|
 The
Ramban
Rabbi
Moshe ben Nachman
philosophy - disputations
with Christianity - writings
Rabbi
Moshe ben Nachman Gerondi is commonly known as Ramban, which is an acronym
of his Hebrew name and title. He
is also often called "Nachmanides", which is
a Greek translation of the Hebrew "Ben
Nachman," meaning "Son of Nachman." Sometimes
he is known by his Catalan name, Bonastruc Ça
Porta.
Nachmanides was
a Catalan rabbi, philosopher, Kabbalist and biblical commentator. Nachmanides
was born at Girona (hence his name "Gerondi") in 1194,
and died in the Land of Israel about 1270.
He was the
grandson of Isaac ben Reuben of Barcelona and cousin of Jonah Gerondi. His brother
was Benveniste da Porta, the bailie of Barcelona.
Among his teachers
in Talmud were Judah
ben Yakkar and Meïr ben Nathan of Trinquetaille, and he is said to have
been instructed in Kabbalah (Jewish mysticism) by his countryman Azriel.
Nachmanides
studied medicine, which he practiced as a means of livelihood. He
also studied philosophy. |
|
|
|
|
|
During
his teens he began to get a reputation as
a learned Jewish scholar. At
age 16 he began his writings on Jewish law. In
his Milchamot Hashem (Wars of the Lord) he defended Alfasi's decisions
against the criticisms of Zerachiah ha-Levi of Girona.
These
writings reveal a conservative tendency that distinguished his later works — an
unbounded respect for the earlier authorities. In the view of
Nachmanides, the wisdom of the rabbis of the Mishnah and Talmud, as well
as the Geonim (rabbis of the early medieval era) was unquestionable. Their
words were to be neither doubted nor criticized. "We bow," he
says, "before them, and even when the reason for their words is not
quite evident to us, we submit to them" (Aseifat Zekkenim,
commentary on Ketubot). |
Nachmanides'
adherence to the words of the earlier authorities may be due to piety,
or the influence
of the northern French Jewish school of thought. However,
it is thought that it also may be a reaction to the rapid acceptance of
Greco-Arabic philosophy among the Jews of Spain and Provence. This
occurred soon after
the appearance of Maimonides' Guide for the Perplexed. This work
gave rise to a tendency to allegorize Biblical narratives, and to downplay
the
role
of miracles. Nachmanides strove against this tendency, and went
to the other extreme, not even allowing the utterances of the immediate
disciples
of the
Geonim to be questioned.
|
Called upon,
about 1238, for support by Solomon of Montpellier, who had been excommunicated
by supporters of Maimonides, Nachmanides addressed a letter
to the communities of Aragon, Navarre, and Castile, in which Solomon's adversaries
were severely rebuked. However, the great respect he professed for Maimonides
(though he did not share the latter's views), reinforced by innate gentleness
of character,and kept him from allying himself with the anti-Maimonist party
and led him to assume the role of a conciliator.
In
a letter addressed to the French rabbis, he draws attention to the virtues
of Maimonides and holds that Maimonides' Mishne Torah - his Code
of Jewish Law - not only shows no leniency in interpreting prohibitions
within Jewish law, but may even be seen as more stringent, which in Nachmanides'
eyes was a positive factor. |
|
|
As
to Maimonides' Guide for the Perplexed, Nachmanides stated that it was
intended not for those of unshaken belief, but for those
who had
been led astray by the non-Jewish philosophical works of Aristotle and Galen.
(Note that Nachmanides's analysis of the Guide is not the consensus
view of modern scholars.)
"If," he
says, "you
were of the opinion that it was your duty to denounce the Guide as heretical,
why does a portion
of your flock recede
from the decision as if it regretted the step? Is it right in such important
matters to act capriciously, to applaud the one to-day and the other tomorrow?"
|
|
|
To
conciliate both parties Nachmanides proposed that the ban against the philosophical
portion of Maimonides's Code of Jewish law should
be revoked, but that the
ban against the study of the "Guide for the Perplexed", and against
those who rejected allegorical interpretation of the Bible, should be maintained
and even strengthened. This compromise, which might have ended the struggle,
was rejected by both parties in spite of Nachmanides' authority.
Nachmanides
was popularly attributed with writing a letter on marriage, holiness,
and sexual relations, Iggeret ha-Kodesh. In it the author criticizes
Maimonides for stigmatizing as a disgrace to man; man's sexual nature.
In the view of
the author, the body with all its functions being the work of God, is holy,
and so none of its normal sexual impulses and actions can be regarded as objectionable. |
|
In Nahmanides's
Torat ha-Adam, which deals with mourning rites, burial customs, etc., Nachmanides
sharply criticizes writers who strove to render man indifferent
to both pleasure and pain. This, he declares, is against the Law, which
commands man to rejoice on the day of joy and weep on the day of mourning.
The last
chapter, entitled Shaar ha-Gemul, discusses reward and punishment, resurrection,
and kindred subjects. It derides the presumption of the philosophers
who pretend to a knowledge of the essence of God and the angels, while even
the composition
of their own bodies is a mystery to them.
For Nachmanides,
divine revelation is the best guide in all these questions, and proceeds
to give his views on Jewish views of the afterlife. He holds
that as God is immanently just, there must be reward and punishment. This
reward and punishment must take place in another world, for the good and evil
of this world are relative and transitory.
|
|
|
Besides the animal
soul, which is derived from the "Supreme powers" and
is common to all creatures, man possesses a special soul. This special
soul, which is a direct emanation from God, existed before the creation of
the world.
Through the medium of man it enters the material life; and at the dissolution
of its medium it either returns to its original source or enters the body
of another man. This belief is, according to Nachmanides, the basis
of the levirate marriage, the child of which inherits not only the name of
the
brother
of his father, but also his soul, and thus continues its existence
on the earth. The resurrection spoken of by the rabbis, which will take
place after the coming of the Messiah, is referred by Nachmanides to the body.
The
physical body may, through the influence of the soul, transform itself into
so pure an essence that it will become eternal.
His commentary
on the Torah (five books of Moses) was his last work, and his most well
known. He was prompted to write it by three motives:
|
|
|
- to
satisfy the minds of students of the Law and stimulate their interest
by a critical
examination of the text;
- to justify
the ways of God and discover the hidden meanings of the words of
Scripture, "for in the Torah are
hidden every wonder and every mystery, and in her treasures is
sealed every beauty of wisdom";
- to soothe
the minds of the students by simple explanations and pleasant words
when they read the appointed sections of the Pentateuch on Sabbaths
and festivals.
|
His exposition,
intermingled with aggadic and mystical interpretations, is based upon careful
philology and original study of the Bible. As in
his preceding
works, he vehemently attacks the Greek philosophers, especially Aristotle,
and frequently criticizes Maimonides' Biblical interpretations. Thus
he cites Maimonides' interpretation of Gen. 18:8, asserting that it is contrary
to
the evident meaning of the Biblical words and that it is sinful even to hear
it. While Maimonides endeavored to reduce the miracles of the Bible
to the level of natural phenomena, Nachmanides emphasizes them, declaring
that "no
man can share in the Torah of our teacher Moses unless he believes that all
our affairs, whether they concern masses or individuals, are miraculously
controlled, and that nothing can be attributed to nature or the order of the
world."
|
Next to belief
in miracles Nachmanides places three other beliefs, which are, according
to him, the Jewish principles of faith, namely, the belief in creation
out of nothing, in the omniscience of God, and in divine providence.
Nachmanides was
an adversary of Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra, an influential Jewish Bible commentator.
Nachmanides criticises him with harsh expressions that are
not in keeping with his usual temper. He is especially bitter against
ibn Ezra for deriding Kabbalah (Jewish mysticism), which Nachmanides thought
to be a divine tradition. However, we know that Nachmanides showed
ibn Ezra considerable
respect. This is evident from Nahmanides' introduction to his commentary
on the Bible.
|
|
|
Nachmanides,
first as rabbi of Girona and later as chief rabbi of Catalonia, seems to
have led a quiet and happy life. When well advanced in years, however,
his life was interrupted by an event which compelled him to leave his family
and his native country and wander in foreign lands. He was called upon
to sustain a religious disputation he was called upon to sustain,
in 1263, in the
presence
of King
James of Aragon, with the apostate Pablo Christiani, to whom he had been sent
by his general Raymond de Penyafort, requested King James to order Nachmanides
to take part in a public disputation.
|
|
|
Christiani had
been trying to make the Jews of Provence abandon their religion and convert
to Christianity. Relying upon the reserve his adversary would
be forced to maintain through fear of wounding the feelings of the Christian
dignitaries, Pablo assured the King that he could prove the truth of Christianity
from the Talmud and other rabbinical writings.
Nachmanides complied
with the order of the King, but stipulated that complete freedom of speech
should
be
granted, and for four days (July 20-24) debated with Pablo Christiani in
the presence of the King, the court, and many ecclesiastical dignitaries.
|
The subjects discussed were:
- whether the Messiah had appeared;
- whether the Messiah
announced by the Prophets was to be considered as divine or as a man born
of human parents
- whether the Jews
or the Christians were in possession of the true faith.
Christiani's
argued, based upon several aggadic passages, that the Pharisee sages believed
that the Messiah had lived during the Talmudic
period, and
that they ostensibly believed that the Messiah was therefore the
man described in the Gospels.
|
Nachmanides
countered that Christiani's interpretations were per-se distortions;
the rabbis would not hint that the central figure of the Christian
Myth was the Messiah while, at the same time, explicitly
opposing him as such.
Nachmanides
proceeded to provide context for the proof-texts cited by Christiani, showing
that they were
most clearly
understood differently
than as proposed by Christiani.
Furthermore,
Nachmanides demonstrated from numerous biblical and talmudic sources that
traditional Jewish
belief ran
contrary to Christiani's postulates. |
|
|
Nachmanides
went on to show that the Biblical prophets regarded the future
messiah as a human, a person of flesh and blood, and not as a divinity, in
the way that Christians view their central figure. He noted that their
promises of a reign of universal peace and justice had not yet been fulfilled.
On the
contrary,
since the appearance of the central character in their Gospels, the world
had been filled with violence and injustice, and among all denominations
the
Christians
were
the most
warlike.
|
|
|
He noted that
question of the Messiah are of less dogmatic importance to Jews than most
Christians imagine. The reason given by him for this bold statement
is that it is more meritorious for the Jews to observe the precepts under
a Christian ruler, while in exile and suffering humiliation and abuse, than
under the rule of the Messiah, when every one would perforce act in accordance
with the Law.
As the disputation
turned in favor of Nachmanides, the Jews of Barcelona, fearing the resentment
of the Dominicans, entreated him to discontinue; but the King,
whom Nachmanides had acquainted with the apprehensions of the Jews, desired
him to proceed.
|
|
The
controversy was therefore resumed, and concluded in a complete victory
for Nachmanides, who was dismissed by the King with
a gift
of three hundred maravedis as a mark of his respect.
The King remarked
that he had never encountered a man who, while yet being wrong, argued
so well
for his position.
The Dominicans,
nevertheless, claimed the victory, and Nachmanides felt constrained to
publish the controversy. From this publication Pablo selected certain
passages which he construed as blasphemies against Christianity and denounced
to his
general Raymond de Penyafort. A capital charge was then instituted,
and a formal complaint against the work and its author was lodged with the
King.
|
|
|
|
|
|
James was
obliged to entertain the charge, but, mistrusting the Dominican court,
called an extraordinary commission, and ordered that the proceedings
be conducted in his presence. Nahmanides admitted that he had
stated many things against Christianity, but he had written nothing which
he had
not used
in his disputation in the presence of the King, who had granted him freedom
of speech.
The
justice of his defense was recognized by the King and the commission;
but to satisfy
the Dominicans, Nachmanides was sentenced to exile for two years
and his pamphlet was condemned to be burned. He was also fined, but
this was remitted as a favor to Benveniste de Porta, Nahmanides' brother.
The Dominicans,
however, found this punishment too mild and, through Pope Clement IV, they
seem to have succeeded in turning the two years' exile into perpetual banishment.
|
|
Nachmanides
left Aragon and sojourned for three years somewhere in Castille or in southern
France. In 1267 he emigrated to the land of Israel, and, after
a short stay in Jerusalem, settled at Acre, where he was very active in spreading
Jewish learning, which was at that time very much neglected in the Holy Land.
He gathered a circle of pupils around him, and people came in crowds,
even from the district of the Euphrates, to hear him. Karaites were said
to have
attended his lectures, among them being Aaron ben Joseph the Elder, who later
became one of the greatest Karaite authorities.
It was to arouse
the interest of the Israeli Jews in the exposition of the Bible that Nachmanides
wrote the greatest of his works, the above-mentioned
commentary on the Torah.
|
|
|
Although surrounded
by friends and pupils, Nachmanides keenly felt the pangs of exile. "I left my family,
I forsook my house. There, with my sons and daughters, the sweet, dear
children I brought
up at
my knees, I left also my soul. My heart and my eyes will dwell with
them forever."
|
|
|
During his three
years' stay in the Holy Land, Nachmanides maintained a correspondence with
his native land, by means of which he endeavored
to bring about a closer
connection between Judea and Spain.
Shortly
after his arrival in Jerusalem, he addressed a letter to his son
Nachman, in which he described the desolation
of the Holy City, where there were at that time only two Jewish inhabitants — two
brothers, dyers by trade. In a later letter from Acre he counsels his
son to cultivate humility, which he considers to be the first of virtues.
In another,
addressed to his second son, who occupied an official position at the Castilian
court, Nachmanides recommends the recitation of the daily prayers and warns
above all against immorality.
|
Nachmanides
died after having passed the age of seventy, and his remains were
interred at Haifa, by the grave of Yechiel
of Paris. Nahmanides'
wrote glosses on the whole Talmud, and made compendiums of parts of Jewish
law, after the model of Isaac Alfasi.
0899062180
089906390X
|