Much space in this volume is given to the Agadah and the so‐called

“Teachers of the Agadah.” Weiss makes no attempt at apology for that which

seems to us strange, or even repugnant in this part of the Rabbinic

literature. The greatest fault to be found with those who wrote down such

passages as appear objectionable to us is, perhaps, that they did not

observe the wise rule of Johnson, who said to Boswell on a certain

occasion, “Let us get serious, for there comes a fool.” And the fools

unfortunately did come in the shape of certain Jewish commentators and

Christian controversialists, who took as serious things which were only

the expression of a momentary impulse, or represented the opinion of some

isolated individual, or were meant simply as a piece of humorous by‐play,

calculated to enliven the interest of a languid audience. But on the other

hand, as Weiss proves, the Agadah contains also many elements of real

edification and eternal truths as well as abundant material for building

up the edifice of dogmatic Judaism. Talmudical quotations of such a nature

are scattered by thousands over Weiss’s work, particularly in those

chapters in which he describes the lives of the greatest Rabbinical

heroes. But the author lays the student under special obligations by

putting together in the concluding pages of this volume some of these

sentences, and classifying them under various headings. I give here a few

extracts. For the references to authorities I must direct the reader to

the original:—

“The unity of God is the keystone of dogmatic Judaism. The Rabbis give

Israel the credit of having proclaimed to the world the unity of God. They

also say that Israel took an oath never to change Him for another God.

This only God is eternal, incorporeal, and immutable. And though the

prophets saw Him in different aspects, He warned them that they must not

infer from the visions vouchsafed to them that there are different Gods.

‘I am the first,’ He tells them, which implies that he had no father, and

the words, ‘There is no God besides me,’ mean that he has no son. Now,

this God, the God of Israel, is holy in every thinkable way of holiness.

He is merciful and gracious, as it is said, ‘And I will be gracious to

whom I will be gracious,’ even though he who is the recipient of God’s

grace has no merit of his own. ‘And I will show mercy to whom I will show

mercy,’ that is, even to those who do not deserve it. His attributes are

righteousness, loving‐kindness, and truth. God speaks words of eternal

truth, even as He himself is the eternal life. All that the Merciful One

does is only for good, and even in the time of His anger He remembers His

graciousness, and often suppresses His attribute of judgment before His

attribute of mercy. But with the righteous God is more severe than with

the rest of the world, and when His hand falls in chastening on His saints

His name becomes awful, revered, and exalted. This God of Israel, again,

extends His providence over all mankind, and especially over Israel. By

His eye everything is foreseen, yet freedom of choice is given, and the

world is judged by grace, yet all according to the works wrought. Hence,

know what is above thee, a seeing eye and a hearing ear, and that all thy

deeds are written in a book.

“They [the Rabbis] believed that God created the world out of nothing,

without toil and without weariness. This world was created by the

combination of His two attributes, mercy and justice. He rejoices in His

creation, and if the Maker praises it, who dares to blame it? And if He

exults in it, who shall find a blemish in it? Nay, it is a glorious and a

beautiful world. It is created for man, and its other denizens were all

meant but to serve him. Though all mankind are formed after the type of

Adam, no one is like his fellow‐man (each one having an individuality of

his own). Thus he is able to say, ‘For my sake, also, was the world

created’; and with this thought his responsibilities increase. But the

greatest love shown to man is that he was created in the image of God. Man

is a being possessed of free will, and, though everything is given on

pledge, whosoever wishes to borrow may come and borrow. Everything is in

the gift of Heaven except the fear of God. In man’s heart abide both the

evil inclination and the good inclination; and the words of Scripture,

‘Thou shalt not bow down before a strange god,’ point to the strange god

who is within man himself, who entices him to sin in this world, and gives

evidence against him in the next. But the Holy One—blessed be He!—said, ‘I

have created the evil inclination, but I have also created its antidote,

the Torah.’ And when man is occupied with the Torah and in works of

charity, he becomes the master of the evil inclination; otherwise, he is

its slave. When man reflects the image of God, he is the lord of creation,

and is feared by all creatures; but this image is defaced by sin, and then

he has no power over the universe, and is in fear of all things.

“Another principle of Judaism is the belief in reward and punishment. ‘I

am the Lord, your God,’ means, ‘it is I who am prepared to recompense you

for your good actions, and to bring retribution upon you for your evil

deeds.’ God does not allow to pass unrewarded even the merit of a kind and

considerate word. By the same measure which man metes out, it shall be

meted out to him. Because thou drownedst others, they have drowned thee,

and at the last they who drowned thee shall themselves be drowned. Though

it is not in our power to explain either the prosperity of the wicked or

the affliction of the righteous, nevertheless know before whom thou

toilest, and who thy employer is, who will pay thee the reward of thy

labour. Here at thy door is a poor man standing, and at his right hand

standeth God. If thou grantest his request, be certain of thy reward; but

if thou refusest, think of him who is by the side of the poor, and will

avenge it on thee. ‘God seeketh the persecuted’ to defend him, even though

it be the wicked who is persecuted by the righteous. The soul of man is

immortal, the souls of the righteous being treasured up under the throne

of God. Know that everything is according to the reckoning, and let not

thy imagination give thee hope that the grave will be a place of refuge

for thee, for perforce thou wast formed, and perforce thou wast born, and

thou livest perforce, and perforce thou wilt die, and perforce thou wilt

in the future have to give account and reckoning before the Supreme King

of kings, the Holy One, blessed be He.

“The advent of the Messiah is another article of the belief of the Rabbis.

But if a man tell thee that he knows when the redemption of Israel will

take place, believe him not, for this is one of the unrevealed secrets of

the Almighty. The mission of Elijah is to bring peace into the world,

while the Messiah, in whose days Israel will regain his national

independence, will lead the whole world in repentance to God. On this, it

is believed, will follow the resurrection of the dead.

“Another main principle in the belief of the Rabbis is the election of

Israel, which imposes on them special duties, and gives them a peculiar

mission. Beloved are Israel, for they are called the children of God, and

His firstborn. ‘They shall endure for ever’ through the merit of their

fathers. There is an especial covenant established between God and the

tribes of Israel. God is their father, and He said to them, My children,

even as I have no contact with the profanity of the world, so also

withdraw yourselves from it. And as I am holy, be ye also holy. Nay,

sanctify thyself by refraining even from that which is not forbidden thee.

There is no holiness without chastity.

“The main duty of Israel is to sanctify the name of God, for the Torah was

only given that His great name might be glorified. Better is it that a

single letter of the law be cast out than that the name of Heaven be

profaned. And this also is the mission of Israel in this world: to

sanctify the name of God, as it is written, ‘This people have I formed for

myself, that they may show forth my praise.’ Or, ‘And thou shalt love the

Lord thy God,’ which means, Thou shalt make God beloved by all creatures,

even as Abraham did. Israel is the light of the world; as it is said, ‘And

nations shall walk by thy light.’ But he who profanes the name of Heaven

in secret will suffer the penalty thereof in public; and this whether the

Heavenly Name be profaned in ignorance or in wilfulness.

“Another duty towards God is to love Him and to fear Him. God’s only

representative on earth is the God‐fearing man. Woe unto those who are

occupied in the study of the Torah, but who have no fear of God. But a

still higher duty it is to perform the commandments of God from love. For

greater is he who submits to the will of God from love than he who does so

from fear.

“Now, how shall man love God? This is answered in the words of Scripture,

‘And these words shall be upon thy heart.’ For by them thou wilt recognise

Him whose word called the world into existence, and follow His divine

attributes.

“God is righteous; be ye also righteous, O Israel. By righteousness the

Rabbis understand love of truth, hatred of lying and backbiting. The seal

of the Holy One, blessed be He, is Truth, of which the actions of man

should also bear the impress. Hence, let thy yea be yea, and thy nay, nay.

He who is honest in money transactions, unto him this is reckoned as if he

had fulfilled the whole of the Torah. Greater is he who earns his

livelihood by the labour of his hands than even the God‐fearing man;

whilst the righteous judge is, as it were, the companion of God in the

government of the world. For upon three things the world stands: upon

truth, upon judgment, upon peace; as it is said, ‘Judge ye the truth and

the judgment of peace in your gates.’ But he who breaks his word, his sin

is as great as if he worshipped idols; and God, who punished the people of

the time of the Flood, will also punish him who does not stand by his

word. Such a one belongs to one of the four classes who are not admitted

into the presence of the Shechinah; these are the scoffers, the hypocrites

(who bring the wrath of God into the world), the liars, and the

slanderers. The sin of the slanderer is like that of one who would deny

the root (the root of all religion, _i.e._ the existence of God). The

greatest of liars, however, is he who perjures himself, which also

involves the sin of profanation of the name of God. The hypocrite, who

insinuates himself into people’s good opinions, who wears his phylacteries

and is enwrapped in his gown with the fringes, and secretly commits sins,

equally transgresses the command, ‘Thou shalt not take the name of the

Lord thy God in vain.’

“God is gracious and merciful; therefore man also should be gracious and

merciful. Hence, ‘Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself,’ which is a

main principle in the Torah. What is unpleasant to thyself, do not unto

thy neighbour. This is the whole Torah, to which the rest is only to be

considered as a commentary. And this love is also extended to the

stranger, for as it is said with regard to Israel, ‘And thou shalt love

thy neighbour as thyself,’ so is it also said, ‘And thou shalt love him

(the stranger) as thyself.’ And thus said God to Israel, ‘My beloved

children, Am I in want of anything that I should request it of you? But

what I ask of you is that you should love, honour, and respect one

another.’ Therefore, love mankind, and bring them near to the Torah. Let

the honour of thy friend be as dear to thee as thine own. Condemn not thy

fellow‐man until thou art come into his place, and judge all men in the

scale of merit. Say not ‘I will love scholars, but hate their disciples;’

or even, ‘I will love the disciples, but hate the ignorant,’ but love all,

for he who hates his neighbour is as bad as a murderer. Indeed, during the

age of the second Temple, men studied the Torah and the commandments, and

performed works of charity, but they hated each other, a sin that

outweighs all other sins, and for which the holy Temple was destroyed. Be

careful not to withdraw thy mercy from any man, for he who does so rebels

against the kingdom of God on earth. Walk in the ways of God, who is

merciful even to the wicked, and as He is gracious alike to those who know

Him, and to those who know Him not, so be thou. Indeed, charity is one of

the three pillars on which the world is based. It is more precious than

all other virtues. The man who gives charity in secret is greater even

than Moses our teacher. An act of charity and love it is to pray for our

fellow‐man, and to admonish him. ‘Thou shalt in any wise rebuke thy

neighbour, and not suffer sin upon him’ (Lev. xix. 18), means it is thy

duty to admonish him a hundred times if need be, even if he be thy

superior; for Jerusalem was only destroyed for the sin of its people in

not admonishing one another. The man whose protest would be of any weight,

and who does not exercise his authority (when any wrong is about to be

committed), is held responsible for the whole world.

“Peacefulness and humility are also the fruit of love. Be of the disciples

of Aaron, loving peace, and pursuing peace. Let every man be cautious in

the fear of God; let him ever give the soft answer that turneth away

wrath; let him promote peace, not only among his own relatives and

acquaintances, but also among the Gentiles. For (the labour of) all the

prophets was to plant peace in the world. Be exceeding lowly of spirit,

since the hope of man is but the worm. Be humble as Hillel, for he who is

humble causes the Divine presence to dwell with man. But the proud man

makes God say, ‘I and he cannot dwell in the same place.’ He who runs

after glory, glory flees from him, and he who flees from glory, glory

shall pursue him. Be of those who are despised rather than of those who

despise; of the persecuted rather than of the persecutors; be of those who

bear their reproach in silence and answer not.

“Another distinctive mark of Judaism is faith in God, and perfect

confidence in Him. Which is the right course for a man to choose for

himself? Let him have a strong faith in God, as it is said, ‘Mine eye

shall be upon the faithful (meaning those possessing faith in God) of the

land.’ And so also Habakkuk based the whole Torah on the principle of

faith, as it is said, ‘And the just shall live by his faith’ (ii. 4). He

who but fulfils a single commandment in absolute faith in God deserves

that the Holy Spirit should rest on him. Blessed is the man who fears God

in private, and trusts in Him with all his heart, for such fear and trust

arms him against every misfortune. He who puts his trust in the Holy One,

blessed be He, God becomes his shield and protection in this world and in

the next. He who has bread in his basket for to‐day, and says, ‘What shall

I have to eat to‐morrow?’ is a man of little faith. One consequence of

real faith is always to believe in the justice of God’s judgments. It is

the duty of man to thank God when he is visited with misfortune as he does

in the time of prosperity. Therefore, blessed is the man who, when visited

by suffering, questions not God’s justice. But what shall he do? Let him

examine his conduct and repent.

“For repentance is the greatest prerogative of man. Better is one hour of

repentance and good deeds in this world than the whole life of the world

to come. The aim of all wisdom is repentance and good deeds. The place

where the truly penitent shall stand is higher than that of the righteous.

Repentance finds its special expression in prayer; and when it is said in

Scripture, ‘Serve God with all thy heart,’ by this is meant, serve Him by

prayer, which is even greater than worship by means of sacrifices. Never

is a prayer entirely unanswered by God. Therefore, even though the sword

be on a man’s neck, let him not cease to supplicate God’s mercy. But

regard not thy prayer as a fixed mechanical task, but as an appeal for

mercy and grace before the All‐Present; as it is said, ‘For He is gracious

and full of mercy, slow to anger, abounding in loving‐kindness, and

repenteth him of the evil.’ ”

The last two volumes of Weiss’s work deal with the history of Tradition

during the Middle Ages, that is, from the conclusion of the Talmud to the

compilation of the Code of the Law by R. Joseph Caro. I have already

indicated that with Weiss Tradition did not terminate with the conclusion

of the Talmud. It only means that a certain undefinable kind of

literature, mostly held in dialogue form and containing many elements of

Tradition, was at last brought to an end. The authorities who did this

editorial work were the so‐called _Rabbanan Saburai_(153) and the

_Gaonim_, whose lives and literary activity are fully described by Weiss.

But, while thus engaged in preserving their inheritance from the past,

they were also enriching Tradition by new contributions, both the Saburai

and the Gaonim having not only added to and diminished from the Talmud,

but having also introduced avowedly new ordinances and decrees, and

created new institutions.

Now, it cannot be denied that a few of these ordinances and decrees had a

reforming tendency (see the second and twentieth chapters of vol. iv.); in

general, however, they took a more conservative turn than was the case in

the previous ages. This must be ascribed to the event of the great schism

within the Rabbinical camp itself. I refer to the rise of Caraism, which

took place during the first half of the eighth century.

There is probably no work in which the Halachic or legalistic side of this

sect is better described than in this volume of Weiss. I regret that I am

unable to enter into its details. But I cannot refrain from pointing to

one of the main principles of the Caraites. This was “Search the

Scriptures.” Now this does not look very dissimilar from the principle

held by the Rabbis. For what else is the Talmud, but a thorough searching

through the Bible for whatever was suggestive by time and circumstances?

The light which the Caraites applied to the searching of the Scriptures

was the same which illumined the paths of the Rabbis’ investigations. They

employed most of the expository rules of the Tannaite schools. The fact is

that they were only determined to find something different from what the

Rabbis found in the Scriptures. They wanted to have gloomy Sabbaths and

Festivals, and discovered authority for it in the Bible; they wanted to

retain most of the dietary laws which had their root only in Tradition,

but insisted on petty differences which they thought might be inferred

from the Scriptures, and they created a new “order of inheritance,” and

varied the forbidden degrees in marriage, in all which the only merit was

that they were in contradiction to the interpretation of the Rabbis. They

also refused to accept the Liturgy of Rabbinical Judaism, but never

succeeded in producing more than a patch‐work from verses of the Bible,

which, thus recast, they called a prayer‐book. There were undoubtedly

among their leaders many serious and sincere men, but they give us the

impression of prigs, as for instance, Moses Darai, when he reproaches the

Rabbinical Jews for having an “easy religion,” or Israel Hammaarabi, when

he recommended his book on the laws regarding the slaughtering of animals,

as having the special advantage that his decisions were always on the more

stringent side. Those who made a pilgrimage to the Holy Land were by the

Caraites canonised as “mourners.” The Rabbanite R. Judah Hallevi also

visited the ruins of Jerusalem, but he did something more than “mourn and

sigh and cry,” he became a God‐intoxicated singer, and wrote the “Zion‐

Elegy.” The novel terminology which they use in their exegetical and

theological works, was only invented to spite the Rabbanites, and marks

its authors as pedants. On the other hand, it is not to be denied that

their opponents did not employ the best means to conciliate them. The

Middle Ages knew no other remedy against schism than excommunication, and

the Gaonim were the children of their time. Nor were the arguments which

the latter brought forward in defence of Tradition always calculated to

convince the Caraites of their error. When R. Saadiah, in his apology for

the institution of the Second Day of the Festival,(154) went the length of

assigning to it a Sinaitic origin, he could only succeed in making the

Caraites more suspicious of the claims of Tradition than before. In a

later generation one of his own party, R. Hai Gaon, had to declare his

predecessor’s words a “controversial exaggeration.” The zeal which some of

the Gaonim showed in their defence of such works as the _Chambers_ and the

_Measure of the Stature_(155) was a not less unfortunate thing, for it

involved the Rabbanites in unnecessary responsibilities for a new class of

literature of doubtful origin, which in succeeding centuries was disowned

by the best minds in Judaism.

The Gaonic period, to which we also owe the rise of the Massorah and the

introduction of points in the text of the Bible—of which Weiss treats

fully in the twenty‐third and twenty‐fourth chapters of vol. iv.—comes to

an end with the death of R. Hai. The famous schools of Sura and

Pumbeditha, over which these two Gaonim presided, fell into decay, and

Babylon ceased to be the centre of Judaism. To be more exact, we should

say that Judaism had no longer any real centre. Instead of dwelling in one

place for centuries, we now have to be perpetually on our journey,

accompanying our authors through all the inhabited parts of the

world—France, Italy, Spain, Germany, with an occasional trip to Africa and

Russia. There we shall meet with the new schools, each of which, though

interpreting the same Torah, occupied with the study of the same Talmud,

and even conforming more or less to the same mode of life, has an

individuality and character of its own, reflecting the thought and habits

of the country which it represents. Thus “geographical Judaism” becomes a

factor in history which no scholar can afford to neglect. It is true that

Judaism never remained entirely unbiassed by foreign ideas, and our author

points in many a place to Persian, Greek, and Roman influences on

Tradition; still, these influences seem to have undergone such a thorough

“Judaization” that it is only the practised eye of the scholar that is

able to see through the transformation. But it requires no great skill to

discriminate between the work produced by a Spanish and that of a French

Rabbi. Though both would write in Hebrew, they betray themselves very soon

by the style, diction, and train of thought peculiar to each country. The

Spaniard is always logical, clear, and systematising, whilst the French

Rabbi has very little sense of order, is always writing occasional notes,

has a great tendency to be obscure, but is mostly profound and critical.

Hence the fact that whilst Spain produced the greatest codifiers of the

law, we owe to France and Germany the best commentaries on the Talmud.

What these codes and commentaries meant for Judaism the student will find

in Weiss’s book, and still more fully in his admirable essays on Rashi

(Solomon b. Isaac), Maimonides, and R. Jacob Tam (published in his

periodical, _Beth Talmud_, and also separately). It is enough for us here

only to notice the fact of the breadth of Tradition, which could include

within its folds men of such different types as the sceptics, Maimonides,

Solomon b. Gabirol, and Abn Ezra on one side, and the simple “non‐

questioning” Rabbenu Gershom, Rashi, and Jacob Tam on the other.

The last three centuries, which occupy our author’s attention in the fifth

volume, are not remarkable for their progress. The world lives on the

past. The rationalists write treatises on Maimonides’ philosophical works,

whilst the German Talmudists add commentary to commentary. It is, indeed,

the reign of authority, “modified by accidents.” Such an accident was the

struggle between the Maimonists and Anti‐Maimonists, or the rise of the

Cabbalah, or the frequent controversies with Christians, all of which

tended to direct the minds of people into new channels of thought. But

though this period is less original in its work, it is not on that account

less sympathetic. One cannot read those beautiful descriptions which Weiss

gives of R. Meir of Rothenburg and his school, or of R. Asher and his

descendants, without feeling that one is in an atmosphere of saints, who

are the more attractive the less they were conscious of their own

saintliness. The only mistake, perhaps, was that the successors of these

“Chassidim or pious men of Germany” looked on many of the religious

customs that were merely the voluntary expression of particularly devout

souls as worthy of imitation by the whole community, and made them

obligatory upon all.

Studies in Judaism, First Series · 第 15 / 26 段