Fifty Key Jewish Thinkers

Dan Cohn-Sherbok

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2007
• ISBN:
  9781135983727
• Edition: 2
• Topic: Philosophie
• Subtopic: Philosophie de la religion

Fifty Key Jewish Thinkers is a panoramic survey of over 2, 000 years of Jewish thought, religious and secular, ancient and modern. Now in its second edition, this essential reference guide contains new introductions to the lives and works of such thinkers as: Hannah Arendt, Immanuel Levinas, Judith Plaskow, Sigmund Freud, and Walter Benjamin.

Also including fully updated guides to further reading on figures from the middle ages through to the twenty-first century, historical maps and a chronology placing the thinkers in context, this is an essential and affordable one-volume reference to a rich and complex tradition.

FIFTY KEY JEWISH THINKERS

ISAAC ABRABANEL (1437–1508)

[Abravanel] Portuguese biblical exegete and statesman. Born in Lisbon in 1437, Isaac Abrabanel was a descendant of merchants and courtiers. He received both Jewish and secular education; by the age of 25 he had composed a tract on providence and prophecy and given discourses on Deuteronomy in the synagogue. Like his father Judah, he served as the treasurer to Alfonso V of Portugal and became head of a prosperous business. However, after being accused of conspiracy by João II who acceded to power in 1481, he fled two years later and entered the service of Ferdinand and Isabella of Castile. In April 1492 Abrabanel unsuccessfully sought to revoke the Edict of Expulsion of the Jews of Spain; on 3l May he sailed to Naples where he undertook a similar role to that he had played in Castile, in the court of Ferdinand I, King of Naples. Eventually, he settled in Venice in 1503 where he participated in diplomatic negotiations between the Venetian Senate and Portugal. He died in 1508.

During his sixteen years in Italy, he composed most of his writings. His works consist of a variety of texts, most of which were published in the sixteenth century:

1. Commentary on the Pentateuch, early prophets ( Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings), later prophets (Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel) and twelve minor prophets;
2. Commentaries on the Haggadah (Passover prayer book) and Pirkei Avot (Sayings of the Fathers);
3. Three studies dealing with messianic deliverance, including a commentary on the Book of Daniel;
4. A commentary on Maimonides’ Guide of the Perplexed, answers to queries dealing with the Guide and a short treatise on its composition; and
5. Assorted works discussing philosophical and theological issues, including
   • The Crown of the Ancients dealing with prophecy and providence;
   • New Skies on the creation of the universe;
   • The Works of God also dealing with creation;
   • The Principle of Faith treating the principles of the Jewish faith; A short study on the Form of the Elements; and
   • A short study on the Form of the Elements; and
   • Two other texts on divine justice and prophecy.

In Abrabanel’s writing, there are numerous references to Maimonides whom he often bitterly criticizes; in many respects his philosophical writing is a commentary on Maimonides’ Guide of the Perplexed. Hence Abrabanel’s discussion of three major areas of interest – the creation of the cosmos, prophecy and the principles of Judaism – was deeply influenced by Maimonides’ theories even if at various points he puts forward differing interpretations. According to Abrabanel, the doctrine of creatio ex nihilo is the only viable theory of creation, even if it cannot be conclusively demonstrated through rational argument. In opposition to Gersonides, Abrabanel maintains that the concept of pre-existent and unformed matter is unacceptable because of the necessary correlation between matter and form. Unlike Crescas, he contends that the idea of a necessary will on God’s part undermines the very notion of the will. And as regards the question of the exact moment when creation is supposed to have occurred, Abrabanel maintains that this can be resolved only by appealing to the idea that God forms innumerable worlds and then destroys them after a certain period of time.

Regarding prophecy, Abrabanel endorses the first opinion Maimonides describes in his Guide: God chooses whomever he wishes among human beings in order to make them his prophet, as long as that individual has a pure and pious heart. Prophecy is therefore a divine knowledge that God causes to descend onto the prophet either through or without an intermediary. If the prophet’s intellect receives such knowledge, his words will be precise and clear; if it is bestowed on the imagination, this divine communication will be expressed through images and allegories. Thus the difference between a sage and a prophet resides in the different influx that each receives – the prophet receives an influx more abundant and eminent. Thus, the superabundance of divine emanation permits one to differentiate between the prophetic and the premonitory dream. Prophetic images impose themelves on the imagination through their intensity.

Continuing this discussion, Abrabanel argues that as a supernatural phenomenon which is able to correct the natural weakness of the prophet’s intellect and imagination, prophecy resides only in a person whose heart is constantly inclined toward God. This, he believes, takes place only in a free nation living in its own land – for the Jewish people, this is Israel. If a Jew is overwhelmed by his misfortune and dependent on the good will of gentile kings, prophecy can never occur.

Turning to the issue of Jewish dogma, Abrabanel argues for Maimonides’ Thirteen Principles in his book The Principle of Faith. Abrabanel sets out to defend Maimonides’ conception of the thirteen central beliefs of Judaism in his first twenty-two chapters. Yet in the last chapters of this work, Abrabanel states that because the Law of Moses is of a supernatural character, no principle can in fact be more important than any other: everything contained in the Torah is of equal weight and must be accepted by the believer. In Abrabanel’s view Maimonides sought to isolate the central principles of Judaism because he wished to help the ignorant to understand the underlying assumptions of the Jewish faith. In this connection, he points out that these Thirteen Principles are part of the Mishneh Torah which is not designed for those who are philosophically inclined.

Another important feature of Abrabanel’s writing concerns politics and history. According to Maimonides, Moses was closest to the Active Intellect and therefore able to advance a divine law as a prophet– philosopher. Abrabanel, on the the other hand, views prophecy as supernatural in character: hence divine law is directly related to natural events and human history. In his view, the meeting point of the human and natural realms is biblical history where God’s disclosure and intervention take place. In this context the Messiah should not be understood along Maimonidean lines as a victorious king who will be able to return the exiles to the Promised Land. Instead, he will be a person inspired by God who will act miraculously in the violent upheavals which will signify the end of the world.

Continuing this theme, Abrabanel asserts that what appears as natural history is in fact artificial. The life of the Jewish nation in the desert, for example, is like the life of Adam before the Fall. Adam’s disobedience disrupted this natural state – subsequent civilized life is actually a rebellion against God. The only really natural life is that of free and equal persons who lead a rural lifestyle. Similarly, the proliferation of different languages and nations is also the consequence of human rebellion. It is in the context of this false life that Abrabanel explores the best form of government. What is at issue is the least bad sort of government since only the Messiah will be able to recreate what Abrabanel conceives as humanity’s natural state.

Despite such theoretical considerations, Abrabanel lived the life of a statesman and was interested in the political realities of his day. On the basis of an analysis of Deuteronomy 17:14 and 1 Samuel 8:6, he criticizes the philosophical arguments supporting monarchy. Dismissing the principle of hierarchy, he argues that the king should serve his people. The monarch is to society what the heart is to the body. Against those who assert that only monarchy is able to assure the conditions for the proper functioning of society, he maintains that a nation can be maintained and subsist with other forms of government. Unity is attainable through the unanimous consent of several persons rather than the irresponsible will of only one individual. In this light continuity can be assured through the government of a succession of leaders as long as they are aware that they must provide an account of their actions. Regarding absolute power, Abrabanel insists that this is not a necessity. Furthermore, collective decision-making is advocated by the Torah. Turning to existing states, he asserts that government by elected judges, as found in Venice, Florence and Genoa, is far superior to monarchical rule.

As far as Israel is concerned, Abrabanel stresses that its true guide must be the God of the Jewish nation. It does not need a king, and experience has proved that monarchy is a disastrous institution. The judges, however, were faithful servants of the Lord. The best form of government is thus that of an elite group of judges who are guided in their decisions by the will of God. The Messiah, he continues, will not be a king, but a judge and prophet. In this respect, Abrabanel anticipated the revolution in political thinking brought about by the Renaissance even though he resembles other thinkers of the Middle Ages in terms of his philosophical and theological ideas.

Abrabanel’s major writings

Isaac Abrabanel, Principles of Faith (trans. M.M. Kellner), London and Toronto, 1982

See also in this book

Gersonides, Hasdai Crescas, Maimonides

Further reading

S. Feldman and Seymour Feldman, Philosophy in a Time of Crisis: Don Isaac Abravanel: Defender of the Faith, London, 2002

M.M. Kellner, ‘Rabbi Isaac Abravanel on Maimonides’ Principles of Faith’, Tradition 18, 1980

E. Mihaly, ‘Isaac Abravanel on the Principles of Faith’, Hebrew Union College Annual, Cincinnati, OH 26, 1955

B. Natanyahu, Don Isaac Abravanel, Statesman and Philosopher, Philadelphia, 1953

A.J. Reines, Maimonides and Abrabanel on Prophecy, Cincinnati, OH, 1970

J. Sarachek, Don Isaac Abravanel, New York, 1938

AHAD HA-AM (1856–1927)

[Asher Ginsberg] Ukrainian Hebrew essayist. Born in Skvira in Kiev province (now in the Ukraine) in 1856, Asher Hirsch Ginsberg (later known as Ahad Ha-Am) was preoccupied with the spiritual regeneration of the Jewish people. He received a typical Jewish education, but in 1868 his family moved to an estate leased by his father, where he studied medieval Jewish philosophy as well as the writers of the Enlightenment. At the age of twenty he was exposed to French and German literature as well as philosophy. Subsequently he unsuccessfully attempted to pursue his studies in various European capitals. In 1884 he settled in Odessa where he began to publish essays dealing with modern Jewish life.

His first essay, ‘Wrong Way’, appeared in 1889, setting the stage for his role within the Hovevei Zion (Lovers of Zion) movement. In this work he encourages the restoration of Zion although he is critical of several aspects of the movement. In a later essay, ‘The Jewish State and the Jewish Problem’, which was written after his return from the first Zionist Congress, he discusses Max Nordau’s opening address to the congress. For Nordau, the central problem facing Eastern European Jewry is economic misery, whereas Jews in Western countries are confronted by the failure of the Emancipation to provide a framework for Jewish identity in the contemporary world. According to Nordau, these dilemmas illustrate the need for the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine.

In Ahad Ha-Am’s view, however, the situation is more complex. Assuming that such a homeland were established, what would occur when the Jewish state absorbed the first wave of immigrants? Would this solve the Jewish problem? Clearly not all Jews throughout the world could settle in Palestine. What would be the result if only a small segment of the world Jewish population emigrated to Palestine? Ahad Ha-Am argues that the economic difficulties facing Eastern European Jewry would not be overcome for those who remained behind. Hence the major problem faced by Zionism is how to resolve the spiritual perplexities of Jews living in the diaspora.

In Ahad Ha-Am’s opinion, Zionism is able to solve the problems of Western Jewry more readily than it can ameliorate the conditions of Jews living in Eastern Europe. The Jew in the West is separated from Jewish culture as well as alienated from the society in which he lives. The establishment of a Jewish state would enable him to resolve the problems of national identity, thereby compensating him for his lack of integration into the culture of the country in which he resides:

If a Jewish state were re-established [in Palestine], a state arranged after the pattern of other states, then he [the Western Jew] could live a full, complete life among his own people, and find at home all that he now sees outside, dangled before his eyes, but out of reach. Of course, not all the Jews will be able to take wing and go to their state; but the very existence of the Jewish state will raise the prestige of those who remain in exile, and their fellow citizens will no more despise them and keep them at arm’s length as though they were ignoble slaves, dependent entirely on the hospitality of others. (Ha’am, 1962, 74–5)

Such an ideal would be able to cure the Jew in the West of his social unease – the consciousness of his inferiority in lands where he is regarded as an alien.

In Eastern Europe, on the other hand, such a solution is inadequate. With the disappearance of the ghetto, Judaism has lost its hold on the Jewish people. In the past, Jews were able to ensure the survival of the tradition through common practice. Yet, the passing of this closed society has led to the collapse of Jewish learning. Thus for Ahad Ha-Am, it is impossible for Eastern European Jews to return to the traditional religious system of the ghetto. What is required now is the creation of a new Jewish social identity in Israel:

Judaism needs at present but little. It needs not an independent state, but only the creation in its native land of conditions favourable to its development: a good sized settlement of Jews working without hindrance in every branch of culture, from agriculture and handicrafts to science and literature. This Jewish settlement, which will be a gradual growth, will become in the course of time the centre of the nation, wherein its spirit will find pure expression and develop in all its aspects up to the highest degree of perfection of which it is capable. Then from the centre the spirit of Judaism will go forth to the great circumference, to all the communities of the diaspora, and will breathe new life into them and preserve their unity; and when our national culture in Palestine has attained that level, we may be confident that it will produce men in the country who will be able, on a favourable opportunity, to establish a state which will be truly a Jewish state, and not merely a state of Jews. (Ibid., 78–9)

Israel, therefore, is to be a state infused with Jewish values. It should not simply be a homeland for world Jewry. Rather, it must embody the religious and cultural ideals of the past. The strength of Judaism, Ahad Ha-Am argues, resides in the prophetic emphasis on spiritual values. A Jewish state which is devoid of such an orientation is doomed – a secular state is not viable, he maintains, because ‘a political ideal which does not rest on the national culture is apt to seduce us from our loyalty to spiritual greatness, and to beget in us a tendency to find the path of glory breaking the thread that unites us with the past, and undermining our historical basis’ (Ibid., 80).

Without such spiritual ideals, political power can become an end in itself. To illustrate this point, Ahad Ha-Am uses the example of Judea under Herod the Great:

History teaches us that in the days of the Herodian house Palestine was indeed a Jewish state, but the national culture was despised and persecuted, and the ruling house did everything in its power to implant Roman culture in the country, and frittered away the national resources in the building of heathen temples and amphitheatres, and so forth. Such a Jewish state would spell death a...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Preface
• Acknowledgements
• Chronological Table
• Fifty Key Jewish Thinkers