Page:Jewish Encyclopedia Volume 2.pdf/312

274 Atlas

THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA

Atonement

In 1900 he again contributed to Sokolow's

"

Sefer

lia-

Shanah." Atlas' occupation is that of a bookkeeper. In 1895 lie settled atByelostok.in the government of Grodno, Russia.

When

practically

unknown

in the liter-

aiy world, he was entrusted with the criticism of such important works as Herzberg's "Handelsgeschichte der Juden des Alterthums" and the third volume of I. H. Weiss' VC'TlTl TH "in (History of Jewish Tradition), besides six other works of minor importance ("Ha-Asif," i. 24-37, 229-250). This work brought him into prominence. The review of Herzberg's book is practically a sketch of the progress of trade among the ancient Hebrews, following in the main the outline of Herzberg, but showing, nevertheless, independent reasoning and fearless criticism, and proving that the critic was as much at home in the subject as the author. His criticism of Weiss showed that he was in his element when dealing with Talmudic literature. Atlas' critical studies in the second year of the "Ha-Asif" range over works widely divergent in character. The " Bet Talmud " of Weiss, a Hebrew periodical devoted to rabbinic lore the " Ha-Shahar " of Smolenskin, a periodical of a general character two Russian monthlies (" Voskhod " and " Evreiski Obozrenie "), and Gratz's "Monatsschrift," all pass his review. The wide learning, the critical acumen, the lucid style, and the sound reasoning displayed in these studies at once place him among the foremost

Hebrew literature. He next ventured on editorial ground, and his "Ha-Kerem" showed that he had a following, for we find among his coworkers such men as Epstein, Mandelkern, and Reifmann. Of his own contributions to that volume we may say that they all attest living critics in

and erudition. Whether reconstructing the order of Isaac ben Shesheth's Responsas ("Ha-Kerem," pp. 6-9), or treating of the

to his originality

Masoretic work rf"ONl !"63X (ib. pp. 27-32), he shows that he has the whole rabbinic literature at his com-

mand. His review of 8. J. Fuenn's 7X1^ riDJ3, the comprehensive biographical dictionary in Hebrew, is worth the study of all editors of similar works (ib. pp. 258, 259). His criticism of Radner's translation of Cassel's " History of the Jews " proves how se-

fashion the law after their own heart. the people themselves. When a certain law has been hopelessly infringed by the people, it is time then for the rabbi to find a legal Such was fiction as an excuse for the infringement. the origin of many reforms, which are now accepted by Orthodox Judaism, e.g., lending money on interest and the like ("Essays," pp. 22-26). Bibliography Sokolow, Sefer Zikkaron, p. 6; Lippe, Bibliographisehes Lexicon, 2d series, pp. 15, 16; Goldin, HaZeman pp. 183, 183, Warsaw, 1893. I. D. i,. a.

who would

The true reformers are



ATOMISM

Kerem "

(ib. p. 24), but his hopes were not fulfilled. In the writings thus far discussed, as well as in his criticism of Ha-Levy's D'JWNin DVin (fWH 1SD, pp. 102-124), Warsaw, 1900, Atlas appears only as It is in his article on the the student of history. yeshibah of Wolozyn ("Ha-Kerem," pp. 77-82), and especially in his collected essays, that he shows himHis views on current self the man of the world. questions are stamped with the same originality as his The study of Jewish history discussion.? in history. is to him not an end in itself, but a means of getting at the proper system of education ("Essays," pp. Hence he advocates the establishment of a 62-64). premium by some representative Jewish body for the

encouragement of historic work done with this end Zionism is an economic in view ("Essays," p. 74). question with him ("Ha-Asif," i. 245). Religious reform should not be the product of a few scholars,

(from

Greek

The theory concerning atoms.

arofior;

= indivisible)

Two

opinions of the nature of matter were professed in the Greek philoThe Eleatic school asserted that sophical schools. matter is infinitely divisible. Democritus, Leucippus, and Epicurus maintained, on the contrary, that in the repeated division and subdivision of anything a point is reached when, by no conceivable means, ran it be divided in two the molecule being a real unity, not compounded of separable parts; in other words, it is an atom. On this idea of indivisibility of matter, Democritus founded hiscosmological system. In his opinion, nothing exists but atoms of different shapes and forms, and a vacuum in which The atom possesses, besides the the atoms move. property of solidity, that of movement. The vacuum is nothing by itself it is only the absence of any impediment to the movement of the atoms. Genesis and destruction proceed from the aggregation and disaggregation of atoms that existed from all eternity (compare Lucretius, " De Rerum Natura, i. 601 et seq.). This theory which in ascribing the existence of the whole universe to a fortuitous combination of atoms was intended to exclude all intelligent principle from the world-formation was later adopted, with many amendments, by the MoteThe Mote- kallamin as the basis of their dogma kallamin. of creation ex nihilo. The universe, they asserted, is composed of atoms



—

—

(-*-/-*"

first

vere one may be in criticism without being offensive. He hoped to continue the publication of the " Ha-

274

>*>>* or

sy$?*), which, on account

of

smallness, are indivisible. An atom has no magnitude but when several atoms combine the sum their



has a magnitude, and thus forms a body. Atoms were created, and are not as was supposed by the Greek atomists always numerically the same in the order of things; but are created anew whenever it so pleases the Creator their annihilation being impossible. According to Maimonides, the Motekallamin extended the theory of atoms even to space and time. Having seen that Aristotle had proved that space, time, and motion could be divided into parts standing in such relations to one another that if one be divisible the others must be correspondingly divisible, they maintained that space could not be con-

—

—



tinuous, but that ments; and that

was composed

of indivisible elelikewise was reducible to corresponding indivisible time-elements. Although the Kalam exercised a great influence on the earlier Jewish philosophy, AtSaadia. omism found nothing but adversaries it

time

among the Jewish philosophers. Saadia rejects the theory of atoms on the ground that it is impossible to imagine that atoms, having no