Chapter XI: Introduction (8)

It is noteworthy that this principle is exceptionally supported by a Biblical verse. The same may be noticed in the book Cuzari (V. xviii.), in the enumeration of the principles of faith according to the methods of Mohammedan Theologians (Medabberim); the principle of God’s Omniscience is supported by a Biblical verse, only with this difference, that in the Cuzari it is not exactly the principle of God’s Omniscience, but its proof derived from the Creation, that is supported by a quotation from Ps. xciv. The reason of the anomaly is this: Some of the opponents of this principle contend that it would be derogatory to the greatness of God if He were to take notice of the doings of each individual being. To this the reply is given: The Psalmist, who was far from saying anything derogatory of God, declared that God knows the deeds and the thoughts of each individual.

The problem how to reconcile God’s Prescience and Omniscience with man’s Free-will has of course engaged the attention of all Jewish theologians and philosophers, and, though in different ways and words, they all assume that God’s knowledge of a thing is by no means the cause of its existence. (See Cuzari, V. xx.; “Guide,” III. xx.; Saadiah, Emunoth, II. chap, ix.)

Perhaps a reconciliation is not necessary at all, there being no conflict. We should not call it a defect in God if His Omniscience were restricted to things knowable; a prescience of things to be determined by man’s free-will is contradictory in itself, and illogical, and to say that God would not be omniscient if He did not know them, is as absurd as to say that God would not be omnipotent if He could not make twice two to be three.

On the Eleventh Principle, p. 150.

The subject of this creed has been the main thought of the lesson preached by the prophets, of the hymns sung by the psalmists, and of the narratives written by the sacred chroniclers, as has been illustrated above (p. 155) by Biblical quotations. To these may be added (1.) the song haazinu, the professed object of which was to remind the Israelites of God’s Justice whenever evil should befall them. The words which form the basis of the song, viz., “The Rock, perfect is his work,” &c. (Deut. xxxii. 4), are also at present recited at funeral rites, as צדוק הדין, an expression of our firm belief in God’s Justice. (2.) The prophet who laments over the fall of Jerusalem declares: “Out of the mouth of the Most High do not come forth the evil things and the good (i.e., man causes them by his evil or good deeds, which are the result of his own free will and not of the Will of God). Why should man complain (of what has befallen him), being master over his sins?” (Lam. iii. 38, 39).

In the Talmud the doctrine of God’s Justice is expressed thus: “Thy employer is trustworthy, that he will pay thee the reward of thy deeds” (Aboth ii. 21). “The shop is open, and the merchant gives on credit, and all who like may come and borrow; but the collectors go constantly about, and exact payment whether the debtor is willing to pay or not, for they have something to rely upon, and the judgment is a just judgment; and everything is prepared for a banquet” (Aboth iii. 20). “God does not withhold ought of the desert of any creature” (Pesachim, 118a).

It is, however, emphatically declared in the Talmud that the reward of good deeds is given to the righteous in the future life, עולם הבא, “The reward for obedience to the Divine commandments is not to be expected in this world” (Kiddushin, 39b). “The Law says with reference to the Divine precepts, ‘Which I command thee this day to do them;’ hence we infer that their performance is to take place this day, i.e., in this life, but their reward will be received in the future life” (Abodah-zarah, 3a).

“Rabbi Elazar ha-kappar used to say, ‘Those that have been born will die; those that have died will come to life again; those that have come to life again will be judged.’ He said so in order that he himself might bear in mind, and tell others, and that it might become generally known, that God, who has formed and created man’s heart and understands all his doings, is the Judge, the Witness, and the Prosecutor; He before whom there is no wrong, no forgetfulness, no partiality, and no bribery, will one day judge. Let thy imagination not persuade thee that the grave is a refuge for thee. For without thy consent hast thou been born, and without thy consent wilt thou die, and without thy consent thou art brought to life again to account for thy deeds before the King of kings, blessed be He” (Aboth iv. 22).

The immediate enjoyment of the reward is, however, not excluded. We read in the Law, “Do this and thy days will be long;” and the Mishnah teaches, “These are the good acts, the fruit of which man enjoys in this life, whilst the full reward awaits him in the world to come: honouring father and mother, the practice of charity, peace-making between man and man, and above all the study of the Law” (Mishnah, Peah. i. 1).

The faithful Israelite is not discouraged at the sight of the successes of the wicked; on the contrary, he believes: “If to those who break the Divine laws such kindness is shown by God, what must be His goodness to those who obey Him!” (Midrash Yalkut on Isaiah viii. 1). As regards the troubles of the good, our Sages teach that the good will receive their reward “in proportion to their suffering.” Yet pious men do not seek trouble and pain merely for the prospect of future compensation; on the contrary, they avail themselves of every possible means to secure relief, and would even renounce in their agony all compensation in the future world, in order to secure release from pain in the present (Babyl. Talm. Berachoth, 5a).

As the life of Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden was free from care and trouble, and such a life was the ideal of human hopes and wishes, the Garden-Eden, גן עדן (lit., “the garden of pleasure”), became the symbol of man’s happiness in its perfection, such as will fall to the share of the good and the righteous. On the other hand, the valley of Hinnom, near Jerusalem, was a place of horror and disgust; a place where at one time children were burnt to Moloch, and where later the refuse of the city was cast. Dwelling in the valley of Hinnom (גיהנום) became the symbol of the punishment to be inflicted on the wicked. Gan-eden or Paradise, and Gehinnom or Hell, are thus mere figures to express our idea of the existence of a future retribution, and must not be taken literally as names of certain places.

The detailed descriptions of Paradise and hell as given in books both profane and religious are nothing but the offspring of man’s imagination.

The question has been asked, How long shall the punishment of the wicked last? Will it be eternal? and if so, is it compatible with God’s goodness? This and similar questions do not concern us in the least. Our task is to do what the Lord has commanded us to do, and to trust, as regards the future, in Him, who knows best to combine goodness and justice. We must here bear in mind that “God’s thoughts are not ours.”

Equally ignorant are we as to the cause of the suffering and of the death of each individual; but of this we are certain, if death is punishment, that every one dies for his own sin. This theory is so frequently repeated in the Bible that it is surprising how the theory of Vicarious Death and Vicarious Atonement could be considered as harmonising with the teaching of the Bible. We are taught that God visits the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, upon the third and upon the fourth generation; but at the same time we are told that the children are only punished if they repeat the sins of their fathers, and even then only for their own sins (comp. p. 251). It has been asserted that Isaiah in chap. liii. assumes the principle of vicarious atonement. That this is not the case we can easily see if we turn from the Anglican Version to the original Hebrew, and translate it literally and in accordance with the context. Isaiah, in describing the future glory of the servant of the Lord (= Israel), tells us what those people who oppress Israel will then feel, and how they will give expression to their feeling of shame and regret, saying, “Surely he hath borne griefs caused by us, and carried sorrows caused by us: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted. But he was wounded through our transgressions, bruised through our iniquities” (comp. Family Bible, Anglican Version, revised by M. Friedländer). Sin-offerings were brought, but not as a vicarious atonement, although the sinner might well have felt that he himself deserved the treatment endured by the sacrifice. The sin-offering could not have been a vicarious atonement, as it was not offered when the sin was committed knowingly. Maimonides explains the various laws concerning sin-offering as based on the principle that the sacrifices serve as the means of reminding us more vividly of our sins, and of their evil consequences (The Guide, III. xlvi.; comp. Mic. vi. 6–8).

On the Twelfth Principle, p. 155.

A belief in Messiah, although not directly taught, is assumed in the Mishnah as existing; and the days of Messiah (ימות המשיח) are spoken of as an event that admits of no doubt (comp. Mishnah Berachoth, i. 5). That this belief was in reality taught by the religious heads of the Jewish community is clearly shown by the introduction into the Amidah of a prayer [27] for the speedy appearance of Messiah.

The belief in the coming of Messiah in some future time has been, like the belief in the Unity of God, the source of vexatious disputations between Jews and non-Jews. Mohammedans and Christians tried by all means in their power to convince the Jews that the Anointed whose advent was prophesied by the Prophets had already appeared, the former pointing to Mohammed, the latter to Jesus, as the person realising those predictions. The Biblical passages adduced as evidence prove nothing of the kind. E.g., the three names, Sinai, Seir, and Paran, in Deut. xxxiii. 2, were interpreted by Mohammedans to refer to three revelations through Moses, Jesus, and Mohammed; and Mohammed being mentioned last, his revelation was to be the final one. It is not necessary to contradict such reasoning; one need only read the text in order to see the absurdity of the argument. Christians quoted passages from Isaiah which had no reference whatever to Messiah in evidence of the Messianity of Jesus. Children born in the days of Isaiah (vii. 14; viii. 18), whose names had reference to good or evil events of the time, were wrongly interpreted as referring to the birth of Jesus; the sufferings and final relief of the servant of the Lord, that is, Israel (chaps. lii. and liii.), were applied to Jesus; the Psalmist who sings of victories which God will grant to David (cx.) is made to declare the divinity of Jesus.

Commentators and philosophers have taken notice of these arguments and refuted them. Of the many works on these topics a few may be named: “Nitsachon” (נצחון), by Lipmann Mühlhausen (1400), “Strengthening of Faith” (חזוק אמונה), by Isaak ben Abraham Troki (1594), “Vindiciæ Judæorum,” by Manasseh ben Israel (1650).

In refuting arguments brought by Christians and Mohammedans against Jews and Judaism, and rejecting the Messianic claims of Jesus and Mohammed, Jews are ready to acknowledge the good work done by the religions founded by these men, Christians and Mohammedans, in combating idolatry and spreading civilisation. Maimonides says as follows:—“The King Messiah will in some future time come, restore the kingdom of David to its former power, build the Temple, bring together the scattered of Israel, and all the ancient laws will again be in force: sacrifices will be offered, and years of release and Jubilees will be kept as prescribed in the Law. Whoever does not believe in him, or does not hope for his coming, shows a want of faith not only in the Prophets, but also in the Law; for the Law testifies concerning him in the words: ‘And the Lord thy God will again bring back thy captivity, show mercy to thee, and again gather thee, &c. If thy outcasts be at the end of the heavens, thence will the Lord gather thee,’ &c, ‘and the Lord will bring thee,’ &c. (Deut. xxx. 3–5), &c.

“You must not imagine that Messiah must prove his Messianity by signs and miracles, doing something unexpected, bringing the dead to life, or similar things, &c. The principal thing is this: the statutes and precepts of our Torah remain for ever, and nothing can be added to them nor ought taken from them. If, therefore, a descendant of David earnestly studies the Law, observes, like David his father, what the Law, both the written and the oral, enjoins, causes all Israelites to act similarly, exhorts those who are lax in the performance of the commandments, and fights the wars of the Lord: he may possibly be Messiah. If he succeeds, builds the Temple in its place, and gathers the outcasts of Israel, he is certainly Messiah; and if he does not succeed, or is killed in war, it is certain that he is not the Messiah promised in the Law; he is like all the noble and good kings of the House of David who have died; and the Almighty only caused him to rise in order to try us thereby, as it is said, ‘And of the wise some will stumble, and through them the people will be tested, purified, and made white, till the time of the end comes; for there is yet a vision for an appointed time’ (Dan. xi. 35). Also Jesus, the Nazarene, who imagined that he would be Messiah, and was killed through the court of law, is alluded to in the Book of Daniel, as it is said, ‘And the sons of the transgressors among thy people will rise, in order to establish a vision, and will stumble’ (ibid. xi. 14). Can there be a greater stumbling than this? All the prophets said that Messiah will be a redeemer and a saviour to the Israelites, will bring together their outcasts, and will strengthen their obedience to the Divine precepts, but he (Jesus) caused destruction by the sword to Israel, the dispersion of those left, and their humiliation; he changed the Law, and misled many people to worship a being beside God. But the thoughts of the Creator of the universe cannot be understood by any human being, for the ways of men are not His ways, nor their thoughts His thoughts; for all the events connected with Jesus and with Mohammed, that rose after him, served only to pave the way for the King Messiah, who will reform all mankind and lead them to the unanimous service of God, as it is said, ‘For then will I turn to the peoples a pure language, that all may call by the name of God, and serve him unanimously’ (Zeph. iii. 9). How can this be done? Almost all people have through them—Jesus and Mohammed—become acquainted with the idea of Messiah, with the words of the Torah and the Divine precepts. Through them the knowledge of the Bible spread even unto the remotest islands and unto many nations ‘uncircumcised’ in heart and uncircumcised in flesh. They seek to justify their disobedience to the precepts of the Torah; some of them say that these precepts are Divine, but are not in force at present, and were never intended to be permanent laws; others maintain that they must not be taken literally, as they are mere symbols, the meaning of which has already been explained by Messiah. But when the true King Messiah will rise, he will prosper, be high and exalted; all will then at once know that it was falsehood what their fathers have inherited, and that their prophets and their teachers have misled them.

“Do not imagine that in the days of Messiah the course of Nature will be altered in any way, or that any new creation will take place. When Isaiah said, ‘The wolf will dwell with the lamb, and the leopard will lie down with the kid,’ he merely employed allegorical and figurative speech; and he meant to say that the Israelite will dwell in safety together with his enemy, who has been as cruel to him as wolves and leopards, &c.; all will join the true religion; they will not rob, nor commit any violence, &c., and in the days of Messiah the meaning of the allegories will be clearly known.

“Our Sages said that there will be no other difference between the present time and the days of Messiah but the independence of the people of Israel.

“It appears from the literal meaning of the prophecies that the Messianic period will be preceded by the war of Gog and Magog, and that before the war a prophet will appear to guide the Israelites, and to direct their hearts to repentance. Comp. ‘Behold, I will send you Elijah,’ [28] &c. (Mal. iii. 23). Elijah will not come to declare unclean that which is clean, or clean that which is unclean; nor to disqualify persons who are believed to be qualified for joining the congregation of the Lord, or to qualify persons who are believed to be disqualified; but he will come to establish peace on earth, as it is said, ‘He shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children’ [29] (Ibid. 24).

“Some of our Sages believe that Elijah will come before Messiah, but of all these and similar things no man knows how they will come to pass; they are unexplained in the Prophets, and our Sages have no tradition about them; they only adopt what they believe to be the meaning of the Biblical passages which refer to this subject. Hence the difference of opinion. At all events, the order and the detail of these events do not form an essential portion of our creed; we must not take too much notice of Agadoth and Midrashim speaking on these and similar themes. We must not attribute great importance to them, for they do not lead to the fear or the love of God. We must also abstain from calculating the time of the coming of Messiah, &c. All we have to do is to believe in the coming of Messiah, to wait and hope.

“It is not because they desired to have dominion over all lands and nations, and be honoured by all people, or because they desired to have plenty to eat and drink, and other pleasures, that the wise men and the prophets longed for the Messianic days, but because they would then be at leisure to study the Law and its teaching without being interrupted by any oppressor, and would thus make themselves worthy of the life in the world to come (עולם הבא).

“There will not be in those days any famine, war, jealousy, or quarrel, because the good things will be in plenty, and even luxuries will be found everywhere; all will only busy themselves with trying to know the Lord. Therefore the Israelites will be great sages, knowing things which are at present hidden; they will obtain a knowledge of their Creator as far as is possible by human understanding; ‘For the earth is full with the knowledge of the Lord as the waters that cover the sea’” (Maim., Mishneh-torah xiv.; Hilchoth Melachim xi.–xii.).

The war of Gog and Magog against the Holy Land referred to by Maimonides is described by the prophet Ezekiel (chaps. xxxviii., xxxix.) as preceding the complete restoration of Israel. Saadiah has a different view of this war. The punishment of Israel in exile is to come to an end at a fixed time, or as soon as the Israelites by earnest and thorough repentance show themselves worthy of Divine grace. In that case no war of Gog and Magog will be waged against them. But if the Israelites should allow the approach of the time fixed for the redemption without having given signs of repentance and improvement, great troubles will be brought upon them, which will forcibly remind them of the necessity of returning to God; they will come together under a leader, Messiah ben Joseph, under whose leadership they will fight against their enemies, but will be beaten, and Messiah ben Joseph himself will be killed. Then Messiah ben David will appear, and with him the period of glory, of permanent peace and prosperity, and of the worship of the One God by all nations. The idea of a double Messiah, a warlike and a peaceful, an unsuccessful and a successful, is not expressed in any of the prophecies in the Bible, and seems to be of a later origin. Maimonides is silent about Messiah ben Joseph; so also Albo in Ikkarim, and Rabbi Jehudah ha-levi in the book Cuzari. Albo discusses the question about Messiah in chap. xlii. of the fourth section of Ikkarim. He refutes the opinion of those who maintain that the Messianic prophecies refer to the reign of Hezekiah or to the restoration of Israel under Zerubbabel and Ezra. The condition of the Israelites in the reign of Hezekiah did not resemble the state of prosperity and glory and universal peace as depicted in the Messianic prophecies; the fulfilment of these prophecies is still hoped for, and our hope is founded on our belief in the truthfulness of the Word of God. (Comp. Saadiah, Em. ve-deoth, VIII. iii.).

On the Thirteenth Principle, p. 16

The belief in the Resurrection of the Dead has been formulated in the Mishnah (Sanhedrin x. i) as an essential creed: “He who says that the belief in the Resurrection of the Dead is not implied in the Law has no portion in the world to come.” There is no doubt that the Almighty has the power to give fresh life to the body in which life has been extinct. We set no limits to the Omnipotence of God. But it is different if we ask whether it is the Will of God to give new life to the dust and ashes of the dead, and to restore the soul to the dead body in which it has dwelt before. Maimonides substitutes the Immortality of the Soul for the Resurrection of the Dead, and has been vehemently attacked by those who had a different opinion. He defended his view in an essay called מאמר תחיית המתים, “On the Resurrection of the Dead,” in which he attempts to prove that the Agadoth and Midrashim in depicting the future life employed figurative language, but in reality meant only a spiritual life, without any material enjoyment.

Saadiah defends the literal interpretation of “Resurrection of the Dead” (Emunoth ve-deoth, VII.), and believes that the event will take place at the time of the final redemption (גאולה אחרונה). Rabbi Jehudah ha-levi, in Cuzari, though mentioning this principle, seems to understand it as identical with the Immortality of the Soul. The king, who was at first surprised at the scarcity of references to the future life in our prayers, confessed his complete satisfaction, after having heard the exposition of our prayers by the Jewish scholar. “I see,” he says, “that I was in error; those who pray to have the Divine light vouchsafed to them during lifetime, who long to see it with their own eyes, and to attain to the degree of prophecy, they certainly seek something better even than the future life, and they who attain it may be sure that they will also enjoy the blessing of the future life; for if the soul of a man, troubled by the wants of the body, is nevertheless cleaving to the Divine glory, how much more may this be the case after the soul has left this body!” (III. 20).

II.

OUR DUTIES.