Between Enlightenment and Tradition: The Torah Work and Philosophical Teaching of Rabbi Moshe Mendelssohn (Ramba"man)
13 min read2,680 words
Summary
The text surveys the complex figure of Rabbi Moshe Mendelssohn (Ramba"man), a thinker who constituted a meeting point between the world of halakha and the values of the Enlightenment in the 18th century. The article details his Torah work, foremost the "Be'ur" enterprise on Scripture, which was intended to bridge the linguistic and cultural gap of the Jews of his time while preserving Hebrew grammar and the plain sense of the text. Alongside this, it analyzes his philosophical teaching in his book "Jerusalem," in which he proposed a model of the separation of religion and state and defined Judaism as a religion based on practical commandments and not on coercion of thought. Finally, the source discusses Mendelssohn's historical frictions with the great sages of the generation, such as the Yaavetz and the author of the "Haflaah," and sums up his disputed influence as one who opened a window to modernity but also aroused fear of cultural assimilation.
Rabbi Moshe Mendelssohn (1729–1786), known in Hebrew writings as Ramba"man (Rabbi Moshe ben Menachem) or as Rabbi Moshe of Dessau [1], stood at one of the most fascinating and complex junctions of Jewish existence in the modern age. His Torah work and philosophical thought served as an initial and powerful meeting point between the Orthodox world of halakha and the values of the European Enlightenment and modernity.[1] His historical labeling in later generations ranges between enormous esteem for his scholarship and sharp criticism for opening the gate to processes of secularization and assimilation. However, a careful examination of the entirety of his work and his ties with the great figures of his generation teaches of a personality who sought to formulate a distinctive halakhic and cultural model that does not give up a single tittle of the tradition on the one hand, and integrates into the civil and intellectual fabric of the modern state on the other.[1, 2]
At the outset it is worth offering a fundamental historical and bibliographical distinction that is at times required in modern scholarly discourse. While the name "Mendelssohn" is at times connected in the later halakhic tradition also with rabbinic figures of the twentieth century—such as the Gaon Rabbi Binyamin Mendelsohn (1904–1979), who served as rabbi in Kfar Ata and afterwards led the Haredi moshav Komemiyut, conducting distinctly conservative struggles to observe the Sabbatical year without relying on the sale permit (heter mechira) within the framework of the Keren HaShevi'it [3, 4]—the Ramba"man was active in the cultural and geographical sphere of Prussia in the eighteenth century, and his challenges were connected with shaping the consciousness of the beginnings of the Jewish Haskalah movement.[1]
The Torah Background and Spiritual Growth of the Ramba"man
Mendelssohn's early education in Dessau rested on the foundations of the accepted conservative curriculum, which included the study of Scripture, Mishnah and Talmud with their commentaries.[1] This early prodigy was soon recognized by his outstanding teacher, the Gaon Rabbi David Fraenkel—author of the monumental commentary "Korban HaEdah" on the Jerusalem Talmud.[1] When Rabbi Fraenkel moved to Berlin in order to serve there as av beit din, Mendelssohn followed him and continued to take shelter in his shadow.[1]
In Berlin Mendelssohn was exposed to the philosophical work of the Rambam, the "Guide of the Perplexed," a book that in those days was hardly studied in the conservative communities of Ashkenazi Jewry.[1] This study opened to him a window onto the world of metaphysics, grammar and the general sciences, and moved him to formulate a view according to which human reason does not contradict the laws of the Torah, but rather complements them. His early Hebrew work included the founding of the first modern journal, "Kohelet Musar," through which he sought to disseminate philosophical, aesthetic and ethical ideas using the lucid language of Scripture, out of an aspiration to extricate the Jewish community from the cultural isolation of the ghetto.[1]
As can be seen in the bibliographic documentation of his writings, Mendelssohn labored at writing varied Torah and exegetical works in Hebrew, which were printed in different historical processes and collected anew in later generations, as presented in the table detailing his central Torah works within the network of halakhic literature:
The "Be'ur" Enterprise—Netivot HaShalom and the Educational Revolution
Mendelssohn's most monumental Torah enterprise is the "Be'ur" project, which was published under the title "Netivot HaShalom" in the late 1770s and the early 1780s of the eighteenth century.[1] The beginning of the venture was entirely private, as Mendelssohn sought to translate Scripture into German and to formulate a precise commentary for the education of his own sons.[1] However, at the encouragement of Rabbi Solomon Dubno, who served as a teacher to Mendelssohn's sons and recognized the importance of the enterprise, Mendelssohn agreed to release the work to the public.[1]
The "Netivot HaShalom" enterprise had a number of profound cultural and halakhic aims. First, Mendelssohn sought to offer an authoritative Jewish alternative to the Christian translations of Scripture, which attracted educated Jews who were seeking modern translations in the absence of an internal alternative.[1] Second, he aspired to distance learners from the use of the Yiddish language, which he perceived as a corrupted dialect incapable of containing the complex and sublime linguistic and theological ideas of the language of Scripture.[1] The translation into High German (in Hebrew letters) was intended to serve as a two-way educational tool: bringing learners closer to standard biblical Hebrew, and at the same time opening for them a gate to the study of the German language, which was the key to civil and cultural integration.[1]
The preparation of the project and its financing were based on a pioneering commercial model. In 1778 Solomon Dubno published in Amsterdam the prospectus "Alim li-Terufah" ("Leaves for Healing"), in which he presented samples of the translation and commentary and recruited hundreds of subscribers (signatories) across the communities of Europe who financed the publication of the books in advance.[1] As regards the division of labor, Mendelssohn himself translated all five books of the Torah into German, and composed the commentary on the book of Exodus, on the portion Bereshit and on several portions in the book of Deuteronomy, while serving as chief editor of the entire enterprise.[1] Rabbi Solomon Dubno helped greatly in the general editing, wrote the commentary on most of the book of Genesis and added detailed grammatical notes, but at a certain stage withdrew from the venture for economic and personal reasons.[1]
The rabbinic opposition to the "Be'ur" enterprise was swift and sharp, and revealed the deep fear of the rabbinic establishment of the processes of modernization. Although Mendelssohn held various rabbinic approbations, among them that of the av beit din of Frankfurt on the Oder, Rabbi Saul Berlin, and his father, Rabbi Levin, he chose not to attach them to the first volumes, arguing that a work intended for the broadening of knowledge and for a civil language does not require a traditional halakhic seal of approval.[1]
At the head of the opposition stood two of the greatest figures of the generation at that time. Rabbi Raphael Cohen of Hamburg was enraged at the enterprise and threatened to impose a ban on the work.[1] Mendelssohn coped with this threat by sophisticated diplomatic means, as he arranged to enroll as subscribers to the "Be'ur" the king of Denmark (under whose sovereignty Hamburg was at that time) and his heir to the throne, and thereby compelled Rabbi Raphael Cohen to restrain his protest out of fear of harming the honor of the monarchy.[1] On the other hand, the Gaon Rabbi Yechezkel Landau of Prague, author of the "Noda BiYehuda," opposed the work on the basis of a precise sociological analysis: he feared that the High German translation would not serve for understanding Scripture, but would become an aid for learning the German language and the culture of the state.[1] This fear was indeed realized over the course of the generations, especially in the communities of Eastern Europe, where the "Be'ur" served as a central educational tool for young people who sought to acquire a general education.[1] As an alternative, the author of the "Noda BiYehuda" preferred translations written in a more popular and lower register that do not lead to cultural integration.[1]
"Jerusalem" and the Separation of Religion and State
In 1783 Mendelssohn published his most foundational philosophical work, "Jerusalem, or On Religious Power and Judaism" (Jerusalem, oder über religiöse Macht und Judentum).[1, 2] The book was written in the midst of a stormy public controversy, and was intended to respond to Christian thinkers who demanded that he undergo baptism into Christianity if he truly believed in the universal values of reason, and conversely to reassure rabbis who feared the loss of communal halakhic authority.[1]
In this work Mendelssohn presented a revolutionary model of the social contract, based on a complete separation between the powers of the state and the powers of religion.[1, 2] In his view, the state is entrusted with regulating practical relations between people by means of law and physical coercion, whereas religion addresses only inner persuasion, the heart and reason.[1] From this Mendelssohn inferred that religious institutions have no right whatsoever to use means of coercion, punishment, ban or excommunication against their members on account of their opinions or beliefs.[1]
Alongside this distinct call for religious tolerance, Mendelssohn defined the essence of Judaism in a way intended to defend it against theological attacks. In contrast to Christianity, which is based on dogmas of faith that bind thought, Judaism according to Mendelssohn does not command beliefs and opinions, but only practical commandments.[1, 2] The general metaphysical truths—such as the existence of God, His providence and the immortality of the soul—are truths of reason accessible to every human being as a human being, without need for historical revelation.[1] The uniqueness of Judaism lies in the "revealed legislation" given at Sinai, which constitutes a binding national covenant based on deeds and laws.[1, 2]
This approach enabled Mendelssohn to oppose resolutely any tendency toward assimilation or aspiration to a shared "natural religion" that would blur the differences between religions, since he regarded these attempts as anti-enlightened coercion.[1] From this standpoint Mendelssohn even distanced himself from the "Edict of Tolerance" issued by the Austrian emperor Joseph II in 1782, out of concern that these laws were intended to draw the Jews into cultural assimilation under the guise of equal civil rights.[1]
Halakhic Controversies and His Relations with the Great Figures of the Generation
Mendelssohn's innovative conceptions placed him sooner or later in direct and indirect confrontations with the great Torah scholars of his generation, both in the sphere of practical halakha and in the leadership of the communities, as reflected in the following table that gathers his theological and halakhic points of contact with the leaders of the period:
The Controversy over Leaving the Dead Unburied versus the Yaavetz
One of the most important and best documented halakhic confrontations took place in 1772, following an edict of the Duke of Mecklenburg-Schwerin that forbade the burial of the deceased before three days had passed from the moment of death, out of concern for burying people while still alive in a state of "apparent death."[5] The appeal of the German communities to Mendelssohn and to Rabbi Yaakov Emden (the Yaavetz) to find a solution to the crisis revealed deep differences of outlook.[5]
Mendelssohn proposed a solution combining the demands of modern medicine with the tradition of Israel.[1, 5] He argued that the law of the Torah does not require absolute immediate burial, and that the halakhic prohibition against leaving the dead unburied overnight is essentially rabbinic in origin.[5] From this he proposed a compromise according to which the communities would continue the custom of immediate burial, but only after a certified physician examined the deceased and confirmed that death was indeed certain, thereby resolving the medical concern of the authorities.[1, 5] The Yaavetz, on the other side, held an uncompromising conservative view and firmly rejected any change from the custom of immediate burial that had been accepted for generations, seeing in the proposal a dangerous opening for governmental and scientific interference in religious life.[5]
This historic controversy, which was reviewed extensively in later generations in the book "She'elat Chacham" (printed in a single edition in Frankfurt on the Oder in 1811 and including an approbation from Rabbi Aharon Yehuda Leib Margaliot), presented the definitive signs of death and discussed the importance of science in halakhic decisions.[5] The controversy became a historical landmark in the relations between halakha and modern medicine in the German sphere.[5]
The Confrontation with the Author of the "Haflaah" in Frankfurt
Another significant crossroads took place in the community of Frankfurt am Main, where the Gaon Rabbi Pinchas HaLevi Horowitz, known as the author of the "Haflaah," served in the rabbinate for thirty-three years.[7] Rabbi Pinchas, who raised many students among them Rabbi Moshe Sofer (the author of the "Chatam Sofer") [6, 7], represented the glory of traditional scholarship and was known as a halakhic decisor of great stature to whom all of Europe turned with questions.[7]
During the tenure of the author of the "Haflaah," a strong local Haskalah movement began to develop in Frankfurt, drawing its inspiration from Mendelssohn's Berlin center of Haskalah.[7] The presence of a Torah leader with such wide influence created built-in friction: on the one hand, Rabbi Pinchas Horowitz strictly preserved the old communal institutions and the traditional method of study [7]; on the other hand, the adherents of the Haskalah sought to introduce changes in the structure of education and of the community inspired by Mendelssohn's ideas about integrating languages and general sciences.[1]
This communal tension in Frankfurt laid the foundations for the deep social and religious polarization of the nineteenth century in the German sphere, as the outstanding disciple of the author of the "Haflaah," the Chatam Sofer, later led the rigid Orthodox struggle against modernity under the slogan "The new is forbidden by the Torah."[6, 7]
Summary and Conclusions
An examination of the Torah work and philosophical teaching of Rabbi Moshe Mendelssohn (Ramba"man) sketches a complex figure who sought to shape a new model of the Jew in the modern age: a loyal and educated citizen who is a full partner in the general intellectual and cultural discourse, and yet a Jew observing the commandments who is absolutely committed to halakha and to the historical covenant of the people of Israel.[1, 2]
Although Mendelssohn's intentions were to preserve Jewish life within a changing reality, the historical results of his work were profoundly disputed. The "Be'ur" project, which was intended to serve as an instrument for drawing the maskilim closer to the Torah and to the language of Scripture, served in practice for generations of young people in Eastern Europe as a bridge and an introduction to abandoning the tradition of the fathers and to complete assimilation into the culture of the West.[1] Similarly, his demands for the separation of religion and state and for the negation of the community's power of coercion in his book "Jerusalem" weakened in the long run the institutions of the traditional Jewish community and opened the gate to secularization and to the creation of the liberal streams.[1, 2]
For the conservative halakhic decisors and the leaders of Orthodoxy, Mendelssohn remained a dangerous figure who heralded the cracking of the walls of the spiritual ghetto. However, for scholars of Jewish thought and modern history, his work constitutes the first serious attempt of its kind to cope with the challenges of modernity, the Enlightenment and emancipation out of loyalty to Jewish existence and to the practical commandments.[1, 2]
Sources7
- 1.משה מנדלסון – ויקיפדיה, he.wikipedia.org/wiki/משה_מנדלסון
- 2.ירושלים (ספר) - ויקיפדיה, he.wikipedia.org/wiki/ירושלים_(ספר)
- 3.בנימין מנדלזון – ויקיפדיה, he.wikipedia.org/wiki/בנימין_מנדלזון
- 4.אודות | - קרן השביעית |, keren7.com/אודות/
- 5.ספר שאלת חכם – פולמוס הלנת המת וקביעת רגע המוות – פרנקפורט דאודר, תקע"א - Kedem Auctions, kedem-auctions.com/he/ספר-שאלת-חכם-–-פולמוס-הלנת-המת-וקביעת-רגע-המוות-–-פרנקפורט-דאודר-תקעא-–-מהדורה-יחידה
- 6.פנחס הורוביץ - ויקיפדיה, he.wikipedia.org/wiki/פנחס_הורוביץ
- 7.רבי פנחס הורוביץ 'בעל ההפלאה' - ברסלב סיטי, breslevcity.co.il/הילולת-הצדיקים-רבי-פנחס-הורוביץ/