Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T23:32:41.693Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Jewish-Christian Disputation in the Setting of Humanism and Reformation in the German Empire

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 June 2011

Haim Hillel Ben-Sasson
Haim Hillel Ben-Sasson
Affiliation:
The Hebrew University, Jerusalem
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The very conception of change in the social and cultural climate of the Christian society as providing a meaningful setting for an exchange of ideas between Jews and Christians in Germany during the late fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries needs clarification. Some scholars characterize Jewish life and thought in that time and place as dominated by almost total social isolation and strict spiritual traditionalism. According to their view, this seclusion was as much self-willed as imposed by Christian society. It is admitted that there was defence against danger and refutation of libel on behalf of the Jews. The Shtadlan Josel von Rosheim, the great Jewish diplomat of those days, represents this Jewish response to external challenge. It is, of course, well established that Johannes Reuchlin acquired his Hebrew from Jewish teachers, but this is seen mainly as a feature of awakening European Hebraism. Very little has been done to ascertain what relation obtained between the cultures of the pupil and his teachers. Even his defence of the Talmud — beneficial to the Jews in its results — is seen as unrelated to their trend of thought.

Type
Research Article
Information
Harvard Theological Review , Volume 59 , Issue 4 , October 1966 , pp. 369 - 390
Copyright
Copyright © President and Fellows of Harvard College 1966

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Jacob Katz, Tradition and Crisis (New York, 1961).

2 Selma Stern-Taeubler, Josel von Rosheim (Stuttgart, 1959).

3 Stern-Taeubler, loc. cit.

4 By my student, Mrs. Ḥavah Fraenkel-Goldschmidt, who prepared an edition of this work.

5 Abraham ben Shem Tov Bibago (late fifteenth century). Bibago's Derekh Emuna was printed in Constantinople, 1522. Josel became absorbed in it either through a copy of the printed edition which arrived in Germany shortly after the publication, or through a Ms. On the cultural climate in Spain in the days of Bibago see my article, “The Generation of the Spanish Exiles on its Fate” (Hebrew), in Zion 26 (1961), 23–64.

6 As seen in his writings (which are extant in Mss.). See my article, “The Social Teaching of R. Joḥanan Loria” (Hebrew), Zion 27 (1962), 166–98Google Scholar.

7 Ibid., 172–87 (rule of scholars and “patricians”); 187–89 (antiascetic attitude); 189–94 (family life).

8 In my Hagut We-Hanhaga, The Social Views of Polish Jewry in the Later Middle Ages (Hebrew), (Jerusalem, 1960), 13–14.

9 Rabbi of Cracow (1523–1572).

10 Id., Responsa (Amsterdam, 1711), §7, Fol. 4v:

11 A collection of philosophizing sermons in the form of a commentary on the Torah, by Rabbi Yitzḥak ʻAramah (lived in Spain late fifteenth century).

11a A systematic philosophic-theological treatise, by one of the Jewish spokesmen at the Tortosa disputation (1412–1413), R. Joseph Albo (Spain).

12 The philosophic dialogue by R. Jehudah Halevi (lived in Spain, first half of twelfth century).

13 Bakhia Ibn Pakudah's moralistic-philosophical treatise (11th century, Spain). R. Yaʼir Ḥayyin Bacharach (1637–1702), Responsa (Frankfurt a. Main, 1699), § 123, םחורחבב םירמולו םיעמוש ויה — יחעמשש המ יפל — םינושארה ׳ורורב הגהו״ Fol. 116v: חובוח רפס, ל״נה םעטמ, ׳ירמול ןחצק ויה םג …,ןחמגוודו דזוכהז םידקעהו הדיקעה רפס ״…חובבלה

14 A work contemporaneous with the disputations dealt with here is the Sefer “Nizaḥon” by JomTov Lipman Mühlhausen (Nürnberg, 1644). I hope to compare it with the material analyzed here when publishing the full texts.

15 As quoted by Werner Schwarz, Principles and Problems of Biblical Translation, Some Reformation Controversies and their Background (Cambridge U.P., 1955), 69.

16 Bodleian Ms. Opp. Add. 4° 91, fol. 74r: A literal translation of the last sentence would be: “It is a law without reason that you impose on us, and the like.”

17 Ibid., fol. 75r: … םיעמושה לכ וסייפחנו [!] סייפסנו See also below, note 29.

18 Zeitschrift für Bayer. Landesgeschichte 22 (1959): P. Herde, “Gestaltung und Krisis des christlich-jüdischen Verhältnisses in Regensburg am Ende des Mittelalters,” 385, n. 138: “…dan man undter zwaintzig Juden nit ainen findet, der sein zaichen tregt…”

19 Composed, or copied, in Nürnberg approximately in the last quarter of the fifteenth century.

20 Hans Folz, Die Alt und Neu Ee (Fastnachtspiele aus dem fünfzehnten Jahrhundert, ed. Adalbert Keller, Erster Theil [Stuttgart, 1853]), 1–33.

21 See Wolf-Dieter Marsch u. Karl Thieme, Christen und Juden (Mainz, 1961), 79–90 (“Die Geistlichen Spiele”).

22 Hans Folz, Die Meisterlieder, ed. August L. Meyer (Berlin, 1908).

23 Ibid., § 100, 372–84, and § 103, 387–401.

24 § 100, 383: “Sprechen auch [die Juden]: ‘Wer dez talmut spot, der wurt mit einer schentlichen pein gepeingt.’ Warumb ward dann nit gepeinnigt der kunig von Franckreich der nit verspot, sunder alle bücher dez talmuts verbrennet in seinen reich? Warumb wurden nit gepeinnigt die gelarten die solchs zu richten im landt Franckreich?”

25 § 103, 391.

26 “…daz auch gelogen…”

27 “…und get ym gar woll als keinem könig in der cristenheyt; dar umb in die cristenheyt schreibt den aller cristenlichsten kunig.” All the above passages seem to refer to the burning of the Talmud in France in 1240–1242. The theme is therefore an old story at the time of Folz.

Account has also to be taken of Victor Michel's opinion that Folz was in these Pharetrae only partly an author, and in part he was a copyist only (see his Studien über die ältesten deutschen Fastnachtspiele, [Strassburg, 1846], 235–37). This does not change the evidence for the variation of formulae of the one theme in a single line of its tradition, pointing to its use in various disputations.

28 Ibid., § 76, par. 5, 299–300: “Mich fragt ein jüd: ‘Wi micklich wer // Das dy ainig persan Cristi//Eins mals bewegt wer hin und her, //Als man sicht taglich pey uns hye: //Ein priester ab, den andern aüff // Gen mit dem sacrament, // Das nit allein an einem ort, // Sünder an vil enden geschicht.’ Ich sprach: ‘Verste nün meine wort, // So las ich dich dem zweiffel nicht. // Merck aüff den mon, ww naczt ein haüf // Menschen gesamelt sent, // (299) Dy sechen in al vor in stan, // Und welch aüs in von dannen gen, // Was weges ein yder vur nem, // Get es mit itlichem aus den. // Sich, jud, hie der gleichen rem // Wiltw irrung entgan…’” (300).

29 Hans Folz, Die Reimpaarsprüche, ed. Hanns Fischer (Münchener Texte und Untersuchungen zur deutschen Literatur des Mittelalters, Bd. 1 [München, 1961], 241: [Jude:] ‘“Noch eins mir prist: // Seyt Jhesus nun ein mensch auch ist, // Wie wirt sein leyb so weit geteylt // In prots gestallt und vermeylt, // Als an vil enden teglich gschicht. // Kein mensch so weyt sich teylet nicht.’ // Do sprach ich: ‘jüd, wo ir beschneyt // Ein kindlein in der jüdscheyt weyt, // Seczt ir allweg zwen sessel ho. // Sag, worumb sten die sessel do? ‘// Do sprach der jüd: ‘crist, glaub mir das, // Do sint Enoch und Elias // Und siczen auf den sesseln peyd, // Wo man auf erd ein kint beschneyd.’ // Ich sprach: ‘jüd, künen die zwen das, // Worumb mein herr Jhesus nit pas, // der worer got an mittels frist // An allen enden ewig ist?’ // Der jüd sprach: ‘crist, ich mus nun sweygen…’”.

This formulation is part of an extensive disputation with Jews (ibid., 226–42). It was conducted, according to Folz, in public. A Jew “who thought of himself as very wise” — “…der sich daucht gar weys…” (ibid., 227) — provoked it. In its first edition this piece was headed: “Itē eī krieg dē der dichter dises spruchs gehapt // hat wider einem iuden mit dē er wandret. Gedruckt vō hansē volczē vo wurmss barwirer // wō hafft zu nurmberg Im Mcccc un Lxxlx Jare” (ibid., 226). In the contemporaneous Sepher Nizaḥon (see above, note 14) the subject of Elijah's chair is brought up not in connection with the Christian sacrament (dealt with separately there, Section Bereshit, § 8, 11) but as an independent Christian argument and a Jewish answer to it. In Section Lek-Leha, § 22, 19–20: “They made fun of the chair prepared in honor of the prophet who is also the angel [or: messenger] of the covenant, saying: How many circumcisions are there in the world in one day. How, then, can he arrive at all of them?… [the Divine Presence — Shekinah — is omnipresent, without being involved in movement and arrival], likewise is Elijah's supervision of them all. I would answer them moreover according to their understanding, that he comes in person, and I would say: Let the Angel of Death be proof, for how many die in the world, and in one [and the same] moment he arrives from one end of the world to the other. Elijah has been transformed into the likeness of an angel,” i.e., when he ascended to heaven.

30 It is difficult to see where he got the idea that both — Elijah and Enoch — are expected at a Jewish circumcision ceremony and that two chairs are prepared. The only explanation that occurs to me is that he, or his literary source, had heard about the Midrashic identification of Elijah with Enoch, amongst others, and later split the identification in two. If true, this would tend to show much more acquaintance with Jewish lore and much more confusion about it than even his disputation-writings in their generality show.

31 E.g., “tu irdische Maulberff” (Meisterlieder, 391); “tu giftige natter” (ibid.); “ir plinten hunt” (ibid., 392); “du schweziger Jud” (ibid., 393); “O du falscher Jud” (ibid., 396).

32 He lived from 1386 to 1456 and was virulently anti-Jewish, measured even by the concepts of his time. Towards the end of his life he preached in Germany, and caused the Jews much tribulation in the whole Empire as well as in Poland.

33 See Eugen Jacob, Johannes von Capistrano, Zweiter Theil, Erste Folge (Breslau, 1905), 404 ff.

34 Ibid., 408: “Judei cachinnant contra simplices et suos notos Christianos, ut in veritate compertum est, quibus deridendo fidem nostram dixerunt: Ecce quid agunt clerici vestri! Numquid aperte videtis, quod vos decipiunt, falsa vobis praedicantes et falsa signa et miracula vobis mentientes ? Numquid simile estimare potestis factum fuisse per priores? Vae, si Christus vester non alia fecit miracula quam ista! Debile habet fundamentum fides vestra.’”

35 Ibid., 409.

36 Ibid.

37 Ibid.: “Talibus et similibus fortioribusque motivis Judei invehunt contra fidem nostram.”

This whole passage is found only in one Ms. — the one that was at Dessau; it is omitted in the Breslau Ms.

38 Johannes Hofer, Johannes von Capistrano (Innsbruck, 1936), 439, n. 30 (from a Munich Ms.): “Decipiuntur Judei dicentes, quod omnis possit salvari in fide sua, quod est impossibile, quia oporteret ponere tot deos, quot sunt diversitates hominum.” This sermon was given in Wien. In a German version of a sermon of Capistrano given in Nürnberg he warns again his listeners against what the Jews say, that salvation is possible through every faith. “If each man were saved through his faith, then the number of religions would be the number of men.” “Geh, geh, geh! Dann darfst Du nie mehr sagen, im Namen des Herrn, oder, ich glaube an einem Gott” (ibid., 439).

39 Lev. 20: 26.

40 This seems the meaning of the Hebrew … ךממ יחעמש אל םא.

41 This seems the meaning of … חוכלמל עדוי םא אוה ושפנבו.

42 Ms. Opp. Add. 4° 91 (Bodleian), fol. 74v–75r:

.(fol. 75v) ״םיעמושה םלוכ

43 See S. Grayzel, The Church and the Jews in the Thirteenth Century (Philadelphia, 1933), 308.

44 The 5 letters make 600: 400 = ח; 10 = י; 90 = צ.

45 E.g.: םהלש םיליכשמה ורמאו …ונילע םיגיעלמ… (Ms. Opp. 223, fol. 166v); “… They deride us… and their scholars say” (ibid.) …חומואה ימכחמ דחא םכח ינחצנ “I disputed with a sage of the Gentile sages.” The conclusion of one of his disputations is described by him (fol. 168r): ןיא םא:ורמא א״ט, הפל די ומשו וניחעדל הסייפחנ הזבו םיעדוי יאדובש, שירפבש ימורב םילודג םימכח שיו שי ירה, ביצהל םיצדוי ונא ץרחל. — “And with this they were reconciled to our view and stopped arguing. But they said: ‘Even if we don't know the answer, there are still plenty of great scholars in Rome and Paris, who certainly know how to explain.’” This seems an accurate rendering of the certainty about great Christian centres of learning and of the calibre of his opponents in their own view. Only rarely does he use slighting expressions, like (fol. 170r) םירקום רשא; והיימופב ארפצ — that when speaking with great bitterness of the Christian accusation that the Jews would exterminate the Christians if they could.

46 See my “The Social Teaching of R. Joḥanan Loria,” especially 181–83.

47 Ibid., 189–94.

48 Ibid., especially 197–98.

49 Ps. 19: 8.

50 Deut. 13: 1.

51 Ms. Opp. 223, fol. 168v:

52 See Arno Borst, Der Turmbau von Babel, vol. 3, part 1 (Stuttgart, 1950); Ernst Cassirer, Individuum und Kosmos in der Philosophic d. Renaissance (Berlin, 1927), 20; id., “Die Bedeutung d. Sprachproblems f. d. Entstehung d. neuren Philosophie,” in Festschrift Meinhof (Hamburg, 1927), 507–14; Karl Otto Apel, Die Idee d. Sprache bei Nicolaus v. Cues, in Archiv f. Begriffsgeschichte 1 (1955), 200–21.

53 See Hermann Gumbel, “Vom wundertätigen Wort,” in Zeitschrift für deutsche Philologie 59 (1935), 189–96.

54 See Werner Schwarz, Principles and Problems of Biblical Translation, some Reformation Controversies and their Background (Cambridge U.P., 1955); especially his summing up of Reuchlin's antitraditional stand on linguistic grounds, 79.

55 Ms. Opp. 223, fol. 170r.

56 If translated “all the religions,” it would even agree better with the context.

57 Literally: “One pastor, one stable.”

58 Zech. 14: 9.

59 Literally: “from the side of unity.”

60 Literally: “no partnership to God.”

61 It may be that ךוליח וא יוניש are here as synonyms.

62 It could be that he intended with שודיח — “birth.”

63 Literally: “They have no mouth to answer.”

64 In Zech.; see n. 58.

65 Ms. Opp. 223, fol. 170r:

66 See Nicolai de Cusa, De Pace fidei…, ediderunt… Raymundus Klibansky et Hildebrandus Bascour, Supplement 3 to Medieval and Renaissance Studies (London, 1956); Bruno Decker, Nikolaus v. Kues und der Friede unter den Religionen, in Humanismus, Mystik u. Kunst in d. Welt der Mittelalters, ed. J. Koch, 94–121.

67 De Pace, ch. 13, ed. R. Klibansky…, 39.

68 Ibid., ch. 15, 50.

69 Ms. Mich. 121 (Bodleian), fol. 270r–73r.

70 One could tentatively assume a later date for this introduction. A case for this view could be made on the basis of our author's remark that Luther “wrote to all the nations to worsen” [the lot of the Jews]. He writes also about Luther that he “composed books” against the Jews “of whatever he could find of libels and lies” (see Hebrew text below). This could be taken as evidence that the Jew's response to the Reformation challenge was made some time after 1543; it would still have to be some date very close to 1543. But judging from his general tone it does not seem to be after the publication of Luther's worst anti-Jewish writings. In any case this introduction was written while Luther was alive.

71 Or: “dukes and nobles and the law-breakers of the nations and scholars of their faith.” It will depend on how one translates םימע יצירפו.

72 Or “…and his faction,” or “…and his sect.” It will depend on the translation of אחעייסו.

73 Or: “…to bring them closer [nearer].” It turns on the translation of םחוא ברקלו.

74 Or: “He brought evidence and made a book,” depending on the translation of רפס השעו הייר איבהו.

75 ילארשיה חחפשממ ושי.

76 Or: “…after the faith of the Israelites,” depending on the translation of רחא ׳לארשי חנומא.

77 Ms. Mich. 121, fol. 270r: ׳יפ ,אניטרמ ומשו ,רמוכ םוק [1520] [=Das Jesus Christus eyn geborner Jüd sey, Doctor Martinus Luther, Wittenberg, Mdxxiii].

78 The excellent History of the Merchant of Venice… by W. Shakespeare, Printed by J. Roberts, 1600, Act 3, Scene 1, Fol. 18v.: “Hath not a Jewe eyes? hath not a Jew hands? organs, dimensions, senses, affections, passions ? fed with the same food?…”; see H. B. Charlton, “Shakespeare's Jew,” in the Bulletin of the John Rylands Library 18 (January 1934).

79 Or: “somewhat,” depending on the translation of חצקמ.

80 Ms. Mich. 121, fol. 270v:

81 See my review of R. Straus' Volume of Regensburg sources in Tarbiz 34 (1964), 99–105; especially 101, n. 12.

82 See Ludwig Feilchenfeld, Rabbi Josel von Rosheim (Strassburg, 1898), Beilagen: § 3 (year 1530), 156, 157; § 7 (1531), 163, 164; § 21 (1546), 192; § 24 (1548), 198.

83 Ms. Mich. 121, fol. 272r:

Luther's use of this term is seen, e.g., in a letter to his father, February 15th, 1530: “…Es ist doch ja dis verfluchte Leben nichts anders denn ein rechtes Jamertal/Darin man je lenger je mehr suende/bosheit/ plage und unglueck sihet und erfehret/Und ist des alles kein auffhoeren noch abnemen da” till saving death comes to bring the joy of the heavenly abode (his Schriften, vol. 5 [Jhena, 1575], fol. 13v); and see Grimm, Deutsches Wörterbuch, 4, 2te Abteilung (Leipzig, 1877), Col. 2261. For Luther's attitude to the Jews, see Reinhold Lewin, Luthers Stellung zu den Juden (Breslau, 1911); Stöhr, Martin, “Luther und die Juden,” in Wolf-Dieter Marsch u. Karl Thieme, Christen u. Juden (Mainz, 1961), 115–40Google Scholar.

84 Ms. Mich. 121, fol. 272r:

85 Ibid., fol. 272v:

86 Das Jesus Christus eyn geborner Jüd sey, Wittembergk, 1523, 12: “…weyl sie [die Juden] den ja so wortkriegisch sindt und an den buchstabe so hart hangē.” This is a constant theme there.

87 Ms. Mich. 121, fol. 272v: …חצ ונושלו חוכיראב אלש הו יחרבח.