m 
 
 33 
 
 = 
 
 = 30 
 
 — ^^ m 
 
 ^^ 
 
 r (7) 
 
 4 ^ 
 
 — ? O 
 
 8 ^ 
 
 J> 
 
 9 m 
 
 
 5 M 
 
 = 1> 
 
 _^— :]D 
 
 2 = 
 
 
 9 m 
 
 :^^= r — 
 
 ..« 
 
 ^— -< 
 
 8 — 
 
 
 ^':-mm'm-:\ 
 
 ivi An ■'.y«-iYi'i f f.i'i > >;i 1^ ' .' 
 
 ^^1«^ 
 
 \iftl'.' 
 
 m 
 
 P:v::.'.^ 
 
 OF TI 
 
 
 1 
 
 [TOIHA-?, 
 
 M> 
 
 
 
 «^^^'^i,>fe:-^; 

 
 THE LIBRARY 
 
 OF 
 
 THE UNIVERSITY 
 
 OF CALIFORNIA 
 
 LOS ANGELES 
 
 GIFT OF 
 
 Willian Popj^er
 
 PHILOSOPHY 
 
 AND 
 
 PHILOSOPHICAL 
 
 Authors of the 'Jews, 
 
 A HISTORICAL SKETCH 
 
 WITH EXPLANATORY NOTES, 
 
 BY 
 
 s. 3yLTj:]sric, 
 
 Librarian of the National Library at Paris (France). Author of 
 many Eminent Scientific Works. 
 
 TRANSLATED BY 
 
 DR. ISIDOR KALISCH. 
 
 B^i 
 
 V 
 
 CINCINNATI: 
 
 Block & Co.'s Printing House, 
 1881.
 
 Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1881. by 
 
 BLOCH & CO., 
 In the Office of the Librarian of Congress, at Washington.
 
 b 
 
 PREFACE 
 
 f- 
 
 My principal design in publishing this little volume is to give 
 to the public an English translation of a higbljMearned and a 
 very interesting sketch of the Jewish philosophy as it appeared 
 in France (Paris, 1849), under the title, " La Philosophic Chez 
 les Juifs par," S. Munk, Librarian at the Parisian Xational Li- 
 brar}', etc., which is originally contained in the " Dictionaire des 
 Sciences Philosophiques." It was translated into German, with 
 additional notes, by Dr. B. Beer. For this portion of philosophy 
 discussed in the book is still generally a terra incognita to many ; 
 yes, it is like a cemetery, where there are a few epitaphs of some 
 learned Jews, consisting merely of their names, but their works, 
 ideas and principles are buried in oblivion. Therefore Professor 
 Dr. Julius Fuerst very correctly remarks, in his introduction to 
 his German translation of "Emunoth Wedeoth," preface, page 
 vi. : " They take haughty leaps in the gradation of history ; al- 
 though the steps are not wanting. They take no notice of the 
 many links in the great chain of philosophy of religion which 
 were wrought by Jews with constant effort in the course of many 
 centuries." 
 
 But the reason of such a negligence of the Jewish philosophy, 
 especially of the Middle Ages, may be, because the works of 
 Jewish literati at that time were mostly written in the Arabian 
 and Hebrew languages, which are not understood by laymen, 
 and which can be read even by professional men with great 
 difficulty. In the work before us the great Orientalist, S. Munk, 
 sketched in a masterly manner the endeavors and researches 
 made by Jewish scholars and their vast movements in the bat- 
 talion of thoughts in ancient times and in the Middle Ages. 
 and thus supplied the desideratum felt by every liberal and 
 honest lover of truth. 
 
 May this new book be kindly received in the dominions of 
 philosophy and religion, is the sincere wish of the translator. 
 Faxit Deu8 ! 
 
 9l7r
 
 HISTORICAL SKETCH 
 
 — OF 
 
 JEWISH AUTHORS OF ANCIENT TIMES 
 
 And the Middle Ages in the Domain of Philosophy. 
 
 To KNOW God and to make him known to the whole world, 
 was the mission which was alloted to the Jewish people. But 
 they were led to the knowledge of God hy suggestions of faith 
 and by a revelation which they received without adding to it 
 anything themselves. The savans and prophets of the ancient 
 Hebrews, appealing to the heart of man, to its moral feeling and 
 to the imagination, endeavored to cherish and promulgate the 
 belief in a unique Being, the Creator of all things. 
 
 The Hebrews did not try to penetrate into the secret of the 
 divine Being. The existence of God, the spirituality of the soul, 
 the knowledge of good and evil are not the results of a series of 
 inferences. 
 
 They believed in God, the Creator, who revealed himself to 
 their ancestors, and his existence seemed to them to be beyond 
 the arguments of human reason. Their morality flowed natu- 
 rally from conviction and from the intrinsic feeling of a just 
 and good God. Therefore, there are in all their books no traces
 
 — 6 — 
 
 of metaphysical speculations, as are to be found in those of the 
 Hindoos and Greeks. 
 
 They do not possess a philosophy in the sense of the word as 
 we understand it. 
 
 Mosaism in its theological part presents to us neither a scien- 
 tific theology nor a philosophical system, but merely a religious 
 doctrine, based upon revelation. Many points of this doctrine, 
 however, although they are couched in poetical terms, belong 
 indisputably to the province of philosophy, and we perceive in 
 that the endeavor of human thought to solve certain problems 
 regarding the absolute Being in revelation to man. 
 
 The existence of evil in a world which owes its origin to a 
 Being that is the Supreme Goodness awakened especially the 
 reflection of the Hebrew savans. 
 
 How is it possible to admit the real existence of evil without 
 prescribing limits to that Being from whom no evil can ema- 
 nate? And how can we admit such limitations without de- 
 nying the unit}^ of the Absolute Being and without adopting the 
 doctrine of Dualism? 
 
 The evil, says the Mosaic doctrine, has no real existence. It 
 does not exist in the creation at all ; because, as the creation 
 proceeded from God, there can not be any place for the evil. 
 
 Thus it reads at the close of every period of creation : " And 
 God saw that it was good." 
 
 The evil made its appearance in the world just when intelli- 
 gence came, that is, at the same moment when man, an intel- 
 lectual, moral being, was destined to grapple with matter. It 
 happened then that a collision of the spiritual with the material 
 principle took place, which produced the evil; because man, 
 endowed with moral feeling and free in his movements, should 
 endeavor to bring all his actions in unison with the supreme 
 good ; but when he allows matter to overpower him, the evil is
 
 engendered by himself. This doctrine of evil, contained in the 
 third chapter of Genesis, is closely connected with the doctrine 
 of freedom of will, one of the fundamental doctrines of Mosaism. 
 
 Man possesses an absolute freedom in using his faculties. 
 Life and good, and death and evil are in his power (Deuter. 
 XXX. 15-19). 
 
 It is important to let this doctrine derive its efficacy from 
 this passage. 
 
 The Jews have always subordinated to it the manifold philo- 
 sophical doctrines of foreign origin which they adopted at dif- 
 ferent periods. 
 
 The development of this doctrine in its relations to the di- 
 vine providence and to the will of God as the only cause of 
 creation, was always considered by the Jewish sages of all 
 times one of the most important subjects of reflection. Mai- 
 monides, Moreh Nebuchim, 1, 3, ch. xvii. 
 
 The literati among the Hebrews and Mohammedans contented 
 themselves with the cultivation of poetry and that practical 
 wisdom which the Orientals like to clothe in the form of 
 parables, proverbs and enigmas. 
 
 The religion of the Hebrews granted no room for real philo- 
 sophical speculations. 
 
 In the councils of learned men important philosophical ques- 
 tions were sometimes engendered, but they were treated from a 
 religious standpoint and in a poetical form. Thus, for instance, 
 we find in the book of Job an assembly of wise men trying to 
 solve the problems of divine Providence and of human destiny. 
 
 After a long, unsuccessful explanation, God himself appears 
 in a thunder-storm, and accuses man of the audacity in desir- 
 ing to judge the mysterious ways of Providence. Man can only 
 behold the works of creation with awe and astonishment, when 
 everything in nature is a great secret to him ; how, then, could
 
 — 8 — 
 
 he judge the inscrutable motives of the divine Providence, and 
 the government of the universe? Man is not able to know the 
 ways of the infinite Being. He shall bow down before the Al- 
 mighty and be resigned to his will. This is the final principle 
 of the book of Job, which has decidedly a purely religious ten- 
 dency, and allows the human reason too little power to favor 
 the philosophical speculation. 
 
 The book of Ecclesiastes arrived nearly at the same conclu- 
 sion, showing traces of a well-considered skepticism, presup- 
 posing certain efforts of the intellect whose insufficiency the 
 author has perceived and alluded to, even (Eccl. xii. 12) to an 
 exuberance of books, wherein the human spirit endeavored to 
 solve problems which are beyond its power. But this very book, 
 which is ascribed to Solomon, shows us by its diction and ideas 
 a period when foreign culture was already exersising an influ- 
 ence with the Hebrews. It was indisputably composed after 
 the Babylonian captivity, and therefore the spiritual condition 
 of the ancient Hebrews can not be inferred from that at all. 
 The Babylonian exile and all the events that followed it brought 
 the Jews in contact with the Chaldeans and Persians, who did 
 not fail to exercise a certain influence upon the civilization and 
 even upon the religious views of the Je\^ s. The influence of the 
 tenets which are contained in Zend-Avesta we perceive already 
 in some books of the Old Testament, especially in Ezekiel, Zach- 
 ariah and Daniel. 
 
 The true worshipers of Jehovah did not manifest that abhor- 
 rence to the religious views of the Persians which they showed 
 against those of other heathen nations. The religion of the 
 Zend-Avesta, although she does not teach an absolute mono- 
 theism, is, nevertheless, just as hostile to idolatry as the Jewish 
 religion.
 
 — 9 — 
 
 The spirituality of the Persian religion was the main cause 
 which induced the Jews in their relations to that people to be 
 less reserved, and many Persian religious views were adopted 
 by them and became national by degrees. 
 
 Parseeism, however, contains too little of the speculative ele- 
 ments, that it could of itself not have engendered the philo- 
 sophical speculation among the Jews. 
 
 The prevailing character of the Jewish Scriptures under the 
 Persian King and during the period of the Macedonian govern- 
 ment remained essentially the same after as it was before the 
 Babylonian exile ; only the frequent intercourse with the Greeks 
 and the influence of their civilization engendered gradually 
 among the Jews a relish for metaphysical speculations. 
 
 This taste was preserved, especially among the Egyptian 
 Jews, from a necessity to extol their religion before the eyes of 
 the Greeks. 
 
 They improved the interpretations of their Holy Scriptures, 
 represented their articles of faith, laws and religious ceremo- 
 nies, clothed with sublime aspects, in order to attain the respect 
 of the people among whom they lived. We find already, in the 
 Greek translation of the Pentateuch which is ascribed to " Sev- 
 enty," and is known by the name Septuaginta, extending up to 
 the times of the first Ptolemies (280-210 Before the Christian 
 Era), numerous annotations of allegorical interpretations, and 
 we discover therein some traces of that Greek-Oriental philoso- 
 phy which developed itself since that time among the Alexan- 
 drian Jews, and whose principal representative for us is Philo. 
 
 This philosophy was already quite cultivated under the gov- 
 ernment of Ptolemy Philometor, as it can be easily ascertained 
 by many still preserved fragments of the Jewish philosopher, 
 Aristobul.
 
 — 10 — 
 
 The Book of Wisdom, the time of the composition of which 
 is also uncertain, but which is undoubtedly the work of an Al- 
 exandrian Jew, contains distinct traces of it. 
 
 The principal doctrine of this philosophy can be summed up 
 as follows : The divine Being is of such an absolute perfection, 
 that it can not be signified by any attributes which can be per- 
 ceived by human thoughts. 
 
 It is an abstract Being, without any manifestation. The 
 world is the work of certain intermediary powers, which share 
 the divine essence, and by which alone God makes himself 
 known, shedding innumerable beams in every direction. By 
 this means he is omnipresent and works everywhere without 
 being influenced by the objects which emanate from him. 
 
 We perceive in the developments of this doctrine, just as we 
 find it in the works of Philo, an eclectical philosophy, the ele- 
 ments of which are borrowed from the pre-eminent systems of 
 the Greeks, as well as of certain Oriental theories as they pre- 
 vailed at that time among Hindoo philosophers, the historical 
 derivation of which is still not sufficiently known. Although 
 this philosophy is really fantastical and boldly declares that 
 God is the only active principle in the world, and every motion 
 of our soul is affected by a divine impulse, it acknowledges 
 nevertheless the human freedom to be unrestricted, and at the 
 risk of appearing inconsequent, it is induced by a moral and 
 religious interest to pay homage to the Jewish principle of free 
 will, as it has been noticed already. The Egyptian Jews under- 
 stood how to give a peculiar air to this eclectical philosophy, 
 and cultivated it with such a success that they sometimes 
 looked on them afterward as men who were perfect, original 
 thinkers. 
 
 This was pushed so far that they regarded Pythagoras, Plato 
 and Aristotle as the disciples of Jews.
 
 — 11 — 
 
 The fables which are detailed by different Jewish authors 
 concerning the relations that took place between several Greek 
 philosophers and some Jewish sages have their origin in the 
 national pride of some rabbis, but are very old and were propa- 
 gated by heathen and Christian authors. Josephus (c. Ap I. 
 1, c. 22) and Eusebius (Praep. Evang. I. ix. c. 3) communicate 
 a passage as related by Clearchus, a disciple of Aristotle, that 
 Aristotle made the acquaintance of a Jew in Asia, with whom 
 he conversed on philosophical subjects, and confessed to have 
 learned more from him than he did from Aristotle. According 
 to Numenius of Apamea, Plato was nothing else than an 
 Attic-speaking Moses. 
 
 This proves that the manner of interpreting the Bible intro- 
 duced by the Egyptian Jews has gained great authority. After 
 the Battle of Ipsus (301 Before Christ) Palestine was, with the 
 exception of a few short intervals, under the government of the 
 Kings of Egypt. Therefore frequent intercourse must have 
 taken place between the Jews of both countries. 
 
 Under the later government of the Syrian Kings the relish 
 for Greek civilization and habits became so prevalent, that the 
 Jewish religion was exposed to the greatest dangers until finally 
 the tyranny of Antiochus Epiphanes effected an energetic re- 
 action, produced by the Maccabees. 
 
 We can not fail to recognize the influence of the Greek 
 dialectics upon the schools or sects which we find in their per- 
 fect development under the Maccabean princes. 
 
 The Jews of Palestine divided themselves into two sects, 
 namely, Pharisees and Sadducees. The first adopted the time- 
 honored religious views, doctrines and usages and endeavored 
 thereby to ascribe to them an ancient and divine origin, claim- 
 ing that they had received them from the greatest antiquity, or 
 at least that they received even from Moses himself the system
 
 — 12 — 
 
 of interpretation upon which they were founded, based upon 
 the holy texts. 
 
 Although it can not be denied that this sect sanctioned many 
 religious views and usages which were borrowed from the Chal- 
 deans and Persians, their system of interpretation had, never- 
 theless, the advantage of giving life and motion to the dead 
 letter, of favoring progress and development of Judaism, and of 
 opening the door to the theological and philosophical specula- 
 tions among intelligent minds. 
 
 The Sadducees, however, who refused to accept the oral tra- 
 dition, and rejected all the doctrines which are not explicitly 
 mentioned in the Bible, deprived Mosaism on account of that 
 of all the germs of development contained in it. 
 
 They went so far as to deny the immortality of the soul and 
 the interposition of the divine Providence in human affairs as 
 incompatible with the principle of the freedom of will. 
 
 A society of men was organized among the Pharisees, which 
 may be called " Practical Philosophers," who adopted the re- 
 ligious principles and observances of Pharisaism, but endea- 
 vored always to act according to the principles of a rigid 
 morality, which was taught by Pharisees but not strictly per- 
 formed by them. The members of this society set the example 
 to practice virtue. A laborious life and the greatest frugality 
 recommended them even to the respects of the common people, 
 who could only judge them superficially. They were called 
 Essaer or Essenes, probably derived from the Syrian word 
 Asja (physician) ; for it seems that they formed themselves 
 upon the model of a society of Egyptian Jews who called them- 
 selves " Therapeutse ;" or, according to the explanation of Philo, 
 " Physicians of Souls."* These Therapeutae lived in solitude 
 and devoted themselves to abstinence and contemplation. 
 
 * See my Guide, p. 77, Note 23, ed. Cincinnati, 1857.— Translator.
 
 — 13 — 
 
 Although the Essenes of Palestine had more regard to prac- 
 tice concerning religious matters, as well as social life, than the 
 Therapeuta\ they, however, displayed like them a decided 
 proneness to an ascetic and contemplative life.' This is here 
 especially of importance to us, because we consider them as 
 the first preservers of a half- mystical and a half-philosophical 
 doctrine, which developed itself among the Jews of Palestine at 
 the time of the origin of Christianit3^ We know from Josephus 
 (on the Jewish War, 1, 2, Chapter viii. ) that the Essenes laid 
 great importance on the names of angels and had special doc- 
 trines of which they made a mystery, not allowing them to be 
 communicated to newly-initiated members of their society until 
 after a certain time of probation. According to Philo (in the 
 treatise entitled " Every Virtuous Person is Free "), the Essenes 
 held in contempt the logieal part of philosophy, and studied 
 only that of the physical part, which treated on the existence of 
 God and the origin of the world. 
 
 Therefore, they had tenets of philosophy wherein the doc- 
 trine of angels played an important part, besides certain meta- 
 physical speculations. It is very probable that they cultivated 
 in later times the doctrine which is known by the name Kabba- 
 lah, which was drawn from different sources and inspired the 
 first founders of the Gnosis (sublime wisdom). The influence 
 which the Jewish philosophers had on the New-Platonism in 
 Egypt and Palestine, as well as on the Gnosis, placed the Jews 
 in the rank of nations who participated in that spiritual move- 
 ment which endeavored to blend the Oriental with the Occiden- 
 tal ideas. In this capacity they deserve a place in the history 
 of philosophy. 
 
 But, although a certain originality nmst be admitted to the 
 philosophy of the Alexandrian Jews and especially to the Kab- 
 balah, the different elements of these two doctrines, especially
 
 — 14 — 
 
 their decided pantheistical tendency, are too little consonant to 
 Judaism in order to give them the name of Jewish philosophy. 
 There exists not a Jewish philosophy ; but, nevertheless, the 
 Jews may claim the merit of having been one of the interme- 
 diate members through whom the speculative ideas of the 
 Orient were transferred to the Occident. Later on we will ob- 
 serve them appear again in the same part of mediation. 
 
 The first centuries of the Christian era show us the Jews in a 
 situation which w'as not favorable to the spiritual progress. At 
 first they were engaged in a political war, which terminated in 
 the horrible catastrophe of Jerusalem ; later, after a disastrous 
 trial of Bar Kochba, when the teachers who escaped the ven- 
 geance of the Romans convinced themselves that Jerusalem 
 could not be any more the center of the divine service and the 
 symbol around which the dispersed remnants of the Jewish 
 nation could unite themselves, they set themselves to work to 
 devise expedients to strengthen the bonds by which the Jews 
 of all countries were enabled to be preserved as a religious com- 
 munit3^ 
 
 The religious system of the Pharisees, to which the majority 
 of the Jews were attached, did not suffice to preserve the Jews 
 intact through the influence of the authority of the Holy Writ 
 alone, therefore equal power was also ascribed to the interpre- 
 tations and traditional developments that were hitherto handed 
 down in the schools by oral instruction and of which only a 
 few compositions are now extant, containing some parts which 
 can not claim the honor of canonicity. 
 
 During the first quarter of the third century there appeared 
 a vast collection of ancient religious laws, usages and obser- 
 vances of the Pharisaical school and even of those which had 
 ceased to be applicable after the destruction of the Temple at 
 Jerusalem. The diflerent parts of this collection known by the
 
 — 15 — 
 
 name Mishnah (in the Novelles of Justinian, deuterosis) were 
 during three hundred years supplied with notes in order to 
 discuss them exhaustively in all their bearings. 
 
 They busied themselves at the same time with an extensive 
 critical labor to establish irrevocably the text of the Holy Scrip- 
 tures, according to authentical manuscripts, and went so far 
 that they even counted all the letters which were contained in 
 every book. 
 
 In the immense collections of the first five or six centuries of 
 che Christian era, which we still possess in the Talmud as well 
 as in the allegorical interpretations, there are very little traces 
 of philosophical speculations. When we find therein reminis- 
 cences of the Kabbalah, which occur frequently, they concern 
 only, so to speak, the exoterical part or the doctrine of the 
 angels. The existence of the speculative part of the Kabbalah 
 reveals itself to us in those books in mentioning the mysteries 
 which are contained in the first chapter of Genesis, " Bereshith " 
 (history of creation), and in the Mercabah (chariot) in the 
 vision of Ezekiel. The Jews remained in the same spiritual 
 state until the period when Mohammed and his successors 
 brought about in Asia an immense revolution, and the spiritual 
 monuments of the Mussulman world reacted powerfully upon 
 the synagogue, and produced in its bosom struggles, the com- 
 batants of which needed quite other weapons than they were 
 wont to wield in the Talmudical schools, and were now pressed 
 to resolve questions of canonical rights, as well as of cases of 
 conscience. Under the government of Abu-Djaafar-Almansm-, 
 second caliph of the Abassical dynasty, Anan ben David (2) 
 one of the most distinguished Jewish teachers of the Babyloni- 
 cal academy, put himself at the head of a party which endeav- 
 ored to set themselves free from rabbinical hierarchy, and to 
 shake off the yoke of traditional laws. Anan promulgated the
 
 — 16 — 
 
 rights of reason and the principle of free inquiry. As he ac- 
 knowledged, however, that tradition made the text of the Scrip- 
 tures clearer, giving to Judaism the means to improve by 
 degrees, he did not reject, like the old Sadducees, the principle 
 of interpretation and every kind of tradition, but wanted to 
 keep both in perfect unison with reason and the text of the 
 Scriptures, and contended against the binding authority of 
 many laws contained in the Mishnah. The members of this 
 sect called themselves " Karaim " (adherents of the text), and 
 are known in modern times by the name of " Karaites " or 
 " Karaer." 
 
 We will not discuss in this connection the religious principles 
 of Karaism, but we will only show its influence upon the philo- 
 sophical speculations among the Jews. 
 
 Because, although it is true that the Karaites, having no 
 stable principles, and having acknowledged no other authority 
 than the individual opinions of their teachers, lost themselves 
 in a labyrinth of contradictions and decisions the unraveling 
 of which is much more difficult than those of the Talmudical 
 discussions ; yet it can nevertheless not be denied that Kara- 
 ism, according to its principles, using the weapons of reason to 
 refute rabbinism, they compelled the rabbis to take up the same 
 aims in their defense. 
 
 Moreover, the Karaites were only qualified to establish a 
 sound Biblical exegesis and a systematical and rational theol- 
 ogy, supported by philosophy. Concerning the latter, the ex- 
 ample of the Arabic Motekallemin had undoubtedly great 
 influence upon the Karaitical teachers, who, according to their 
 doctrine and schismatical situation, had much similarity (3) to 
 the Mussulmanic sect of Motazalen, the founders of the Knowl- 
 edge of Kalam,
 
 — 17 — 
 
 The Karaitical theologians themselves adopted the name 
 Motekallemin (see Kusari i., v., § 15) (4) and Maimonides 
 (More Nebuchim i. i. c. 41) says explicitly that they borrowed 
 their demonstrations from the Mussulmanic Motekallemin. By 
 such demonstrations they affected to place the fundamental doc- 
 trines of Judaism upon a philosophical basis. 
 
 The dialectics of Aristotle, which came into vogue among the 
 Arabians at that time, gave to the Mussulmanic and Jewish 
 theologians their co-operation, although they wrote also partly 
 their polemics against the philosophical dogmas of the Stagirite. 
 
 The main points which were defended in the books of the 
 Karaitical Motekallemin were as follows : The first matter is not 
 from eternity ; the world was created and consequently it has a 
 Creator ; this Creator, God, has neither a beginning nor an end ; 
 he is incorporeal, and no f, limited within the boundaries of space; 
 his knowledge comprehends all things, his life consists in intel- 
 ligence and he himself is pure intelligence ; he acts with a free 
 will, and his will corresponds to his omniscience (see Kusari, 
 V. 18.) 
 
 None of the works of the ancient Karaitic teachers were trans- 
 mitted to us. The only evidence that we have that their works 
 existed are the quotations from them which are occasionally 
 found in later books. 
 
 One of the most renowned Karaitic Motekallemin is David 
 ben Merwan al-Mokammes, or el-Mekammes of Rakka, in the 
 Arabic language Irak, who flourished in the ninth century (5). 
 His work is quoted by rabbinical authors, namely, by Bechaja 
 and Jedaja Hapenini (Bedresi) ; but it seems that he did not 
 know that this author was a Karaite (6). 
 
 By this it appears that he busied himself with such fundamen- 
 tal doctrines as were adopted equally by both sects, and that his 
 works did not contain any polemics against the Rabbinites.
 
 — 18 — 
 
 He maintains, among other things, as we are informed by 
 Jephet ben Ali (in the tenth century), that man, as a micro- 
 cosm, is the most perfect creature and takes a rank among 
 angels (7). Whatever his theory of the angels may have been, 
 this proves, however, that he ascribed to man pre-eminence and 
 great power. 
 
 The Rabbinites, or the adherents of the Talmud, followed the 
 example set by the Karaitic teachers, and tried to support their 
 religious edifice with arguments which they drew from the phi- 
 losophy of their times. 
 
 The first who opened this new path successfully and whose 
 religious principles gained a certain authority among the Jews, 
 was Sadias ben Joseph al Fajum, renowned as exegete, theolo- 
 gian and Talmudist, and at the same time a formidable antago- 
 nist of Karaism. 
 
 He was born at Fajum, in Egypt, in 892, and was appointed 
 Principal of the Academy at Sora, near Bagdad, which was at 
 that time the capital seat of Rabbinism. Having lost his office 
 by the intrigues of some adversaries, he was, after a few 
 years, reinstated, and died at Sora in the year 942. Among his 
 numerous works, the only book which concerns us is entitled 
 " On the Doctrines of Faith and the Different Opinions," or 
 " On Religion and Knowledge," which was composed by him in 
 the Arabic language about 933, and was translated into Hebrew 
 by Juda Ibn Tabon in the twelfth century, in which language 
 it is still extant in different editions. It was lately translated 
 into German by Dr. Julius Fuerst, Leipsic, 1848. Besides the 
 authority of the Holy Writ and tradition, Sadias acknowledges 
 also that of reason, and announces not only the right but also 
 the duty to investigate the religious faith ; because it must be 
 understood thoroughly on account of its own safety and per- 
 i fection against assault from without.
 
 — 19 — 
 
 Reason teaches, according to his opinion, the same truisms 
 as revelation ; but the latter was nevertheless necessary to at- 
 tain quicker to the highest truisms, which reason, when left to 
 itself, could have only arrived at after great difficulties. The 
 subjects of which he treats are generally those which are men- 
 tioned above by the Karaites, namely, unity of God, his attri- 
 butes, the Creation, revelation of the Law, nature of the human 
 soul, etc. 
 
 Some doctrines of faith of the second order which correspond 
 less with reason, to-wit, resurrection of the dead, are adopted 
 by him; but he contents himself to prove it by the idea that 
 reason is not positively against them ; on the contrary, all re- 
 ligious views which were popular at that time, and which have 
 no foundation whatever in the Holy Writ — for instance, me- 
 tempsychosis — were rejected and declared by Sadias as absurd- 
 ities (E. v., Chap, iii., Berlin ed.) 
 
 Sadias denies the existence of Satan, or a contradictory 
 angel, in his Commentary of Job, and shows that the sons of 
 God and Satan which are mentioned in the prologue are men. 
 
 That was a bold view at the time of Sadias. 
 
 The polemics take up a great deal of space in the book of 
 "Faith and Knowledge," and it concerns us herein that it ac- 
 quaints us with the opinions which prevailed at that period 
 in the domain of religion and philosophy. Thus we are in- 
 formed that Jewish philosophers like the Motekallemin adopted 
 the doctrine of atoms, which they considered to be everlasting. 
 
 Others, who could not resist the consequences of rationalism, 
 denied all miracles and endeavored to explain them upon nat- 
 ural grounds. 
 
 Philosophy, however, takes in its true sense a second rank, 
 according to Sadias' opinion.
 
 — 20 — 
 
 It is in the service of religion, and is to him a simple tool for 
 defense of religious doctrines of Judaism. The peripatetic phi- 
 losophy had not as yet made a great advance among the Arabs ; 
 it first began spreading and establishing itself by the works of 
 Farabi. 
 
 Sadias touched no other points of the peripatetic doctrine 
 than the categories, and proved at large that they are not ap- 
 plicable to God (E. v., II. Chap, viii.) 
 
 His theory of the creation of matter is an assault upon the 
 philosophy of antiquity generally. 
 
 Among the Jewish authors, the works of whom w^ere trans- 
 mitted to us, Sadias is the first who taught systematically the 
 dogma of the creation out of nothing (ex nihilo), which was 
 undoubtedly laid down already by Karaitical theologians. He 
 does this indirectly by refuting all systems which are contrary 
 to this dogma (E. V. 1, Chap, iv.) and maintained that the sole 
 will of God was active at the creation. Furthermore, the doc- 
 trine of free will, based upon the evidence of the senses, reason. 
 Holy Writ and tradition, was developed by Sadias in minute 
 details (E. V, 4, Chaps, ii. and iii.). It would be useless to 
 follow Sadias in his demonstrations, as they strike us very sel- 
 dom by their novelty, and, besides, they concern more the theo- 
 logian than the philosopher. Sadias' great merit (consisted in 
 having shown to his contemporaries that religion, far from 
 fearing the light of reason, finds in it, on the contrary, a 
 strong support. By this method he paved the way for the 
 introduction of true philosophical studies among his co-religion- 
 ists, and the brilliant epoch of the Spanish and Provenzal Jews. 
 Shortly after the death of Sadias, the propagation of the philo- 
 sophical writings of the eastern Arabians began in Spain. At 
 the same time the Spanish Jews liberated themselves from the 
 ecclesiastical authority of the Babylonian A^caderay at Sora,
 
 — 21 — 
 
 A fortunate coincidence of circumstances put them in a posi- 
 tion to establish a new school at Cordua and to find learned 
 men to take an active part in its management (8) and to pro- 
 cure all literary apparatus which they were in need of, but 
 which were in abundance among the Oriental Jews. 
 
 A learned Jewish physician, Chasdai ben Isaac ben Shaph- 
 ruth, who was appointed physician at Court in Cordua by 
 Abdal-Rahman III. and his son, Al Hakem II., exerted the 
 great influence which he enjoyed to enrich the Spanish schools 
 with all the works of Oriental Jews (9). 
 
 It is usually thought that the Mussulmanic philosophers in 
 Spain were the teachers of philosophy of the Spanish Jews ; but 
 this opinion is only true concerning Maimonides and his fol- 
 lowers in Christian Spain. 
 
 It is certain, however, that the Spanish Jews had already 
 treated philosophy successfully, before this knowledge found 
 among the Mussulmans a worthy representative. 
 
 Ibn Badja, or Ibn Badshe, who died very young, in the year 
 1138, was the first Spanish Arabian who studied profoundly 
 Aristotle's philosophy. 
 
 But we find in the second part of the eleventh century a 
 very remarkable philosopher in Spain, whose main work, which 
 was afterward rendered into Latin, created great sensation 
 among the Christian theologians of the thirteenth century. 
 
 We mean here him whom Thomas of Aquino, Albert the 
 Great and others quoted by the name Avicebron, who is no 
 other than he who is renowned among the Jews as a religious 
 poet and philosopher by the name of Solomon ben Gabirol, of 
 Malaga. 
 
 When we compare the quotations which were made by Albert 
 and Thomas of Aquino from the book Fons Vitae (Fountain of 
 Life), by Avicebron, with the extracts from the book Mekor
 
 — 22 — 
 
 Chajim, by Solomon ben Gabirol, which is still extant in a He- 
 brew manuscript at the Parisian National Library, then the 
 identity of both works being the offspring of the same author 
 is proven by the strongest evidence (10). 
 
 Avicebron or Ibn Gabirol shows himself at once to have been 
 initiated into the peripatetic philosophy. He distinguishes 
 " matter and form " in all that exists, the connection of which 
 is effected by motion, but he defines more accurately the ideas 
 of matter and form than all Arabian peripatetics. 
 
 Matter, he says, is a simple capability to be, while it takes 
 the form ; the latter (the form) bounds the capability of being, 
 making matter to be a certain expressed substance. 
 
 Besides God, who is a necessary and absolute Being, does 
 not admit any substratum of possibility, every being is spirit- 
 ual or material, composed of matter and form. 
 
 Avicebron first laid down this principle in an absolute sense, 
 that matter be ascribed to the soul, as Thomas of Aquino said : 
 " Quidam dicunt quod anima et omnino substantia praeter deum est 
 composita ex materia et forma. Cujus quidem positionis primus auc- 
 tor invenitur Avicebron auctor libri fontis vitae "—that is, some say 
 that the soul and every substance besides God is composed of 
 matter and form. This dogma was first laid down by Avicebron, 
 author of the book " Fountain of Life," quaestiones disputatae, 
 quaest de anima (Art. vi., ed. Lugd, p. 153a. See also Albertus, 
 " De causis et proc. univ.," 1. 1 tract 1, Chap, v.) 
 
 When Avicebron spiritualizes matter, on one side ascribing 
 it to all spiritual substances, he gives on the other side, in a 
 certain measure, a corporeity to the form, as he considers it as 
 that by which matter is limited in always narrower boundaries 
 from the form of substance unto its exact materiality. In the 
 book " Fons Vitae " he expresses himself about it as follows : I 
 will give you a rule by which you may gain a knowledge of
 
 -23 — 
 
 forms and matters. You may imagine all classes of beings (in 
 circles) one above the other, one comprising the other, one car- 
 r^'ing the other, inclosed by two boundary lines, one above and 
 one below. 
 
 All that is of these (beings) on the upper boundary line, sur- 
 rounding all as general matter, is only a carrying matter (sim- 
 ple substratum) ; all which is on the lower boundary line, as 
 the sensual form, is merely sensual form. Of that which is in 
 the midst between the two boundary lines, the finer and higher 
 becomes matter of the lower and coarser, the latter serves the 
 first for a form. 
 
 It follows from this that the materiality of the world, which 
 shows itself as matter carrying a form, of which it is carried 
 itself, is a form in itself which is carried by an inside abstract 
 matter of which we just now speak. In this way this matter 
 becomes again the form of its following, until this returns to 
 the first all comprising matter. The substance of this place is 
 also communicated by Aquino, " Quaest. de Spiritualibus Crea- 
 turis," art. III. p. 1388. 
 
 The motion which combines matter with form has its origin 
 from the will of the Creator, and not from his intellect, because 
 only the latter could produce the infinite. 
 
 Matter receives from the will as much as was assigned of 
 it to its susceptibility, but not according to the power of the 
 will, because that which matter received from the light of the 
 will is small in comparison to that which the will is able to 
 create (Mekor Chajim I. V.) 
 
 This intermeddling of the will is a concession made to the 
 religious demands by which Avicebron paid a faithful homage 
 to the dogma of Creation announced by Judaism. Notwith- 
 standing that, the independent course which he pursued in his 
 philosophy could not please the Jewish theologians of that pe-
 
 — 24 — 
 
 riod. But later, when the peripatetic doctrine of the Arabians 
 became prevalent in the Jewish schools, the doctrines of 
 Avicebron were considered in regard to pliilosophy as heresies. 
 Therefore, while the religious poems of Ibn Gabirol were very 
 celebrated among the Jews, and were even adopted in the rituals 
 of the synagogues, his book, entitled " Fountain of Life," was 
 abandoned to utter oblivion. 
 
 A single Jewish author, Shem tob ben Palkeira, a distin- 
 guished philosopher of the second half of the Thirteenth Cen- 
 tury, appreciated the philosophical work of Ibn Gabirol, which 
 he quotes frequently, and from which he made copious extracts, 
 translating them from the Arabic into the Hebrew language. 
 
 Ibn Gabirol could not exert any influence upon the Arabian 
 philosophers in Spain. The Mussulmans did not read the works 
 of the Jews. 
 
 Ibn Badja and Ibn Roshd were scarcely acquainted with the 
 name of Ibn Gabirol, but he became renowned among the scho- 
 lastics of the Thirteenth Century under the falsified name of 
 Avicebron, by a Latin translation, " Fons Vitae," for which, ac- 
 cording to Jourdain, we have to be thankful to the Archdeacon 
 Gundisalvi (see " Recherches sur les traduct. d'Aristotc," 2d 
 ed. p. 119.) 
 
 His influence upon certain scholastics is a fact acknowledged 
 by some modern authors ; but they still fail to enlighten us 
 sufficiently on the subject. 
 
 Ibn Gabirol is by originality and boldness of thought an iso- 
 lated appearance among the Spanish Jews, but, as we are in- 
 formed by Maimonides, who was himself a Spaniard, his 
 Jewish countrymen rejected generally both the system and 
 the method of the Motekallemin, and zealousl}'^ adopted the 
 opinions of the properly so called philosophers or peripa- 
 tetics, in so far as they were directly in contradiction with the
 
 — 25 — 
 
 fundamental doctrines of Judaism (Moreh Nebuchim l,p. l,ch. 
 Ixxi.) The theologians perceived the dangers by which Judaism 
 was menaced through the encroachments of the philosophers. 
 
 Bechai, or Baehja ben Joseph, about the end of the eleventh 
 century, was the first who endeavored to represent completely 
 and systematically the morality of Judaism, in his book, en- 
 titled : "The Duties of the Heart" (Choboth Halbaboth). 
 
 He begins with a treatise on the unity of God, wherein he 
 shows evidently a predilection for Sadias' method, although he 
 reveals that he had a perfect knowledge of the difference of the 
 peripatetic systems. 
 
 The superiority which he assigns to the practical morality 
 above speculation, and his decided direction toward an ascetical 
 manner of life, give him a certain resemblance to his contem- 
 porary, Gazali. (12) 
 
 A stronger reaction is manifest in the l)ook " Cosri," or, more 
 properly, "Cusari," composed by the renowned poet, Judah 
 Halevi, in the year 1140. 
 
 This author made use of the historical fact, that a king of 
 the Kosars or Chasars, together with a great portion of his 
 people, (13) embraced Judaism in the second half of the eighth 
 century, in order to give to his book the form of a dialogue 
 between a Jewish savan and the king of the Chasars. 
 
 The latter, who dreamed that his motives, but not his deeds, 
 were agreeable to God, conferred alternately with a philosopher 
 a Christian and a Mussulmanic theologian ; but as none of 
 these three were able to convince the king, he sent for a Jewish 
 savan, who understood at once how to captivate the reason of 
 the king, and returned an answer with sucli precision to every 
 question that was put to him, that the king became perfectly 
 satisfied, and finally embraced Judaism.
 
 — 26 — 
 
 According to this sketch, Juda Halevi composed his book 
 which contains the complete theory of the Rabbinical Judaism, 
 and wherein he opened a regular campaign against philoso- 
 phy. (14) He combats the error of those who think to suffice the 
 demands of religion, when they endeavor to prove that reason, 
 being left to itself, would gain, by its own study, the superior 
 truism which we received by a supernatural revelation. 
 
 The revealed religion does not teach us anything that is 
 directly against reason ; but that we are able only through faith 
 and a life consecrated to devotion and religious exercises to 
 participate in prophetical inspiration and to be pervaded by 
 the revealed truisms. 
 
 Reason can give us, indeed, arguments for the eternity of 
 matter, for the creation of the world out of nothing ; but that 
 tradition, Avhich was handed down from the most ancient times, 
 and was propagated from one century to another, carried \^ith 
 it more power of conviction than any ingenious system of 
 syllogisms and demonstrations that can be impugned very 
 easily by other refuting arguments. The exercises which the 
 religion prescribes have a profound sense and are symbols of 
 sublime truisms. 
 
 This is not the place to give a full representation of the 
 doctrines of Juda Halevi ; but I will only remark that his 
 extravagant ideas led him to the mysticism of the Kabbala. 
 He considered the latter as part of tradition and ascribed to it 
 great antiquity, so that he traced back the Sefer Yezirah even 
 to the earliest times, and ascribed it to the patriarch Abraham. 
 
 The book, " Cusari," contributed, perhaps, to the revival of 
 the study of the Kabbalah, which we find at once in a flourishing 
 condition a century later. 
 
 Judah Halevi's endeavors were, indeed, not powerful enough 
 to give a decisive blow to the study of philosophy, which had
 
 — 27 — 
 
 taken a new flight at that time through the works of Ibn Badja; 
 but the movement of the reaction, the organ of which was the 
 " Cusri," occasioned a great ferment. A certain uneasiness and 
 insecurity of the most distinguished and independent minds 
 reflect as from a mirror the Biblical commentaries of the re- 
 nowned Abraham Ibn Ezra, wherein we find a strange medley 
 of rational criticism and childish ideas borrowed from the Kab- 
 bala, sound thoughts worthy of a philosopher and astrological 
 superstition. (15) But in order, if possible, to bring about a 
 reconciliation between Judaism and philosophy, a mind was 
 necessary which could control both and combine tranquillity 
 and clearness, energy and depth, a man who was enabled, by an 
 imposing knowledge and a piercing criticism, to illumine with 
 the touch of knowledge the whole domain of religion, and to fix 
 the boundaries of speculation and faith with precision. 
 
 The great man who took upon himself this task was Moses, 
 son of Maimon, usually called Maimonides, born at Cordua, 
 on the thirteenth of March, 1135, and died at Old Kairo, on the 
 thirteenth of December, 1204. 
 
 Possessing a profound knowledge of the extensive religious 
 literature of the Jews, he was at the same time very familiar 
 with all profane sciences which were then accessible to the 
 Arabian world. 
 
 He was the first who put in systematical order the shapeless 
 and gigantic masses of Talmudical compilations, erected the 
 religious edifice of Judaism upon a strong foundation and fixed 
 the number of fundamental articles of faith, thus presenting a 
 means to appropriate to one's self the whole of the system of 
 religion ; he effected, although not a full reconciliation, neverthe- 
 less, at last an approximation between philosophy and religion, 
 and acknowledging the rights of both, and thereby secured 
 for them mutual control and support.
 
 — 28 — 
 
 The question as to what extent the endeavor of Maimonides 
 was of advantage to the development of the Jewish theology, 
 is foreign to the subject under consideration ; but in reference to 
 philosophy, his " Moreh " or '' Guide of the Strays," although 
 it did not distinctly produce results which made an epoch in 
 the history of philosophy, contributed considerably to an always 
 larger propagation of the study of the peripatetic philosophy 
 among the Jews, and made the latter as mediators between 
 the Arabians and Christian Europe, and exercised an incon- 
 testable influence upon the scholastic lore. Within the syna- 
 gogue the " Moreh " or " Guide " had results which outlived 
 the dominion of the peripatetic doctrine, and its influence is 
 still perceptible nowadays. 
 
 By the study of the "Moreh," the greatest geniuses among 
 the modern Jews — Spinoza, Mendelssohn, Solomon, Maimon and 
 many others — were introduced into the sanctuary of philosophy. 
 
 The authority of this book became so significant that even 
 the Kabbalists could not avoid it. 
 
 The Kabbalah endeavored to put itself in conformit}' with the 
 peripatetic doctrine of the Arabians, and many master spirits 
 of mysticism went so far as to find in the " Moreh " an esoteric 
 sense, which corresponded to the doctrines of the Kabbalah.(16) 
 The " Moreh " is the last phase of development of the philo- 
 sophical studies among the Jews as a religious association. 
 
 It remains still for me to report the excellent works that were 
 produced under the influence of the direction which the works 
 of Maimonides gave to the studies of the Jews. 
 
 Christian Spain and Provence granted, to a great portion of 
 Jews, who were exiled by the fanaticism of the Almohades 
 from Southern Spain, a place of refuge. 
 
 Maimonides was also compelled to emigrate, and he went to 
 Egypt. It is well known with what violent passion the kings
 
 — 29 — 
 
 of that dynasty persecuted the pliilosophers and destroyed their 
 works. 
 
 Ibn Roshed (usually called Aben Rashid), who wrote his 
 commentaries of the writings of Aristotle at the same time when 
 Maimonides was engaged in Egypt composing his work, " Guide 
 of the Strays,"' would have remained, perhaps, unknown to the 
 Christian world, had not the Jews of Spain and Provence 
 received his works with great admiration, to whom, also, Mai- 
 monides gives great praise, in a splendid manner, in his letters 
 which he wrote in the last years of his life. The works of Ibn 
 Roshed and of other Arabian philosophers, as well as the most 
 scientific writings composed in the Arabic language, were trans- 
 lated into Latin according to the Arabic texts or according to 
 very faithful Hebrew translations, either by learned Jews or 
 under their dictation. 
 
 The interest which the Christian world took in those Hebrew 
 translations, for which Latin translators could more easily be 
 found than for tho?e of the original Arabic writings, is evident 
 from the fact that the Jewish translators were proteges of men 
 of the highest rank in Christendom, among others, also, the 
 Emperor Frederic II. (17) 
 
 But the more philosophy endeavored to spread, under the 
 patronage of the name of Maimonides, the greater were the 
 exertions made by its antagonists, who were terrified by its 
 boldness to oppose its encroachments. 
 
 They did not respond any more quietly with arguments 
 founded on reason as did the pious Juda Halevi. 
 
 Nobody would have been able to struggle with success against 
 Maimonides, and then the parties were too distinctly stamped 
 to be satisfied with a mere war of words. 
 
 The philosophers understood to win the undecided spirits, 
 who could not comprehend the consequences of the agitation,
 
 — 30 — 
 
 and suffered themselves to be hurried away by the awe and 
 confidence the name of Maimonides infused into their minds. 
 
 The antagonists of philosophy were greatly foreign to such 
 studies and acknowledged the grossest views concerning the 
 anthropomorphisms of the Bible. 
 
 In the Provence the " Guide of the Strays," by Maimonides, 
 was translated into Hebrew by Samuel ben Tibbon of Lunel. 
 The conclusion of this translation happened just at the time 
 when Maimonides died. All translators and commentators of 
 the Arabic philosophers were from the Provence, as, for instance, 
 Jacob ben Abba Mari ben Antoli, (18) Moses Samuel, Samuel 
 Ibn Tibon, and later, during the fourteenth century, Levi ben 
 Gerson, Kalonimos ben Kalonimos, (19) Todros Todrosi, (20) 
 Moses of Narbonne and others ; and from this land the tocsin 
 of alarm was sounded from south to north and from the Occi- 
 dent to the orient. 
 
 They accused each other of heresy, and one party anathe- 
 matized the other. 
 
 To describe the details of warfare, which was allayed many 
 times, and then was again renewed with greater or lesser violence 
 until the end of the thirteenth century, would exceed the object 
 of this sketch ; we, therefore, refer the reader who desires to 
 gather a thorough information about it to the excellent essay of 
 Dr. Geiger, in his periodical for Jewish theology (Vol. V., p. 82). 
 
 It suffices that this warfare took a turn giving advantage 
 to philosophy, which received an advance even by the exaspera- 
 tion of its adversaries. In the year 1305, a synod of Rabbis, 
 at the head of which was the renowned Solomon ben Adereth 
 (chief of the synagogue of Barcelona), forbade, under penalty 
 of excommunication, any person to begin the study of phi- 
 losophy before he attained the age of twenty-five years ; but, 
 nevertheless, we observe that not long afterward the Arabic
 
 — 31 — 
 
 peripateticism was taught with a hitherto unprecedented bold- 
 ness. 
 
 One of the most renowned men at that time, worthy to be 
 mentioned under the promoters of philosophical studies, was 
 Jedaja Penini, called Bedersi, also Bedarshi, because he was 
 born in the city of Beziers. 
 
 On account of his work, entitled : "Bechinoth Olom " (Ex- 
 amination of the World), a book on morality which represents 
 the nothingness of this world in a very sublime and racy 
 Hebrew style, he wore the appellation, "The Eloquent.'' 
 
 This work gained the attention of Christian literati and was 
 translated into many languages. 
 
 Jedaja shows therein that true happiness of man can only be 
 gained by religious exactitude and knowledge, and concludes 
 with an admonition to the reader to take for a guide the doc- 
 trines of the greatest teacher of the synagogue, namely, Moses 
 ben Maimon — Maimonides. 
 
 In an apology, directed to Solomon ben Adereth, Jedaja 
 defends zealously the philosophical studies against the ban 
 under which the Rabbis of Barcelona put them. 
 
 There is still a translation, by Jedaja, of a treatise by Farabi, 
 entitled, "De intellectu et intellecto;" and many other philo- 
 sophical writings. 
 
 Joseph Ibn Caspi, of Caspe, in Aragonia, is the name of 
 another philosopher of that time, under whose numerous works 
 we find commentaries of Maimonides' " Guide of the Strays," 
 and an abridged contents of the " Organon," by Aristotle. (22) 
 
 But the philosopher and exeget, Levi ben Gerson, of Bagnols 
 (near Gerona, on the Spanish boundary), called Master Leon 
 (among the Jews Ralbag), undoubtedly one of the greatest peri- 
 patetics during the fourteenth century, and also the boldest of 
 all Jewish philosophers,(23) eclipsed all his contemporaries. His
 
 works received great approbation among his co-religionists, and 
 nearly all were published in many editions. This success is the 
 more astonishing as the author explicitly acknowledged the 
 philosophy of Aristotle as an absolute truism, without using the 
 caution of Maimonides, and contorted the spirit of the Bible as 
 well as the tenets of faith in order to fit them to his peripatetic 
 ideas. It almost seems, that on account of his great merits 
 about the exegesis, they pardoned him for overstepping the proper 
 boundaries as a philosopher and theologian. And it is also 
 possible, that in a time when a decline of the study of phi- 
 losophy prevailed and combats were discontinued, they busied 
 themselves with reading the ample works of Levi ben Gerson, 
 which attract by the easiness of style and diversity of contents 
 without comprehending their full scope. 
 
 He composed very extensive Biblical commentaries, wherein 
 a considerable portion is occupied by a philosophical interpre 
 tation. His real philosophical works are as follows : 
 
 1. Commentaries, not of Aristotle, as it reads usually in the 
 bibliographical rabbinical writings, but of the middle commen- 
 taries and some translations or analyses of Ibn Roshd.* 
 
 2. Milchamoth Adonaj (the wars of God) has a philo- 
 sophical theological contents, wherein the author develops his 
 philosophical system, which is generally the pure peripateticism 
 as it represents itself among the Arabian philosophers, and 
 wherein he endeavors to prove that the doctrines of Judaism 
 perfectly agree with that system. 
 
 * These are for the most part among the manuscripts of the Parisian 
 National Library. All of that which relates to the Isagoge (preface) of 
 Porphyrias, to the categories and to the treatise, "On theinterpretaiion," 
 is translated into Latin by Jacob Mantino, and is printed in the first 
 volume of both Latin editions of the works of Aristotle, with the com- 
 mentaries of Averroe.
 
 — 33 — 
 
 He finished this work on the eighth of January, 1329, and 
 divided it into six books, which treats of the nature and immor- 
 tality of the soul, of the knowledge of the future and the pro- 
 phetical spirit, of God's knowing of particular and accidental 
 things, of the divine providence, of the celestial bodies and of 
 the creation. 
 
 In the edition of Riva di Trento, 1560, is omitted the first 
 division of the fifth book, which forms for itself an extensive 
 astronomical treatise, and contains various computations and 
 observations peculiar to the author. (24) Among those Jewish 
 philosophers of the Middle Ages, the works of which are handed 
 down to us, Levi benGerschon is the first who ventured to com- 
 bat candidly the dogma of the creation out of nothing (ex 
 nihilo). 
 
 After an extensive demonstration that the world could neither 
 have taken its orighi in an absolute nothing nor in a certain 
 matter (Wars of God I. vi., 1 division chap, xvii.), he arrives at 
 the conclusion that it originated in nothing and at the same 
 time in something. This something is the first matter, which, 
 being without any form, is withal nothing. By similar judg- 
 ments and inferences he endeavored to put (25) in unison his 
 philosophy with the handed-down dogmas concerning many 
 other questions. 
 
 A less prolific author than Levi ben Gerson, but not a less 
 profoundly learned peripatetic, was Moses ben Joshua, of Nar- 
 bonne,(26) whose posthumous>works have an essential interest 
 for the historian of philosophy. 
 
 His commentaries of the most eminent Arabian philoso- 
 phers contain a great mass of useful references and arc very 
 instructive. 
 
 He expounded the book " Makazid," by Gazali ;(27) the treatise 
 on "the material intellect and the possibility of conjunction,"
 
 — 34 — 
 
 by Ibn Roshd, in the year 1344 ;(28) the "physical treatise," of 
 the same author, and especially " Tractat de subtantia orbis," 
 in the year 1349 ;(29) Chai Ibn Jocktan, by Tophail (in the same 
 year);(30) and the "Moreh" of Maimonides (1355 until 1362). 
 (31) Besides he quotes a commentary which he wrote "of the 
 physics" (probably of the middle commentary of Ibn Roshd). 
 (33)* 
 
 Moses of Narbonne has a concise and sometimes an obscure 
 style. His opinions are not less bold than those of Levi ben 
 Gerson ; but he does not express them with the same clearness 
 and frankness. Our attention is drawn at the same time anew 
 to the " Orient," by a member of the Caraitic sect, of which we 
 lost sight of since the tenth century. 
 
 Aaron ben Elia, of Nicomedia, residing probably in Kairo, 
 finished, in the year 1346, a work on philosophy of religion, 
 entitled : " Tree of Life," which could be ranged on the side of 
 the excellent " Moreh " of Maimonides, whom our author took 
 as a model and from whom he borrowed a great deal. Both 
 works breathe the same spirit, both assign to reason and philo- 
 sophical speculation a considerable share in the domain of 
 theology. 
 
 Aaron's works give us more accurate disclosures about the 
 Arabian sects than the " Moreh ; " and, therefore, it is in regard 
 to that of great interest to him who makes historical researches. 
 This work was published in Hebrew by Professor Delitzsh, with 
 very learned prolegomena and fragments of Arabian authors, 
 which are highly important to the history of philosophy. 
 
 The fifteenth century shows us still some very remarkable 
 Jewish scholastics, but at the same time the decline of the peri- 
 
 * These commentaries are all extant in different manuscripts in the 
 National Library at Paris. There is also a treatise of our author (" On 
 the soul and its abilities"). (32)
 
 — 35 — 
 
 patetic philosophy and a return to doctrines which correspond 
 more with the spirit of Judaism. 
 
 In the year 1425, Joseph Albo became renowned by his work, 
 entitled : " Iccarim " (book of fundamental doctrines of Juda- 
 ism). He reduced therein the thirteen articles of faith, laid 
 down by Maimonides, to three fundamental doctrines ; the ex- 
 istence of God, revelation and immortality of the soul. (34) The 
 dogma of immortality must be considered as the substance of 
 the third cardinal doctrine, to which Albo gives more extension ; 
 because he comprises in the words reward and punishment, 
 retribution generally in this world as in the next. This work 
 makes an epoch in Jewish theology; but is merely, for the 
 history of philosoplw, of subordinate advantage. 
 
 Abraham Bibago, at Hueska, in Aragonia, composed, in 1446, 
 a commentary of the "Last Analysis" (Aralytica posteriora of 
 Aristotle).(35) 
 
 He resided later, about 1470, at Saragos8a,(36) and became 
 renowned as a theologian by a work, entitled : " The Path of 
 Faith." 
 
 Joseph ben Shem Tob, whose father wrote against philosophy 
 and even against Maimonides, became known by different 
 theological and philosophical works, among which must be (37) 
 mentioned an ample commentary of " Ethics to Nikomachus," 
 which he composed at Segovia, 1455, and another of the treatise, 
 " On the material reason," by Ibn Roshd. 
 
 His son, Shem Tob, wrote philosophical essays " On the first 
 matter," " On the final cause," and commentaries of Maimon- 
 ides "Moreh," and of the "Physics" of Aristotle,(38) 1480. 
 
 At the same time there lived, in Italy, a renowned Jewish 
 philosopher by the name of Elias del Medigo, who was teacher 
 of philosophy in Padua, and Pic de la Mirandola was one of 
 his disciples.
 
 — 36— 
 
 He composed for the latter some philosophical writings, 
 namely, an essay "On intellect and prophecy," (1482), and a 
 commentary of the treatise, " De substantia orbis," by Ibn 
 Roshd (1485). His questions about several philosophical sub- 
 jects were published in the Latin language. 
 
 In a little Hebrew work, entitled, " Examination of the Law " 
 (that is of the religious law), which he composed in 1491, he tried 
 to prove that the study of philosophy can not injure the religious 
 feelings ; but one must know very well to discriminate between 
 that which belongs to the domain of philosophy and that which 
 belongs to religion. (39) 
 
 The expulsion of the Jews from the whole Spanish monarchy, 
 which happened at the close of the fifteenth centur}'', destroyed 
 the center of the Jewish civilization at that time. On the other 
 side, the decline of the scholastic lore effected the annihilation 
 of the philosophical studies among the Jews, as the latter 
 languishing everywhere from severe oppression, they could not 
 participate in the new spiritual life which was spreading in 
 Europe. 
 
 The civilization of the Spanish Jews died out without having 
 been replaced soon by a new one. 
 
 We hear still some echo of Jewish scholastic lore ; here and 
 there noticeable eminent men among the Spanish emigrants, as, 
 for instance, the renowned Isaac Abarvanel and his son Juda ; 
 but the history of Jewish philosophy (if such an expression 
 may be used) is now really closed. 
 
 The Jews, endeavoring to bring the Arabian philosophy in 
 conformity with their religion, gave the peripatetic doctrine an 
 especial character, by which it became for them, in some 
 respects, a national philosophy. 
 
 If there have been since then some philosophers among the 
 Jews, they belong to the history of a universal civilization, an(l
 
 — 37 — 
 
 are not to be regarded as philosophers of their particular creed. 
 Spinoza, who philosophized without any regard for the religious 
 feelings of a congregation consisting mostly of Spanish and 
 Portuguese refugees, sacrifices of the inquisition, which felt no 
 sympath}'- for men who suffered so much on account of their 
 beHef, was disowned by the Jews. 
 
 Even Moses INlendclssohn, who interested himself so nobly for 
 the cause of his co-religionists, and on whom we look as the 
 creator of the modern civilization of the European Jews, he 
 would and could not establish for them a new philosophical era. 
 In fine, the Jews as a nation, or as a religious association, play 
 only a secondary part in the history of philosophy, because 
 this w'as not their mission. 
 
 They, however, in conjunction with the Arabs, indisputably 
 partake of the merit of having preserved and promulgated the 
 philosophical knowledge during the centuries of barbarism, and 
 have exercised for a long time a civilizing influence on the 
 European world.
 
 NOTES OF THE AUTHOR. 
 
 No. 1. Even Arabic authors adopted the erroneous opinion, 
 that Greek philosophy was borrowed from the Jews. See "Treatise 
 on Animals," by Kalonimos ben Kalonimos, which contains an 
 extract from an Arabic Encyclopoedia, entitled : " Resail ikh- 
 wan alcafa," or " Treatise of the Brothers of Purity," translated 
 into Hebrew. Again, Ichwan-os-suffa, in the original Arabic, 
 Calcuth, 1812 ; page 214. 
 
 No. 2. Anan, founder of Karaism, flourished certainly under 
 the Califate of Abu Djafar al Mansur, in the year 136 of the 
 Hegira, 754 of the Christian era. See the book (D'n^x nno) a 
 Hebrew^ manuscript of the Parisian National Library, No, 61. 
 
 No. 3. In regard to the doctrines of the Arabian scholastics, 
 comprising the Motazales (n^rnj?») as w^ell as the Asharites 
 (iT"ij?u>x), must be remarked that the latter were absolute fatalists, 
 while the Motazales, who conceded that man had a free will and 
 acknowledged the justice of God, maintain that man does 
 good or evil of his own accord. They also agreed not to admit 
 any attributes separated from the divine being, and avoided by 
 that all which could be prejudicial to the dogma of the unity of 
 God. On account of these two principal points of their doctrine, 
 they assumed the name '' Retainers of Justice and Unity," 
 and exactly the same expressions are used by Masudi, an Ara- 
 bian historian of the tenth century, in order to signif}^ the 
 disciples of Anan. See " Notices et extraits des manusc. T. viii., 
 p. 167, 168. Silv. de Sacy, "Chrest Arabe," T. I. p. 349-51,
 
 — 39 — 
 
 The Karaite, Aaron ben Elias, says, explicitly, that the Karaitic, 
 as well as a part of the Rabbinical philosophers, are followers 
 of the principles of the Motazales. (See D^'H ]']} A. b. El. S^'stem 
 der religioesen Philosophic v. F. Delitzsch, Leipzig, 1841 ; 8 p. 4.) 
 No. 4. When the King of the Chasars asked the savant to 
 represent to him the substance of the dogmas of tlic Caraitic 
 philosophers, he expressed himself about it, according to the 
 Arabic original (manuscript in the Bodleian Library), as follows : 
 " I desire to know some summary fundamental principles of the 
 views of the Okulijim, or of those who judge of the funda- 
 mental principles, called, l)y the Karaites, masters of the knowl- 
 edge of Kalam (speech or word). 
 
 No. 5. In the book, entitled : " Eshkol Hakofer," by the 
 Karaite Juda Hadassi, is mentioned our David Al-Rakki. He 
 was called so because he was undoubtedly born in the city 
 of Rakka or Racca. 
 
 No. 6. Bechai, or Bachje, when enumerating the different 
 classes of religious writings, expressed himself in the preface of 
 his book, " On the duties of the heart," as follows : " The third 
 class causes to strengthen the religious subjects in the minds by 
 arguments and refutation of heretics, as the book ' On faith and 
 knowledge,' by Sadias ; the book ' On the fundamental princi- 
 ples of the Law,' and the book 'Almokames,' and such like." 
 '* Tn the same sense," says Jcdaja Penini, in his apologetic 
 writing, mS^^nn 3n3 concerning the Moreli Ncbuchim directed 
 to Rabl>i Solomon ben Adereth, " Rabbi David Hababli, called 
 Al Mokames, from whom we have a book which was entitled 
 after his surname, wherein he endeavors, by a careful inquiry, to 
 give arguments for well-known principles of faith, and to com- 
 bat by that the opinions and refutations of heretics." 
 
 The book, "Al-Mokammcs," which was composed in tlio Arabic 
 language, contained twenty chapters ; three of them were traced
 
 — 40 — 
 
 out in the Hebrew language not long ago, and were published 
 by Professor Fuerst. The second contained the ninth and the 
 third a part of the tenth chapter. The same fragments, with 
 the exception of the latter, were published by A. D. Luzatto, 
 in Halichoth Kedem, by Pollak. Amsterdam, 1847. 
 
 [Dr. B. Beer, in his German translation of this book, remarks 
 that Professor Steinschneider communicated to him that Moses 
 ben Esra quoted also the twenty chapters of " Al-Mokammes 
 Alrakki. — Translator.] 
 
 No. 7. From two places of Jephet's commentaries on Gen. i. 
 26 and Psalm viii. 6, it seems evident that David ben Merwan 
 belonged to the Karaitic sect, which is doubted by Professor 
 Fuerst and others. Jephet, who lived in the tenth century, 
 must have known the truth. The criticism which he makes 
 there, concerning David ben Merwan, would have been severer 
 had he directed it against a Rabbinist, and he would not have 
 failed to cry at his heresy. 
 
 No. 8. Compare Abraham ben David, in " Sefer Hakabalah,'* 
 ed. Amsterdam, p. 41 6., about some literati who were taken 
 prisoners on the Mediterranean Sea, by the captain of a ship of 
 Abd-al Rahman III., two of whom were ransomed by the Jewish 
 congregation at Cordova. 
 
 No. 9. Abn Jussuf Chasdai ben Isaac, whose family name 
 was Shafrut or Shaprut, was one of those fortunate men who 
 know how to gain, by genius and knowledge, a high station in 
 life, by which they become powerful protectors of their oppressed 
 brethren ; because it is a gross mistake when one believes that 
 the Jews residing in Mussulmanic Spain generally enjoyed 
 equal rights with the dominant tribe or were safe from persecu- 
 tion and debasement. Chasdai had a great credit with Abd-al- 
 Rahman III. His expressions concerning it, in a letter directed 
 to Joseph, King of the Chasars, in the year 950, are published
 
 — 41 — 
 
 in the preface of the book " Kusari," in some editions, and are 
 confirmed b}' some Arabian authors. 
 
 The physician, Ibn Djoldjol, at Cordova, who lived under the 
 government of Hesham II. (976-1001), mentioned our Chasdai 
 among the physicians of Abd-al-Rahmau, and speaks of the 
 particular credit he had with this King, and that he used zeal- 
 ously his high position to serve the sciences by co-operating to 
 complete an Arabian translation of Dioscoiides. See Silv. de 
 Saci " Relation de I'Egypte par Abdallatif," p. 497 et 500. Ibn 
 Abi Oceibia, who preserved for us the above quotation of Djol- 
 djol, in his " History of the Physicians," and took particular 
 notice of " Chasdai," which was not yet printed, we will give 
 here a translation of it. " Chasdai ben Isaac, well posted in 
 the science of medicine, was in the service of Al-Hakem, son of 
 Abd-al-Rahman, who was called Al-Nacir Ledin-allah. Chasdai 
 ben Isaac belonged to the Jewish literati, who held the first rank 
 concerning the knowledge of their law ; he opened, for his co- 
 religionists in Andalusia, the gates of knowledge of the religious 
 jurisprudence, chronology, etc. 
 
 Previous to that time, they had to address themselves to the 
 Jews in Bagdad concerning suits, calendars and the time of 
 festivals ; they had to send to them for the computation of a 
 certain number of years in behalf of the calendar procedure and 
 the New Year's days. But when Chasdai was appointed by Al- 
 Hakem, who gave him a high situation, he succeeded in procuring 
 for himself, from the Jews in the Orient, all the books which he 
 wanted. Since that time the Jews in Andalusia knew that 
 which before was unknown to them, and were spared all the 
 trouble they had previously to undergo. 
 
 A Christian author at that time mentions also our Chasdai, 
 on the occasion of an embassy, which the CJerman Emperor 
 Otto 1. sent to Cordova, 953. Abd-al-Rahman III. wanted to
 
 -42 — 
 
 know the main object of the mission before he would receive the 
 embassadors, and commissioned Chasdai to hold a private inter- 
 view with Abbot John von Goerz. (See "Vita Jonnis abbat. 
 Gorziensis," by Labbe, nova bibliotheca manusc. lib. T. I., p. 
 772. Holland, "Acta Sanctor.," T. Ill, p. 713. " Pertz monii- 
 menta Germanise historica," T. IV., p. 371 and 372.) 
 
 No. 10. I entered already into particulars in Lit. Bl. d. Or., 
 1846, No. 46, to prove that Avicebron, who was mentioned by 
 Ritter among the Arabian philosophers, was no other than the 
 Jewish poet, Ibn Gabirol. The renowned historian of phi- 
 losophy acknowledged the correctness of my arguments, and 
 expressed this explicitly in an essay contained in the " Goet- 
 tinger gelehrten Anzeigen," April 17, 1847. At the close of that 
 article Professor Ritter says : " I certainly believed that the 
 philosophy of the Middle Ages owed no thanks to the Jewish 
 philosophers for a fertile influence, but Mr. Munk's discovery 
 reclaimed me from this error." 
 
 No. 11. Shemtob ben Joseph ben Palquera, or Falquera, a 
 Spaniard, was born between 1224 and 1228. In the preface of 
 one of his works (Mebakesh), composed in October, 1263, he says 
 he has already passed half of seventy years and is about forty 
 years of age. All his works evince his extensive and profound 
 learning, and especially his thorough knowledge of the philo- 
 sophical works of the Arabians. His commentaries of the whole 
 Bible, which he himself quoted (see preface of " Moreh hamo- 
 reh"), were not transmitted to us, but the following books were, 
 of which he composed the five first ones before he was thirty- 
 five years of age. They are : 
 
 1st. trwrn 5|ijn njnjn ^nn mJS Treatise written in verses on 
 the conduct of the body and soul. Manusc. in the Medizaeic 
 Library at Florence. 
 
 2d. prn nv " Balm of sorrow," or " On the resignation and
 
 — 43 — 
 
 power of the soul in misfortune." Published at Cremone, 1550, 
 at Prague, 1612. 
 
 [Dr. B. Beer remarks that the main contents of this book, 
 which was published in Cremona, was not composed by Shem- 
 tob, but that the greater part of the text, as well as the comments 
 thereon, were those of a certain person called Saul, who was in 
 possession of an original copy, and having lost it, composed the 
 book entirely from memory. The main contents of the book 
 correspond with that of Palquera. — Translator.] 
 
 3d. m3"'in mJN Colloquy of a theologian and philosopher 
 concerning the reconciliation of religion with philosophy. Pub- 
 Hshed at Prague, 1610, 8. 
 
 4th. noDn n't'X'i " The beginning of wisdom," or " Guide in 
 sciences." This work consists of three sections : the first treats 
 of moral qualities which ought to be possessed in order to begin 
 the study of sciences and philosophy ; the second contains a 
 review of all sciences ; and the third discusses the necessitv 
 of philosophical studies in order to gain true happiness. A 
 manuscript of this work is in the Vatican, and in the Parisian 
 National Library there is a Latin translation of it, and before 
 that is also a translation of the work No. 3, Manusc. No. 6691 a. 
 
 5th. mSyon 1DD " The book on the ranks," or " Treatise on 
 the degrees of human perfection and on the more or less perfect 
 societies." Manusc. in the Paris National Library, suppl. heb- 
 No. 15, wherein is also contained the above-mentioned work 
 No. 3. 
 
 6th. \yp:iDr\ "The Searcher" (after knowledge). Review 
 of human knowledge. Composed 1263, in an elegant style, 
 rhymed prose intermingled with verses. Published, Amsterdam, 
 1779, 8. 
 
 7th. C2Jn 'D Book on the soul in twenty chapters, according
 
 _44 — 
 
 to the principles of the Arabian peripatetics. Manusc. No. 239 
 Hebrew manusc. of the Parisian National Library. 
 
 8th. Q'^V^r] n^^hv Perfection of works. A small moral 
 treatise of ten chapters (It is in the same manuscript with 
 No. 7.) 
 
 9th. miDH miD Commentary on the philosophical places in 
 Maimonides' " Moreh;" composed in 1280. It is of great utility 
 for the study of the Arabian philosophy. In the appendix are 
 amended many places of Ibn Tibbon's translation according to 
 the Arabian original, published at Presburg (l)y Bissliches) 
 1837-8. Manusc. in the Paris National Librar3^ 
 
 10th. " Apologetic writing for the Moreh," by Maimonides, 
 who was assailed anew by some French Rabins in 1290. It is 
 printed at the close of the work niNJp nnjo Presburg, 1833-8. 
 Manusc. at the close of the above-mentioned work — No. 9. 
 
 11th. Extracts from the work D^^n mp!D ''Source of life," by 
 Solomon Gabirol, which he translated from the Arabic language 
 into Hebrew. Heb. Manusc, of the Parisian National Library, 
 No. 239. The author mentions in his preface of the " Meba- 
 kesh," besides all these works, two books more which he has 
 composed : "iDlon mJX " Writing on morality," and |n3Tn nh'JO 
 " Scroll on memory," or " Recollections," of which we find no 
 trace anywhere. 
 
 No. 12. Bechaja, or Bachja, who is usually supposed to have 
 lived in the twelfth century, but who lived at the end of the 
 eleventh century, as it is proved by Rappaport in his biography 
 of Rabbi Nathan, p. 42, note 40; because as our author, when 
 quoting all the different compendiums of the Talmud, did not 
 make any mention of that by the distinguished Rabbi, Isaac 
 Alfasi, who died 1103. The name Bechai must be pronounced 
 Bachja or Bachje, as Menasse ben Israel and other Jewish 
 Spanish authors pronounce it ; as, for instance, the author of
 
 — 45 — 
 
 the poetical translation of the " Chobot halbaboth," published 
 in Amsterdam, 1670. 
 
 No. 13. According to the report of Masudi, this conversion 
 took place at the time of the Kalif Harun-al-Rashid. See El- 
 Masudi's historical encyclopoedia, entitled, " Meadows of Gold," 
 etc., translated from the Arabic by A. Sprenger, v. T., p. 407. It 
 is to be regretted that we no longer possess the works from 
 which Masudi has drawn the communications about the par- 
 ticulars of the conversion of the King of the Chasars. 
 
 At a period when stupid hatred and unreasonable prejudices 
 played the part of criticism, where the Jews were concerned 
 Christian authors, as Buxtorf, Basnage, Baratier, etc., scoffed at 
 the Jews on account of their statement that the Jewish religion 
 occupied a throne during many centuries in the Middle Ages. 
 Basnage even says : " One may search for the empire of the 
 Chasars very far and he will find it nowhere (Hist. d. J. I. VII., 
 chap. 1, § 14.) It required the evidence of Arabian authors to 
 prove the great exactness of the Jewish communications, and 
 especially of the answer and all its particulars, which was sent 
 by Joseph, King of the Chasars, to Chasdai ben Joseph. 
 
 A full description of the Chasars in the tenth century, 
 according to Arabian authors, is to be found in the excellent 
 works by d'Ohsson, " Des peuples du Caucase, au Voy d'Abou 
 El-Casem," Paris, 1828, 8, chaps. 2 and 3. 
 
 [Dr. B. Beer remarks : " Compare, also, concerning the Chasars, 
 ' History of Russia,' by Karamsin ; German by Trappe, Dresden, 
 Arnold, vol. I., p. 41. See also 'Maggarische Alterthuemer,' by 
 S. Cassel, Berlin, 1848."— Translator.] 
 
 No. 11. Juda Halevi expressed himself energetically in his 
 poems against the Greek philosophy, which he claims to proffer 
 many blossoms but no fruits. " Having heard," says he, "the 
 abstruse words of philosophy constructed upon a weak fountla-
 
 — 46 — 
 
 tion, one returns with an empty heart and the mouth filled with 
 phrases and idle talk." (See " Bethulath bath. Jehudah," by 
 Luzatto, Prague, 1840, p. 56.) 
 
 No. 15. Ibn Ezra, renowned among the Jews as one of the 
 most rational and boldest commentators of the Bible, was in the 
 Middle Ages not less distinguished on account of his astrolo- 
 gical knowledge, so that he was considered as one of -the most 
 learned of this chimerical knowledge, for which he wrote a 
 series of works that were formerly much appreciated. Petrus 
 Paduanus translated them into Latin, in the year 1293. (Maunsc. 
 of the Paris National Library No. 7348.) The Hebrew originals 
 are also in manuscript in the same library. 
 
 The books, oSiyn 'D and Dyt^n 'D nnSinn 'd were pubHshed 
 under different editorships, which were known to Pico de la Mi- 
 randola. Compare his ''Disput. in Astrologiam I.," viii., c. 5. 
 He quoted the first edition of the book, " Astrologicis ration- 
 ibus " (Q"'»yt2n ^D) and adds : " Conscripsit enim (Avenezra) de 
 eadem re libros duos." 
 
 No. 16. Compare Maimonides' letter to his disciple Joseph 
 Not. sur Jos. ben Jehuda, "Journal asiat.," Juil, 1842, p. 31. 
 
 No. 17. Jacob ben Abba-Mari, residing at Neapel, says, in a 
 transcript of his translation of the middle commentary of Ibn 
 Roshd on the " Organon," which he finished 1232, that he was 
 receiving a pension from the Emperor, who, as he adds, "loves 
 the sciences and all who occupy themselves with them." 
 
 No. 18. Or better, " Anatolio " vSltDJN as it reads sometimes 
 in manuscripts, namely, in No. 207 de I'ancien fonds, in the 
 continuation of the translation of the extract of the "Almagest," 
 by Ibn Roshd. 
 
 No. 19. Kalonymos was born in 1287, as it appears by many 
 remarks at the close of many works which he translated. Con- 
 cerning this author, compare Zunz in " Geiger's Zeitschrift,"
 
 -47- 
 
 vol. II, p. 313-320; vol. IV, p. 199-201. He has certainly 
 composed also Latin translations, as the author of " Sifthe 
 Jeshenim" cites. This name is identical with Oalo Kalonymos, 
 who translated into Latin the " Destructio dcstructionis," and 
 many other treatises by Averrois. At the beginning of a man- 
 uscript of |ni3 pN* (fonds des Oratoriuui No. 24) he is explicitly 
 called hap noc^'X© (Master Kalo). 
 
 No. 20. Todros is a translator of a eojumontary, by Ibn 
 Roshd, on " Rhetoric and Poetry of Aristotle," wiiich work is 
 dated Trinquetaille, near Aries, 1337. 
 
 No. 21. We can not pass over in silence two more meritori- 
 ous men — Jacob ben Machir, of Montpellier, and Samuel ben 
 Jehuda, of Marseilles. The first lived at Montpellier in the 
 second half of the thirteenth centur}^ and the first years of the 
 fourteenth century. He composed translations of a great many 
 philosophical and niathematical works from the Arabic, as well 
 as having written many very esteemed astronomical treatises 
 which were translated into Latin. He was also called Profiat 
 or Profatius, and under this name he was also known among 
 Christians. 
 
 Wolf (Ribl. Hebr. vol. I., p. 988; vol. IIL, p. 94-1) has errone- 
 ously presented Profatius and Jacob ben Machir as two different 
 authors. The treatise quoted by Wolf dc Quadrante, in the 
 Parisian National Library, Latin Manusc. No. 7437, is merely a 
 literal translation of the Hebrew treatise, ^XiJ^'' J/Dn by Jacob 
 ben Machir. 
 
 Samuel ben Jehudah ben Meshullam was born 1294, and was 
 usualh' known (according to his own statements) by the name, 
 of Miles of Marseilles. His grandfather, Meshullam. was a great 
 grandchild of Jacob ben David Profiague, who is mentioned, by 
 Benjamin of Tudela, as one of the richest residents of Marseilles, 
 and who, according to the appendix of "Shebet Jehudah," died
 
 -48- 
 
 in 1170. Samuel devoted himself, from his eighteenth year, to 
 the study of sciences and philosophy, studied astronomy at 
 Salon Ch^) under the direction of Abba-Mari, usually called 
 Sennor Astruc of Noves. In 1322 he was taken in custody with 
 other Jews at Beaucaire. We find him, by turns, at Murcia, in 
 Spain, at Tarascona ( 1329-30 >, Aix (1335-36), Monteil Aimart 
 or Montelimart, 1340. The Parisian National Library possesses 
 his translation of the treatise, " De Anima," by Alexander of 
 Aphrodisia, of the "Almagest," b}^ Ibn Aflah, and of an extract 
 of the " Organon," by Ibn Roshd. At the close of the works 
 mentioned are a few biographical particulars about Samuel ben 
 Jehudah. 
 
 No. 22. Compare " Zunz additam. ad Catol. Lips," p. 323. 
 From some investigations which I have made in the manu- 
 scripts in the Parisian National Library, to which Mr. Carmoli 
 called my attention, it follows that J. Caspi, of I'Argentiere, in 
 Languedoc, now dep. de I'Ardeche, was born there. Caspi is 
 undoubtedly the Hebrew translation of I'Argentiere, as it was 
 customary at that time. For instance, Lunel-Jarchi, Mont- 
 pellier Hargaash. Concerning the life of Caspi, compare De 
 Rossi Catal. cod. 755. Delitzsch and Zunz at other places. In 
 the manuscript fond de I'orat No. 105, the author is called 
 K-iC^Sixbl CJ^ISJUN that is, Bonafoux de I'Argentiere. 
 
 No. 23. Neither the year of his birth nor of his death is ex- 
 actly known. De Rossi maintains that he was born 1288, as he 
 found it in a manuscript of an arithmetic by Levi ben Gerson, 
 which harmonizes well with the time of his composition of his 
 other different works. But a remark which is at the close of a 
 manuscript of Rashi's Bible commentary (fonds de Sorbonne 
 No. 50) gives rise to some doubts about it. The copyist, David 
 ben Gerson, says that he wrote this commentary for the use of 
 his brother. Rabbi Levi, 5058 (A. M.) 1298. Now, were it
 
 -49 — 
 
 proved that he meant by this Rabbi Levy ben Gerson, we must 
 presume that he was born at an earlier period than that given 
 by De Rossi. This manuscript, liowever, which is written in 
 German characters, and therefore being improbable that it 
 should have been written in Provence, could have been com- 
 posed by one bearing the same name. 
 
 According to Juchsin, Levi ben Gerson died in 1370; but it 
 is not probable that he lived so long, because his last works are 
 dated 1338, and his astronomical observations do not reach 
 beyond 1340. 
 
 We know, nevertheless, according to a few statements at the 
 close of his works, that his literary activity began 1321 and 
 closed 1338, although some sections of his " Milchamoth Ado- 
 naj " were already composed or sketched 1316 or 17. (Compare 
 the edition of this work, p. 68 b.) He began with an Arith- 
 metical work, "iDDOn IDD which he finished April, 1321. He 
 devoted the other part of that year and the two succeeding years 
 to the explanation of different commentaries, by Ibn Roshd, on 
 Aristotle. He proceeded then to elucidations of such parts of 
 the Bible, where he could give his philosophical exegesis full 
 scope, as Canticles, Job, the first chapter of Genesis, and Ec- 
 clesiastes. At the same time he composed also his work, " Milch- 
 amoth Adonaj." After the conclusion of that he gradually wrote 
 commentaries on the books, '' Esther and Ruth," " The Penta- 
 teuch," " The First Prophets," " Daniel," " Ezra," " Nehemiah," 
 "The Chronicles," and at last, "The Proverbs of Solomon," 
 which he concluded on the third (Tjar) April 23, 1338. We 
 have reason to ])resume that Levi ben Gerson had his main 
 residence in the earldom Venaissin. According to a Latin note, 
 which we will cite afterward, he resided in the city of Orange. 
 He went from there very often to a city, which he called Hyssop
 
 — so- 
 City (niTxn T'j;), in order to make astronomical observations. 
 Many Jewish authors were called after this city, ^niTSn (Haesobi.) 
 
 This proves that 31isn is not the corrupted name of a city, 
 but the Hebrew word for " hysop," which Joseph ben Caspi, 
 author of the " Kaaroth Kesseph," signified by the words : " My 
 name is Hyssop, but my words are Cedars." We believe that 
 Hyssop City is identical with Avignon, although we can not un- 
 derstand clearly the etymological connection between Avignon 
 and Hyssop. At the close of his commentary on '^ Deuteronomy," 
 Levi ben Gerson says that he has finished this work in Hyssop 
 City ; and it is added, in a manuscript in the Parisian National 
 Library ( Anc. fonds No. 79) : " When one is reading this book, 
 he shall consider that I have composed this whole commentary 
 in great haste in the city Avignon, without having had at hand 
 any Talmudical or Biblical books. From this it evidently follows 
 that " Ir haesob " was Avignon, and that Levi ben Gerson lived 
 there at certain times. In his astronomical works we often find 
 mentioned " Ir haesob," but once only Avignon. Probably 
 Avignon, -which was at that time the capital of the Pope, 
 attracted our Levi ben Gerson on account of its scientific 
 sources. [Hyssop is a plant which was used by the Jewish 
 priest in ancient times to cleanse the lepers. Avignon being 
 the capital of the pope, who was considered by Christians to 
 have the power to forgive sins and to cleanse the unclean, it 
 seems probable that the Jewish literati therefore called it " Hys- 
 sop." — Translator.] 
 
 No. 24. The Parisian National Library possesses three manu- 
 scripts of this work, one of which is not complete. The work 
 consists of 136 chapters. Having prefaced by some general 
 meditations on the advantage and difficulty of astronomy, the 
 author portrays an instrument invented by him to make with 
 it some astronomical observations, which he calls " The dis-
 
 — 51 — 
 
 coverer of subjects that are found with great difficulty" (n^Jt5 
 niplDj?). In the ninth chapter he celebrates it in two verses. In 
 the continuation of the work, he shows the insufficiency of the 
 Ptolomeic and that of an invented system of an Arabian astron- 
 omer of the twelfth century. The latter is designated by the 
 author " Baal Techunah Chadashah," who is no other than 
 Abu Isak al Batrudji (Al petragius). The latter system made a 
 great sensation, as it appears from the book " Jesod 01am," by 
 •Tizchak Israeli, 11, 9, where Albatrudji is called C^''j;nDn K'-sn 
 (The Thunderer). Levi ben Gerson proves first the impossibihty 
 of this system and gives then his own opinions about the world, 
 which he based on the observations he made at different times. 
 He concluded this work on the twenty-first of Kislew, 5089, A. 
 M. (November 24, 1328). He revised and improved it afterward 
 in different places, and added then gradually the newer observa- 
 tions which he made until the year 1340. This work, which 
 ought to occupy a place in the history of astronomy, deserves 
 to be examined by a professional man. 
 
 Pico de la Mirandola quoted it many times in his " Disputa- 
 tiones in Astrologiam," and expresses himself about it as fol- 
 lows (1, ix., c. 8) : "Leo Hebraeus, a distinguished man and 
 renowned mathematician, who doubted the ancients, invented a 
 new instrument, the excellent construction of which we can see 
 by its mathematical accuracy." 
 
 Wolf (Bibliotheca Hebr. 1, p. 436) took this Leo Hebraeus 
 for the son of Isaak Abravanel. The part (c. 4, 11) wliich 
 treats of the instrument mentioned formed formerly a wseparate 
 work and was translated into Latin for the Pope Clemens VI., 
 1342, which translation (Parisian National Library Manusc. lat. 
 No. 7293) concludes with the remark : " Explicit tractatus in- 
 strument! astronomiae magistri Leonis Judaei de lialneolis 
 habitatoris Auraycae (which is Orange). Ad summam Ponti-
 
 — 52 — 
 
 ficem Dominum Clementem VI. translatu& de Hebraeo in La- 
 tiniim anno incarnationis Chr. et. pontificatus dicti domini 
 dementis anno prime." 
 
 No. 25. The bold views of Levi ben Gerson, as well as his 
 peripatetic interpretations of holy Scriptural passages and 
 religious dogmas were a subject of the greatest criticism by the 
 orthodox Rabbis. 
 
 Isaac Abravanel bewails, in several writings, and especially 
 in the commentary on Joshua (chap. 10), the errors of .Jewish 
 philosophers, who presume that there is a primitive matter, that 
 they put the- active intellect on God's place, deny the divine 
 providence concerning the individual man, and maintain that the 
 immortality of the soul is only a reunion with the active intel- 
 lect (^yiDH h:iV}. He complains especially of Levi ben Gerson, 
 who, as he sa)'s, did not consider it necessary even to veil his 
 thoughts, but announced them with the greatest clearness, and 
 expressed his ideas about the first matter, pE'Xin "iDin the soul, 
 the prophecy and wonders in such a way and manner that it 
 would be a sin merely to hear it, much more to believe in it. 
 Before Abravanel, Isaac ben Shesheth spoke of Levi ben Gerson 
 in the same strain (1374), but with more respect. 
 
 No. 26. Moses ben Joshua, with the surname " Master Vidal," 
 was a descendant of a family which came from Narbonne, but 
 resided in Perpignan, in which latter city young Moses applied 
 himself to his studies under the direction of his father (com- 
 pare his commentary on the " Moreh " I., 1 c. 50 and 63). We 
 can not state exactly the time of his birth, but we may presume 
 that it was probably in the last year of the thirteenth or the first 
 years of the fourteenth century. About the date of his death 
 there is a doubtful intimation in a manuscript of the Parisian 
 National Library (fonds de I'Oratoire No. 40), whose last pages 
 contain a small treatise, " On the free will," composed by our
 
 — 53 — 
 
 Moses to refute a writing entitled mtJn mJN wherein a contem- 
 poraneous man of letters, whom our ^[oses did not mention by 
 his name, defended fatalism. The treatise was concluded by 
 Moses at Sorla, Friday, on the twelfth of Tebeth, 5122, A. ^I., 
 December 10, 1361, and has the following heading: noxr^n 
 ."im'-DS Din D'trin c^t^o^ "nam "jn-ijn nc*» i^ m'naa " The treatise 
 on the free will was composed by Rabbi Moses of Narbonne 
 about three months l)efore his death." By this it appears that 
 the author died in the year 1362, that the words, "about three 
 months," are not to be taken literally, because we know that 
 Moses concluded his commentary on the " Moreh " on the 1st 
 of Ijar, April 26, 1362. In the latter work (I. iii., chap. 17) he 
 cites his small treatise on fatalism, on account of which some 
 doubts arise about the authenticity of the above date. 
 
 Be it as it may, there is no work by Moses of Narbonne later 
 than 1362. But he must have been at that time in a very ad- 
 vanced age, because he relates, in a postscript (see his commen- 
 tary on the " Moreh "), that his son Joshua urged him to con- 
 clude this work that they may not after his death reproach him 
 for having neglected the greatest philosopher of his own nation, 
 while, on the other hand, he had written commentaries on the 
 works of foreign philosophers. See, concerning Moses of Nar- 
 bonne, Zunz addit. ad catal. cod. Lips, to which these notices 
 may serve as a supplement. His commentary on the " Lament- 
 ations" of Jeremiah (addit. p. 326) was one of his former 
 works. It is in the Parisian National Library (nnc. f. 2S0). lie 
 speaks therein of his design to write a commentary on mL*'3X 
 mpmn "On the possibility of the Union with the Eternal" (by 
 Averroes). 
 
 No. 27. This work is entitled, in the Hebrew, D'DlDiSsn ni30 
 "Intentio philosophorum," and was one of his fust Htrrary 
 works. (Compare Zunz add. p. 326, col. 8, et Dclitzsch cat. p.
 
 — 54 — 
 
 305.) According to Casiri (Bibl. Arab. hisp. T. I., p. 184), it 
 seems that there is in Escurial an Arabic commentary by our 
 author on '' Tehafot," by Gazali, but it appears to me not prob- 
 able, and rests upon an error. 
 
 No. 28. Compare Delitzschii cat. cod. Heb. Lips. p. 308, and 
 Zunz addit. p. 325. According to the report in all manuscripts, 
 Moses concluded his work, " Thamus," the 7th, 4104 (June 
 19, 1344). This was, however, on a Saturday. This must, 
 therefore, be undoubtedly a mistake. 
 
 This commentary was composed in the midst of the war 
 troubles which took place (in the region of Roussillon) between 
 Peter IV., King of Aragonia, and his brother-in-law, Jacob, 
 King of Majorka, as the author himself expresses it explicitly. 
 (See Delitzsch I. c.) 
 
 No. 29. The physical dissertations, entitled, (D^yn^n D^ti'mn) 
 form a collection of small treatises and simple remarks of Ibn 
 Roshd, on many different questions which he annexed to the 
 physics of Aristotle. One part of them, with a commentary of 
 Moses Narbonne, is in the Parisian National Library, manusc. 
 8, No. 118 fends de I'Orat. Another part of them, under the 
 title, SjSw n^*yn -inxn "De substantia orbis," is contained in 
 No. 96, 122, 2° of the same fonds. 
 
 The commentary of the latter collection, which concludes the 
 dissertations, was finished on the 5th of Adar, 5109 (Feb. 24, 
 1349). In the preface of the commentary on the first collection 
 (No. 118) the author says, who retired to Cervera, in Catalonia, 
 that he had undertaken this work at the requests of his friends, 
 the literati of Perpignon, in order to preserve his literary con- 
 nection with them. 
 
 He called, later, these learned men DTixn n3 (Society of breth- 
 ren), and in the preface of Chai Ibn Jocton (see the following 
 remark), he called them jN'^JDis i'j?n "^va nDsnn •'K'inD mnnn n33j
 
 -S5- 
 
 " Esteemed inquirers for knowledge in the Citj'' of Perpignon," 
 causes us to presume that here is spoken of a literar}^ society 
 which was within the Jewish congregation in the City of 
 Perpignon. He mentions also the great tribulations which 
 befell many congregations at that time, the devastation of the 
 JcAvish congregation of Cervera, by which he himself lost the 
 greater part of his library. 
 
 No. 30. That the date of the Leipzig manviscii[)t is false was 
 already proved by Zunz, 1 c. The most manuscripts, among 
 which are two of the Parisian National Library, give the date of 
 the conclusion of this work of Cervera the evening before Pente- 
 cost, the fourth of Sivan, for the 5th was on Saturday, 5109 
 (May 22, 1349). This commentary facilitates the comphre- 
 hending of the text by Ibn Tofail, and gives valuable explana- 
 tions of the doctrines of Arabian philosophers. 
 
 At the close, the commentator gives an analysis of an inter- 
 esting work by Abu Bekr al Cajeg, or Ibn Badja, entitled : njnjni 
 nunon ( " The manner of a recluse " ) which work he dis- 
 covered when, on account of the war, he had to tlee to Valenzia* 
 Since the original w^ork is no longer extant, the analysis is 
 therefore the more valuable. The statement of Zunz (1 c. p. 
 326, No. 6) must be amended according to this. 
 
 No. 31. The author says, in a postscript, that he commenced 
 this commentary at Toledo and concluded it, after seven years, 
 in Soria. Several circumstances, among which was especially 
 the plundering which he suffered on the second day of Pente- 
 cost, 5115, A. M. (May 18, 1355), forced him to discontinue his 
 work. 
 
 It appears from a passage, 1, ii. c. 47, of a commentary, that 
 he sojourned since 5118 (1358) at Soria, where as he relates he 
 saw a Christian woman who was one hundred and thirty years 
 of age. At the close of that postscript is given the date of the
 
 -56- 
 
 conclusion of his commentary, the 3d Ijar, 5122 (April 26, 
 1362), when he intended to return to his native country. 
 
 No. 32. (Compare Zunz 1 c. p. 325, col. 2, No. 2). This 
 treatise, entitled: ''t:'Q3n n10^E^•" ("Perfection of the Soul") is 
 in manuscript in the Parisian National Library (fonds de I'orat. 
 No. 118), The author composed this treatise for his son, in 
 order to replace to him, on this subject, the works of Aristotle 
 and Ibn Roshd. As a preface, he repeats the first book of Aris- 
 totle's " Treatise on the soul," according to its treatment in the 
 middle commentary of Ibn Roshd. 
 
 Moses' own treatise begins with the second part and is divided 
 into five books : on the soul and its abilities, the material or 
 passive intellect, the opinions of the commentators about it, 
 especially the ideas of Ibn Roshd, and, finally, on the active 
 intellect (Syisn ^3D) and on God, the first cause of all motion 
 ^_^J1E'^<"l^ nao). 
 
 The author confesses that there are therein many repetitions 
 taken from his treatise " On the material intellect." (See 
 above.) 
 
 It is therefore proved that he composed later the treatise "On 
 the soul." A reference which is made in the treatise, " On the 
 material intellect," to his book, '• On the soul," must therefore 
 
 be a later addition of the author. 
 
 The book, " On the soul," is older than the " Commentary 
 on physical dissertations," and was consequently composed 
 between 1344 and 1349. 
 
 No. 33. In the beginning of the preface of his dissertations, 
 he cites this commentary with the words : Vl^^ n^J^'lSP "IJCIT'S 
 i^'i p-? •'ynta 
 
 In the postscript (see commentary) on the " Moreh," he 
 cites also his works or commentaries on logic and metaphysics,
 
 — 57- 
 
 and in the commentary itself (I. i. e. 55), see nK'O ^piD (Capita 
 Mosis), probably a collection of philosophical aphorisms. 
 
 No. 34. Compare, however, the elaborate dissertation by 
 M. Schlesinger, on the introduction to the German translation 
 of the book " Ikkarim," Frankfort, a. M. 1844. 
 
 No. 3o. This commentary is in the Parisian National Li- 
 brary, fonds de I'orat. No. Ill, entitled, ns^on 'd^ C'n'D 
 
 It appears from the preface that the author wrote it at the 
 request of one of his friends, and took Ibn Roshd as a guide, 
 whom he considered as the most profound commentator of 
 Aristotle, and protected him against some attacks of Levi ben 
 Gerson. It is visible, from the close of the postscript, that he 
 concluded it at Huesca (np*j'"'S1'\), in the year 1440. 
 
 No. 36. At the close of the manuscript of the " Intentio 
 philosophorum," with a commentary of Moses of Narbonne 
 (anc. fonds No. 358), the copyist, Isaac ben Chabib, reports 
 that he concluded it on the 7th of Tebeth, 5232 (December 
 17, 1471), at Saragossa, the seat of learning of the great 
 scholar and philosopher, teacher and Rabbi, Abraham ben 
 Bibag. 
 
 No. 37. Joseph ben Shemtob was an appointed officer at 
 the court of the King of Castilia, but what office he had is 
 unknown to us. Pie was highly respected and in the presence 
 of the king and high officers he disputed sometimes on philo- 
 sophical subjects. He relates it in the preface of his commen- 
 tary on ethics. He was the most fertile Jewish author in Spain, 
 As we find nowhere (compare Wolf, De Rossi) an exact and 
 complete register of his works, I will enumerate them here in a 
 probable chronological order, which shall also comprise among 
 them such which are perhaps not extant any more, but which 
 are quoted by the author himself in such works that are access- 
 ible to me.
 
 — 58 — 
 
 1st. A small treatise " On domestic affairs " n"'3n niDjn 
 composed when he was in his youthful days. Quoted below 
 No. 5. 
 
 2d. Conmientary on the D7^V mrna " Examination of the 
 world," by Jedaja Bedersi. Quoted Ibid. 
 
 3d. Commentary on a work of his father, Shemtob, entitled : 
 nn^D\-i "iSD " Book of the fundaments." Quoted Ibidem. 
 
 4th. Commentary on the renowned letter, " Be not like your 
 fathers," by Profiat Duran. Quoted further No. 7. This com- 
 mentary was, according to De Rossi, published in Constanti- 
 nople, and is also in manuscript in the Parisian National 
 Library. 
 
 5th. Nlipn py or " Eye (that is guide) of the preacher." A 
 treatise on the morality and on the art to preach (quoted in 
 No. 7), and is in manuscript (de I'anc. f No. 158) in the 
 Parisian National Library. 
 
 6th. Commentary on "Lamentations of Jeremiah," com- 
 posed in Medina del Campo, in the year 1444. See De Rossi, 
 Catal. cod. 177. 
 
 7th. D^"^-?S ni33 " Glory of God." Treatise on the highest 
 good and the aim of science and knowledge. Published at 
 Ferrara, 1536 ; composed in the year 1442, thirteen years before 
 he wrote the commentary on " Ethics," as he himself stated in 
 the preface of the latter, on the occasion of the relations of 
 Aristotle's " Ethics " to the moral precepts of the Mosaic law. 
 
 8th. Translation of a polemical treatise against the Chris- 
 tians from the Spanish, by Rabbi Chasdai Crescas, entitled : 
 *7n3Jn nos» (Cited No. 9.) 
 
 9th. Commentary on the treatise " On the material intellect, 
 or on the possibility of uniting with God or attachment to 
 God " nrpmn DI'J'SN* by Ibn Roshd. (Manuscript of the Ora- 
 torien fonds No. 136.)
 
 — 59 — 
 
 10th. |r-?y nyn "The knowledge of the Most High," or 
 refutation of a treatise, entitled: VoJn nip ("The secret of 
 retribution)," on fatalism, by the Apostate Abner, and the views 
 as the}' were expressed by Rabbi Chasdai. (Cited many times 
 in No. 13.) 
 
 11th. Commentary on the Aristotlean treatise, " On the soul." 
 12th. Commentary on the treatise, " On the Intelleetum " 
 72^r\ "lOSD by Alexander Aphrodisi, or rather on an extract of 
 it composed by Ibn Roshd (cited Ibid. 1, 6 and 10). The 
 manuscript of this commentary, which was concluded on the 
 Feast of Booths, 5215 (Oct., 1454), at Segovia, was purchased 
 lately by the Parisian National Library. 
 
 13th. nnjon ^'D "D A very complete commentary " On 
 Ethics to Nikomachus." This most important work of our 
 author Avas composed by him during the time of 100 days, 
 and was concluded on the first of Nissan, 5215 A. M. (March 
 20, 1454), There are in the Parisian National Library two 
 manuscripts of it. IManusc. fonds No. 308; Orat. No. 121. 
 
 No. 38. The manuscript, No. 107 fonds de I'orat., contains 
 three works by Shemtob, viz : ri'n'PDnn nnon laxcn or treatise 
 " On the final cause of creation," a treatise " On the primitive 
 matter and its relations to the form, according to the views of 
 ancient philosoj^hers, and especially those of Aristotle and his 
 interpreters," was probably composed in Segovia in 14G1 ; 
 furthermore, nmn nD "i1X3 " Explanation of speech," or '-Capa- 
 bility for reason," or commentary on a part of the treatise "On 
 the soul," by Aristotle (I. iii. c. 4-7), was concluded at Al- 
 mazan on the first of Marcheshwan, 5241 A. M. (Sept. 28, 
 1478). 
 
 The manuscript, No. 329 anc. f., contains the commentary on 
 the " Physics," by Aristotle, was concluded at Almazan on the
 
 — 60 — 
 
 second of Marcheshwan, 5241 A. M. (Oct. 6, 1480.) The. 
 commentary on the "Moreh," by Maimonides, was printed. 
 
 No. 39. Compare, concerning Elia del Medigo, Geigor in 
 Melo Chofnaim, S. xxiv., xxv. and xxii. The treatise "On the 
 intellectum," is without any title in the Hebrew manuscript in 
 the Parisian National Library, No. 328 anc. f. It is identical 
 with that of Joseph del Medigo, with the words : " Profound 
 question on the unity of intellectus " ('JS"'SlM SsK'), Geiger ib. 
 heb. text p. 17. Elia concluded this treatise about the end of 
 Shebat, 5242 (January, 1482). 
 
 The same manuscript contains also his commentary on the 
 treatise, ^J?Jn DVJJ3 (" De substantia orbis "), concluded at Bas- 
 sano on the 5th of Marcheshwan, 5246 A. M. (Oct. 14, 1485.) 
 Both works were composed by the inducement of Job. Pico of 
 Mirandola, and also the Latin commentary on the " Physics," 
 by Aristotle. It is among the Latin manuscripts of the Parisian 
 National Library, No. 6508, where are also added some letters 
 which our Elia wrote with his own hand to Pico de Mirandola. 
 
 The "Bechinath hadath," published in Basel, 1629, was 
 republished, with an excellent commentary, by J. Reggio, 
 Wien, 1833.
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY 
 
 Los Angeles 
 This book is DUE on the last date stamped below. 
 
 Form L9-40»n-7,'56(C790s4)444 
 
 THE LIBRARY 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA 
 
 LOS ANGELES
 
 UC SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY 
 
 t 
 
 PLEA«^ DO NOT REMOVE 
 THIS BOOK CARD , 
 
 <AtLIBRARYQ<- 
 
 University Research Library 
 
 AA 000 489 529 8 
 
 00 
 
 > 
 r 
 r- 
 
 — ] 
 
 1 
 Ul 
 
 c 
 
 T 
 T 
 
 1 
 1 
 "1 
 
 1_ 
 
 ( 
 
 ■Si 
 
 i 
 
 9 
 
 ■i 
 
 ■> 
 3 
 D 
 
 ] 
 j 
 
 1 
 
 ; 
 
 ) 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 >
 
 ii 
 
 1 ! 
 
 I ]