CHAPTER VII.

THE AGE OF LUZZATTO, EIBESCHÜTZ, AND FRANK.

Poetical Works of Moses Chayim Luzzatto--Luzzatto ensnared

in the Kabbala--His Contest with Rabbinical Authorities--

Luzzatto's last Drama--Jonathan Eibeschütz--Character and

Education of Eibeschütz--His Relations with the Jesuits in

Prague--The Austrian War of Succession--Expulsion of the

Jews from Prague--Eibeschütz becomes Rabbi of Altona--Jacob

Emden--Eibeschütz charged with Heresy--The Controversy

between Emden and Eibeschütz--The Amulets--Party Strife--

Interference by Christians and the Civil Authorities--Revival

of Sabbatianism--Jacob Frank Lejbowicz and the Frankists--

The Doctrine of the Trinity--Excesses of the Frankists.

1727-1760 C. E.

The disgrace and disappointment caused by visionaries and impostors

during almost a whole century, the lamentable effects of the careers

of Sabbataï Zevi and his band of prophets--Cardoso, Mordecai of

Eisenstadt, Querido, Judah Chassid, Chayim Malach, Chayon, and

others--failed to suppress Kabbalistic and Messianic extravagances. As

yet these impostors only invited fresh imitators, who found a credulous

circle ready to believe in them, and thus new disorders were begotten.

The unhealthy humors which, during the lapse of ages, had been

introduced into the organism of Judaism appeared as hideous eruptions

on the surface, but this might be considered the sign of convalescence.

Corruption had seized even the most delicate organs. A gifted youth,

endowed with splendid talents, who in ordinary circumstances would have

become an ornament to Judaism, was tainted by the general degradation,

and under the spell of mysticism misapplied his excellent gifts, and

contributed to error. It is impossible to resist a feeling of sorrow

at finding this amiable man with his ideal character falling into

errors which bring him down to the level of such impure spirits as

Chayon and Löbele Prosnitz--a many-colored sunbeam extinguished in a

swamp. If we denounce the Kabbala, which has begotten such unspeakable

misconceptions of Judaism, and are justly wrathful against its authors

and propagators, we feel specially indignant when we find two noble

young men of high endowments and purity of life, Solomon Molcho and

Luzzatto, following its chimeras, and thereby precipitating themselves

into the abyss. Both literally sacrificed their lives for dreams, the

confused imagery of which was suggested by the dazing medley of the

Kabbala. Although Luzzatto did not meet with a tragic end like the

Portuguese Marrano who shared his convictions, yet he, too, was a

martyr, none the less because his wounds had been inflicted by himself

under the influence of excitement.

Moses Chayim Luzzatto (born 1707, died 1747) was the son of very

wealthy parents, natives of Padua. His father, who carried on an

extensive silk business, spared no expense in educating him. The two

ancient languages, Hebrew and Latin, which in Italy were in a measure

a literary necessity, the one among Jews, the other among Christians,

Luzzatto acquired in early youth; but they had an influence on his

mind altogether different from that which they obtained over his

contemporaries. Both enriched his genius, and promoted its higher

development. Latin opened for him the realm of the beautiful, Hebrew

the gates of the sublime. Luzzatto had a poet's delicately-strung

soul, an Æolian harp, which responded to every breath with harmonious,

tuneful vibrations. His poetic gift displayed at once power and

sweetness, wealth of fancy and richness of imagery, combined with

due sense of proportion. A believer in the transmigration of souls

might have said that the soul of the Hebrew-Castilian singer, Jehuda

Halevi, had been born again in Luzzatto, but had become more perfect,

more matured, more tender, and endowed with a more delicate sense

of harmony, encompassed as he was by the musical atmosphere of his

Italian fatherland. Even in early boyhood every event, joyful or sad,

was to him a complete picture, a little work of art, wherein color and

euphony were revealed together. A youth of seventeen, he discerned with

such remarkable clearness the hidden charm of language, the laws of

harmony, deducible from the higher forms of eloquence as from poetry,

and the grace of rhythm and cadence, that he composed a work on the

subject, and illustrated it by beautiful examples from sacred poetry.

He contemplated introducing a new meter into modern Hebrew poetry, in

order to obtain greater variety in the succession of long and short

syllables, and thus produce a musical cadence. The Hebrew language is

usually classified among the dead tongues. To Luzzatto, however, it

was full of life, vigor, youth, clearness, and euphony. He used Hebrew

as a pliant instrument, and drew from it sweet notes and caressing

melodies; he renewed its youth, invested it with a peculiar charm, in

short, lived in it as though his ear had absorbed the rich tones of

Isaiah's eloquence. Incomparably more gifted than Joseph Penso de la

Vega, Luzzatto, likewise in his seventeenth year, composed a drama

on the biblical theme of Samson and the Philistines. This early work

gives promise of the future master. The versification is faultless, the

thoughts original, and the language free from bombast and redundancy.

His Hebrew prose, too, is an agreeable contrast to the insipid, ornate,

and laboriously witty style of his Jewish contemporaries; it has much

of the simplicity, polish, and vivacity of the biblical narrative.

Before his twentieth year Luzzatto had composed one hundred and fifty

hymns, which are only an imitation of the old psalter, but the language

of which is marked by fervor and purity. It was perhaps during the

same period that he composed his second Hebrew drama, in four acts--

"The High Tower, or The Innocence of the Virtuous"--beautiful in

versification, melodious in language, but poor in thought. The young

poet had not yet seen life in its fullness, nor keenly studied its

contrasts and struggles. He was acquainted only with idyllic family

life and academic peace. Even virtue and vice, love and selfishness,

which he desired to represent in his drama, were known to him but

by hearsay. His muse becomes eloquent only when she sings of God's

sublimity. Isolated verses are faultless, but the work as a whole is

that of a schoolboy. He was too dependent on Italian models--still

walked on stilts.

This facility and versatility in clothing both platitudes and original

thoughts in new as well as borrowed forms, and the over-abundance of

half-matured ideas, which, if he could have perfected them, might have

proved a blessing to Judaism and to himself, were transformed into a

curse. One day (Sivan, 1727) he was seized with the desire to imitate

the mystic language of the Zohar, and he succeeded as well as in the

case of the psalms. His sentences and expressions were deceptively

similar to those of his model, just as high-sounding, apparently full

of meaning, in reality meaningless. This success turned his head, and

led him astray. Instead of perceiving that if the Kabbalistic style

of the Zohar is capable of imitation, that book must be the work of a

clever human author, Luzzatto inferred that his own creative faculty

did not proceed from natural endowments, but, as in the case of the

Zohar, was the product of a higher inspiration. In other words, he

shared the mistaken view of his age with respect to the origin and

value of the Kabbala. Isaiah Bassan, of Padua--who instructed

Luzzatto in his early years--had infused mystical poison into his

healthy blood. However, any other teacher would also have led him into

the errors of the Kabbala, from which there was no escape. The air

of the Ghettos was impregnated with Kabbala. From his youth upwards

Luzzatto heard daily that great adepts in mysticism possessed special

tutelar spirits (Maggid), who every day gave them manifestations from

above. Why should not he, too, be vouchsafed this divine gift of

grace? Some of the mystical writings of Lurya, at that time still a

rarity, fell into his hands. He learnt them by heart, became entirely

absorbed in them, and thus completed his derangement. Luzzatto was

possessed by a peculiar delusion. His naturally clear and methodical

intellect, his fine sense of the simplicity and beauty of the poetry

of the Bible, and his æsthetic conceptions with regard to Italian and

Latin literature urged him to seek clearness and common sense even in

the chaos of the Kabbala, the divine origin of which was accepted by

him as a fact. He in no way resembled the wild visionaries Moses Zacut

and Mordecai of Eisenstadt; he did not content himself with empty

formulas and flourishes, but sought for sound sense. This he found

rather in his own mind than in the Zohar or in the writings of Lurya.

Nevertheless, he lived under the delusion that a divine spirit had

vouchsafed him deep insight into the Kabbala, solved its riddles, and

disentangled its meshes. Self-deception was the cause of his errors,

and religious fervor, instead of protecting, only plunged him in more

deeply. His errors were fostered by the conviction that existing

Judaism with its excrescences would be unintelligible without the

Kabbala, the theories of which could alone explain the phenomena, the

strife, and the contradictions in the world, and the tragical history

of the Jewish people. Israel--God's people--the noblest portion of

creation, stands enfeebled and abased on the lowest rung of the ladder

of nations; its religion misjudged, its struggles fruitless. To account

for this bewildering fact, Luzzatto constructed a system of cobwebs.

It flattered the vanity of this young man of twenty to gain this

insight into the relations of the upper and the lower worlds, to

explain them in the mystical language of the Zohar, and thus become

an important member in the series of created beings. Having firmly

convinced himself of the truth of the fundamental idea of the Kabbala,

he accepted all its excrescences--transmigration of souls, anagrams,

and necromancy. He wrote reams of Kabbalistic chimeras, and composed a

second Zohar (Zohar Tinyana) with appropriate introductions (Tikkunim)

and appendices. The more facility he acquired, the stronger became

his delusion that he, too, was inspired by a great spirit, and was a

second, perhaps more perfect Simon bar Yochaï. Little by little there

crept over him in his solitude the fantastic conviction that he was the

pre-ordained Messiah, called to redeem, by means of the second Zohar,

the souls of Israel and the whole world.

Luzzatto could not long bear to hide his light under a bushel. He began

operations by disclosing to Israel Marini and Israel Treves, two young

men of the same way of thinking as himself, that his guardian spirit

had bidden him grant them knowledge of his new Zohar. His disciples

in the Kabbala were dazzled and delighted, and could not keep the

secret. The result was that Venetian Kabbalists sought out the young

and wealthy prodigy at his home in Padua, and thus confirmed him in

his fanaticism. A vivacious, energetic, impetuous Pole, Yekutiel

(Kussiel) of Wilna, who had come to Padua to study medicine, joined

Luzzatto's circle. To hear of the latter, join him, abandon his former

studies, and devote himself to mysticism was for the Pole a rapid,

easy resolution. It was far harder for him to keep the secret. No

sooner had he been initiated by Luzzatto than he blazoned forth this

new miracle to the world. Kussiel circulated extravagant letters on

the subject, which came into the hands of Moses Chages in Altona. The

latter, who had stoutly opposed and effectually silenced Chayon and the

other Sabbatian visionaries, was, so to speak, the recognized official

zealot, whose utterances were decisive on matters of faith; and the

rabbi of the so-called "three communities" of Altona, Hamburg, and

Wandsbeck, Ezekiel Katzenellenbogen, who had excommunicated Moses Meïr

Kamenker and his confederates, was subservient to him. Chages therefore

requested the Venetian community to suppress the newly-born brood of

heretics before the poison of their doctrine could spread further.

The Venetian community, however, was not disposed to denounce Luzzatto

as a heretic, but treated him with great forbearance, probably out of

consideration for his youth, talents, and the wealth of his family, and

merely ordered him to justify himself. The enthusiastic youth rebelled

against this demand, proudly gave Chages to understand that he did not

recognize his authority, repudiated the suspicion of Sabbatian heresy,

and insisted that he had been vouchsafed revelations from Heaven.

He referred him to his instructor Bassan, who would never refuse to

testify that his orthodoxy was above suspicion. In this Luzzatto was

perfectly right. Bassan was so infatuated with his pupil that he would

have palliated his most scandalous faults, and encouraged rather

than checked his extravagances. In vain Chages and Katzenellenbogen

threatened him and the Paduan community with the severest form of

excommunication, if he did not abandon his pretensions to second sight

and mystical powers. Luzzatto remained unmoved: God had chosen him,

like many before, to reveal to him His mysteries. The other Italian

rabbis showed themselves as lukewarm in the matter as those of Padua

and Venice. Moses Chages called on three rabbis to form a tribunal,

but all three declined to interfere. He exerted himself so zealously,

however, that he persuaded several German rabbis (June, 1730) to

excommunicate all who should compose works in the language of the

Zohar in the name of angels or saints. This threat proved effectual.

Isaiah Bassan was obliged to repair to Padua and obtain a promise from

his favorite disciple to discontinue his mystical writings and his

instruction of young Kabbalists, or emigrate to the Holy Land. At last

the Venetian rabbinate was stirred up to intervene, and sent three

representatives to Padua--Jacob Belillos, Moses Menachem Merari,

and Nehemiah Vital Cohen,--in whose presence Luzzatto was obliged

to repeat his promise under oath. He was compelled to deliver his

Kabbalistic writings to his teacher Bassan, and they were placed under

seal. Thus the storm which had threatened him was averted.

Luzzatto appears to have been sobered by these events. He occupied

himself with his business, wrote more poetry, and resolved to marry.

He was a happy father, lived in concord with his parents and brothers

and sisters, and was highly respected. The evil spirit, however, to

whom he had sold himself would not release him, and led him back to

his youthful follies. A quarrel in the family and business misfortunes

in connection with his father's house, in which he was a partner,

appear to have been the cause of this renewal of his former studies.

Disquieted and troubled in the present he sought to learn the future

by means of Kabbalistic arts. He began once more to write down his

mystical fancies, and ventured to show them to Bassan, from whom he

obtained permission to publish them. It was whispered that Luzzatto

performed incantations by means of magic, and that his teacher

had handed him for publication some of the sealed writings in his

custody. The Venetian council of rabbis, owing to certain reports, was

especially excited and prejudiced against him. Luzzatto had written

a sharp reply to Leon Modena's forcible work against the Kabbala; and

as the latter was a Venetian rabbi, though of doubtful sincerity, the

members of the Venetian council, Samuel Aboab and his five colleagues,

considered any attack upon him an insult to their own honor. Their

_esprit de corps_ roused them to greater activity than had zeal for

their faith, when seemingly in peril. True Venetians, they had in their

service a spy, Salman of Lemberg, who watched and reported Luzzatto's

movements to them. As long as he was prosperous and surrounded by

friends the Venetian rabbis had treated him with remarkable indulgence,

and bestowed on him a title of honor; but after his family fell into

misfortune, when he was on the verge of ruin, and deserted by his

friends and flatterers, their regard for him ceased, and they could

not find enough stones to throw at him. They believed one of their

number who asserted that he had found implements of magic in Luzzatto's

house. Absurdly enough, too, they reproached Luzzatto with having

learnt Latin; to a man who had studied this language of Satan no angel,

they said, could appear! The members of the Venetian council of rabbis

believed, or pretended to believe that Luzzatto had boasted that in

the Messianic age his psalms would take the place of David's psalter.

They now showed themselves as active as they had previously been

negligent in the persecution of the unfortunate author. They sent three

inquisitors to Padua to examine him, search his house for writings, and

make him declare on oath that he would publish nothing without first

submitting it to the censorship of the Venetian council of rabbis. The

poet, deeply mortified, haughtily answered that this council had no

authority whatever over him, a member of the community of Padua. The

Venetian rabbis then excommunicated him, and condemned his writings

to the flames (December, 1734), taking care to give notice of their

proceedings to all the communities in Germany, particularly to the "big

drum," Chages. The Paduan community also abandoned the unfortunate

Luzzatto. To the honor of his teacher Isaiah Bassan be it said, that he

adhered to him as staunchly in misfortune as in prosperity. The rabbi

Katzenellenbogen, or rather his crier Chages, on this occasion made

the sensible suggestion that the study of the Kabbala be altogether

forbidden to young men, to prevent their falling into deplorable

errors, as had hitherto been the case; but the proposition failed to

meet with the approbation of other rabbis. Twenty years later the evils

produced by the Kabbala became so patent, that the synod of Polish Jews

enacted a decree to the above effect without encountering opposition.

The unfortunate, excommunicated dreamer was obliged to leave his

parents, his wife and child, and go forth a wanderer; but what

grieved him even more was separation from his fellow Kabbalists

and his mystic conventicle. He cherished the hope of being able to

print his Kabbalistic writings in Amsterdam. Alas for his want of

experience! Who would help him after fortune had turned her back! At

Frankfort-on-the-Main he was rudely awakened from his pleasant dream.

As soon as the rabbi, Jacob Kahana, heard of his arrival, he insisted

that he should promise on oath to abandon his Kabbalistic illusions,

and to refrain from writing on or instructing any one in the doctrines

of the Zohar (January 12, 1735). One liberty, however, Luzzatto

reserved for himself: to pursue his favorite studies at the age of

forty in the Holy Land. Many rabbis of Germany, Poland, Holland, and

Denmark, who were informed of Luzzatto's concessions, agreed in advance

to his excommunication in case he should break his word. The name of

Chages was of course upon the list.

Deeply humiliated and disappointed, Luzzatto repaired to Amsterdam.

Here a gleam of sunlight smiled on him again. The Portuguese community

received him kindly, as though desirous of atoning for the injustice

he had experienced at the hands of the Germans and Poles. They granted

him a pension; and he found a hospitable home in the house of Moses

de Chaves, a wealthy Portuguese, and became instructor to his son. To

be independent, he applied himself, like Spinoza, to the polishing of

lenses, and this led him to study physics and mathematics. He found

himself so comfortably settled that he induced not only his wife, but

also his parents to come to Amsterdam, and they were well received

by the Portuguese community. This favorable turn in his fortunes

encouraged him to resume his chimerical theories. He repeatedly

exhorted his disciples in Padua to remain true to their Kabbalistic

studies; whereupon the council of rabbis at Venice, which had received

intelligence of his proceedings, pronounced sentence of excommunication

in the synagogues and in the Ghetto against all who possessed

Kabbalistic writings or psalms of Luzzatto, and failed to deliver them

to the council.

In addition to his various occupations, with the Kabbala for his

spiritual wants and the polishing of lenses for his temporal needs,

Luzzatto published a masterpiece second to none in Hebrew poetry;

a drama, perfect in form, language, and thought; a memorial of his

gifts calculated to immortalize him and the language in which it is

composed. Under the unpretentious form of an occasional poem in honor

of the wedding of his disciple, Jacob de Chaves, with the high-born

maiden Rachel de Vega Enriques, he published his drama, "Glory to the

Virtuous" (La-Yesharim Tehilla). It differs materially from his earlier

works. The poet had in the interval enjoyed various opportunities

of gaining pleasant and painful experiences, and of enriching his

mental powers. His muse, grown more mature, had become acquainted with

the intricacies of life. Luzzatto had learnt to know the vulgar herd

well enough to see that it resembles a reed swaying to and fro in the

water, and is kept by the fetters of Deceit in a state of ignorance

and infirmity against which Wisdom herself is powerless. He had been

taught by experience how Folly yoked with Ignorance makes merry over

those born of the Spirit, and mocks at their labors, when they measure

the paths of the stars, observe the life of the vegetable world, behold

God's works, and account them of more value than Mammon. Superficiality

sees in all the events of life and of nature, however powerfully they

may appeal to the heart, only the sport of Chance or the inflexible

laws of heartless Necessity. Luzzatto had proved in his own case that

Craft and Pride closely united can deprive Merit of its crown, and

place it on their own heads. None the less he cherished the conviction

that Merit, though misjudged and calumniated, at last wins the day, and

that its acknowledgment (Fame) will fall to its share like a bride, if

only it allows itself to be led by Reason and her handmaid Patience,

averting its gaze from ignoble strife, and becoming absorbed in the

wonders of Creation. "Could we, with undimmed eyes, for a moment see

the world as it is, divested of pretense, we should see Pride and

Folly, which speak so scornfully of Virtue and Knowledge, deeply

humbled." Through an extraordinary occurrence, a kind of miracle, Truth

is revealed, Deceit unmasked, Pride becomes a laughing-stock, and the

fickle mob is led to recognize true Merit.

Luzzatto in his dramatic parable clothes and vivifies this train of

ideas, and enunciates them in monologues and dialogues through the

mouth of acting, or, more correctly, speaking characters. Luzzatto's

masterpiece is indeed not a drama in the strict sense of the word.

The characters represented are not of flesh and blood, but mere

abstractions: Reason and Folly, Merit and Deceit, are placed on the

stage. The dramatic action is slight. It is in truth a beautiful

wreath of fragrant flowers of poesy, a series of delightful monologues

and dialogues. In it Luzzatto embodies deep thoughts, difficult to

quicken into life or to paint in poetical colors; but he succeeded. The

wonderful evolution of the vegetable world, the extraordinary phenomena

of light, are treated in dramatic verse by Luzzatto with the same

facility as the appropriate subjects for poetry, and this too in the

Hebrew language, not readily lending itself to new forms of thought,

and with the self-imposed fetters of a meter never sinned against. His

style is dignified, and he employed a diction quite his own, replete

with youthful charms, beauty, and harmony. Thereby he supplied a new

impulse for the coming age. When the mists of error passed away, the

general chaos of thought was reduced to some sort of order, and a

happier period opened, young poets derived inspiration from the soft

warm rays diffused by the genius of Luzzatto. A modern Hebrew poet who

helped to accomplish the transition from the old to the new period,

David Franco Mendes, owes his inspiration to Luzzatto.

What might not Luzzatto have accomplished if he could have liberated

his mind from the extravagant follies of the Kabbala! But it held him

captive, and drew him not long after the completion of his drama (about

1744) to Palestine. Here he hoped to be able to follow unmolested the

inspirations of his excited fancy, or play the _rôle_ of a Messiah.

From Safet, too, he continued his communications with his band of

disciples; but before he could commence operations he fell a victim to

the plague, in the fortieth year of his age. His body was buried in

Tiberias. The two greatest modern Hebrew poets, Luzzatto and Jehuda

Halevi, were to rest in Hebrew soil. Even the tongues of the slanderous

Jews of Palestine, to whom Luzzatto, with his peculiarities, must

have seemed an enigma, could only speak well of him after his death.

Nevertheless he sowed bad seed. His Italian followers reintroduced

the Kabbala into Italy. His Polish disciple, Yekutiel of Wilna, whose

buffooneries had first got him into trouble, is said to have led an

adventurer's life in Poland and Holland, playing scandalous tricks

under the mask of mysticism. Another Pole, Elijah Olianow, who belonged

to Luzzatto's following, and proclaimed him as Messiah and himself as

his Elijah, did not enjoy the best of reputations. This man took part

in the disgraceful disorders which broke out in Altona after Luzzatto's

death, and which, again stirring up the Sabbatian mire, divided the

Jews of Europe into two hostile camps.

The foul pool which for centuries, since the prohibition of free

inquiry and the triumph of its enemy the Kabbala, had been in process

of formation in Judaism was, with perverse stupidity, being continually

stirred up, defiling the pure and the impure. The irrational excitement

roused by the vain, false Messiah of Smyrna was not suppressed by the

proscription of Chayon and the Polish Sabbatians, but showed a still

more ill-favored aspect, forcing its way into circles hitherto closed

against it. The rabbis, occupied with the practical and dialectical

interpretation of the Talmud, had hitherto refused admission to the

Kabbala on equal terms, and only here and there had surreptitiously

introduced something from it. They had opposed the Sabbatian heresy,

and pronounced an anathema against it. But one influential rabbi

espoused its cause, invested it with importance, and so precipitated

a conflict which undermined discipline and order, and blunted still

more the sense of dignity and self-respect, of truth and rectitude.

The occasion of the conflict was the petty jealousy of two rabbis.

Its true origin lay deeper, in intellectual perversity and the secret

dislike on the one hand to the excess of ritualistic observances,

and on the other to the extravagances of the Kabbala. The authors

of this far-reaching schism--two Polish rabbis of Altona--each

unconsciously had taken a step across the threshold of orthodoxy.

Diametrically opposed to each other in faculties and temperament, they

were suited by their characters to be pitted against each other. Both

Jonathan Eibeschütz and Jacob Emden had taken part in the foregoing

conflicts, and eventually gave these quarrels a more extended influence.

Jonathan Eibeschütz, or Eibeschützer (born at Cracow 1690, died

1764), was descended from a Polish family of Kabbalists. His father,

Nathan Nata, was for a short time rabbi of the small Moravian town

of Eibenschitz, from which his son derived his surname. Endowed with

a remarkably acute intellect and a retentive memory, the youthful

Jonathan, early left an orphan, received the irregular education, or

rather bewildering instruction of the age, which supplied him with

only two subjects on which to exercise his brains--the far-reaching

sphere of the Talmud, with its labyrinthine mazes, and the ensnaring

Kabbala, with its shallows full of hidden rocks. The one offered

abundant food for his hungry reason, the other for his ill-regulated

fancy. With his hair-splitting ingenuity he might have made an adroit,

pettifogging attorney, qualified to make out a brilliant and successful

justification for the worst case; or, had he had access to the higher

mathematics of Newton and Leibnitz, he might have accomplished much in

this field as a discoverer. Eibeschütz had some taste for branches of

learning beyond the sphere of the Talmud, and also a certain vanity

that made him desire to excel in them; but this he could not satisfy.

The perverted spirit of the Polish and German Jews of the time closed

to every aspiring youth the gates of the sciences based on truth

and keen observation, and drove him into the mazes of Rabbinical and

Talmudic literature. From lack of more wholesome food for his active

intellect, young Eibeschütz filled his brain with pernicious matter,

and want of method forced him into the crooked paths of sophistry. He

imagined indeed, or wished it to be supposed, that he had acquired

every variety of knowledge, but his writings on subjects not connected

with the Talmud, so far as it is possible to judge of them, his

sermons, his Kabbalistic compositions, and a mass of occasional papers,

reveal nothing that can be described as wisdom or solid learning.

Eibeschütz was not even familiar with the Jewish philosophers who wrote

in Hebrew; he was at home only in the Talmud. This he could manipulate

like soft clay, give it any form he desired, and he could unravel the

most intricately entangled skeins. He surpassed all his contemporaries

and predecessors not only in his knowledge of the Talmud, but also in

ready wit.

But Eibeschütz did not derive complete satisfaction from his

scholarship; it only served to sharpen his wits, afford him amusement,

and dazzle others. His restless nature and fiery temperament could

not content themselves with this, but aspired to a higher goal. This

goal, however, was unknown even to himself, or was only dimly shadowed

before his mind. Hence his life and conduct appear enigmatical and

full of contradictions. Had he lived in the age of the struggle for

reform, for the loosening of the bands of authority, he would have been

among the assailants, and would have employed his Talmudical learning

and aggressive wit as levers to upheave the edifice of Rabbinical

Judaism, and oppose the Talmud with the weapons it had supplied. For

he was easy-going, and disliked the gloomy piety of the German and

Polish Jews; and though impressed by it, he lacked fervor to yield to

its influence. He therefore found mysticism as interpreted by the

followers of Sabbataï very comforting: the Law was to be abolished by

the commencement of the Messianic era, or the spirit of the Kabbala

demanded no over-scrupulousness with regard to trifles. Nehemiah Chayon

appears to have made a great impression on young Eibeschütz in Prague

or Hamburg. With the Sabbatian Löbele Prosnitz, he was in constant,

though secret intercourse. He studied thoroughly the works of Abraham

Michael Cardoso, though they had been publicly condemned and branded

as heretical. Eibeschütz had adopted the blasphemous tenets of these

and other Sabbatians--namely, that there is no relation of any kind

between the Most High God, the First Cause, and the Universe, but

that a second person in the Godhead, the God of Israel, the image

and prototype of the former, created the world, gave the Law, chose

Israel, in short governs the Finite. He appears to have embraced also

the conclusions deduced from this heretical theory, that Sabbataï

Zevi was the true Messiah, that the second person of the Godhead was

incorporated in him, and that by his appearance the Torah had ceased to

have any importance.

But Eibeschütz had not sufficient strength of character or

determination to act in conformity with his convictions. It would

have been contrary to his nature to break openly with Rabbinical

Judaism, and by proclaiming himself an anti-Talmudist, as had been

done by several Sabbatians, to wage war against the whole of Judaism.

He was too practical and loved ease too well to expose himself to the

disagreeable consequences of such a rupture. Should he, like Chayon,

wander forth a fugitive through Asia and Europe, and back again?

Besides, he loved the Talmud and Rabbinical literature as food for his

wit, and could not do without them. The contradictions in his career

and the disorders which he originated may be traced to want of harmony

between his intellect and his temperament. Rabbinical Judaism did not

altogether suit him, but the sources from which it was derived were

indispensable to him, and had they not been in existence he would have

created them. Fettered by this contradiction he deceived not only the

world, but also himself; he could not arrive at any clear understanding

with himself, and was a hypocrite without intending it.

At one-and-twenty Eibeschütz directed a school in Prague, and a band

of subtlety-loving Talmud students gathered round him, hung on his

lips, and admired his stimulating method, and playful way of dealing

with difficulties. He captivated and inspired his pupils by his genial,

one might almost say student-like, manners, by his sparkling wit, and

scintillating sallies, not always within the bounds of propriety. His

manner towards his pupils was altogether different from that of rabbis

of the ordinary type. He did not slink along gloomily, like a penitent,

and with bowed head, and he imposed no such restraints on them, but

allowed them great freedom. Social life and lively, interesting

conversation were necessities to him. For these reasons the number of

Eibeschütz's disciples yearly increased, and counted by thousands. At

thirty he was regarded not alone in Prague, but far and wide as an

authority.

It has been stated that the council of rabbis of Frankfort-on-the-Main

had clear proofs of Eibeschütz's connection with Löbele Prosnitz and

the Podolian Sabbatians. Only his extensive influence and the great

number of his disciples protected him from being included in the

sentence of excommunication pronounced against the others. He had the

hardihood to meet the suspicions against himself by excommunicating the

Sabbatians (1725). Moses Chages, the man without "respect of persons,"

the "watchman of Zion" of that age, predicted that forbearance would

prove hurtful. In fact, Eibeschütz was at that time deeply committed

to the Sabbatian heresies, confessed the fact to Meïr Eisenstadt, the

teacher of his youth, who knew his erring ways, and, apparently ashamed

and repentant, promised amendment. Thanks to this clemency Eibeschütz

maintained his reputation, increased by his erudition, his ever-growing

body of disciples, and his activity. The suspicion of heresy was by

degrees forgotten, and the community of Prague, in recognition of his

merits, appointed him preacher (1728).

In another matter Eibeschütz left the beaten path, and placed himself

in a somewhat ambiguous light. Either from vanity or calculation, he

entered into intimate relations with the Jesuits in Prague. He carried

on discussions with them, displaying a certain sort of liberality, as

though he did not share the prejudices of the Jews. He associated, for

instance, with that spiritual tyrant, Hasselbauer, the Jesuit bishop

of Prague, who frequently made domiciliary visits among Jews, to

search for and confiscate Hebrew books that had escaped the vigilance

of the censor. Through this intimacy Eibeschütz obtained from the

bishop the privilege to print the Talmud, so often proscribed by the

Church of Rome. Did he act thus from self-interest, with the view of

compelling the Bohemian Jews to use only copies of the Talmud printed

by him, and in this way create a remunerative business, the profits

to be shared with the Jesuits? This was most positively asserted in

many Jewish circles. Eibeschütz obtained permission to print from the

episcopal board of censors, on condition that every expression, every

word in the Talmud which, in howsoever small a degree, appeared to be

antagonistic to Christianity be expunged. He was willing to perpetrate

this process of mutilation (1728-1739). Such obsequious pliability to

the Jesuits excited the displeasure of many Jews. The community of

Frankfort-on-the-Main spent a considerable sum--Moses Chages and

perhaps David Oppenheim being at the bottom of the movement--in

their efforts to obtain from the emperor a prohibition against the

publication of the Prague edition. Eibeschütz, on the other hand, used

his connection with Christian circles to avert perils impending over

the Bohemian Jews.

Eibeschütz's early heretical leanings were not absolutely forgotten.

When the post of rabbi at Metz became vacant, he applied for it. When

the council were occupied with the election, the gray-haired widow of

the late rabbi appeared at the meeting, and warned them not to insult

the memory of her dead husband and the pious rabbis who had preceded

him, by appointing a heretic, perhaps worse (a Mumar), their successor.

This solemn admonition from the venerable matron who was related to

the wife of Eibeschütz so impressed the council that his election

fell through. Jacob Joshua Falk was appointed at Metz. He remained

there only a few years, and, on his removal to Frankfort-on-the-Main,

Eibeschütz was chosen in his place. Before he entered on his duties,

the Austrian War of Succession broke out, a struggle between youthful,

aspiring Prussia, under Frederick the Great, and decrepit Austria,

under Maria Theresa. A French army, in conjunction with Prussia and

the anti-emperor Charles VII, occupied Prague. The systematically

brutalized population of Bohemia and Moravia conceived the false

notion that the Jews were treacherously taking part with the enemy.

It was said that Frederick the Great, the Protestant heretic, was an

especial patron of the Jews. In Moravia, whither the Prussians had

not yet penetrated, occurred passionate outbursts of fury against

the Jews. An Austrian field-marshal in Moravia, under the delusion

of the Jews' treachery, issued a decree that the communities, within

six days, should "pay down in cash 50,000 Rhenish gulden at Brünn,

failing which, they would all be delivered over to pillage and the

sword." Through the devoted exertions of Baron de Aguilar and the

wealthy rabbi, Issachar Berush Eskeles--two members of the Vienna

community--this decree was revoked by the empress, Maria Theresa (March

21). These men had another opportunity to avert a crushing disaster

from their brethren.

Jonathan Eibeschütz, having been appointed rabbi of Metz, either from

self-conceit or in order to secure for himself the post of rabbi in

French Lorraine, imprudently fraternized with the French soldiery

who occupied the town. He obtained from the French commandant a

safe-conduct enabling him to travel unmolested to France, and thereby

aroused in the Bohemian population the suspicion that he had a

treasonable understanding with the enemy. After the departure of the

French (end of 1742), the Austrian authorities held an inquiry into

his conduct; and all his property, which had not been seized by the

Croats, was sequestered. Eventually all the Moravian and Bohemian

Jews were suspected of treason. The most Catholic empress, who was

at once good-natured and hard-hearted, published a decree, December

18, 1744, for Bohemia, January 2, 1745, for Moravia, that all Jews in

these royal provinces should, "for several important reasons," within

a brief period be banished; and that Jews found in these crown lands

after the expiration of this period should be "removed by force of

arms." Terrible severity was shown in enforcing this decree. The Jews

of Prague, more than 20,630 souls, were obliged in the depth of winter

hurriedly to leave the town and suffer in the villages; and the royal

cities were forbidden to harbor them even temporarily. The position of

the Bohemian and Moravian Jews was pitiable. Whither should they turn?

In the eighteenth century Jews were not in request or made welcome on

account of their wealth as they had been before. As though Eibeschütz

felt himself in a measure to blame for their misfortunes, he took

trouble to obtain relief for them. He preached on their behalf in Metz,

addressed letters to the communities in the south of France, Bayonne

and Bordeaux, asking for aid, and wrote to the Roman community begging

them to intercede with the pope on behalf of their unhappy brethren. It

was all of but little avail. More efficacious appears to have been the

intercession of De Aguilar, Berush Eskeles, and other Jews connected

with the court of Vienna. The clergy, too, spoke on their behalf, and

the ambassadors of Holland and England interceded warmly and urgently

for them. The empress revoked her severe decree, and permitted the Jews

in both the royal provinces to remain for an indefinite time (May 15,

1745). In the case of the Prague community alone, which was chiefly

under suspicion, the strictness of the decree was not relaxed. Not till

some years later, in consequence of a declaration by the states of the

empire "that their departure would entail a loss of many millions" was

the residence of all Jews prolonged to ten years, but under degrading

conditions. They were to be diminished rather than be permitted to

increase, their exact number being fixed. Only the eldest son was

permitted to found a family. Some 20,000 "Familianten," as they were

called, were allowed in Bohemia and 5,100 in Moravia, who were obliged

to pay annually to the imperial treasury a sum of about 200,000 gulden.

These restrictions were maintained almost up to the Revolution of 1848.

Jonathan Eibeschütz rightly or wrongly was declared a traitor to his

country, and forbidden ever to set foot on Austrian soil.

If, during the first years passed in Metz, he was so popular that the

community would not allow him to accept the post of rabbi at Fürth,

offered to him, he must have made himself disagreeable later on, as

during his difficulties, he could not find supporters there, nor any

witnesses to his innocence. If he committed only a small portion of the

mean actions with which he was reproached, his life must have presented

a striking contrast to the sermons which he composed. Eibeschütz

did not feel at home in Metz; he missed the bustling, argumentative

band of young admirers, and the wide platform on which to display

his Talmudical erudition. In France there were fewer students of the

Talmud. It was therefore pardonable that he strenuously exerted himself

to obtain the post of rabbi of the "three communities" (Hamburg,

Altona, and Wandsbeck). Thanks to the efforts of his connections and

admirers, and his fame as the most distinguished of Talmudists and

miracle workers, the choice fell on him. As the Jews of the three

towns had their own civil jurisdiction, based on Rabbinical law, they

required an acute rabbi, a lawyer, and they could not, from this point

of view, have made a better selection.

But an evil spirit seems to have entered Altona with his instalment,

which threw into disorder not only the three communities, but also the

whole of German and Polish Judaism. Eibeschütz, though not free from

blame, must not alone be made answerable. The tendency of the age was

culpable, and Jacob Emden, an unattached rabbi, was more especially the

prime mover in the strife. He desired to unmask hypocrisy, and in doing

so laid bare the nakedness of his Jewish contemporaries.

Jacob Emden Ashkenazi (abbreviated to Jabez; born 1698, died 1776)

resembled his father Chacham Zevi, as a branch its parent stem; or

rather he made the father whom he admired extravagantly his model in

everything. The perverted spirit of the age prevented his following his

natural bent and inspirations. A true son of the Talmud, he seriously

believed that a Jew ought to occupy himself with other branches

of knowledge only during "the hour of twilight," and considered it

unlawful to read newspapers on the Sabbath. He, too, was well versed in

the Talmud, and set a high value on the Kabbala and the Zohar, of the

dangerous extravagances of which he at first knew nothing. Philosophy,

although he possessed no knowledge of it, was an abomination to

him. In his perverseness he maintained it to be impossible that the

philosophical work, "The Guide," could have been composed by the

orthodox rabbi, Maimuni. In character he was just, truth-loving, and

staunch, herein forming a sharp contrast to Jonathan Eibeschütz.

Whatever he considered as truth or false, he did not hesitate forthwith

to defend or condemn with incisive acuteness; it was contrary to

his nature to conceal, dissimulate, hide his opinions, or play the

hypocrite. He differed from Eibeschütz in another respect. The latter

was agreeable, pliant, careless, cheerful, and sociable; Emden, on the

contrary, was unsociable, unbending, earnest, melancholy, and a lover

of solitude. Well-to-do, and maintaining himself by his business, Emden

was always disinclined to undertake the office of a rabbi. He was too

well aware of his own craving for independence, his awkwardness, and

impetuosity. Only once was he induced to accept the office of rabbi,

in Emden (from which he derived his surname); but he relinquished

it after a few years on account of his dislike to the work and from

ill-health, and settled in Altona. He obtained from the king of Denmark

the privilege of establishing a printing-press; built a house with a

private synagogue, and, with his family and a few friends, formed a

community within the community. He indeed visited the exchange, but he

lived enwrapped in a dreamworld of his own.

Emden was on the list of candidates for the appointment of rabbi to

the "three communities." His few friends worked for him, and urged

him to exert himself to try and obtain the post. He, however, resisted

all their solicitations, and declared decidedly, that he would not

accept the election even if the choice fell on him, but he was none

the less aggrieved that he obtained only a few votes, and entertained

an unfriendly feeling towards Eibeschütz, because he was preferred.

There was another peculiarity in Emden's character: his antipathy to

heretics. His father Chacham Zevi had undauntedly pursued Nehemiah

Chayon and the other Sabbatians, and had brought himself into painful

positions by so doing. Emden desired nothing more ardently than to

follow his father, and would not have shunned martyrdom in the cause.

Since the return of Moses Chages to Palestine, he considered himself

the watchman on behalf of orthodoxy among his fellow-believers. He was

a Jewish grand inquisitor, and was in readiness to hurl the thunders

of excommunication whenever heresy, particularly the Sabbatian, should

show itself. The opportunity of exercising his unpaid office of

inquisitor, of proving his zeal for orthodoxy, and even of suffering in

its behalf, was granted him by Jonathan Eibeschütz.

At the time when Eibeschütz entered on his duties as rabbi a painful

agitation was prevalent among the Jews of the "three communities."

Within the year several young women had died in childbirth. Every wife

in expectation of becoming a mother awaited the approaching hour with

increasing anxiety. The coming of the new rabbi, who should drive away

the destroying angel by whom young women had been selected as victims,

was awaited with eager longing. At that time a rabbi was regarded as a

protector against every species of evil (Megîn), a sort of magician,

and the wives of Hamburg and Altona expected still greater things from

Jonathan Eibeschütz, who had been heralded by his admirers as the most

gifted of rabbis and a worker of miracles. How would he respond to

these exaggerated expectations? Even if he had been honest, Eibeschütz

would have been forced to resort to some mystification to assert his

authority in his new office. Therefore, immediately after his arrival,

he prepared talismans--writings for exorcising spirits (Cameos,

Kameoth)--for the terrified women, and indulged in other forms of

magic to impose upon the credulous. He had distributed similar amulets

in Metz, Frankfort-on-the-Main, and other places. From Frankfort a

rumor had reached Altona that the talismans of Eibeschütz were of

an altogether different nature to what they usually were, and that

they were heretical in character. Out of curiosity one of the amulets

distributed by the chief rabbi Jonathan Eibeschütz, was opened in

Altona, and was found to contain the following invocation:

"O God of Israel, Thou who dwellest in the adornment of Thy

might [a Kabbalistic allusion], send through the merit of Thy

servant Sabbataï Zevi healing for this woman, whereby Thy name

and the name of Thy Messiah, Sabbataï Zevi, may be sanctified

in the world."

It is hard to tell which is more surprising--Eibeschütz's stupid belief

in and attachment to the impostor of Smyrna, who had apostatized from

Judaism, or his imprudence in thus exposing himself. He had indeed

altered the words a little, and put certain letters to represent

others; but he must have known that the key to his riddle was easy to

find. These attempts at deception naturally did not remain a secret.

The amulets came into the hands of Emden, who no longer entertained a

doubt that Eibeschütz still adhered to the Sabbatian heresy. Though

he rejoiced greatly at having found an opportunity to exercise his

office of inquisitor, he in a measure recoiled from the consequences

of doing so. Was it wise to begin a contest with a man who had an

extensive reputation as the most learned Talmudist of his day, as an

orthodox rabbi, whose numerous disciples--over 20,000 it was said--were

rabbis, officials of communities, and holders of influential posts,

who clung to him with admiration, and were ready to form a phalanx

round him and exert all their energies in his defense? On the other

hand, the matter could not be suppressed, it having been discussed

in the Jews' quarter and on exchange. The elders felt obliged to

interrogate Eibeschütz on the matter, and he replied by a pitiful

evasion. The council, whether believing Eibeschütz or not, was bound

to lend him a helping hand in burying the matter. What a disgrace

for the highly respected "three communities," which a quarter of a

century earlier had condemned and branded the Sabbatians as heretics,

that they themselves should have chosen a Sabbatian as their chief

rabbi! Jacob Emden, from whose zeal the worst was to be dreaded, was

partially beguiled by flatteries, partially intimidated by threats,

to refrain from publishing the affair. But these threats against him

necessarily led to publicity. Emden solemnly declared in his synagogue

that he held the writer of the amulets to be a Sabbatian heretic who

deserved to be excommunicated, that he did not charge the chief rabbi

with their composition, but that the latter was in duty bound to clear

himself from suspicion. This declaration caused a deep sensation in

the "three communities," and aroused vehement animosity. The council,

and the greater part of the community, regarded it as a gross piece

of presumption and as an encroachment upon their jurisdiction. The

friends of Eibeschütz, especially his disciples, fanned the flame.

Religious hero-worship was so prevalent that some did not hesitate to

declare that if their rabbi believed in Sabbataï Zevi, they would share

his belief. Without putting Emden on trial the council arbitrarily

decreed that no one, under pain of excommunication, should attend his

synagogue, which was to be closed, and that he should not publish

anything at his printing establishment. And now began a struggle which

at first produced abundant evil, but which in the end had a purifying

effect. Jonathan Eibeschütz published the affair far and wide among

his numerous friends and disciples in Bohemia, Moravia, and Poland,

and painted himself as an innocent man unjustly accused, and Jacob

Emden as an audacious fellow who had the presumption to brand him as

a heretic. He was hurried along from one untruth to another, from

violence to violence; but he nevertheless had many partisans to support

him. Jacob Emden on the contrary stood well-nigh alone, for the few who

adhered to him had not the courage to come forward openly. He however

informed his friends, Eibeschütz's enemies, on the same day of what had

occurred. The foolish affair of the amulets thus acquired a notoriety

which it was impossible to check. Every Jew capable of forming an

opinion on the subject took one side or the other; the majority adhered

to Eibeschütz. Many indeed could not conceive it possible that so

distinguished a Talmudist could be a Sabbatian, and the accusation

against him was accounted base slander on the part of the irascible and

malignant Emden. Great ignorance prevailed with regard to the character

and history of the Sabbatians (or Shäbs, as they were termed), for

a quarter of a century had passed since they had been everywhere

excommunicated. Public opinion was therefore at first in Eibeschütz's

favor.

Eibeschütz thoroughly understood how to win over opponents to his

side, and to soothe them with illusions. He convened a meeting in the

synagogue, and took a solemn oath that he did not adhere to a single

article of the Sabbatian creed; if he did, might fire and brimstone

descend on him from heaven! He went on to anathematize this sect with

all kinds of maledictions, and excommunicated his adversaries who had

slandered him, and originated these elements of strife. This solemn

declaration made a deep impression. Who could doubt the innocence of a

rabbi of such high standing when he called God to witness respecting

it? The council of the "three communities" considered itself fully

justified in ordering Emden, as a common slanderer, to leave Altona.

As he refused, and referred to the charter granted him by the king, he

was cut off from all intercourse with others, pursued by intrigues,

and relentlessly persecuted. This treatment only aroused Emden to

more strenuous efforts. Letters had meantime been sent from Metz with

other amulets (1751), which Eibeschütz had distributed there, and the

genuineness of which he had himself admitted, clearly demonstrating

that he revered Sabbataï Zevi as the Messiah and saviour. The Metz

amulets were in the main of the same character:--

"In the name of the God of Israel ... of the God of his

anointed Sabbataï Zevi, through whose wounds healing is come

to us, who with the breath of His mouth slays the Evil One, I

adjure all spirits and demons not to injure the bearer of this

amulet."

A judicial examination of these amulets had been made by the council

of rabbis and elders; and all who had any in their possession were

commanded to deliver them up under pain of excommunication. A royal

procurator confirmed their authenticity; that is to say, they were

proved by the evidence of witnesses under oath to be the work of

Eibeschütz; who did not find one person of note in Metz to maintain

his honor. It was some small satisfaction to Jacob Emden to know that

he did not stand alone in his conflict; but concurrence in his views

did not profit him much. The members of the "three communities," with

the exception of a small minority, adhered to Eibeschütz, and made his

cause their own. It was forbidden to speak a slanderous word against

the chief rabbi. Elsewhere his enemies made plans--he received

notice from all quarters as to what was designed against him--but

there was no definite scheme. His disciples, on the other hand, were

extraordinarily zealous in his behalf. One of these, Chayim of Lublin,

had the courage, in glorification of Eibeschütz and in defamation of

his opponents, to excommunicate three of the latter in his synagogue,

Jacob Emden, Nehemiah Reischer, and an elder in Metz, Moses Mayo,

because they had dared slander "that most perfect man, Jonathan,

in whom God glorified Himself." This decree of excommunication was

distributed throughout Poland for observance and imitation. The

remaining Polish rabbis agreed with it, either being supporters of

Eibeschütz, or having been bribed, or being indifferent in the matter.

By way of Königsberg and Breslau, for example, large sums were sent to

Poland to commend the case of Eibeschütz to the rabbis of that country.

Matters did not stop at excommunications and anathemas; in Altona (Iyar

25=May) they culminated in a riot. A hand-to-hand fight took place, and

the police had to be called in. In consequence, Jacob Emden, believing

his life to be endangered through the fury of Eibeschütz's partisans,

fled to Amsterdam on the next day, and was kindly received there.

Emden's wife was ordered by the council not to part with any of his

property, as an action for damages would be brought against him.

Eibeschütz was acute enough to perceive that the residence of Jacob

Emden in Amsterdam might prove dangerous, as he would have full scope,

by means of his trenchant pen, to expose the rabbi's past history

through the press. To counteract this, Eibeschütz issued to his

followers in Germany, Poland, and Italy, an encyclical (Letter of Zeal,

Sivan 3, 1751), in which, under the guise of an exhortation to bear

testimony to his orthodoxy, he besought them to make his cause their

own. He urged them to prosecute his adversary with all their energy

and by every possible means: it would be set to their account as a

special merit by the Almighty. It greatly resembled the command of a

popular general to thousands of his soldiers to attack, and pitilessly

ill-treat defenseless men. To complete the delusion, he induced two

men, devotedly attached to mysticism, but not to truth--Elijah

Olianow and Samuel Essingen--to declare that his amulets contained

nothing dangerous or heretical, but a great deal of deep orthodox

mysticism intelligible only to the few.

Eibeschütz had not yet just grounds for rejoicing. The excess of

insolence of the newly-fledged rabbi of Lublin in excommunicating

gray-haired rabbis aroused the leading men in the communities. A

cry of horror resounded from Lorraine to Podolia at this arrogance,

justly suspected to be due to the instigation of Eibeschütz. Three

rabbis at length combined, Joshua Falk, Leb Heschels, and Heilmann,

and others joined them. Eibeschütz was challenged to exculpate himself

before a meeting of rabbis regarding the amulets ascribed to him,

which undeniably were heretical. As was to be anticipated, Eibeschütz

declined to justify himself in any way, and the confederates took

council as to what further steps to take against him. The scandal

continued to increase. The newspapers reported the quarrel amongst

the Jews regarding the rabbi of Altona. Christians naturally could

not comprehend the nature of the dispute. It was said that a vehement

controversy had arisen amongst the Jews as to whether the Messiah

had or had not already appeared. The Jews were derided, because they

preferred to believe in the impostor Sabbataï Zevi, rather than in

Jesus. This reacted on the Jews, and the two parties imputed to each

other the offense of this scandal, this "profanation of God's name."

An energetic man, Baruch Yavan, of Poland, transferred the schism to

that country. He was a disciple of Falk, agent to the notorious Saxon

minister Brühl, and enjoyed considerable reputation in Poland. Through

his intrigues, a Polish magnate deprived Chayim Lublin of his office

as rabbi, and ordered him and his father to be thrown into prison

(Elul=September, 1751). In Poland the controversy assumed an ugly

character--bribery, information through spies, acts of violence,

and treachery being among its leading features. Seceders from each

party betrayed the secrets of one to the other. Every fair and every

synod were battlefields, where the partisans of Eibeschütz and Falk

contended. The proceedings at the synods were more disorderly than

those in the Polish Reichstag. When the defenders of either side proved

more numerous or more energetic, the weaker party was excommunicated.

The supporters of Eibeschütz were in the main more active. Count Brühl

made them as many empty promises of protection, as he bestowed on their

opponents through Baruch Yavan.

In Germany, naturally, matters were conducted with more moderation.

The triumvirate of rabbis published a decision to the effect that the

writer of the Sabbatian amulets should be cut off from communion with

Israel. Every devout Jew lay under obligation to persecute him to the

utmost of his power. No one might study the Talmud under his guidance.

All who supported his cause were to be excommunicated. No mention

was made of Eibeschütz's name. Many German rabbis concurred in this

moderate decision, as also the Venetian rabbis who had excommunicated

Luzzatto. The resolution was delivered to Eibeschütz and the council

of the "three communities" (February, 1752), and notice was given

to Eibeschütz that within two months he must clear himself before

a rabbinical court of arbitration of the suspicion that he was the

author of heretical amulets, failing which his name would be publicly

stigmatized. This sentence of excommunication was to be printed by

the Venetian council of rabbis, and published throughout the East and

Africa. But Eibeschütz understood how to meet this blow craftily.

The Italian rabbis were, for the most part, reluctant to burn their

fingers in this violent quarrel, and declined to participate in any

way. The council of rabbis at Leghorn, especially Malachi Cohen,

the last of the Italian rabbinical authorities, inclined towards

the side of Eibeschütz. The Portuguese in Amsterdam and London

designedly kept themselves aloof from this domestic squabble among

the Germans and Poles. One broker of Amsterdam, David Pinto, alone

espoused Eibeschütz's cause, and threatened Emden with his anger if

he continued his hostility. The council of rabbis in Constantinople,

dazzled by Eibeschütz's illustrious name, or in some way deceived,

declared decidedly for him, but would not pronounce a direct sentence

of excommunication against his antagonists. What they neglected

was done by a so-called envoy from Jerusalem, Abraham Israel, a

presumptuous mendicant, who as a representative of the Holy Land and

the Jewish nation, imprecated and anathematized all who should utter

a slanderous word against Eibeschütz. Thus almost the whole of Israel

was excommunicated; on the one side those who showed enmity towards the

illustrious chief rabbi of the "three communities," and on the other

those who supported that heretic. Thus the effects of excommunication

were nullified, or rather it became ridiculous, and with it a phase of

rabbinical Judaism disappeared.

A new turn was given this disagreeable controversy when it was

transferred from its home to the law courts of the Christians. The

fanaticism of Eibeschütz's followers was more to blame than the

conduct of their opponents. One of the elders of Altona, who had so

far remained true to the cause of the persecutors, in a letter to his

brother showed himself somewhat doubtful of its justice. This letter

was opened by the followers of Eibeschütz, and the writer was set down

as a traitor, expelled from the council, ill-treated, and threatened

with banishment from Altona. There remained no alternative for him

but to address himself to the government of Holstein, to the king of

Denmark, Frederick V, and unsparingly expose all the illegalities,

meannesses, and violence of which Eibeschütz and his party had been

guilty. The injustice of the council towards Jacob Emden and his wife

was discussed in connection with the affair. An authenticated copy

of the suspected amulets was translated into German. The trial was

conducted with extreme bitterness; both parties spared no expense. The

plaintiff and his faction in their anger did not confine themselves to

necessary statements, but treacherously stigmatized as a crime much

that was of an innocent nature. King Frederick, who loved justice,

and his minister Bernstorff, gave judgment against the followers

of Eibeschütz (June 3, 1752). The council of Altona was severely

censured for its illegal and harsh treatment of Jacob Emden, and

punished with a fine of 100 thalers. Emden was not only permitted

to return to Altona, but the use of his synagogue and his printing

establishment was restored. Eibeschütz was deprived of authority as

rabbi of the Hamburg community, and ordered to clear himself with

regard to the incriminating amulets, and to answer fifteen questions

propounded to him. Events thus took an unfortunate turn for him. Even

the well-intentioned letter of a partisan sent from Poland served

to show how desperate his case was. Ezekiel Landau (born 1720, died

1793) as a young man had aroused hopes that he would become a second

Jonathan Eibeschütz in rabbinical learning and sagacity. His opinion

as rabbi of Jampol (Podolia) carried great weight. Landau wrote with

youthful simplicity and straightforwardness to Eibeschütz that the

amulets which he had seen were without doubt Sabbatian and heretical.

He, therefore, could not believe that the honored and devout rabbi

of Altona had written them. For that reason he was as much in favor

of condemning the amulets, as of upholding Jonathan Eibeschütz and

declaring war against his adversaries. He entreated Eibeschütz to

condemn the amulets as heretical, and when occasion offered clear

himself from the accusation that he was the author of the slanderous

writings, full of unworthy expressions about God, and to condemn them

leaf by leaf. This was a severe blow from the hand of a friend. As

Eibeschütz had acknowledged the amulets to be genuine, and had only

sophistically explained away their heresy, he was now in evil case.

A follower of Emden's in addition published the correspondence and

decisions of Eibeschütz's enemies, which stigmatized his conduct,

together with an account of the amulets and their true interpretation

("The Language of Truth," printed August, 1752). Emden himself

published the history of the false Messiah, Sabbataï Zevi, and the

visionaries and knaves who had succeeded him, down to Chayon and

Luzzatto, vividly describing the errors and disorderly excesses of

the Sabbatians for his own generation, which was careless with regard

to historical events, and had but scanty, confused knowledge on the

subject. Thus it was made clear to many that the Sabbatian heresy aimed

at nothing less than the dethronement of the God of Israel in favor

of a phantom, and the dissolution of Judaism by means of Kabbalistic

chimeras. But the worst that befell Eibeschütz was that Emden

himself returned unmolested to Altona, and had the prospect of being

indemnified for his losses.

The danger in which Eibeschütz found himself of being unmasked as

a heretic in the courts of law, and before the eyes of the world,

determined him to a step which a rabbi of the old stamp of honest

piety, even under peril of death, would not have taken. He associated

himself with an apostate baptized Jew, formerly his pupil, in order to

obtain assistance from him in his difficulties. Moses Gerson Cohen,

of Mitau, who, on his mother's side, was descended from Chayim Vital

Calabrese, had studied the Talmud under Eibeschütz in Prague for seven

years, then traveled in the East, and, after his return to Europe,

had been baptized in Wolfenbüttel under the name Charles Anton. He

was appointed by his patron, the duke of Brunswick, Reader in Hebrew

in Helmstädt. It was afterwards proved that this convert had become a

Christian solely from self-interest.

To him the chief rabbi of the "three communities" secretly repaired in

order to induce him to compose a vindication, or rather a panegyric, of

his conduct. It is evident on the face of it, even at the present day,

that the work was written "to order," and it transpired that Eibeschütz

had dictated it to Charles Anton. He is extolled as the most sagacious

and upright Jew of his time, as a man versed in philosophy, history,

and mathematics, and as a persecuted victim. Jacob Emden, on the other

hand, is represented as an incompetent, envious fellow. Anton dedicated

this work to the king of Denmark, and commended to him the case of the

alleged innocent and persecuted man. This work, with another cunningly

chosen expedient, had favorable results for Eibeschütz. He had screened

himself not only behind a baptized Jew, but behind a princess. King

Frederick V had married, as his second wife, a princess of Brunswick,

Maria Juliana, and a Jewish agent--a partisan of Eibeschütz--did

business at the court of Brunswick. The latter made the most of his

direct and indirect influence with the young Danish princess, and said

a good word to her on behalf of the chief rabbi under accusation

of heresy. With the comment that the majority of rabbis except some

litigious, malevolent individuals sided with Eibeschütz--proof of

the justice of his cause--the court suppressed the amulet case. A

royal decree, forbidding the continuation of this controversy, was read

aloud in the Altona synagogue (February 7, 1753). At the suggestion

of the government the vote of the community with regard to Eibeschütz

was again taken, and resulted in his favor. He then took the oath of

fealty to the king, and his position was more assured than ever. His

sagacity had a second time gained the day, but his success was only

transitory. The number of his enemies had materially increased even in

Altona through the far-reaching dissensions and the better knowledge

of his character gleaned little by little. His adversaries did not

allow themselves to be silenced by the king's arbitrary decision

without making another effort; and the rabbinical triumvirate urged

them to petition for a revision of the heresy proceedings against

Eibeschütz, and try to convince the king that the assertion that the

majority of the rabbis were his partisans was entirely false, that, on

the contrary, he was supported only by his relatives and disciples.

The three rabbis and the rabbi of Hanover laid before the council a

demand to consider Eibeschütz as excommunicated, and forbid him to

exercise any rabbinical function until he repented of his heresy,

and promised amendment. Hostile writings by Emden and others fed the

fire of dissension; they were written in vehement, pitiless language

and were full of petty gossip. To calm the public wrath, the Altona

council with great difficulty induced Eibeschütz to make a binding

declaration that he was prepared of his own free-will to justify

himself before an impartial rabbinical court of arbitration, and submit

to its decision (beginning of 1753). This only inflamed the strife.

Eibeschütz proposed as his judges two rabbis, of Lissa and Glogau,

men but little known, who were to add a third to their number. But the

opposite party insisted that the court be composed of Joshua Falk and

his colleagues. This angered Eibeschütz, who lost the calmness of mind

he had hitherto maintained. At one time he desired to submit his cause

to the rabbis of Constantinople, at another he proposed the Synod of

the Four Polish Countries, to meet in Jaroslav late in the summer of

1753. He appears to have reckoned on obtaining a favorable sentence

from this assemblage of many rabbis and influential persons. Relying on

this, he believed that he could easily free himself from the compact

forced upon him, of submitting to arbitration. He is said to have

managed this by giving information at court that the royal prerogative

had been encroached upon by this proposed appeal from the judgment of

the sovereign to that of the rabbis. Both parties were therefore fined

by the magistrates. This only increased his enemies, and several of his

warmest supporters, former members of the communal council, renounced

him, and proclaimed him, not only a heretic, but an intriguer. These

opponents complained once more to the king with regard to the prevalent

dissensions in the community, of which he was the cause. They could

not, they said, obtain impartial judgment from him in their lawsuits,

because he allowed himself to be guided in his decisions by spite and

passion. The justice-loving king gave these complaints his attention.

He desired to arrive at a definite conclusion with regard to the case,

whether Eibeschütz was an arch-heretic, as his opponents maintained, or

a persecuted innocent, as he described himself.

With this in view the king ordered certain Christian professors and

theologians versed in Hebrew, to give him their opinion with regard to

the amulets. Eibeschütz felt uneasy at the turn affairs had taken; he

feared that the matter might prove disastrous to him. To place himself

in a favorable light he resolved on a course which he had hitherto

hesitated to adopt--to dispose public opinion in his favor through

the press. As things then stood, there was no other course open to

him, and he therefore composed a defense--"The Tables of Testimony,"

completed Tammuz 18, end of June, 1755, the first production of his

pen. As might have been expected from a man of his ability, it is

skillfully worked out; and he places his case in a favorable light. But

Eibeschütz was unable to convince either his impartial contemporaries

or posterity of his innocence. On the contrary, his vindication, and

much of the evidence adduced, clearly betray his guilt. Emden and

his disciple David Gans did not fail to publish refutations, drawing

attention to weak points, and throwing doubt on the testimony in favor

of Eibeschütz.

A publication by a professor and pastor, David Frederick Megerlin,

early in 1756, made a fresh diversion, apparently in Eibeschütz's

favor, with respect to this vexed question. This confused babbler and

proselytizer, induced by the order of the Danish king to pronounce an

opinion upon the matter, imagined that he had discovered the key to

the enigmatical amulets of Eibeschütz, the disputed characters which

his opponents explained as referring to Sabbataï Zevi being nothing

less than a mystic allusion to Jesus Christ! The chief rabbi of Altona

and Hamburg was at heart attached to the Christian faith, Megerlin

maintained, but dared not come out openly through fear of the Jews. He

himself, it is true, and his disciple, Charles Anton, had explained

these amulets in quite another way, not in a Christian sense; but

the latter had not comprehended the deeper meaning, and Eibeschütz

had composed his vindication only for Polish Jews. In his heart of

hearts the chief rabbi was a true believer in Christianity. Megerlin,

therefore, called on the king of Denmark to protect Eibeschütz against

the persecutions of the Jews, especially against the calumnies of

Jacob Emden, who hated and persecuted the Christians, as his father

had persecuted Chayon, also a secret Christian. In his folly Megerlin

exhorted Eibeschütz most earnestly to throw off his mask, resign the

post of rabbi of the "three communities," and allow himself to be

baptized. He also addressed a circular letter to the Jews, urging

them to arrange a general convention of rabbis and openly glorify

Christianity. Had Eibeschütz possessed a spark of honor he would have

repudiated, even at the risk of losing the king's favor, his supposed

adherence to Christianity. But he did not take the smallest step

to answer the charge of hypocrisy; he was content to profit by it.

Megerlin's arguments, foolish as they were, convinced King Frederick.

He revoked the suspension from office with which Eibeschütz was

threatened, and decreed that the Jews of the Altona community should

show him obedience. The Hamburg senate, also, again acknowledged him

as rabbi of the German community. Eibeschütz exulted, and his admirers

prepared a solemn triumph for him (Chanukkah--middle of December,

1756). His disciples, clad as knights, marched through the streets

shouting, till they reached the rabbi's house, where they arranged a

dancing-party. The six years of strife which had aroused every evil

passion among the Jews, from Lorraine to Podolia, and from the Elbe to

the Po, ended apparently in a dance. But at the same time Eibeschütz

in another direction suffered defeat, which branded him in the eyes of

those who had hitherto spoken favorably of him and supported him.

Facts flatly contradicted his assertion, put forward through his

mouthpiece, Charles Anton, that "there were no longer any Sabbatians."

They raised their serpent heads and shot forth their tongues full of

poisonous rage at this very moment. The seed which Chayim Malach had

scattered in Poland was by no means checked in growth by the anathemas

of the rabbis. They had only forced the Sabbatians to disguise

themselves better, and to counterfeit death; but they flourished

secretly, and their following increased. Some towns in Podolia and

Pakotia were full of Talmudists who, in Sabbatian fashion, scoffed

at the Talmud, rejected the law of Judaism, and, under the mask of

ascetic discipline, lived impure lives. The disorders to which the

dispute regarding Eibeschütz had given rise in Poland encouraged the

Polish Sabbatians to venture from their hiding-places and raise their

masks a little. The time seemed favorable for an attempt to cast aside

odious religious rites, and openly to come forward as anti-Talmudists.

They needed a spirited leader to gather the scattered band, give it

cohesion, and mark out a line of action. This leader now presented

himself, and with his appearance began a new movement which threw the

whole Jewish world of Poland into intense agitation and despair. This

leader was the notorious Jacob Frank.

Jankiev Lejbovicz (that is, Jacob son of Leb) of Galicia, was one of

the worst, most subtle, and most deceitful rascals of the eighteenth

century. He could cheat the most sagacious, and veil his frauds so

cleverly that after his death many still believed him an admirable man,

who bore through life, and carried to the grave, most weighty secrets.

He understood the art of deception even in his youth, and boasted how

he had duped his own father. As a young man he traveled in Turkey

in the service of a Jewish gentleman, and in Salonica entered into

relations with the Sabbatians or Jewish Moslems there. If he did not

learn from them how to work deceptive and mystifying miracles, he at

all events learnt indifference towards all forms of religion. He became

a Mahometan, as afterwards a Catholic, for so long as it served his

purpose, and changed his religion as one changes one's clothes. From

his long sojourn in Turkey he acquired the name of Frank, or Frenk.

Ignorant of Talmudical literature, as he himself confessed, he was

acquainted with the Zoharist Kabbala, explained it to suit his purpose,

and took peculiar pleasure in the doctrine of metempsychosis, by virtue

of which the successive Messiahs were not visionaries or impostors, but

the embodiment of one and the same Messianic soul. King David, Elijah,

Jesus, Mahomet, Sabbataï Zevi, and his imitators, down to Berachya,

were one and the same personality, which had assumed different bodily

forms. Why should not he himself be another incarnation of the Messiah?

Although Jacob Frank, or Lejbovicz, loved money dearly, he accounted it

only a lever by which to raise himself; he wished to play a brilliant

part and surround himself with a mysterious halo. Circumstances were

exceptionally favorable to him. He married in Nicopolis (Turkey) a

very beautiful wife, through whom he attracted followers. He collected

by degrees a small number of Turkish and Wallachian Jews, who shared

his loose principles, and held him to be a superior being--the

latest embodiment of the Messiah. He could not, however, carry on his

mischievous schemes in Turkey, where he was persecuted.

Frank appears to have obtained intelligence of the schism in Poland

caused by the Eibeschütz controversy, and thought that he might

utilize the propitious moment to gather round him the Sabbatians of

Podolia, and play a part among them, and by means of them. He came

suddenly amongst them, visiting many towns of Podolia and the Lemberg

district, where secret Sabbatians resided, with whom he may have been

in communication previously. They fell, so to speak, into his arms.

Frank needed followers, and they were seeking a leader. Now they found

one who had come to them with a full purse, of the contents of which

he was not sparing. In a trice he won the Sabbatians of Podolia. Frank

disclosed himself to them as the successor of Sabbataï, or, what was

the same thing, as the new-born soul of the Sabbatian chief Berachya.

What this manifestation signified was known to the initiated. They

understood by it the blasphemous and at the same time absurd theory

of a kind of Trinity, consisting of the Holy and Most Ancient One,

the Holy King, and a female person in the Godhead. Frank, like his

predecessors, attributed the chief importance to the Holy King, at once

the Messiah and God incarnate, and possessed of all power on earth

and in heaven. Frank ordered his followers to address him as the Holy

Lord. In virtue of his participation in the Godhead, the Messiah was

able to do all things, even miracles, and Frank did perform miracles,

as his followers maintained. The adherents whom he brought in his

train, and whom he gathered round him in Poland, believed so strongly

in his divine nature that they addressed to him mystic prayers in

the language of the Zohar, with the same formulas that the Donmäh

of Salonica were wont to address to Jacob Querido and Berachya. In

short, Frank formed a sect from the Sabbatians of Podolia, called by

his name, "Frankists." Their founder taught his disciples to acquire

riches for themselves, even by fraudulent and dishonest means. Deceit

was nothing more than skillful artifice. Their chief task was to

undermine rabbinical Judaism, and to oppose and annihilate the Talmud.

This task they undertook with a passion which perhaps owed its origin

to the constraints imposed upon them through fear of persecution. The

Frankists opposed the Zohar to the Talmud, and Simon bar Yochaï, its

alleged author, to the other authorities of the Talmud, as though in

earlier times the former had combated the latter and accused them of

being the falsifiers of Judaism. The true teaching of Moses was said

to be contained only in the Zohar, which had declared the whole of

rabbinical Judaism to be on a lower level--a fact which blundering

Kabbalists had so long overlooked. The Frankists, more clear-sighted,

had discovered the half-concealed secret of the Zohar. They rightly

called themselves anti-Talmudists as well as Zoharites. With a certain

childish frowardness they did exactly those things which rabbinical

Judaism strongly prohibited, and neglected those which the latter

prescribed, not only in points of ritual, but also with regard to

marriage and the laws of chastity. Among these anti-Talmudic Frankists

were found rabbis and so-called preachers (Darshanim, Maggidim), Jehuda

Leb Krysa, rabbi of Nadvorna, and Rabbi Nachman ben Samuel Levi of

Busk. Of especial reputation among Polish Sabbatians was Elisha Schor

of Rohatyn, an aged man, descended from distinguished Polish rabbis.

He, his sons, his daughter Chaya (who knew the Zohar by heart, and

was considered a prophetess), his grandson, and sons-in-law were from

an early period thoroughgoing Sabbatians, to whom it was a positive

pleasure to deride rabbinical precepts.

During the first months after his return to Poland, Frank held

secret conferences with the anti-Talmudists of Podolia, as a public

demonstration was attended with danger. One day, he with about

twenty of his followers was surprised in Laskorun in a conventicle.

The Frankists declared that they had been singing psalms in the

Zohar language, while their adversaries asserted that they had been

performing an indecent dance around a half-naked woman, and kissing

her. Many gathered about the inn to force their way in; others ran to

the police to give information that a Turk had stolen into Podolia to

pervert the Jews to the Mahometan religion and make them emigrate to

Turkey, and that those who had joined him were leading an Adamite,

that is to say dissolute, life. The police immediately interposed,

broke open the barricaded doors, and expelled the Frankists. Frank was

dismissed next day as a foreigner, and repaired to the neighboring

Turkish territory; and the Podolian Frankists were kept in custody. The

incident made a sensation, and was perhaps intentionally exaggerated.

Like wild-fire the news concerning the Sabbatians spread. It can be

imagined what this defiance of Rabbinical Judaism meant in those days,

especially in Poland, where the most insignificant religious rites were

sedulously observed. It was now discovered that, in the midst of the

excessive piety which characterized the Poles, a number of persons,

brought up in the knowledge of the Talmud, scoffed at the whole system

of Rabbinical Judaism. The rabbis and elders forthwith began to employ

the usual weapons of excommunication and persecution against the

offenders, and the secret heretics were hunted out. Won over by large

sums, the Polish authorities energetically supported the persecutors.

Those in distress showed signs of repentance, and made public

confession of their misdeeds, which, be they accurate or exaggerated,

present a sad picture of the deterioration of the Polish Jews. Before

the council of rabbis in Satanov, in open court, several men and women

stated that they and their friends had not only treated the rites of

Judaism with contempt, but had abandoned themselves to fornication,

adultery, incest, and other iniquities, and had done so in accordance

with Kabbalistic-mystic teachings. The penitents declared that Frank

had taught his followers to scoff at chastity.

In consequence of this evidence a solemn sentence of excommunication,

during the reading of which tapers were extinguished, was pronounced in

Brody against the Frankists: no one might intermarry with them, their

sons and daughters were to be treated as bastards, and none who were

even suspected could be admitted to the post of rabbi, to any religious

office, or to the profession of teacher. Every one was in duty bound

to denounce and unmask the secret Sabbatians. This excommunication was

repeated in several communities, and finally ratified by a great synod

in Konstantinov on the Jewish New Year (September, 1756). The document

was printed, distributed, and ordered to be read aloud every month

in the synagogues for observance. This sentence of excommunication

contained one point of great importance. No one under thirty years

of age was to be permitted to study the Kabbala. Necessity at length

opened the eyes of the rabbis to the recognition of the impure spring,

which since the time of Lurya had poisoned the sap of the tree of

Judaism. More than four centuries had passed since philosophical

inquiry had been forbidden, and the young Kabbala encouraged. In

their blindness, the rabbis had imagined that they were strengthening

Judaism in placing folly on the throne of wisdom. This course produced

that book of lies, the Zohar, which impudently set itself above the

Holy Writings and the Talmud. Finally, the delusions of the Kabbala

declared a life and death war against rabbinical Judaism. Such were

the fruits of blindness. The members of the synod of Konstantinov

turned in their perplexity to Jacob Emden, who, since his controversy

with Eibeschütz, was accounted the representative of sound orthodoxy.

He, too, enjoyed a triumph, though of an altogether different kind

from the one his antagonist was at the same time celebrating in the

midst of his noisy admirers. The Polish Jews at last began to be aware

that secular knowledge and cultivated eloquence are after all not

altogether objectionable, since they can render assistance to Judaism.

They were desirous that a cultured Portuguese should come to Poland,

endowed with knowledge and readiness of speech, who would represent

them before the Polish magistracy and clergy, in order to suppress the

dangerous Frankist sect.

Jacob Emden, deeply affected by the despairing appeal of his Polish

brethren, came to a conclusion of great importance for succeeding ages.

Sabbatians of all shades appealed to the Zohar as a sacred authority,

as the Bible of a new revelation, excusing all their blasphemies and

indecencies by quotations from it. What if the Zohar should prove

not to be genuine, but only a supposititious work? And this was the

conclusion to which Emden came. The repulsive incidents in Poland first

suggested the inquiry to him, and it became clear to him that at least

a portion of the Zohar was the production of an impostor.

To the question whether it would be lawful to persecute the Frankists,

Jacob Emden answered emphatically in the affirmative. He held them,

according to the accounts received from Poland, to be shameless

transgressors of the most sacred laws of decency and chastity, turning

vice into virtue by means of mystical jugglery. No persuasion, however,

was required from him; when persecution became necessary in Poland the

will to inflict it was never wanting. The Frankists were denounced

to the magistracy and clergy as a new sect, and handed over to the

Catholic Inquisition, and the bishop of Kamieniec, Nicolas Dembowski,

in whose diocese they were apprehended, had no objection to erect a

stake. Frank was cunning enough to avert from his followers the blow

aimed at them and to direct it against their enemies. From Chocim,

where after a brief imprisonment he had settled in safety, he counseled

them to emphasize two points in their defense: that they believed in

a Trinity, and that they rejected the Talmud as a compilation full

of error and blasphemy. His counsel meeting with opposition, he

secretly assembled some of his followers in a small town in Poland, and

reiterated his advice, with the addition that twenty or thirty of them

must quickly be baptized to give more emphasis to their assertions that

they acknowledged the Trinity and rejected the Talmud. To Frank change

of religion was a small matter. The Talmud Jews of the district heard

of Frank's secret conference with his confederates, collected a band,

attacked them, and after using them roughly placed them in confinement.

This proceeding provoked the anti-Talmudists to revenge. They would

not, indeed, be baptized, but they declared before the tribunal of

Bishop Dembowski that they were _almost_ Christians, that they believed

in a Divine Trinity, that the rest of the Jews, who repudiated this

doctrine, did not hold the true faith, and persecuted them on account

of their superiority. To make their breach with Judaism unmistakable,

or to revenge themselves in a very sanguinary way, they made false

accusations, namely, that believers in the Talmud make use of the blood

of Christians, and that the Talmud inculcates the murder of Christians

as a sacred duty. There was no difficulty in trumping up evidence in

favor of the accusation. It was only necessary that some Christian

child should be missing. Something of the kind must have occurred in

Jampol in Podolia (April, 1756), and immediately the most respected

Jews of the town were placed in chains, and the other communities

menaced. Bishop Dembowski and his chapter, rejoiced at their good luck,

favored the Frankists in every way in return for their false evidence,

freed them from prison, protected them from persecution, allowed them

to settle in the diocese of Kamieniec, permitted them to live as they

pleased, and were delighted to foster their hatred of the Talmud Jews.

The bishop flattered himself that, through the Frankists, among whom

were several rabbis, he would be able to convert many Polish Jews to

Catholicism. The new sect passed into the state in which the persecuted

becomes the persecutor.

In order to drive their adversaries to desperation, the Frankists

(1757) petitioned Bishop Dembowski to arrange a disputation between

themselves and the Talmudists, and bound themselves to prove both

the doctrine of the Trinity and the harmful nature of the Talmud,

from the Scriptures and the Zohar. To this the bishop willingly

consented. One of the Frankist rabbis--perhaps old Elisha Schor, of

Rohatyn--composed a confession of faith, which, almost unequaled

for audacity and untruthfulness, is so artful in its explanation of

Sabbatian-Kabbalistic doctrines as to have led the bishop to suppose

that they were in consonance with the Catholic faith, and to drive

their adversaries into a corner. The Frankist confession of faith

contains nine articles. The religion revealed by God to man contains

so many deep mysteries, that it must be thoroughly searched out and

examined; without higher inspiration, however, it cannot be understood.

One of these mysteries is that the Godhead consists of three Persons,

equal to one another, at once a Trinity and a Unity. Another mystery

is that the Godhead assumes human form to manifest itself visibly to

all men. Through the mediation of these deities incarnate, mankind is

redeemed and saved--not through the Messiah expected to assemble

the Jews and lead them back to Jerusalem. The latter is a false

belief: Jerusalem and the Temple will never be rebuilt. The Talmud,

indeed, interprets revealed faith otherwise; but its interpretation is

baneful, and has led its adherents into error and unbelief. The Talmud

contains most revolting statements; such as that Jews are permitted,

indeed, obliged, to deceive and slay Christians. The Zohar, which is

diametrically opposed to the Talmud, offers the only true and correct

interpretation of the Holy Writings. All these absurd statements, the

Frankist confession of faith supported by passages from the Bible and

the Zohar; and to vilify the Talmud, passages in it were intentionally

misrepresented. The creed was printed and published in the Hebrew and

the Polish language. The representatives of the Polish community--

the Synod of the Four Countries--were painfully sensible, in their

desperate situation, of the want of education prevalent among them.

They could not produce a single man who could expose the imposture

of the Frankists and the hollowness of their creed in well-turned or

even tolerable language. The proud leaders of the Synod behaved like

children in their anxiety. They helplessly devised extravagant schemes,

wished to appeal to the pope, and to incite the Portuguese in Amsterdam

and Rome to protect them from the machinations of their vindictive

enemies.

Bishop Dembowski consented to the proposition of the Frankists, and

issued a command that the Talmudists send deputies to a disputation at

Kamieniec, failing which he would punish them and burn the Talmud as a

book hostile to Christianity. In vain the Polish Jews referred to their

ancient privileges, screened themselves behind great nobles, and spent

large sums of money. They were obliged to prepare for the disputation

and render account to the enemies they had so greatly despised. Only

a few rabbis appeared. What could the representatives of the Talmud,

with their profound ignorance and halting speech, effect against the

audacious denunciations of the Frankists, particularly as they also

acknowledged the Zohar as a sacred book, and this, as a matter of

fact, formulates the doctrine of a kind of Trinity! What happened at

the disputation of Kamieniec has never transpired. The Talmudists were

accounted as vanquished and refuted. Bishop Dembowski publicly declared

(October 14, 1757), that, as the anti-Talmudists had set down in

writing and proved the chief points of their confession of faith, they

were permitted everywhere to hold disputations with the Talmudists.

Copies of the Talmud were ordered to be confiscated, brought to

Kamieniec, and there publicly burned by the hangman. Dembowski was

permitted arbitrarily to favor the one party and condemn the other.

The king of Poland and his minister, Count Brühl, troubled themselves

but little about internal affairs, still less about the Jews. Hence

Dembowski, who at about that time was made archbishop of Lemberg, was

allowed with the aid of the clergy, the police, and the Frankists,

to search for copies of the Talmud and other rabbinical writings in

the towns of his bishopric, collect them at Kamieniec, and drag them

through the streets in mockery. Only the Bible and the Zohar were to

be spared, as in the time of the Talmud persecution under Popes Julius

IV and Pius V. Nearly a thousand copies of the Talmud were thrown into

a great pit at Kamieniec and burnt by the hangman. The Talmudists

could do nothing, but groan, weep, and proclaim a rigorous fast-day

on account of "the burning of the Torah." It was the Kabbala that had

kindled the torches for the funeral pile of the Talmud. The clergy, in

conjunction with the anti-Talmudists, daily made domiciliary visits

into Jewish houses to confiscate copies of the Talmud.

To free themselves and all other Jews from the oft repeated, and as

often refuted, accusation of child-murder, which the abject Frankists

had confirmed, the Jewish Talmudists sent Eliakim Selig (Selek) to

Benedictus XIV, to procure an official exposure of the falsehood of the

charge brought against Jews. Eliakim's determination and persistence

succeeded in obtaining this authoritative acquittal in Rome at the end

of 1757.

Suddenly Bishop Dembowski died (November 17, 1757) a violent death,

and this led to a new development in the controversy. Persecution of

the Talmudists immediately ceased, and from that time the Frankists

were persecuted, imprisoned, and declared outlaws. Their beards were

shaved off as a mark of disgrace and to make them easily recognizable.

The majority, no longer able to maintain themselves in Kamieniec,

fled to the neighboring province of Bessarabia. But they were even

more disturbed under Turkish jurisdiction. Their persecutors informed

the Jewish community of the arrival of the anti-Talmudists in their

district and of their injuriousness to Judaism, and the former had

only to notify the Pasha and the Cadi that these supposed Polish Jews

were not under the protection of the Chacham Bashi (chief rabbi) of

Constantinople in order to invite the Turks to fall upon the newcomers

and mercilessly rob and ill-treat them. In despair the Frankists

wandered restlessly about the borderlands of Podolia and Bessarabia.

At length they addressed the king of Poland, and implored him to

confirm the privilege tolerating their worship granted them by Bishop

Dembowski. Augustus III, the weakling and martyr of the seven years'

war, thereupon issued a decree (June 11, 1758) permitting the Frankists

to return unmolested to their homes, and reside in Poland wherever they

pleased. The decree was not enforced with sufficient energy, and the

Frankists continued to be persecuted by their opponents aided by the

nobles. In their trouble some of their body were sent to beg Frank,

who had so long forsaken them, to assist them with his advice. While

affecting to demur, he willingly obeyed their call and repaired again

to Podolia (January, 1759).

With his appearance the old game of intrigue began once more. Frank

was from that time the life and soul of his followers, and without his

commands they undertook nothing. He saw clearly that the hypocrisy of

simply declaring that the anti-Talmudists believed in the Trinity

must not be repeated, but that they must make more of a concession to

Christianity. By his advice six Frankists, the majority foreigners,

repaired to Wratislav Lubienski, Archbishop of Lemberg, with the

declaration (February 20, 1759), "in the name of their whole body,"

that they were all willing, under certain conditions, to be baptized.

In their petition they used phrases savoring of Catholicism, and

breathed vengeance against their former co-religionists. Lubienski had

this petition of the Zoharites printed, in order, on the one hand, to

proclaim the victory of the Church, on the other, to keep the members

of this sect to their word; but he did nothing for them. Although in

their Catholic and Kabbalistic language they declared that they were

languishing for baptism "like the hart for the water-brooks," they

did not in the least contemplate an immediate formal secession to

Christianity. Frank, their leader, whom they blindly followed, did not

consider the time ripe for this extreme measure. He reserved it to

extort favorable terms, which were embodied in an address presented

to the king and Archbishop Lubienski (May 16, 1759) by two deputies.

They insisted especially on a disputation with their opponents,

adducing as a reason, that they wished to show the world that they

were led to embrace Christianity, not from necessity and poverty, but

through conviction. They wished, moreover, to give an opportunity to

their secret confederates to publicly avow themselves believers in

Christianity, which they would infallibly do if their righteous cause

should triumph in public argument. Finally they hoped in this way to

open the blinded eyes of their antagonists. To this cunningly devised

petition breathing malice against their enemies, the king made no

reply, while Lubienski answered evasively that he could only promise

them eternal salvation if they allowed themselves to be baptized; the

rest would follow as a matter of course. He displayed no zeal whatever

for the conversion of these ragged fellows whom he believed to be

dissemblers. The papal nuncio in Warsaw, Nicholas Serra, did not regard

with favor the idea of the conversion of the anti-Talmudists.

The position of affairs changed, however, when Lubienski withdrew

to Gnesen, his arch-episcopal seat, and the administrator of the

archbishopric of Lemberg, the canon De Mikulski, showed more zeal

for conversion. He immediately promised the Frankists to arrange a

religious conference between them and the Talmudists, if they would

exhibit a sincere desire for baptism. On this the deputies, Leb

Krysa and Solomon of Rohatyn, in the name of the whole body, made a

Catholic confession of faith (May 25), which savored of Kabbalism:

"the cross is the symbol of the Holy Trinity and the seal of the

Messiah." It closed with these words: "The Talmud teaches the use of

the blood of Christians, and whosoever believes in it is bound to use

this blood." Thereupon Mikulski, without consulting the papal nuncio

Serra, made arrangements for a second disputation in Lemberg (June,

1759). The rabbis of this diocese were summoned to appear, under pain

of a heavy fine, and the nobility and clergy were requested in case

of necessity to compel them. The nuncio Serra, to whom the Talmudists

complained, was in the highest degree dissatisfied with the idea of

the disputation, but did not care to prevent it because he wished to

learn with certainty whether the Jews used the blood of Christians.

This appeared to him the most important point of all. Just at this

time Pope Clement XIII had given a favorable answer on this question

to the Jewish deputy Selek. Clement XIII proclaimed that the Holy See

had examined the grounds on which rested the belief in the use of human

blood for the feast of the Passover and the murder of Christians by

Jews, and that the Jews must not be condemned as criminals in respect

of this charge, but that in the case of such occurrences legal forms of

proof must be used. Notwithstanding this, the papal envoy at this very

time, deceived by the meanness of the Frankists, partially credited the

false accusation, and notified the Curia of it.

The religious conference which was to lead to the conversion of so many

Jews, at first regarded with indifference, began to awaken interest.

The Polish nobility of both sexes purchased admission cards at a high

price, the proceeds to go to the poor people who were to be baptized.

On the appointed day the Talmudists and Zoharites were brought into the

cathedral of Lemberg; all the clergy, nobility, and burghers crowded

thither to witness the spectacle of Jews, apparently belonging to the

same religion, hurling at each other accusations of the most abominable

crimes. In reality it was the Talmud and the Kabbala, formerly a

closely united pair of sisters, who had fallen out with each other.

The disputation failed miserably. Of the Frankists, who had boastfully

given out that several hundreds of their party would attend, only about

ten appeared, the rest being too poor to undertake the long journey and

attire themselves decently. Of the Talmudists forty were present owing

to their dread of the threatened fine. How Judaism had retrograded

in the century of "enlightenment" when compared with the thirteenth

century! At that time, on a similar occasion, the spokesman of the

Jews, Moses Nachmani, proudly confronted his opponents at the court of

Barcelona, and almost made them quake by his knowledge and firmness.

In Lemberg the representatives of Talmudic Judaism stood awkward and

disconcerted, unable to utter a word. They did not even understand

the language of the country--their opponents, to be sure, were in

like case--and interpreters had to be employed. But the Catholic

clergy in Poland and the learned classes also betrayed their astounding

ignorance. Not a single Pole understood Hebrew or the language of the

rabbis sufficiently to be an impartial witness of the dispute, whilst

in Germany and Holland Christians acquainted with Hebrew could be

counted by hundreds. The Talmudists had a difficult part to play in

this religious conference. The chief thesis of the Frankists was that

the Zohar teaches the doctrine of the Trinity, and that one Person

of the Godhead became incarnate. Could they dare to deny this dogma

absolutely without wounding the feelings of the Christians, their

masters? And that leanings toward this doctrine were to be found in

the Zohar they could not deny. Of course, they might have refuted

completely the false charge of using the blood of Christian children

and of the bloodthirsty nature of the Talmud, or might have cited the

testimony of Christians and even the decisions of popes. They were,

however, ignorant of the history of their own suffering, and their

ignorance avenged itself on them. It is easy to believe that the

Talmudic spokesmen, after the three days' conference, returned home

ashamed and confused. Even the imputation of shedding Christian blood

continued to cling to their religion.

The Zoharites who had obtained their desire were now strongly urged

by the clergy to perform their promise, and allow themselves to be

baptized. But they continued to resist as if it cost them a great

struggle, and only yielded at the express command of their chief,

Frank, and in his presence. The latter appeared with great pomp, in

magnificent Turkish robes, with a team of six horses, and surrounded

by guards in Turkish dress. He wished to impress the Poles. His was

the strong will which led the Frankists, and which they implicitly

obeyed. Some thousand Zoharites were baptized on this occasion. Frank

would not be baptized in Lemberg, but appeared suddenly, with dazzling

magnificence, in Warsaw (October, 1759), aroused the curiosity of the

Polish capital, and requested the favor that the king would stand

godfather to him. The newspapers of the Polish capital were full of

accounts of the daily baptisms of so many Jews, and of the names of

the great nobles and ladies who were their godparents. But the Church

could not rejoice in her victory. Frank was watched with suspicion

by the clergy. They did not trust him, and suspected him to be a

swindler who, under the mask of Christianity, as formerly under that of

Islam, desired to play a part as the leader of a sect. The more Frank

reiterated the demand that a special tract of country be assigned to

him, the more he aroused the suspicion that he was pursuing selfish

aims and that baptism had been but a means to an end. The Talmud Jews

neglected nothing to furnish proofs of his impostures. At length he

was unmasked and betrayed by some of his Polish followers, who were

incensed at being neglected for the foreign Frankists, and showed

that with him belief in Christianity was but a farce, and that he had

commanded his followers to address him as Messiah and God Incarnate

and Holy Lord. He was arrested and examined by the president of the

Polish Inquisition as an impostor and a blasphemer. The depositions

of the witnesses clearly revealed his frauds, and he was conveyed to

the fortress of Czenstochow and confined in a convent (March, 1760).

Only the fact that the king was his godfather saved Frank from being

burnt at the stake as a heretic and apostate. His chief followers

were likewise arrested and thrown into prison. The rank and file were

in part condemned to work on the fortifications of Czenstochow, and

partly outlawed. Many Frankists were obliged to beg for alms at the

church doors, and were treated with contempt by the Polish population.

They continued true, however, to their Messiah or Holy Lord. All

adverse events they accounted for in the Kabbalistic manner: they had

been divinely predestined. The cloister of Czenstochow they named

mystically, "The gate of Rome." Outwardly they adhered to the Catholic

religion, and joined in all the sacraments, but they associated

only with each other, and like their Turkish comrades, the Donmäh,

intermarried only with each other. The families descended from them

in Poland, Wolowski, Dembowski, Dzalski, are still at the present day

known as Frenks or Shäbs. Frank was set at liberty by the Russians,

after thirteen years' imprisonment in the fortress, played the part

of impostor for over twenty years elsewhere, in Vienna, Brünn, and at

last in Offenbach; set up his beautiful daughter Eva as the incarnate

Godhead, and deceived the world until the end of his life, and even

after his death; but with this part of his career Jewish history has

nothing to do.

For all these calamitous events, Jonathan Eibeschütz was in some

measure to blame. The Frankists regarded him, the great Gaon, as one

of themselves, and he did nothing to clear himself from the stigma of

this suspicion. He was implored to aid the Polish Jews, to make his

influence felt in refuting the charge of the use of Christian blood.

He remained silent as if he feared to provoke the Frankists against

himself. Some of his followers who had warmly upheld him began to

distrust him, among them Ezekiel Landau, at that time chief rabbi of

Prague. Jacob Emden had won the day, he could flourish over him the

scourge of his scorn; and he pursued him even beyond the grave as the

most abandoned being who had ever disgraced Judaism. The rabbinate had

placed itself in the pillory, and undermined its own authority. But it

thereby loosened the soil from which a better seed could spring forth.

Whilst Eibeschütz and his opponents were squabbling over amulets

and Sabbatian heresy, and Jacob Frank Lejbowicz was carrying on his

Zoharistic frauds, Mendelssohn and Lessing were cementing a league

of friendship, Portugal was extinguishing its funeral fires for the

Marranos, and in England the question of the emancipation of the Jews

was being seriously discussed in Parliament.