Abstract
The chapter essentially discusses the reception of Maimonides’ Guide of the Perplexed at the Rabbinical Seminaries in Germany during the second half of the nineteenth century. The main focus is on the Breslau seminary where philosophy-professor Manuel Joel published in 1859 the first academic monograph on the philosophy of the Guide, followed by books on Maimonides by Breslau teachers David Kaufmann, David Rosin and later Israel Finkelscherer. Also, some 15 doctoral dissertations were written by graduates of all three German seminaries between 1884 and 1909 on several aspects of the Maimonidean teachings in the Guide, which will in part be discussed in the chapter. In addition, the chapter evaluates the reception in Germany of Solomon Munk’s first academic edition of the Guide from the Arabic original in the 1860s, the frequent appearances of Maimonidean ideas in the numerous Jewish catechisms and text books published during that period, further the Maimonidean arguments used in a debate about the amendment of the Jewish prayer book, and finally the ambitious project of the two Moses ben Maimon volumes containing several influential essays on Maimonidean thought, published at the beginning of the twentieth century.
At this time, Maimonides’ philosophy was increasingly interpreted as asserting the priority of reason in any conflict between reason and religion. The idea of harmonization between the two elements was reduced to a limited number of aspects where harmony was possible – all this being nevertheless a strong conviction among those scholars who held that such an interpretation was seen by Maimonides as within the possibilities that traditional Judaism offered, and not as a concession to Aristotelianism – a point of view that they themselves all too willingly shared. No longer did Maimonides’ students pick single doctrines out of their context for support of a radical Reform approach to Judaism; they now concentrated on a systematic reading of the Guide’s many teachings in their historical framework, and thus place Maimonidean philosophy back into the intellectual history of Judaism.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
The Budapest seminary (from 1878) is the least known among them, and research about its history is still missing – although it was home to scholars like David Kaufmann and Wilhelm Bacher. Concerning Maimonides specifically, Julius Samuel Spiegler (1838–1900) published there in 1885 a History of the Philosophy of Judaism, written originally in Hungarian, that extensively paraphrased and discussed the Guide. The book caused a stir in Hungarian scholarly circles for it apparently proved to them that there was an independent Jewish philosophy. Five years later a German translation of the work appeared as Geschichte der Philosophie des Judentums, Leipzig 1890 (on the Guide p. 277ff).
- 2.
In the middle of the 1830s, Geiger and Ludwig Philippson had in vain advanced a project to introduce Jewish Studies into German universities. See Philippson’s “Aufforderung an alle Israeliten Deutschlands zu Subscriptionen, um eine jüdisch-theologische Fakultät und ein jüdisches Seminar zu begründen”, in: Allgemeine Zeitung des Judenthums 1837, p. 349ff. In 1843 and 1848, Zunz failed with the same project in Berlin. (See for details Monika Richarz Der Eintritt der Juden in die akademischen Berufe, Tübingen 1974, p. 192f.)
- 3.
Moritz Güdemann (1835–1918), after graduating from Breslau, first replaced Philippson in Magdeburg, from 1866 in Vienna, and in 1890 became chief rabbi there. He wrote seminal works on the history of Jewish education, but also the influential Jüdische Apologetik (1906). See his memoirs in Monika Richarz (ed.) Jewish Life in Germany – Memoirs from Three Centuries, (transl. Stella.P. and Sidney Rosenfeld), Bloominton 1991, p. 134ff. For Güdemann’s appreciation of Maimonides, see his “Moses Maimonides”, in: Jahrbuch für jüdische Geschichte und Literatur 1905, p. 93–106.
- 4.
See here in detail Carsten Wilke Den Talmud und den Kant: Rabbinerausbildung an der Schwelle zur Moderne, Hildesheim: Olms, 2003, p. 593–596. Salo W. Baron, ‘The Revolution of 1848 and Jewish Scholarship’, Proceedings of the American Academy for. Jewish Research 20 (1951).
- 5.
Nikolaus Vielmetti “Die Gründungsgeschichte des Collegio Rabbinico in Padua”, in: Kairos 12(1970), 1–30 and Kairos 13 (1971), 38–66, here 12, p. 25 and 13, p. 54–57. Luzzatto’s own well-known dislike of the Guide will probably not have contributed to the status of the treatise at the Padua Collegio.
- 6.
On Joel, see Monatsschrift für Geschichte und Wissenschaft des Judentums 5 (1926) 305–355, a special edition of the Monatsschrift dedicated to his 100th birthday; and Görge K. Hasselhoff “Manuel Joel and the neo-Maimonidean Discovery of Kant”, in: James T. Robinson (ed.) The Cultures of Maimonideanism, Leiden 2009, p. 289ff.
- 7.
Frankel used this term for the first time in the public announcement of December 1843 of his new scholarly journal, the Zeitschrift für die religiösen Interessen des Judenthums. He wrote that “the further development of Judaism must be based on scholarly efforts of a positive-historical nature” [Forschung auf positivem, historischem Boden], cf. Zacharias Frankel, Anzeigen und Prospectus einer Zeitschrift für die religiösen Interessen des Judenthums, Berlin 1843. Often misunderstood, (the rabbis assembled at the 1844 conference in Frankfurt spontaneously all agreed with this formulation), it seems to mean for Frankel that the requirements of the Zeitgeist cannot be accepted as a Reform criterium: Contemporary Judaism has grown from a historical tradition that long became part of real Jewish life, as outdated as it might be, given the needs of the time. In this approach, long standing custom is seen as an essential part of Judaism, side by side with the universal, ethical teachings that the more radical Reformers emphasized. (See Andreas Brämer “The Dilemmas of Moderate Reform: Some Reflections on the Development of Conservative Judaism in Germany 1840–1880,” Jewish Studies Quarterly, 10 (2003), pp. 73–87). Ismar Schorsch traces the ‘positive’ back to technical legal positivism, this however seems to disconnect Oral Law too much from the divine Torah (See Ismar Schorsch “Zacharias Frankel and the European Origins of Conservative Judaism”, in: From Text to Context, Hanover, NH 1994, p. 256f.). Already in 1846 Samuel Holdheim cynically attacked the use of the term positive-historical as mendacious, see his Die religiöse Stellung des weiblichen Geschlechts im talmudischen Judenthum, Schwerin 1846, p. 5.
- 8.
Manuel Joel Die Religionsphilosophie des Mose ben Maimon, Breslau 1859. A second, unmodified edition was made in 1876.
- 9.
Quoted from Ismar Schorsch “Emancipation and the Crisis of Religious Authority – The Emergence of the Modern Rabbinate”, in: W.E. Mosse [et al.] ed., Revolution and Evolution, 1848 in German-Jewish History, Tübingen 1981, p. 212.
- 10.
Wolf Landau “Die Wissenschaft als Regenerationsmittel des Judentums”, in: Monatsschrift für Geschichte und Wissenschaft des Judentums 1851/52, p. 492f.
- 11.
The disputes took place in 1819 and 1841, both basically on the subject of the Reform prayer book, issued by the Temple community in Hamburg. (See Meyer, Response, p. 32ff) Isaac Bernays’ other son, Michael, converted to Christianity and became a renowned expert on German literature, especially Goethe.
- 12.
Bernays incessantly sent applications to German universities while in Breslau, but all calls he received were opposed by the Prussian government because he was a Jew. See Hans Israel Bach Jacob Bernays: Ein Beitrag zur Emanzipationsgeschichte der Juden und zur Geschichte des deutschen Geistes im neunzehnten Jahrhunderts, Tübingen, 1974, p. 139ff.
- 13.
Hermann Cohen “Ein Gruß der Pietät an das Breslauer Seminar”, written in 1904 for its 50th anniversary, the text was reprinted in: Guido Kisch (ed.) Das Breslauer Seminar, Tübingen 1963, p.303ff. (here p. 306). In 1860 Jacob Bernays taught a course especially on the Guide, open only for advanced students.
- 14.
On Joel’s contribution to Wissenschaft des Judentums, see Dieter Adelmann “Manuel Joel – In der Mitte der Wissenschaft des Judentums im 19. Jahrhundert”, in: “Reinige dein Denken” Über den jüdischen Hintergrund der Philosophie von Hermann Cohen (ed. Görge K. Hasselhoff), Würzburg 2010, p. 107–119.
- 15.
Two exceptions might be mentioned: Scheyer’s Das psychologische System des Maimonides from 1845 and David Joel’s Die Religionssphilosophie des Sohar from 1849 are genuine philosophical works of the Wissenschaft movement that had been published earlier.
- 16.
Die Religionsphilosophie des Mose ben Maimon, p. 55 and 65.
- 17.
Ibid.
- 18.
Ibid., p. 13.
- 19.
Ibid.
- 20.
Ibid. p.11.
- 21.
Ibid., p. 8.
- 22.
Note the title: ‘On the Damaging Prejudice for Systems of Religious Philosophy that True Philosophy operates Presuppositionlessly’ – (Manuel Joel “Über das die Schätzung religionsphilosophischer Systeme beeinträchtigende Vorurtheil, daß die wahre Philosophie voraussetzungslos verfahre”, in Monatsschrift für Geschichte und Wissenschaft des Judentums 1859, No. 4, p. 125–135).
- 23.
For detailed discussion, see Chap. 8 below.
- 24.
Manuel Joel “Über das die Schätzung”, p. 135. Emphasis in the original.
- 25.
Manuel Joel Spinoza’s Theologisch-Politischer Traktat auf seine Quellen geprüft, Breslau 1870. The book compares the positions of Maimonides and Spinoza on prophecy (p. 17–30), the Law (42–48/52–55), miracles (57–59), and other subjects.
- 26.
Cf. Graetz Tagebuch und Briefe, p. 226f.
- 27.
Salomon Munk’s Le Guide des Egarés appeared from 1856 (1861, 1866).
- 28.
Geiger called Munk’s method a dangerous concession and “a sacrifice to appease the Church”. (Jüdische Zeitschrift für Wissenschaft und Leben 1865, p. 188) In his obituary for Munk, Geiger continued this criticism “The avoidance of a theological motive is to be bought only at the price of independent research” (Ibid., 1867, p. 15).
- 29.
Manuel Joel’s review of Le Guide des Egarés in: Monatsschrift für Geschichte und Wissenschaft des Judentums 1862, p. 31–37.
- 30.
Adolf Jellinek Salomon Munk, Wien 1865, p. 20 and Abraham Geiger in Jüdische Zeitschrift für Wissenschaft und Leben 1867, p. 5. Geiger had published a review of the first volume of Munk’s edition for the Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 1860 (discussed above).
- 31.
Heinrich Graetz Geschichte der Juden, vol. 11, Leipzig 1900, p. 515.
- 32.
See the almost complete bibliography published by Görge K. Hasselhoff, “Philosophie und Rabbinat: Manuel Joel,” in:.Religion und Rationalität, ed. Görge K. Hasselhoff, Michael Meyer-Blanck, Würzburg 2008.
- 33.
Heinrich Graetz Geschichte der Juden, vol. 6, Leipzig 1861, p.xii.
- 34.
Cf. Arthur Hyman “Maimonidean Elements in Hermann Cohen’s Philosophy of Religion”, in: Hermann Cohen’s Critical Idealism, ed. R. Munk, Dordrecht 2005, p. 358.
- 35.
For Joel, see the bibliography by Hasselhoff mentioned above. Jacob Guttmann Das Verhältniss des Thomas von Aquino zum Judenthum, Göttingen 1891, and “Der Einfluss der Maimonidischen Philosophie auf das christliche Abendland”, in: Moses ben Maimon, vol I, p. 135ff.
- 36.
David Rosin Die Ethik des Maimonides, Breslau 1876, and David Kaufmann Geschichte der Attributenlehre in der jüdischen Religionsphilosophie des Mittelalters, Gotha 1877.
- 37.
For the Eight Chapters see Chap. 2, note 11.
- 38.
See his articles in Allgemeine Zeitung des Judenthums 1891, p. 161ff. and in Monatsschrift für Geschichte und Wissenschaft des Judentums 1895, p. 145ff. In 1888/1889 he engaged in a long debate with Franz Delitzsch regarding a missionary treatise written by Delitzsch in the same year. (See for details Christian Wiese, Challenging Colonial Discourse, Leiden 2005, p. 130ff.)
- 39.
Kaufmann was an ardent admirer of Yehuda Halevi’s philosophy. A good indication for his personal views of Judaism are Kaufmann’s German sermons at the synagogue of the rabbinical seminary in Budapest, collected in Achtzehn Predigten von David Kaufmann (ed. L. Blau and M. Weisz), Budapest 1931.
- 40.
Geschichte der Attributenlehre, p. XII.
- 41.
Die Religionsphilosophie des Mose ben Maimon, p. 12.
- 42.
Geschichte der Attributenlehre, p. 480. This essay will be discussed in detail in Chap. 6.
- 43.
Wilhelm Dilthey Gesammelte Schriften, 20 vols. (ed. K. Gründer), Göttingen 2006, vol. 17, p 173.
- 44.
Geschichte der Attributenlehre, p. 501.
- 45.
David Kaufmann “Der Führer Maimunis in der Weltliteratur”, first in Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie XI (1898), p. 335ff. Reprinted in David Kaufmann Gesammelte Schriften II, (ed. M. Brann), Frankfurt 1908, p. 152ff. and in Wissenschaft des Judentums im deutschen Sprachbereich (ed. Kurt Wilhelm) Tübingen, Mohr, 1967, p. 401ff. – here p. 427 and 430. Note Kaufmann’s praise for the Scheyer edition of part III of the Guide, discussed earlier (p. 427).
- 46.
See Ludwig Stein Die Willensfreiheit und ihr Verhältnis zur göttlichen Präscienz und Providenz bei den jüdischen Philosophen des Mittelalters, Berlin 1882. Stein (1859–1930) studied at the orthodox Rabbinerseminar and at the University of Berlin. He officiated as rabbi in Berlin for a few years before he went to Switzerland, where he held the chair in philosophy and sociology at the University of Bern for 20 years. Beginning in 1910, for the last 20 years of his life he lived in Berlin as an internationally acclaimed journalist on foreign politics and a widely respected peace activist. Cf. for Stein: Jacob Haberman “Ludwig Stein: Rabbi, Professor, Publicist, and Philosopher of Evolutionary Optimism”, in: The Jewish Quarterly Review, Vol. 86, No. 1/2, pp. 91–125.
- 47.
Manuel Joel Verhältniss Albert des Grossen zu Moses Maimonides, Breslau 1876. p. 6.
- 48.
David Rosin: Die Ethik des Maimonides, Breslau 1976, p. 27.
- 49.
Jacob Kramer Das Problem des Wunders im Zusammenhang mit der Providenz bei den jüdischen Religionsphilosophen des Mittelalters von Saadja bis Maimuni, Strassburg 1903, p. 97f.
- 50.
Ibid., p. 67f.
- 51.
Ibid., p. 108.
- 52.
Curt Tirschtigel Das Verhältnis von Glauben und Wissen bei den bedeutendsten jüdischen Religionsphilosophen bis Maimonides, Breslau 1905, p. 88.
- 53.
Both Schopenhauer and Feuerbach refer, of course, to Leibniz, and not to Maimonides himself. But given Leibniz’ admitted drawing on the Guide in his own theodicy, Goitein seems to interpret the discussion of the two nineteenth century philosophers as indirectly directed also against Maimonides. See Hirsch Goitein Optimismus und Pessimismus in der jüdischen Religionsphilosophie, Berlin 1890, p. 91 (note). Concerning Leibniz: the French count A. Foucher de Careil discovered in Hannover some handwritten notes by Leibniz on some chapters of the Guide which he published in his Leibniz, la Philosophie Juive et la Cabale, Paris 1861. (See Manuel Joel’s review of the book in the Monatsschrift for a discussion of the Maimonidean references in Leibniz – Monatsschrift für Geschichte und Wissenschaft des Judentums 1862, No. 6, p. 228ff.) When Foucher became the French ambassador to the Austrian court in 1884, Adolph Jellinek (1821–1893), the well-known liberal preacher at the Vienna central synagogue, wrote a welcoming article for the count, touching upon his discovery of Leibniz’ appraisal of Maimonides as a sign for Foucher’s favorable view of the Jews. See Adolph Jellinek Aus der Zeit: Tagesfragen und Tagesbegebenheiten, Budapest 1884, p. 81ff.
- 54.
Hirsch Goitein Optimismus und Pessimismus, p. 95 (note). See Guide III: 12–13. Goitein (1863–1903) was born in Hungary, served in Nachod (Bohemia), and later became the chief rabbi of Copenhagen.
- 55.
This is one of the few references to a medieval commentator of the Guide that nineteenth century Maimonidean scholars made. Their mastery of that literature deserves further research. Profiat Duran (c. 1350–c. 1415), known as Ha-Efodi, was forcibly baptized during the bloody Catalonian riots of 1391. He wrote a synoptic commentary on the Guide that is printed in the classical editions. Duran became famous for his sarcastic anti-Christian epistle “Be Not Like Thy Fathers” (1396) that Geiger translated into German in 1839, see “Priphot Duran’s Schreiben an einen Abtrünnigen”, in: Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift für jüdische Theologie, 1839, No.3, p. 451ff. On Maimonides and Duran, see Maud Kozodoy “No Perpetual Enemies: Maimonideanism at the Beginning of the Fifteenth Century”, in: James T. Robinson (ed.) The Cultures of Maimonideanism, Leiden 2009, p. 156–70.
- 56.
Neumann Sandler Das Problem der Prophetie in der jüdischen Religionsphilosophie von Saadja bis Maimuni, Breslau 1891, p. 59.
- 57.
Benjamin Grüll Die Lehre vom Kosmos bei Maimuni und Gersonides, Lemberg 1901 (Dissertation Bern) p. 26.
- 58.
Ludwig Stein in his article on “Arabic-Jewish Philosophy” in the Jewish Encyclopedia from 1906. The JE has no general article on Jewish philosophy.
- 59.
An allusion to Isaiah 2,3. Moses Mendelssohn Gesammelte Werke (JbA), vol. 14, p. xxv.
- 60.
This is the fundamental difference with respect to Spinoza, Rubin continues, who believed the Bible could be invalidated if it contradicted reason. See: Salomon Rubin Spinoza und Maimonides: Ein psychologisch-philosophisches Antitheton, Wien 1868, p. 12 (see also p. 16). Rubin (1823–1910) wrote about 25 books about superstitious practices in different cultures and about Kabbalah in Hebrew, about Seneca and Salomon Maimon in German. At the age of 23 he compiled a compendium of Spinoza’s writings, called
(The New Guide of the Perplexed). His German language study on Maimonides and Spinoza earned him a doctorate from the university of Göttingen. In 1885 he produced an annotated edition of Spinoza’s Ethics in Hebrew. - 61.
Munk’s essay is in Archives Israelites, vol. VIII, Paris, 1850 (translated into German by Bernhard Beer in 1852); Adolf Schmiedl Studien über jüdische, insbesondere jüdisch-arabische Religionsphilosophie, Wien 1869; Moritz Steinschneider Die arabische Literatur der Juden, Frankfurt 1902. Gustav Karpeles Geschichte der jüdischen Literatur, Berlin 1886.
- 62.
Schmiedl, p. 116. Towards the end of his book, Schmiedl inserted an entire chapter dealing with the question “What made Aristotelianism so popular among the Jewish religious philosophers” of the Middle Ages. (p. 259ff.).
- 63.
p. 456 of the second edition from 1909.
- 64.
Kuzari I: 63. Also II: 66. For the general history of the myth see Abraham Melamed The Myth of the Jewish Origin of Science and Philosophy (Hebr.), Jerusalem, 2010. For Philo, see Harry A. Wolfson Philo, Cambridge 1947, p. 141ff.
- 65.
Several Jewish authors of the Middle Ages assumed that Aristotle learned wisdom from Jewish teachers or even converted to Judaism. See N. Samter “Der Jude Aristoteles”, in Monatsschrift für Geschichte und Wissenschaft des Judentums 1901, p. 453–59.
- 66.
Graetz, Geschichte, vol. 6, p. 310f.
- 67.
David Cassel (1818–1893) studied at the Berlin University and wrote his doctoral dissertation on the book of Psalms. Ordained as a rabbi in 1843 by Frankel, he never accepted a rabbinical position, but became an eminent scholar of Wissenschaft des Judentums. He was a close friend of Steinschneider and Jolowicz, working with both these and many others on the edition of medieval rabbinical texts. He wrote several pamphlets in defense of a careful reform of Judaism, especially supporting his friend, the conservative Berlin rabbi, Michael Sachs, against orthodox attacks. From 1872 on, Cassel was among the first lecturers at the liberal Berlin Hochschule.
- 68.
David Cassel Das Buch Kusari des Jehuda ha-Levi, (second edition) Leipzig 1869, p. 47 (note 1).
- 69.
Die Religionsphilosophie des Maimonides, p. 32 (note) – my emphasis.
- 70.
Arnold Grünfeld Die Lehre vom göttlichen Willen bei den jüdischen Religionsphilosophen des Mittelalters von Saadja bis Maimuni, Münster 1909 (Diss. Erlangen).
- 71.
Philipp Bloch (1841–1923), one of the first Breslau graduates, produced, among many other writings, annotated editions of philosophical works by Saadia and Crescas.
- 72.
Moses ben Maimon, ed. Jacob Guttmann et al., Leipzig 1908/1914. More on this project later in this chapter.
- 73.
Philipp Bloch “Charakteristik und Inhaltsangabe des Moreh Nebuchim”, in: Moses ben Maimon (see above), p. 12.
- 74.
An overview of the relevant references can be found in Cassel (ibid.); for the Church Fathers see Münz (ibid.). Munk refers to Ibn Rushd’s version of the mythos in his comment to the Guide ad locum. Cf. also the note to I:71 made by A. Weiss in his 1923 translation of the Guide into German (Mose ben Maimon, Führer der Unschlüssigen, translated and annotated by Adolf Weiß, repr. Hamburg 1995, p. 280).
- 75.
All three quotes from Bloch, Charakteristik, p. 5.
- 76.
Julius Guttmann’s major Die Philosophie des Judentums from 1933 still reflects this trend very strongly even after WWI, and thus drew heavy criticism from Strauss. For the subsequent Guttmann-Strauss debate see Leora Faye Batnitzky Leo Strauss and Emmanuel Levinas: Philosophy and the Politics of Revelation Cambridge 2006, p. 181–86 and the appendix to Chap. 9.
- 77.
Wolf Mischel Die Erkenntnistheorie Maimonides’, Berlin 1903. The acceptance of at least three dissertations on Maimonides at the Bern university between 1900 and 1912 is probably due to philosopher Ludwig Stein’s teaching there (see note 46). As mentioned above, in 1882, Stein himself wrote a dissertation on the problem of free will in medieval Jewish philosophy, dedicating a large section to Maimonides.
- 78.
See Klaus Christian Köhnke Entstehung und Aufstieg des Neukantianismus, Frankfurt 1986, p. 58–88.
- 79.
Mischel, Erkenntnistheorie, p.6. Before moving on to the Berlin Hochschule, Mischel (d. 1923) studied Philosophy and Oriental Languages at the University of Vienna. In 1904 he became the rabbi of the town of Kimpulung in the Bukowina. Mischel’s daughter Salome Mischel-Gruenspan was a medical doctor and a poet. Julius Guttmann refers to Mischel’s dissertation in the very the last edition of the Monatsschrift from 1939 as “brilliant”, but “completely useless in its results.” See his “Das Problem der Kontingenz in der Philosophie des Maimonides”, in Monatsschrift für Geschichte und Wissenschaft des Judentums 1939, No.1, p. 408.
- 80.
Ibid., p. 7.
- 81.
Martin Kavka Jewish Messianism and the History of Philosophy, Cambridge 2004, p. 9.
- 82.
Finkelscherer (1866–1942) graduated from Breslau and earned his doctoral degree at the university of Jena. He returned to the seminary where he taught from 1890 until 1899. For the next 30 years he was the assistant rabbi (Rabbinatssubstitut) of Munich, the librarian of the community, and a teacher at the Jewish school there. In 1942, at the age of 76, he was murdered in Theresienstadt.
- 83.
Israel Finkelscherer Mose Maimunis Stellung zum Aberglauben und zur Mystik, Breslau 1894, p. 6.
- 84.
Ibid., p. 7.
- 85.
Ibid., p. 44f. See Maimonides’ commentary on Mishnah Shabbat II: 5. ( appears already in
I, Sam 14:16 where Abarbanel interpreted it, probably following Maimonides, with melancholy.) This same subject had been heavily disputed already in the 1850s between the liberal rabbi Leopold Löw and Joseph Gugenheimer (then rabbi of Stuhlweißenburg in Hungary). Löw claimed with reference to the commentary on the Mishnah that Maimonides, in his rejection of demonism “implanted his anti-Talmudic opinion into the Talmud”, a view that Gugenheimer completely rejected. (See Löw in Ben Chanajah, 1858, No. 4, p. 154f. and Gugenheimer’s response in Jeschurun 1859, No. 2, p. 88f.) - 86.
Ibid., p. 88. The second half of the nineteenth century in Germany saw a flood of books on superstition and the devil. See for example the classics by Gustav Roskoff Die Geschichte des Teufels, 2 vols. Leipzig 1869 and Der Aberglaube des Mittelalters: Ein Beitrag zur Culturgeschichte by Heinrich Bruno Schindler, Breslau 1858.
- 87.
Scholem’s positivistic attack on this Wissenschaft’s approach cannot be the last word on the subject. Scholem accused the Wissenschaft scholars of neglecting where they were actually rejecting Kabbalah for theological reasons. I am in the process of preparing a detailed study on the relation between Wissenschaft des Judentums and Kabbalah, in the meantime, see: David N. Myers “Philosophy and Kabbalah in Wissenschaft des Judentums: Rethinking the Narrative of Neglect” Studia Judaica 16 (2008), p. 56–71.
- 88.
Cf. for the numbers: Meyer, Response, p. 210 and Lowenstein “The 1840s” p. 114ff.
- 89.
The Guidelines themselves and the subsequent Richtlinienstreit within German Jewry are documented in Gunther W. Plaut The Growth of Reform Judaism: American and European Sources until 1948, New York: World Union for Progressive Judaism, 1965, p. 68ff.
- 90.
For the attempt to give the Guidelines a basis in classical Jewish legal sources, see Max Freudenthal “Ein liberales Gutachten als historisches Dokument”, in: Festgabe für Claude G. Montefiore, Berlin 1928, p. 35–43.
- 91.
- 92.
Der Israelit 1906, No. 31, p. 2. See Maimonides’ Mishneh Torah, Laws of Kings and Wars 11,1.
- 93.
Jüdische Presse 1906, No. 48, p. 568. Rabbi Kaatz (1870–1942) was a leading orthodox apologist who published, among others, a pamphlet denouncing “Abraham Geiger’s Religious Character” (Frankfurt 1911).
- 94.
Denkschrift zur Begründung des von dem Grossherzoglich Badischen Oberrate der Israeliten herausgegebenen Gebetbuchentwurfs, Karlsruhe 1907, p. 25f. In this booklet, Steckelmacher still writes strictly on behalf of the Oberrat, not in his own name. Only when Hoffmann approaches him personally in the reply, Steckelmacher protests, but then drops the mask of anonymity and answers signing with his name and title.
- 95.
David Hoffmann Zur Aufklärung über die badische Gebetbuchreform: Ein Sendschreiben an den “Verein zur Wahrung des gesetzestreuen Judentums in Baden”, Rödelheim 1908. For a discussion of Hoffmann’s brochure, see Chap. 9.
- 96.
Moritz Steckelmacher Widerlegung des Sendschreibens des Dr. D. Hoffmann, Mannheim 1908, p. 25.
- 97.
Cf. Maimonides’ Laws of Kings and Wars 4:4. Steckelmacher Widerlegung, p. 27f.
- 98.
Cf. Maimonides’ Laws of the Foundations of the Torah 9:5. Steckelmacher Widerlegung, p. 31.
- 99.
Steckelmacher Widerlegung, p. 39.
- 100.
Denkschrift, p. 3.
- 101.
Denkschrift, p. 16f, note.
- 102.
Steckelmacher Widerlegung, p. 40. cf. Guide III:41 where Maimonides interprets the verse in Deut. 13:1 (…you shall neither add to it, nor subtract from it) as a means of saving the authority of the Torah – although God knew that changes in the law will always be necessary due to changing places and events.
- 103.
Jacob J. Petuchowski, taking both categories together, counted “one hundred and sixty textbooks which undertook to give a systematic presentation of the Jewish religion” between 1782 and 1884 alone. For a preliminary theological overview of this literature, see his “Manuals and Catechisms of the Jewish Religion in the Early Period of Emancipation”, in Alexander Altmann (ed.) Studies in Nineteenth Century Jewish Intellectual History, Cambridge 1964, p. 47ff.
- 104.
Leopold Löw Praktische Einleitung in die heilige Schrift und Geschichte der Schriftauslegung: ein Lehrbuch für die reifere Jugend, ein Handbuch für Gebildete, Gross-Kanischa 1855, p. 224–227. Löw (1811–1875) worked for 25 years as the liberal rabbi of the town of Szeged in Hungary, took part in the Reform conference in Breslau 1846, and edited the influential journal Ben-Chananja from 1858 to 1867.
- 105.
Leopold Stein
– Israelitisches Religionsbuch, Frankfurt 1855, p. 125. - 106.
Joseph Aub Grundlage zu einem wissenschaftlichen Unterrichte in der mosaischen Religion, Mainz 1865, p. 103. Aub, (1805–1880) an active but moderate Reformer, held three rabbinical posts during his lifetime, first in Bayreuth, then the major rabbinates of Mayence (for 15 years) and Berlin (from 1865) as successor of Michael Sachs. In 1831 Aub published a new Synagogenordnung that soon became a focus of the controversy about Reform. His call to Berlin later led to a split of the community and the formation of a Austrittsgemeinde.
- 107.
David Einhorn
(Beständige Leuchte). Die Lehre des Judentums, dargestellt für Schule und Haus, Philadelphia 1866, p. 13. - 108.
Hirsch B. Fassel (
) Die Mosaisch-Rabbinische Religionslehre, katechetisch für den Unterricht bearbeitet, Wien 1863, p. 176. - 109.
David Cassel Lehrbuch der jüdischen Geschichte und Literatur. Frankfurt a.M.: quoted after the second edition from 1896, p. 259ff. On Cassel see note 60.
- 110.
Adolf Biach Maimonides: ein Beitrag zum jüdischen Geschichtsunterrichte an Mittelschulen, Wien 1900. Biach (1866–1918) studied at the Breslau seminary and became rabbi of the town of Brüx (Most) in Bohemia in 1891. He also taught religion at the Brüx Obergymnasium and published monographs on Wieland and Hebbel. For his view on Maimonides, see below.
- 111.
Emil Dessauer Die jüdische Geschichte im Zeitbilde grosser Kulturstufen: Für höhere Schulen und zur Selbstbelehrung dargestellt, Frankfurt a.M.: 1905, p. 46ff.
- 112.
Max Freudenthal Religionsbuch für den Israelitischen Religionsunterricht an den Oberklassen der höheren Schulen, Nuremberg 1912 (quoted after the second edition from 1918), p. 13–15. Freudenthal (1868–1937) studied at the rabbinical seminary and at the university in Breslau, and in 1891 he earned a doctorate with a study on epistemology in Philo. As rabbi in Dessau, Danzig, and especially Nuremberg (1907–34), he was one of the most resolute exponents of religious liberalism in Germany. His contributions to Jewish scholarship are basically in the field of historiography, but he also published a Reform prayer book in 1914. From 1908 to 1921 he was a member of the “Maimonides lodge” of the Bnai-Brith order.
- 113.
Ibid., p. 69f. Crescas (1340–1410) tried to refute Aristotelian intellectualism (and Maimonides’ adoption of it) in his major work Or Hashem, not only in terms of religion, but also in natural science, where he achieved remarkable results. The soul, for Crescas, is independent of knowledge, and consequently man’s highest perfection is not attained through knowledge, but principally through love. Only love brings about the soul’s eternal happiness in the World to Come. (Or Hashem ch. II: 6,1) See Warren Z. Harvey Physics and Metaphysics in Hasdai Crescas, Amsterdam 1998, p. 108ff.
- 114.
Ignaz Ziegler Die Geschichte des Judentums von dem babylonischen Exile bis auf die Gegenwart: ein Familienbuch, Prag 1900, p. 145f. Ziegler (1861–1948) studied at the rabbinical seminary and at the University of Budapest where he earned a PhD in 1888. He officiated as rabbi of Carlsbad for five decades, publishing numerous books on Jewish subjects, among them a monumental study about midrashic metaphors dealing with kings, and a reinterpretation of the Talmud in the tradition of German Idealist philosophy. After the synagogue of Carlsbad burnt down in 1938, Ziegler emigrated to Israel and became one of the preachers in Rabbi Kurt Wilhelm’s liberal congregation, “Emet ve-Emunah”, which was founded in a Jerusalem basement room in 1936. See here my “Platzmachen für Gott – Else Lasker-Schüler, Rabbiner Kurt Wilhelm und der religiöse Liberalismus in Palästina”, in: Aschkenas 2/2011.
- 115.
Ignaz Ziegler Religionskämpfe im Judenthume, Wien 1898, p. 15–18.
- 116.
Jeremiah 9: 23 (
), the verse that Maimonides quotes at the end of Guide III: 54. For the whole section see Ludwig Philippson Die Israelitische Religionslehre, vol. 3, Leipzig 1865, p. 75f. - 117.
Ludwig Pick Die Weltanschauung des Judentums, Berlin 1912, p. 87f. Pick (1845–1937) was born in Hungary, studied theology and philosophy in Berlin and Prague, and earned a doctorate from the University of Heidelberg. He officiated as rabbi of Pyritz (Pommerania). Called to Königsberg in 1895 as assistant rabbi and teacher at the religious school, he actually substituted for the incumbent Rabbi Bamberger, who was ill. In 1899, apparently after some argument about his Reform views, he left for Berlin, where he gave private lectures, among other subjects, about Nietzsche and Judaism.
- 118.
A protocol of that meeting was published in Monatsschrift für Geschichte und Wissenschaft des Judentums 1904, No. 11, p. 751–54. Leopold Lucas claimed in 1906 that the plan was not only to publish the Maimonides biography, but the entire medieval Jewish corpus philosophicum. See his Die Wissenschaft des Judentums und die Wege zu ihrer Förderung, Berlin 1906, p. 11.
- 119.
David Jacob Simonsen (1853–1932) graduated from Breslau in 1879, but declined the offer to teach there and went back to his native Copenhagen, where he was Denmark’s chief rabbi from 1891 to 1902. Upon Simonsen’s resignation, the King conferred upon him the title of honorary professor.
- 120.
The preface (p. VIII) mentions that the volume appeared “much later than originally planned”, and that it became possible only due to the change of the 1904 concept from an organized biography to a loose collection of essays. The second volume, which would finally include a biography, was announced for 1910, appearing only in 1914 with a biographical essay by Simon Eppenstein (1864–1921), a lecturer at the orthodox Rabbinerseminar. The preface of the second volume mentions the plan for a third volume, which was to include a systematic exposition of Maimonides’ philosophy. But (probably because of the war) it never appeared.
- 121.
“Der Einfluss der Maimonidischen Philosophie auf das christliche Abendland”, in: Moses ben Maimon, vol I, p. 135ff. For the subject of Maimonides’ influence on Christian thinkers, see Görge K. Hasselhoff Dicit Rabbi Moyses, Würzburg 2004.
- 122.
Moses ben Maimon, vol I, p. 135ff.
- 123.
Jacob Guttmann Über Dogmenbildung im Judentum, Breslau 1894, p. 8.
- 124.
Jacob Guttmann “Die Beziehungen der maimonidischen Religionsphilosophie zu der des Ibn Daud” in: Judaica, Festschrift zu Hermann Cohens siebzigstem Geburtstage, Berlin 1912, p. 136. For Cohen and Guttmann, see also Guttmann’s critical review of Cohen’s programmatic “Einleitung mit kritischem Nachtrag”in: Monatsschrift für Geschichte und Wissenschaft des Judentums 1896/7, No. 2, p. 89–92 and Dieter Adelmann’s discusion of the relation of the two thinkers in “Reinige dein Denken” Über den jüdischen Hintergrund der Philosophie von Hermann Cohen (ed. Görge K. Hasselhoff), Würzburg 2010, p. 132ff. and 292f.
- 125.
Hermann Cohen, Jüdische Schriften III, p. 34. For this debate, see Hans Liebeschütz “Hermann Cohen and his Historical Background”, in: Leo Baeck Institute Year Book 13 (1968) p. 25–27 and Dieter Adelmann “Reinige dein Denken” p. 137 (note) and 139 (note). Adelmann claims that Cohen’s attack on Lazarus’ project was a concerted effort of the Breslau school against a non-philosophic, apologetic approach to “Jewish ethics.” See also Cohen’s lecture “Das Judentum als Weltanschauung” (1898), reprinted in “Reinige dein Denken”, p. 321ff.
- 126.
For Neumark and Kellermann, see Chap. 5 below. For Horovitz, see his “Die Stellung des Aristoteles bei den Juden des Mittelalters”, Leipzig 1911, reprinted in Wissenschaft des Judentums im Deutschen Sprachbereich (ed. K. Wilhelm), Tübingen, 1967, esp. p. 398. Strauss and Wolfson are briefly discussed at the end of Chap. 9.
- 127.
See his Hirsch’s collection of responsa Shemesh Marpei, New York, 1992, p. 205f. and Mordechai Eliav, Hildesheimer Briefe, Jerusalem 1965, letter 46. In a bitter irony of history, Hildesheimer’s proud alternative to Breslau, the Berlin Orthodox Rabbinical Seminary, was destroyed by the Nazis when the “ultra-orthodox” Lithuanian faction refused in 1933 a request by Hildesheimer’s aged son Meir to transfer the seminary to Israel. (See Christhard Hoffmann and Daniel R. Schwartz “Early but Opposed – Supported but Late: Two Berlin Seminaries Which Attempted to Move Abroad”, in: Leo Baeck Institute Year Book 36, 1991, p. 267–304.)
- 128.
Ignatz Münz Moses ben Maimon, sein Leben und seine Werke, Frankfurt 1912. (Note the similarity in the title to the Breslau project.)
- 129.
Arnold Klein “Rambam oder Maimonides”, in: Festschrift für Jacob Rosenheim, Frankfurt 1931. p. 212–226. See Chap. 9 for a more detailed discussion. Klein (1875–1961) came to Palestine in 1939 and served as the rabbi of a haredi congregation in Haifa.
- 130.
Moritz Güdemann, “Moses Maimonides”, p. 96. (my italics).
- 131.
Felix Perles (1874–1933), the son of Rabbi Joseph Perles, one of the first Breslau graduates, studied at the seminary himself, and received a doctorate from the university of Munich. Later, he taught at the Rabbinical Seminary of Vienna.
- 132.
Felix Perles “Maimonides”, in: Ost und West 1905, No. 5 (290–300) and No. 6 (379–388), p. 290.
- 133.
Ibid., p. 299.
- 134.
Klein, p. 213. Isaac Breuer Der neue Kusari (1934), in part translated by J. Levinger in Concepts of Judaism, Jerusalem 1974, quote on p. 172.
- 135.
Perles, p. 382.
- 136.
Ibid., p. 384.
- 137.
Ibid., p. 386.
- 138.
Martin Schreiner Die jüngsten Urteile über das Judentum, Berlin 1902, p. 5. Schreiner (1863–1927) earned a PhD from the University of Budapest in 1885, and officiated as rabbi in Hungary. In 1894 he was called to the Hochschule in Berlin, where he taught until his death. Schreiner published numerous studies on Jewish and Arabic medieval philosophy.
- 139.
Ibid., p. 38.
- 140.
Von Hartmann explicitly wrote that “Reform Judaism can certainly not be called Judaism anymore,” because “if one wants to remain a Jew, one needs to be faithful to the Law.” The theoretical and practical Weltanschaung of Reform Judaism was not religious anymore because a religion of law is, in this view, irreformable. Cf. E.v.Hartmann Das religiöse Bewusstsein der Menschheit, Leipzig 1888, p. 538 and 541.
- 141.
Schreiner, p. 52.
- 142.
Wilhelm Bacher (1850–1913), one of the most prolific Wissenschaft scholars, graduated from Breslau in 1870, and was the rabbi of Stettin for only one year before he became professor of Bible and Talmud at the newly created rabbinical seminary in Budapest. He published numerous influential books on subjects ranging from the Haggada to early Persian culture, among them a volume on Maimonides’ exegetical methods and results. On Bacher see Dieter Adelmann “Reinige dein Denken”, p. 177–82.
- 143.
Wilhelm Bacher, “Raschi und Maimuni”, in: Monatsschrift für Geschichte und Wissenschaft des Judentums, 1905, No. 1, p. 1–11.
- 144.
Österreichische Wochenschrift 1904, No. 49, p. 789.
- 145.
Adolf Biach Zur Erinnerung an den 700jähr. Todestag des jüdischen Geisteshelden Moses Maimonides Brüx 1906 (3rd edition), p. 7 (emphasise in the original). The work appears sometimes also under the title of the actual lecture “Moses Maimonides und Moses Mendelssohn in ihrer Bedeutung für die Zukunft des Judentums.” The same claim to superiority was then repeated four years later by Hermann Cohen at the World Congress for Free Christianity in Berlin. See his “Die Bedeutung des Judentums für den religiösen Fortschritt der Menschheit”, in: Werke, vol. 15, p. 429ff.
- 146.
Biach, Zur Erinnerung, p. 6.
- 147.
Ibid., p. 13f.
(The New Guide of the Perplexed). His German language study on Maimonides and Spinoza earned him a doctorate from the university of Göttingen. In 1885 he produced an annotated edition of Spinoza’s Ethics in Hebrew.
I, Sam 14:16 where Abarbanel interpreted it, probably following Maimonides, with melancholy.) This same subject had been heavily disputed already in the 1850s between the liberal rabbi Leopold Löw and Joseph Gugenheimer (then rabbi of Stuhlweißenburg in Hungary). Löw claimed with reference to the commentary on the Mishnah that Maimonides, in his rejection of demonism “implanted his anti-Talmudic opinion into the Talmud”, a view that Gugenheimer completely rejected. (See Löw in Ben Chanajah, 1858, No. 4, p. 154f. and Gugenheimer’s response in Jeschurun 1859, No. 2, p. 88f.)
– Israelitisches Religionsbuch, Frankfurt 1855, p. 125.
(Beständige Leuchte). Die Lehre des Judentums, dargestellt für Schule und Haus, Philadelphia 1866, p. 13.
) Die Mosaisch-Rabbinische Religionslehre, katechetisch für den Unterricht bearbeitet, Wien 1863, p. 176.
), the verse that Maimonides quotes at the end of Guide III: 54. For the whole section see Ludwig Philippson Die Israelitische Religionslehre, vol. 3, Leipzig 1865, p. 75f.Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Kohler, G.Y. (2012). The Rabbinical Seminaries. In: Reading Maimonides' Philosophy in 19th Century Germany. Amsterdam Studies in Jewish Philosophy, vol 15. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4035-8_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4035-8_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-4034-1
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-4035-8
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPhilosophy and Religion (R0)