iCk vfEX THE LAW IS LIGHT. TIN min THE LAW IS LIGHT;" & Course of JFour lectures ON THE SUFFICIENCY OF THE LAW OF MOSES AS THE GUIDE OF ISRAEL. THE REV. D. W. MARKS, MINISTER OF THE WEST LONDON SYNAGOGUE OF BRITISH JEWS. 13rtntrD at tfje request of tfye Council of jFounfccrs. TO BE HAD OF S. JOEL, 42, FORE STREET, F1NSBURY, ALSO OF MR. COHEN, 50, MARGARET ST., CAVENDISH SQUARE. 56141854. LONDON: PRINTED HI J. WERTHE1MER AND CO., CIRCUS PLACE HNSBURY CIRCUS. THE LAW IS LIGHT. LECTURE I. DEUT. XXX. 1114. Kin nxsi x Dvn *pB& ^JK -IE>K nNn nra&n uS n^r 'fcnDN 1 ? Kin DWS *6 : Kin nnn 'S -aya K^I trwpi rm nr\K uy&Bn uS nn^i D*n "in Sx " For this commandment, which I command thee to-day is not beyond thy comprehension, nor is it out of thy reach. It is not in heaven that thou shouldest say, Who shall ascend for us to heaven and fetch it for us, that we may hear it and perform it 1 Nor is it beyond the sea that thou shouldest say, Who shall traverse for us the sea and fetch it for us, that we may hear it and perform it ? But it is exceedingly near unto thee : it is in thy mouth and in thy heart that thou mayest per- form it." I HAVE here cited a most important passage of Scrip- ture, which should be attentively read arid pondered on by every Jew, and especially by the members of the congregation I am addressing ; because I take it to be one of the solid foundations on which Judaism, as it presents itself to us and to those that think with us, is based. When we consider the many shades of opinion that are to be found with respect to the precise exegesis which should be assigned to many passages of Scripture, we ought to feel how totally unjustifiable it is for any body of men to assume to themselves anything approaching to infallibility in B 2071690 2 LECTURE I. this process. What may strike us as perfectly con- clusive, when considered in relation to one object, may appear to other men equally clear and certain when received in reference to another object of an almost totally different character. Hence the conflict of opinion that prevails amongst men in most things ; but chief of all in regard to detached Scriptural passages, when considered within the strict limits of the texts themselves, apart from the general sense of the chapter with which they are properly connected. In such cases, it is certainly not the province of a weak mortal to assume that the inference he draws is clothed with the same high authority as the divine oracle itself. It is not for him to conclude, much less to act upon the conclusion, that he alone is in the possession of truth, whilst all who differ from him are plunged in error. It rather behoves each to pro- duce, in a spirit of calmness and of brotherhood, the arguments by which his opinions may be supported ; and if a common agreement cannot be arrived at, to respect each other's conscientious convictions. With respect to the passage of the text placed at the head of this lecture, I can neither concur in the exposition assigned to it by our brethren of a different faith, nor in that adopted by a large class of our Jewish brethren, who receive, unconditionally, the rabbinical system as a whole. In endeavouring to expound this passage for ourselves, we must ascertain to what the word plltf/b " commandment," which Moses tells us " is not beyond our comprehension, and not beyond our reach," really alludes : and here the con- text affords us all the information which, I venture to think, we can reasonably require. If we go back to THE LAW IS LIGHT. 3 the 9th verse of the chapter we shall find the inspired legislator promising the Israelites many national blessings, if they perform the conditions laid down in the following, or 10th verse, which runs thus: rail-on vnpni vrrMb *tovh *frhx 'n ^pa y&e>n ^ pnS hn 7nS** n hx si&>n ^ nrn minn " If thou shalt hearken unto the voice of the Lord thy God, to keep his commandments and his statutes which are written in this book of the law: if thou shalt turn unto the Lord thy God with all thy heart and all thy soul." It is then to the precepts and commandments written in the Pentateuch to which Moses refers, when he tells us that the ni or " commandment" he has just enjoined upon us, " is not above our comprehension," " is not out of our reach, but is in our mouth and in our heart that we may perform it." If the passage of the text have any meaning at all, it is, according to our view at least, a positive decla- ration that the principles of the law, as written by Moses himself, are so clear as to be perfectly suited to every capacity, to be thoroughly grasped by every intellect, and to commend themselves to the adoption of every Israelite, whether lettered or unlettered, so long as he is in possession of that healthfulness of mind which enables him to distinguish between what is morally right and what is morally wrong. I am far from asserting that this passage involves the admission, that the written law is of itself suf- ficient to enable every Israelite to perform each ceremonial rite in precisely the same manner as it was observed by the men who came out of Egypt; for this, as I shall endeavour to shew hereafter, is a B 2 4 LECTURE I. matter of very secondary importance when compared with the principles of the law. But what 1 do assert the text to contain is this, a plain admission by .Moses, that in the written law to which he refers and it is the only law of which he speaks is to be found all that constitutes Jewish doctrine, all that involves moral action and instruction as to the things which it is proper for the Israelite to perform, or sinful for him to transgress; and further, that these matters are there set forth Avith so much clearness and per- spicuity as to be easy of comprehension to every one endowed with ordinary intelligence. I submit that this is the meaning which an unpre- judiced mind, unacquainted with any commentary or gloss of theologians or schoolmen, would naturally draw from the passage of the text. And such an in- terpretation would acquire additional weight if the biblical student could be brought to the conviction, after attentively reading the volume of the Penta- teuch, that the holy book may be well trusted to go by itself and make its own way ; that it requires no expositor to run before it to tell man what he is to find in it, and no creed to run after it to satisfy the diligent and conscientious enquirer that he has read it in its genuine spirit. Now it is worthy of note that the Psalmist is fully impressed with a belief that the Bible is capable in itself of inducing such a conviction, since he tells us that wrO 1 ? TIKI "pm 'hfb 13 " God's word was a lamp to his feet and a light for his path." 1 Whether David "Was the author of the Psalm from which I 1 Psalm cxix. 105. THE LAW IS LIGHT. 5 have just quoted, is a matter of uncertainty: but that this renowned Israelite held the same opinion as the writer of the 119th Psalm, with respect to the all-sufficiency of the written word of God is placed beyond the possibility of a doubt, by a record pre- served to us in the earlier part of the second chapter of the first book of Kings. In this chapter, David is described as stretched on his mortal couch ; and, in his dying charge to his son and successor, he solemnly tells him, that if he hopes to find favour with God and to prosper in all his undertakings, he must keep all the " divine commandments, statutes and ordi- nances, n^D mini lirO3 as they are written in the Law of Moses." 2 Here, then, in David's words, is presented to us one view of practical Judaism, and in very plain terms. There is, however, another view of Judaism, differing in some respects very materially from what is laid down by David, and which is known by the name of traditional Judaism, or, as modern casuists are pleased to name it, historical Judaism. This system is practically developed in a sermon which has recently been published and very ex- tensively circulated by a religious teacher who is regarded as a high authority by the larger portion of the Jews of this empire. In this sermon it is declared, that if the five books of Moses were left to make their own way without the help of a divine commen- tary, so far from being a suificient guide for the faith and practice of the Israelite, " every doctrine [I quote the reverend Rabbi's own words], every doctrine, 2 1 Kings ii. 3. 6 LECTURE I. every ordinance, and every law would be a sealed book, a riddle without solution." 3 If this be indeed the correct view of the volume of the Pentateuch, it then follows, that Judaism as a system is not to be determined by what Moses wrote, and by what we have been accustomed to regard and to venerate as 71 min; but, by some teachings that are not found in the Bible at all, and to which the sacred volume does not make a single positive reference. As the sermon to which I have just alluded, though not addressed in plain terms to our congregation, is evidently intended as an indirect censure of our proceedings, I shall not hold myself precluded from referring occasionally to the positions of the reverend author during the pre- sent course of lectures, in which I purpose to con- sider which of the two views of Judaism is the more in harmony with the passage of our text. I have already placed before you, brethren, the meaning which I believe, and I have no doubt this congregation believes, to be fairly drawn from the memorable words of Moses. Between the interpre- tation we assign to this passage, and that which is adopted by our brethren of a different faith, there is a wide interval. The writings of the " New Tes- tament," held by them to be plenarily inspired are their great authorities; and whatever expositions, applications, or accommodations are there found of passages from the Jewish scriptures, are esteemed by them as infallible. In the Epistle of Paul to the Romans, at the 10th chapter^ may be found the fol- lowing explanation of the words of Moses, which I 3 Solomon's Judgment ; A Sermon, etc., pp. 8, 9. THE LAW IS LIGHT. have selected for my present text. The word or " commandment," to which Moses refers when he says " for this commandment which I command you this day is not above your comprehension," etc., is pronounced to denote the Messiah the son of Mary. According to Paul, when Moses said " Who shall go up to heaven for us to fetch it?" he meant that there would be no necessity to ascend on high for the Messiah, as He would come down upon the earth; and when Moses said "who shall descend into the deep?" though here the zealous convert misquotes the words of the immortal legislator, who said, " Who shall cross the sea," and not " Who shall descend into the deep" (which last word Paul would interpret to be hell), he meant that there would be no neces- sity to go down to the grave to bring up the son of Mary from the dead. 4 Those who conscientiously believe that Paul was divinely inspired of God when he thus expounded the passage of our text, will of course receive his explanation with reverence and faith. But as we Jews do not acknowledge any inspiration out of the canon of our own scriptures, we can only regard such an exposition of Moses' words as one of the many (to us) unsatisfactory attempts at making the Old Testament vouch for the correctness of the system established by the writers of the New Tes- 4 The interpretation of the last verse of the text is given in these words ; " But what saith it ? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth and in thine heart ; that is the word of faith which we preach. That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved " (Romans x. 8, 9). 8 LECTURE I. tament. But how wide soever of the letter and the spirit of our text we may hold the exposition ad- vanced by Paul, we cannot but consider as equally extravagant, though in a different manner, any in- terpretation of the words of Moses found in the 30th chapter of Deuteronomy, which is based on the proposition, that " every doctrine, every law, and every ordinance," as they are found in the written word of the Pentateuch, are "riddles without a solution." A doctrine like this, which is so boldly asserted in the sermon of the reverend Rabbi, may well startle us, and induce us to question whether, instead of listening here to the voice of Judaism, we are not having rehearsed to us, the substance, though in a different phraseology, of the theology of Rome? However we may dissent from the teachings of the Vatican, and deny the right of any body of men to place tradition on a perfect equality with oracular certainty, we must nevertheless admit that the Vati- can is at least consistent, and that one part of its system is ingeniously made to harmonise with the other. " Rome," says Martineau, " maintains, it is true, the infallibility of scripture, but it also main- tains its impenetrable obscurity. It asserts, that the ideas of scripture are unerringly true, but that they excite in the readers of the Bible notions different from those that possessed the Divine mind : that the inspiration is real, but out of reach; that truth is there, but completely veiled ; that the oracle speaks, but only in an obscure, enigmatic, and partially understood tongue. To make all this plain, an in- fallible interpreter is needed ; and this interpreter is THE LAW IS LIGHT. to be found in the bishop or the hierarchy. Without such aid, the Bible is a useless book, its voice is a source of discord, and its truth is an unapproachable reality." 5 Such is the doctrine of Rome : and in ac- cordance with this system, every son and daughter of the church is strictly cautioned against reading the Bible; because that book is merely " the seat of a virtual and unavailable infallibility, the actual and serviceable infallibility being alone in the possession of the priesthood." 6 Now the position taken up in the sermon of the reverend Rabbi, bears in many respects a resemblance to the teachings of Rome, but the system as a whole is by no means so consistent. It admits the inspira- tion of the Pentateuch; that every word of it penned by Moses was dictated by God ; that it was addressed to the unlettered men of the desert; and that they were enjoined to consider it as the book of life. But notwithstanding all this, the sermon in question asserts that the Bible is a book which, of itself, is not intelligible to the human mind; that of itself it is useless as a guide to faith and practice, since the doctrines, the laws and ordinances it contains, so far from being comprehensible to its readers, can only be rendered plain to the understanding of the Israelite, by means of an infallible interpretation, which is to be found in the traditions, orally com- municated from age to age from Moses downwards, and never attempted to be committed, even in part, to writing, till centuries after prophecy had ceased, 5 " Rationale of Religious Enquiry," p. 42. 6 Ibid. 10 LECTURE I. and nearly two hundred years after the Jewish state had fallen and the second temple was destroyed. 7 But where the inconsistency of this system as com^ pared with that of Rome becomes evident, is in not only permitting, but in positively enjoining, every Israelite to read for himself, and to study by day and by night, this written volume of Moses which, accord- ing to the dictum of the reverend Rabbi, can only offer to the reader a mass of " riddles without a solution." On this day, brethren, and on every other Sabbath, this very written book, which the reverend Rabbi tells us is so useless of itself, is nevertheless suffered to make its own way in the several synagogues which acknowledge his authority. The written law is alone read, the written law, which we are told is a sealed book, embodying problems which remain unsolved; and yet no means are taken by him to accompany the recital of the written law by the inspired tra- ditional explications, without which, it is contended, all that is read from the pages of Moses is practically unprofitable, a mere mass of enigmas. I repeat, then, that the system propounded in this sermon is, when considered in relation to its practices, by no means so consistent as that of the Vatican. To make it harmonise in all its parts, the Bible, should be prohibited from being read by Israelites, so long as the infallible interpretations which can alone solve the "riddles" of the written word are not printed 7 R, Judah, surnamed " The Holy," was the first who committed the traditions to writing in the Mishna. But this work could not have appeared till very late in the second century, since the Academy of Tiberius, in which this Rabbi was so distinguished, was not founded earlier than the year 178 of the common era. THE LAW IS LIGHT. 11 side by side, or so long as the minister who recites what Moses penned, neglects to repeat after each verse the tradition which, we are told, can alone make the sense profitable to the understanding. If we view the passage of the text as bearing upon the five books which Moses wrote out for the guid- ance of his disciples from generation to generation, till the end of time, the words are in accordance with our reason, because every part of the Pentateuch becomes, as I shall hereafter endeavour to shew, emi- nently practical, to the full extent required. But if we are asked to consider the text not in reference to the written word only, but also to what is said to be the " Divine oral law," then, indeed, the whole com- plexion of the passage is changed. The phraseology as it appears in the venerable book, would then become a ** stumbling block"; and though I will not even hypothetically apply the term "riddle" to any thing that emanates from Almighty wisdom, I must admit that the passage would involve us in great perplexity. The ni of which Moses speaks, would not then be within our comprehension and within our grasp, but above the comprehension of ordinary men. and by no means practicable: and the Bible would cease to be the heritage of all men, and, would become the exclusive property of schoolmen and casuists. This will be shewn in the next lecture, when I shall have to consider what kind of process is required, in order to make the Israelite thoroughly acquainted with what are called the " Divine .oral traditions." 12 LECTURE II. THE question which I have to consider first to-day is, What is the mental process which would be imposed on the Israelite, if he were required to make himself thoroughly acquainted with the Oral traditions, without a knowledge of which, the Reverend author of the Sermon I referred to in the previous Lecture, boldly declares that, " every doctrine, ordinance, and law of the Pentateuch would be a sealed book, a riddle without a solution?" In the first place, the Israelite would have to study the 524 D\Tl5, or chapters of the Mishna, which are supposed to con- tain the text of the Oral tradition, or the explanation or supplement of the written Law of Moses. Secondly, he would have to sift, out of the many disputations of the Mishna, the Plj?!"!, or " pure traditionary law," in every case ; and for this purpose he would be obliged to have recourse to the Jerusalem Talmud and the Babylonian Talmud, the latter compilation alone con- taining 2947 double folio pages : and even then his task would not be completed, until he should have pored over the writings of the many CADDIS, or "casuists," who tried to unravel the tissue of dis- putations with which both Talmuds abound. If, then, the doctrine laid down in the Sermon called THE LAW IS LIGHT. 13 " Solomon's Judgment," that the written Law of Moses is a sealed book without the oral explanations or traditions, be correct, this is the labour that every rabbinical Jew would have to impose upon himself, before he could rest satisfied that he understood completely all the precepts which God commanded him to perform. Now, who can read the words of the text placed at the head of these Lectures, and imagine for a moment that they apply not to the written law only, but likewise to the oral traditions (to understand which, according to the rabbinical system, the labour of a life is required), without at once perceiving the perplexity in which they would involve him? The passage of Moses is plain enough, when we view it in relation to the written law; but it certainly ceases to be so when we are called upon to receive it in the sense of the rabbinical exposition. Considered in the latter sense, the interval between the simple unvarnished text, and what is represented as the traditional supplement, is so wide, as to remind us forcibly of a passage in Jeremiah : }&]} filjn DT1&? ^ D'fiPl *h*y tih *\WX D^SEO " My people have done two evil things : they have forsaken Me the fountain of living waters, to hew for themselves cisterns, broken cisterns, which cannot contain water." 1 Seeing, then, that the oral traditions, as they are preserved in the Talmud and its auxiliaries, give a complexion to the written Law of Moses so essen- tially different from that which the naked text of the Pentateuch would offer to every unprejudiced reader 1 Jeremiah ii. 13. 14 LECTURE II. who had never heard of a divine Oral law, or of a Mishna or a Talmud, it is but reasonable to suppose that those who demand of us to renounce the right of determining for ourselves the meaning of the Scriptures, and to yield implicit obedience to the expositions contained in the Talmud, should, at least, be able to satisfy us of three things : first, that the Talmud is an authorised work; secondly, that what it enjoins is as fixed in its character, and as free from disputation and doubt, as the Pentateuch itself, of which, according to some Rabbins, it is the infallible commentary ; and, thirdly, that it was received by all those who compiled it, as well as by all subsequent religious teachers, as a work binding on the con- sciences of Israelites from age to age. Now, it may be broadly asserted, without the slightest hesitation, that the Talmud does not answer any one of these reasonable conditions. In the Sepher Hakkabalah Leharabad, we meet with the following passage: " The seventh generation of the Amoraim, or Doctors of the Gemara, were Marimar, and Mar, the son of Rab Ashi, and their colleagues : they closed the *7ll Tl^Sn (Babylonian Talmud), and it was sealed in the year of the creation 4265 (corresponding with the year 505 of the common era). It was spread throughout all Israel; it was received, and the sages of all generations taught it publicly: the whole of Israel approved it. To it nothing must be added, and from it nothing must be taken away." 5 This is, perhaps, the only instance to be found, of an early date, where something approach- 2 Seder Amoraim, 7th Generation. THE LAW IS LIGHT. 15 ing to an authority though even here nothing is said of a divine authority is claimed for the Talmud. But this individual opinion is over-ruled, on more than one occasion, by the men of the Talmud them- selves. So little faith had the Talmudist Rabbi Jeremiah in the divine character of the Babylonian commentaries on the Mishna, and so far was he from regarding them as calculated to illumine and to ex- pound the pages of the Pentateuch, that he declared them to be the work of confusion and darkness. His words are preserved in the text of the Talmud, 3 where, after citing from the prophet Jeremiah, the following words, D^iy ' ^TPin MBTllbn, " He has placed me in darkness like those eternally dead," 4 he adds, 'btt T)D?n IT, " This may be applied to the Babylonian Talmud." The learned Rashi thus com- ments on the above remarkable passage : " One doctor did not agree with the other, DT2 pfiD DTl&Sm, and so their doctrine remained doubtful." Now, if even we were disposed to admit (which God forbid we should concede), that the written word of God is insufficient of itself, might it not, with perfect fair- ness, be asked, What faith is to be placed in the Oral traditions, when a Talmudical Rabbi declares its authors to be promoters of darkness, because what one affirms the other denies, and their doctrine re- mains doubtful after they have disposed of the dis- cussion ? 5 3 Sanhedrim, fol. 24. 4 Lamentations iii. 6. 5 R. Sira, the teacher of R. Jeremiah, fasted one hundred days on his arrival in the Holy Land from Bahylonia, trusting to obtain thereby the divine favour of being allowed to forget all that he had 16 LEC1URE II. If the rabbinical dicta do not offer the same per- plexities at the present day to those who advocate the divinity of the Oral Law, as it is found in the Talmud, the cause must be ascribed to the labours of Maimonides. In the twelfth century, this celebrated scholar wrote his great digest, called PHin H^/b, in which he studiously omitted all discussions and dis- putations, and cut the Gordiari knot asunder, by deter- mining, on his own individual authority, the law in every matter where the disputations of the Talmudists had left it uncertain and undecided. Many of the Rabbins living at that time, disputed the right of Maimonides to pronounce a decision in these cases. Some set his authority at nought ; others pronounced against him a sentence of excommunication ; and others persecuted him to such a. degree that he was compelled to quit Spain, and to seek a home in Egypt. Even there theological hatred pursued him; and it is said that when death called him away, the virulence of his opponents was directed against his ashes, and that for many years the tomb-stone of the man, who is now regarded as the great pillar of Rabbinism, and whose decisions are acted upon by those Rabbins who style themselves orthodox, bore for a time an inscrip- tion which reflected shame upon those only who were its authors. 6 learned amongst the Babylonian doctors of the Oral Law. Baba Meziah 85, col. 1. R. Jochanan says, " Babel is confused in the Law, confused in the Mishna, confused in the Gemara: therefore it is called Babel." Sanhedrim 24, col. i. 6 According to Jost, an honourable inscription appeared at first on the tomb of Maimonides ; but it was afterwards changed by his enemies. " Seine Feinde haben nachher die Inschrift entstelldt aber THE LAW IS LIGHT. 17 But though the victim of what was held as ortho- doxy in the twelfth century, may have been made the idol of those who style themselves " orthodox" in the present age, chere is no reason why we should subscribe to the dicta of Maimonides or of any uninspired mortal, how learned soever he may have been, when the views he sets forth appear to us to be in plain contradiction to what we conscientiously believe the Avritten word of scripture to teach. And here we do not stand alone; but we are supported in the right we assert by some of the most learned and pious Jews of the present age. " Neither Maimonides nor Rashi," says Dr. Flirst, Professor of Rabbinical Literature in the University of Leipsic " neither Maimonides nor Rashi is an undoubted authority on the meaning of the Talmud, unless supported by the simple meaning of the text : nay more the whole Talmud is far from being what the enemies of the Jews pretend; for it is not a sanc- tioned book. It is not a supplement to the Law : it is a commentary on the Law, furnishing explanations which must vary according to the state of the gene- rations. The Pentateuch alone is the fixed law of the Jews." 7 The quotation which I have here made from Dr. Fiirst, forms part of an article written by him on the occasion of the persecution of the Jews in Da- mascus, and when many persons professed to believe the poor Jews of the East guilty of the crime imputed to them, on no other grounds than because the Talmud contains various passages of a seemingly harsh and anti-social character. If I now allude to the circum- in spiiterer Zeit ihr Unrecht wieder gut gemacht." Geschichte der Israelites, vol. vi. p. 179. 7 Orient. 1840, No. 23. C 18 LECTURE II. stances which called forth this bold avowal from Dr. Furst, of the true character of the Talmud, it is for the purpose of confirming what I asserted in the first dis- course I pronounced as Minister of this congregation ; viz. that whilst every attempt to improve the ritual, and to remove abuses from the Synagogue, has been resisted by an appeal to the Divine authority of the Talmud, the claim for the inspiration of that work has been abandoned, whenever the Jewish system has had to be defended against attacks from without. Sentiments no less clear and decided with respect to the Talmud and its binding force upon the con- sciences of the Israelites, are employed in the reply of Rabbi Abraham Cohen, to the ultra-talmudist Rabbi Hirsch. " Why" says he, " should we renounce our right to a critical investigation of the Mishna and the Gemara? . . . Are we to be fettered by the decisions of later authorities? . . . We recognise only one reve- lation ; and it is our incontestable duty to ponder on its behests, and to regulate our lives in accordance with the results furnished by such scrutiny. Thus it has ever been in Israel; and no human authority can forge chains for the free mind." 8 After speaking in terms of veneration of the sages of the Talmud, and acknowledging the great and lasting benefits they have conferred on their fellow-worshippers, he adds : u But as men, they were not free from the influence of their times, and of human dispositions; con- sequently they were liable to error; and though their words deserve all possible attention, and ought not to be rejected, without a mature reflection on 8 Allg. Zeit. d. Judenth., 1839, p. 217, etc. THE LAW IS LIGHT. 19 every point of the subject still we cannot blindly follow them ; and though we may hush to silence our reason, we cannot suppress the voice of our con- science." 9 The reverend author of the sermon on "Solomon's Judgment" admits that "all is not divine" that is found in the writings of the sages; and he appends a note, shewing that the traditions are divided into three classes: the first comprises the statutes orally com- municated from Moses to others ; the second contains the statutes expounded by the sages according to the thirteen rules of logical interpretation, also orally taught by Moses ; and the third comprises the fences and the landmarks enjoined by the sages. But as this division does not point out precisely which are, and which are not, to be considered as pure divine traditions, nor in what books in use at present they are to be found, it will be for me to endeavour to shew, in the next lecture, what, according to modern Rabbinism, are the Divine traditions, or Oral law, arid in what work or works they are supposed to be contained. Before, however, I proceed to this part of my task, I will take leave to cite a few passages from a most learned article on the Talmud in general, from the pen of the celebrated Reggio, a profound theolo- gian, and one of the most accomplished Hebrew scholars of the present age. " The general question," says he, u ' What is the Talmud?' is almost unanimously met by the reply, that it is a code of laws by which our religious lives ought to be regulated. But this belief is so 3 Ailg. Zeit. cl. Judenth., 1839, p. 217, etc. 20 LECTURE II. directly contradicted by the nature and the contents of the Talmud, that it is indeed surprising, that so gross an error has been allowed to prevail for so many centuries. The bare fact that the Talmud is nothing but a commentary on the Mishna, should have induced the enquiry, whether this pretended legislative character can be claimed for the Mishna before it is demanded for the Talmud. But a careful examination of the Mishna will force on the mind of the enquirer a very different result. The men whose names figure in that book have not, as is well known, written the book, nor did they ever suppose that their verbal discourses would be placed in the hands of posterity in the shape of written works." After shewing that the Mishna bears many marks irreconcileable with the character of a legis- lative code, he adds, " The greater part of the Mishna is filled with debates on opinions which exclude each other, and respecting which no decision is arrived at. Many laws ordained in the Bible are not noticed by the Mishna ; whilst, on the contrary, it contains elaborate treatises on statutes which, even at that time, had no longer a practical bearing. When, how, and by whom, this mass of isolated propositions was collected and framed into a whole, cannot with certainty be determined ; but with certainty it may be concluded, that the tendency apparent in the compilation does in no wise answer the purpose to which it has subsequently been misapplied. Now, the Mishna having become the text, the commentary on which became the object of the activity of the Tal- mudic doctors, it would be preposterous to attach to the commentary a title which does not belong to the THE LAW IS LIGHT. 21 text itself." The writer then dwells upon the fact that the Talmudists prohibited unconditionally that any sign of permanence or immutability should be given to their dicta ; and he adds, that " if, never- theless, the later generations have obtained possession of a written record of those dicta, it has been ob- tained not only independently of, but in contradiction to, the will of the men of the Talmud . . . By the side of a few explanations of the Mishna, the Talmud contains much more of disputations, tales, allegorical and parabolical expositions of biblical texts, notions belonging to natural history, medicine, astronomy, astrology, demonology, mystical philosophy, theo- sophy, etc., which do not at all appear to belong to the sphere of a code of laws . . . The principle must be maintained, that where there is a difference of opinion the idea of a tradition must be relinquished ; since tradition and discrepancy are two ideas which neutralize each other. Moreover, where objects, usages, and alterations are mentioned which took their rise in an age posterior to Moses, an appeal to the traditions would be vain. For the residue of the work, after a deduction has been made of the before- mentioned elements, a traditional origin might be claimed, but it would have to be restricted to six chapters out of the 524 contained in the Mishna, since these six only are free from disputations : still even here the difficulty would be enormous to sift the few grains of gold from the immense mass of sand." 1 Such, then, is the judgment pronounced by a pro- found Talmudist on that work which we are required 10 .Isr. Annal. 1840. No. 12 14, passim. 22 LECTURE II. by the writer of the Sermon to acknowledge as the repository of the explanations and the supplements communicated by God himself to Moses, and transmit- ted from age to age by word of mouth; and without which, we are told, that " every ordinance, every doc- trine, and every Law " of the Pentateuch, u would be a sealed book, a riddle without solution." I might carry the discussion on this part of the subject much further, and shew the inconsistency involved in the doctrine of the Sermon, in a more glaring light than I have hitherto represented it; but many more lectures would then be required than I can possibly devote to this course. I propose to consider, in the next lecture, where the code is to be found which is asserted to contain the divine tra- dition of the law ; and I think I shall be enabled to shew, that a considerable portion of this tradition is studiously set at nought, not only in the practices of the lives, but also in the public teachings of those who professedly assign to it so sacred a character. LECTURE III. HAVING endeavoured to furnish an outline of the general contents of the Mishna and the Gemara, I propose to enquire at the opening of the present lecture, in what book or books, in actual use, we are to seek for a complete collection of the religious laws, which are said to be divinely inspired traditions, or customs having a basis in the Oral Law. In the sermon called " Solomon's Judgment," to which I have so often had occasion to refer in this course, the following passage will be found at page 9 : " And, although not all is divine which is found in the writings of our sages -- and a large portion is avowedly of human origin, and only our adversaries confound and confuse both together, to serve their own purpose yet the existence of an Oral Law cannot be denied ; nevertheless, there have been, and are still, some within our own pale, who will believe in the Written Law, and who yet deny the divinity of the Oral Law . . . m Now I hope that I shall not be 1 The admission that " not all is divine" in the Talmudical Laws, is a concession that can be no longer withheld, since the criticism of the Talmud, by the great Jewish Scholars of the Continent, has rendered the contrary assertion untenable. But to say that there 24 LECTURE III. found guilty of the same offence as those " adver- saries" to whom the reverend preacher alludes. Indeed, I will take the surest means of avoiding the error, by refraining from offering a single remark upon the " Hagada" or " Talmudic Legend," not-- withstanding that there are many " Dinirn" and " Minhagim," which have wholly originated in this "Hagaddic" element. I will merely speak of the Halacha, or the received legal decision, as set forth in the np?nn T, and more particularly in the D'HID JD"ltf, or in its still more authoritative, because more recent, Epitome the *tny Vrhw, which latter work may be called the Manual of Rabbinical Judaism. And whilst I do not hesitate to declare, that, with the exception of the laws and statutes which it embodies in the strict letter of the Pentateuch, I deny the divinity of the *l"ny jrpfcy, in the sense adopted by the author of the " Sermon," I think I shall be able to shew, that those who profess to regard this work as a code, every provision of which is obligatory on the con- science of the Israelite, do, nevertheless, as good and upright men, set at open defiance many of its ordinances, not only in the practices of their lives, but also in their public teachings. In the previous lecture, I spoke of the great digest of the Talmud furnished by Maimonides, in which all legends and disputations of the Schoolmen are is a traditional portion of divine origin amongst an immense com- pilation of sayings, without clearly stating the criterion of the divine, is to offer to the world perplexity and not instruction. Shall the same sanctity be ascribed to that which is not divine as to what is so ? And if not, by what sign are we to distinguish the wheat from the chaff"? THE LAW IS LIGHT. 25. studiously left out; and I remarked that this work, though much censured and reviled when it first ap- peared ; became soon after the writer had passed to his final account, the avowed standard of Eabbinism. But although the npTPin T of Maimonides omitted all the legend and the " Pilpul" or wrangling, it contained many learned and valuable treatises on Metaphysics, Astronomical Science, etc., which are not indispensable to a mere code of laws. Hence it was found necessary to abridge the JlpTHn Y of all that was not needful to a bare statement of practical Talmu- dic Law; and in the first quarter of the fourteenth century, appeared the work, called QHltD $D*1X, of K. Jacob Ben Asher. A few years later a commentary was written upon it by the learned R. Joseph Karo, 2 and a compendium was made of the text and of the commentary, under the name of ^'ny frpJ>, which has since been regarded by Rabbinists as the essential Law-book of Judaism, although it was never stamped with any other authority than that of custom. The laws found in the *\T\y )n?> are not all claimed as pure divine traditions, or *^DD WfiS rYoSn '' tra- ditions of Moses from Sinai." Those ordinances which are termed FVHU "decrees," and JtDpH " regula- tions," are acknowledged to be the "fences" or "hedges," which the sages placed around the Mosaic Law, to pro- tect it ; and these are merely stated to have a tradition- al basis. But all the rest of the ordinances of the *]1iy \rh& are claimed to be either " divine traditions from Moses," or direct inferences from the 2 See The Rabbinical Law on Excommunication, etc., by T. Theo- dores. Manchester: Simms and Co., 1854. 26 LECTURE 111. or "the thirteen logical rules of interpretation," 8 which, it is maintained, were also orally taught by the immortal legislator. The number of laws con- tained in the rny pSfc?, as necessary to regulate the life of the Israelite, is no less than 13,602. Of these, Maimonides in his preface to D^IT TJD, only admits about twenty 4 to be pure oral traditions from Moses. The rest, after allowing for the Q^D or "fences," are the laws, ordinances, and precepts, deduced from the Pentateuch, by means of the logical rules of interpreta- tion. Of the " fences" I shall say nothing, as they are avowed to be of human origin, though based on the tra- dition ; but I shall refer to those laws only that are said to be divine, either because they are 3D& fi^ftS PO7PT or are inferred by the fil^D? which latter are also asserted to have been orally taught by Moses him- self. Now, if the dictum of Maimonides is to be upheld 3 A difference of opinion prevails with respect to the precise number of the " Midoth." Hillel had 7, Ishmael 13, and R. Eleazar Ben R. Jose Hagalili recognised 32. Many attempts have been made to harmonize these different catalogues, a proof that they are all believed to serve for the same purpose, and not, as has some- times been contended, that some are employed for finding the TIalacha, and others are only fit for rhetorical uses. The " Midoth" are not declared by the Talmud to be traditions from Moses. 4 Of the traditions from Moses, enumerated by Maimonides, many refer to laws which are now no longer in practice. His list, however, is neither complete nor quite accurate, as some eminent scholars have shown. If the expressions , TDD HEW ri3?n , fO^n ^3 , 11ON nDK3 may be regarded as the characteristics of a tradi- tion from Moses, about forty more laws than those stated by Maimonides are entitled to that name amongst the enactments of the Talmud. But if the reasonable admission be made, that no law shall be denominated a tradition from Sinai, on which a difference of opinion obtained amongst the Doctors of the- Talmud, then the number of such traditions must be materially curtailed. THE LAW IS LIGHT. 27 that the Talmud contains but twenty oral traditions which have a pure Mosaic origin ; and if, as any one may satisfy himself, who consults the prayer-books in use amongst our brethren of other congregations, the whole text of the thirteen rules of logical deduc- tion, as laid down by hyfcW *y\, are compressed into as many lines, is it not remarkable that the Legis- lator should have omitted to insert these in the volume of the Pentateuch? The whole space re- quired for them would not have exceeded a single page of a printed book of ordinary size. 5 And yet, no mention whatever is made of them by Moses, whilst he devotes three long chapters to genealogies, more than ten chapters to the minutiaa of every branch of the work of the tabernacle, and thirty chapters of Deuteronomy to a recapitulation of what he had pre- viously written in Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers. That many wise and wholesome ordinances are de- duced from the fillD, in reference to the civil law of the Hebrews, must, in truth and fairness, be admitted ; but without mentioning many of the decrees thus inferred, I will content myself by citing one, which is so manifest an abuse of the letter and the spirit of the text of the Bible, that it is difficult to conceive how any Israelite, who compares the written words of Moses with the inference here derived from them ac- cording to the rrnfc, can possibly receive these (so called) logical rules as divine. Previously to the publication of the Calendar-rules now in use, the fixing of the day of the New Moon, 5 If all the various " Midoth," of whatever kind, were admitted, the space required would still be inconsiderable. 28 LECTURE III. and consequently of the first day of each Festival, was left to the decision of the Sanhedrin at Jerusalem. The system by which the Sanhedrin were guided was that of the actual observation of the moon's re-ap- pearance ; and, as this rude principle was liable to practical inaccuracies which might lead to much confusion, it was considered necessary to entrust the highest religious authority in the state, for the time being, with the power of declaring, at their sole discretion, the commencement of a new month. In this there is nothing objectionable, considering the infant state of astronomical science among our fore- fathers in those days. But the process by which the Holy Scripture is attempted to be explained, in order to procure for the Great Beth-din an authority for instituting the festival days, is very remark- able; and that my hearers may form some notion of it, I must refer them to the twenty-third chapter of Leviticus, in which the various festivals are commanded. At the 2nd, 4th, and 37th verses of this chapter, will be found the passage, with some slight modifications, " these are the Festivals of the Lord which ye shall proclaim to be Holy Convoca- tions." Bat as in each case the accusative pronoun, DHN 5 is written without 1, the inference attempted to be drawn from the fact is, according to a great Tal- mudic authority, R. Akiba, " that the calendar of the Great Sanhedrin is to be recognised as correct, even though it should be discovered to contain an error whether voluntary or involuntary." 6 6 See Note 8, page 30. THE LAW IS LIGHT. 29 Nor is this all. To make the theological scheme complete, we are told that the passage found at the commencement of the 2nd verse of Leviticus xxiii. njnib DPI nW enp wpa DHN i*npn n^x " njna and which every child who has learned Hebrew would properly interpret, " The Festivals of the Lord which ye shall proclaim to be Holy Convocations are these My Festivals": this plain passage is to be read, agreeably to a divine oral tradition, in the follow- ing manner: "Whatever Festivals you, the Grand Sanhedrin, may proclaim as Holy Convocations, I, the Lord, will acknowledge as My Festivals." In the outline furnished by the Jewish Chronicle of a dis- course on the " double Festivals," by the author of the sermon called " Solomon's Judgment," the same exegesis of the passage to which I have referred is ad- duced as one of the reasons for upholding the addi- tional festive day. 7 Every man is at perfect liberty, as I remarked at the opening of this course of Lec- tures, to adopt that exposition of Scripture which r satisfies the convictions of his conscience ; and it would be unjust and uncharitable to question the sincerity of those of our brethren who subscribe to this interpretation of the 2nd verse, as a Divine oral tradition. But you and I, my hearers, may surely claim a right to reject such an exposition of the text of Holy Writ. Nay, more, we may most justly deny the divine character of any logical rules of interpre- tation which attempt to give, as in the present in- stance, to a Scriptural passage a meaning so totally 7 Vide Jewish Chronicle, vol. iv. No. 30. 30 LECTURE III. different from the obvious sense of the written text. 8 Such an exposition is sufficient to cast a grave suspicion on the divine origin of the whole of the fVnfi from which it is inferred. A single glance at the twenty-third chapter ought to prove sufficient to satisfy every unbiassed mind, that the 2nd verse cannot be tortured into the meaning assigned to it by the Talmud, without a violation of the native sense of the passage and of its context. But I pass from this Talmudic exposition and from the rvn/b on which it is based, to the consideration of a few of the positive laws of the wy JHW, which are asserted to be traditional, and consequently of divine origin. Amongst these there are many 8 The contrivance here resorted to is to read DPI5? " you" instead of DniX ''them." The Talmudists did not unfrequently say, "Read not so, but so," when they wished to prove some argument from the Scriptures; but it cannot be supposed for a moment that they seriously intended to alter the text. They never interfered with the text; since their reference to it had simply the character of a mnemonic sign. If R. Akiba himself had been called upon to recite this twenty-third chapter of Leviticus, he would unquestion- ably have read each time DniS, as we read it, and not BriX. But just as absurd as it would be, on the one hand, to assert that R. Akiba attempted to falsify the Scriptures, so unjustifiable is it, on the other hand, to have recourse to this mnemonic sign, as though it furnished a real argument in favour of his doctrine. In fact, his argu- ment from DDK is most inconclusive ; because the very same word occurs in the introduction to the command for the celebration of the Sabbath-day (Lev. xxiii. 2,3), although no one would be so rash as to assert that any body of men ever had the power to fix the Sabbath- clay according to their option. Finally, the substitution of DDK for DniX has nothing whatever to do with the obligation to keep the double festivals. If all Israel had been confined to Jerusalem, there would have been no nv^3 h& *)& &*, arid yet R. Akiba's argument would have remained intact. THE LAW IS LIGHT. 31 laws breathing the purest spirit of justice, mercy, and benevolence, in perfect keeping with the sublime ethics of the Pentateuch; but these laws and prac- tices are so obvious from the words of Moses, that no oral tradition was required to impress them upon any one acquainted with the Decalogue, or with the 21st, 22nd, and 23rd chapters of Exodus and the 19th of Leviticus. There are, however, other laws in the "T'ny pSs^, also stated to be orally communi- cated as divine traditions, whose ethical character is of a different stamp; and if we are to decide the claim of inspiration for the rabbinical code by these laws, I feel that we ought at once to reject it, because no book can be divine that enjoins laws at variance with the letter and the spirit of the Pentateuch. When we consider the laws of the *\T}y \fhW re- lating to the religious education of women, and find it there stated, that the study of the law, so strictly enjoined on the males, is to be discouraged, to say the least, in females. 9 Again, when we find that a woman's evidence is not to be taken, 10 and that she cannot be reckoned as one of a congregation to form pft; 11 and when we compare these laws which tend to degrade woman below her proper station, with the 9 x'rn , rrtan mo'pio "tao" min mi nx "i^tan ^ n^an wx rnota DSI n^nrD;) nnix 10^ vb inm^ min ^nx B"JDB> mira nVPQn rntD?D3 tl The sages have said, He that teaches his daughter the law may he said to have taught her wickedness. This refers to the oral law : as to the written law, a father ought not to teach it to his daughter ; hut if he do, it is not equivalent to teaching her wickedness" (Yore Deah 246, 6). 10 Hilchoth Eduth, xxxv, 14. 11 Orach Chayim, 55,4. 32 LECTURE III. position she occupies in the pages of Scripture ; when, we read the lives of Sarah, Rebecca, Miriam, Hannah, Deborah, Huldah, and others; and when we refer to the words of Moses himself (Deut. xxxi. 12), where, at the time appointed for the public reading of the law, he especially mentions the women amongst those Avho are to be present (DWni D'BONPI D^H HK SnpJD we must at once perceive that the teachings of the Bible are here at variance with those of the '"['ny p?^ and that, therefore, the claim made for the Divinity of the latter must be rejected. Again, the words " brother," and " neighbour," as they occur in the Pentateuch, are evidently to be understood as applying to man universally, whether Israelite or non-Israelite, the Canaanite nations alone excepted, on account of their abominable practices. The proofs that might be adduced from the Bible, in support of this proposition, are overwhelming, but I will satisfy myself by a reference to two only. The one is found in the 19th chapter of Leviticus, 33rd and 34th verses " If a stranger sojourn in your land you shall not oppress him. This stranger shall be to you like one born in the land; and thou shalt love him as thyself." The second proof may be found in reference to the conduct Moses recommends to be pursued to the Edomites. It must be borne in mind that the Edomites were the bitterest enemies of the Hebrews, and that when the latter, worn out by fatigue, implored a passage through their land to Canaan, it was unconditionally refused. But to prevent the Israelites from indulging any ill-will or revenge against their hostile neighbours, Moses expressly THE LAW IS LIGHT. 33 enjoins in Deut. xxiii. 8 Kin -ppIN 3 " Thou shalt not abhor the Edomite, for he is thy brother." Indeed, those of our brethren who attach the greatest sanctity to the entire code of the ^"ny rrh& maintain inviolably these Mosaic Laws in their lives and practices, and they teach in their pulpits as well as in their catechisms, that the Jew is bound to re- gard all men as brothers and neighbours, without reference to creed. And here they properly set aside the authority of the *?Hp jnS^, which does not give so wide an application to HK or JH. In that code also the laws are less stringent with respect to strict integrity, and to a sacred regard for human life, than those found in the Pentateuch. The Bible commands that the lost thing shall invariably be restored to the owner thereof, whosoever he may be. 12 But the *]*ny pSfc? modifies this law, and mentions a certain class of wicked persons, to whom it is held a sin to restore the lost thing, " because it would only strengthen the hands of the wicked of the world." 13 It likewise forbids the restoration of the HTHK to a non-conforming Israelite rh'D SlDlKn D"yD!"l7 " who eateth what is forbidden in a public or provoking manner," because DTliTSX Kin >ta lPI " such a person is an epicurean" or "infidel." 14 It needs scarcely be stated, that no pious Jew, however he may profess to venerate the *Wty |H7^, acts upon these principles. In the practice of honesty and in- tegrity, he makes no distinction between Israelite or non-Israelite, nor between the Jew who conforms to 12 Deut. xxii. 1 4. 13 Choshan Hammishpat 266, 1. '* ibid. 266, 2. 34 LECTURE III. every ritual ordinance and him who does not so conform. But the whole house of Jacob, with one accord, set aside these rabbinical ordinances, notwith- standing the sanctity many of them professedly at- tach to the entire code. Again, the Bible draws no distinction with respect to the punishment to be inflicted on the homicide; but it broadly declares that " whosoever sheds man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed" ! 15 The Rab- binical law, however, does make a difference, since Maiinonides, the Shulcan Aruch, etc., go so far as to offer impunity to him who slays a brother Israelite, reputed as a heretic, such a one, for example, as should commit the offence of eating in public, to the scandal of the multitude, food forbidden by the Rab- binical law, or the offence of wearing a garment of woollen and linen intermixed. 16 No Jew has ever yet been found capable of acting upon such principles; nor does there live any Israelite, how devoted soever he might be to the Talmudical code, who would not hold in abhorrence the man, if one could be found who could act even in the spirit of such a law. But these facts only tend to prove that the "rny |rp6?, however men may speak of it as possessing a divine character, is unhesitatingly set at defiance by all Jews, whenever its enactments offer a contradiction to the sublime ethics- taught by Moses. It is in reference to some of the above laws in the "fry \rh& that R. Abraham Cohen thus addresses Rabbi Hirsch: "I ask you," says he, "what are 15 Gen. ix. 6. 16 See Hilchoth Rotzeach, 4, 10; also Choshan Hammisphat, 425, 5. THE LAW IS LIGHT. 35 we to do with many of the rabbinical precepts? What are we to do with such ordinances as are embodied in the t3S?&n |t?h, chapter 266, or in the n$Tj J"nV, chapter 158? Leaving out of the question who the people are of whom these pas- sages speak, I well know that those and similar decisions have never been acted upon. I am well aware, that at present they are entirely unknown to the body of the people : but I ask, how can law-books remain unchanged in which such laws and decisions still exist? Can men be declared infallible, who have suffered their feelings to sway them so as to lead them to pass such decrees? 17 The true point of the question is here raised by the learned Rabbi. The great evil of which we have to complain, and of which Judaism has to complain, is that such teachings and such decisions should have been stamped by subsequent ages as divine, and that the work in which they are put forth should have been asserted as a collection of " Divine Oral explana- tions of Laws" without which, a modern rabbi tells us, " the whole of the Pentateuch would be a riddle." Admit the writings of the Talmud to be what they really are the composition of fallible men and there are few statutes or regulations which the work con- tains, but what may either be justified or palliated by reason of the age of persecution in which the Talmud was collated. I will endeavour to make this apparent to you, my hearers, in the next and last lecture, when I shall have to speak of the real benefits our early sages have conferred upon us, and of the assistance they >7 Allg. Zeit. d. J., 1839, No. 54. D 2 36 LECTURE III. have afforded us, by enabling us to preserve a uni- formity in our ritual practices. But whilst I shall have to make full acknowledgment of their eminent services, I shall, nevertheless, come back to what I asserted on the day when I consecrated the first synagogue of this congregation : " though we are content to accept with reverence from our post- biblical ancestors, advice and instruction, we cannot unconditionally accept their Laws." 37 LECTURE IV. I HAD occasion to remark, at the close of the last lecture, on the grievous injury inflicted on Judaism, by those who have endeavoured to stamp as obligatory the whole of the ritual precepts and the social laws contained in the n'ny Yrhw- But whilst it behoves us to reject, in the most unqualified manner, as in- spired doctrine, everything that is opposed to the obvious sense and to the generous spirit of the ethics of the Pentateuch, we must not put aside the works of our Talmudic ancestors as useless, or devoid of practical good, nor must we pronounce judgment on the character of the sages of the Talmud, without bestowing due consideration on the iron age in which they lived and wrote. With regard to the Rabbinical Laws, which have one measure of punishment for the man who kills a Jew reputed to be orthodox, and another for him that slays a JCAV who is held to be lax in the observance of the ritual ordinances, no excuse whatever can be offer- ed, and no extenuating circumstances can be pleaded. One fact, however, must be borne in mind, and it is of the highest importance, that there is not upon record a single instance of these laws having been put into operation. That the men of the Talmud, and the communities who obeyed their behests, did, however, 38 LECTURE IV. give practical effect to those Rabbinical Laws which make a distinction between man and man in relation to the discharge of many of the duties of social life, can scarcely for a moment be questioned. But who that is even partially read in the history of the times when these Rabbinical Laws were framed, can fail to make ample allowance for the outraged feelings of the men of the Talmud, under the galling per- secutions of which they were the victims ? In those deplorable times, the Jews were the out- laws of society. It was in vain that they invoked princes and rulers, in the name of common humanity, to shelter them from the savage hatred of an ignorant rabble, and from the barbarous edicts of a persecuting church. It was in vain that they implored the tri- bunals of the land to interpose the barrier of the civil law between them, the unoffending exiles and wanderers, and those who plundered them of the fruits of their industry and caused their blood to flow like water in the streets. It was in vain that they appealed to imperial Rome herself; for if the Jew was protected there for a time, it was but too often that he might be reserved for the inhuman sports of the Circus, to be cast alive into the ring, where the famished lion and tiger awaited him. Is it, then, a matter of surprise, that the men of the Talmud should have denied the endearing terms of "brother" and "neighbour" to those who thus systematically persecuted and tortured them? Is it to be wondered at, that they should have enjoined their disciples not to restore to such relentless foes any lost property which might have found its way into their hands ; not to be active for their welfare, THE LAW IS LIGHT. 39 and not to assist them in the hour of their need? Assuredly not. Instead of being astonished at the few anti-social laws found in the Talmud, our wonder might well be excited, that they should not have been many times more numerous, when we consider how the lives of the Jews were embittered, and how this afflicted race were made to drink the cup of sorrow to the very dregs. It is well remarked by a Jewish historian, that it is the highest characteristic o'f the Hebrew people, that they should have preserved any moral feeling, after having passed through such an ordeal of persecution for fifteen long centuries. If, then, we judge the writings and the laws of the Talmud as the productions of learned and well- meaning men, but whose views were often influenced by the sufferings they were made to endure, much may be said in the way of palliation of their anti-social enactments (though morally they cannot be jus- tified), in consideration of the persecuting age in which they wrote. But to attempt to defend the 'jTalmudic code as a whole, as the lawbook of Ju- daism, on the principle that it is divinely inspired, is preposterous and profane. To admit that the best of men may at times go wrong, and that their notions of religious truth and of moral right may be warped by a keen sense of hard usage and of bitter persecution, is simply to acknowledge that man is human ; but to attempt to exalt man to the standard of divine perfection, by bringing down Almighty God to the level of weak humanity, is one of the greatest sins into which we can fall it is a sin which the disciples of Moses should be especially careful to avoid. 40 LECTURE IV. On considering the men of the Talmud in the age in which they lived, no one who is sensible of their piety, their fortitude, their moral courage, and their profound learning, can fail to think of them with sentiments of gratitude and veneration. Whilst other men would have been flying from land to land, to save their property and to protect their lives, these pious and heroic Jews sacrificed every personal con- sideration to a strong sense of what they conceived to be duty. Their time was chiefly engrossed in the study of the law, in the exposition of its principles, and in the teaching of youth. To instruct in the law, and in what they regarded as its divine oral explanations, was held by them to be the most praiseworthy pursuit in which man could be engaged. Their instruction was wholly gratuitous; and the rabbi who had no property of his own, cheerfully spent a part of the day in manual labour, in order to procure his loaf of bread ; but to receive payment in any shape for his teaching, was held by him to be totally unworthy of his vocation. Whatever opinions may be entertained in the present times with respect to the mass of enactments which the Talmudists framed for the uniform observance of the ritual law, and for the conduct of the Jew in every moral and physical- action of life, there can be little doubt that these regulations and ordinances were amongst the means of keeping the Israelites within the pale of Judaism for many centuries. When the Jew, and the faith he followed, were objects of such violent hatred to the Romish Church when the crusader was taught by his priest and confessor, that to immolate a Jew was more meritorious in the sight of God than to slay a THE LAW IS LIGHT. 41 Saracen when the steel and the cord, the rack and the stake, were employed as the spiritual weapons for exterminating from the earth that detested race, who were denounced for persisting in their Jewish abomi- nations and when, on the other hand, the offer of power, station, wealth, and everything that could excite the cupidity of man, was freely made to those who would abandon Judaism and enter the fold of Rome, some great counteracting force was needed, to induce the Israelites to brave the cruelty and to reject the bribes of their enemies. Now this force was found in the Talmudic code, and in the spiritual supervision it exercised over every Jewish household. It brought each action, as it were, under the eye of the rabbinical law, which had to be consulted in the performance of all social duties, how minute soever they might be. It kept the Jews closer and closer together ; it built up a wall of separation between them and heathenism on one side, and Rome on the other; it preserved them, not only from forming relations with the Gentiles, but even from acquiring their languages and from studying their literature. And though this Talmudic code may have tended to narrow the views of the Israelites, and what is still worse, to weaken in a degree their reverence for the ethical principles of Moses, and to induce them to ascribe an undue importance to out- ward ritual practices, it nevertheless proved a fortress against the attacks of proselytism, in which the whole of the clerical force of the Romish Church was engaged. Again we are indebted to our Talmudical ancestors for affording us the means of maintaining some uni- formity in our ritual practices, and especially in the 42 LECTURE IV. worship of the Synagogue. The traditions they have preserved of the manner in which some of the cere- monials were performed are, no doubt, as old as the second temple, and many of them may claim a date even more remote. In all this, our rabbinical fathers have done us good service, and we ought to remember it with pious gratitude. But it by no means follows, because the Talmud contains a statement of the par- ticular manner in which certain scriptural rites were solemnized, that the Talmudic code should be regard- ed as a work inspired of God. What we have chiefly to regard is the divine commandments themselves, and they are written plainly enough in the Penta- teuch ; but the precise manner in which each ritual precept is to be carried into effect is quite a secondary question ; and it is one that the Legislator appears to have left, in the majority of cases, to the Jews them- selves, according to the age in which they should live, and the social position they might occupy. Had there been any necessity for a divine revelation respecting the minutiaa of each ceremonial rite, such revelation would have occupied a place in the Pentateuch, as it does in the instance of the Passover, where definite instructions are given concerning the number of days it is to be kept, the strict prohibition of leaven within the dwelling, &c. ; and it would not have been left to so uncertain a source a source so likely to be cor- rupted in process of time as that of oral tradition. It is very possible that the Talmud is correct in the statement it sets forth, that the Tin Y9 *TS " the fruit of the goodly tree," which we are commanded to use in our worship on the feast of tabernacles, 1 is the 1 See Levit. xxiii. 40. THE LAW IS LIGHT, 43 " citron." But suppose that this tradition had failed to be preserved by our sages, could any rea- sonable man hesitate for a moment to believe, that his worship would be equally acceptable in the eyes of God, if he employed as a representation of the TlPl Yy ^ an orange, or a pine, or any choice fruit of the land? It is the spirit of the ritual to which we should have our attention directed, more than to any set form in which it is to be presented to our senses ; and whatever the advocate of a divine oral tradition may assert to the contrary, it is a fact, deduced from the history of the Synagogue, that whilst the principles of Judaism have ever remained the same, its forms have been subject to considerable variations. 2 Admitting, however, the minor importance of the precise form of the ritual, when compared with the precept itself, we must not forget how much the Synagogue is indebted to its ancient customs for the outward effects it produces, ever recalling eastern associations, the eastern origin of the Jewish people, and illustrating, in a practical manner, various pas- sages in our sacred books, and in the wondrous his- tory of our race. For the preservation of those customs, we have to thank our Talmudical fathers, as well as for many wise expositions of the Scriptures, for throwing a flood of light, by means of their archaeological lore, upon what would have been other- wise most obscure to us> and chief of all for their 2 See a Collection of Sermons published at the request of the Council of Founders of the West London Synagogue of British Jews, pp. 171 176. 44 LECTURE IV. devoted and conscientious labours, by whose instru- mentality, under God's providence, the books of the Bible have come down to us in the integrity of the original text, and the word of revealed truth has been made the common property of mankind. Such, my hearers, are the obligations, to say no- thing of many others, for which we stand indebted to the sages of the Talmud; and it would reflect but little credit upon us who are reaping many benefits from their pious labours, if we forgot what we owe to such ancestors, who were ready to sacrifice every worldly advantage to the preservation of the Sinaic faith, and to the religious instruction of the generation that was to succeed them. But if their merits were ten-fold greater than they are, it would, nevertheless, be our bounden duty to draw a broad line of demarcation between them and the men of the Bible between what they taught on tradition and inferred by logical deduction, and what the Prophets authoritatively pronounced as the inspired word of God. By maintaining this clear distinction between the one and the other, we may subscribe, as it becomes us, to the advice and the lessons our sages have bequeathed to us, whenever tending to promote the fulfilment of the Pentateuch in its true spirit; and yet may we not adopt their laws when these seem, in our conscientious opinion, to be at variance with the genuine sense of the written words of Moses, the only standard of inspired doctrine whicli we can acknowledge. Coming back, then, to the text of the 30th chapter of Deuteronomy, which I placed at the head of this course of lectures, I venture to think that the inquiry into THE LAW IS LIGHT- 45 which I have been led respecting the general character of the Talrnudic code, has given additional force, if it were required, to the proposition I advanced at the opening of the first lecture, k ' that when Moses declared that the law is not above our comprehension, and not beyond our reach, but in our mouth and in our heart, that we may perform it," he alluded to the written law, and the written law only. I have freely admitted that the Pentateuch does not lay down, in every in- stance, precise information for the purpose of ensuring a perfect uniformity in the carrying into effect of all the ritual observances; and I have endeavoured to point to the inference which plain reason would de- duce from this omission. But if the omission be an evil, it is one that has certainly not been remedied by what is called the divine oral interpretations. If it were indeed true, that Moses received on the Mount an explanation from God Himself, how each detail of the ceremonials was to be carried into effect, and that all these explanations were delivered orally by the legislator as a divine tradition to Joshua, and from Joshua downwards in a direct line, until they reached Rabbi Judah, the Holy, who compiled the Mishna 1600 years ago; and further, if it were true that this tradition had been preserved in its integrity, it would follow, as a matter of course, that the inter- pretation would universally be one and the same. But so far are the doctors of the Tradition from holding a uniformity of opinion with respect to the interpretation, that there is scarcely a single ritual precept, about the performance of which a difference of opinion does not prevail between one sage of the 46 LECTURE IV. Talmud and the other. 3 Nevertheless, the author of the Sermon styled " Solomon's Judgment," tells us, that unless we receive as divine the traditions con- tained in the Talmud, the Law of Moses becomes "a sealed book, a collection of riddles without a solution." Brethren, I think there is little cause for fear that you will be disposed to receive the Talmudic code at the same estimation as it is set down by the writer of that Sermon. Least of all do I apprehend, that any congregant whom I have been addressing will so far forget the veneration he owes to the Bible, as to adopt the alternative of the reverend rabbi, that either the traditions of the Talmud are derived from Moses, and are inspired, or all that the immortal five books contain is of no practical use, but a mere col- lection of riddles which cannot be solved. May the Lord in mercy and loving kindness remove us far, very far, from such a doctrine; and though it can hardly be doubted that the preacher conscientiously believed he was promoting Judaism, when he pro- pounded this teaching, it nevertheless behoves us to pray devoutly that God may be pleased to avert the evil it is but too calculated to produce, by placing a powerful weapon in the hands of sceptics and scoffers. To you, my brethren and sisters, the Holy Bible will, I am sure, present itself in a very different light. You will receive the Pentateuch in the same sense as 3 See " The Oral Law and its Defenders, A Review, &c.," page 8, where this argument is most ably maintained. UC SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY Illl I II IIII 1111 II II II I HI I II II III II II III A ^1 A 000 101 254 1 it was regarded by the Psalmist, when he exclaimed, nbWl 'PI min " The law of the Lord is perfect." 4 The more you read it, and the more you meditate on its holy precepts and sublime ethics, the more you will be impressed with the conviction that it is in- herently perfect, because you will discover it to be of itself, and without the aid of any expositor, a manual of holiness, setting forth every duty and obligation incumbent on the Israelite. Here you will find the nature of the blessed Deity revealed by means of His transcendant moral attributes, the relation explained in which He stands to man and man to Him, the species of worship that He requires of His creatures, and how man may perform it, so as to render it ac- . cep table at the throne on high. Here you will learn your several duties as husbands and wives, as parents and children, as brothers and sisters, friends and neighbours, rich and poor, rulers and subjects, masters and servants, judges and suitors; and here you will find the germs of that great doctrine, which was to be developed and popularised by the future Hebrew prophets, of whom Moses spoke as his successors 5 , that the soul is immortal, and must render its account unto Almighty God in a future state. Here also shall the proud man find that wholesome rebuke of which he so much stands in need when he forgets his origin and his end, trusts in his arm of flesh, and tramples on the rights of his fellow-creatures. Here shall the tyrant find a lesson that may well arrest him in his mad career, and bring him back to the ways of justice, mercy, and human love. Here shall 4 Psalm xix. 8. 5 Deut. xviii. 15, etseq. 48 LECTURE IV. the unrighteous judge and the perjured witness, the slanderer and the oppressor, the man-slayer and the seducer, the betrayer and the double-dealer, the en- vious, the malignant, and the stony-hearted, each read his condemnation. Here also shall every child of sorrow read the words of consolation and of hope ; the man of bruised spirit, and he that is overburdened with grief, shall here find a gentle welcome; the be- reaved a solace, the widow a support, the orphan a protection, the penitent a fountain of mercy, the re- claimed a diadem of grace ; and every one of us shall here find a stay and a staff in the hour of our need. Say then, brethren, is such a work a " sealed book"? Is it a work whose u doctrines," " ordinances," and " laws " could be regarded, under any circumstances, as " a riddle without a solution " ? No ; it is the revelation of Almighty God it is PT&? DH?N miDM ^N*)" 'U ^sh " the law which Moses set before the children of Israel." 6 Finally, it is the book, the only book, to which the inspired legislator referred, when, in the expressive words of the text, which I have striven to keep prominently in the foreground during the whole series, he admonishes us, that "it is not beyond our comprehension, and not out of our reach : not in the heavens above, not far away across the seas ; but that it is exceedingly near to us," available to us at all times and in every condition of life, yea, " that it is in our mouths and in our hearts, that we may perform it." 6 Deut. iv. 44.