Judaism by Israel Abrahams - HTML preview

CHAPTER VIII

THE SURVIVAL OF JUDAISM

The Messianic Hope has an intimate connection with Eschatology. Whereas,

however, the latter in so far as it affirmed a Resurrection conceived

of the immortality of Israelites, the former conceived the Immortality

of Israel. It is not necessary here to trace the origin and history of

the Messianic idea in Judaism. That this idea had a strong nationalistic

tinge is obvious. The Messiah was to be a person of Davidic descent,

who would be the restorer of Israel's greatness. Throughout Jewish

history, despite the constant injunction to refrain 'from calculating

the date of the end,' men have arisen who have claimed to be Messiahs,

and these have mostly asserted their claim on nationalistic pleas. They

were to be kings of Israel as wel as inaugurators of a new regime of

moral and spiritual life. But though this is true without qualification,

it is equal y true that the philosophers of the Middle Ages tried to

remove al materialistic notions from the Messianic idea. It is very

difficult to assert nowadays whether Judaism does or does not expect

a personal Messiah. A very marked change has undoubtedly come over the

spirit of the dream.

On the one hand the neo-Nationalists deny any Messianic hopes. When that

great leader, Theodor Herzl, started a Zionistic movement without claiming

to be the Jewish Messiah, he was putting the seal on a far-reaching change

in Jewish sentiment. Dr. J. H. Greenstone, who has just published an

interesting volume on the _Messianic Idea in Jewish History_, writes

(p. 276): 'After the first Basle Congress (1897), when Zionism assumed

its present political aspect, Dr. Max Nordau, the vice-president of the

Congress, found it necessary to address an article to the Hebrew-reading

public, in which he disclaimed al pretensions of Messiahship for himself

or for his col eague Dr. Theodor Herzl.' We have thus this extraordinary

situation. Many orthodox Jews stood aloof from the Zionistic movement

because it was not Messianic, while many unorthodox Jews joined it just

because of the movement's detachment from Messianic ideas.

It may be wel to cite Dr. Greenstone's verdict on the whole question,

as the reader may care to have the opinion of so competent an authority

whose view differs from that of the present writer. 'Sacred as Zionism

is to many of its adherents, it cannot and wil not take the place of the

Messianic hope. Zionism aims at the establishment of a Jewish State in

Palestine under the protection of the powers of Europe. The Messianic hope

promises the establishment, by the Jews, of a world-power in Palestine

to which all the nations of the earth wil pay homage. Zionism, even

in its political aspect, will fulfil only one phase of the Jewish

Messianic hope. As such, if successful, it may contribute toward the

ful realisation of the hope. If not successful, it will not deprive

the Jews of the hope. The Messianic hope is wider than the emancipation

of the Jews, it is more comprehensive than the establishment of a

Jewish, political y independent State. It participates in the larger

ideals of humanity, the ideals of perfection for the human race, but it

remains on Jewish soil, and retains its peculiarly Jewish significance.

It promises universal peace, an age of justice and of righteousness, an

age in which all men will recognise that God is One and His name One.

But this glorious age will come about through the regeneration of the

Jewish people, which in turn be effected by a man, a scion of the house

of David, sent by God to guide them on the road to righteousness. The

people chosen by God to be His messengers to the world will then be

able to accomplish their mission of regenerating the world. This was

the Messianic hope proclaimed by the prophets and sages, and this is

the Messianic hope of most Jews to-day, the difference between the

various sections being only a difference in the details of the hope'

(_op. cit._, p. 278).

Dr. Greenstone surely cannot mean that the question of a 'personal

Messiah' is a mere detail of the belief. Yet it is on that point that

opinion is most divided among Jews. The older belief undeniably was what

Dr. Greenstone enunciates. But for this belief, none of what Mr. Zangwil

aptly terms the 'Dreamers of the Ghetto' would have found the ready

acceptance that several of them did when they presented themselves as

Messiah or his forerunners. And no doubt there are many Jews who stil

cling to this form of the belief.

On the other hand, there has been a slow but widespread tendency to

reinterpret the whole intention of the Messianic hope of Judaism. In

1869, and again in 1885, American Conferences of liberal Rabbis adopted

resolutions to the following effect: 'The Messianic aim of Israel is not

the restoration of the old Jewish State under a descendant of David,

involving a second separation from the nations of the earth, but the

union of all children of God in the confession of the unity of God,

so as to realise the unity of al rational creatures and their call to

moral sanctification.' This view sees in the destruction of the Temple

and the dispersal of Israel not a punishment but a stage in the fulfilment

of Israel's destiny as revealed to Abraham. Israel is High-Priest, and

can only fulfil his mission in the close neighbourhood of those to whom

he is elected to minister.

This, no less than the non-Messianic Zionism, is a considerable change

from older beliefs. As a Messianic hope it transcends the visions of

Isaiah. The prophet looks forward to an ideal future, a reign of peace

and felicity, but the nations are to flow to Zion. The significance of

the change lies in this. The Messianic idea now means to many Jews a

belief in human development and progress, with the Jews filling the role

of the Messianic people, but only as _primus inter pares_. It is

the expression of a genuine optimism. 'Character, no less than Career,'

said George Eliot, 'is a process and an unfolding.' So with the Character

of mankind as a whole. But this idea of development, unfolding, is quite

modern in the real sense of the terms; it is something outside the range

even of the second Isaiah. Judaism was never quite sure whether to join

the ranks of the '_laudatores temporis acti_,' or to believe that man

never is but always to be blest. On the one hand, the person of Adam was

endowed with perfections such as none of his successors matched. On the

other hand, the Golden Age of Judaism, as Kenan said, was thrown forward

into the future. That on the whole Judaism has taken the prospective

rather than the retrospective view, is the sole justification for the

modern conception of the Messianic Age which is fast becoming predominant

in the Synagogue. The Synagogue does not share the Roman poet's sentiment:

'A race of men baser than their sires

Gave birth to us, a progeny more vile,

Who dower the world with offspring viler stil ';

but the English poet's trust:

'Yet I doubt not through the ages one increasing purpose runs,

And the thoughts of men are widened with the process of the suns.'

Denouncing the 'Calculators of the End,' a Rabbi said (Sanh. 97 b):

'Al the computed terms have passed, and the matter dependeth now on

repentance and good deeds' (cf. S. Singer, The Messianic Idea in Judaism,

pp. 1 and 18)

If, however, Israel is not destined to a Restoration, if the

Jewish Mission is the propagation of an idea, on what ground is the

continued existence of Israel as a separate organisation defensible or

justified? Israel is indestructible, said Jehuda Halevi in the twelfth

century; certainly Israel is undestroyed. When Frederick the Great

asked what should make him believe in God, he received in answer,

'the survival of the Jews.' Dr. Guttmann of Breslau not long since put

forward a similar plea in vindication of the continued significance of

Judaism. In nature all forms die when their utility is over; in history,

peoples succumb when their work in and for the world is complete. Shall,

he asks, we recognise Judaism as the solitary exception, as the unique

instance of the survival of the unfit and the unnecessary?

The modern apologists for all religions rarely belong to the rank

and file. Whether it be Harnack for Christianity or Mr. Montefiore

for Judaism, the vindicators stand far above the average of the

believers whose faith they are vindicating. The average man needs

no defence for a religion which enables him to live and thrive,

materially and spiritually. The importance of this consideration is very

great. Restricting our attention to Judaism, it is clear that it stil

offers ideals to many, prescribes and enforces a moral law, teaches a

satisfying doctrine of God. If so, then it is futile to discuss whether

Judaism is stil necessary. Can the world afford to surrender a single

one of its forces for good? If there are ten millions of men, women, and

children who live, and live not ignobly, by Judaism, can it be contended

that Judaism is obsolete? The first, the main justification of Judaism is

its continued efficiency, its proved power still to control and inspire

many millions of human lives. There are more people living as Jews to-day,

than there were at any previous moment in the world's history.

But, like many answers to questions, this reply does not satisfy those

who raise the question. I refer exclusively to the doubters among the Jews

themselves, for if Jews were themselves convinced of the justification of

the Jewish separateness, the rest of the world would be convinced. Now,

the Jews who ask this question are those who are not so completely given

over to Judaism, that they are blind to the claims of other religions.

To them the question is one not of absolute, but of comparative

truth. Judaism may stil be a power, but it may not be a desirable

power. The further question therefore arises as to the mission of Israel

in history to come as well as in history past. History seems contradicted

by the claim made by Judaism. Jews are quick enough to see the weakness

of the pretension made by certain sects of dogmatic Christianity that

it is the last word of religion, that all saving truth was once for

all revealed some nineteen centuries ago. History, says the Jewish

controversialist, teaches no such lessons of finality. Forces appear,

work their destined course, and then make way for other forces. The world

does not stand stil ; it moves on. Then how can Judaism claim for itself

a permanence, a finality, which it must deny to every other system,

to every other influence which has in its turn moulded human destiny?

A favourite answer is: Judaism is the exception that proves the rule. It

_has_ been a permanent force in the world's history. It is argued

that Jewish ideals have exercised recurrent influence at all important

crises. Dr. Guttmann somewhat rhetorical y makes this identical claim. He

points to the birth of Christianity, the rise of Islam, the mediaeval

Scholasticism, the Italian Renaissance, the German Reformation, the

English and American Puritanism, the modern humanitarian movement, as

exemplifications of the continued power of Judaism to mould the minds

and souls of men. There is a sense in which this claim is just. It

is a valuable support to the Jew's al egiance to Judaism. But even if

Dr. Guttmann's claim were granted, and it is considerably exaggerated,

how does it help? We are all agreed as to the debt which the world owes

to Greece. That debt is a great one. Is it obsolete? Surely not. Greece

has again and again revived its ancient power to inspire men. The

world would be a poor one to-day without all that Greek culture stands

for. Greece did not give men enough to live by; Hebraism did that. But

Greece made life more worth living. Hel enism is an ever-recurrent

force in human civilisation. Yet no one argues that because Hel enism

is still necessary, Hel enes are also necessary. Who contends that for

carrying on Greek culture you need Greeks? On the contrary, it was the

case of Greece that gave rise to the profound observation that just as

a man must die to live, so peoples must die that men may live through

them. Renan, who, among the moderns, gave ful est value to this truth,

included Judaea with Greece in the generalisation. Certainly as a nation,

whether temporarily or irrevocably, Judaea perished no less than Athens,

that a new world might be born. And a new Jewish nation would no more

be the old Judaea of Isaiah than the Athens of to-day is the Athens of

Pericles, or the Rome of to-day the Rome of Augustus. History does not

retrace its steps.

Athens fel , and with it the Athenians. Why then, when Judaea fel , did

the Jews remain? Greek culture does not need Greeks to carry it on;

why does Jewish culture need Jews? The first suggestion to be offered

is this:--Israel is the protestant people. Every religious or moral

innovator has also been a protestant. Socrates, Jesus, Luther; Isaiah,

Maimonides, Spinoza; all of them, besides their contributions--very

unequal contributions--to the positive store of truth, assumed also the

negative attitude of protesters. They refused to go with the multitude,

to acquiesce in current conventions. They were al unpopular and even

anti-popular. The Jews as a community have fulfil ed, and are fulfil ing,

this protestant function. They have been and are unpopular just because

of their protestant function. They refuse to go with the multitude;

they refuse to acquiesce. Geiger used this argument very forcibly,

from the spiritual point of view, in the early part of the nineteenth

century, and Anatole Leroy-Beaulieu (in his book _Israel among the

Nations_) even more forcibly used it at the end of the same century,

from the historical point of view. This ingenious French observer cites

a suspicion that 'the sons of Jacob, as compared with the rest of the

human race, represent a higher state of evolution' (p. 232). No modern

Jew would make so preposterous a claim. But when the same writer sees

in the Jew a _different_ stage of evolution, then he is on the

right tack. Here is a passage which deserves to be quoted again and

again: 'I have little taste, I confess, for uniformity; I leave that

to the Jacobins. My ideal of a nation is not a monolith, nor a bronze

formed at a single casting. It is better that a people should be composed

of diverse elements and of many races. If the Jew differs from us, so

much the better; he is the more likely to bring a little variety into

the flat monotony of our modern civilisation' (p. 261). And the same

argument applies to religions. There is a permanent value to the world

in Israel's determined, protestant attitude. The handful of protestants

who, in Elijah's day, refused to bow to Baal and to kiss him, were the

real saviours of their generation. And though the world to-day is in no

need of such salvation, stil the Jew remains the finest exemplification

of the truth that God fulfils Himself in many ways, lest one good custom

should corrupt the world.

Then again, Judaism seems destined to survive because it represents

at once the God-idea and the ethical idea. The liberal Jew, as well as

the orthodox, believes that no other religion does this in the same way

as does Judaism. Putting it crudely, the Jew would perhaps admit that

Christianity has absorbed, developed, enlarged and purified the Hebrew

ethics, but he would, rightly or wrongly, think that it has obscured by

dogmatic accretions the Jewish Monotheism. On the other hand, the Jew

would admit that Islam has absorbed and purified the Jewish Monotheism,

but has done less of the flattery of imitation to the Hebrew ethics. Islam

has certainly a pure creed; it freed itself from the entanglements of

anthropomorphic metaphors and conceptions of God, which are apparent in

the early strata of the Hebrew Bible, and from which Judaism, because

of its reverence for the Bible, has not emancipated itself yet. But that

it can emancipate itself is becoming progressively more clear. And even

if we drop comparisons, Judaism stands for a life in which goodness and

God are the paramount interests.

But, beyond all, the Jew believes himself to be a Witness to God. He

thinks that on him, in some real sense, depends the fulfilment of the

purposes of God. It may be an arrogant thought, but unlike most boasts it

at once humiliates and ennobles, humiliates by the consciousness of what

is, ennobles by the vision of what might be. After enumerating certain

ethical and religious ideas which, he holds, Judaism still has to teach

the world, the Rev. M. Joseph adds: 'But to the Jew himself, first of

all, these truths are uttered. He is to help to win the world for the

highest ideals. But if he is to succeed, he must himself be conspicuously

faithful to them. He is the chosen, but his very election binds him to

vigorous service of truth and righteousness. "Be ye clean, ye that bear the vessels of the Lord." Only when Israel proves by the nobility of his life that he deserves his holy vocation wil the accomplishment of his

mission be at hand. When al the peoples of the earth shall see that he

is worthily cal ed by the name of the Lord, the Divine name and law wil

be near to the attainment of their destined empire over the hearts of men'

(_Judaism as Creed and Life_, p. 513).

A community that believes itself to fil this place in the Divine

purpose deserves to live. Its separate existence is a means, not an end;

for when al has been said, the one God carries with it the idea of one

humanity. The Fatherhood of God implies the brotherhood of man. And so,

amid al its trust that the long travail of centuries cannot fulfil

itself in Israel's annihilation, amid al its particularism, there soars

aloft the belief in the day when there wil be no religions, but only

Religion, when Israel wil come together with other communions, or they

with Israel. And so, thrice daily, in most Synagogues of Israel, this

prayer is uttered: 'We therefore hope in Thee, O Lord our God, that we

may speedily behold the glory of Thy might, when Thou wilt remove the

abominations from the earth, and the idols wil be utterly cut off;

when the world will be perfected under the kingdom of the Almighty,

and al the children of flesh will cal upon Thy name, when Thou wilt

turn unto Thee al the wicked of the earth. Let al the inhabitants of

the world perceive and know that unto Thee every knee must bow, every

tongue must swear. Before Thee, O Lord our God, let them bow and fall;

and unto Thy glorious name let them give honour. Let them al accept

the yoke of Thy kingdom, and do Thou reign over them speedily, and for

ever and ever. For the Kingdom is Thine, and to al eternity Thou wilt

reign in glory; as it is written in Thy Law, The Lord shal reign for

ever and ever. And it is said, And the Lord shall be King over al the

earth; in that day shal the Lord be One, and His name One.'

Modern Judaism, in short, claims no finality but what is expressed in

that hope. It holds itself ready to develop, to modify, to absorb, to

assimilate, except in so far as such processes seem inconsistent with

this hope. Modern Jews think that in some respects the Rabbinic Judaism

was an advance on the Biblical; they think further that their own modern

Judaism is an advance on the Rabbinic. Judaism, as they conceive it, is

the one religion, with a great history behind it, that does not claim the

religious doctrines of some particular moment in its history to be the

last word on Religion. It thinks that the last word is yet to be spoken,

and is inspired with the confidence that its own continuance wil make

that last word ful er and truer when it comes, if it ever does come.

SELECTED LIST OF BOOKS ON JUDAISM

[This list does not include works on the early Religion of Israel,

or articles in the standard Dictionaries of the Bible. For the rest,

only works written in English are cited, and for the most part Jewish

expositions of Judaism.]

Articles in the _Jewish Encyclopedia_ (New York and London, Funk

and Wagnal s, 12 vols. 1901-1906). Especially the fol owing: 'Articles of

Faith' (E. G. Hirsch); 'Atonement' (K. Kohler); 'Cabala' (L. Ginzberg);

'Catechisms' (E. Schreiber); 'Conferences' (D. Philipson); 'Ethics'

(K. Kohler, I. Broyde and E. G. Hirsch); 'Eschatology' (K. Kohler);

'God' (E. G. Hirsch); 'Hassidim' (S. M. Dubnow); 'Immortality'

(K. Kohler); 'Judaism' (K. Kohler); 'Law, Codification of' (L. Ginzberg);

'Messiah' (M. Buttenwieser); 'Nomism' (J. Z. Lauterbach and K. Kohler);

'Pharisees' (K. Kohler); 'Keform Judaism' (E. G. Hirsch and D. Philipson);

'Resurrection' (K. Kohler); 'Sabbath' (E. G. Hirsch and J. H. Greenstone);

'Theology' (J. Z. Lauterbach).

M. FRIEDLANDER.--_The Jewish Religion_ (Kegan Paul, 1891).

J. H. GREENSTONE.--_The Messiah Idea in Jewish History_

(Philadelphia, Jewish Publication Society of America, 1906).

M. JOSEPH.--_Judaism as Creed and Life_ (London, Macmillan, 1903).

N. S. JOSEPH.--_Religion, Natural and Revealed_ (London, Macmillan,

1906).

M. LAZARUS.--_The Ethics of Judaism_ (London, Macmillan; 2 vols.,

1900-1)

C. G. MONTEFIORE.--_Hibbert Lectures_ (London, Wil iams and Norgate,

1892, especially _Lectures_ VII.-IX.).

------_Liberal Judaism_ (London, Macmil an, 1903).

S. SCHECHTER.--_Studies in Judaism_ (London, A. and C. Black, 1896).

E. SCHURER.--_A History of the Jewish People in the Time of Christ_

(Edinburgh, T. and T. Clark, 1890).

S. SINGER.--_Authorised Daily Prayer Book_ (London, Eyre and

Spottiswoode; many editions).

End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of Judaism, by Israel Abrahams

*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK JUDAISM ***

This file should be named judsm10.txt or judsm10.zip

Corrected EDITIONS of our eBooks get a new NUMBER, judsm11.txt

VERSIONS based on separate sources get new LETTER, judsm10a.txt

This eBook produced by: Distributed Proofreaders, John Williams,

and David Starner

Project Gutenberg eBooks are often created from several printed

editions, al of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the US

unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we usually do not

keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.

We are now trying to release al our eBooks one year in advance

of the official release dates, leaving time for better editing.

Please be encouraged to tel us about any error or corrections,

even years after the official publication date.

Please note neither this listing nor its contents are final til

midnight of the last day of the month of any such announcement.

The official release date of all Project Gutenberg eBooks is at

Midnight, Central Time, of the last day of the stated month. A

preliminary version may often be posted for suggestion, comment

and editing by those who wish to do so.

Most people start at our Web sites at:

http://gutenberg.net or

http://promo.net/pg

These Web sites include award-winning information about Project

Gutenberg, including how to donate, how to help produce our new

eBooks, and how to subscribe to our email newsletter (free!).

Those of you who want to download any eBook before announcement

can get to them as fol ows, and just download by date. This is

also a good way to get them instantly upon announcement, as the

indexes our cataloguers produce obviously take a while after an

announcement goes out in the Project Gutenberg Newsletter.

http://www.ibiblio.org/gutenberg/etext03 or

ftp://ftp.ibiblio.org/pub/docs/books/gutenberg/etext03

Or /etext02, 01, 00, 99, 98, 97, 96, 95, 94, 93, 92, 92, 91 or 90

Just search by the first five letters of the filename you want,

as it appears in our Newsletters.

Information about Project Gutenberg (one page)

We produce about two mil ion dollars for each hour we work. The

time it takes us, a rather conservative estimate, is fifty hours

to get any eBook selected, entered, proofread, edited, copyright

searched and analyzed, the copyright letters written, etc. Our

projected audience is one hundred mil ion readers. If the value