Page:The New International Encyclopædia 1st ed. v. 03.djvu/36

BIBLE. contemporary information, the history of the Tsraelitish people, the life of Jesus. and the rec- ord of the Karly Christian Church have heen re- studied. On tlie same basis the faith of Israel, which reached its culmination in Christianity, is being traced. In every department of investi- pation the principle of growth and development from the simple to the higher, and with this the fact of the unity of all life and thought, find fullest illustration. Thus the revelation of the Divine preserved in the Uible is found to be in perfect harmony with His revelation of Himself elsewhere. With the demonstration that the Bible records real facts and is the result of im- pulses and influences which still stir humanity, comes the deeper realization that it has a living, vital, eternal message for mankind. It may be defined as the record on the one hand of thirteen centuries of human endeavor to know and do the will of God. and on the other of His gracious re- sponse to that effort.

n. — HISTORY OF INTEBPRET.^TION.

(A) Of the Old Testament among the Jews. The earliest .Jewish commentaries upon selected passages of the Law are apparently found in the writings of Philo (c.20 B.C.-50 A.D.), and in the Mishna. Many of the facts that have led modern investigators to recognize the compos- ite aiithorship and legendary character of the Pentateuch were already clearly perceived by the Alexandrian philosopher. But by adopting the allegorical method of interpretation then in vogue among rhetoricians he was able to avoid the most obvious inferences, and to read into the text his oTi philosophy. In this he no doubt had predecessors: but it was his work that be- came epoch-making in its influence upon Jewish haggada. Christian dogma, and Greek philoso- phy.

On the other hand, the Mishna largely confined itself to the "Halaka,"or the rules of conduct au- thoritatively deducted from the Law. Among its leading interpreters were Hillel and Shammai (First Century B.C.), the Gamaliels and .lo- hanan ben Zakkai (First Century A.D.). In such Midrash works as Mekilta (to Ex.), Sifra (to Lev.), and Sifre (to Xuni. and Deut.). likewise written in Neo-Hebraic. the "Haggada," or homi- letic exegesis, had a wider field ; "and the same is true of the .ramaic parai)hrases, or Targunis. While the two Aramaic (jcmnra's are primarily crnuncntaries upon the Mishna, a vast number of passages from all parts of the Bible are intro- duced and explained in the discussion. The chief amoraic authorities of the Palestinian Talmud are Chiya (died c.230) and Johanan ben Nap- )iacha (died 279) ; the most eminent exegetes of the Habvlonian Talmud are Abba Arica. called Rab (died 247). Chisda (died .SOO). Ashi (died 427) and Rabina (died 4!t'.)) of Sura. Samuel (died 2.')7) and Amemar (died 422) of Nehardea, Rabba ben Xachmani (died 3.30) and Abayi (died C.33!)) of Pumbedita, and Raba (died 3.52) of Machuza.

An inestimable aid to the understanding of the Bible was rendered by the scholars who, in the Eighth Centurv', devised systems of vowel nota- tion to preserve the traditional reading of the text. In the same century, the Karaites, under the influence of Mohammedan thought, rejected the 'oral law.' codified in the Mishna and the Tal- muds, and fell back upon the Pentateuch itself. Extracts from the works of Anan ben David (c.760) and Benjamin ben Moses Mahawendi (c.SOO) render it probable that their lost com- mentaries were already chanicterized by that sober exegesis we find in the writings of .Tefet ben Ali (902-990). .aron ben .Joseph (c.1300), and Aaron ben Elijah (died 13C9). The reaction jiroduced a wholesome effect. Without break- ing with the historical development, rabbinical scholars began to vie with the Karaites in attention to grammar, lexicon, and literal sense. Eminent among tlu'se were Saadia ben Joseph al Fayyumi (892-942), gaon. or president, of the academy at Sura, who wrote in Arabic translations, commentaries, and grammatical works; .Tehudah ben Karish (c.920), Menahem ben Sarak (c.9oO). Jehudah Chayyug of Fez (c. 1000-501, the grammarian, and his younger contemporary, Jonah Abulwalid Marwan ibn .lanah, the lexicographer, who was a bold and sagacious textual critic. In opposition to both Karaites and Rabbanitcs. Chiwwi al Balkii (fl. 87.5-900) pursued liis independent criticism of the Bible itself, known to us partly through Saa- dia. partly, it would seem, through the Geniza fragments recently found by Schechter. and jmb- lished in the Jeirish Quarterly Rcvieir (1901, page 345 fl'. ). With the doubts and questions that occupied Chiwwi"s mind. Solomon ben Isaac ('Rashi') of Troyes (1040-1105) had little sym- pathy. His connnentaries, printed in the Rab- binic Bibles, are celebrated for their erudition rather than for any originality. But, according to Ibn Ezra, a Spanish rabbi. Isaac ben .Tasos, maintained that Gen. xxxvi. 31 ff. was written at the time of .Jehoshaphat ; and Abraham ben Mein ibn Ezra, of Toledo (1088-11G7) himself, however cleverly he concealed his heresies, not only revealed his consciousness of the late origin of the vowel-points, but also his grave doubts as to the Jlosaic authorship of parts of the Penta- teuch, ilore deeply fnfluenced by Greek and Arabic philosophy was Moses ben Maimon. of Cor- dova (1135-1204). His Arabic work. /)ii?iii«f «< hairiii, or "Guide of the Erring." lays down her- meneutical principles akin to those of Al Gha- zali (died 1111) and Ibn Roshd (Averroes. died 1198), allowing the siippression of the literal sense in the interest, not of theology, but of a philosophical system. David Kamchi, of Nar- bonne (died 1235), wrote commentaries that were particularly valuable because of his excel- lence as a grammarian. Tanchum of Jerusalem (e.12.50) also produced several commentaries. Levi ben Gerson (died 1370) gave special at- tention to archipology; his exegesis was nuuh in- fluenced by his philosophy. An original thinker was Chasdai Creska (c.l410), who conceived of prophethood as within the domain of human pow- er. Joseph Albo (died c.1444) reflected in a pro- found manner on the element of divination in prophecy, and its ethico-pa^dagogic value. They were influenced by Christian thought. Isaac Abrabanel (died 1508) was perhaps the first Jewish exegete who could approach the histori- cal books with the intelligence of a statesman; his personal expcrieme and the sufferings of his people account for the intense Messianic hope nourished by and reflected in his interpretation of the prophets. The exegesis of Solomon ben Melek, of Fez (e.l550), was largely philologi- cal, leaning heavily on D. Kamchi. By his criti-