MANASSEH’S _NISHMATH CHAYYIM_
The most important of his Hebrew writings――Quotations from
Gebirol, Bedersi, _R._ Kalonymus, _R._ Zerahiah Ha’levi, and
others――Plato, Aristotle and Philo――_Cabbalistic_ ideas――_R._
Isaac Luria――Miracles and Christian Saints――Manasseh’s Jewish
Nationalism――“The Jewish Soul”――The _Zohar_――_R._ Jehudah
Ha’levi――The holiness of the Land of _Israel_――_R._ David
Carcassone, the messenger from Constantinople.
THE most important of Manasseh’s _Hebrew_ writings, though it is only
alluded to incidentally, or dismissed with derisive criticism in some
biographies, was his _Nishmath Chayyim..._,¹ Amsterdam, 1651 (Appendix
xi). Sarcastic observations have been made with regard to the legends
and superstitions with which this book abounds. It is true that the
book contains many legends and superstitious beliefs; but that is just
why, from a literary point of view, it contributes far more to a real
knowledge of Manasseh than the writings in which he advocated certain
causes as apologist or translator. In this book we get Manasseh
himself, a national Jew, preaching to his brethren in the national
language. A careful study of the book in the original, with its
peculiar style, its wide range of allusion, and its distinctive spirit,
gives us a clear idea of Manasseh’s religious views, his Jewish
national self-consciousness, or――to use the modern term――his Zionism.
¹ “The Breath of Life”: on the existence of the soul, the
future life, _etc._
The book is a careful compilation, skilfully put together and well
chosen in every part. Though somewhat florid in certain portions, it
is on the whole excellently written. Its style reminds one of that of
Abrabanel, with a touch of _R._ Isaac (1402?‒1494) _ben_ Moses Arama.
The author often quotes poetical sentences of Solomon (1021?‒1058)
_ben_ Judah Ibn Gabirol [Abu Ayyub Sulaiman Ibn Yahya Ibn Jabirul],
known as Avicebron: _R._ Jedaiah (1270?‒1340?) _ben_ Abraham Bedersi
[Bedaresi].¹ Kalonymos (1286‒_post_ 1328) _ben_ Kalonymos _ben_ Meir
[Maestro Calo]; Zerahiah (1131?‒1186?) _ben_ Isaac Ha’levi Gerondi,
and others, and thus shows himself well versed not only in the ancient
texts, but also in the beauties of comparatively recent _Hebrew_
poetry.
¹ He quotes Bedersi also in _De Termino Vitae_: “Quando
aspicis coelum, quod supra te est”――with the _Hebrew_
original (_p._ 17).
Manasseh’s argument aims at proving that the immortality of the
soul is an old _Biblical_ as well as a _Talmudical_, _Rabbinical_
and _Cabbalistic_ principle. He defines the _Nefesh_ (Soul) as the
internal ultimate principle by which man thinks, feels and wills. The
term _Ruach_ (Mind) denotes this principle as the subject of man’s
conscious state, while _Nefesh_ denotes it as the source of man’s
physical activities as well. The question of the reality of the soul
and its separate existence apart from the body is for him one of
the most important problems of religion, for with it is bound up the
doctrine of a future life. He knows Plato (427?‒347? _b.c.e._),
Aristotle (384‒322 _b.c.e._) and Philo (20? _b.c.e._‒_post_ 40
_c.e._). It is well known that Mysticism shares to a great extent
the ideas of the system of Plato, _e.g._ in his theory of the world
of ideas, of the origin of the world-soul and the human soul. The
two standpoints, the cosmological and the epistemological, are
found combined in Plato. In the _Phædo_ the chief argument for
the immortality of the soul is based on the nature of intellectual
knowledge interpreted by the theory of memory; this of course implies
the pre-existence of the soul. This doctrine developed into an extreme
Transcendentalism. Aristotle, on the other hand, emphasized the
intimacy of the union of body and soul. The difficulty in his theory
is to determine what degree of distinctness or separateness from the
matter of the body is to be conceded to the human soul. He fully
recognizes the spiritual element in thought, and describes the “active
intellect” as separate, but the precise relation of this “active
intellect” to the individual mind was an obscure point in his theory.
Philo combined the Platonic theory with the data of the Bible, and
taught that every man, by freeing himself from matter and receiving
illumination from God, may reach the mystic, ecstatic or prophetic
state, where he is absorbed in the Divinity. The Stoics taught that
all existence is material, and described the soul as a breath
pervading the body. They also called it Divine, a particle of God.
Manasseh’s system is a syncretism of the ideas of Plato, Philo and
the Stoics, while he rejects the Aristotelian ideas. He endeavours
to prove that Moses Maimonides (1135‒1204) did not follow the
great Peripatetic, and opposes the commentator of Maimonides’
_Moreh-Nebuchim_ Moses (_fl. 14th cent._) _ben_ Joshua Narboni
[Mestre Vidal], in a somewhat forced dialectical manner.
Accepting on these grounds the pre-existence of the soul, the
continuance of the soul in the world to come, and reincarnation, he
comes to the _Cabbalah_, quotes the _Zohar_, and declares himself
a disciple of _R._ Isaac Luria. According to the _Zohar_, man is
composed of three things: Life, or _Nefesh_, Spirit, which is _Ruach_,
and Soul, which is _Neshamah_. By this man becomes a _Ruach Chajah_
(Living Spirit).¹ Manasseh’s doctrine may be summarized as follows:――
¹ See _p._ 157, _The Secret Doctrine in Israel_, by A. E.
Waite, 1913.
(1) The human soul is endowed with special gifts fitting it for
an intimate union with the Divinity――the Stoic “particle of God,”
corresponding to the _Hebrew_ “_Chelek Eloha Mimaal_”;
(2) The gifts or graces through which every man is equipped for his
perfection form his Life, Spirit and Soul into an organized whole,
whose parts are knit together;
(3) Through contemplation and piety the human soul enters into that
higher heavenly soul, into the mystical cosmos whose parts are united
in divine eternity. This is, to his mind, the meaning of the Biblical
teaching that man is made in the image and likeness of God.
The _Cabbalistic_ ideas once accepted, Manasseh accepts also the
transmigration of souls, physical resurrection, expelling of demons,
and so on. He indulges in theosophical visions and metaphysical
speculations. All these seem strange from a modern point of view,
but he should be considered in the light of his time. He believed
in miracles. Did not the Fathers of the Christian Church believe in
them? Origen (185?‒253(4)) says that he has seen examples of demons
expelled.¹ St. Athanasius (293‒373) writes in the Life of St. Anthony
(251(2)‒356(7)) from what he himself saw and heard from one who had
long been in attendance on the saint. Justin Martyr (100?‒163‒7), in
his second apology to the Roman Senate appeals to miracles wrought
in Rome and well attested. Tertullian (155?‒222?) challenges the
heathen magistrates to work the miracles which the Christians perform²;
St. Augustine (354‒430) gives a long list of extraordinary miracles
wrought before his own eyes, mentioning names and particulars. And
even in the time of the Reformation, did not Johann _von_ Reuchlin
(1455‒1522) adhere to _Cabbalistic_ mysticism in his _De arte
cabalistias_ and _De verbo mirifico_? Paradoxical as it may seem at
first sight, Manasseh even in his metaphysical beliefs was somewhat
of a rationalist, in the sense that he accepted only evidence of
trustworthy authority. The _Safed_ authorities, who were supposed to
have witnessed the miracles of Luria, of course impressed him in the
same way as Montezinos’ reports, because they were in harmony with his
theory. At any rate, it is characteristic of his way of thinking that
he was anxious to build upon facts and evidence.
¹ _c. Celsum_, i. 2.
² _Apol._, xxiii.
We have had to wander to some extent into a domain outside our
province in order to appreciate fully Manasseh’s general ideas.
His Jewish nationalism, which is for us the principal point, can be
understood only in connection with his whole system of ideas. This
nationalism is outspoken in the _Nishmath Chayyim_. What we, in modern
language, call race, national (from _natus_――_natio_) individuality,
_i.e._ what the Jew is by himself, by the fact of being born a Jew,
is termed by Manasseh “the Jewish soul.” His system is rooted in
his faith in the excellency of the Jewish soul, which is a profound
act of homage to the race; that is the point of view from which he
regards Jewish history. History, he thinks――and in this point again
he is guided by the evidence of historical facts――bears witness to
the beneficial influence that the soul of _Israel_, or――more precisely
――the _Israelitish_ soul, has exerted on the intellectual life of
mankind.
On this point he is even carried away by his imagination to make
exaggerated statements of the following kind, again backed up by
authorities: “It is a truth confirmed by innumerable writers, that
all the learning of the Greeks and Egyptians was derived from the
Jews: Justin Martyr, Clement of Alexandria (150?‒213?) and Theodoret
(386?‒247) assert that all the best philosophers and poets owe their
learning to the Holy Scriptures, for which reason they call Plato the
‘Attic _Moses_’; the ‘Athenian _Moses_.’ Clearchus the Peripatetic
(320 _b.c.e._) writes that Aristotle gained most of his learning from
a Jew with whom he had much conversation; Ambrose (340?‒397) writes
that Pythagoras (_fl._ 540‒510 _b.c.e._) was by origin a Jew, and like
a pilferer robbed them of many things; Cornelius Alexander Polyhistor
(80 _b.c.e._) writes that he was a disciple of the prophet Ezekiel
(_fl._ 3332 _a.m._). Lastly, it is certain that Orpheus (_14th_ or
_13th cent. b.c.e._), Plato, Anaxagoras (500‒428 _b.c.e._) Pythagoras,
the Milesian Thales (640‒546 _b.c.e._), Homer (_fl._ 962‒927 _b.c.e._)
and many other very learned men, derived their knowledge from the wide
ocean of the knowledge of _Moses_ (2368‒2488 _a.m._) and the Sages and
professors of his most Holy Law; for, according to the Psalmist,
“He declareth His word unto Jacob, ...” (Psalm cxlvii. 19).
“He hath not dealt so with any nation; ...” (_Ibid._ 20).
In his preface to _Nishmath Chayyim_ he makes this statement in a
more general form, saying that “wherever he quoted the non-Jewish
authorities, he wanted only to show that most of their teachings were
derived from our ancient sources.” He repeats that “Pythagoras was a
Jew, and all he taught and wrote was copied from our Holy Law and true
Tradition” (_fol. 171a_), and that “Plato had learned the teachings of
our prophet _Jeremiah_” (_fol. 171b_) (_fl._ 3298 _a.m._). Not that he
was lacking in love and consideration for other nations. Far from it:
on the contrary, he lays stress upon the sentence of the _Mishnah_,
that the pious men even of heathen nations have their share in the
future life, inasmuch as they observe the Seven Commandments of the
_Noahides_; and, needless to say, he highly respected Christianity,
and was practically the first _Hebrew_ author who quoted so often and
with such great reverence the authority of the Christian Church. Even
when he speaks of the Spanish Inquisition, of which his father was one
of the tortured victims, no word of contempt or hostility escapes his
pen, although, living in Holland, and dealing almost exclusively with
the adherents of the Reformation, he could have expressed his ideas
on this subject quite frankly. But, nevertheless, he is convinced that
“God gave to the _Israelitish_ soul a very special grace, by which
it is enabled to feel his sensible presence,” that “the _Israelites_
are and have to remain a distinct nation, having essentially the
prerogative of sanctifying life,” and he continually quotes and
illustrates the Biblical verses:――
“... Blessed be ... Israel, Mine inheritance”
(Isaiah xix. 25).
“... Israel is the tribe of his inheritance;...”
(Jeremiah x. 16).
“And who is like Thy people, like Israel, a nation one in the
earth,...” (2 Samuel vii. 23).
as well as several passages of the _Zohar_, which emphasize the
particular dignity of the Jewish soul, and _R._ Judah (1085(6)‒_post_
1140) _ben_ Samuel Ha’levi’s [Abu al-Hasan al-Lawi] well-known views,
expounded in the _Kuzari_ (_chap._ i., _par._ 46):――
“The Israelites are favoured, for God gives them holy souls.”
This sentence from the _Zohar_ is the keynote of Manasseh’s teachings,
and his favourite phrase when he speaks of all _Israel_ is,
“... shall ... surname himself by the name of Israel”
(Isaiah xliv. 5).
Whenever he means to lay stress on Jewish origin, without distinction
of country, party, school, _etc._ (a significant allusion also to
the _Marranos_), he uses this phrase. If we add that he emphasizes
the holiness of Palestine, enumerating the seven degrees of sanctity,
explains the desire of pious men to find their rest after death
in Palestinian soil by the fact that the _Shechina_ will dwell in
the Holy Land, and so on――we can realize the depth of his national
Palestinian enthusiasm. His devoted attachment to the cause of his
persecuted brethren is expressed when he speaks of _Rabbi_ David
Carcassone, the messenger from Constantinople, “who came to our city
to collect funds for the relief of our brethren who had fallen a year
before into the hands of the Cossacks, ... may God send His angel
before him” (_fol. 173b_)――referring to the massacres in Poland, 1648.
The most interesting reference to his propaganda among Christians on
behalf of the Restoration is made in his preface, where he relates
that towards morning he had a vision: “And I raised my eyes and I saw
behold an Angel touched me and said unto me ... I have given thee for
a light to the Nations in the book which thou hast written about the
Ten Tribes to possess desolated heritages....”