Page:Jewish Encyclopedia Volume 1.pdf/60

14 Aaron ben Joseph Aaron ha-Levi

THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA

Bayit" (Breaches of the House), u

critieisin

of the

" (The Precept of the freiit work. "Torat Im Bsiyit louse), written by .Soloiiioii lien Adret. Several times during his nilihinical career Aaron came into eontiict on imiKirtanl jioints with Solo-

mon ben

Adret, the liadini; spiril of the Spanish one occasion tin y failed to agree in the decision of a subject submitted to them, and neither being willing to acknowledge the superiority of the other, they were obliged to refer the case to the

Jews.

(.)n

French authorities. No sooner had Adret i)ulilished Ids important work, "Torat ha-Bayit," than Aaron subnntled il It retlects great to a severe but just criticism. credit upon Aaron that he treated his opponent with the greatest deference, never allowing himself to descend to personalities. The same thing can not be said of Adret 's counter-criticisni, "Mishnierel ha-Bayit" (Defense of the House), which is written in an acrimonious, not to say nialici<ius, tune: that may jierhaps be the rea.son that Adret pulilished it anonymously, for it was only in later years that he

acknowledged

his authorship.

Thesi'

two

distin-

guished pupils of NahmaniilesdilTered also in many While Adret inclined to mysticism. other points. Aaron treated important dogmatical ((uestions in a

was distasteful to the orlhodD.x. as. Without for instance, his opinion im resurrection. denying resinreetion, he maintained that the body would have to undergo certain changes until it acquired an ethereal nature which would pennit it to appear before God and to look upon the glory of Aaron was at lirst credited with the auheaven. thorship of the "Sefer ha-Hinnuk" an error correeted by Kosin (" Eiu t'limpendium der Jlidischen Gesetzeskunde," ISTl, pp. 131-134). See A.MtoN fashion which

—

h.v-Lkvi of B.vrcelona. BiBi.iouRAPiiv: MenahPni

Melrl,

Bet ha-Bchiroli. in Ni'tiDavid nf Kstt-lla. p.

hailtT. Mriliiintt Jtnr. Chroii. ii.23 iiit-illHT of tliein know.s utiytliiiiji of Aaron's sojourn In Provem-i-i; NeuIwuer. Miimitx'chrift, ISTl. p. 513; (ieiger, JHil. Z('i7. .t. 1;^; Neubauer. ^rt^ OxfunU index Gnitz, Gci^vh. <i. Jiulni. vii. Itil. Iti2; Ilenan. L€j< lialilnns Frani^aiK <//i.vfo(rc Litterairi: tic la Frnnre^ vol. xxvii.). pp. .52:j-.'»2S: Gross. GalUa Juitaita, pp. 3S7-3;£i. 4t), 4til Miihael, Or /ia-//(i.wi''i. No. SiH; J. Perles, i?. Saloino ben Abraham ben Ailcreth, pp. -.W;

I.saai'iit' Latlt-.s.





4, G2.

L. G.

AARON BEN

JOSEPH,

THE KARAITE

the Elder t(i distinguish him from A.xuox BEN Elijah of Nicomedia. the Yorx(^Eu): Emi(called

nent teacher, i)hilosopher. physician, and liturgical poet in Constantinople; bom in Sulchat, ('rinx'a, about 12fiO; died about 1330. He took a prominent part in the regeneration of Karaism by the help of philosophical elements borrowed from liabbanite literature. When only nineteen years of age he had mastered the theological knowledge of his time to such a degree that lie was elected the spiritual head of llu^ Karaite community of his native town, and in that capacity he engaged the Habbanite teachers in a public dispute to determine the correct time for the new moon. He then journeyed through many lands and diligently studied the works of Ibn Ezra, Jfaimonides, Nahmanides. and Rashi. Being, as he said, eager to arrive at "the truth without bias and prejudice, and free from partizan spirit," he determined to accept the results of his investigation, even if they conflicted with Karaite teachings and traditions. In this spirit of fairness he wrote, in 1294. while following the profession of a iiliysician in Constantinople, the

work which

fame and influence despite his Habbanite proclivities. This work was " Mibhar " (The Choice), a commentarv on the the established his

14

Pentateuch, written in the terse, concise, and often obscure style and after the critical method of Ibu Ezra, and this became to the later generation of Karateachers a .source of instruction in religious i)hilosin exegesis, and in practical theology, that is. file observance of the Law. Like Ibn Ezra, he presents his theology not in systematic and coherent form, but in observations made throughout the book, in connection with the various jiorlions of His Theology, the Torah. Unlike Ibn Ezra, however, he avoids references lo hid<leu mysteinesof the Biblical te.xt, insisting always on its plain meaning or its possible liguralive signiticunce. For the latter he especially uses the conunenlary of Nahmanides. whose pupil he is errone<iusly sjiid to have been. Like Judah Iladassi anil .Maimoni<les. he accentuates the spirituality of God; but. unlike these, lie assumes certain attributes of Gc«l lo be inseparable from His essence, but to be taken rather as human forms of speech. In connection with this he dwells especially on the will of God, by which the world was created, anil by which the Angels celestial bodies are moved and governed. are to him intelligences emanating from the divine intellect, not created beings; and the existence of demons he rejects as an absurdity. God's saying, " Let us make man " he explains as signifying the cooperation of the spiritual with the sensuous in the creation and evolution of man; and when God is described as giving names to things, the meaning is that He prompts man to do so. Still, he o])])o-es that rationalism which dis.solvcs miracles into natProphecy he explains as a jisyural occurrences. chologieal. not a physical, process, manifested in ditlVrent forms; either the inner eye or ear perceiving the object in a vision or dream, or. the Irulh being on a Ingher plane, communicated intuitively. Only Moses received the divine revelation directly ite

ophy,

I

and clearly without any mind-obscuring vision. Abraham's call to sjicritice his son he takes to be a mere vision. Aaron is very outspoken on the subject of man's free will, opposing emphatically the notion held by Ibn Ezra and othei's. that human destiny or dispiLsition is influenced by the idanels. The expression, that God hardened the lieart of Pharaoh, he so interprets as not to contravene the principle of free will. The most important of the Commandments Aaron declares, against older Karaite teachers and in accordance with the Babbanites. to be the first of the Ten Words, which makes of the knowledge of God a positive command, as this alone gives to the observance of all the other laws its inner value and its life consecrating character. Often, in the interpretation of the Law or in regard to its spirit, as in regard to the law of retaliation, "eye for eye and tooth for tooth," he sides with the lijibbain'tes. Everywhere he shows himself to be of sound, inde]ienilcnt judgment. He virtually accepts the principle of tradition, rejecting it only when it conflicts with the letterof Scripture. His conceiitioii of the human soul is peculiar and probably influenced by his medical studies: it seems to him in its various functions dependent upon the brain, the blood, and the spinal cord or marrow; whereas otherwise he claims full independence for the immortal spirit. Here his jdiysiology and theology do not harmonize. Aaron ben .Joseph achieved more permanent results for the Karaites by his liturgical work than by his

commentary.

It

was

his "

Seder Tefillot

"

(Book

of Prayers and Hymns) that was adopted by most of the Karaite congregations as the standard prayerbook, and that probably earned for him the epithet