JudaismIsraelAbrahams CONTENTSI.THELEGACYFROMTHEPASTII.RELIGIONASLAWIII.ARTICLESOFFAITHIV.SOMECONCEPTSOFJUDAISMV.SOMEOBSERVANCESOFJUDAISMVI.JEWISHMYSTICISMVII.ESCHATOLOGYVIII.THESURVIVALOFJUDAISMJUDAISMByISRAELABRAHAMS,M.A.READERINTALMUDICANDRABBINICLITERATUREUNIVERSITYOFCAMBRIDGEFOREWORDThewriterhasattemptedinthisvolumetotakeupafewofthemostcharacteristic points in Jewish doctrine and practice, and to explainsome of the various phases through which they have passed, sincethefirstcenturiesoftheChristianera.The presentation is probably much less detached than is the casewith other volumes in this series. But the difference was scarcelyavoidable.Thewriterwasnotexpoundingareligioussystemwhichhasnorelationtohisownlife.Onthecontrary,thewriterishimselfa Jew, and thus is deeply concerned personally in the mattersdiscussedinthebook.Thereadermustbewarnedtokeepthisfactinmindthroughout.Onthe one hand, the book must suffer a loss of objectivity; but, on theother hand, there may be some compensating gain of intensity. Theauthor trusts, at all events, that, though he has not written withindifference,hehasescapedthepitfallofunduepartiality.I.A.Judaism1CHAPTERITHELEGACYFROMTHEPASTThe aim of this little book is to present in brief outline some of theleading conceptions of the religion familiar since the Christian EraunderthenameJudaism.ThewordJudaismoccursforthefirsttimeatabout100B.C.,intheGraecoJewishliterature.InthesecondbookoftheMaccabees(ii.21,viii.1),JudaismsignifiesthereligionoftheJewsascontrastedwithHellenism, the religion of the Greeks. In the New Testament (Gal. i.13) the same word seems to denote the Pharisaic system as anantithesis to the Gentile Christianity. In Hebrew the correspondingnoun never occurs in the Bible, and it is rare even in the Rabbinicbooks.Whenitdoesmeetus,JahaduthimpliesthemonotheismoftheJewsasopposedtothepolytheismoftheheathen.Thus the term Judaism did not pass through quite the sametransitionsasdidthenameJew.Judaismappearsfromthefirstasareligion transcending tribal bounds. The Jew, on the other hand,was originally a Judaean, a member of the Southern Confederacycalled in the Bible Judah, and by the Greeks and Romans Judaea.Soon, however, Jew came to include what had earlier been theNorthern Confederacy of Israel as well, so that in the postexilicperiodJehudiorJewmeansanadherentofJudaismwithoutregardtolocalnationality.Judaism, then, is here taken to represent that later development ofthe Religion of Israel which began with the reorganisation after theBabylonianExile(444B.C.),andwascrystallisedbytheRomanExile(during the first centuries of the Christian Era). The exact periodwhichwillbehereseizedasastartingpointisthemomentwhenthepeople of Israel were losing, never so far to regain, their territorialassociationwithPalestine,andwerebecoming(whattheyhaveeversincebeen)acommunityasdistinctfromanation.Theyremained,itistrue,adistinctrace,andthisisstillinasensetrue.Yetatvariousperiods a number of proselytes have been admitted, and in otherwaysthepurityoftheracehasbeenaffected.Atalleventsterritorialnationality ceased from a date which may be roughly fixed at 135A.D., when the last desperate revolt under BarCochba failed, andHadrian drew his Roman plough over the city of Jerusalem andtheTemple area. A new city with a new name arose on the ruins. TheJudaism2ruins afterwards reasserted themselves, and Aelia Capitolina as adesignationofJerusalemisfamiliaronlytoarchaeologists.ButthoughthenameofHadriansnewcityhasfaded,theeffectofitsfoundation remained. Aelia Capitolina, with its marketplaces andtheatre,replacedtheoldennarrowstreetedtown;aHouseofVenusreared its stately form in the north, and a Sanctuary to Jupitercovered,intheeast,thesiteoftheformerTemple.Heathencolonistswere introduced, and the Jew, who was to become in futurecenturiesanalieneverywhere,wasmadebyHadriananalieninhisfatherland.FortheRomanEmperordeniedtoJewstherightofentryinto Jerusalem. Thus Hadrian completed the work of Titus, andJudaism was divorced from its local habitation. More unreservedlythan during the Babylonian Exile, Judaism in the Roman Exileperforcebecamethereligionofacommunityandnotofastate;andIsrael for the first time constituted a Church. But it was a Churchwithnovisiblehome.Christianityforseveralcenturieswastohaveacentre at Rome, Islam at Mecca. But Judaism had and has no centreatall.It will be obvious that the aim of the present book makes it bothsuperfluous and inappropriate to discuss the vexed problemsconnected with the origins of the Religion of Israel, its aspects inprimitive times, its passage through a national to an ethicalmonotheism, its expansion into the universalism of the secondIsaiah. What concerns us here is merely the legacy which theReligionofIsraelbequeathedtoJudaismaswehavedefinedit.Thislegacy and the manner in which it was treasured, enlarged, andadministeredwilloccupyusintherestofthisbook.But this much must be premised. If the Religion of Israel passedthrough the stages of totemism, animism, and polydemonism; if itwas indebted to Canaanite, Kenite, Babylonian, Persian, Greek, andother foreign influences; if it experienced a stage of monolatry orhenotheism(inwhichIsraelrecognisedoneGod,butdidnotthinkofthat God as the only God of all men) before ethical monotheism ofthe universalistic type was reached; if, further, all these stages andthemoralandreligiousideasconnectedwitheachleftamoreorlessclear mark in the sacred literature of Israel; then the legacy whichJudaismreceivedfromitspastwasasyncretismofthewholeofthereligious experiences of Israel as interpreted in the light of Israelslatest, highest, most approved standards. Like the Bourbon, the Jewforgets nothing; but unlike the Bourbon, the Jew isalways learning.Judaism3The domestic stories of the Patriarchs were not rejected asunprofitable when Israel became deeply impregnated with themonogamousteachingsofwritersliketheauthorofthelastchapterof Proverbs; the character of David was idealised by the spiritualassociations of the Psalter, parts of which tradition ascribed to him;the earthly life was etherialised and much of the sacred literaturereinterpreted in the light of an added belief in immortality; God, intheearlyliteratureatribalnonmoraldeity,wasinthelaterliteraturea righteous ruler who with Amos and Hosea loved and demandedrighteousness in man. Judaism took over as one indivisible body ofsacredteachingsboththeearlyandthelaterliteratureinwhichthesevarying conceptions of God were enshrined; the Law was acceptedas the guiding rule of life, the ritual of ceremony and sacrifice wastreasured as a holy memory, and as a memory not contradictory ofthe prophetic exaltation of inward religion but as consistent withthat exaltation, as interpreting it, as but another aspect of Micahsenunciation of the demands of God: What doth theLord requireofthee but to do justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thyGod?Judaism,inshort,includedfortheJewallthathadgonebefore.ButforSt.PaulsattitudeofhostilitytotheLaw,butforthedeepseatedconviction that the Pauline Christianity was a denial of the Jewishmonotheism, the Jew might have accepted much of the teaching ofJesus as an integral part of Judaism. In the realm of ideas which heconceived as belonging to his tradition the Jew was not logical; hedid not pick and choose; he absorbed the whole. In the Jewishtheology of all ages we find the most obvious contradictions. Therewas no attempt at reconciliation of such contradictions; they werejuxtaposed in a mechanical mixture, there was no chemicalcompound. The Jew was always a man of moods, and his religionresponded to those varying phases of feeling and belief and action.Hence such varying judgments have been formed of him and hisreligion. If, after the mediaeval philosophy had attempted tosystematiseJudaism,thereligionremainedunsystematic,itiseasytounderstand that in the earlier centuries of the Christian Eracontradictionsbetweenpastandpresent,betweendifferentstrataofreligious thought, caused no trouble to the Jew so long as thosecontradictionscouldbefittedintohisgeneralschemeoflife.Thoughhe was the product of development, development was an ideaforeign to his conception of the ways of God with man. And to thisextent he was right. For though mens ideas of God change, GodHimselfischangeless.TheJewtransferredthechangelessnessofGodJudaism4to mens changing ideas about him. With childlike naivete heacceptedall,headoptedall,andhesyncretiseditallasbesthecouldintotheloosesystemonwhichPharisaismgrafteditself.Thelegacyofthepastthuswasthepast.One element in the legacy was negative. The Temple and theSacrificial system were gone for ever. That this must havepowerfully affected Judaism goes without saying. SynagoguereplacedTemple,prayerassumedthefunctionofsacrifice,penitenceand not the blood of bulls supplied the ritual of atonement. Eventshadpreparedthewayforthischangeandhadpreventeditattainingthecharacterofanupheaval.Forsynagogueshadgrownupalloverthe land soon after the fifth century B.C.; regular services of prayerwith instruction in the Scriptures had been established long beforetheChristianEra;theinwardatonementhadbeenpreferredto,oratleast associated with, the outward rite before the outward rite wastorn away. It may be that, as Professor Burkitt has suggested, theawfulexperiencesofthefallofJerusalemandthedestructionoftheTemple produced within Pharisaism a moral reformation whichdrove the Jew within and thus spiritualised Judaism. ForundoubtedlythePhariseeoftheGospelsisbynomeansthePhariseeas we meet him in the Jewish books. There was always a latentpowerandtendencyinJudaismtowardsinwardreligion;anditmaybethatthispowerwasintensified,thistendencyencouraged,bythelossofTempleanditsSacrificialrites.But though the Temple had gone the Covenant remained. Not somuch in name as in essence. We do not hear much of the Covenantin the Rabbinic books, but its spirit pervades Judaism. Of all thelegacy of the past the Covenant was the most inspiring element.BeginningwithAbraham,theCovenantestablishedaspecialrelationbetweenGodandAbrahamsseed.Ihaveknownhim,thathemaycommand his children and his household after him, that they maykeep the way of the Lord to do righteousness and judgment (Gen.xviii. 19). Of this Covenant, the outward sign was the rite ofcircumcision. Renewed with Moses, and followed in traditionalopinion by the Ten Commandments, the Sinaitic Covenant was afurtherlinkinthebondbetweenGodandHispeople.OfthisMosaicCovenant the outward sign was the Sabbath. It is of no moment forour present argument whether Abraham and Moses were historicalpersons or figments of tradition. A Gamaliel would have as littledoubted their reality as would a St. Paul. And whatever CriticismmaybedoingwithAbraham,itiscomingmoreandmoretoseethatJudaism5behind the eighthcentury prophets there must have towered thefigureofa,ifnotofthetraditional,Moses;behindtheprophetsa,ifnot the, Law. Be that as it may, to the Jew of the Christian Era,AbrahamandMoseswererealandtheCovenantunalterable.Bythesyncretism which has been already described Jeremiahs NewCovenantwasnotregardedasnew.Norwasitnew;itrepresentedachangeofstress,notofcontents.Whenhesaid(Jer.xxxi.33),Thisisthe covenant which I will make with the house of Israel, after thosedays,saiththeLord;Iwillputmylawintheirinwardparts,andintheir heart will I write it, Jeremiah, it has been held, was makingChristianitypossible.ButhewasalsomakingJudaismpossible.HereandnowhereelseistobefoundtheprinciplewhichenabledJudaismto survive the loss of Temple and nationality. And the NewCovenant was in no sense inconsistent with the Old. For not onlydoes Jeremiah proceed to add in the selfsame verse, I will be theirGod, and they will be my people, but the New Covenant isspecifically made with the house of Judah and of Israel, and it isassociated with the permanence of the seed of Israel as a separatepeopleandwiththeDivinerebuildingofJerusalem.TheJewhadnothoughtofanalysingtheseversesintothewordsofthetrueJeremiahand those of his editors. The point is that over and above, incomplementary explanation of, the Abrahamic and MosaicCovenants with their external signs, over and above the Call of thePatriarch and the Theophany of Sinai, was the Jeremian CovenantwritteninIsraelsheart.The Covenant conferred a distinction and imposed a duty. It was abond between a gracious God and a grateful Israel. It dignifiedhistory, for it interpreted history in terms of providence andpurpose; it transfigured virtue by making virtue service; it was thesalt of life, for how could present degradation demoralise, seeingthatGodwasinit,tofulfilHispartofthebond,toholdIsraelasHisjewel,thoughRomemightdespise?TheCovenantmadetheJewselfconfident and arrogant, but these very faults were needed to savehim.Itwashisonlydefenceagainsttheworldsscorn.Heforgotthatthe correlative of the Covenant was Isaiahs CovenantPeoplemissionary to the Gentiles and the World. He relegated his worldmission(whichChristianityandIslaminpartgloriouslyfulfilled)toa dim Messianic future, and was content if in his own present heremainedfaithfultohismissiontohimself.Judaism6Above all, the legacy from the past came to Judaism hallowed andhumanisedbyalltheexperienceofredemptionandsufferingwhichhadmarkedIsraelscourseinagespast,andwastomarkhiscoursein ages to come. The Exodus, the Exile, the Maccabean heroism, theRoman catastrophe; Prophet, Wise Man, Priest and Scribe,all hadleft their trace. Judaism was a religion based on a book and on atradition; but it was also a religion based on a unique experience.The book might be misread, the tradition encumbered, but theexperience was eternally clear and inspiring. It shone through theRoman Diaspora as it afterwards illuminated the Roman Ghetto,makingthepresenttolerablebythememoryofthepastandthehopeofthefuture.Judaism7CHAPTERIIRELIGIONASLAWThe feature of Judaism which first attracts an outsiders attention,and which claims a front place in this survey, is its Nomism orLegalism. Life was placed under the control of Law. Not onlymorality,butreligionalso,wascodified.Nomism,ithasbeentrulysaid, has always formed a fundamental trait of Judaism, one ofwhose chief aims has ever been to mould life in all its varyingrelations according to the Law, and to make obedience to thecommandments a necessity and a custom (Lauterbach, JewishEncyclopedia, ix. 326). Only the latest development of Judaism isaway from this direction. Individualism is nowadays replacing theolden solidarity. Thus, at the Central Conference of AmericanRabbis, held in July 1906 at Indianapolis, a project to formulate asystem of laws for modern use was promptly rejected. The chiefmodern problem in Jewish life is just this: To what extent, and inwhatmanner,canJudaismstillplaceitselfunderthereignofLaw?But for many centuries, certainly up to the French Revolution,Religion as Law was the dominant conception in Judaism. Beforeexamining the validity of this conception a word is necessary as tothemodeinwhichitexpresseditself.Conduct,socialandindividual,moralandritual,wasregulatedintheminutestdetails.AstheDayanM. Hyamson has said, the maxim De minimis non curat lex was notapplicabletotheJewishLaw.ThisLawwasasystemofopinionandof practice and of feeling in which the great principles of morality,the deepest concerns of spiritual religion, the genuinely essentialrequirements of ritual, all found a prominent place. To assert thatPharisaism included the small and excluded the great, that itenforced rules and forgot principles, that it exalted the letter andneglected the spirit, is a palpable libel. Pharisaism was founded onGod.Onthisfoundationwaserectedastructurewhichembracedtheeternalprinciplesofreligion.Butthesystem,itmustbeadded,wentfar beyond this. It held that there was a right and a wrong way ofdoing things in themselves trivial. Prescription ruled in astupendousarrayofmatterswhichothersystemsdeliberatelylefttothefancy,thejudgment,theconscienceoftheindividual.Lawseizedupon the whole life, both in its inward experiences and outwardmanifestations. Harnack characterises the system harshly enough.Christianity did not add to Judaism, it subtracted. Expanding afamous epigram of Wellhausens, Harnack admits that everythingJudaism8taughtintheGospelswasalsotobefoundintheProphets,andevenin the Jewish tradition of their time. The Pharisees themselves werein possession of it; but, unfortunately, they were in possession ofmuch else besides.With them it was weighted, darkened, distorted,rendered ineffective and deprived of its force by a thousand thingswhichtheyalsoheldtobereligious,andeverywhitasimportantasmercy and judgment. They reduced everything into one fabric; thegoodandholywasonlyonewoofinabroadearthlywarp(WhatisChristianity? p. 47). It is necessary to qualify this judgment, but itdoes bring out the allpervadingness of Law in Judaism. And thoushalt speak of them when thou sittest in thine house, when thouwalkestbytheway,whenthouliestdownandwhenthourisestup(Deut. vi. 7). The Word of God was to occupy the Jews thoughtsconstantly; in his daily employment and during his manifoldactivities; when at work and when at rest. And as a correlative, theLawmustdirectthiscomplexlife,theCodemustauthoriseactionorforbidit, must turn the thoughts and emotions in one directionanddivertthemfromanother.Nothinginthehistoryofreligionscanbecitedasacompleteparallelto this. But incomplete parallels abound. A very large portion of allmenslivesisregulatedfromwithout:bytheBibleandothersacredbooks;bytheinstitutionsandritesofreligion;bythelawoftheland;by the imposed rules of accepted guides, poets, philosophers,physicians; and above all by social conventions, current fashions,and popular maxims. Only in the rarest case is an exceptional manthemonstrositywhich,wearetold,everyIsraelitewasintheepochoftheJudgesalawuntohimself.But in Judaism, until the period of modern reform, this fact ofhumanlifewasnotmerelyanunconscioustruism,itwasconsciouslyadmitted.AnditwasrealisedinaCode.Or rather in a series of Codes. First came the Mishnah, a Codecompiled at about the year 200 A.D., but the result of a Pharisaicactivity extending over more than two centuries. While ChristianitywasproducingtheGospelsandtherestoftheNewTestamenttheworkinlargepartofJews,orofmenborninthecircleofJudaismJudaism in its other manifestation was working at the Code knownas the Mishnah. This word means repetition, or teaching byrepetition; it was an oral tradition reduced to writing long aftermuchofitscontentshadbeensiftedinthediscussionsoftheschools.In part earlier and in part later than the Mishnah was the MidrashJudaism9(inquiry, interpretation), not a Code, but a twofold exposition ofScripture; homiletic with copious use of parable, and legalistic withan eye to the regulation of conduct. Then came the Talmud in tworecensions, the Palestinian and the Babylonian, the latter completedabout500A.D.ForsomecenturiesafterwardstheGeonim(headsofthe Rabbinical Universities in Persia) continued to analyse anddefine the legal prescriptions and ritual of Judaism, adding andchanging in accord with the needs of the day; for Tradition was aliving,fluidthing.ThenintheeleventhcenturyIsaacofFez(Alfasi)formulated a guide to Talmudic Law, and about a hundred yearslater (1180) Maimonides produced his Strong Hand, a Code of lawand custom which influenced Jewish life ever after. Othercodificationsweremade;butfinally,inthesixteenthcentury,JosephCaro (mystic and legalist) compiled the Table Prepared (ShulchanAruch), which, with masterly skill, collected the whole of thetraditional law, arranged it under convenient headsin chapters andparagraphs, and carried down to our own day the Rabbinicconceptionoflife.UnderthisCode,withmoreorlessrelaxation,thegreatbulkofJewsstilllive.Buttherevoltagainstit,oremancipationfromit,isprogressingeveryyear,fortheoldenJewishconceptionofreligion and the old Jewish theory of life are, as hinted above,becomingseriouslyundermined.NowinwhatprecedestherehasbeensomeintentionalambiguityintheuseofthewordLaw.MuchofthemisunderstandingofJudaismhas arisen from this ambiguity. Law is in no adequate sense whatthe Jews themselves understood by the nomism of their religion. Inmodern times Law and Religion tend more and more to separate,andtospeakofJudaismasLaweoipsoimpliesadivorceofJudaismfrom Religion. The old antithesis between letter and spirit is but aphase of the same criticism. Law must specify, and the lawyerinterprets Acts of Parliament by their letter; he refuses to be guidedby the motives of the Act, he is concerned with what the Actdistinctlyformulatesinsetterms.InthissenseJudaismneverwasaLegalReligion.Itdidmostassiduouslyseektogettotheunderlyingmotivesofthewrittenlaws,andalltheexpansionsoftheLawwerebasedonadesiremorefullytorealisethemeaningandintentionofthe written Code. In other words, the Law was looked upon as theexpressionoftheWillofGod.ManwastoyieldtothatWillfortworeasons. First, because God is the perfect ideal of goodness. Thatidealwasformantorevere,and,sofarasinhimlay,toimitate.AsIam merciful, be thou merciful; because I am gracious, be thougracious. The Imitation of God isa notion which constantly meetsJudaism10us in Rabbinic literature. It is based on the Scriptural text: Be yeholy, for I the Lord am holy. God, the ideal of all morality, is thefounder of mans moral nature. This is Professor Lazarus modernway of putting it. But in substance it is the Jewish conceptionthrough all the ages. And there is a second reason. The Jew wouldnot have understood the possibility of any other expression of theDivine Will than the expression which Judaism enshrined. ForthoughheheldthattheLawwassomethingimposedfromwithout,he identified this imposed Law with the law which his own moralnature posited. The Rabbis tell us that certain things in the writtenLaw could have been reached by man without the Law. The Lawwas in large part a correspondence to mans moral nature. ThisRabbinic idea Lazarus sums up in the epigram: Moral laws, then,arenotlawsbecausetheyarewritten;theyarewrittenbecausetheyare laws. The moral principle is autonomous, but its archetype isGod.Theultimatereason,likethehighestaimofmorality,shouldbeinitself.Thethreatofpunishmentandthepromiseofrewardarethepsychologicmeanstosecurethefulfilmentoflaws,neverthereasonsfor the laws, nor the motives to action. It is easy and necessarysometimes to praise and justify eudemonism, but, as Lazarus adds,Not a state to be reached, not a good to be won, not an evil to bewardedoff,istheimpellingforceofmorality,butitselffurnishesthecreative impulse, the supreme commanding authority (Ethics ofJudaism, I. chap, ii.). And so the Rabbi of the third century B.C.,Antigonos of Socho, put it in the memorable saying: Be not likeservants who minister to their master upon the condition ofreceivingareward;butbelikeservantswhoministertotheirmasterwithout the condition of receiving a reward; and let the Fear ofheavenbeuponyou(Aboth,i.3).Clearly the multiplication of rules obscures principles. The object ofcodification,togetatthefullmeaningofprinciples,isdefeatedbyitsown success. For it is always easier to follow rules than to applyprinciples. Virtues are more attainable than virtue, characteristicsthan character. And while it is false to assert that Judaism attachedmoreimportancetoritualthantoreligion,yet,thetwobeingplacedononeandthesameplane,itispossibletofindincoexistenceritualpietyandmoralbaseness.Suchacombinationisugly,andpeopledonot stop to think whether the baseness would be more or less if theritual piety were absent instead of present. But it is the fact that onthewholetheJewishcodificationofreligiondidnotproducetheevilresults possible or even likely to accrue. The Jew was alwaysdistinguishedforhisdomesticvirtues,hispurityoflife,hissobriety,Judaism11his charity, his devotion. These were the immediate consequence ofhis Lawabiding disposition and theory. Perhaps there was somelack of enthusiasm, something too much of the temperate. But thefacts of life always brought their corrective. Martyrdom was themeans by which the Jewish consciousness was kept at a glowingheat. And as the Jew was constantly called upon to die for hisreligion, the religion ennobled the life which was willinglysurrendered for the religion. The Messianic Hope was vitalised bypersecution. The Jew, devotee of practical ideals, became also adreamer. His visions of God were ever present to remind him thatthelawwhichhecodifiedwastohimtheLawofGod.Judaism12CHAPTERIIIARTICLESOFFAITHIt is often said that Judaism left belief free whileit put conduct intofetters. Neither half of this assertion is strictly true. Belief was notfreealtogether;conductwasnotaltogethercontrolled.IntheMishnah(Sanhedrin, x. 1) certain classes of unbelievers are pronouncedportionless in the world to come. Among those excluded fromParadise are men who deny the resurrection of the dead, and menwhorefuseassenttothedoctrineoftheDivineoriginoftheTorah,orScripture. Thus it cannot be said that belief was, in the Rabbinicsystem, perfectly free. Equally inaccurate is the assertion thatconduct was entirely a matter of prescription. Not only were menpraised for works of supererogation, performance of more than theLaw required; not only were there important divergences in thepractical rules of conduct formulated by the various Rabbis; buttherewasawholeclassofactionsdescribedasmattersgivenovertothe heart, delicate refinements of conduct which the law leftuntouchedandwereaconcernexclusivelyofthefeeling,theprivatejudgment of the individual. The right of private judgment waspassionatelyinsistedoninmattersofconduct,aswhenRabbiJoshuarefusedtobeguidedastohispracticaldecisionsbytheDaughterofthe Voice, the supernatural utterance from on high. The Law, hecontended, is on earth, not in heaven; and man must be his ownjudgeinapplyingtheLawtohisownlifeandtime.And,theTalmudadds,GodHimselfannouncedthatRabbiJoshuawasright.Thus there was neither complete fluidity of doctrine nor completerigidity of conduct. There was freedom of conduct within the law,andtherewaslawwithinfreedomofdoctrine.But Dr. Emil Hirsch puts the case fairly when he says: In the samesense as Christianity or Islam, Judaism cannot be credited withArticles of Faith. Many attempts have indeed been made atsystematisingandreducingtoafixedphraseologyandsequencethecontentsoftheJewishreligion.Butthesehavealwayslackedtheoneessential element: authoritative sanction on the part of a supremeecclesiasticalbody(JewishEncyclopedia,ii.148).Since the epoch of the Great Sanhedrin, there has been no centralauthorityrecognisedthroughoutJewry.TheJewishorganisationhaslongbeencongregational.SincethefourthcenturytherehasbeennoJudaism13body with any jurisdiction over the mass of Jews. At that date theCalendar was fixed by astronomical calculations. The Patriarch, inBabylon,therebyvoluntarilyabandonedtheholdhehadpreviouslyhad over the scattered Jews, for it was no longer the fiat of thePatriarch that settled the dates of the Festivals. While there wassomething like a central authority, the Canon of Scripture had beenfixedbySynods,butthereisnorecordofanyattempttopromulgatearticles of faith. During the revolt against Hadrian an Assembly ofRabbiswasheldatLydda.ItwasthendecidedthataJewmustyieldhis life rather than accept safety from the Roman power, if suchconformityinvolvedoneofthethreeoffences:idolatry,murder,andunchastity (including, incest and adultery). But while this decisionthrows a favourablelighton the Rabbinic theory oflife,it caninnosensebecalledafixationofacreed.Therewerenumeroussynodsinthe Middle Ages, but they invariably dealt with practical morals orwith the problems which arose from time to time in regard to therelationsbetweenJewsandtheirChristianneighbours.Itistruethatwe occasionally read of excommunications for heresy. But in thecase,forinstance,ofSpinoza,theAmsterdamSynagoguewasmuchmoreanxioustodissociateitselffromtheheresiesofSpinozathantocompel Spinoza to conform to the beliefs of the Synagogue. Andthough this power of excommunication might have been employedby the mediaeval Rabbis to enforce the acceptance of a creed, inpointoffactnosuchstepwasevertaken.Since the time of Moses Mendelssohn (17281786), the chief JewishdogmahasbeenthatJudaismhasnodogmas.Inthesenseassignedabovethisisclearlytrue.DogmasimposedbyanauthorityableandwillingtoenforceconformityandpunishdissentarenonexistentinJudaism. In olden times membership of the religion of Judaism wasalmost entirely a question of birth and race, not of confession.Proselyteswereadmittedbycircumcisionandbaptism,andnothingbeyond an acceptance of the Unity of God and the abjuration ofidolatryisevennowrequiredbywayofprofessionfromaproselyte.AtthesametimetheearliestpassageputintothepublicliturgywastheShema(Deuteronomyvi.49),inwhichtheunityofGodandthedutytoloveGodareexpressed.TheTenCommandmentswerealsoreciteddailyintheTemple.ItisinstructivetonotethereasongivenforthesubsequentremovaloftheDecaloguefromthedailyliturgy.ItwasfearedthatsomemightassumethattheDecaloguecomprisedthewholeofthebindinglaw.Hencetheprominentpositiongiventothem in the Temple service was no longer assigned to the TenCommandments in the ritual of the Synagogue. In modern times,Judaism14however,thereisagrowingpracticeofreadingtheDecalogueeverySabbathday.WhatwedofindinPharisaicJudaism,andthisistherealanswertoHarnack (supra, p. 15), is an attempt to reduce the whole Law tocertainfundamentalprinciples.WhenawouldbeproselyteaccostedHillel,inthereignofHerod,withthedemandthattheRabbishouldcommunicate the whole of Judaism while the questioner stood ononefoot,Hillelmadethefamousreply:Whatthouhatestdountonoman; that is the whole Law, the rest is commentary. This recallsanother famous summarisation, that given by Jesus later on in theGospel. A little more than a century later, Akiba said that thecommand to love ones neighbour is the fundamental principle oftheLaw.BenAzzaichoseforthisdistinctionanothersentence:Thisis the book of the generations of man, implying the equality of allmen in regard to the love borne by God for His creatures. AnotherRabbi, Simlai (third century), has this remarkable saying: Sixhundred and thirteen precepts were imparted unto Moses, threehundredandsixtyfivenegative(incorrespondencewiththedaysofthe solar year), and two hundred and fortyeight positive (incorrespondencewiththenumberofamanslimbs).Davidcameandestablishedthemaseleven,asitiswritten:ApsalmofDavidLordwho shall sojourn in Thy tent, who shall dwell in Thy holymountain? (i) He that walketh uprightly and (ii) workethrighteousness and (iii) speaketh the truth in his heart. (iv) He thatbackbiteth not with his tongue, (v) nor doeth evil to his neighbour,(vi) nor taketh up a reproach against another; (vii) in whose eyes areprobate is despised, (viii) but who honoureth them that fear theLord.(ix)Hethatswearethtohisownhurt,andchangethnot;(x)Hethat putteth not out his money to usury, (xi) nor taketh a bribeagainst the innocent. He that doeth these things shall never bemoved. Thus David reduced the Law to eleven principles. Thencame Micah and reduced them to three, as it is written: What doththe Lord require of thee but (i) to do justice, (ii) to love mercy, and(iii)towalkhumblywiththyGod?ThencameHabbakukandmadethe whole Law stand on one fundamental idea, The righteous manlivethbyhisfaith(Makkoth,23b).This desire to find one or a few general fundamental passages onwhich the whole Scripture might be seen to base itself is, however,far removed from anything of the nature of the Christian Creeds orof the Mohammedan Kalimah. And when we remember that thePharisees and Sadducees differed on questions of doctrine (such asJudaism15the belief in immortality held by the former and rejected by thelatter), it becomes clear that the absence of a formal declaration offaith must have been deliberate. The most that was done was tointroduce into the Liturgy a paragraph in which the assembledworshippers declared their assent to the truth and permanentvalidity of the Word of God. After the Shema (whose contents aresummarised above), the assembled worshippers daily recited apassageinwhichtheysaid(andstillsay):TrueandfirmisthisThyword unto us for ever.... True is it that Thou art indeed our God ...andthereisnonebesideThee.Afterall,thedifferencebetweenPhariseeandSadduceewaspoliticalrather than theological. It was not till Judaism came into contact,contact alike of attraction and repulsion, with other systems that adesire or a need for formulating Articles of Faith was felt. Philo,coming under the Hellenic spirit, was thus the first to make theattempt. In the last chapter of the tract on the Creation (De Opifico,lxi.),Philoenumerateswhathetermsthefivemostbeautifullessons,superiortoallothers.Theseare(i)Godis;(ii)GodisOne;(iii)theWorld was created (and is not eternal); (iv) the World is one, likeuntoGodinsingleness;and(v)Godexercisesacontinualprovidenceforthebenefitoftheworld,caringforHiscreatureslikeaparentforhischildren.Philos lead found no imitators. It was not for many centuries thattwocausesledtheSynagoguetoformulateacreed.AndeventhenitwasnottheSynagogueasabodythatacted,norwasitacreedthatresulted. The first cause was the rise of sects within the Synagogue.Of these sects the most important was that of the Karaites orScripturalists. Rejecting tradition, the Karaites expounded theirbeliefsbothasajustificationofthemselvesagainsttheTraditionalistsand possibly as a remedy against their own tendency to dividewithin their own order into smaller sects. In the middle of thetwelfth century the Karaite Judah Hadassi of ConstantinoplearrangedthewholePentateuchundertheheadingsoftheDecalogue,much as Philo had done long before. And so he formulates tendogmas of Judaism. These are(i) Creation (as opposed to theAristoteliandoctrineoftheeternityoftheworld);(ii)theexistenceofGod; (iii) God is one and incorporeal; (iv) Moses and the othercanonical prophets were called by God; (v) the Law is the Word ofGod,itiscomplete,andtheOralTraditionwasunnecessary;(vi)theLaw must be read by the Jew in the original Hebrew; (vii) theTemple of Jerusalem was the place chosen by God for HisJudaism16manifestation;(viii)theResurrectionofthedead;(ix)theComingofMessiah,sonofDavid;(x)FinalJudgmentandRetribution.WithinthemainbodyoftheSynagoguewehavetowaitforthesamemoment for a formulation of Articles of Faith. Maimonides (11351204) was a younger contemporary of Hadassi; he it was that drewuptheoneandonlysetofprincipleswhichhaveeverenjoyedwideauthority in Judaism. Before Maimonides there had been someinclination towards a creed, but he is the first to put one into setterms. Maimonides was much influenced by Aristotelianism, andthisgavehimanimpulsetowardsalogicalstatementofthetenetsofJudaism.Ontheotherside,hewasdeeplyconcernedbythecriticismof Judaism from the side of Mohammedan theologians. The lattercontended, in particular, that the biblical anthropomorphisms weredestructive of a belief in the pure spirituality of God. HenceMaimonides devoted much of his great treatise, Guide for thePerplexed, to a philosophical allegorisation of the human termsapplied to God in the Hebrew Bible. In his Commentary on theMishnah (Sanhedrin, Introduction to Chelek), Maimonides declaresThe roots of our law and its fundamental principles are thirteen.Theseare(i)BeliefintheexistenceofGod,theCreator;(ii)beliefintheunityofGod;(iii)beliefintheincorporealityofGod;(iv)beliefinthe priority and eternity of God; (v) belief that to God and to Godalone worship must be offered; (vi) belief in prophecy; (vii) beliefthatMoseswasthegreatestofallprophets;(viii)beliefthattheLawwas revealed from heaven; (ix) belief that the Law will never beabrogated,andthatnootherLawwillevercomefromGod;(x)beliefthat God knows the works of men; (xi) belief in reward andpunishment; (xii) belief in the coming of the Messiah; (xiii) belief intheresurrectionofthedead.Nowherewehaveforthefirsttimeasetofbeliefswhichwereatestof Judaism. Maimonides leaves no doubt as to his meaning. For heconcluded by saying: When all these principles of faith are in thesafekeepingofaman,andhisconvictionofthemiswellestablished,he then enters into the general body of Israel; and, on the otherhand: When, however, a man breaks away from any one of thesefundamental principles of belief, then of him it is said that he hasgone out of the general body of Israel and he denies the roottruthsofJudaism.Thisformulationofadogmatictestwasneverconfirmedby any body of Rabbis. No Jew was ever excommunicated fordeclaring his dissent from these articles. No Jew was ever calledupon formally to express his assent to them. But, as ProfessorJudaism17Schechter justly writes: Among the Maimonists we may probablyinclude the great majority of Jews, who accepted the ThirteenArticleswithoutfurtherquestion.MaimonidesmusthavefilledupagreatgapinJewishtheology,agap,moreover,theexistenceofwhichwas very generally perceived. A century had hardly lapsed beforethe Thirteen Articles had become a theme for the poets of theSynagogue.AndalmosteverycountrycanshowapoemoraprayerfoundedontheseArticles(StudiesinJudaism,p.301).Yet the opposition to the Articles was both impressive andpersistent. Some denied altogether the admissibility of Articles,claiming that the whole Law and nothing but the Law was theCharter of Judaism. Others criticised the Maimonist Articles indetail. Certainly they are far from logically drawn up, someparagraphs being dictated by opposition to Islam rather than bypositive needs of the Jewish position.A favourite condensation wasa smaller list of three Articles: (i) Existence of God; (ii) Revelation;and(iii)Retribution.ThesethreeArticlesareusuallyassociatedwiththe name of Joseph Albo (13801444), though they are somewhatolder. There is no doubt but that these Articles found, in recentcenturies,moreacceptancethantheMaimonistThirteen,thoughthelatterstillholdtheirplaceintheorthodoxJewishPrayerBooks.TheymaybefoundintheAuthorisedDailyPrayerBook,ed.Singer,p.89.Moses Mendelssohn (17281786), who strongly maintained thatJudaism is a life, not a creed, made the practice of formulatingArticlesofJudaismunfashionable.Butnotforlong.Moreandmore,Judaic ritual has fallen into disregard since the French Revolution.Judaism has therefore tended to express itself as a system ofdoctrinesratherthanasabodyofpractices.Andtherewasaspecialreason why the Maimonist Articles could not remain. Reference isnot meant to the fact that many Jews came to doubt the Mosaicorigin of the Pentateuch. But there were lacking in the MaimonistCreed all emotional elements. On the one hand, Maimonides,rationalist and antiMystic as he was, makes no allowance for thedoctrine of the Immanence of God. Then, owing to his unemotionalnature,helaidnostressonalltheaffectingandmovingassociationsof the belief in the Mission of Israel as the Chosen People. BeforeMaimonides, if there had been one dogma of Judaism at all, it wasthe Election of Israel. Jehuda Halevi, the greatest of the Hebrewpoets of the Middle Ages, had at the beginning of the twelfthcentury, some half century before Maimonides, given expression toJudaism18this in the famous epigram: Israel is to the nations like the heart tothelimbs.Though, however, the Creed of Maimonides has no position ofauthority in the Synagogue, modern times have witnessed nosuccessful intrusion of a rival. Most writers of treatises on Judaismprefer to describe rather than to define the religious tenets of thefaith. In America there have been several suggestions of a Creed.Articlesoffaithhavebeentherechieflyformulatedforthereceptionof proselytes. This purpose is a natural cause of precision in belief;for while one who already stands within by birth or race is rarelycalled upon to justify his faith, the newcomer is under the necessitytodoso.InthepreChristianJudaismitisprobablethattherewasaCatechismorshortmanualofinstructioncalledinGreektheDidache,in which the Golden Rule in Hillels negative form and theDecalogue occupied a front place. Thus we find, too, modernAmerican Jews formulating Articles of Faith as a ProselyteConfession. In 1896 the Central Conference of American Rabbisadopted the following five principles for such a Confession: (i) Godthe Only One; (ii) Man His Image; (iii) Immortality of the Soul; (iv)Retribution;(v)IsraelsMission.Duringthepastfewmonthsatract,entitled Essentials of Judaism, has been issued in London by theJewish Religious Union. The author, N. S. Joseph, is careful toexplain that he is not putting forth these principles as dogmaticArticles of Faith, and that they are solely suggestive outlines ofbelief which may be gradually imparted to children, the outlinesbeingafterwardsfilledupbytheteacher.ButtheeightparagraphsoftheseEssentialsareatoncesoablycompiledandsoinformingastothemoderntrendofJewishbeliefthattheywillbeherecitedwithoutcomment.Accordingthentothispresentation,theEssentialsofJudaismare:(i)There is One Eternal God, who is the sole Origin of all things andforces,andtheSourceofalllivingsouls.Herulestheuniversewithjustice, righteousness, mercy, and love. (ii) Our souls, emanatingfrom God, are immortal, and will return to Him when our life onearth ceases. While we are here, our souls can hold directcommunion with God in prayer and praise, and in silentcontemplation and admiration of His works. (iii) Our souls aredirectly responsible to God for the work of our life on earth. God,being Allmerciful, will judge us with lovingkindness, and beingAlljust,willallowforourimperfections;andwe,therefore,neednomediatorandnovicariousatonementtoensurethefuturewelfareofJudaism19our souls. (iv) God is the One and only God. He is Eternal andOmnipresent. He not only pervades the entire world, but is alsowithin us; and His Spirit helps and leads us towards goodness andtruth. (v) Duty should be the moving force of our life; and thethought that God is always in us and about us should incite us tolead good and beneficent lives, showing our love of God by lovingour fellowcreatures, and working for their happiness andbettermentwithallourmight.(vi)InvariousbygonetimesGodhasrevealed, and even in our own days continues to reveal to us,something of His nature and will, by inspiring the best and wisestminds with noble thoughts and new ideas, to be conveyed to us inwords,sothatthisworldmayconstantlyimproveandgrowhappierandbetter.(vii)Longagosomeofourforefatherswerethusinspired,and they handed down to usand through us to the world atlargesome of Gods choicest gifts, the principles of Religion andMorality,nowrecordedinourBible;andthesespiritualgiftsofGodhave gradually spread among our fellowmen, so that much of ourreligionandofitsmoralityhasbeenadoptedbythem.(viii)Tillthemain religious and moral principles of Judaism have been acceptedby the world at large, the maintenance by the Jews of a separatecorporate existence is a religious duty incumbent upon them. Theyare the witnesses of God, and they must adhere to their religion,showingforthitstruthandexcellencetoallmankind.Thishasbeenand is and will continue to be their mission. Their public worshipand private virtues must be the outward manifestation of thefulfilmentofthatmission.Judaism20CHAPTERIVSOMECONCEPTSOFJUDAISMThoughtherearenoacceptedArticlesofFaithinJudaism,thereisacomplete consensus of opinion that Monotheism is the basis of thereligion. The Unity of God was more than a doctrine. It wasassociatedwiththenoblesthopeofIsrael,withIsraelsMissiontotheworld.TheUnityofGodwasevenmorethanahope.Itwasaninspiration,a passion. For it the Jews passed through fire and water, enduringtribulation and death for the sake of the Unity. All the Jewishmartyrologiesarewrittenroundthistext.In one passage the Talmud actually defines the Jew as theMonotheist.WhoeverrepudiatestheserviceofothergodsiscalledaJew(Megillah,13a).ButthisallpervadingdoctrineoftheUnitydidnotreachJudaismasanabstractphilosophicaltruth.Hence,thoughthebeliefintheUnityofGod,associatedasitwaswiththebeliefintheSpiritualityofGod,might have been expected to lead to the conception of an Absolute,Transcendent Being such as we meet in Islam, it did not so lead inJudaism.JudaismneverattemptedtodefineGodatall.MaimonidesputthesealonthereluctanceofJewishtheologytogobeyond,ortofall short of, what historic Judaism delivered. Judaism waversbetween the two opposite conceptions: absolute transcendentalismand absolute pantheism. Sometimes Judaism speaks with the voiceofIsaiah;sometimeswiththevoiceofSpinoza.Itfoundthebridgeinthe Psalter. The Lord is nigh unto all that call upon Him. The Lawbroughtheaventoearth;Prayerraisedearthtoheaven.As was remarked above, Jewish theology never shrank frominconsistency. It accepted at once Gods foreknowledge and mansfreewill. So it described the knowledge of God as far above mansreach; yet it felt God near, sympathetic, a Father and Friend. Theliturgy of the Synagogue has been well termed a precipitate of allthe Jewish teaching as to God. He is the Great, the Mighty, theAwful, the Most High, the King. But He is also the Father, Helper,Deliverer, the PeaceMaker, Supporter of the weak, Healer of thesick. All human knowledge is a direct manifestation of His grace.Mans body, with all its animal functions, is His handiwork. HeJudaism21createdjoy,andmadetheBridegroomandtheBride.HeformedthefruitoftheVine,andistheSourceofallthelawfulpleasuresofmen.He is the Righteous Judge; but He remembers that man is dust, Hepardons sins, and His lovingkindness is over all. He isunchangeable, yet repentance can avert the evil decree. He is inheaven, yet he puts the love and fear of Him into mans very heart.He breathedthe Soulinto man, and is faithful to those that sleep inthe grave. He is the Reviver of the dead. He is Holy, and Hesanctified Israel with His commandments. And the whole ispervadedwiththethoughtofGodsUnityandtheconsequentunityof mankind. Here again we meet the curious syncretism which wehave so often observed. God is in a special sense the God of Israel;butHeisunequivocally,too,theGodofallflesh.Moses Mendelssohn said that, when in the company of a Christianfriend, he never felt the remotest desire to convert him to Judaism.This is the explanation of the effect on the Jews of the combinedbeliefinGodastheGodofIsrael,andalsoastheGodofallmen.Atone time Judaism was certainly a missionary religion. But after theloss of nationality this quality was practically dormant. Belief wasnotnecessarytosalvation.Thepiousofallnationshaveapartintheworld to come may have been but a casual utterance of an ancientRabbi, but it rose into a settled conviction of later Judaism.Moreover, it was dangerous for Jews to attempt any religiouspropagandain the Middle Ages,and thus the pressure of fact cameto the support of theory. Mendelssohn even held that the samereligion was not necessarily good for all, just as the same form ofgovernment may not fit equally all the various nationalidiosyncrasies. Judaism for the Jew may almost be claimed as aprincipleoforthodoxJudaism.Itsaystotheoutsider:Youmaycomein ifyou will, but we warn you whatit means.At all events it doesnot seek to attract. It is not strange that this attitude has led tounpopularity.ThereasonofthisresentmentisnotthatmenwishtobeinvitedtojoinJudaism;itliesratherinthesensethattheabsenceof invitation implies an arrogant reserve. To some extent this is thecase. The oldfashioned Jew is inclined to think himself superior toothermen.Suchathoughthasitspathos.On the other hand, the national as contrasted with the universalaspect of Judaism is on the wane. Many Jewish liturgies have, forinstance, eliminated theprayers for the restoration of sacrifices;andseveral have removed or spiritualised the petitions for the recoveryof the Jewish nationality. Modern reformed Judaism is aJudaism22universalistic Judaism. It lays stress on the function of Israel, theServant, as a Light to the Nations. It tends to eliminate thoseceremonies and beliefs which are less compatible with a universalthan with, a racial religion. Modern Zionism is not a real reactionagainst this tendency. For Zionism is either nonreligious or, ifreligious,bringstothefrontwhathasalwaysbeenacorrectivetothenationalism of orthodox Judaism. For the separation of Israel haseverbeenameanstoanend;neveranendinitself.Oftentheendhasbeen forgotten in the means, but never for long. The end of Israelsseparateness is the good of the world. And the religious as distinctfrom the merely political Zionist who thinks that Judaism wouldgain by a return to Palestine is just the one who also thinks thatreturnisanecessarypreliminarytotheMessianicAge,whenallmenshallflowuntoZionandseekGodthere.ReformedJewswouldhaveto be Zionists also in this sense, were it not that many of them nolongersharethebeliefinthenationalaspectsofthepropheciesastoIsraelsfuture.Thesemaybelievethattheworldmaybecomefullofthe knowledge of God without any antecedent withdrawal of Israelfromtheworld.If Judaism as a system of doctrine is necessarily syncretistic in itsconception of God, then we may expect the same syncretism in itstheoryofGodsrelationtoman.Itmustbesaidatoncethatthetermtheoryisillchosen.ItislaidtothechargeofJudaismthatithasnotheoryofSin.Thisistrue.Ifvirtueandrighteousnessareobedience,then disobedience is both vice and sin. No further theory wasrequired or possible. Atonement is reversion to obedience. Now itwassaidabovethatthedoctrineoftheUnitydidnotreachJudaismasaphilosophicaltruthexactlydefinedandapprehended.Itcameastheresultofalonghistoricgropingforthetruth,andwhenitcameitbrought with it olden anthropomorphic wrappings and tribaladornmentswhichwerenoteasilytobediscarded,iftheyeverwereentirelydiscarded.SowiththerelationofGodtomaningeneralandIsrael in particular. The unchangeable God is not susceptible to thechange implied in Atonement. But history presented to the Jewexamples of what he could not otherwise interpret than asreconciliation between God the Father and Israel the wayward butalways at heart loyal Son. And this interpretation was true to theinwardexperience.MansrepentancewascorrelatedwiththesorrowofGod.Godaswellasmanrepented,theformerofpunishment,thelatter of sin. The process of atonement included contrition,confession,andchangeoflife.UndoubtedlyJewishtheologylaysthegreateststressontheactivestageoftheprocess.JewishmoralistsuseJudaism23thewordTeshubah(literallyturningorreturn,i.e.aturningfromevil or a return to God) chiefly to mean a change of life. Sin is evillife, atonement is the better life. The better life was attained byfasting, prayer, and charity, by a purification of the heart and acleansing of the hands. The ritual side of atonement was seriouslyweakened by the loss of the Temple. The sacrificial atonement wasgone. Nothing replaced it ritually. Hence the Jewish tendencytowardsapracticalreligionwasstrengthenedbyitsalmostenforcedstress in atonement on moral betterment. But this moral bettermentdepended on a renewed communion with God. Sin estranged,atonementbroughtnear.Jewishtheologyregardedsinasatriumphof the Yetser Hara (the evil inclination) over the Yetser Hatob (thegoodinclination).Manwasalwaysliabletofallapreytohislowerself.Butsuchafall,thoughusualanduniversal,wasnotinevitable.Man reasserted his higher self when he curbed his passions, undidthewronghehadwroughttoothers,andturnedagaintoGodwithacontrite heart. As a taint of the soul, sin was washed away by thesuppliants tears and confession, by his sense of loss, his bitterconsciousness of humiliation, but withal man was helpless withoutGod. God was needed for the atonement. Israel never dreamed ofputting forward his righteousness as a claim to pardon. We areemptyofgoodworksistheconstantrefrainoftheJewishpenitentialappeals.ThefinalrelianceisonGodandonGodalone.YetJudaismtookoverfromitspasttheanthropomorphicbeliefthatGodcouldbemoved by mans prayers, contrition, amendmentespecially bymans amendment. Atonement was only real when the amendmentbegan; it only lasted while the amendment endured. Man must notthinktothrowhisownburdenentirelyonGod.Godwillhelphimtobearit,andwilllightentheweightfromwillingshoulders.Butbearitmancanandmust.Theshouldersmustbeatalleventswilling.Judaism as a theology stood or fell by its belief that man can affectGod. If, for instance, prayer had no validity, then Judaism had nobasis. Judaism did not distinguish between the objective andsubjectiveefficacyofprayer.Thetwowenttogether.TheacceptanceofthewillofGodandtheincliningofGodspurposetothedesireofman were two sides of one fact. The Rabbinic Judaism did notmechanicallyposit,however,theobjectivevalidityofprayer.Onthecontrary,themanwhoprayedexpectingananswerwasregardedasarrogant and sinful. A famous Talmudic prayer sums up thesubmissive aspect of the Jew in this brief petition (Berachoth, 29 a):Do Thy will in heaven above, and grant contentment of spirit tothosethatfearTheebelow;andthatwhichisgoodinThineeyesdo.Judaism24Blessed art Thou, O Lord, who hearest prayer. This, be itremembered, was the prayer of a Pharisee. So, too, a very largeportion of all Jewish prayer is not petition but praise. Still, Judaismbelieved, not that prayer would be answered, but that it could beanswered. In modern times the chief cause of the weakening ofreligion all round, in and out of the Jewish communion, is thegrowing disbelief in the objective validity of prayer. And a similarremarkappliestothebeliefinmiracles.Buttoamuchlessextent.Allancient religions were based on miracle, and even to the laterreligiousconsciousnessadenialofmiracleseemstodenythedivineOmnipotence. Jewish theology from the Rabbinic age sought toevadethedifficultybythemysticnotionthatallmiracleswerelatentin ordered nature at the creation. And so the miraculous becomesinterconnectedwithProvidenceasrevealedinhistory.Butthebeliefin special miracles recurs again and again in Judaism, and thoughdiscarded by most reformed theologies, must be admitted as aprevailingconceptoftheolderreligion.ButthebeliefwasratheringeneralthaninspecialProvidence.Therewas a communal solidarity which made most of the Jewish prayerscommunalmorethanpersonal.ItisheldbymanythatinthePsalterI in the majority of cases means the whole people. The sense ofbrotherhood,inotherrelationsbesidespublicworship,isaperennialcharacteristicofJudaism.Even more marked is this in the conception of the family. Thehallowing of homelife was one of the best features of Judaism.Chastitywasthemarkofmenandwomenalike.ThepositionoftheJewish woman was in many ways high. At law she enjoyed certainprivilegesandsufferedcertaindisabilities.Butinthehouseshewasqueen.MonogamyhadbeentheruleofJewishlifefromtheperiodofthereturnfromtheBabylonianExile.IntheMiddleAgesthecustomof monogamy was legalised in Western Jewish communities.Connected with the fraternity of the Jewish communal organisationandtheincomparableaffectionandmutualdevotionofthehomelifewasthehabitofcharity.Charity,inthesensebothofalmsgivingandof lovingkindness, was the virtue of virtues. The very word whichintheHebrewBiblemeansrighteousnessmeansinRabbinicHebrewcharity.Onthreethingstheworldstands,saysaRabbi,onlaw,onpublicworship,andonthebestowaloflovingkindness.Judaism25SomeotherconceptsofJudaismandtheirinfluenceoncharacterwillbe treated in a later chapter. Here a final word must be said on theHallowingofKnowledge.InoneoftheoldestprayersoftheSynagogue,repeatedthricedaily,occurs this paragraph: Thou dost graciously bestow on manknowledge, and teachest mortals understanding; O let us begraciously endowed by Thee with knowledge, understanding, anddiscernment. Blessed art Thou, O Lord, gracious Giver ofKnowledge.TheintellectwastobeturnedtotheserviceoftheGodfrom whom intelligence emanated. The Jewish estimate of intellectand learning led to some unamiable contempt of the fool and theignoramus. But the evil tendency of identifying learning withreligion was more than mitigated by the encouragement which thisconcept gave to education. The ideal was that every Jew must be ascholar, or at all events a student. Obscurantism could not for anylengthyperiodlodgeitselfintheJewishcamp.Therewasnolearnedcaste.ThefactthattheBibleandmuchofthemostadmiredliteraturewas in Hebrew made most Jews bilingual at least. But it was notmerelythatknowledgewasuseful,thatitaddeddignitytoman,andrealisedpartofhispossibilities.TheserviceoftheLordcalledforthededication of the reason as well as for the purification of the heart.TheJewhadtothinkaswellasfeelHehadtoservewiththemindaswell as with the body. Therefore it was that he was always anxiousto justify his religion to his reason. Maimonides devoted a largesection of his Guide to the explanation of the motives of thecommandments. And his example was imitated. The Law was theexpressionoftheWillofGod,andobeyedandlovedassuch.ButtheLaw was also the expression of the Divine Reason. Hence man hadthe right and the duty to examine and realise how his own humanreason was satisfied by the Law. In a sense the Jew was a quitesimplebeliever.Butneverasimpleton.KnowtheLordthyGodwasthekeynoteofthisaspectofJewishtheology.Judaism26CHAPTERVSOMEOBSERVANCESOFJUDAISMThe historical consciousness of Israel was vitalised by a uniqueadaptabilitytopresentconditions.Thisisshowninthefidelitywithwhich a number of ancient festivals have been maintained throughtheages.SomeoftheseweretakenoverfrompreIsraelitecults.Theywerenaturefeasts,andtheseareamongtheoldestritesofmen.But,as Maimonides wisely said eight centuries ago, religious ritesdepend not so much on their origins as on the use men make ofthem. People who wish to return to the primitive usages of this orthat church have no grasp of the value and significance ofceremonial. Here, at all events, we are not concerned with origins.The really interesting thing is that feasts, which originated in thefieldsand under the free heaven, were observed and enjoyed in theconfined streets of the Ghetto. The influence of ceremonial isundying when it is bound up with a communitys life. It isimpossible to create festivals to order. One must use those whichexist, and where necessary charge them with new meanings. SowritesMr.MontefioreinhisLiberalJudaism(p.155).This is precisely what has happened with the Passover, Pentecost,andtheFeastofTabernacles.Thesethreefestivalswereoriginally,ashas been said, nature feasts. But they became also pilgrim feasts.After the fall of the Temple the pilgrimages to Jerusalem, of course,ceased, and there was an end to the sacrificial rites connected withthem all. The only sense in which they can still be called pilgrimfeasts is that, despite the general laxity of Sabbath observance andSynagogue attendance, these three celebrations are nowadaysoccasionsonwhich,inspring,summer,andautumn,alargesectionof the Jewish community contrives to wend its way to places ofpublicworship.IntheJewishLiturgythethreefeastshavespecialdesignations.Theyare called respectively The Season of our Freedom, the Season ofthe Giving of our Law, and the Season of our Joy. Thesedescriptionsare not biblical, nor are they found in this precise formuntil the fixation of the Synagogue liturgy in the early part of theMiddle Ages. But they have had a powerful influence inperpetuatingtheholdthatthethreepilgrimfeastshaveontheheartand consciousness of Israel. Liberty, Revelation, Joythese are asequenceofwondrousappeal.NowitiseasilyseenthattheseideasJudaism27have no indissoluble connection with specific historical traditions.True, Freedom implies the Exodus; Revelation, the Sinaitictheophany; Joy, the harvest merrymakings, and perhaps someconnection with the biblical narrative of Israels wanderings in thewilderness.Buttheconnection,thoughessentialfortheconstructionof the association, is not essential for its retention. The Passover,says Mr. Montefiore (Liberal Judaism, p. 155), practically celebratestheformationoftheJewishpeople.Itisalsothefestivalofliberty.Inview of these two central features, it does not matter that we nolongerbelieveinthemiraculousincidentsoftheExodusstory.Theyaremeretrappingswhichcaneasilybedispensedwith.Afestivalofliberty, the formation of a people for a religious task, a peopledestined to become a purely religious community whose continuedexistence has no meaning or value except on the ground ofreligion,here we have ideas, which can fitly form the subject of ayearly celebration. Again, as to Pentecost and the TenCommandments,Mr.Montefiorewrites:Wedonotbelievethatanydivine or miraculous voice, still less that God Himself, audiblypronouncedtheTenWords.Buttheirimportanceliesinthemselves,not in their surroundings and origin. Liberals as well as orthodoxmay therefore join in the festival of the Ten Commandments.Pentecostcelebratesthedefiniteunionofreligionwithmorality,theinseparableconjunctionoftheserviceofGodwiththeserviceofman.Cananyreligiousfestivalhaveanoblersubject?Finally,astotabernacles, Mr. Montefiore thus expresses himself: For us, today,the connection with the wanderings from Egypt, which the latest[biblical]legislatorsattempted,hasagaindisappeared.Tabernaclesisaharvestfestival;itisanaturefestival.Shouldnotareligionhaveafestivalorholydayofthiskind?IsnottheconceptionofGodastherulerandsustainerofnature,theimmanentandallpervadingspirit,oneaspectoftheDivine,whichcanfitlybethoughtofandcelebratedyearbyyear?ThuseachofthethreegreatPentateuchalfestivalsmayreasonably and joyfully be observed by liberals and orthodox alike.We have no need or wish to make a change. And of the actualceremonial rites connected with the Passover, Pentecost, andTabernacles,itisapparentlyonlytheavoidanceofleavenonthefirstof the three that is regarded as unimportant. But even there Mr.Montefiores own feeling is in favour of the rite. It is, he says, amatter of comparative unimportance whether the practice of eatingunleavenedbreadinthehouseforthesevendaysofthePassoverbemaintained or not. Those who appreciate the value of a pretty andancientsymbol,bothforchildrenandadults,willnoteasilyabandonthecustom.Judaism28This is surely a remarkable development. In the Christian Church itseems that certain festivals are retaining their general hold becausetheyarebecomingpublic,nationalholidays.ButinJudaismtheholdis to be maintained precisely on the ground that there is to benothingnationalaboutthem,theyaretobereinterpretedideallyandsymbolically.Itremainstobeseenwhetherthisispossible,anditistooearlytopredicttheverdictofexperience.TheprocessisinactiveincubationinAmericaaswellasinEurope,butitcannotbeclaimedthattheeggsarehatchedyet.Ontheotherhand,Zionismhassofarhad no effect in the opposite direction. There has been nonationalisation of Judaism as a result of the new striving afterpolitical nationality. Many who had previously been detached fromtheJewishcommunityhavebeenbroughtbackbyZionism,buttheyhave not been reattached to the religion. There has been noperceptibleincrease,forinstance,inthenumberofthosewhofastonthe Ninth of Ab, the anniversary of the destruction of the Temple.Hence, from these and other considerations, of which limited spacepreventsthespecification,itseemsonthewholelikelythat,asinthepast so in the future, the Festivals of the Synagogue will survive bychanges in religious significance rather than by any deepening ofnationalassociation.Except that the Synagogues are decked with flowers, while theDecalogueissolemnlyintonedfromtheScrollofthePentateuch,theFeast of Pentecost has no ceremonial trappings even with theorthodox.PassoverandTabernaclesstandonadifferentfooting.Theabstention from leavened bread on the former feast has led to aclosely organised system of cleansing the houses, an interminablearrayofrulesastofood;whiletheprescriptionsoftheLawastothebearing of palmbranches and other emblems, and the ordinance asto dwelling in booths, have surrounded the Feast of Tabernacleswith a considerable, if less extensive, ceremonial. But there is thisdifference. The Passover is primarily a festival of the Home,Tabernacles of the Synagogue. In Europe the habit of actuallydwelling in booths has been long unusual, owing to climaticconsiderations. But of late years it has become customary for everySynagogue to raise its communal booth, to which many Jews payvisitsofceremony.Ontheotherhand,thePassoverisparexcellenceahome rite. On the first two evenings (or at all events on the firstevening) there takes place the Seder, (literally service), a service ofprayer,whichisatthesametimeafamilymeal.Gatheredroundthetable,onwhicharespreadunleavenedcakes,bitterherbs,andotherJudaism29emblems of joy and sorrow, the family recounts in prose and songthe narrative of the Exodus. The service is in two parts, betweenwhich comes the evening meal. The hallowing of the home hereattainsitshighestpoint.Unless, indeed, this distinction be allotted to the Sabbath. Therigidity of the laws regarding Sabbath observance is undeniable.Movementwasrestricted,manyactswereforbiddenwhichwerenotinthemselveslaborious.TheSabbathwashedgedinbyaformidablearrayofenactments.ToanoutsidecriticitisnotwonderfulthattheJewish Sabbath has a repellent look. But to the insider things wearanother aspect. The Sabbath was and is a day of delight. On it theJewhadaforetasteofthehappinessoftheworldtocome.Thereaderwho wishes to have a spirited, and absolutely true, picture of theJewish Sabbath cannot do better than turn to Dr. Schechtersexcellent Studies in Judaism (pp. 296 seq.). As Dr. Schechter pithilyputs it: Somebody, either the learned professors, or the millions ofthe Jewish people, must be under a delusion. Right through theMiddleAgestheSabbathgrewdeeperintotheaffectionsoftheJews.It was not till after the French Revolution and the era ofemancipation, that a change occurred. Mixing with the world, andsharing the worlds pursuits, the Jews began to find it hard toobservetheSaturdaySabbathasofold.Instillmorerecenttimesthedifficulty has increased. Added to this, the growing laxity inobservances has affected the Sabbath. This is one of the mostpressingproblemsthatfacetheJewishcommunitytoday.Hereandthere an attempt has been made by small sections of Jews tosubstitute a Sunday Sabbath for the Saturday Sabbath. But the planhasnotprospered.OneofthemostnotableritesoftheServiceofthePassovereveisthesanctification with wine, a ceremony common to the ordinarySabbath eve. This rite has perhaps had much to do with thecharacteristic sobriety of Israel. Wine forms part of almost everyJewish rite, including the marriage ceremony. Wine thus becomesassociated with religion, and undue indulgence is a sin as well as avice.Nojoywithoutwine,runsanoldRabbinicprescription.Joyisthe hallmark of Judaism; Joyous Service its summary of mansrelationtotheLaw.SofarisJudaismfrombeingagloomyreligion,that it is almost too lighthearted, just as was the religion of ancientGreece.ButtheTalmudtellsusofaclasswhointheearlypartofthefirst century were known as lovers of sorrow. These men were inlove with misfortune; for to every trial of Israel corresponded anJudaism30intervention of the divine salvation. This is the secret of the Jewishgaiety. The resilience under tribulation was the result of a firmconfidence in the saving fidelity of God. And the gaiety wastempered by solemnity, as the observances, to which we now turn,willamplyshow.Far more remarkable than anything yet discussed is the changeeffected in two other holy days since Bible times. The genius ofJudaism is nowhere more conspicuous than in the fuller meaningswhich have been infused into the New Years Day and the Day ofAtonement. The New Year is the first day of the seventh month(Tishri),whentheecclesiasticalyearbegan.IntheBiblethefestivalisonly known as a day of blowing the shofar (rams horn). In theSynagoguethisritewasretainedafterthedestructionoftheTemple,anditstillisuniversallyobserved.Butthedaywastransformedintoa Day of Judgment, the opening of a ten days period of PenitencewhichclosedwiththeDayofAtonement.Here, too, the change effected in a biblical rite transformed itscharacter. It needed a long upward development before a day,originally instituted on priestly ideas of national sin and collectiveatonement, could be transformed into the purely spiritual festivalwhichwecelebratetoday(Montefiore,op.cit.,p.160).Butthedayisnonethelessassociatedwithastrictrite,thefast.Itisoneofthefewascetic ceremonies in the Jewish Calendar as known to most Jews.ThereisastrainofasceticisminsomeformsofJudaism,andonthisafewwordswillbesaidlater.But,onthewhole,thereisinmodernJudaismatendencytounderratesomewhatthevalueofasceticisminreligion. Hence the fast has a distinct importance in and for itself,anditisregrettablethatthelaudabledesiretospiritualisethedayisleading to a depreciation of the fast as such. But the real change isduetothecessationofsacrifices.IntheLeviticalCode,sacrificehadaprimaryimportanceintheschemeofatonement.Butwiththelossofthe Temple, the idea of sacrifice entirely vanished, and atonementbecame a matter for the personal conscience. It was henceforth aninward sense of sin translating itself into the better life. To purifydesire, to ennoble the willthis is the essential condition ofatonement.Nay,itisatonement(Joseph,JudaismasCreedandLife,p.267;cf.supra,p.45).This,intheopinionofChristiantheologians,isashallowviewofatonement.Butitisatalleventsanattempttoapplytheologytolife.Anditsjustificationliesinitssuccess.Judaism31Of the other festivals a word is due concerning two of them, whichdiffermuchinsignificanceandindevelopment.PurimandChanukaare their names. Purim was probably the ancient BabylonianSaturnalia, and it is still observed as a kind of Carnival by manyJews,thoughtheirnumberisdecreasing.ForPurimisemphaticallyaGhettofeast.Andthisdescriptionappliesinmorewaysthanone.Inthe first place, the Book of Esther, with which the Jewish Purim isassociated,isnotabookthatcommendsitselftothemodernJewishconsciousness.Thehistoricityofthestoryisdoubted,anditsnarrowoutlook is not that of prophetic Judaism. Observed as mediaevalJews observed it, Purim was a thoroughly innocent festivity. Theunpleasant taste left by the closing scenes of the book was washedoff by the geniality of temper which saw the humours of Hamansfallandneverforamomentrestedinafeelingofvindictiveness.Butthewholebookbreathessonationalisticaspirit,souncompromisinga belief that the enemy of Israel must be the enemy of God, that ithas become difficult for modern Judaism to retain any affection forit. It makes its appeal to the persecuted, no doubt: it conveys astirringlessonintheprovidentialcarewithwhichGodwatchesoverHis people: it bids the sufferer hope. Esthers splendid surrender ofself, her immortal declaration, If I perish, I perish, still maylegitimatelythrillallhearts.ButtheCarnivalhasnoplaceinthelifeof a Western city, still less the sectional Carnival. The hobbyhorsehad its opportunity and the maskers their rights in the Ghetto, butonly there. Purim thus is now chiefly retained as a childrens feast,and still better as a feast of charity, of the interchange of giftsbetween friends, and the bestowal of alms on the needy. This is aworthysurvival.Chanuka, on the other hand, grows every year into greaterpopularity.Thisfestivaloflight,whenlampsarekindledinhonourof the Maccabean heroes, has of late been rediscovered by theliberals. For the first four centuries of the Christian Era, the festivalofChanuka(Dedication)wasobservedbytheChurchaswellasbytheSynagogue.Butforsomecenturiesafterwardsthesignificanceofthe anniversary was obscured. It is now realised as a momentousevent in the worlds history. It was not merely a local triumph ofHebraism over Hellenism, but it represents the reentry of the Eastinto the civilisation of the West. Alexander the Great hadoccidentalised the Orient. But with the success of the Judaeansagainst the Seleucids and of the Parthians against the Romans, theEast reasserted itself. And the newly recovered influence has neveragainbeensurrendered.Hencethisfeastisafeastofideals.YearbyJudaism32yearthisisbecomingmoreclearlyseen.Andthesymbolofthefeast,light,isitselfaninspiration.TheJewisreallyaverysentimentalbeing.Helovessymbols.Agooddealofhisfondnessforritualisduetothisfact.Theoutwardmarksof an inner state have always appealed to him. Ancient taboosbecamenotonlyconsecratedbutsymbolical.Whetheritbetheriteofcircumcision, or the use of phylacteries and fringed prayinggarments,ortheadfixtureoflittlescrollsinmetalcasesonthedoorposts,orthegladsubmissiontothedietarylaws,inallthesematterssentiment played a considerable part. And the word sentiment isused in its best sense. Abstract morality is well enough for thephilosopher, but men of flesh and blood want their moralityexpressedintermsoffeeling.LoveofGodisafinething,buttheJewwishedtodolovingactsofservice.ObediencetotheWillofGod,thesuppression of the human desires before that Will, is a great ideal.But the Jew wished to realise that he was obeying, that he wasmakingtheselfsuppression.Hewasnotsatisfiedwithagenerallawofholiness:hefeltimpelledtoholinessindetail,toalifeinwhichthelaws of bodily hygiene were obeyed as part of the same law ofholinessthatimposedritualandmoralpurity.Muchoftheintricatesystem, of observance briefly summarised in this paragraph, asystem which filled the Jews life, is passing away. This is largelybecause Jews are surrendering their own original theory of life andreligion.ModernJudaismseemstohavenousefortheritualsystem.TheolderJudaismmightretortthat,ifthatbeso,ithasnouseforthemodern Judaism. It is, however, clear that modern Judaism nowrealises the mistake made by the Reformers of the midnineteenthcentury. Hence we are hearing, and shall no doubt hear more andmore, of the modification of observances in Judaism rather than oftheirabolition.Judaism33CHAPTERVIJEWISHMYSTICISMJudaismisoftencalledthereligionofreason.Itisthis,butitisalsothereligionofthesoul.Itrecognisesthevalueofthatmysticinsight,those indefinable intuitions which, taking up the task at the pointwhere the mind impotently abandons it, carries us straight into thepresence of the King. Thus it has found room both for the keenspeculatorontheologicalproblemsandforthemysticwho,becausehefeelsGod,declinestoreasonaboutHimforaMaimonidesandaMendelssohn, but also for a Nachmanides, a Vital, and a Luria (M.Joseph, op. cit., p. 47). Used in a vague way, mysticism stands forspiritual inwardness. Religion without mysticism, said Amiel, is arose without perfume. This saying is no more precise and no moreinforming than Matthew Arnolds definition of religion as moralitytouched with emotion. Neither mysticism nor an emotional touchmakes religion. They are as often as not concomitants of apathological state which is the denial of religion. But if mysticismmeans a personal attitude towards God in which the heart is activeaswellasthemind,thenreligioncannotexistwithoutmysticism.When,however,weregardmysticismaswhatitveryoftenis,asanantithesistoinstitutionalreligionandarevoltagainstauthorityandforms, then it may seem at first sight paradoxical to recognise themystics claim to the hospitality of Judaism. That a religion whichproduced the Psalter, and not only produced it, but used it withnever a break, should be a religion, with intensely spiritualpossibilities, and its adherents capable of a vivid sense of thenearness of God, with an everfelt and neversatisfied longing forcommunion with Him, is what we should fully expect. But thisexpectationwouldrathermakeuslookforanexpressiononthelinesofthe119thPsalm,inwhichtheLawissomarkedlyassociatedwithfreedomandspirituality.Judaism,afterall,allowedtoauthorityandLaw a supreme place. But the mystic relies on his own intuitions,dependsonhispersonalexperiences.Judaism,ontheotherhand,isaschemeinwhichpersonalexperiencesonlycountinsofarastheyarebroughtintothegeneralfundofthecommunalexperience.But in discussing Judaism it is always imperative to discard all apriori probabilities. Judaism is the great upsetter of the probable.AnalyseatendencyofJudaismandpredictitslogicalconsequences,and then look in Judaism for consequences quite other than these.Judaism34Over and over again things are not what they ought to be. Thesacrificial system should have destroyed spirituality; in fact, itproduced the Psalter, the hymnbook of the second Temple.Pharisaism ought to have led to externalism; in fact, it did not, forsomehow excessive scrupulosity in rite and pietistic exercises wenthandinhandwithsimplefaithandreligiousinwardness.So,too,theexpression of ethics and religion as Law ought to have suppressedindividuality; in fact, it sometimes gave an impulse to eachindividual to try to impose his own concepts, norms, and acts as aLawupontherest.Eachthoughtverymuchforhimself,anddesiredthat others should think likewise. We have already seen that inmatters of dogma there never was any corporate action at all; inancient times, as now, it is not possible to pronounce definitely onthe dogmatic teachings of Judaism. Though there has been and is acertainconsensusofopiniononmanymatters,yetneitherinpracticenorinbeliefshavethelocal,thetemporal,thepersonalelementseverbeen negligible. In order to expound or define a tenet or rite ofJudaismitismostlynecessarytogointoquestionsoftimeandplaceandperson.Perhaps,then,weoughttobepreparedtofind,asinpointoffactwedofind,withinthemainbodyofJudaism,andnotmerelyasafreakof occasional eccentrics, distinct mystical tendencies. ThesetendencieshaveoftenbeenactivewellinsidethesphereoftheLaw.Mysticismwas,asweshallsee,sometimesarevoltagainstLaw;butit was often, in Judaism as in the Roman Catholic Church, theoutcome of a sincere and even passionate devotion to authority.Jewish mysticism, in particular, starts as an interpretation of theScriptures.Certaintruthswerearrivedatbymaneitherintuitivelyorrationally,andthesewereharmonisedwiththeBiblebyaprocessoflifting the veil from the text, and thus penetrating to the truemeaninghiddenbeneaththeletter.Allegoricalandesotericexegesisalwayshadthisaim:tofindwrittenwhathadbeenotherwisefound.Honour was thus done to the Scriptures, though the latter weresomewhat cavalierly treated in the process; Philos doctrine (at thebeginning of the Christian era) and the great canonical book of themediaevalCabbala,theZohar(beginningofthefourteenthcentury),were alike in this, they were largely commentaries on thePentateuch. Maimonides in the twelfth century followed the samemethod,andonlydifferedfromtheseinthenatureofhisdeductionsfromScripture.Thisprinceofrationalistsagreedwiththemysticsinadopting an esoteric exegesis. But he read Aristotle into the text,Judaism35while the mystics read Plato into it. They were alike faithful to theLaw,orrathertotheirowninterpretationsofitsterms.But further than this,a large portion of Jewish mysticism was thework of lawyers. Some of the foremost mystics were famousTalmudists, men who were appealed to for decisions on ritual andconduct. It is a phenomenon that constantly meets us in Jewishtheology.Therewereantinomianmysticsandlegalisticopponentsofmysticism,butmany,likeNachmanides(11951270)andJosephCaro(14881575), doubled the parts of Cabbalist and Talmudist. ThatJewish mysticism comes to look like a revolt against the Talmud isdue to the course of mediaeval scholasticism. While Aristotle wassupreme, it was impossible for man to conceive as knowableanythingunattainablebyreason.ButreasonmustalwaysleaveGodas unknowable. Mysticism did not assert that God was knowable,but it substituted something else for this spiritual scepticism.MysticismstartedwiththeconvictionthatGodwasunknowablebyreason,butitheldthatGodwasneverthelessrealisableinthehumanexperience.AcceptingandadoptingvariousNeoPlatonictheoriesofemanation, elaborating thence an intricate angelology, the mysticsthrew a bridge over the gulf between God and man. Philos Logos,thePersonifiedWisdomofthePalestinianMidrash,thedemiurgeofGnosticism, the incarnate Christ, were all but various phases of thissame attempt to cross an otherwise impassable chasm. Throughoutits whole history, Jewishmysticism substituted mediate creation forimmediatecreationoutofnothing,andthemediatebeingswerenotcreated but were emanations. This view was much influenced bySolomon ibn Gabirol (10211070). God is to Gabirol an absoluteUnity, in which form and substance are identical. Hence He cannotbe attributively defined, and man can know Him only by means ofbeings which emanate from Him. Nor was this idea confined toJewish philosophy of the GreeceArabic school. The GermanCabbala, too, which owed nothing directly to that school, held thatGodwasnotrationallyknowable.Theresultmustbe,notmerelytoexalt visionary meditation over calm ratiocination, but to placereliance on inward experience instead of on external authority,which makes its appeal necessarily to the reason. Here we seeelementsofrevolt.For,asDr.L.Ginzbergwellsays,whilestudyofthe Law was to Talmudists the very acme of piety, the mysticsaccorded the first place to prayer, which was considered as amystical progress towards God, demanding a state of ecstasy. TheJewish mystic must invent means for inducing such a state, forJudaism cannot endure a passive waiting for the moving spirit. TheJudaism36mysticsoulmustlearnhowtomountthechariot(Merkaba)andrideinto the inmost halls of Heaven. Mostly the ecstatic state wasinduced by fasting and other ascetic exercises, a necessarypreliminarybeingmoralpurity;thenthereweresolitarymeditationsand long night vigils; lastly, prescribed ritual of proved efficacyduring the very act of prayer. Thus mysticism had a fartherattraction for a certain class of Jews, in that it supplied the missingelement of asceticism which is indispensable to men more austerelydisposedthantheaverageJew.In the sixteenth century a very strong impetus was given to Jewishmysticism by Isaac Luria (15341572). His chief contributions to themovement were practical, though he doubtless taught a theoreticalCabbala also. But Judaism, even in its mystical phases, remains areligion of conduct. Luria was convinced that man can conquermatter; this practical conviction was the moving force of his wholelife. His own manner of living was saintly; and he taught hisdisciples that they too could, by penitence, confession, prayer, andcharity, evade bodily trammelsand send their soulsstraight to Godevenduringtheirterrestrialpilgrimage.Luriataughtallthisnotonlywhile submitting to Law, but under the stress of a passionatesubmissiontoit.HeaddedinparticularanewbeautytotheSabbath.Many of the most fascinatingly religious rites connected now withthe Sabbath are of his devising. The white Sabbath garb, the joyousmystical hymns full of the Bride and of Love, the special Sabbathfoods, the notion of the overSoulthese and many other of theLurianritesandfanciesstillholdwideswayintheOrient.TheoverSoul was a very inspiring conception, which certainly did notoriginate with Luria. According to a Talmudic Rabbi (Resh Lakish,thirdcentury),onAdamwasbestowedahighersoulontheSabbath,whichhelostatthecloseoftheday.Luriaseizeduponthismysticalidea,anduseditatoncetospiritualisetheSabbathandattachtoitanecstatic joyousness. The ritual of the overSoul was an elaboratemeans by which a relation was established between heaven andearth. But all this symbolism had but the slightest connection withdogma. It was practical through and through. It emerged in anumber of new rites, it based itself on and became the cause of adeepening devotion to morality. Luria would have looked withdismay on the moral laxity which did later on intrude, inconsequence of unbridled emotionalism and mystic hysteria. Therecomes the point when he that interprets Law emotionally is nolonger Lawabiding. The antinomian crisis thus produced meets usJudaism37in the careers of many who, like Sabbatai Zebi, assumed theMessianicrole.Jewish mysticism, starting as an ascetic corrective to theconventional hedonism, lost its ascetic character and degeneratedinto licentiousness. This was the case with the eighteenthcenturymysticism known as Chassidism, though, as its name (Saintliness)implies,itwasinnocentenoughatitsinitiation.Violentdances,andotheremotionalandsensualstimulations,ledtoastateofexaltationduring which the line of morality was overstepped. But there wasnevertheless, as Dr. Schechter has shown, considerable spiritualworthandbeautyinChassidism.Ittransferredthecentreofgravityfromthinkingtofeeling;itledawayfromtheworshipofScripturetothe love of God. The fresh air of religion was breathed once more,the stars and the open sky replaced the midnight lamp and thecollege. But it was destined to raise a fog more murky than theconfinedatmosphereofthestudy.ThemanwiththebookwasoftennearerGodthanwasthemanoftheearth.TheoppositionofTalmudismagainsttheneomysticismwasthusonthe whole just and salutary. This opposition, no doubt, was bitterchiefly when mysticism became revolutionary in practice, when itinvaded the established customs of legalistic orthodoxy. But it wasalso felt that mysticism went dangerously near to a denial of theabsolute Unity of God. It was more difficult to attack it on itstheoreticalthanonitspracticalside,however.TheJewishmysticdidsometimes adopt a most irritating policy of deliberately alteringcustoms as though for the very pleasure of change. Now in mostreligious controversies discipline counts for more than belief. AsSalimbene asserts of his own day: It was far less dangerous todebate in the schools whether God really existed, than to wearpubliclyandpertinaciouslyafrockandcowlofanybuttheorthodoxcut. But the Talmudists antagonism to mysticism was notexclusivelyofthiskindintheeighteenthcentury.Mysticismisoftenmere delusion. In the last resort man has no other guide than hisreason. It is his own reason that convinces him of the limitations ofhis reason. But those limitations are not to be overpassed by avisionary selfintrospection, unless this, too, is subjected to rationalcriticism. Mysticism does its true part when it applies this criticismalsotothecurrentforms,conventions,andinstitutions.Conventions,forms,andinstitutions,afterall,representthecorporatewisdom,theaccumulated experiences of men throughout the ages. Mysticism isthe experience of one. Each does right to test the corporateJudaism38experience by his own experience. But he must not elevate himselfinto a law even for himself. That, in a sentence, would summarisetheattitudeofJudaismtowardsmysticism.Itismedicine,notafood.Judaism39CHAPTERVIIESCHATOLOGYThatthesoulhasalifeofitsownafterdeathwasafirmlyfixedideain Judaism, though, except in the works of philosophers and in theliberal theology of modern Judaism, the grosser conception of abodily Resurrection was predominant over the purely spiritual ideaofImmortality.Curiouslyenough,Maimonides,whoformulatedthebeliefinResurrectionasadogmaoftheSynagogue,himselfheldthattheworldtocomeisaltogetherfreefrommaterialfactors.Atamuchearlierperiod(inthethirdcentury)Rabhadsaid(Ber.17a):Notasthis world is the world to come. In the world to come there is noeatingordrinking,nosexualintercourse,nobarter,noenvy,hatred,orcontention.Buttherighteoussitwiththeircrownsontheirheads,enjoying the splendour of the Shechinah (the Divine Presence).Commenting on this in various places, Maimonides emphaticallyasserts the spirituality of the future life. In his Siraj he says, withreference to the utterance of Rab just quoted: By the remark of theSages with their crowns on their heads is meant the preservationofthesoulintheintellectualsphere,andthemergingofthetwointoone.... By their remarkenjoying the splendour of the Shechinahismeant that those souls will reap bliss in what they comprehend oftheCreator,justastheAngelsenjoyfelicityinwhattheyunderstandof His existence. And so the felicity and the final goal consists inreaching to this exalted company and attaining this high pitch.Again, in his philosophical Guide (I. xli.), Maimonides distinguishesthree kinds of soul: (1) The principleof animality,(2) the principleof humanity, and (3) the principle of intellectuality, that part ofmansindividualitywhichcanexistindependentlyofthebody,andthereforealonesurvivesdeath.EvenmoreremarkableisthefactthatMaimonides enunciates the same opinion in his Code (Laws ofRepentance, viii. 2). For the Code differs from the other two of thethree main works of Maimonides in that it is less personal, andexpresses what the author conceives to be the general opinion ofJudaismasinterpretedbyitsmostauthoritativeteachers.There can be no question but that this repeated insistence ofMaimonideshasstronglyaffectedallsubsequentJewishthought.Tohim,eternalblissconsistsinperfectspiritualcommunionwithGod.He who desires to serve God from Love must not serve to win thefuture world. But he does right and eschews wrong because he isman, and owes it to his manhood to perfect himself. This effortJudaism40brings him to the type of perfect man, whose soul shall live in thestatethatbefitsit,viz.intheworldtocome.Thustheworldtocomeisastateratherthanaplace.But Maimonides view was not accepted without dispute. It wasindeed quite easy to cite Rabbinic passages in which the world tocomeisidentifiedwiththebodilyResurrection.AgainstMaimonideswere produced such Talmudic utterances as the following: SaidRabbi Chiya b. Joseph, the Righteous shall arise clad in theirgarments,forifagrainofwheatwhichisburiednakedcomesforthwith many garments, how much more shall the righteous arise fullgarbed,seeingthattheywereinterredwithshrouds(Kethub.111b).Again, Rabbi Jannai said to his children, Bury me not in whitegarments or in black: not in white, lest I be not held worthy (ofheaven) and thus may be like a bridegroom among mourners (inGehenna);norinblack,lestifIamheldworthy,Ibelikeamourneramong bridegrooms(in heaven). But bury me in colouredgarments(so that my appearance will be partly in keeping with either fate),(Sabbath, 114 a). Or finally: They arise with their blemishes, andthenarehealed(Sanh.91b).The popular fancy, in its natural longing for a personal existenceafter the bodily death, certainly seized upon the belief inResurrection with avidity. It had its roots partly in the individualconsciousness, partly in the communal. For the Resurrection wasclosely connected with such hopes as those expressed in Ezekielsvision of thereanimation of Israels dry bones (Ezek. xxxvii.). Thuspopular theology adopted many ideas based on the Resurrection.ThemythoftheLeviathanhardlybelongshere,for,widespreadasitwas,itwascertainlynotregardedinamateriallight.TheLeviathanwascreatedonthefifthday,anditsfleshwillbeservedasabanquetfor the righteous at the advent