,the eccen

tric Hamann,Gleim

,Herder and the excellent

Dohm,in Germany Count de Mirabeaufi!< Abbe

Gregoire and Thierry of Nancy,in France the

Pelham cabinet and Dean Tucker in England,where

the Jews were emancipated by the act Of 1 753 ( re

voked in 1 754) the Emperor Joseph,in Austria

,

and many others . Berlin was at .that time the in

tellectua l center of Germany,and Moses Mendels

sohn was very prominent in it . Montesquieu wasprobably the first great wri ter of that age who ad

voca ted the cause of the Jews . In his great work,

“L

’éspr it a

’es L ois

”

( l ivre 2 5 ,chap . he exposed

the disadvantages which accrue to states that maltreat

the Jews . While in Lisbon , he saw a Jewish girl of

e ighteen years of age burned alive for the crime ofbelieving in one God . This awful incident elicited

the following words from him :" You Christians

complain that the Emperor of China has tortured

M ira bea u,S u r Mos es Mendels sol m et s ur la Réforme

P ol i tique des 7 77s 27 L ondr es , 1787.

REFORMED JUDA I SM . 30 7

Christians by fire . .You treat the Jews worse,

simply because they do not believe all that you bel ieve . If any of our descendants Should ever daresay that the nations of Europe were enlightened ,

your example will be adduced,Showing you your

selves have been barbarians . The idea one will

have of you will stain your reputation,and will

bring contempt on your contemporaries . ”

It was not only in this way that Moses Mendelssohn contributed to the ‘amelioration of the social

and political condition of the Jews ; he was active ,notwithstanding his natural meekness and timidity

,

his apathy to public controversies,and his stoic

calmness . Lessing has described him for lastingfame in his -Nathan the Wise , forNa tha n is noproduct of fancy . It is the portrait of Moses Men

delssohn in the several Situations . When Lessinghad ‘ published his drama

,

“D ie j 777len ,

” in which

we might say he rebuked the German prej udiceagainst the Jews ( i t was impossible to ignore whatLessing wrote) , the Goettingen professor Of theol

ogy,Chevalier Michaelis

,attacked him in the Ge

le/zr le Anzeigen . I may add here that the professors at Goettingen and tha t organ are as reactionary to-day as they were a century ago . Michaelisthought it improbable that there could be a soulamong the Jewish people as noble as the one described by Lessing . No Jew in Germany then had

the courage and the ability to meet Prof . Michaeli sin controversy

,except Mendelssohn . In the form

of a letter to Mr . Gomperz , he silenced Michaelis ,and left him before the public a learned

,but a very

small man .


While he was still tutor in the h ouse of Mr . Ziltz ,Mendelssohn made an attempt to esta blish a Jewishorgan . He published two numbers of a weeklyin Hebrew

,of course— which he called Kolzelel/z

Mnssa r ; but the enterprise wa s nipped in the bud .

The Jews had no appreciation of the value a nd influence of a public organ

,edited by an able and

zealous friend of the people . Pious men discour

aged the reading of anything else than sacredbooks ; in fact , they fea red it .They had no confidenee in Moses Dessau

,who

,

while he was clerk,had had a library containing

such books as Klopstock ’ s Mess ia s and the NewTestament . Though

,while in Hamburg on a visi t

in the Spring of 1 76 1 , the great Rabbi Jonathan

Eibenschuetz had said he was glad to learn that

Moses Dessau was well versed in the Talmud,and

that if married he would confer the Ma renu,the

rabbinical degree,on him . The ultra bigoted men

were still afraid of this philosopher . Mendelssohnwrote German sermons for Berlin rabbis who couldnot write them themselves . He wrote one in 1 757 ,

after the battle of Rossbach,which was delivered

on Thanksgiving Day,and he wrote to Lessing

,It

has come so far that I write sermons and praise aking .

”

He wrote another,delivered at the peace j ubilee

,

and then he wrote to Lessing concerning it,Dr.

Slop might have fallen asleep over it,and Uncle

Toby might have whistled his lilla bnlers twice asloud .

” He wrote an excellent commentary ( inHebrew) on Maimonides

’ Logic (Milollz ba -lzigg a

yon) , presented it to a Jewish beggar from Jerusa

I O I SAAC M . W I SE .

ing house,a nd that the Jew Hirsch , of Berlin , had

charged him with swindling .

The king was a philosopher,author and poet , but

Moses Mendelssohn was a consummate critic , and hisauthority went farther than the king ’ s . He was a

bel esprit in his day,and took up the gauntlet , on

the one side,against the very strong Gottsched a nd ,

on the other hand,against the king and his French

deists,along with Less ing and Nicolai . He was

a match for both in metaphysics and belles let

tres . He was not only the philosophical Moses ,but also one of the best prose writers of his day .

The L iter a tnrbr ief e” was the critical j ournal of

his day in which the literature Of the period was reviewed

,and Mendelssohn ’ s were the best of the

L i lera tnrbr ief e. Frederick ’ s philosophy was

hard pressed by Mendelssohn . When that kingdenied the immortality of the soul

,and turned up

from old books a number of epicurean passages,the

author of the “Pba edon

” made the king feel theJew ’ s superiority over him . Mendelssohn closes his

review thus : “ It appears to me that a Frederickwho doubts the immortality of the soul is a merechimera a squared circle .

” He handled the

king ’ s Poés ies D iverses (Frederick hated theGerman language) as only the author of The

Letters on Sensation ” could do it,and treated the

king ’ s book with honesty,fairness and thorough

ness such as he should like to have ha d for his own .

The Rev . Mr . Justi , whose hymns Mendelssohn hadrevi ewed in a similar manner , took advantage ofthe opportunity and charged Mendelssohn with libel

a nd blasphemy against God a nd the king,and the

REFORMED JUDA I SM . 3 1 1

L i lera lvrbr iefe were confiscated . The little Jewwas commanded to appear at Sansouci on a Satur

day evening . In the anteroom of the king,the

courtiers could not understand how a little Jewcould be cited be fore the king , . and Mendelssohnwas subj ected to a rigid examination . Moses knewthat the fellow he ha d to deal with was ignorant

,

a nd he said in sport , I am a magician .

” Ushered

into the king ’ s presence,he was asked whether he

was the author of that review .

“ Yes,

” said Mendelssohn

,whoever makes verses plays nine pins and

whoever plays nine pins,be he king or peasant

,must

allow a fellow to tell him the pins he has thrown .

”

This satire took well,and the continuance of the

L i lera z‘nrbr iefe” was granted . Still , the right to

be a Jewish citizen of Berlin the king could notconfer on him . It was against the law . Marquisd

’

ArgenS , a French philosopher and companion of

the king,at Potsdam

,happened to hear of that

law. He asked,astonished

,How about notre

cher Moise ? The day he resigns as bookkeeper,

i f he finds no Berlin Jew to employ him,the police

will escort him out of the city .

” The Marquis expostulated with the king for years before he agreedto receive a petition with regard to this

,and after

it had been submitted it was lost . D’

Argens in

duced Mendelssohn to write a Similar petition,and

he himself handed it to the king , and the Marquiswrote upon it the following satire

Un Philosophe mauvais catholique supplie un

Philosophe mauvais protestant de donner le privilege a un Philosophe mauvais j ui f . I l y a trop de


Philosophie da nS tout ceci que la raison ne soit pa sdu cOté de la demande .

”

The king granted the privilege,made Mendels

sohn a present of a thousand thalers,which by law

he would have h ad to pay,but refused to extend the

toleration to his children . Mendelssohn thus hadrealized that the emancipation of the Jews in Prussia

was not to be achieved . Nevertheless he would notgive up the task .

A man in Alsace,by the ominous name of Hell

,

“copyist,clerk

,and finally d istrict j udge

,who went

to the guillotine in 1794 ,used the execrable laws of

Alsace to keep the Jews in constant‘

dread,and to

replenish his purse . XVhen the Jews refused to

comply with his extortions,he provoked excitement

against them among the burghers of Strasburg and

Metz,and thus endangered their property and their

lives . Pamphlets were written against the Jews,

and the Jews ha d no one to reply . The clergy agi

ta ted in the dark ,and pamphleteers in public

,with

out opposition . Finally the Jews selected Cerf Beerto go to Paris a nd lay their complaint before Louis

XVI . At the same time Mendelssohn was re

quested to defend their cause in the public press .The discretion of Mendelssohn was very valuable in

such emergencies ; He was moderate,sagacious

,

and invincible in the debate . He accepted thismission . His friend

,Christian William Dohrn

( 1 75 1 to ha d j ust received an appointmentat the royal archives

,with the title of Kriegsra th .

This young statesman was won over for the c auseby Mendelssohn ,

and wrote the memorable essay

On the Political Improvement of the Jew

3 14 I SAAC M . W ISE .

His literary fame,his high posi tion in society

,his

independence and his generosity . drew to him therespect of tens of thousands . His manly defense

of his oppressed brethren endeared him to themasses .

VIII .

— MOSES MENDELSSOHN ON RELIGIOUS REFORMS .

*The center of gravity in European Judaism had

been gradually moved from Spain to Poland . Itwas Poland , where Jewish lore had its home .

The young Israelites of all other countries inEurope were obliged to frequent the Polish academies called Yesh iboth

,in order to acquire that

rabbinical knowledge which was necessary not onlyfor the rabbi

,but also for general education .

The Talmud and the rabbinical commentaries,to the

Bible,constituted the literature considered worth

knowing ; everything else was excluded from thecurriculum .

Besides the Talmud,i t was the Caba lah

,espe

cia lly the Sepher Yezirah ,the books of the Zohar ,

the works of rabbi Isaac Luria,Chaim Vida l and

others,which attracted the attention of s tudents .

This study had produced in the person of Sabba tha i

I n 1740 ,King Cha rles of the two S icilies

,the first king

o f tha t country who wa s independent of Spa in ,in order to

give a fresh impu l se to the Sinking commerce of southernI ta ly,

invited the Jews to return to h is country, a nd in a n

edict (Februa ry 3 , 1 740 ) gra nted them importa nt privileges . The king ’

s edict,however

,wa s pra ctica lly a nnulled

by the Jesuits a nd priests .


Zevi , a messianic impostor , an age of miracles andprophecy

,and a newsect , small but mischievous in

influence . About 1 740 another cabalistic impostor ,Israel Baal Shem

,wrought miracles and conversed

with angels . He succeeded in establishing asect of cabalists

,called Chasidim , who had vota

ries also outside of Poland,a nd spread supersti

tion and fanaticism . The rabbis receiving con

tinua lly new revelations from on high , rej ected the

authority of the Talmud . A heated controversyarose

,in which the three greatest authorities of that

age,Eliah Wilna

,Ezekiel Landau and Jonathan

E ibenschuetz were engaged , and bans were exchanged between rabbinists and cabalists . Jona

than Eibenschuetz , success ively chief rabbi ofPrague

,Metz and Hamburg

,was charged with

be ing one of the cabalistic impostors of Poland , a

charge he did not deny . He was seriously attackedby Jacob Emden and the rabbis mentioned be

fore . Although Rabbi Landau defended him becausehe admired and venerated him

,he condemned the

Caba lah and the imposition connected with it . But

controversies and bans were ineffectual,so far as the

Chasidim were concerned belief in the Caba lah andin holy rabbis persists to this day among nearly

Jews inPoland and Hungary,and in Jeru

salem . From time to time those saints announcethat they have performed some miracle and they

get rich .( A great number of credulous persons

believed in the spperna tura l powers of those mencalled Baale Shem ,

the last Of whom in Germany,

Rabbi Seckel Loeb ,of Michelstadt

,died but a few


years ago . Jews and Christians from near a nd farwent to such a “ holy man ” to work miracles forthem in case of d isease or special occurrences . The

cabalistic absurdi ties of the -Jews were of the samenature and equally tenacious as the belief ofChristians in the miracles wrought by images ofsaints

,to whose chapels some crawl upon their

knees for miles,leaving the spot more bewildered

and demoralized than ever .This was the state of society when Moses Men

delssohn wrote . His philosophical works,how

ever,did not reach the masses . Parts of his

Pha edon . on the immortality of the soul were translated into Hebrew

,but Jews stood in no need of

such proofs of a doctrine which was firmly believed,

nor had they any taste for the exquisite beauty of

diction which distinguishes that book . Some of the

.best among the Jews of Germany and Poland werereached by the Pha edon ,

but the masses and the demoralized rabbis cared nothing about it .Honored and beloved by the most prominent

of his days , as Mendelssohn was , receiv—.a M

ing no eneouragment from the Jews,his pen might

have remained ina etive had not a zealous Christainchallenged

_

thetimid_man to defend his religious

belief before the public . Deacon Lavater,who had

translatedi

th'

e'

bO-‘

Ok‘

Of his colleague Bonnet,On

the Evidences of Christianity,

” from French intoGerman

,sent it to the author of the Pha edon

( 1769) with a ded ication challenging him eitherto refute the arguments of the book or to embrace Christianity . Lavater , Since 1 763 a personal

3 I 8 I SAAC M . W I SE .

without submitting them before this consistory,

since every one is convinced of his wisdom a nd

humility,and that he would write nothing which

might lead to public scandal . ” The best productof this controversy was Mendelssohn ’ s epistle tothe Prince of Brunswick

,which was not published

,

however,during the lifetime of its author .

From this time on , Mendelssohn never ceased‘

working for the Jews , who honored him greatly .

He wrote on a nd translated rabbinical lawsWhichare still in effect

,and he also translated the Pen

ta teuch into German for the°

use’

b f“

his children .

Solomon Dubno ( born a Polish Jew of learning

,instructed Mendelssohn ’ s children in Hebrew

grammar . It was to this man that he first Showedhis translation of the Pentateuch

,and this one re

quested that it be published for the public good .

After an agreement with Dubno to assist him,both

went to work to write a Hebrew commentary in de

fense of Mendelssohn ’ s translation and to preface i twith a brief exposition on Hebrew grammar

,pro

sody and exegesis . Mendelssohn wrote the preface

and a few chapters on Genesis ; the balance of thecommentary to this book Dubno wrote . In 1 778 aproof-sheet was issued in Amsterdam

,and the public

was invited to subscribe for the work . From allparts of Germany

,Holland

,France and England

s i1b_

s_ _

criptions came . Rabbi Hirschel Lewin,of

Berlin,and h is son Saul , rabbi of Frankfurt a . d .

Oder,zealously supported the enterprise

,and Naph

tali Hartwig Wessely , the great Hebrew poet , onseeing the proof and advertisement , poured forthhis enthusiasm for it in beauti ful lines . The rabbis


of Fuerth Prague and Altona , however, pronouncedthea bam over the work, -

and prohibited i ts circula

Vienna and theking of Denmark subscribed forthe Work ,

a nd in 1780 the firSts i

vOl-

iimm

e (Genesis)appeared the seco

’

ii d volume (Exodus) followed°in

1 783 ,Meanwhile

,the teacher of Solomon Dubno

,

a pious rabbi,had come to Berlin

,and had persuaded

Dubno to leave the city,and to abandon his share

in this work of Mendelssohn ’ s . He left and Men

delssohn was obliged to write the Hebrew commen

tary to Exodus alone . But Naphtali Hartwig Wessely came to his rescue and wrote his matchless coinmentary to Leviticus . Aaron Jaroslaw furnished thecommentary to Numbers

,and Herz Homberg to Deu

teronomy,SO that the work was finished in 1 783

and gi ven the titleN et/zib 5 177710777,Path of Peace .

In the same year Mendelssohn ’ s version of thePsalms appeared in print . He translated the Song

of Solomon,the Song of Deborah

,wrote a He

brew commentary to Ecclesiastes,when death made

an end to his glorious ca reern

No book or books reached the Jews more rapidlyand was read more thoughtfully than were thosetranslations and commentaries . The Bible has a l

ways been the book of the Jews . In the darkestdays the Jewess did not stop reading the Ze-ena /z

77-Re-ena /7,which is the Pentateuch paraphrased in

medieval German,and the Jews would read every Fri

day and Sabbath the weekly section of the Pentateuchtwice

,and once the Aramic translation

,besides the

Hap/i la ra /z, section of the Prophets . The Psalmswere recited SO frequently that almost every one


knew them by heart , though they were hardly understood . When the beautiful versions of Mendelssohn reached them ,

the Jews learned from themGerman a nd Hebrew

,grammar a nd prosody

,exe

gesis and aesthetics . A treasury of knowledge wa sopened for them

,and in a short time they learned

to know many things . Especially the young Talmud students of Poland were irresistibly seized by

the new Spirit , and were carried into the world

of culture by Mendelssohn ’ s versions and commenta ries . The Talmud was laid aside

,and other

books were sought and read . It was a new kind

iOf education they craved for they could not find

lit at the Polish academies , a nd the universitieso f Austria

,Italy and Holland received the Talmud

students,to school them for the world and the

ihigher vocations .T he commentaries added to the versions of Men

delssohn,though very carefully written

,disposed

of rabbinical hermeneutics,and re- introduced to

s tudents Ibn Ezra , Gersonides , Kimchi and Abarbanel , grammar , philology and criticism . Despite

all bans a nd denunciations,a new era set in and

rabbinism and cabalism were overthrown . The

Arabic-Spanish literature of the Jews was readagain . The Hebrew language again found ad

mirers and cultivators , and people began to speakGerman correctly . Here modern reform had its

beginning .

Mendelssohn,the manufacturer of silk goods and

of good books,became the reformer and benefactor

of his race . He was no rabbi and no priest,no pro

fessor and no doctor (he refused all titles) , no agi


learned men,so was his wife eminent among the

ladies Of Berlin for her beauty,wit and refinement .

In her house the greatest men of Germany met atsocial gatherings . The king , courtiers , professors ,soldiers

,poets

,authors

,composers

,artists

,all

kinds of distinguished characters,including the

two brothers Humboldt,Boerne and Heine

,were

the s a ttel ites of that remarkable woman . Her mostfavored were Dorothea Mendelssohn

,daughter of

Moses,afterward the wife of Friederich von

Schlegel,and Rachel Levin

,afterward the wife

of Varnhagen von Ense . Schleiermacher said ofHenrietta Herz

,she was his Platonic bride

,Count

Mirabeau worshipped her and Bishop Teller a d

mired her,Boerne

,when a lad

,fell in love with her

,

although she was older than his mother . After thedeath of her husband she lost much of her prestige

,

still i t i s due to her to say that the prej udices against

the Jews in Germany,and especially among the

higher classes,diminished

,and that social intere

course between Jews a nd Gentiles was beginning to

be cultivated . At the same time Fanny Itzig,of

Berlin,married a Jewish baron of Vienna

,Nathan

Adam Arnstein,a nd exercised nearly similar influ

ence on Vienna society as Henrietta Herz exercisedin Berlin .

Lazarus Bendavid ( 1 762— 1832 ) was another expounder of Immanuel Kant ’ s philosophy . He wa sboth a rabbinical scholar and a mathematician ofgreat note . As a philosophical writer he was moreeminent than Dr . Herz

,but he was not as popular

as a lecturer . He began his philosophical lectures

in 1 793 ,at the university of Vienna

,much to the


chagrin of the Christian professors,who succeeded

eventually in forcing him from the university . CountHarrach opened his palace to the Jewish philosopher

,a nd he continued his lectures in his mansion .

I ii 1798 he returned to Berlin , and remained there tohis death

,as superintendent of the Jewish free school

and secretary of the royal treasury for widows .

Solomon Maimon ( 1 753—1800 ) was probably the

most interesting of the three great expounders.

ofKant . Two natures appeared to unite in him , that

of the coarse cynic and of the sagacious philosopher .Besides his numerous essays and treatises on philosophical themes in the B er liner

a nd theMag a z in ,from 1 789 to 1800 ,

constituting inthemselves a small library

,and besides ten books on

many departments of philosophy,published between

1 790 a nd 1797 , he also wrote the Giba ib li a -M’

oreb,

a Hebrew commentary and a remarkable introduction to three parts of Maimonides ’ More N eb77c/7i 777

,

published in Berlin 1 79 1 , and then again at Viennaand Sulzbach

,in which he proves himself master of

philosophy . This man was a beggar all his lifetime

,but always found generous admirers .

At the same time another Jew , Marcus EliasBloch of Ansbach

,distinguished himself as a nat

u ra l ist,and especially as an ichthyologist . Besides

his numerous treatises on medical and scientific sub

jects , published between 1 782 and 1 79 2 ,he wrote

ten volumes on natural history of fishes,published

in German and French,in Berlin

,between 1 784 and

1795 . He laid the foundation of this science .

These four men did much for the German people,

German literature,and especially for the German


Jew . As afterward Meyerbeer,Halevy

,Mendels

sohn-Bartholdy a nd Offenbach proved that Jewishgenius has the brilliancy in music

,to the chagrin

a nd discomfiture of all pedantic egotists,so those

savants broke through the inveterate stupidity of

German professors . AS Paul once sat at the feetof Gamaliel

,so now princes

,generals

,cabinet min

isters a nd high-born nobility,sat at the feet of

Jewish philosophers and learned from them,and

frequented Jewish homes and were refined byJewish women . This changed the status of theJew . The masses of the German people were toomuch neglected to learn the lesson of tolerance

at once,but the higher classes began to look upon

the Jew with a certain degree of respect,and

despite the iniquitous laws of Frederick the Great,

enforced also by Frederick William II,the Jew had

some hope now for improvement and elevation in

society .

Naphtali Hartwig Wessely ( 17 2 5— 1805) was theson of wealthy parents

,and was educated in the

rabbinical schools . In every other branch of knowledge he was a self-made man . An intimate friendOf Mendelssohn

,and aspiring like him to con

tribute to the regeneration and elevation of theJew and of Judaism

,he lived as a merchant on a

small income at Copenhagen,and spent his leisure

hours in the acquisi tion of knowledge,and in turn

ing it to practical benefit for his fellow-men . Wessely was the most prominent Hebraist of his age .

Germany,Poland and Italy owe to his Hebrew

works,in prose a nd poetry

,the revival of Hebrew

letters . After he had published the two volumes


beauty of form a nd elegance of diction has rousedthousands of young Hebrews to enthusiasm for

the Bible . And yet,who knows the care he had in

bringing out his work Wealthy friends advanced

the money at last . The waste of genius wasstayed .

Herz Homberg ( 1 748— 184 1 ) was of another turnof mind . He was eminently practical . It appears

to us now like a vision from dreamland , when we

recollect the hoary man with the appearance of aprince

,the imperial order in his button -hole

,and

scorn in his mien'

for all that is vulgar,mean or

small . Young students cluster about him twice aweek to listen to his story

,which reaches back as

far as the year 1760 ,embracing the political com

motion,changes of empires

,wars

,revolutions

,

progress and retrogr ession,all stored up in his tena

cious memory . We had forgiven him the wronghe committed on the boys of his days who wereobliged to study the Hebrew text of his catechism

,

“I 777 re Sbepber , a dry book of interminable prose .

We looked up to him as to an authority of an a n

cient day . He loved to be compared to Socrates,

though'

he bore not the least resemblance to him .

One of the lads pleased the old man by writing a

Hebrew dialogue,

“ Socrates and His Disciples,

”

with marked reference to him and to his band ofyoung disciples . The writer of the Dialogues ”

was called Herz Plato for years after,a nd

,i f we are

not mistaken,he is still called so by some of his

earliest friends .Herz Homberg

,as narrated before

,was tutor in

Mendelssohn ’ s house,and co

-laborer in the com


mentary to the Pentateuch . When Emperor Josephof Austria had issued his memorable edict

,Hom

berg returned to Austria,highly recommended

by Mendelssohn,who was his warm friend . .After

some time he was appointed Schulra th ,general

superintendent of the Jewish schools in AustrianPoland

,with a considerable salary . He met with

little success,partly on account of the intolerance

of the Chasidim,partly on account of the wars

which rapidly followed one another,and partly also

on account of his imprudent opposition to rabbinicalcustoms and Jewish observance . His “

I 7 nre

Sbepber , written for schools,in which he is

much more orthodox than the thirteen articles ofMaimonides require of the rabbinical Jew ,

and evidently relegates it to oblivion ; he makes no men

tion of the ceremonial law . This was too much

for the Jews of that country and age . EmperorFrancis decorated him

,and a royal pension

was paid to him during his li fetime . The publica

tion of his second catechism (German ) ,“B ene

Zion,

” is his least credible effort . It is dry andtedious reading

,but every boy and girl ambitions

for higher education,or desirous of marriage

,had

to pass an examination in it before a rabbi and animperial commissioner . This became a source ofchicanery and extortion in Austria ; but the edictwas not revoked till 1848 . Through his acquaint

ance with Elia Morpurgo ,Homberg exercised con

s idera ble influence on the Jews of Italy,and in

Prague his influence on the rising generation wasquite helpful . He was a man of enlightened prin

ciples and of energy . A splendid Hebraist,ver


s a tile in Scriptures and its commentaries,well a c

quainted with the Hebrew philosophical literature ,and possessing enough knowledge of the Talmud

to know its weak points,he was an apostle of re

form to the narrow circle of his friends and disc iples , many of whom he enlisted under the banner

of Progress .Here it is proper to mention David Friedlander

,

but we must reserve him for another chapter . With

this group of men the three directions which reform

took after Mendelssohn are clearly indicated . Thefirst group, Herz , Bendavid , Maimon , and Bloch( also the poet , Ephraim Kuh ,

a nd the musician,

Bernard Wessely, ) indicates the course which one

portion of Jews took,

cultivation of science

and art . Naphtali Hartwig Wessely indicates thecourse of positive reform in religion and Herz Homberg the course of negative reform . Gradual regen

cration was the tendency Of the former,destruction

was the parole of the latter . The succession ofthese three groups up to our days is continuous .

X . ACTIVE REFORM .

The new spirit promulgated among the Jews by

Mendel ssohn and his contemporaries manifested

)its

elffirs t i n thr ee diff erent directions

,viz .

, in thel iterature

,schools

,and political emancipation . In

literature it wa s the association of the Mea sp/zim

( compilers ) that made a popular a nd successful be

ginning . During the li fetime of Mendelssohn , whenthe orthodox rabbis waged war against N aphtha l i

Hartwig Wessely,a nd the great question Wa s dis

cussed,whether the Jew must remain restricted to


of this small beginning,which have exercised a

deep influence on the Jewish affairs a nd learning,

a nd now Hebrew,English

,German

,French

,Italian

,

New°

Greek,Polish

,Prussian a nd Hungarian jour

na ls reach all parts of the globe where Israelites

live,and form a bond of union and a medium of

intercourse among all of them .

W i th theprogress of academical studies and systema tlcaL leerning among the Hebrews , writers ofprominence in all branches of li terature rOse amongthem

,a nd

_

especia_l_ly‘

1We must follow

the history of some branches of literature . Mostimportant to the Hebrew a nd a proper understafidmv

’

g

f

of mission is the knowledge of history , _so very

”

In/

ch neglected hyt he Israelites themselves . AfterJosephus Flavius the JeWs h a dfl sot o ne h istoriog

ra pher of distinction . This was one of the main

reasons why the Jew and his literature were so longneglected . In France

, J . B a snage wrote his H is

7‘oire de la Religion a

'es j u if s ,

” from the beginningof the Christian era to 1 700 A . C .

,published in Six

volumes,Rotterdam

,1 70 7 to 1 7 1 1 , and then again

in fifteen volumes Hague,1 7 16 , besides the three

volumes of his L a 137757 7779777 a’es Hébreux

,

”

Amsterdam,

1 705 . In England,Dr . Humphrey

Prideaux wrote hi s Old and New Testament Con

nected'

in the History of the Jews ,” London

,1 7 19 .

In the beginning of the eighteenth century Christian Bastholm

,preacher of the Danish court

,wrote

a history of the Jews from Abraham to the end ofthe seventeenth century

,in three volumes

,which

was translated into German and published in Leip


zig in 1 786 . These three books , together with varions Jewish works on history , and th e works ofChristians like John Christopher Wolf

, Schudt , andBodenschatz

,would have offered sufli cient material

for a good history of the Jews ; but there was nobody to do it . After a considerable number of historica l essays had been published in various period

ica ls,a nd A . T . Hartman ha d published his remark

able three volumes (Amsterdam ,on the cos

tumes of the ancient Hebrews , D ie Hebra er in a 777

P a ta l isc/ze,Herder

, Eichborn Rosenmuller,Mi

cha elis,and a host of others

,had dug up vast his

torica l materials . The first German Israelite pub

lished in the year 18 1 2 a history of the Jews from

B . C . to 1800 A . C .,in three parts

,one octavo vol

ume,very brief and very defective . David Otten

soser,of Fuerth

,in Bavaria

,is the name of the

writer . It was published by Zirndorf,

'

fa ther and

son,in German

,in Hebrew type . One year before

,

in 1 82 0,Dr . J . M . Jost had commenced his Ge

scbiclztef

iler I sra eliz‘en

,

” etc .,

“ History of the Isra elites from Time of the Maccabees to the Presentday but his first volume reached only to 45 A . C .

,

and the second volume,published in 182 1

,formed

a supplement to the first . The ninth volume,with

the alphabetical index,reaching to 18 15 , was pub

l ished in 18 2 5 . In 1847 he wrote the concludingvolume

,in three divisions

,reaching to 1845 . In

1850 he published in two volumes a complete history of Israel

,and afterward again three volumes

o f the history of Judaism and its sect .Dr . restorer of Jewish history . B e

side—

S‘

h is erudition in the Hebrew,Greek and Latin


classics,he was a fine German

,French a nd English

scholar,so that

.

he had an unusual command ofsources

,and he studied them scrupulously . He is

systematical in his arrangement and concise andclear in his diction

,though cold and pedantic

,with

out enthusiasm,without any apparent love for his

subj ect . Sometimes he is even unj ust to the Jews,the

very reverse of the Christian B a sna ge ,whose work

he largely used,like all his successors in this litera

ture . Historiography ,in the earlier days of Jost

,

was quite imperfect in Germany,as it was in En

gland before Hume,and the Jewish sources had

been neither sufficiently known nor critica lly'

inves

tiga ted . Therefore,although Jost

,after Josephus

,

was the father of Jewish history and did giganticwork

,he necessari ly affords many a weak point to the

impartial critic,although in the main he is a reliable

and strictly Obj ective historian . This Dr . Isaac

Marcus Jost was born in Bernberg in 1793 , and diedin Frankfort-on - the-Main . Besides editing for threeyears the periodical

,

“I sra el itisclze A nna len

,

”1839

to 184 1 ,and co-editing with Creizena ch the Zion

,

etc . ,184 1 and 1842 ,

writing a number of text

books for the school of which he was a teacher,

a nd a number of pamphlets and contributions tovarious j ournals

,he translated the Mishnah

,supply

ing it with vowel points (Berlin , wrote anEnglish grammar and a dictionary to Shakspea re ,

a

guide-book of London , the German ,English and

French text to F . Steuber’

s“Myilzolog iscbeGa ller ie,

a nd published the works of Frederick the Great .

Jost’

s influence on the minds of Jewish students

was deeply felt,and lead a considerable number to


ness , his discovery of sources as El ia za r ben Ka l ir’

s

poetry,and the like .

More important to literature because more systemetical and scientific than Rappaport

,is Dr .

'

.L

Zn nz . Jewish literature ha d found in him an impartial critic

,a historiographer of rare abil ities

,a

bibliographer of incomparable industry and exactness . In the years 18 2 2 and 182 3 Zunz was before

the public as a writer of eminence ; he edited theli terary periodi cal

,

“Zeilscbr if tf uer VVissenscbaf l a

’es

j nalentlzmns .

” He had made his debut in 18 2 0

Wi th the first volume of a book on rabbinical literature

,to which he wrote a second volume in 1 8 2 8 .

In these he proved the necessity of classical studiesin order to comprehend the importance of Jewishliterature aside from its theological contents . Hismasterpiece in this field

,

“D ie Goiz‘escl ienslicben Vor

tra ege,” etc .

,appeared in Berlin in 1832 . In 48 1

pages octavo,this remarkable book places before

the reader history on the sermons,homilies

,prayers

and hymns of the Jews from the time when the last

book of the Bible,Chronicles

,was written

,to the

year 1830 A . C . ,embracing over twenty-one cen

turies in Asia , A frica and Europe , surveying animmense library

,and placing each author and each

book in exact time . The notes and quotations

under the text of this book are overawing tothe reader

,SO that it is difli cult to comprehend how

one man could have done that amount of reading,

and have compressed it in so small a compass . The

vast field surveyed by Dr . Zunz contain many details upon which he could touch but Sl ightly . Avast field of labor was opened to the inquisitive and


critic,and a host -of scribes followed Zunz to re-dis

cover,as it were

,the ancient literature of the

Hebrews,and to clear it of the dust Of ages which

had gathered on it . The other books of Dr . Zunz,

“ History and Literature,

” Berlin,

1 845 ;“ The

Synagogal Poetry of the Middle Ages,Berlin

,

1855' “ History of the Rites in Synagogal Wor

ship,Berlin

,1850,

and his minor works are all

of the same cast . He was a living library,ani

mated by a n eminent sense of criticism a nd with

a rare talent for giving shape and form to chaoticmatter .Less important than Rappaport and Zunz

,a l

thougho a much more elegant writer and more suc

cessful expounder of the Bible than either of theformer

,was Solomon David Luzza tto ,

the scion ofone of the most eminent Italian families

,and to the

end of his life the leading professor at the rabbinicalseminary of Padua . He wrote Hebrew

,Italian

,

French and Ge rman . His diction is graceful andexceedingly pleasant . He bears a stronger resemblance to Plato than Mendelssohn did to Socrates . Hewas the Jehudah Halevi of the nineteenth century .

His lectures on moral theology are so much akin tothe Cha za ri , as the diction a nd form of his Hebrewpoems always remind one of Jehudah Halevi

,whose

Divan he published,Prague

,1840 ,

containing thebest poems of the great Castilian . In his critical

labors he appears in the same field with the twosavants named

,no less learned and erudite

,but less

profound and suggestive than Rappaport,and less

industrious and systematical than Zunz . His essays

a nd treatises in his field appeared mostly in the


B ile/cu re Ha -I ttinz,

a nd afterward ( 184 1 ,In the Kerem published in Vienna and

then in Prague by a man of learning in Jewish

literature , Samuel L . Goldenberg of Tarnopol .One of his best works in this field is his Dia

logues , etc .,on the ! abalah ,

the Zoha r,on the

antiquity Of the vowel points and accents of theBible . This Hebrew book

,published in 1852 ,

shows the folly of the Caba lah ,proves the origin of

the Zolza r in the thirteenth century , and of thevowel points in the fifth

,and the accents probably

in the sixth . Luzza tto’

s main force was the Bible ,which he knew well . He was master of Biblical

literature in all i ts branches . He studied . the a n

cient versions a nd published his Obeb Ger,

” on

the Aramic version of Onkelos , Vienna , 1830 . Hisresearches are laid down in hi s Italian version of

Job,Livorno

,1844 ; his French notes onIsaiah in

Rosenmuller ’ s version,Leipzig ; 1834 ; his Hebrew

notes on the Pentateuch,Vienna

,1850 ; and finally

in his “ Isaiah,

” the Italian translation and extensive Hebrew commentary

,Vienna

,1850 . Luz

za tto was more an exegetic than historical critic ;but also in this

,and epecia lly in the history of

exegesis,he was very successful . Around these

original men and writers a host of others groupedthemselves . They are too numerous to be men

tioned in this Sketch . One,however , who worked

independently,must be mentioned here

, viz ., J .

Salvador of Paris . He published his L ois a’e

Moise,

” etc .,Paris 18 2 2

,and in 18 2 8 his H is loire

ales I nstitutions a’e Moise ez

‘o’u peuple Hebreu ,

” in

three volumes,Pa ris

,

°

tra ns l a ted into German ,with


most of them . In many points,however

,he has

corrected the statement of Zunz a nd Rappaport,so

that the honest historian can not overlook him . Inone point

,especially

,he is correct . He complains

that Zunz in his quotations most always markedthe page of old editions

,inaccessible to men outside

of Berlin,or other large cities

,instead of giving

notations which would be found in other editions .This

,he maintains

,imposes an unnecessary dith

culty on the reader to control Zunz ’

s statements .Rabbi Jacob of Lissa

,the celebrated author of

Ha m/ot/z D a a tfi and N et/zibot/z Izammisbpa t,”

tells us that Rabia ’ s name was Eliakim Getzel,son

of Juda Loeb,and that he also wrote commentaries

to the Zo/za r a nd Post/eta Ra ba t/22°

,neither of which

appeared in print . Fuerst gives his name Ben JehudaHammilsa hagi , according to the title-page , and as

serts that his original name was Mehlsack and that

he was probably rabbi in Smilow .

Elijah Ca rmoly,of Brussels

,wrote a number of

books and treatises,in French and Hebrew

,between

the years 182 8 and 1845 , which exercised a great

influence on the development of Jewish literature .

His works are,in the main

,geographical and

biographical One of his books,H istoire a

’es Me

'

deoins j ztzf s , etc .,has found an English translator

in John R . W . Dunbar , and the book was publishedin Baltimore

,1844 . Others of his works were

translated into,Germa n . Jost translated his Mai

monides and his Contemporaries ,”

and published itin the “

l sr . Amza lon .

” His book,

“Des K/zoza rs

a n X e etc . ,Brussels

,1 845 ,

gives a fact then

unknown,that the Cba za r i of Rabbi Jehudah Ha


levi is no fiction,and that a dynasty which had em

braced Judaism actually existed in Arabia . Ca rmolydirected the attention of scholars chiefly to geography

,in which many were very deficient and there

fore the localities named in Jewish sources wereoften misplaced . Most of his treatises appeared inthe Revue Or ienta te

,whi ch he published from 184 1

to 1 844 . His books appeared in Brussels , except his“Tou r da Monde de P eta e/zia a

’e Ra tisoonne

,etc .

,

which appeared in Paris,1 83 1 , and his

“Totea

’ot/i

God’ole I sra el,

” which appeared in Metz,18 2 8 .

It must_

hem here t ha t _ modern~ Jewish

li terature_origina ted in Germany

,Poland

,Italy and

France . While Jost and Zunz a re—

Germans,Rap

paport,Krochmal and Rabia are Poles

, Luzza tto

and Reggio Italians,Salvador and Ca rmoly French

men . They , it cannot be doubted , were the origi

na tors of the historic li terature among modern Jews,

which embraces the largest part of their works .rary of the above is Dr .8 10 ) in Frankfurt a .

rM.,

of the periodical called“

‘

i/uea’isofie Zeitse/zrzf t f uer Mssek se/zaf t a nalL eben .

”

Thi s remarkable man was , for nearly forty years ,one of the central figures of Jewish literature and

Jewish reform . As early as 1833 , he signalized hisrifl e by a book ,

“ What has Mahommed takenfrom Judaism ?” Bonn

,1833 ,

originally a treatise

crowned by the University of Bonn . Geiger wa‘s

successively Rabbi of Wiesbaden,Breslau

,Frank

furt a . M . a nd Berlin,always a firm champion of

reform and a fertile and original mind . Geiger


made his j ournal,which was continued with slight

interruptions a nd changes from 1835 ,a central

point to all students,developing Jewish literature

and unearthing Jewish documents . He himselfwas the master-spirit

,a nd his pupils published a

number of valuable and instructive treatises andessays .

Another master mind,no less important to Jewish

literature than Geiger,was Dr . Julius Fuerst , born

180 5 ,at Zolkiew

,professor of history at the Uni

versity of Leipzig . The nine volumes of theOrient

,

” which he published in Leipzig from 1840

to 1848 ,contained in the “

L itera turota tt,

” besidesthe editor ’ s essays

,contributions on almost all

periods of Jewish history,besides linguistic and

biographical essays. of considerable value . Soalso another prince of the mind

,Dr . Zacharias

~Frankel,born in Prague

,180 1 ,

rabbi-“

of Toepl itz,Bohemia

,then in Dresden

,and director of the

rabbinical seminary at Breslau,edited a monthly

periodical ( from 1844 to 1846 and then againfrom 185 1 to 1 868

,continued by Dr . Graetz ) , in

which another not less important direction was

taken for the progress of Jewish studies . He re

constructed various episodes of Jewish history andliterature . While Geiger and Fuerst worked ongeneral subj ects

,Frankel exhumed

,as it were

,the

Talmudical literature in its historical bearings , andwas certainly most successful in this . In the

same field the Hungarian reformer,Dr . Leopold

Loew,rabbi of Papa

,then Szegedin a nd Gross

Kanischa,was active and worked with no less suc


History of the Jews of Spain and Portugal,

E . H . Lindo,London

,1849 . Also Dr . Ka yserl ing ,

Gese/ziefite der / zation in Por tug a l , Leipzig , 1 867 D ie

j nden in N a va r r a,a’

en B a skenla ena’ern nnel a nf a

’

en

B a lea ren,Berlin

,186 1 a nd Seph a rdin1 , Roma nise/ze

Poes ien a’er / na

’en in Spa n ien ,

Leipzig,1859 .

This vast literature was widely circulated,when

,

in 1870 ,Dr . H . Graetz , professor at Breslau ,

finished

the history of the Jews , in nine volumes , from thedeath of Judah Maccabee to this date . With allthese sources and preparations before him

,it was

not a difficult task for Dr . Graetz to write a history,

nor was it necessary for him to state,as he does on

the title-page,that he wrote according to original

sources,for many excellent crit ical expounders had

well prepared them for him . The reader of theaforementioned literature finds little new matter in

Gra etz’

s history,although he will find something

more useful,viz . : a thorough survey of the romance

of Jewish history . He understands well to write

history in a pleasant style,although he might have

conveniently written the same account of history

in five instead of ten volumes .Nevertheless

,in the field of Jewish history

,

Graetz offers '

a finished work,a complete com

pendium of all previous researches . However,his

last volume,on the modern history after Mendels

sohn,must be excepted . It is a well written book ,

but not history . He abuses reforms a nd reformersin Judaism beyond measure

,and in many instances

unjustly,praises their opponents

,and ignores his

own teachers on the plea that they are not yet

dead . Still he does not adhere to this rule in the


case of Cremieux,Montefiore

, Rothschild and otherwealthy men

,although he would not mention 'Dr .

Loewe of Brighton,the interpreter who accompanied

Sir Moses . In a history of the Jews it is unjust to

dwell with particular delight on Boerne and Heine,

a nd to ignore Geiger and Fuerst , Salvador andHerzfeld

,Ph il ippson and Stein , Mayer and Herx

heimer,Zunz and Frankel

,the very men

'

who made

Dr . Graetz , who did not , like Minerva , spring fromJupiter ’ s brain all armed . But

,whatever one may

say about Gra etz ’

s History of the Jews,i t is

,never

theless , the best work of this kind which we have .

The lectures in Jewish history by Dr . AbrahamGeiger

,reaching from the year 500 B . C . to the end

of the sixteenth century , published in Breslau ,

1 864 ,1865 and 187 1 , the first part in English by

Dr . Maurice Mayer , New York,1866

,point out a

new course to the future historiographer,and

,in our

opinion,treat successfully the main point

,much

neglected by Graetz , viz . : the influence of the Jewand Judaism upon the general development of thehuman family . This must be the main obj ect o fevery Jewish history . Geiger dwells on this pointwith success . We only regret that he did not pointout the reciprocity of Parsism a nd Judaism

,which

we consider very important .

We have allotted much space in this sketch to thehistoriography of the modern Jews

,because we

wish to sound the key-note . Since the revival of

letters among the Jews,historical researches formed

the main point of occupation of their scholars . It

is not anything new which is sought i t i s chiefly


the exact knowledge of that which has been thoughta nd produced by the Jewish mind ,

or done and

suffered by the Hebrew peoplCI —

Wfl

h—

iCIi are _ the ob

ject o f Study and Inquiry . Before we have a clearidea of the past and its mental treasures

,we can

not safely build upon it for the future . In ph ilosophy and religion also it is not the absolute whichJewish thinkers seek ; i t is much more the resultproduced by the Jewish minds

,as religious or

philosophical doctrine,which are reproduced in

modern garb,as we shall see in all departments of

modern Jewish literature . The opinion still prevails that we are far behind our ancestors in thecorrect comprehension and appreciation of both re

l igious and philosophical doctrine . Perhaps i t

i s so at any rate,we are not sure that we are up

to them,as long as we have not mastered the whole

l iterature of the past,a nd do not know what is the

axis around which the Judaism of all centuries re

volves . Therefore historical criticism a nd bistori

ogra phy have become important to modern Hebrews .Wonderful

,indeed

,is the progress achieved in this

branch in the last fifty years,from 1 82 0 to 1870 ,

from Ottensoser to Graetz and Geiger . A com

plete library , worked up by hundreds of indus triousand talented Scholars

,l ies between the two points ;

a library of Hebrew,rabbinical

,German

,French

,

Italian,and English books

,large enough to occupy

the lifetime of a man,and interesting enough to

captivate the attention of the best of readers .Still the masses of Jews and Christians are probablyas ignorant now of Jewish history as they werefi fty years ago . The subj ect has not been popu


books appeared in separate editions,with new

translations and commentaries,of these the Penta

teuch by Wolf Heidenheim,is most notable (Roe

delheim,

Meanwhile the bulk of Hebrew prayers was alsotranslated and furnished with Hebrew commentaries

,

especially by the learned Wolf Heidenheim andMoses J . Landau .

The German Jews began also to read German,

and new editions of the Bible appeared ; one byDr . Zunz assisted by Doctors Z . Arnheim

,Julius

Fuerst,and Michael Sachs another by Dr . Gott

hold Salomon of Hamburg,and a third with the

Hebrew text and numerous notes by Dr . S . Herx

heimer . These three translations are still cons idered standard among German Israeli tes . The notesof Herxheimer are of special value .

In 1 832 ,Mr . S . Cahen

,of Paris

,since 1 840 the

edi tor of the Jewish month ly,

“A rc/t ives I sra elites

de Fra nce,began to publish a French version of

the Bible,with critical introduction and commen

taries to each book . The twenty-four books werefinished in 185 2 . The title of the work is “

L a

B ible,tr a a

’nction nouvelle

,a vec l

’

lzéoren en'

reg a ra’

,

a ccompagne'

a’es points voyelles et des a ccents toniques ,

a vecdes notesp/zilolog igues ,g éog rap/ziqa es , cl littéra ires ,et les pr incipa les de la vers ion a

’es septente et la tekte

sama r i ta in .

” This is decidedly the most completeand critical Bible version which the Jews possess .In Italy

,Isaac Samuel Reggio ( 1 784 to

one of the most fertile writers,published

,in 182 1 ,

his Italian translation of the Pentateuch with aHebrew commentary . The Italian Jews did very


little in this field,till

,in 1 844 , S . D . Luzza tto pub

l ished his Italian version of Job , followed ,in 1850

to 1856 , by Isaiah ,Hebrew text and commentary

,

with Italian translation . Reggio’

s Pentateuch i stinctured with Cabalistic views

,in which respect

B enamozegh followed him in his commentary to the

Pentateuch . Luzza tto’

s Isaiah is of great value .

The introduction and commentary are important tothe Bible students , a nd his Italian translation is

sweet and lyric . The Italian Jews have no Bible intheir vernacular that has become known outs ide of

their country .

Three attempts were made to render the Penta

teuch into English , one by David Levi , one by thelate Drs .

'

Rapha ll , De Sola and Lindo (Genesis) ,and another by Dr . Kalisch . Dr . Benisch succeeded

in the attempt of giving a plain translation of thePentateuch ,

Haphtaroth , and the First Prophets .

In America,Isaac Lesser succeeded in translating

the whole Bible . He published first the Pentateuch,

Hebrew and English , five volumes , with the Haph

ta roth to each ; Philadelphia , 1845 ; and then thewhole Bible

,English , with brief notes , in large

quarto and duodecimo Philadelphia, 1854 . Theeditions are typographically correct . In his translation a nd notes he depended chiefly on Mendels

sohn,Zunz and Philippson , to whom he added

nothing .

Besides the above complete works,a large num

ber of essays a nd treatises on Biblical books andpassages were published in books

,pamphlets and

periodicals , by men like Luzza tto ,Reggio

,Rappa _

port,Geiger

,Krochmal , and others . This class of


literature which has been produced by Jews a ggregate now to a library of respectable s ize .

The first in Germany who attempted to reproduce the result of these researches was Dr . Ludwig

Philippson ,Since 1834 edi tor of the

“Prea

’

zgt

una’

Sc/znl inag a z in ,

” and of the “A llgemeine Zei

tung a’es He published

,Leipzig

,

1848 , a magnificent edition of the Bible in four

volumes,Hebrew text

,German translation

,ex

ens ive notes , i llustrations of historical interest and

critical introductions to every book . The work hashad a second edition . The translation is almost

literal . The commentary offers , in brief , the opin

ions of acknowledged authorities,and is of great

value to those who do not possess the originals . AJewish Bible society , established in Germany

,

adopted Ph illipson’

s translation .

Al though the work is quite conservative,much

‘more so than Bunsen ’ s,the hyper-orthodox of Ger

many were not satisfied with it,and Dr . Samson

Raphael H irsch , of Frankfurt , a . M. ,published

the Pentateuch,with a German translation and

l commentary . This is strictly rabbinical , often con

tra ry to obvious facts , as Raphael Kircheim hasproven in his cri ticism of H irsch ’ s Pentateuch

(“D ie nea e Exeg etensc/zule

Last,though not least

,Dr . Julius Fuerst entered

the field ( 1869 ) with a large and magnificent editionof the Bible

,in folio

,giving the Hebrew text

,a Ger

man translation,commentaries and introductions ,

i llustrations,index

,chronological tables

,etc . , repre

senting the results of Bible studies up to date , in


l ished a book on criticism of the Bible text,

“Ur sc/zr ift una

’ e ersetza ngen der B ioel,

” etc . ,which contains a vast amount of learning , althoughreplete with hasty theories . Despite its merits , i t

produced feeble echoes . Not even in Hebrewlexicography have modern Jews done much . Since

Judah Loeb B enseb published his Hebrew GermanDictionary (Vienna , nothing was done inthis field till Dr . Fuerst improved and enlarged the

Hebrew Concordance (Leipzig, and published his Hebrew German Dictionary (Leipzig ,

Between those two dates lexicographicalattempts on the part of the Hebrews

, Wi th theexception of the Etymolog isc/t -Symbolisck-Myt/zolo

g isc/tes Rea l Woerteronc/t,by F . Nork

,an ex-Jew

(Stuttgart , are of very little value . Rab

/biniea l d i ctiona r ies will be spoken of later on .

On the Whole , the Jews of the nineteenth centuryhave made very little progress in the critical study

of the Bible , compared with Ibn Ezra , Kimchi ,L/

eon de Banolas,and Aba rbanel

,and it would ap

pear as i f these had exhausted the subj ect . Recentcomparative linguistical studies

,initiated by Ge

senius,are limited in scope

,and the archeological

discoveries have not thrown much light on the sub

ject of Semitic philology . We open our. Amsterdam folio edition of the B iblia Ra bbin ical

, gi ving the

Hebrew text,ancient paraphrases

,and the above

commentaries,and we can lay aside all modern

translations,commentaries

,and introductions , and

obtain a clear understanding of the original . It appears to us that the nineteenth century has donelittle more than popularize this particular field .

REFORMED JUDAI SM . 35 I

In conclusion,i t must be remarked that the

Apocrypha of the Old Testament,with the excep

tion of the Book of Enoch,were translated into Ger

man by M . Gutmann , a nd were published , togetherwith his critical introduction and notes (Altona ,

Most of ' these books were also translated

into Hebrew by various writers,portions of which

,

with the English translation,were published by Dr .

H . Vidaver and J . L . Levinsky (New York ,

and Ben Sirach , Hebrew and German 18 by Dr .

Mayer,of Hartford

,Conn .


PAUL AND THE MYST ICS .

Few and far apart are the brilliant stars on thehorizon of history . Strike out a hundred namesa nd their influence upon the fate of man

,and you

have no history .

Those brilliant men,however

,did not make

history out of the resources of their mind . Ideas

which tens of thousands have held,are seized upon

by an executive genius at the right time and under

favorable circumstances a nd a new epoch in hi story

is opened . The numerous minor spirits which con

tributed to the sum total of the creative idea disa ppear

,the one star remains visible in history .

Paul was one of these brilliant stars on thehorizon of history . He was the author of GentileChristianity . He conceived the idea of carryinginto effect what all the prophets

,all pious Israelites

of all ages hoped and expected,the dena tiona liza

tion of the Hebrew ideal and its promulgation inthe form of universal religion

,among the Gentiles

,

so that the whole human family might be unitedbeneath the banner inscribed with the motto

,One

God and one humanity . All Jews of all ageshoped and expected that the kingdom of heavenwould encompass all nations and tongues ; but

Paul' undertook to realize this hope,this is his ti tle

to greatness .


Talmudic anecdotes about Acher,as the rabbis

called Paul these are of value to the historian .

Paul is not a proper name . It signifies “ thel ittle one

,a term which the Jews used to place be

fore their names,viz .

, jtmpn. But,i t appears

,he‘

knew no more about the matter than we do,and

changed the P of Paul into an S,to make of it the

Hebrew name Saul . In his epistles he calls himselfPaul invariably a nd not Saul . The author of the

We ” portion of the Acts likewise calls himselfPaul . Passing under an assumed name

,the rabbis

called him Acher,another

,

”i . e.

,one who passes

under another or assumed name .

’

They maintain

that his name was Elisha ben Abujah . But thisname must be fictitious

,because it has direct refer

ence to Paul ’ s theology . It signifies “ the savingdeity

,son of the father god a nd Paul was the

author of the son of God . doctrine . The factis

,he was known to the world by his assumed name

a lone .

Nothing is known of his youth,except a few

spurious anecdotes recorded in the Talmud . Whenquite young he sat at the feet of Gamaliel in Jerusa lem

,among the numerous students who list

ened to the wisdom of that master . He statesthat he was a very zealous Pharisee

,and that he

persecuted the Christians . But all of a sudden heembraced the cause of the persecuted

,and became

one of its most ardent apostles . We can easily im

a gine the nature of that persecution , although theStephen story

,l ike the Damascus story and the

nuns 1: your:

PAUL AND THE MYSTI CS . 55

vision on the way,as narrated in the Acts

,are Spu

rions,because Paul never alludes to them

,and the

Jews of Jerusalem ha d no jurisdiction in Damascus .But What caused his remarkable transition fromone extreme to the other ? First a Pharisee

,with

law and nothing but law ,and then the author of

the Epistles,which rej ect and abrogate the entire

law. Such a change is effected by violent agencies

only .

A number of stories narrated in the Talmud,like

those told in the Acts , point to the fact that theyouthful Paul

,possessing

,at any rate

,a vivid imag

ina tion,witnessed many an act of violence and of

inj ustice . Occurrences of this nature were ‘not rareunder the military despotism of Rome in Judea .

The soil was saturated with innocent blood . Theworld was dominated by the 'sword

,and Rome

groaned under the unnatural crimes of the Caesars .There was depravity among the governing classes

,

and unspeakable misery among the governed . The

rabbis give us to understand that this state of affairsmisled Paul into the belief that there was no j ustice

in heaven or on earth ,no reward nor punishment

,

and no hope for Israel . It is quite natural thatunder such circumstances a young and sensitive

man should become disheartened .

King Saul having received no reply from theProphets nor from the Urim and Thumim

,sought

the Witch of Endor in his despair . LikewiseFaust

,for want of a reply to his eager questions

from the philosophy and the theology of his age,

sold himself to Mephistopheles . This is humannature . Paul did the same thing . The misery of


the age was indescribable . Men took refuge inmysticism because they could get no satisfactory

solution of the problems that vexed their souls .Visionary gnostics arose among the Gentiles

,and

kabbalistic mystics among the Jews .

The mystic art among the Hebrews at that timewas of two kinds its purpose was either to attract anevil spirit or to transport the devotee alive into paradise or heaven . An evil spirit was attracted by fastingand he

,who remained alone in burial grounds for

days and nights,till his brain was maddened

,

might prophesy and perform miracles . The trans

lation to heaven or paradise was more diffi cult .The candidate would retire to an isolated spot andfast until he became delirious . Then

,in a state of

trance,he would sit on the ground

,draw up his

knees,and murmu

‘

r magic formulae ; he would im

agine that he saw heaven open,and hosts of angels

pass into the diamond palaces on high . He felthimself “ caught up into paradise

,

” where he heardunspeakable words

,which it is not possible for a

man to utter ” (Cor . xl . It requires no great

s tretch of the imagination to form an idea of the

eccentricities to which these mystic practices led .

Among those particularly noticed in the Talmudas having been in heaven or paradise is Acher , orPaul

,as he himself states in his Second Epistle to

the Corinthians (xxii ) . That passage gave rise tothe story that Jesus had appeared in person to Paul

,

j ust as the rabbinical mystics claimed to have frequent intercourse with the Prophet Elij ah , who hadbeen translated alive to heaven .

So Paul passed from the law school of the


frequently put down Joshua or Jesus in the placeof Meta thron .

Those who believe that Acher ’

s dualism of Deityfl l ’ lW‘

l mu was the Persian Ornznza’ and A /zr inza n ,

hence a good and an evil principle,and that Meta

thron never was an evil demon,are as decidedly

mistaken as those who believe that Paul ha d morethan one God . Paul ’ s son of God a nd Acher

’

s

Meta t/zron are the same central figure before thethrone of God ,

and the two authors are identical .In that world of secret thoughts

,Paul discovered

discordant speculations harmonized,and the rem

edy for all existing evils .“ The world must be

regenerated by a new religion,

” was his greatideal . The ancient religions and philosophieshave produced universal corruption . They must be

Swept away . Society must be reconstructed on anew basis , and this basis is the theology and theethics of Israel

,freed from national limitations .

There was no hope left of rescuing the Jewishnationality from omnipotent Rome

,which devoured

kingdoms and nations . The obj ect of Jesus wasto reconstruct the kingdom of heaven in I sra el

,

a nd he was crucified . All Israel had the same

obj ect in view,and its dissolution was imminent .

Paul ’s main idea was that Jesus would be resurrected and Israel would be saved as soon as the

basis and principles of the kingdom of heaven be

came the postulate of society at large .

The Pharisean rabbis hoped that this would come

to pass at some future day, $ 125 amps , when , theymaintained

,all sacrifices and all laws would be


abol ished,a nd the nations of the earth would be one

family,acknowledging one God and one moral law .

Paul seized upon the idea,and added to it the

Simple dogma of Peter , “ the Messiah has come .

”

That hoped- for condition has been consummated .

God ’ s promise to Abraham,

“And there shall beblessed by thee

,a nd by thy seed

,all the families of

the earth,is ful filled . Thus he came forth from

his mystical paradise as an apostle of Jesus and aredeemer of Israel . He argued exactly as thePharisean doctors did who maintained that the

Messiah would come when mankind should be allgui lty or all righteous . In the estimation of Paul

all mankind was corrupt and demoralized,at that

particular time,and therefore that was the time for

the Messiah to make his appearance .

He went to work at once . He began to preachhis new Christiani ty at Damascus about the year 51,but learned that the world was not prepared for h isideas . He had a narrow escape at Damascus

,

where the governor and soldiers pursued him .

Like the spies at Jericho,he was let down in a

basket over the city walls,and made his escape .

This is his version of the occurrence . The authorof the Acts

,consistent in his hostility toward the

Jew,makes them figure as the persecutors . But

Paul rarely speaks of his kinsmen and his brothers

according to the flesh in any other manner thanwith the highest regard .

The failure at Damascus did not discourage Paul . ’

It convinced him that he was too young (he was

a t that time hardly much older than twenty-one) ;


that he wa s'

not sufficiently prepared for the greatenterprise ; tha t i t was not an easy task to reor

ga nize society . He retired into Arabia and re

mained there nearly three years , to perfect aplan of operation . In 53 or 54 we find himagain at Antioch

,with his new a nd original gos

pel— the Gospel for the Gentiles,

—prepared for

his mission and ready to wage active war uponexisting systems of religion and philosophy

,and to

replace all of them by his gospel . He had been in

Jerusalem fifteen days,had conversed with Peter

and nobody else,but he tells us repeatedly that he

had taken advice of none,consulted none

,was ap

pointed by nobody and learned nothing of anybody .

The Gospel was hi s gospel and he was an apostle

by the appointment of God Almighty himself,who

had revealed His son to him . In Antioch he es

tablished the first congregation of Jews and Gentiles

,and called them Christians . Paul therefore

was the actual author of Christianity among theGentiles .What was Paul ’ s gospel ? Paul

,setting out on

his j ourneys with the intention of converting theheathen

,was obliged to paganize the Gospel .

The heathen knew nothing of the Jewish Messiah,

and he gave him a name current among them— he

called him the Son of God ,which was a common

name in mythology . The Son of God and Mary

was a term as popular among heathens as it was

foreign to the Jews,among whom Jesus was to re

main the Messiah,only that he became a lso the

Meta thron . This suggested to Jewish mystics thepossibility of the second advent , and gave a meta


No such questions were asked,and the ocular

demonstration of immortality was tangible and intelligible to the grossest intellect .The Jewish nationality a nd the Jewish law are atan end

,and the world is the heir of the covenant

made by God with Abraham and his seed . With

the new covenant the old one ceases . It has ful

filled its destiny . It was a state of preparation forthis period of universal salvation for all who havelove

,hope and faith . With Adam and the flesh

came the sin,law and death ; with Jesus the flesh

ceases hence,no more sin

,law or death .

These are the main features of Paul ’ s GospelThe Son of God , the theological kingdom of heaven ,the vi carious atonement , the bodily resurrection ofthe crucified one , the abrogation of the law a nd the

beginning of the new covenant,was the first man

to utter these doctrines with him Christianity begins

,and he gave it its name .

But Paul knew well that the doctrine alone wouldbe insufficient to rouse the heathen world from its

demoralized state , and he resorted to the most om

inous of all messages . He came to the heathenwith the dread proclamation : “ The end is nigh !The whole earth

,with all the creatures thereon the

whole human family,with its wickedness

,will be

destroyed in a moment . Oh,you men

,women and

children,you will be summoned

,with all your vices

and crimes,before the Eternal and All - j ust ; you

must appear before the omniscient God . The endis nigh

,the destruction of the human family is im

minent . It may come a nymoment .”

The saving opportunity of Paul ’ s Gospel had ar


rived . Here is your choice . On the one hand ,death a nd damnation on the other

,life and happi

ness everlasting . In anticipation of the approaching catastrophe God ha d sent his Son to warn you ,and he is appointed now to conduct the end of allflesh . Cling to him a nd be saved ,

or believe not

and be damned forever . So he came to the heathen .

This was his Gospel .All passages in the Gospels and the Acts whichhave reference to this christology , as to the end

of things ( and with respect to it the Synopticscontradict one another) , are the productions of

writers long after Paul,who attempted to reconcile

Jewish and Gentile Christianity . For with Paul

begins the new form of Christianity ,and the strug

gle with the representatives of the old form . Withinten years he traversed the land from Antioch toAthens

,in three diflerent j ourneys , and established

his bishopric,the first Christian congregations

among the Gentiles . He organized them fully,

with deacons and deaconesses,preachers and

prophets and he was their bishop and their oracle .

He allowed his converts to believe that they could dowonderful things

,heal the sick

,drive out demons

,

prophesy and speak in strange tongues,because it

served his purpose,although he himself did none of

these things . He gave them the holy ghost,i . e.

,he

regenerated their feelings and pacified their passions,

and awakened in them aspirations toward high erthings . He did not feel that sovereign contemptfor money which the master whom he glorified feltfor he

,like the other apostles

,took his pay

,and


argued with the Corinthians,like a good Pharisean

lawyer,that bishops and preachers must be paid .

Wonderful,indeed

,was Paul ’ s success among the

Gentiles within ten years . Like a pillar of fire,he

traversed the deserts of heathenism ; like a secondElij ah

,he battled against the priests and prophets

of Baal,and conj ured down the fire from heaven to

his assistance . Within ten years he laid the foun

dation of a new civilization . He did not live to seei t realized

,but he saw the new system take root

and promise golden fruit . Wonderful,we main

tain,was his success for he was not only opposed

by the entire heathen world , a nd by the orthodoxJews

,although he proclaimed their God and their

doctrines,their religion and their hopes

,but was

also most strenuously opposed by the apostles andthe nascent congregation in Jerusalem ,

whose masterhe glorified a nd whose cause he made the cause of

the world .The dissensions between Paul and the

apostles were of a very serious character , and there

was ample cause for them .

In the first place,he claimed to be the apostle ,

and they had their college of twelve , to which nonecould be added , especially not Paul , who had never

seen Jesus of Nazareth . He maintained that God

had appointed him,God h ad revealed his son and

his Gospel to him but the apostles did not believeit

,a nd did not acknowledge him as an apostle . At

the end of his j ourneys , Peter , James and John ,

three out of twelve,acknowledged him as an apostle

to the Gentiles,but not to the Jews . The rest

did not at all ; this , of course , was a hindrance to

Paul among his own converts .

I SAAC M. W I SE .

a nd everything,to be guided by the phantom

of hope,love and faith

,against which James

argues in his epi stle with all the energy of hissoul . Those inexperienced saints did not know

that the Pharisean doctors held similar theories,

and that Paul could not possibly hope to meet with

any success among the Gentiles i f he came to them

with the laws of the Jews . They were Roman citizens

,who contemned the laws of the barbarians .

Had Paul come with the word Judaism on his lips,

he would have surely failed . Had he come to en

force a foreign law,he would have been derided .

They did not know that Paul cared not for any

law i f only the essence could be saved ; he heldthat laws are local

,the spirit i s free ; he was de

termined to drop everything which might retard

his progress .In the fi fth place

,and this was the worst

,they

could not forgive him for preaching the theologicalkingdom of heaven . A kingdom of Israel

,a throne

of David,a Davidian prince

,a Zion and a Jerusalem

in heaven,a nd slavery

,misery a nd oppression on

earth,was so new and foreign to them

,so contrary

to what they had heard from their master,that they

could not accept it . What would become of Peter ’ sMessiah

,of the hopes a nd promises connected with

the second advent,i f all at once the whole scheme

is transported from earth to heaven . It was too

di sappointing,they could not endure it . Those

men did not understand that Paul desired to avoid

confl ict with the Roman authorities . He was tooprudent to run the risk of crucifixion . They could

PAUL AND THE MYST I CS . 367

not comprehend that his obj ect was not to removethe evil at once ; he intended to sow the seed ,

togive to the heathens correct notions of Go d ,

duty,

responsibility,purity

,holiness

,morality,

j ustice,

humanity and freedom,which in proper time would

elevate the views and aspirations of the nations .They could not comprehend that their Messiah andkingdom of heaven

,together with his terrible mes

sage of the end of all flesh a nd the last judgmentday

,were means

,and nothing but means

,to capti

vate and reform the heathen . His son of God wascrucified and resurrected from the dead to forewarn

all of'

the approaching end of all flesh to Show thatin a little while all the dead should resurrecta nd

the living should be changed to spiritual beings .He had been given power by the Almighty withrespect to the catastrophe of the world

,and would be

present at the last j udgment day. But after all that

was over,a nd the earth and man ha d been changed

to a new state of spiritual li fe,then the Son of God

would return the kingdom to the Father,and God

would be again all in all . So the son of God was ageneral superintendent

,the demiurge for the time

being,a doctrine of which apostles ha d no knowl

edge,and to which they could not assent . Paul

could not make them understand that these werebut means for the conversion of the Gentiles

,

and that he had quite another gospel for the en

lightened portion of the community . They could not

see that ideas ha d to assume tangible form if theywere to become effective among heathens accustomedto apotheosis

,man-worship and plastic gods . They

failed to comprehend that the sensuality and cor


ruption of the age required heroic means to rouseand to move the masses hence the dissensions andtroubles between Paul and the nascent church increased with the success of Paul among the Gentiles . His epistles

,one and all

,are polemics

,not

against heathenism,nor against Judaism, but

against his colleagues in Jerusalem,whom

,together

with their doctrines,he treats in a most reckless

manner . They were not able to measure wordswith Paul

,in truth there were no writers of any note

among them . Therefore,only Paul ’ s side of the

controversy is set forth fully in the New Testament the Side of the Jewish Christians remainedmostly matter of tradition .

Messengers were sent to follow Paul to undo theeffect of his gospel and preach that of the apostles ;to introduce the law and circumcision among the

Gentile Christians . Those messengers ( in manycases) succeeded ,

notwithstanding the thundering

epistles of Paul . His influence was weakened andhis progress retarded among the Gentiles

,till finally

,

after ten years of hard work,he concluded to go to

Jerusalem,

a nd,i f possible

,effect a compromise

with the apostolic congregation . It was a danger

ous time for him to go to Jerusalem for j ust thenthe fanatical high priest

,Ananias

,had convened a

court of his willing tools , had tried James , thebrother of Jesus

,and

,finding him guilty— of what

,

God only knows— had had him a nd some of hisassociates executed— a bloody deed which cost himhis office

,on account of the loud and emphatic pro

test of the Jews before Agrippa II . and the Romangovernor . Therefore Paul was cautioned by proph


were informed concerning thee are nothing ; butthat thou thyself also walkest orderly and keepestthe law .

” How mortifying to the man who haddefied a world this submission to the humiliatingdictates of his colleagues

,veritable children in com

pari son with him ! To this incident the statementof Paul or Asher

,recorded in the Talmud

,un

doubtedly refers ; he relates that on passing behindthe sa nctum sa nctorum he heard the B a t/z-leol or

Holy Ghost exclaim,

“ Return,all ye froward chil

dren ; return all , except Paul , who has known me

and has rebelled against me .

” Paul never forgot,

never forgave this humiliation . It estranged him

altogether from his colleagues in Jerusalem ,and he

embraced the first opportunity to throw off his Jewish

associations altogether .The opportunity soon oflered itself . While near

the Temple,some Jews from Asia Minor recognized

him . A disturbance ensued . He was arrested andlocked up in the castle by the Roman commander .In describing this event the author of the Actsspeaks of a great tumult

,speeches

,trials

,a Jewi sh

mob,a noble Roman stepping forward in time to

wind up dramatically— not one word of which i s

historical . Paul,accused as the ringleader of the

new sect who expected the second advent of the

Messiah,could not but appear dangerous to the

zealous a nd vigilant Roman authorities . Nothingelse was necessary to put his life in j eopardy . .

During the night he determined to appeal to Caesar,

because he was a Roman citizen . Therefore,he

was sent to the governor of Caesarea under the protection of soldiers . Not a sound was heard in his

PAUL AND THE MYSTI CS . 37 1

favor among the Jewish Christians . Not an angelappeared . Not a solitary miracle was wrought ;none dreamt a dream ; nobody had a vision ; theholy ghost was silent as the grave ; of all theChristians in Palestine

,not one showed his face

,

when Paul,laden with chains

,was transported

from Jerusa lem to Caesarea . This silence speaksvolumes . They did not care much about the innovator . Therefore , Paul

’ s epistles from his prison

in Caesarea are thunderbolts against the law ,cir

cumcis ion ,and his colleagues inJerusa lem . It is

the offended man,the wounded lion

,who retaliates

in his anger .In Caesarea another mock trial is described by theauthor of the Acts . There can be little doubt thatAnanias

,the Sadducean high-priest who had slain

James,also thirsted for the blood of Paul . But it is

certainly not true that Felix was governor of Judeawhen Ananias was high-priest . Felix and Festus hadbeen removed from their offi ces before Ananias wasmade high-priest

,as the authentic sources of history

Show . If tried at Caesarea at all (which is doubtful ,because Paul had appealed to Caesar) , he was triedbefore Albinus . The speeches recorded in theActs contain sentences of Paul

,i t is true

,but the

greater portion emanates from the author of the

Acts himself .I t

' matters little,however

,whether Paul was

tried before Albinus or Fel ix,or whether there was

a trial at all . He had appealed to Caesar,in order

to estrange himself from his colleagues in Jerusalem a nd to come before the converts as an expa tri

ated man,although Agrippa had said This man


might have been set at liberty,had he not appealed

unto Caesar .

” Fortunately , however , he was de

ta ined in Caesarea , when Nero put to death theChristians of Rome with exquisite cruelty

,and

added mockery and derision to their sufferings .Had he been brought to Rome then

,no angels could

have saved his li fe,and no power could have pro

tected him for two years . He came to Rome in the

year 65 , when the cruelty of Nero’ s proceedings

against the Christians filled every breast with compassion

,and humanity relented in favor of the

Christians . As a result,it was possible for Paul to

obtain a hearing in Rome,where he lived in a rented

house for two years .Neither Paul nor Peter was bishop of Rome

,nor

was either of them beheaded in Rome or anywhereelse . All the legends and myths concerning themare void of truth . We know that Paul

,who was

then about thirty -five years old , wrote from Romeepistles in defense of his Gospel and against his

colleagues in Jerusalem in the same spirit ‘as those

from Caesarea . We know , furthermore , that hewent from Rome to Illyricum , where he preached

his Gospel . We know that he returned to Asia,

and wrote the quintessence of his Gospel in hisEpistles to the Romans . We know that many

passages in his epistles were written after the de

struction of Jerusalem , when Paul was about forty

years old , and his principal activity commenced stilllater

,in opposition to Rabbi Akiba and his col

leagues . We know from the Talmud that he married

a nd left daughters . We know also numerous storiesof Acher or Paul and his disciple , Rabbi Meir .


demi -god or man-

god on earth . The difficultiesand dissensions arising from the attempts to uniteall the contradictory systems into one ended with

the Council of Nice in the beginning of the fourthcentury

,the formation of the orthodox creed

,the

ex -communication of the Jewish Christians,and

the establishment of the church as a state institution . .Thereupon the sword and the pyre estab

l ished doctrines .You will find upon investigation that Jesus became the savior of the Gentiles through the exer

tions of Paul that the teachings which Peter and

Paul formulated for temporary purposes have beenturned into main dogmas ; that the religion which

Jesus taught and believed is partly laid aside,and

the remainder of no consequence in Christology,

but that he himself has been adopted in place of hisreligion and finally that the entire New Testamenthas no knowledge of the Trinity and the orthodox

creed . You will discover further that,i f any of

our modern congregations are Christian , the apostolic congregation of Jerusalem was heretical . I f

the Pope is a Chri stian , Paul was not . If theorthodox creed is Chri stian

,then Jesus of Nazareth

was a Jew . If the religion and the theocracy whichJesus preached are to become the universal religion

,

all dogmas must fall , and God alone will be all in

all . Man must become his own priest,prince and

prophet . Justice must govern the nations,love

must construe the law,virtue and righteousness

must lead to satisfaction and happiness,and man ’ s

consciousness of God,immortality

,a nd moral re

sponsibility must be his catechism ,his guiding


star,his protecting angel in li fe and death . No

dogmas truth in thename of God“ I see it

,although it is now ; I behold it , a l

though it i s not nigh— a star will arise from Jacob

in whose brilliancy will shine forth all the greatand redeeming truth . Freedom and humanity

,

j ustice and love in the name of God are the tru e rel igion to strive for them is divine worship

,to love

them is holiness .This was the mission of Paul . The means he

employed to accomplish that mission were such as

he thought were necessary to appeal to and convert

his generation . He could not dream that the meanswould obscure the mission

,that the servant would

occupy the master ’ s seat . His was a fearless,

powerful and unyielding character he strove with

al l his might to Change the old order,to create a

now heaven a nd a new earth,a nd his success

,

though incomplete,was wonderful . However

widely we may differ from men like Jesus and

Paul,whose great aim was to elevate human nature ,

yet they are deserving of the student ’ s laboriousresearch , the philanthropist

’ s profound admiration .

Great works bear testimony to their authors grea tminds are the crown and the glory and pride ofhumanity . The God Jesus and the supernaturalPaul appear small in the focus of reason . The pa

triotic and enthusiastic Jesus,and the brave

,bold

,

wise Paul are grand types of humanity among thosehundred that shine on the horizon of history a nd

i llumine the records of the human family .

SELECTI ONS .

UN ION .

The_ pohuca l condition of our brethren and the

influence of modern science , philosophyand art , as

well as our new social relations , have completely

revolutionized the province of religious conceptionsa nd observances . Thef

l ewish of the United

States _

cannot think and feel as did the-“

inmate ofa secluded Ghetto In a past century. The philosophy

and science of the schools pervade all departments ofpractical li fe . No man

,and especially no scholar

,

of this day can honestly entertain the same re

ligious opinions as did Isaac Newton and his con

temporaries . Much less can we_

now coincide in

rel ig ious opinions with the talmudical . rabbi_

offormer days to whom science and philosophy ,

_ theword and its literature And as forthe changes in social l i fe— everybody knows them .

It is perfectly useless to_

deny that our faith to day,

cardinal principles excepted,which have been the

same under all circumstances,bear the same rela

tion to the religion of former centuries a s

'

our re

pub lican’

form of government does to the Germanicempire of other days . This 1s especially true in theUnited States . But we reform in the samespirit

,

2 . e. ,we aim to reconcile Judaism with the age

and its needs . The reformers do it openly , systema tica lly and Self consciously ; the orthodox do itslowly , unwillingly and unconsciously— but thev do

’

i t . How do we reform ? We do it single h- anded .

Every congregation has a leader who reforms as hethinks proper . We do not struggle to maintain


Judaism,we work to maintain a congregation

,each

by himself . We do not consider Israel ’s future,

the future of a certain congregation is every leader ’ sobj ect . Since when are we so narrow-minded ?

Every reform congregation has its own views,its

own prayer-book,i ts own catechism ; every congre

ga tion behaves as a distinct sect . They call this

the free development of the religious idea,we call

i t anarchy . They say it is beneficial,we say it

keeps the congregations apart and gives rise to undue

rivalry . H istory condemns it,common sense says

,

“united we stand,

” there is strength in union .

The reform congregation would like to see union

of action . Only the ambition of leaders,who like

Jeroboam,ask “Who shall walk before us ?” (Who

shall lead ?) prevents it . Is it impossible for us to

lay aside our egotism and cement a union of theAmerican congregations in order to reconcile Judaism with the demands of the age ? Can we layaside personalities and whims and think of thefuture of Israel and of the sacred truths we possess ?

Is there none to propose ways and means for a union

of the American Hebrew congregations ?

We need the following : A uniform liturgy andthe music appertaining thereto ; a catechism forschools and for confirmands ; a board of examiners

to protect the congregations from pseudo ministers

and teachers ; a college and a female academy . If

all the congregational leaders would work unitedly

for these obj ects and advocate them earnestly , wecould realize them in a very short time , and wecould say we have done our duty to GOD and

ISRAEL .


the United States can meet and join hands andhearts for a great fraternity of Israel

,to foster the

spiritual interests of Israel,to promote institutions

which shall elevate the character of our co-religionists in this country . The Union proposes by unitedefforts to accomplish what individuals or separatecongregations cannot do

,because they have neither

the means nor the influence,and it invites them all

to co-operate . Individual opinions or the autonomyof congregations are in no way to be disturbed .

The Union invites all to unite before God and man

in such work as demands the support of all . Ifwisdom

,moderation and earnest devotion to the

cause prevail in the councils,all American Hebrew

congregations will j oin hands and hearts under the

banner of freedom,and be one in all great and pro

gress ive enterprises . The work done so far is great ;the foundation has been laid for a Union of Israelin peace and by wisdom . The Spirit is democratic ,and truly American in all its features . This Unioni s a child conceived of the spirit of the age . It

imposes no duties on the congregation aside of twosimple . obligations

, viz . ,to be represented in the

annual council of this Union,and to pay into its

treasury one dollar annually for each contributing

member . It imposes no other obligation,there are

no “ ifs” and no “whens . ” The whole scheme i sliberal and j ust .The first obj ect of the Union is the College . I t

proposes , first of all,to establish a seat of learn

ing for Hebrew literature . Whenever this shallhave been accomplished other institutions are to be

established .

SELECTIONS . 83

I t will be seen from the official record of the Con

vention all congregations of Ohio except one wererepresented ; also congregations from Texas , Louisiana

,Arkansas

,Mississippi

,Georgia

,Tennessee ,

Kentucky,West Virginia

,Michigan

,Illinois

,and

Indiana,so that thirteen states were represented .

This is not a Union of congregations West and Southonly ; i t is a Union for all , inviting all and excluding

none . It will be an amazing fact to our co-religionists all over the country and they will learn what

they can accomplish by union and the proper use oftheir influence . There is nothing in our way toaccomplish anything which is great

,good and use

ful for our common cause,and the cause of hu

manity . This fact was deeply felt in the convention

,and fully appreciated .

The new chapter in the history of AmericanIsrael has opened . Go to work

,all faithful son s

of Israel,encourage

,assist and with the help of

God,the wilderness shall become a Carmel

,and the

work of righteousness shall abound in peace . I f

you are true to God and to Israel,go to work in all

your congregations and speak for this Union,and i t

will be a tree of life for you,and for generations

to come . Up and labor in the name of God andIsrael .


THE CONGREGAT ION .

The duties of the congregation to Israel are twofold : first

,the preservation of Israel ’ s sacred treas

ures and Israel ’s union as one indivisible congre

ga tion ; a nd secondly , i ts effi cient co-operation withall other congregations for the faithful performance

of Israel ’s Messianic duties . In our dispersion we

must be united ; without pope or bishop , council orsynod

,prince or chief , by the Spiri t of truth and

the word of God we must remain one intimate fraternity; in happiness or adversity , in light or dark

ness,in freedom or oppression

,one . The Jew must

be no stranger wherever a fellow Jew lives ; hemust not be friendless or homeless where anotherJew can provide for him ; he should have a home

and friends wherever a son of Israel lives . Let allmen learn from us the lesson of unity a nd fratern ity.

The public expression of Israel ’ s unity rests in

its worship . Outside of the synagogue we are ci tizens of the lands of our nativity or adoption

,and

do not differ from our fellow-men . In public life ,in business

,in culture

,in all worldly aspirations ,

we have abandoned separation,and very few i f any

wish to restore i t . In the synagogue,in the public

demonstration of our religious li fe,we must pre

serve our identity,we must bear Israel ’ s badge of

honor,conferred upon the congregation of Jeshurun


practices . We must be one in spirit forever . Whatever a congregation does

,it must never neglect the

first of all i ts duties— the Messianic duty of Israel .It must contribute its full share to the elevation ofhuman nature

,the redemption of mankind

,the sov

ereignty of truth ,and the supremacy of reason

,

freedom a nd virtue .

THE RABB I .

The rabbi is the teacher in Israel , no more andno less . With the destruction of the temple at Je

rusa lem and the abolition of sacrifices,the priest

hood ceased in Israel . Judaism knows nothing of

a mediating priest standing between God and man .

Intelli ence and conscience are the arbiter of faiths

era ture,and the rabbi is the spokesman for them .

Formerly,when theology and law were intimately

connected among Jews as among all peoples,then

the rabbi was also a j udge . Now,however

,the

rabbi is the teacher 1n srac . H is claim upon therespect of his brethren 1S based m l

for fHe cause wh1ch he serves . If he rs la cEIng In

any of these gifts of grace,he is no rabbi

,how

ever good,pious

,charitable or clever he may be .

His ordination is no warrant that he possesses allthe necessary qualities . It is a testimony on thepart of an a cknowleged authority that the candidate possesses adequate knowledge and blamelesscharacter . The real title

,however

,is earned In the

creditable discharge of dut 7Ithis duty 13 to tea cfi

W e family . In the nameof God and Israel , he must be a bearer of light andtruth , of reason

’s choice gifts and conscience ’ s holy


lessons . He must be a man of peace a nd '

of good

will ; he must conciliate wherever he can , but must

always be strong in the declaration of truth Without fear or favor . He must never degrade the pul

pit by resorting to unworthy and undign ified agencies . Sensational preachers a re comedia ns .

“Forthe lips of the priest shall guard knowledge

,and

the law is to be sought from his mouth ,for he is

a messenger of the Lord of Hosts .

”


must be a beast of burden ! I am growing old,and

yet I go . I cannot rebel against my God andmy conscience . I cannot separate myself frommy people ; cannot be faithless to my religion .

I have come to plead,to beg

,to raise my feeble

vol ce In a holy cause . I beg you,Brethren

,come

assist your aged father,help him to save our cause

and to raise our people . I beg , Brethren , lay aside

all other considerations ; do what it is your duty to doas men and Israelites . Forty-four congregationsin Israel have promised let us go in the light ofthe Lord .

”Drop all small considerations

,and

ask yourselves whether you should stand in thebackground in this great movement to unite the

forces in the American Israel for our mission . In

a hundred years hence,the annals of history will be

examined a nd posteri ty will tell what we have done ;a nd will it then be to your glory that you have

hesitated now ? What could you urge to j usti fy inaction ? We stand before God

,in this holy place ;

here is the Thorah,and a numerous congregation ;

I call you to witness before God that I have donemy duty . If I should die this very moment , I have

done my duty . Go,each and all

,and ask your

selves the solemn question , Have I done myduty ?” You must render an account to Him

whose name is ineff able,and whose glory fills the

universe . You are God ’ s messengers on earth ,

the anointed of the Most High . Our days are

numbered,our end is certain

,and God liveth forever ;

he judgeth every man according to his doings , andthe fruits of his li fe . Brethren

,let us be right .

HEBREW UNION COLLEGE .


they were in the days of Samuel,to assist Israel in

a crisis,a nd to guide it .

When you will come in contact with the worldyou will perhaps be astonished to learn how rapidlydogmatism a nd blind faith decline . None can ar

rest the wheels of progress . Freedom a nd learning

progress in exact ratio with the retrogression of reactionary theology . As in the household of nature

,

law rules ; so also in the realm of mind ,the funda

mental principles of Judaism persevere . As longas the intellect thinks logically a nd the heart beats

sympathetically, God ,

Providence,moral responsi

bility,immortality

,the happiness of man a nd the

solidari ty of mankind will be the guiding stars of

good people,and so long must Judaism last ; for

these are its themes conceived from the loftiest

standpoint of philosophical thought . It will be your

task,students

,to understand this thoroughly

,a nd

to expound i t adequately . Your mission will be aholy one

,and will involve a grave responsibility be

fore God and man .

There can be no victory without combat,no tri

umph without a struggle,a nd the value of the

one is measured by the intensity of the other .The students ’ combat is in his studies

,and his tri

umphs in his learning . You are making war upon

ignorance,and the more courageously and effi ciently

you do it,the more glorious will be your victory .

He who harvests in time will have plenty , but theindolent will beg his bread . Young men ,

the great

mystery of success lies in your acquisition of knowledge first

,and an enthusiastic persistence in your

work . Your knowledge is your capital . There is

SELECTI ONS . 393

0

nothing profane in learning , and what is usuallycalled profane learning is an important department

of your studies . All knowledge is sacred ; it is allrevelation of the same God addressed to the samehuman mind .

Judaism must be studied in the products of theHebrew mind

,and these are preserved in Israel ’ s

great literature . As little as one can possess an adequate knowledge of a country without surveying it

,

so little can one form a correct idea of Jewish his

tory,ethics

,metaphysics and theology without an

intimate acquaintance with the original sources,in

which the Hebrew mind has actualized itself . Asfor the scientists no obj ect of nature is withoutinterest

,so for us not a line of Jewish literature

is without significance . The spirit can be correctly understood by the entire sum of its manifest

a tions . Israel ’ s spirit is expressed in its vast litera

ture,whose beginning is co-equal with the begin

ning of historical man,whose periods are the index

to all phases of human culture,whose forms seem

to exhaust all possibilities of dialectics,a nd whose

contents comprise the whole of man ’ s moral,intel

lectual and spiritual nature . Every line,every

word is of grave importance , to you'

and to everystudent of human mind ; and the part the Hebrewmind has had in that totality of the world ’s civilization is of so wonderful a magnitude , in quantity and

quality,that without the knowledge thereof the

human mind can not be properly understood .

As long as your mind is engaged in Jewish l iterature you stand in spiritual rapport with the greatestmen of all ages

,with the Patriarchs of Israel

,with


Moses,the Prophets and the inspired bards of a n

cient times ; you are in spiritual kinship with theheroic sons of Ma tha tia

,the Asmonean

,the Scribes

of olden times,the teachers of Judaism

,the ex

po'

unders of the traditional treasurers,a host of ex

pounders,philosophers

,men of high aspirations and

exalted genius,men of first magnitude in human

greatness ; while you are engaged in the study of

Jewish literature you are in the very presence of

the Shekinah,the Great

,Glorious and Ineffable

,

I AM .

“Also one alone who sits engaged in the Law hasthe Shekinah with him.

”

I I

The morality of a rabbinical student,who seeks

rabbinica l honors from his alma mater , includes thepossession of genuine religious zeal and enthusiasm .

Without this he may become an actor in the pulpit,

a polished elocutionist , a sensationalist , a seeker ofplaudits

,but no rabbi . I consider it my duty to a d

monish all present to leave this college,i f they lack

religious zeal and enthusiasm,for they never will

be honest rabbis ; their whole life would be immoral .If you do possess this excellent quality , you must cul

tiva te i t assiduously , so that it may become perma

nent in your character ; you must be as conscientious

in your religious practices as in your studies and inthe fulfillment of all other moral duties . Whatever i s not steadily a nd diligently cultivated is

slowly but surely deadened . The rabbi furthermore must be a faithful Israelite

,a true expounder


has none ; no fixed laws of hermeneutics ; i t i sstill in its pilpulistic state . Kuenen , Welha usen

,

Renan,Ewald ,

or Smith,are no more reliable a u

thorities than the Jochanans , Gamaliels , Jehuda s orRabbina and Ashi . In order to be a very faithfuldisciple of the sciences

,we may maintain the stu

dent ought to acquaint himself with them andthe Talmud alike

,and like Rabbi Mair of old

,

enj oy the kernel a nd rej ect the shell . As freeborn Israelites we claim this right of free choice .

Where the old Talmud appears to us contrary to

the spirit of the Thorah,we rej ect its teaching .

The same thing exactly we do with the new Talmud

,and we do it on general principles , not being

slaves of any system . Wherever the new Talmudis contrary to the spirit a nd letter of the Thorah

,

we rej ect it,and we do so because we are servants

of Judaism,and not of any domineering school ;

and there is no Judaism without this Thorah

and revelation,except in the nuclea r minds of

the latitudinarians,whose faculty of reason is be

dimmed by scholastic prejudices , so that they can

only think of the when,and never of the what .

This Thorah is authentic,truthful , perfect , or your

Judaism is a farce also before the judgment seat ofreason . We are the expounders of Judaism , somust you be i f you would aspire honestly to rab

binica l honors .

SELECTI ONS . 397

WOMEN AS MEMBERS OF CON

GREGATIONS .

In the Bible,woman stands very high . At the

beginning of Israel ’ s natural li fe,Miriam appears

as a leader so that she could say “Did God per

haps speak through Moses only,did He not also

Speak through us ?” Rahab saved the spies at

Jericho,and Achsah was a heroic woman . During

the rude period of the Judges , the Bible mentions fivewomen of exceptional caliber . The mother of Sam

son,wiser than her husband ; Jephtha

’

s daughter ,the beloved child

,nobler than her father ; the

inspired patriotic heroine Deborah,the poetess

queen of her people ; the lovable , idyllic andchildlike Ruth

,faithful and quietly obedient ;

and Hannah,the pious mother of the Prophet

,

who stands in a much higher . place than thehigh-priest . The brief stories of Abigail

,the

Shunnamite , the wise woman of Tekoah , and theProphetess Huldah

,reveal that woman held a

high position during a period of advanced civiliza tion . ! ueen Esther , the daughters of the Levites who sang in the temple

,Susannah and

Judith , the wise and pious ! ueen Salome Alexandra

,and the many great women of the Talmud

,

like B eruriah and Ya ltha,all testify to the lofty

posi tion woman had in ancient Jewish society .

None of the rabbinical provisions as to law


a nd practice affected the high regard for women ;She always remained the queen ’

of the heart andhome . But up to 1000 A . C . ,

all Jewish laws a nd

customs adopted in Europe were Oriental in or

igin . The influence of Oriental soc iety a nd the

Koran gradually excluded woman from public

affairs of the community,so that up to our very

day she was assigned to a subordinate,

position in

the synagogue . To call a woman to the Thorah,or

admit her to public honors equally with men,would

have appeared preposterous,a nd would to-day be

considered a desecration by the orthodox synagogue .

In the early days of our activity in America,we

admitted females to the choir . Then we confirmed

boys and girls together,and we allowed girls to

read the Thorah on that occasion . Later on weintroduced family pews into the temple .

With the admission of mothers and daughters to

a recognized place in public worship,came order

and decorum . Abuses that had crept into thesynagogue disappeared as soon as woman againtook her proper place in the temple . But we cannot stop here ; the reform is not complete . Youmust en franchise woman in your congregations

,she

must be a member,must have a voice and a vote in

your assemblies . We need women in the congrega

tiona l meetings to bring heart and piety into them .

We must have women in the boards for the sake of

the principle . We must have women in the schoolboards to visit the Sabbath-schools

,and to make

their influence felt . We must have women in thechoir committee

,because they understand music

better than men . But,all other considerations


LETTER To A GENTLEMAN WHOWITH HIS FAMILY W ISHES ToEMBRACE JUDA ISM.

Dea r S ir a na’B rot/zer .

° —You seek the Lord andyou will surely find him ; for those who seek truthshall not find error

,and those who long after

light Shall not abide in darkness . The spirit of theLord is nigh to all who yearn after it

,and the

words of the Most H igh are Clear and accessible toall . They are laid down in the twenty-four books

of the Bible,commonly styled the Old Testament

,

which'

contains the path of righteousness and salvation . The five books of Moses , commonl y calledthe Pentateuch

,teach you what you shall do and

believe,and what you Shall not do and not believe

,

in order to be happy here and hereafter and acceptable in the eyes of God and man .

First of all,Judaism demands of you to believe in

one spiritual a nd invisible God ,the great first

cause,the source of all intellect and essence , who

cannot be compared to anything or person,not

limited by any space or time,not fully conceived

by any human intellect ; who is the Father , Maker ,Governor a nd Preverser of all things . Hence he

never was nor will be incarnated,nor shall he ever

appear in a human form or shape . This our Godis revealed in His works and words as a beingall -mighty

,all -wise

,omnipresent

,infinite , all- j ust ,

SELECTION S . 40 1

most merciful,most benign and most gracious . I f

you,dear brother

,can comprehend this sublime doc

trine,which most of the Gentiles cannot , and who ,

therefore,cling to an incarnate God or mediator

i f you,with all your heart

,all your soul a nd all

your might can believe and worship the true God ,trust in him in li fe and death

,wait for him in

j oy and adversity,and call on him with love and

confidence as a child calls on its parents , thenyou are in heart and spirit of the seed of Israel

,and

you are redeemed from all the errors that becloudthe soul of the unredeemed

,then we welcome you

into the covenant of God and Israel .AS a son or daughter of the divine covenant , it isfurthermore expected of you that you truly believein the j ustice a nd grace of our God . You

o

can

not and shall not for one moment believe thatan original sin rests upon man

,for it would be

unjust for God to punish all unborn generationsfor the sin of the first parents of the human race .

Nor Shall you believe that there is a devil,and much

less that the devil or unclean spirits exercise any

influence on man ; for God is absolutely good , Hecannot have created anything absolutely evil . Norshall you believe the doctrine of universal depravity

,

i . e .,that evil propensities predominate in most men ;

for this would be an unj ust charge against ourCreator . On the contrary

,you Shall believe that

man was made in the image of God,that he was

gi fted with all the qualities to be good,j ust

,

righteous,pious and happy . God in His infinite

goodness bestowed upon us intellect,moral free

2 6


dom , respect for j ustice , truth and magnanimity ,aversion to inj ustice and meanness

,and the desire

to worship the Most High . Sin is the conse

quence of ignorance or error , therefore the Lordrevealed to us the Law and truth . As a sonor daughter of the divine covenant you are re

quired to regard every human being as the imageof God ,

and to love your neighbor as yourself.You are required to instruct the ignorant

, en

lighten the erring,pity him who goes astray

,

protect the weak,feed the hungry ,

clothe the

naked and give shelter to the homeless,because

each of these is the image of God . If you canlook upon man from this exal

’

ted point of Viewand do to every one as love dictates

,i f thus you

behold man as God ’ s noblest work,His image

,His

reflexon earth,

“His son,

” then you will do a s

God ’ s redeemed ones are required to do,then you

fulfill the stipulations of the divine covenant .We must tell you

,beloved brother

,virtue

,

righteousness,goodness

,piety

,and the kindred

terms,signify obedience to the laws of God as

they are revealed in his sacred words and in oursoul . Disobedience is sin

,impiety is vice and crime .

Therefore salvation lies in obedience . You havefree will to obey ; therefore salvation lies in yourhands exclusively . None can pray and makeatonement for you ; for none ca n obey the lawsof God for you . God j udges you according toyour obedience or disobedience to His laws

,a c

cording to your doings you shall be j udged . TheOmniscient

,All - j ust God rewards the righteous

a nd punishes the wicked here and hereafter . You


the mortifying knowledge of guilt,ingratitude a nd

rebellion,and this sel f-inflicted punishment corrects

the sinner a nd brings him back to the path ofrighteousneSS

'

a nd obedience ; then God need notpunish him

,his sins are forgiven

,atonement is

made . Sin stains our minds and not God,hence

we must wipe the stain from ourselves and notfrom God . God ordained a Day of Atonement thatwe remember both our Sins and H is grace andmercy .

Brother,can you honestly repent your Sins and

amend your conduct before God? I f so,be sure of

the remission of Sin by Him who said that He for

gives “ iniquity,transgress ion and sins . Sin not

that you may be always nigh to your God ; butwhen sin has drawn you from him

,return to Him

a nd He will return to you . No blood of sacrifices,

no blood of a dying man,is required by God .

“The

sacrifices of the Lord are a broken spiri t (broken

with penitence ) . God will not despise the brokena nd contrite heart .We furthermore enjoin upon you the duty to be

lieve with the prophet that the time will come when“God will be King over all

'

and H is name willbe one .

” Understand me aright,my brother . God

is absolute j ustice,and this must finally govern all

mankind . While love a nd benignity -must regulate

our conduct toward our fellow-man,the laws , which

emanate from the principle of absolute j ustice

(God’ s law) , must govern the nations in their

mutual intercourse,the states a nd commonwealths

in their very organism . When thrones a nd v io

lence and self-willed depotism will be no more ,

SELECTI ONS . 40 5

when every knee will be bent before absolute j ustice,

then God will be King over all the earth . Removethe chains which priestcraft and statecraft

,selfish

ness and obstinacy,forged about the neck of human

ity,let all men be politically free and be governed

by justice only,and mankind will awake from a long

and dreary dream a nd cast away their idols of Silvera nd their idols of gold

,and be ashamed of the errors

a nd fictions,

and seek God in truth and light .Whoever seeks Him shall find Him . Whenever allthe nations Shall seek Him

,all of them shall find

Him in truth and light ; on that day God shall be

one,

” truth shall gloriously triumph over error ;light over night and right over might . There is

but one truth and this was revealed to Israel ;therefore Israel is the mountain of the Lordwhich all nations must finally ascend

,there to

learn of God ’ s ways and to walk . in His paths .

As God revealed His nature and will to Israel,

even so He will ultimately be known to humanity .

As He revealed his name to Israel,so He Shall

be called the nameless great first cause of all,

Jehovah,blessed forever be H is glorious name .

Whenever the nations will know God in truth andlight

,they will also know that they learned Him

from Israel,and they Shall call him Jehovah

,as we

claim him,not Allah

,not Jupiter

,not Jesus

,not

Messiah,but Jehovah

,the God of all

,the cause and

governor of all ; then“His name will be one .

” Theknowledge and fear of God will 1nv1te all men toknow and observe H is laws ; this is redemption ,there is the fountain -head of salvation . This i sour Messiah for whom we wait .


Can you,my brother

,as we do

,adhere firmly to

these sublime doctrines,despite persecutions

,scorn

a nd misery? Can you,like us

,sacrifice j oy

,happi

ness,nay

,even home and li fe on the altar of sublime

a nd divine truth? Can you with all your heart workfor the redemption of mankind when ten thousandtimes you are repulsed

,rej ected with scorn

,and lose

not your confidence in God and the sacred cause?I f you then come to us

,you are welcome

,you are

a son or daughter of the divine covenant . Believethus

,hope thus

,live a nd act as the divine laws

command ; before all things observe strictly the ten

commandments and the laws logically connected

therewith,and you are one of us

,one of the cove

nant before God here and hereafter . If , beforeman

,also

,you wish it to be

,come to me a nd be

blessed in the name of GOD and ISRAEL .

408 INDEX’

.

Augustu s , Jews under,187 .

Au thenticity of Penta teuch,

77Authority o f Jewish sta te

,

2 57 .

Avicebron,Jewish ph ilosopher , 194, 268 .

Azu l a i,Ma a rech eth Hagger

do lim,266

,note .

B a chya ibn Pekuda,Jewish

mora l ist,151 , 267 .

Ba dj a,ibn

,2 73 .

Ba nola s,Leon de

,2 80 .

Ba ruch und Sein Idea l , novel ,100 .

B eda rsh i,2 7 1

Beer,B .

,2 73 , note .

B enamozegh ,I ta l ia n Jewish

writer,2 24.

Bendavid,La za ru s

, 32 2 .

Benisch,Dr . , 347 .

B en Zion,a ca techism

, 32 7 .

Ber lin,Jewish Reform Con

grega tion of,16.

Reform Verein,67 .

Beth D in,a court of lea rned

men,6,1 1 .

first movem ent for confer

ence of r a bbis in UnitedSta tes , 38 .

Beth H il lel a nd Beth Sh amma i

,149 .

Beth Hammidra sh,Jewish

school , 4 .

Bettma n,Bernh a rd

,85 , 1 1 2 .

Bible,tra ns la tions of

,the

beginnings of reforma

tions,186 .

divis ions of,20 1

,20 2 .

Clevela nd conference on,

70 .

Bibl ica l criticisms, 77 , 96 ,

.

395Bibl i ca l eth i cs

,280 .

B la ine, J . G . ,

108 .

B liden a nd Epstein ,tra ns

l a tors of W ise ’s

“Firstof the Ma cca bbees ,

100

B loch ,Ma rcu s El ia s

,ichthy

o logist ,323 .

Bloch,Therese

, wife of I sa a cM . W ise ,

1 1 .

B’

ue I s ra el Congrega tion of

Cincinna ti,25 , 103 .

B’ne Yeshurun Congrega tionof Cincinn a ti

,25 , 44 ,

62,

68,8 1

, 90 , 98 .

insta l la tion,10 1 .

a nd theReform Movement,

105 .

dedica ti on of temple,104.

a prototype ,103 .

Brya nt , W . C . ,109 .

Buch a na n,Pres ident

,108.

Bunsen,B ibelwerk

, 348 .

Bush,I s a dor

,84.

Ca ba la h,2 79 , 3 15 .

Ca l l ing up to the Thora ,68 .

Ca rca,284.

Ca rlyle ,Thoma s

,on Moses

,

166 .

Ca rmoly,E l i j a h , 338 .

Ca s sel,David

,quoted

,15 1 .

Ca tech isms, 97 , 380 .

Centra l Conference of Ameri

ca n Ra bbis, 3 1 , 57 , 70 , 76,

79 °

Cha bib ,Ibn

,Ja cob

,2 85 , 286 .

Cha na niah,Ra bbi

,0 11 the

Deca logue ,146 .

Cha pla in in New York legisla ture

,108 .

Ch a rity,Jewish

,founded on

the tithe system ,243 .

Ch a rleston, S . C . ,

ReformCongrega tion of

,2 1

,60

,

61 .

Cha se, Sa lmon P . ,

a necdoteof

, 56 .

Cha ss idim,Jewish s ect

,142 .

Ch a zoth Ka sh a,285 .

Ch a zza ri , 2 70 .

Chelek,Mishna

,2 77 .

Ch ina,Jewish proph ets in

,

182 .

Ch isda ,Ra bbi

,quoted

,138 .

INDEX .

Chizzuk Emunah,293 .

Chora l service,62 .

Christia n ity,a pologetics of

,

2 2 1 .

a nd Jesus, 374.

contra sted with Juda ism ,

93 , 400

origi n of, 9 1 , 188 .

Ch ristology, 363 .

Ch ronik ,61 .

Cincinna ti , congrega tions of

in 1846, 2 1 .

convention,82

, 381 .

W ise a nd Li l ientha l in,25 .

in first un ion of congrega

tions, 53 .

I sa a c M . W ise in, 54if .

Circumcis ion of proselytes,

74.

C lemens,Roma n pros elyte

to Juda ism ,187 .

Clevel a nd Con ference,65 , 67 ,

70 , 7 1 , 73 , 74Col lege ,

Hebrew Union,84 ,

380—389 .

a ddres s a t open ing , 39 1 .

Comma ndments presupposemora l code

,231 .

Commenta tors, 345 .

Conferences a nd persona lconnections

, 78 .

Confirma tion,68

,106 .

Congrega tion , 384 .

Congrega tiona l a utonomy,

78 .

Conscience is undel ibera terea son

,2 28 .

is inna te,233 .

definition of,240 .

Cons erva tism pla us ible,61 .

Controversy of Albo,2 83 .

Convention,first

,82 .

Convert,the Jewish

,novel

,

990

Cosm i c God, 90 .

Councils,Church

,on Jews

,

190 .

Creizena ch,2 72 .

Cresca s, Ch a sda i , 28 1 .

40 9

Cr itica l study among Jews ,350 .

Criticism , 94.

Critics of rel igion , 96 .

Crucifixion of Jesu s, 92 .

Crucifixion a nd Pa u l, 367 .

Crusa des a nd Jews,189 .

Da n iel, 95 .

Da ud,Abra h am ibn

,2 73 .

Debora h ,quoted

,17 , 76

—79 ,

80 .

Deca logue , 75 .

Deca logue is the Law ,1 25ff .

Defense of Juda ism, 93 .

Delega tes , boa rd of,87 .

Del itzsch,Fra nz

,in Leipzig ,

15 ; see a lso 295 .

Democra tic Juda ism , 73 .

Detroit , Mich . , 76 .

Deuteronomy, da te of a uthorsh ip

, 94 .

De Wette ,295 .

D ia z Letters, 3 2 .

Dibre Ma lche I s ra el,2 73 .

Dieta ry Laws , 174.

Disa bil ities of Jews , 295 .

Dogma s,2 78 .

Dohm , 3 1 2 .

Domitia n ’s l aws aga inst Jew

ish pros elytes , 187 .

Doubt necessa ry to progres s ,182 .

Dreyfoos , Ra bbi , tra ns la torof W ise ’

s“La st Strug

gle of the Na tion,

”160 .

Dukes on Moses ben Ezra,

2 71 , note .

Durm a u l,Bohemian vil

l a ge ,I .

Eccles ia stes , 263 , note .

Educa tion,definition o f

,199 .

“Eger , The ca ta strophe a t,

”

novel,I oo .

Egypt , Prophets in ,182 .

Einhorn,David

, 59 , 61 , 66,

7 1 , 7 2 ,8 1 .

on deca logue , 15 1 .

4 10 I NDEX .

El iezer b . Na th a n,Ra bbi

,on

deca logue ,150 .

El iezer,Ra bbi

,on observ

a nce of l aw ,143 .

Elish a ben Abuya h , 354.

Ema ncipa tion Struggle , 108 .

Ema nuel Congrega tion of

New York ,2 1

,81

,85 .

Emuna h Ram a h,2 73 .

Emunoth ve Deoth, Sa a dia

’s,

pu se of,2 2 2 .

En Ja co 287 .

Epicu ru s in Gra eco-Jewishl itera ture

,187 .

Epstein a nd Bl iden,tra ns la

tors of W ise’s“First of

the Ma cca bbees,

”100 .

Equ a l ity a neces sa ry condition of mora lity,

236.

in laws of Moses,244 .

Essence of Juda ism, 97 , 10 7 .

Es sence of rel igion , 95 .

Esther,book of

, 94 .

Eth ics,founda tion o f

,231 .

wea k fea tu res of,23 1 .

objective,236.

of Moses,173 .

Ewa ld a nd Dukes ’ B eitra ege ,266 .

edition of S a a dia’s Ara bic

vers ion of Psa lms a nd

Job ,264 .

Exam iners,boa rd of

, 380 .

Exodus,book of

, 94.

Fam il ia ntrech t,

in iqu itou sregu la tion aga inst Jews ,1 2 .

Fam ily pews introduced in

synagogu e , 4o ,62 .

pl a ce of,in development of

mora l ity,2 55 .

th e ba s is of the sta te,255 .

Fels enheld,H .

,member of

Beth D in, 30 .

Fema le a ca demy, 380 .

Fil lmore Pres ident , 2 8 .

Fischel,Moses

,pa tron o f

,I .

M . W . , 4—5 .

Form,

”262 .

Form stecher, S . ,

a s a pologist , 2 24.

Fra nce ,Jews in , 305 .

Fra nkel,Z . B eweis fueh rung,

41 .

Fra nkfurt am Ma in,Reform

Verein,67 .

r a bbinica l conference of,

14.

Freedom ,tea ch ing of Moses

,

172 .

of ma n,2 17 .

mora l,presupposed by sys

tem of la w ,2 28 .

persona l,256.

Free Religi ous Ass ocia tion ,

9 1 , 109 .

Freund, Samuel

,Ra bbi

, grea tTa lmudist

,6, 9 , 10 .

Friedla nder , David , 328 .

Froth ingh am , O . B . ,109 .

Fuerst,Jul ius

,in Leipzig ,

15 ;see a lso 340 , 348 .

Fuerstentha l , 2 86 .

Funera l s in Temple,68 .

Gabirol , Solomon ibn,267 .

Gama l iel I I,pa tria rch

,1 29 .

Ga ns,David

,2 23 .

Geiger , Abra h am ,Jewish re

former,

15 , 41 , 63 , 96,?70 “GIG, 339 , 343

Gen1us,

ch a ra cteristics o f,

209 .

Genti le Christia nity, 352 .

Germa n Juda ism, 73 .

Germa n la nguage in wor

sh ip,68 .

Germa n Ra bbis, 78 .

Germa n reformers, 59 .

Germa nu s,Ja cob

,286

,note .

Germa ny,Jews in

, 304.

Geronimo de S a nta F6,282 .

Geseniu s,295 .

Gnostics, 356 .

God,just

, 40 1 .

God of science, 75 .

4 1 2 INDEX .

Jesu s a nd Pa ul , 357 .

“Jesus Himself,

”92 .

Jewish Theologica l Fa cu lty,

82 .

Jewish Theologica l Sem inary,

85 .

Jews a s phys icia ns , 1 .

in America in 1846 , 2off .

did not crucify Jesus , 180 ,

190 .

home life of,18 1 .

m isunderstood ,i bid .

a protest aga inst creeds,

182 .

ora cles o f kings a nd na

tions,183 .

influence on Zoro a ster , 183 .

in Alexa ndr ia ,184.

a nd Greeks,185 .

in Rome,187 .

in the fa r ea st,19 1 .

in Moh ammeda n coun

tries,193 .

ha d no middle ages , ibid .

a nd enfra nch isement, 379 .

Job ,book o f

,cosmopolita n

ism of,184 .

contents of,2 2 2 .

da te of a uthorsh ip, 94 ,

263 .

Joha na n,Ra bbi

,on a uthority

of the Law ,1 26 .

Johlson , 98 .

Jona h,book of

, cosmopol ita nism of

,184 .

Jose ben Joezer,Ra bbi

,hea d

of Sa nhedr in ,1 29 .

Jose ben Ch amina,Rabbi

,

quoted,138 .

Josephus Flavius,Jewish h is

toria n,186

,264 .

Contra Apion,

”2 2 2 .

Joshua of Lorca,282 .

Joshua ben Levi,Ra bbi

,on

recita l of benedictions ,Joshua ben Ch a na nia ,

Ra bbi,

146.

Jost,I . M. , 331 .

Juda h ibn Tibbon ,265 .

Juda h di Modena a s a pologis t , 2 23 .

Juda h Ha levi on Deca logue ,150 ; a s a pologist , 2 23 .

Juda h Ha nna s s i,pa tria rch

,

206 .

Juda ism,continu ity of

, 59 .

America n , 59 .

Juda ism a nd Christia nity, 9 2 .

Juda ism a nd dogma tism, 392 .

Juda ism,

a t Rome,

187 ;founded on th ree-foldcovena nt conta ined in

Tora h,199 ; definition of

theology of,199 ; sou rce

of h istor ica l , 20 1 ; sourcesof theology of , 208 ; wh a tis

,2 12 ; eth ics of

,2 16ff ;

a pologetics Of, 2 2 1— 2 2 7 .

Juda ism ,democra tic , 73 .

“Juda ism ,its doctrines

,

10 7 .

Justice,a n idea l of Juda ism ,

2 19 .

Juvena l , on Juda ism ,187 .

Ka fka,Abra ham

,district

ra bbi in Bohemia,14 .

Ka l isch,I sidore , 98

“Kel ima th Haggoyim ,282 .

Keren Shemuel,269 .

Kether Ma lchu th,267 .

Kimch i,David

,defended

Ma imonides,149 .

a s th inker , 195 .

a s a pologist, 2 24 .

a s a uthor,2 79 .

Kingdom of Heaven on

ea rth ,2 17 .

Kingdom of Heaven a ndPa ul

, 361 , 366 .

K leeberg ,Minna

, 98 .

Koheleth,book of

,contents

of,2 2 2 .

Kohlmeyer , member of BethD in

, 30 .

Kora n,Jewish elements in ,

19 2 .

INDEX .

Koref,Moses

,tea cher in nor

ma l school of Prague , 7 .

Kornfeld ,Ra bbi Aa ron

,of

Jenika u ,6.

Krochma l,

Na chma n,

Ma la ch i,142 .

a s a pologist , 2 24.

Kuenen, 96.

La bor,a condition of mora l

ity,239 , 246.

La nda u,M. .

-L .,editor of the

Aruch, 9 .

La ndshuth ,Judenvon ,

novel,

100 .

La st Struggle of the Na tion,

a novel,100 .

Law a nd Doctr ine,2 12 .

Law , publ ic , is the mora l

law consented to by community,

23 1 .

Law ,mora l

,no fina l a uthor

ity for,23 1 .

Law ,the

,1 25 , 15 2 .

eternity of, a dogma of ra b

binica l Juda ism,13 1 .

Leeser,I sa a c , editor of Occi

dent , 2 2 .

first encounter with W ise ,30 .

tra ns la tor of Bible, 35 , 347 .

a dvoca tes union of congre

ga tions , 45 , 52 .

orthodox lea der, 59 , 61 , 67 ,

7 2 , 97 .

Less i ng , 307 .

Levi ben Gerson ,Jewish

ph ilosopher,

on Decalogue , 149 ; a s th inker ,195 ; a s a pologist , 2 23 ; a sa uthor

,280 .

Levi,Rabbi

,on da ily prayers ,

146.

Levita,El ia s

,294.

Leviticus, 94.

Liberty,l aw of

,243 .

Lil ienth a l,Ma x

,first meet

ing with I . M. W . ,24 ;

ra bbi of three congrega

4 13

tions in New York,24 ;

a ba ndons ministry tem

pora r i ly, 35 ; del iversora tion a t dedica tion of

temple in Alba ny, 40 ;supports ca l l for unionof congrega tions , 52 ;elected ra bbi of B

’ue

I sra el congrega tion , Cin

cinna ti, 56 , 108 ; a nd Ein

horn,66 ; a izd the Ta l

mud,66 ; a nd ra dica ls

,

68, 7 1 .

Lindo,A .

'

A .,of Cincinna ti ,

on Union of Congr egations

, 5 2 .

Litu rgy,America n-Jewish ,

98 .

uniform, 380 .

Loa ns,Ja cob Jeh iel

,294.

Loew,Leopold

, 340 .

Loewi , Dr . Joseph,of Al

ba ny, 35 .

Lou isville,its ca ll

,104 .

Luther,Ma rtin

,a nd Protest

a nt Reform a tion,194.

Luzza tto on eth ics,2 24 ; a s

exegete , 335 ; his B ethu

la th Ba th Jehuda ,269 .

Lyon ,Robert, editor of As

momea n, 40 .

Ma ccabbees , First of the,

novel , I oo .

Ma cca bees , revolt of, 184.

Ma chu sa,Aca demy of

,191 .

Ma imon, Solomon

, 323 .

Ma imonides Col lege ,85 .

Ma imonides , Moses,on a ddi

tions to Law of Moses,

1 29 ; on eternity of the

l aw,

131 ; a ccu sed of

heresy,149 ; studied by

Ch ri stia n ph ilosophers,

194 ; quoted ,198 ; on su

periority of Moses overa l l prophets

,206 ; a s a pol

ogist , 2 23 ; a s ph iloso

pher,266

,2 74

—2 78 .

4 14 INDEX .

Ma la ch i,an a pologetica l

book,2 2 2 .

Ma nnheimer,I sa a c Noah

,

prea cher in Vienna ,18 .

Ma rtyrdom of Jesus , 92 .

Ma tter a nd force ,: 233 .

Mayer , Ma urice , 98 .

Mayer , Na th a n, 98 .

May laws , 108 .

Mea sph im , 328 .

Medigo del , the ,2 23 , 292 .

Men a sseh ben I sra el a s a pologist , 2 23 ; in h istory, 292 .

Mendelssohn ,Moses

,a nd re

form,68 ; a s a pologist ,

2 23ff ; a nd Ma imonides,

2 78 ; h istory of,2 97

—32 1 .

Menora h Hama -or,286.

Meor Enayim ,293 .

Merzba cher, Leo ,

63 .

Mess ia nic duty of I s ra el, 386.

Meta th ron, 357 .

M ielziner ’s,Dr . ,

Apprecia

tion,1 13

—1 2 1 .

Milch amoth Ha shem,280 .

Miloth ha h iggayon ,2 76.

M inh ag America,64, 67 , 68 ,

77 , 98 . 106 .

Mi shne Tora h ,2 76.

Mixed choir , 65 .

Modena, Leo de ,

292 .

Montesqu ieu a nd the Jews ,306 .

Mora is, Sa ba to ,

60,61 .

Mora l integr a tion , 384.

Mora l ity,definition of

,2 29 ,

230 .

divis ions of,252 .

no fixed s ta nda rd ,241 .

a nd intel lectu a l ity,2 53 .

More Nebuch im ,2 75 .

Mosa ic Code ,2 58 .

Mos es,the ma n a nd sta tes

m a n,

153— 178 a nd pa s

Sim .

Motives in a ction ,237 .

Muen ster , 294.

Munk, S . ,

264 .

Mystics , 353 .

Na chma nides,2 79 .

defendedMa imonides,149 .

Na h a rdea,Aca demy of

,19 1 .

Na tha n,I sa a c

,283 .

Na th a n,Mordeca i , 283 .

Na tion,sovereign ,

257 .

Newport , 60 .

New Testament, 91 .

New York ,60

,8 1

,85 , 103 .

N iss im ben Reuben,281 .

Novels, 99 .

Numbers,book of

, 94.

Onia s Temple ,184.

Or Adonoi , 28 1 .

Orga n on Sa bba th ,68 .

Origina l S in ,2 17 .

Orpha n Asylum ,10 7 .

Orthodox pa rty,63 .

Orthodoxy a nd dogma s,2 78 .

Pa dua,medica l school of

,1 .

Pa lestine,laws obl iga tory in ,

130 ,138 , 143 .

Pa ul a nd Acher, 358 .

a nd the l aw , 365 .

h is tria ls, 370

—37 1 .

a nd the Jewish Christia ns ,369 .

a nd the Jews, 359

—373 .

Pa ul , a ctua l a uthor of Gen

tile Chr istia nity,188 ; a nd

the Apostles, 364 ; a nd

the Gentiles, 365 .

Pedro de Luna,282 .

Penta teuch,exclus ive ba s is

of Juda ism,1 26 ; object

of,157 .

Pers ia,Jewish prophets in ,

182 .

Persecution a nd convers ion,

406.

Persona l God deba te, 74 .

Perush Hamm ishna h,2 74.

Ph ila delph ia conference, 70

73 °

Ph il ippson ,Ludwig ,

Germ a n

Jewish lea der,

15 ; a s

a pologi st , 2 24 ; a s writer ,348 .

I NDEX .

Roma nce,Ph ilosophy , a nd

Ca ba la h ,a Novel

,100 .

Roma ns, gods of

,17 1 .

Ronsperg ,Ra bbi B eza lel

,a

judge in Prague , 4 .

a town where I . M. W .

fi lled h is first pos ition a s

tea cher , 9 .

Rosenfeld,Ja cob

,prea cher

in Cincinna ti, 5 2 .

Rosh Ama na h,287 .

Roshd,ibn

,28 1 .

Rosh Ha sh a na,second day

of,68 .

Ross i , Aza riah dei , 293 .

ROthenheim,Wol f

, 98 .

Rothkopf,a novel

,I OO .

Rouma nia,ba rba rity of

,to

Jews,183 .

Rus s ia,ba rba rity of

,to Jews

,

183 .

Russia n Jews,108 .

Ruth, da te of a u thorsh i

, 94 ;cosmo olita nism 0 a n

thor o 184 .

Sa a dia on Deca logue ,150 ;

first Jewish ph ilosopher,

196 ; a s a po logi st , 2 2 2 ; a sa uthor

,264.

S a bba th,109 .

Sa bba th -school of Cong . E’ne

Yeshurun,106 .

S a bia ns, gods of

,17 1 .

Sa ch s , Mich a el,Jewish

prea cher in Berl in,15 ,

2 70 ,note .

Sa lerno ,medica l school of

,1 .

Sa lva dor , J ., 336 .

Samuel,books of

, 94 .

Sa nhedrin ,Jewish a uthor ita

tive body,67 , I 28ff .

S ava nna h,60 .

Schools , W ise a member ofBoa rd of

,Cincinna ti

,10 7 .

Schuba rt,C . F . D . ,

a uthor

of poems on“The Wa ni

der i ng Jew ,

”180 .

Seelenfeier , 98 .

maga zine ,61

,66

,

Sel f-preserva tion,the first

law of na ture,234ff , 238 .

Seph a rdim ,60 .

Sepher Yezira h,265 .

Sepher Ha kka ba la h,2 73 .

Septu agint , beginning of

modern h istory,186 .

Sewa rd ,Wm . H . ,

friend of

I . M . W .,28

, 36 .

Seymour, Gov . ,

109 .

Sforno ,Oba dia h

,294.

Sha buoth a nd confirma tion,

68 .

Sha kespea re , unjust to Jew ,

18 1 .

Sha losh Es reh Middoth ,268 .

Shebet Jehuda ,2 82 .

Shemone Perakim,2 76.

Shoeni aker’s fam ily,

novel,

100 .

Shylock ,a fa lse presenta tion

of the Jew ,18 1 .

S ich ron Divre Romi,2 73 .

Simla i , Ra bbi, celebra ted

homily of,130 .

S imon of Cyrene ,bea rer of

the cros s,180 .

Simon ben Azza i,Ra bbi

,

quoted,130 .

Simon ben La kish,Ra bbi

,on

a uthority of penta teuch,

1 26 ; quoted ,147 .

S in , 40 2 .

Sina i , ”80

, 93 .

S i ra ch , 95 .

Skepticism,helpful

,182 .

Smith , W . Robertson, 396.

Socia l in stinct , th e ,249 .

Society for Convers ion of

Jews, 32 .

Sol ida rity,83 .

Solomon ben I sa a c,268

,

Solomon ibn Ga biro l on dec

a logue ,149 : a s th inker ,

194 : a s a po logi st , 2 2 2 .

Song of Songs , da te of a u

thorsh ip , 94 .

INDEX .

Sopher , Moses , Rabbi in

Pressburg , 9 .

Spa in ,Jews in

,291 .

Spa nier , Lou is , pres ident ofcongrega tion in Alba ny,38 .

Spinoza,fa ther of modern

ph i losophy,195 ; a s ph i

losopher , 2 87—292 ; a nd

Ma imonides,

2 78 ; a nd

Cresca s,281 .

Spirit of Age ,289 .

Spir itua l element in ma n,

2 50 .

Sta te sena torship , 108 .

Sta te ,principles on wh ich

ba sed,256.

Stein , Leo old,prea cher in

Fra nk ort,15 ; on deca

logue , 15 1 .

Steingrub , birthpla ce of I .

M . W .,2 .

Steinh eim, S . L . ,on deca

logue , 15 1 ; a s a pologist,2 24.

Stern , editor of Ibn Ezra ’s

Yesod,2 72 .

Stra us , David Friedrich,

wr itings of, 2 2 1 .

Sue ,Eugene ,

a uthor of“Le

Juif Erra nt,

”180 .

Sulzer , Solomon,Jewish ca n

tor , 10 .

Sunday s ervice, 76 .

Sunday-school , first Jewish ,

i n United Sta tes , 2 2 .

Superstition ,296 .

Sura ,a ca demy of , 19 1 .

Synod , 70 , 7 1 , 73 .

Ta citus on Juda ism ,187 .

Ta lmud a nd Einhorn ,66.

a nd W ise, 67 .

a nd Clevela nd Conference ,70 .

a nd tra dition , 72 .

Ta lmud Yelodim Institute,

106 .

Taylor , President Z . , 36 .

4 17

Ten comma ndments, 95 .

Teweles , E . L .,a ra bbinica l

schola r in Prague , 10 .

Text-book of h istory, 94.

Text books , 98 .

Theocra cy,pr inciples of

,173

Theo logy,the science of the

conception of deity,197 .

a nd ph ilosophy,198 .

of Juda ism,199 .

sources for,208 .

Thoma s Aqu ina s, student o f

Jewish ph ilosophers,194.

Tiberius,Jews under , 187 .

T1kkun Midda th Ha ne

phesch ,268 .

Tobit,book of

,Golden Ru le

in,237 .

Tora h,source of Juda ism

,

20 1

most importa nt portion o f

Scripture,203 .

the only revela tion,23 1 .

a nd Juda ism, 395 .

Tortosa,282 .

Tribe,a family of fam il ies

,

256.

Troki,I s a a c

,293 .

Tusa n,Joseph ben

,283 .

Union of America n HebrewCongrega tions , first movement towa rds

, 45—54 ;

rea lized, 57 ; see a lso 78 ,

82.83 , 380 . 38 1 . 389 .

Union a nd democra cy, 382 .

Union,a nd the ritua l

,64 .

Union Pra yer Book, 3 1 , 68 ,

106 .

United Sta tes , constitution,

257

Verga , Solomon Ibn,282 .

Wa ndering Jew ,1 79—197 .

Webster,Da n iel

, 36 .

Weed, Thur low ,10 9 .

Wel lh a us en, 96, 396 .

Wessely,Na phta l i , 324.

4 I 8 I NDEX .

Wisdom o f Solomon, book

of,its purpose ,

W ise, Leo , grea t-gra ndfa therof I sa a c M. ,

I .

Leo ,fa ther of I sa a c M.

,2 .

Regina ,mother of I sa a c

M. , 36.

li ow family name or igin

a ted,1 .

I s a iah, gra nd

- fa ther of

I s a a c M. ,I .

I s a a c M.

,birth

,2 ; studies ,

2 ff ; goes to Prague , 4 ;a t the Beth Hammoreth

,

5 ; first secu la r studies,

6 ; a ttended yesh iba h a t

Jenika u ,6 ; studiesGreek

,

8 ; a ttends gymna sium a t

Pra gue ,8 ; elected tea ch

er a t Ronsperg , 9 ;‘

goes to

Pressburg to ma ke ex

amina tion for entra nceto univers ity

, 9 ; a t

tends yesh ibah ofMoses Sopher , 9 , entersunivers ity a t Prague , 9 ;a ttends univers ity a t Vienna

,10 ; writes novel ,

10 ; ma kes I ta l ia n tour,

10 ; receives ra bbinica ldiploma

,10 ; elected ra b

bi of Ra dnitz,1 1 ; ma rries

Therese B loch,1 1 ; ra di

ca l , 13 , 14 ; leaves Radnitz for America

,15 ; a r

r ives a t New York,16 ;

first meeting a nd con

tinned intima cy withLil ienth a l

,24

— 26 ; firstpublic function in Amer

i ca,2 6 ; elected ra bbi of

Alba ny,2 7 ; offered pro

fessorsh ip ,28 ; offered

pos ition in l ibra ry of

congress , 28 ; institutedreforms in Alba ny,

29 ;m ade first dra ft ofMinh ag Amer ica

, 30 ; firstmeeting with I sa a c Lee

ser , 30 ; first tilt withm iss iona r ies to Jews

, 32

34 ; troubles in congre

ga tion a t A lba ny, 35 ;invited to prea ch a t

Cha r leston, 36 ; encoun

ter with Raph a l l a t

Cha rleston , 37 ; elected

minister by Ch a rlestoncongrega tion , 37 ; diffi

cul ties with Spa nier a ndorthodox element in

Alba ny congrega tion ,

38 ; forms new congrega

tion, 39 ; introduces fam

i ly pews , 40 ; a ssumes

editorsh ip of Asmonea n,

41 ; publishes fi rst book ,

42 ; elected ra bbi of B ’ne

Yeshurun congrega tion ,

Cincinna ti, 44 ; issues

ca l l for union of congre

ga tions , 45—54 ; prea ches

fa rewel l sermon a t Al

ba ny, 55 ; ina ugura l sermon a t Cincinna ti

, 55 ;founds I s r a el ite

, 55 ; or

ga nizes Zion Col legia teAssocia tion

, 57 ; fa ir

ness,61 ; democra tic

,62 ;

constructive ,62 ; a nd the

people,62 ; a nd prayer

book,62 ; a nd Ta lmud

,

67 ; a nd Minh ag Amer

ica,67 ; a nd confirma

tion,68 ; hymn-book

,68 ;

a nd Ph ila delph ia confer

ence , 70 ; a nd the r ab

bis, 74 ; a s journa list , 80 ,

1 1 1 ; a s lecturer,

88 ;un ity of l ife ,

89 ; a s a u

thor,89 ; dedica tes syna

gogues , 104 ; PresidentHebrew Union Col lege ,

87 ; a ppea l s for col lege

a nd union, 387 ; a s

prea cher,

109 ; dea th ,

1 12 ; epita ph ,1 1 2 .

isaac m. wise - forgottenbooks.com · wandering jew, ’ and “paul a nd the ... the wise man....

Documents