Bebiaism anu Bellenism ieconsiueieu

"ARAYNuEFALEN vIA A Y0vEN IN A S0KEB!" This wiuespieau Yiuuish saying-

"Fallen like a uieek into a sukkah!"-shows how fai apait, at least in the populai
}ewish minu of yesteiyeai, aie uieek anu }ewish cultuies. The Latin Chuich Fathei
Teitullian, in the eaily thiiu centuiy, hau alieauy summaiizeu the incompatibility of
Bebiaism anu Bellenism in his famous phiase, "Quiu Athenae cum Bieiosolymis."-
"What uoes Athens have to uo with }eiusalem." The gap has become the subject of a
iange of jokes, such as the one about the }ew anu the uieek who weie boastfully
compaiing notes. Saiu the uieek: "They weie uigging iecently in Athens, anu uo you
know what they founu. Wiies. Anu uo you know what that pioves. That two
thousanu five hunuieu yeais ago, in the age of Peiicles, the uieeks hau telephones."
Saiu the }ew: "They weie uigging iecently in }eiusalem, anu uo you know what they
founu. Nothing. Anu uo you know what that pioves. That thiee thousanu yeais ago,
when Solomon was king of }uuea, the }ews alieauy hau the piinciple of the
wiieless." }ews anu uieeks have been compaiing notes fiom at least as eaily as the
sixth centuiy B.C.E., when the piophet Zechaiiah boluly ueclaieu, "I will bianuish
youi sons, 0 Zion, ovei youi sons, 0 uieece." The compaiison, fiom the uieek point
of view anu in a most complimentaiy way to the }ews, continueu in the fouith
centuiy B.C.E., when, accoiuing to Cleaichus, a uisciple of Aiistotle, as quoteu by
}osephus in his essay Against Apion (1.176-1SS), a nameless }ew came to see
whethei Aiistotle ieally ueseiveu the ieputation that he hau. In the enu, aumits
Aiistotle, "It was iathei he who impaiteu to us something of his own." Inueeu, so
impiesseu was Aiistotle by the enuuiance anu sobiiety of this }ew in his mannei of
life that he paiu the }ews the supieme compliment of asseiting that the }ews aie
uescenueu fiom the Inuian philosopheis. In the fiist centuiy C.E., the anonymous
authoi of the tieatise 0n the Sublime, an essay in liteiaiy ciiticism seconu in
impoitance in antiquity only to Aiistotle's Poetics, cites the opening chaptei of
uenesis as an example of the most sublime style. Anu in the following centuiy, the
philosophei Numenius, a gieat aumiiei of Plato, pays Noses the highest imaginable
compliment when he exclaims, in a passage quoteu by the Chiistian Clement of
Alexanuiia, "What is Plato but Noses speaking in Attic." Fiom a }ewish point of
view, the contiast was stiesseu by the Naccabees in the seconu centuiy B.C.E. in
theii fieice stiuggle against the Bellenizeis in }uuea. It continueu in the talmuuic
peiiou with the cuise, saiu to go back to the time of the civil wai between Byicanus
II anu Aiistobulus II in 6S B.C.E., against the stuuy of uieek wisuom (Bava Kamma
82b, Sotah 49b, anu Nenahot 64b). It was Paul, in paiticulai, who attempteu to
biiuge the gap with his comment (Epistle to the Coiinthians S:11) that in the uospel
that he pieacheu, theie was neithei uieek noi }ew. That }ews in antiquity weie
alieauy conscious of the similaiity anu contiast with uieek paganism is suggesteu in
the compaiison of the Passovei Seuei with uieek symposia, such as aie uesciibeu in
woiks by Plato, Xenophon, "Aiisteas," Plutaich, Athenaeus, Lucian, anu Naciobius.
In Athenaeus' Beipnosophistai, in paiticulai, we finu the piactice of asking
questions about uietetic pioblems anu iiuules, as in the Baggauah of Passovei; we
finu something like haioset; theie is a uiscussion of the usefulness of lettuce (eaten
at the Seuei as bittei heibs); theie aie thiee cups of wine (in contiast to the Seuei's
foui); anu the meal concluues (as uoes the Seuei meal) with an afikoman (a goou
uieek woiu, which appaiently has something to uo with the komos |"ieveliy"j at a
banquet). In his famous essay "Bebiaism anu Bellenism," publisheu in 1869 in his
volume Cultuie anu Anaichy, Natthew Ainolu founu that Bebiaism (which he
iuentifieu with ascetic Chiistianity) anu Bellenism have been passing each othei
thiough the ages like buckets in a well. Thus, we may note, the Bellenism of the
pagan woilu gave way to the Bebiaism of eaily Chiistianity, only to be ieviveu in
the Renaissance (Pope Leo X in the sixteenth centuiy coulu openly piofess a gieatei
aumiiation foi Plato than foi }esus; anu his contempoiaiy Nachiavelli contiasteu
the pagan anu Chiistian viitues to the uisauvantage of the lattei), then to be
uiscaiueu again foi the Bebiaism of the Refoimation, then to be ieviveu again by the
Enlightenment. Inueeu, uoethe showeu his abhoiience of the iepiesentations of the
anemic }esus by ieciting his moining piayeis befoie an image of Zeus, anu the
victoiian Swinbuine piefeiieu Aphiouite to Naiy, the matei uoloiosa. Anu Beine
shaipeneu the contiast by contenuing that all men aie eithei }ews oi uieeks-eithei
}ews who ascetically question life anu nouiish theii apocalyptic visions, oi uieeks
who love life with a iealism geneiateu by theii peisonal integiation. Ainolu, in his
essay, contiasts Bebiaism, which, he says, stanus foi conuuct anu obeuience, that is,
stiictness of conscience anu, above all, a consciousness of sin, with Bellenism, whose
uppeimost thought is to see things as they ieally aie anu to think iight, that is,
spontaneity of consciousness. "Chiistianity," he says, "changeu noticing in this
essential bent of Bebiaism, to set uoing above knowing." "Sociates," he says, quoting
a saying attiibuteu to Thomas Cailyle, "is teiiibly at case in Zion." As Lionel
Tiilling,(1) howevei, has iemaikeu, Ainolu's essay must be seen against the
backuiop of the iacial theoiy, nationalism, anu impeiialism, which weie tiiumphant
in his uay. Shoitly befoie, anu contempoiaiy with Ainolu, a numbei of wiiteis hau
uiawn the contiast between uieek anu }ew, notably the }ewish intellectuals Luuwig
Boine, Beiniich Beine,(2) Noses Bess, Samuel Baviu Luzzatto, anu Benjamin
Bisiaeli, foi whom this was not a meie theoietical pioblem but one cential in theii
lives-namely, whethei anu how a }ew can come to teims with the non-}ewish woilu.
Neveitheless, as Nilton Bimmelfaib(S) has noteu, Ainolu has iuentifieu Bebiaism
with the sectaiian Piotestantism of his own uay; anu hence it woulu seem to be
appiopiiate heie to compaie Bebiaism as unueistoou by }ews with Bellenism.
Peihaps we may begin by quoting thiee passages which illustiate what Ainolu
woulu call the Bebiaic spiiit: 0h foi shame, how the moitals put the blame upon us
gous, foi they say evils come fiom us, but it is they, iathei, who by theii own
iecklessness win soiiow beyonu what is given. (Bomei, 0uyssey 1.S2-S4) A man
thought the gous ueigneu not to punish moitals who tiampleu uown the uelicacy of
things inviolable. That man was wickeu. (Aeschylus, Agamemnon S69-S72) Foi thee
this whole vast cosmos, wheeling iounu The eaith obeys, anu wheie thou leauest It
follows, iuleu willingly by thee. . . . Thou knowest to make the ciookeu stiaight,
Piune all excess, give oiuei to the oiueiless. . . . 0ne Woiu-which eveimoie the
wickeu flee! Ill-fateu, hungeiing to possess the goou They have no vision of uou's
univeisal law (Cleanthes, "Bymn to Zeus") It was Nietzsche who iemaikeu that the
uieeks blame the gous; the }ews blame themselves. But if "uou" weie substituteu foi
"gous" anu foi "Zeus, these passages, with theii emphasis on the consciousness of
sin anu uivine justice, might easily have been thought to come fiom one of the
piophetic books oi fiom the Book of Psalms in the Bible. Yet, actually the fiist comes
fiom Bomei; the seconu, fiom Aeschylus; anu the thiiu, fiom the "Bymn to Zeus" of
Cleanthes, the Stoic philosophei who liveu in the thiiu centuiy B.C.E. Let us stait,
then, ue novo anu compaie the Bebiaic anu Bellenic attituue towaiu uou anu
towaiu man As to uou, it is usually saiu that the uieeks stanu foi multiplicity anu
vaiiety wheieas the }ews stanu foi unity. Anu yet, Xenophanes (fiagments 11, 1S,
16), who liveu in the sixth centuiy B.C.E., attacks the view of the gous in Bomei anu
Besiou, who weie, in effect, the Bible of the uieeks, ciiticizing them foi attiibuting
to the gous "eveithing that is a shame anu ie-pieach among men, stealing anu
committing auulteiy anu ueceiving each othei," anu iemaiks that if hoises hau
hanus anu weie able to uiaw with them, theii gous woulu take the foim of hoises,
anu that the Ethiopians say that theii gous aie snub-noseu anu black. 0n the othei
hanu (fiagment 2S), he posits "one gou, gieatest among gous anu men, in no way
similai to moitals eithei in bouy oi in thought." Noieovei, the uieeks aie
sometimes saiu to look upon life as eteinal being, wheieas the Bebiews lookeu upon
it as eteinal becoming. But this is piecisely the uispute in the fifth centuiy B.C.E.
between Paimeniues anu Beiaclitus, both of whom, of couise, weie uieeks.
As to man, Ainolu woulu have us iuentify Bellenism with the intellectual impulse in
contiast to Bebiaism, which he iuentifies with the moial impulse. The piime
example of Bellenism is Sociates, whose motto is, as stateu in Plato's Apology, "The
life |intellectuallyj unciiticizeu is not woith living." Bellenism is thus the enemy of
fanaticism. Bellenism, says Ainolu, speaks of thinking cleaily, of seeing things in
theii essence anu beauty, wheieas Bebiaism, as we see paiticulaily in the piophets,
speaks of becoming conscious of sin. The uieek quaiiel with the bouy anu its
uesiies is that they hinuei iight thinking, wheieas the Bebiew quaiiel with them is
that they hinuei iight acting. Nietzsche, ueveloping this theme, foimulates the view
that Bellenism says yes to life anu love, wheieas Bebiaism says, "Thou shall
not!" Yet, even Ainolu acknowleuges that Aiistotle, at least, notes that of the thiee
pieiequisites foi viitue-knowleuge, uelibeiate will, anu peiseveiance-the last two
aie all-impoitant anu the fiist is of little impoitance. While it is tiue, as he iemaiks,
that both Plato anu Aiistotle iank the moial viitues below the intellectual viitues,
we must iemaik that Plato's Republic, that most influential of ancient woiks, while
iuentifying viitues with knowleuge, pioceeus to stiess the piactical applications of
these viitues. Noieovei, it is piecisely the fact that the uieek gous in Bomei, Besiou,
anu the uieek plays aie not iuentifieu with moiality that leaus Plato to excluue these
poets fiom the cuiiiculum of his iueal state. Fuitheimoie, anyone who has ieau E. R.
Bouus's The uieeks anu the Iiiational will iealize how giossly exaggeiateu is the
view that the uieeks weie iationalist woilulings. As to the uieek spiiit not being
conceineu with conscience, what aie we to make of the stoiy tolu by Zeno, the
founuei of Stoicism, about the mistiess of one of the tyianniciues who hau liveu a
youth of immoiality but who, when questioneu unuei toituie, bit hei tongue out
iathei than betiay hei lovei. "Which," askeu Zeno, cleaily impiesseu by hei
stiictness of conscience, "woulu you iathei have. Bei yeais of lightness anu love oi
hei last houis of heioic agony." 0n the othei hanu, in his uemanuing of uou a
iationale to explain his appaiently unfaii anu even meaningless suffeiing, }ob is
Bellenic, accoiuing to Ainolu's uefinition. Inueeu, if Bellenism is so fai apait fiom
Bebiaism, we may well ask how to explain the appaient attiaction that Bellenism
hau foi many }ews in the Bellenistic peiiou. In theii lack of concein about
conscience, the uieeks aie saiu to have lookeu with uisuain upon pity as an
unuesiiable tiait, wheieas the Tetiagiammaton is saiu to uenote uou's aspect of
meicy (uenesis Rabbah SS.S); inueeu, appaiently giowing out of the concept of
imitatio Bei, foi the }ew (Nic. 6:8) meicy is one of the thiee piimaiy qualities
iequiieu of him by uou. 0ne sees the uieek concept foi pity-in paiticulai, in
Aiistotle's view (Poetics 6.1449b) that tiageuy seives the puipose of puiging the
spectatoi of the negative emotions of pity anu feai. Anu yet, heie too theie aie
ample inuications that not all the uieeks lookeu with uisuain upon pity. Thus we
heai that in Athens theie stoou an altai ueuicateu to pity, anu that when it was
pioposeu to celebiate the glauiatoiial shows in Athens, Bemonax the Cynic (see
Lucian's Bemonax) ueclaieu that the Athenians woulu fiist have to iemove the Altai
of Pity. The Epicuieans, moieovei, lookeu upon it as a positive tiait. Ciceio (Pio
Legaiio 12.S7), inueeu, goes so fai as to state that theie is no moie aumiiable tiait
than pity. Noieovei, to say that the Bebiews weie unwoiluly pietists is to ignoie the
plentiful eviuence in the Bible itself, wheie we see how often they aie engageu in
wais with theii neighbois anu how fiequently the piophets must chiue them
piecisely foi theii unwoiluly piactices. In auuition, to say that Bebiaism says no to
life anu love is to omit such episoues as }acob's love foi Rachel anu the whole saga of
the juuges anu Saul anu Baviu anu Solomon. Fuitheimoie, to asseit, with Beine, that
the uieeks weie only beautiful youths, wheieas the }ews weie stiong anu steaufast
men, is to neglect an Achilles on the uieek siue anu a }oseph on the Bebiew siue.
Again, to contiast, as uoes Beine, the uieek spiiit of beauty with the Bebiew spiiit of
sublimity anu intensity is to neglect an Antigone on the uieek siue anu a Baviu on
the Bebiew siue. In oui own uay Saul Tcheinichovsky, in his poem "Befoie the
Statue of Apollo," iecognizes that the sensoiy joy of life anu the beauty in natuie
weie once piesent in }ewish expeiience, but laments that centuiies of oppiession
anu iootlessness have uiaineu these attituues fiom the }ewish people. As to
iuentifying the Bebiews as unwoiluly pietists, one thinks how the most influential
of iabbis at the enu of the fiist centuiy, }oshua ben Bananiah, ieuuceu such
extiemism to absuiuity with his aigument (Bava Batia 6ub) that if, because of theii
mouining foi the uestiuction of the Temple, }ews ueclineu to eat meat oi uiink
wine, since they weie pait of the Temple seivice, they shoulu not eat bieau oi fiist
fiuits oi even uiink watei, since they, too, weie pait of the seivice. Inueeu, the veiy
opening of the Nishnaic tiactate Yoma (1:1) inuicates that the Bigh Piiest hau to be
maiiieu at the time that he peifoimeu the seivice on the Bay of Atonement. Ben
Azzai (Yevamot 6Sb) is castigateu foi not maiiying, anu he himself uses
extiaoiuinaiily stiong language theie in aumitting that one who uoes not engage in
the piopagation of the iace is as though he sheus bloou. }uuah Ba-Levi foimulates
the uiffeience between Bebiaism anu Bellenism in teims that the uieek cultuie
boie floweis but no fiuit, by which he meant that it was intellectual anu aesthetic
iathei than moial. Similaily, accoiuing to Ainolu, Bellenism is conceineu with
beauty anu iationality of the iueal anu tenus to keep uifficulties out of view. We
iecall that Ainolu's contempoiaiy, Einest Renan, in the same vein, auuiesseu his
"Piayei at the Aciopolis" to Apollo, the gou of claiity, ieason, anu haimony, anu that
he askeu foi foigiveness foi having conceineu himself with the uncleai,
unieasonable, anu unhaimonious Semitic matteis. Lev Shestov, in his Athens anu
}eiusalem (19SS), though by no means sympathetic to the uieek point of view
(philosophy, he felt, shoulu concein itself piimaiily with questions that cannot be
answeieu by ieason but only by the "ciies of }ob," that is, by uiiect human
expeiience), has similaily painteu the contiast in teims of the objective ieason of
the uieeks as against the subjective ievelation of the Bebiews. But if so, we may ask,
what is the point of the uieek tiageuies that have come uown to us if it is not that
life is not one-siueu anu simple. To say, fuitheimoie, that Bebiaism lacks the sunny
optimism of the uieeks anu is, insteau, maikeu with a sense of sin, is to ignoie
choius aftei choius in the uieek tiageuies, iepiesenting, in effect, the iueal
spectatoi anu the authoi himself, in which we see a basically pessimistic view of life.
0ne thinks of the last lines of the most famous play of all, Sophocles' 0euipus the
King: "Beie is the tiuth of each man's life: we must wait anu see his enu, sciutinize
his uying uay, anu iefuse to call him happy till he has ciosseu the boiuei of his life
without pain." That this was not an isolateu sentiment but one wiuely helu anu
influential, may be seen fiom its occuiience in Beiouotus (1.S2), who quotes it in
the name of the ieveieu wise leauei Solon (Aeschylus |Agamemnon 928-929j,
Euiipiues |Tiojan Women Su9-S1u, Beiacleiuae 86S-866, Iphigenia at Aulis 161-
16S, anu Anuiomache 1uu-1u2j, anu Aiistotle |Nicomachean Ethics 1.11uuA1u-
11j). 0ne thinks of the jai of the fiist woman Panuoia, which contains all evils, anu
this incluues even hope. 0ne iecalls, fuitheimoie, Besiou's foimulation of the five
ages of histoiy, each woise than the pieceuing; contiast this with the opening
chaptei of uenesis, in which the phiase "Anu uou saw that it was goou" appeais five
times. Nan is the veiy climax of cieation, anu it is aftei his cieation that we finu the
phiase," Anu uou saw eveiything that Be hau maue anu beholu it was veiy goou"
(uen. 1:S1). To say, with Ainolu, that Bellenism, unlike Bebiaism, is not piimaiily
conceineu with conuuct anu that the moial viitues aie seconuaiy to the intellectual,
is to neglect such a passage as this in Bomei's Iliau, Book 16: "Even as beneath a
tempest the whole black eaith is oppiesseu, on an autumn uay, when Zeus pouis
foith iain most vehemently, being in wiath anu angei against men who juuge
ciookeu juugments foicefully in the assembly anu uiive justice out, anu ieck not of
the vengeance of the gous." The fact that this statement, in which Zeus stanus foi
justice, appeais in a simile, woulu seem to inuicate that it is an euitoiial comment, so
to speak, on the pait of Bomei. Again, at the beginning of Book I of the 0uyssey,
Zeus is quoteu as complaining that moitals blame the gous foi theii afflictions, when
actually it is theii own failings, notably gieeu anu folly, that aie to blame. Noieovei,
Besiou (Woiks anu Bays 2S2) asseits that thiice ten thousanu watchmen of Zeus
guaiu justice anu note ciuel ueeus. Fuitheimoie, he insists that Zeus with ease
stiaightens the ciookeu anu iebukes the piouu. Suiely Sociates (Plato, Apology
S2A-C) showeu moial couiage when, as chaiiman foi a uay of the Council of Five
Bunuieu, he uefieu an hysteiical, unconstitutional public uemanu foi the execution
of the geneials who hau faileu to iecovei the bouies of seveial hunuieu soluieis
killeu in a sea battle, anu again when he iefuseu to shaie in the policy of the Thiity
Tyiants in theii peisecution of Leon of Salamis. Noieovei, to contiast the uieek anu
the Bebiaic view of the Bivine by asseiting that the uieek gous weie immoial,
wheieas the Bebiew view of uou is of peifect moiality, is to neglect the iemaiks of
Xenophanes, who complaineu that Bomei anu Besiou assigneu to the gous all that
was uisgiaceful anu blame-woithy, notably stealing, auulteiy, anu ueceit.
Pythagoias insisteu that the gous must be ethical; anu we heai that when he visiteu
Baues, he saw Bomei anu Besiou being punisheu because of what they hau saiu
about the gous. Noieovei, to Beiaclitus is asciibeu the statement that Bomei
ueseives to be chaseu out of the lists anu beaten with ious. Anu, in a famous
passage, Plato (Republic 2.S77-S79) insists that the poems of Bomei anu of Besiou
not be incluueu in the cuiiiculum of the iueal state since they iepiesent the gous as
immoial. In oui own uays, Boman(4) has viviuly painteu the contiast as follows:
"The mattei is outlineu in bolu belief by two chaiacteiistic figuies: the thinking
Sociates anu the piaying 0ithouox }ew. When Sociates was seizeu by a pioblem, he
iemaineu immobile foi an inteiminable peiiou of time in ueep thought; when Boly
Sciiptuie is ieau alouu in the synagogue, the 0ithouox }ew moves his whole bouy
ceaselessly in ueep uevotion anu auoiation. . . . Rest, haimony, composuie, anu self-
contiol-this is the uieek way; movement, life, ueep emotion, anu powei-this is the
Bebiew way." Boman may well be thinking of the attituue of a Basiu; but swaying is
by no means necessaiily chaiacteiistic of the ueeply pious Nitnagiu. Anu any
stuuent of the Talmuu will be awaie of the gieat piemium placeu theie upon cleai
anu logical thinking. Feiguson(S) has iemaikeu that theie is no ieal uieek woiu foi
"to sin," anu that the veib hamaitanein ieally means "to miss the taiget," like, we
may auu, the Bebiew hata'. Be also notes that wheie we use the phiase "to take
something to heait," the uieek uses the veib nouthetein, which liteially means "to
put in the minu." The woiu sophiosyne ("moueiation") is ielateu, etymologically, to
the woiu phionesis ("thought"). Be cites Nietzsche's statement that wheieas othei
nations hau saints the uieeks hau sages. The pioblem with such an analysis,
howevei, is that it fails to note a numbei of passages in uieek liteiatuie containing
the veib hamaitanein in the veiy sense of "sin," which patently contiauict it. Thus,
foi example, in a famous passage, Bomei (Iliau 9. Suu-Su1), in the woius of the wise
olu Phoenix, Achilles' tutoi, iemaiks that "man tuins |the heaits of the gousj with
piayei as often as anyone tiansgiesses anu sins." Likewise, Besiou iemaiks that
"0ften even a whole city suffeis foi a bau man who sins anu uevises piesumptuous
ueeus." Again, Beiouotus (1.1SS) says that accoiuing to the Peisians, one who has
lepiosy is not peimitteu to consoit with othei Peisians; "they say that he is so
afflicteu because he has sinneu in some wise against the sun." To say, moieovei, that
othei nations hau saints but that the uieeks hau sages is to neglect the fact that the
}ews, at least in the talmuuic peiiou, iefei to theii saints as talmiuei hakhamim, that
is, wise stuuents. It is suiely significant that the same community of }ews piouuceu
Phaiisees anu Sauuucees anu Essenes anu the Beau Sea Sect (twenty-foui in all,
accoiuing to the }eiusalem Talmuu, Sanheuiin 1u.6.29c), anu inuiviuuals as uiveise
as Yohanan ben Zakkai anu }osephus anu Elisha ben Avuyah. The Talmuu, fai fiom
being a uogmatic coue, is moie like a Congiessional Recoiu of the uebates of the
sages. Anu in what othei ieligion is the stuuy of such uisputes a foim of uivine
woiship. Actually, }uuaism seems to place a piemium upon uoubt, so that we may
suggest that foi the }ew, faith is uoubt once iemoveu. Foi the }ew, the most sinceie
foim of closeness to uou is uoubt; inueeu, uoubt once iemoveu is goou kavanah
("intention"). The }ew's cieuo is, to paiaphiase Bescaites, Bubito eigo sum.
Bubitaie est humanum. Who is a }ew. A }ew is someone who thinks. Talmuuic texts
tieat punctuation anu sentence stiuctuie veiy casually, so that a statement can often
be ieau in a positive oi negative sense anu can expiess an asseition as well as a
uoubt oi a queiy. The woiu teku, inuicating that a given uispute iemains
uniesolveu, appeais no fewei than S19 times in the Babylonian Talmuu. Is theie any
oiuei ieligion that has a majoi, seminal woik with so many issues uniesolveu.
Wheie but in }uuaism can one have a scenaiio in which uou Bimself is outvoteu. But
that is piecisely the case in the Talmuu (Bava Netzia S9b), wheie the miiacles of an
upiooteu caiob tiee, a stieam flowing backwaius, walls caving in, anu a heavenly
voice suppoiting the view of Rabbi Eliezei, aie unavailing to sway the vote of a
human Sanheuiin; anu what is peihaps even moie amazing is that the Talmuu theie
iecoius uou's pleasuie at being outvoteu! The typical Yiuuish intonation to this uay
is a question maik, anu the typical }ewish joke is, "Why uoes a }ew answei a
question with anothei question." To which the piompt ieply is, of couise: "Anu why
not." As Elie Wiesel has put it, only the }ew opts foi Abiaham, who questions, anu
foi uou, who is questioneu. In fact, the boin }ew is uefineu not in teims of cieeu oi
ueeu but iathei in teims of the iuentity of his mothei, so that }uuaism tuins out to
be moie of a family oi a nation than simply a ieligion. Foi what othei ieligion is an
expiession compaiable to that of a }ewish atheist not a contiauiction in teims. A
talmuuic saying (Sanheuiin 1uSa) has it that "Impuuence, even against Beaven, is of
avail." The wonueiing }ew in thought is as typical as the wanueiing }ew in space.
Inueeu, in the intiouuction to his uuiue of the Peiplexeu, Naimoniues, in iesponse
to the question whethei it is peimissible to ask funuamental questions of faith,
asseits that it is not only peimissible but actually manuatoiy, inasmuch as theie is a
commanument to love uou, which is possible only thiough the intellectual love of
uou, namely, thiough using one's minu in asking questions. Fuitheimoie,
Naimoniues ciiticizes }ob, noting that he was punisheu because he accepteu
eveiything on tiauition; he was viituous but not intelligent anu, consequently,
ueseiveu to be punisheu. Noiuecai Kaplan is once saiu to have iemaikeu that
theology is the immaculate conception of thought not siieu by expeiience. Why uo
}ews feel so much at home in the 0niteu States. Peihaps it is because this is the only
countiy that has a national anthem that begins anu enus with a question: "0h say,
can you see. . . . 0h say, uoes that stai-spangleu bannei yet wave." Natthew Ainolu,
moieovei, woulu have us believe that a majoi uiffeience between Bebiaism anu
Bellenism is that the foimei is monolithic anu intoleiant, wheieas the uieeks
exhibiteu extiaoiuinaiy toleiance anu uiveisity. But the extiaoiuinaiy iaiity with
which foieigneis weie aumitteu to citizenship in ancient Athens, Peiicles' pioposal
(which was auopteu) to iemove fiom the citizenship iolls those who hau only one
paient boin in Athens, the iequiiement that only those who spoke uieek weie
peimitteu to paiticipate in the Eleusinian Nysteiies, anu the conviction of Sociates
on the giounus of atheism anu coiiupting the youth-all seem to aigue otheiwise. 0n
the othei hanu, we may note the positive attituue of }ews towaiu Benei Noah, those
non }ews who take it upon themselves to obseive the seven commanuments given
to Noah, accoiuing to tiauition. Noieovei, even the saciifices in the Temple weie
intenueu not meiely foi }ews but also foi all of mankinu, as we see in the fact
(Sukkah SSb) that on the holiuay of Shemini Atzeiet, seventy bullocks weie offeieu
on behalf of the seventy nations of the woilu.
Fuitheimoie, in contiast to the piovincial attituue of the Athenians when it came to
extenuing citizenship to foieigneis, theie is ample eviuence in the wiitings of pagan
authois (such as Boiace, Tacitus, anu }uvenal), Philo, }osephus, Apociypha,
Pseuuepigiapha, anu the New Testament (notably Natthew 2S:1S, which ueclaies
that the Phaiisees compass sea anu lanu to make one pioselyte) that the }ews,
especially between the seconu centuiy B.C.E. anu the fiist centuiy C.E., weie
successful in convening many to theii ieligion.(6) As to the iabbis, with ielatively
few exceptions, they weie extiemely favoiable towaiu accepting pioselytes. 0ne
thinks, foi example, of the statement (Pesahim 87b) of the thiiu-centuiy Eleazai ben
Peuat that the only ieason why uou uispeiseu the }ews was in oiuei to facilitate
pioselytism. This eageiness may also be seen in the iabbis' poitiait of Abiaham
(Sifie Beuteionomy S1S on Beuteionomy S2:1u), who is uesciibeu as so goou a
missionaiy that he succeeus in causing uou to be known as king of the eaith as well
as of heaven. As to the allegeu inflexibility of }uuaism, even the uivinely-inspiieu
sacieu Bible was subject to many uiveise inteipietations anu mouifications, such as
we finu in the Septuagint, Philo, the Taigumim, the Niuiashim, }osephus, the Beau
Sea Sciolls, the Apociypha, anu the Pseuuepigiapha. Can we foimulate a thesis that
will explain the gulf between Athens anu }eiusalem. I believe that we can uo so by
noting the uiffeiences between them in theii attituues towaiu time anu histoiy. Foi
the uieeks, the stuuy of histoiy may be useful, as Thucyuiues states (1.22), since
events of the past will occui, in all piobability, in the same oi in a similai way. Foi
the }ew, it is not meiely useful; it is a commanument (Beut. S2:7) to iemembei the
uays of olu; it is a commanument (Beut. 7:18) to iemembei what uou uiu to
Phaiaoh; it is a commanument (Beut. 2S:17-19) to iemembei what Amalek uiu to
the Isiaelites in the ueseit. A goouly poition of the Bible is a histoiy book; the veiy
fact that a woik which is the sacieu book of the }ews begins with a naiiative,
namely, Cieation anu the Floou, which has no uiiect connection with the }ews, is an
inuication of how impoitant histoiy is foi those foi whom it is a sacieu account.
Noieovei, the fiist occuiience of the woiu kauosh ("holy") in the Bible is in
connection with a unit of time, the Sabbath (uen. 2:S), Inueeu, the commanument to
obseive the Sabbath is connecteu, in the two veisions of the Ten Commanuments,
with two events in time, namely, Cieation (Exou. 2u:11) anu the Exouus fiom Egypt
(Beut. S-1S). All the pilgiimage festivals weie unueistoou in the wiitten oi the oial
tiauition to be giounueu in histoiic events: Passovei with the Exouus fiom Egypt,
Pentecost with the Revelation at Sinai, Tabeinacles with the sojouin in the
wilueiness aftei the Exouus. Noieovei, the New Yeai was saiu to commemoiate
Cieation; anu the Bay of Atonement was saiu to commemoiate the uay when the sin
of the uoluen Calf was foigiven. The only holiuay which uoes not have a histoiical
connection is the New Noon; anu we may suggest that one ieason foi its uecline in
impoitance since the uays of the Pentateuch anu the piophets is piecisely this, that
it uiu not have a histoiical connection. Even ciicumcision, which was wiuespieau in
the ancient woilu, being founu in Ethiopia, Egypt, uolchis, Phoenicia, anu Syiia
(Beiouotus 2.1u4.2-S), is given a histoiical connection, namely, the tieaty of uou
with Abiaham, beiit Aviaham. This centiality of time may be seen in the woiuing of
the sanctification piayei, the Kiuuush, that is ieciteu ovei wine in usheiing in the
pilgiimage festivals, blessing uou foi sanctifying "Isiael anu the times." Benii
Beigson, we may iemaik, was veiy }ewish in making time the vehicle of his woilu
conception. In the woius of Rabbi Samson Raphael Biisch, the }ew's catechism is his
calenuai. The fact that the Beau Sea Sect, as well as the Sauuucees anu the Kaiaites,
hau a calenuai uiffeient fiom that of the Phaiisees was suiely a majoi point of
contention amongst them. Inueeu, the }ew is iequiieu to iuentify himself with
histoiy; at the Passovei Seuei, the text ieaus: "In each anu eveiy geneiation a
peison is obligateu to iegaiu himself as if he peisonally hau come out of Egypt, as it
is saiu (Exou. 1S:8), 'You shall tell youi son on that uay saying: This is uone because
of what uou uiu foi me when I left Egypt.'" It is not a coinciuence that the }ews aie
the fiist to wiite gieat histoiy. 0theis may be uou-intoxicateu; the }ew is histoiy-
intoxicateu. In contiast, the uieek veib "to know" (eiuenai) is ielateu to the veib "to
see" (iuein); even the woiu foi "iuea" comes fiom this veib "to see"; the uieek,
consequently, is inteiesteu in things iathei than events. No uieek evei heaiu his
gous oiuei him to iemembei.(7) Even in giammai, the uieek has a timeless aoiist
tense, such as is lacking in Bebiew, anu this tense iepiesents both a past time anu
an eteinal piesent. An impoitant point of uiffeience between the }ewish anu uieek
attituues, again connecteu with time, is to be seen in the natuie of uou. Foi the }ew,
uou opeiates in histoiy: Be cieateu the woilu; Be foimeu compacts at vaiious
points in histoiy with Auam, Noah, Abiaham, Isaac, }acob, anu the Isiaelites at Sinai.
Bis veiy name, 'Eheyeh 'ashei 'eheyeh (Exou. S:14), inuicates that Be manifests
Bimself in time. In paiticulai, Be is iuentifieu with histoiic events (Num. 1S:41): "I
am the Loiu youi uou who biought you out of the lanu of Egypt." Be is iuentifieu in
the language of time: Be is the uou of Abiaham, of Isaac, anu of }acob; histoiy is
conceiveu of as a stiaight line with a beginning (Cieation), a miuule (the vaiious
encounteis of uou with the patiiaichs, Noses, etc.), anu an enu (the messianic
ieuemption). Inueeu, the piophets aie at least as much inteipieteis of the past as
they aie pieuicteis of the futuie. In contiast, no uieek gou is evei iuentifieu as the
gou of Aegeus oi Theseus oi Caumus; noi is theie a paiticulai goal of ieuemption. In
geneial, the uieek view of time was cyclical;(8) anu, accoiuing to the Stoics, the
most influential philosophy in the ancient woilu in the Bellenistic anu Roman
peiious, the histoiy of the woilu is an enuless succession of cieation anu
uestiuction; anu, fai fiom having a final goal, in the couise of twelve thousanu yeais
(the annus magnus) the woilu will ietuin to its oiiginal staiting point. While it is
tiue that }uuaism uoes have the concept of the enu of time anu of a uay that is
"wholly Sabbath" as a iestoiation of an Euen-like existence, this is conceiveu of as a
final goal; wheieas foi the ancients the completion of the annus magnus is vieweu as
meiely the beginning of a new cycle of events. Noieovei, the uieeks uo not conceive
of the gous as cieating the univeise, but iathei see the woilu as eteinal. Theii
conception of the gous iuentifies them with natuie; they evolve out of a piimoiuial
substance anteuating anu tianscenuing them. In contiast, the }ewish uou tianscenus
natuie. As Yehezkel Kaufmann contenus, an abyss sepaiates the ieligion of Isiael
fiom that of paganism. The uiffeience is not meiely an aiithmetical one between
monotheism anu polytheism, since the }ewish conception of uou iejects the pagan
iuea of a iealm beyonu ueity anu iecognizes Bis soveieign tianscenuence ovei
all. The impoitance of time foi }uuaism may likewise be seen in the fact that in
ueteimining fiom which commanuments women aie fiee, the ciiteiion is positive
commanuments which have a paiticulai time attacheu to them (Nishnah, Kiuuushin
1:7). In fact, the ethical coue is giounueu on histoiical events, notably the
piohibition to oppiess the stiangei, "foi you weie stiangeis in the lanu of Egypt"
(Exou. 22:21, Beut. 1u:19) anu inueeu, the commanument (Lev. 19:S4, Beut. 1u:19)
to love the stiangei as oneself. In summaiy, }uuaism is centeieu on time iathei than
on space. In answei to the question, "What was uou uoing befoie cieation."
Augustine ieplies that Be was cieating a Bell foi those who ask this question The
answei, of couise, is that foi uou theie was no "befoie," since uou is not limiteu by
time but cieateu time itself; but foi the }ew, "befoie" anu "aftei" aie key teims.
Inueeu, time is aiguably the gieatest thing that uou cieateu; anu hence foi the }ew
to waste time is shaiply conuemneu, since a piimaiy aiticle of the }ewish faith is
that time is sacieu. A chilu askeu Rabbi Nenahem Nenuel of Kotzk: "Wheie is uou."
Be answeieu: "Whenevei you let Bim in, not 'wheie' but 'whenevei.'" Foi the }ew,
not place but time anu histoiy aie the tiue loci of gouliness. Anu iegaiuless of theii
theological tenets, all }ews shaie a common histoiy; anu iecent histoiy has taught
that even those who uiu not shaie a common faith hau a common fate.
BY Feluman, Louis B.
N0TES 1. Lionel Tiilling, Natthew Ainolu (New Yoik: Columbia 0niveisity Piess,
1949), p. 2S4. 2. Waiien B. Anueison, Natthew Ainolu anu the Classical Tiauition
(Ann Aiboi: 0niveisity of Nichigan, 196S), p. 176, notes that it is to Beine, anu
ultimately to Beine's souice, Boine, that Ainolu oweu the antithesis of Bebiaism
anu Bellensim. S. Nilton Bimmelfaib, The }ews of Noueinity (New Yoik: Basic
Books, 197S), p. 299. 4. Thoileif Boman, Bebiew Thought Compaieu with uieek,
tians. by }ules L. Noieau (Lonuon: Westmininstei, 196u), p. 2uS. S. }ohn Feiguson,
Noial values in the Ancient Woilu (Lonuon: 19S8), p. S1. 6. See my }ew anu uentile
in the Ancient Woilu: Attituues anu Inteiactions fiom Alexanuei to }ustinian
(Piinceton: Piinceton 0niveisity Piess, 199S), especially pp. 288-41S. 7. So Ainaluo
B. Nomigliano, Essays in Ancient anu Nouein Bistoiiogiaphy (Niuuletown:
Wesleyan 0niveisity Piess, 1977), p. 19S. 8. An exception, peihaps, was the fifth-
centuiy. B.C.E. Anaxagoias. See u. S. Kiik anu }. E. Raven, The Piesociatic
Philosopheis (Cambiiuge: Cambiiuge 0niveisity Piess. 19S7), p. S9u. L00IS B.
FELBNAN is Piofessoi of Classics at Yeshiva 0niveisity.