EX-LIBRIS 
 
 THE JEWISH PUBLICATION SOCIETY 
 OF AMERICA 
 
 ■lED TO THE 
 
 INTERCOLLEGATE MENORAH ASSOCIATION 
 
 FOR USE AT 
 
 CORNELL UNIVERSITY 
 
 i^nxull ^mn%\ii ^WtM^ 
 
 THE GIFT OF 
 
 'O.Kjl •^LcTirYuR^JLm^n.aiv ^^^c^^ 
 
 ^^.iL^mi - iia]lN\i4:.. 
 
The date shows when this volume was taken. 
 
 To renew this book copy the call No. and give to 
 
 the librarian. 
 
 HOME USE RULES 
 
 All Books subject to Recall. 
 
 All books must be 
 
 1^ ^ All books must D< 
 
 -. ,^-f o o WSt ™ ' returned at end of col 
 QCl (i (i '''•' . lege year for inspec 
 
 aspec- 
 
 tion and repairs. 
 
 • Students must re- 
 
 i turn all books before 
 
 leaving town. Of&cers 
 
 should arrange for 
 
 1^><# -^ W I the return of books 
 
 ■*/»% *."^V wanted during their 
 
 ' ' absence from town. 
 
 Books needed by 
 ' *-ife.-i*«<i;^.a^ •' ■ , .more than one person 
 ZW=l&t[S?h*iH...., Mare held on the reserve 
 list. 
 
 Volumes of periodi- 
 cals and of pamphlets 
 are held in the library 
 as much as possible. 
 For special purposes 
 they are given out for 
 a limited time. 
 
 Borrowers should 
 not use their library 
 privileges for the bene- 
 fit of other persons. 
 
 Books of special 
 value and gift books, 
 when the giver wishes 
 it, are not allowed to 
 circulate. 
 
 Readers are asked 
 to report all cases of 
 books marked or muti- 
 lated. 
 
 Do not deface books by marks and writing. 
 
 "c^i^i^lTunlverslty Library 
 I BM755.S68 L69 1906 
 
 ■i ■■ tj *■ ;\ - . RashI, by Maurice Uber:tr^^^^^^^ F^ 
 
 3 1924 029 222 878 
 olin 
 
Cornell University 
 Library 
 
 The original of tliis bool< is in 
 tlie Cornell University Library. 
 
 There are no known copyright restrictions in 
 the United States on the use of the text. 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924029222878 
 
RASHI 
 
■ As for the wise, their body alone perishes In this ■world." 
 
 (Bashi, on Psalm xlix. 11.) 
 
THE RASHI COUNTRY 
 
RASHI 
 
 MAURICE LIBER 
 
 TRANSLATED FROM THE FRENCH 
 
 BY 
 
 ADELE SZOLD 
 
 PHILADELPHIA 
 The Jewish Publication Society of America 
 
Copyright, 1906, by 
 The Jewish Publication Society of America 
 
TO THE MEMOET OF 
 
 ZABOC-KAHN' 
 
 GEAND-EABBIN OE EEANCE 
 
PREFACE 
 
 Some months ago the Jewish world celebrated the 
 eight hundredth anniversary of the death of Eashi, who 
 died at Troyes in 1105. On that occasion those whose 
 knowledge authorizes them to speak gave eloquent ac- 
 counts of his life and work. Science and devotion 
 availed themselves of every possible medium — lectures 
 and books, journals and reviews — to set forth all we 
 owe to the illustrious Eabbi. The writer ventures to 
 express the hope that in the present volume he has made 
 at least a slight contribution toward discharging the 
 common debt of the Jewish nation — ^that it is not utterly 
 unworthy of him whose name it bears. 
 
 This volume, however, is not a product of circum- 
 stances; it was not written on the occasion of the cen- 
 tenary celebration. It was designed to form one of the 
 series of the biographies of Jewish Worthies planned by 
 the Jewish Publication Society op America, the 
 first issue of which was devoted to Maimonides. The 
 biography of Eashi is the second of the series. It is 
 not for the author to endorse the order adopted, but he 
 hazards the opinion that the readers will find the por- 
 trait of Eashi no unfitting companion-piece even to that 
 of the author of the Moreh. 
 
 Jewish history may include minds more brilliant and 
 works more original than Eashi's. But it is incon- 
 testable that he is one of those historical personages 
 
4 PEEFACE 
 
 who afford a double interest; his own personality is 
 striking and at the same time he is the representative 
 of a civilization and of a period. He has this double 
 interest for us to an eminent degree. His physiognomy 
 has -well-marked, individual features, and yet he is the 
 best exponent of French Judaism in the middle ages. 
 He is somebody, and he represents something. Through 
 this double claim, he forms an integral part of Jewish 
 history and literature. There are great men who despite 
 their distinguished attributes stand apart from the gen- 
 eral intellectual movements. They can be estimated 
 without reference to an historical background. Eashi 
 forms, so to say, an organic part of Jewish history. A 
 whole department of Jewish literature would be enig- 
 matical without him. Like a star which leaves a track 
 of light in its passage across the skies, Eashi aroused 
 the enthusiasm of his contemporaries, but no less was 
 he admired and venerated by posterity, and to-day, after 
 the lapse of eight centuries, he is, as the poet says, " still 
 yoimg in glory and immortality." 
 
 His name is most prominently connected with Eab- 
 binical literature. Whether large questions are dealt 
 with, or the minutest details are considered, it is always 
 Eashi who is referred to — he has a share in all its 
 destinies, and he seems inseparable from it forever. 
 
 It is this circimistance that makes the writing of his 
 biography as awkward a task for the writer as reading 
 it may be for the public. To write it one must be a 
 scholar, to read it a specialist. To know Eashi well is as 
 difficult as it is necessary. Singularly enough, popular 
 as he was, he was essentially a Talmudist, and at no time 
 have connoisseurs of the Talmud formed a majority. 
 
PEEPACE 5 
 
 This is the reason why historians like Graetz, though 
 they dilate upon the unparalleled qualities of Eashi's 
 genius, can devote only a disproportionately small num- 
 ber of pages to him and his works. 
 
 Though the writer has throughout been aware of the 
 difficulties inherent in his task, yet he is also conscious 
 that he has sometimes succeeded in removing them only 
 by eluding them. In parts, when the matter to be 
 treated was unyielding, it became necessary to dwell on 
 side issues, or fill up gaps and replace obscurities by 
 legends and hypotheses. The object in view being a 
 book popular in character and accessible to all, technical 
 discussions had to be eschewed. Many knotty points 
 had to be brushed aside lightly, and the most debatable 
 points passed over in silence. These are the sacrifices 
 to which one must resign himself, though it requires 
 self-restraint to do it consistently. The reader may, 
 therefore, not expect to find new data in these pages, 
 new facts and texts not published before. If the book 
 has any merit, it is that it presents the actual state of 
 knowledge on the subject, and the author anticipates the 
 charge of plagiarism by disclaiming any intention of 
 producing an original work. Eecondite sources have 
 not always been referred to, in order not to overload a 
 text which at best is apt to tax the reader's powers of 
 attention. Such references and special remarks as were 
 deemed necessary have been incorporated either in 
 Notes placed at the end of the book, or in an Appendix 
 containing a bibliography. There the works are men- 
 tioned to which the author is chiefly indebted, and which 
 his readers may profitably consult if they desire to 
 pursue the subject further. 
 
6 PEEFACE 
 
 The author desires to express his appreciation of the 
 work of the translator, whose collaboration was all the 
 more valuable as the revision of the book had to be 
 made, after an interval of almost two years, under most 
 unfavorable conditions, aggravated by the distance be- 
 tween the writer and the place of publication. The 
 readers will themselves judge of the skill with which 
 the translator has acquitted herself of her task, and 
 the author gladly leaves to her the honor and the 
 responsibility for the translation. 
 
 But how can I express all I owe to M. Israel Levi, my 
 honored master? Without him this work would never 
 have been begun, without him I should never have dared 
 carry it to completion. I have contracted a debt toward 
 him which grows from day to day, and I discharge but 
 the smallest portion of it by dedicating this volume to 
 the memory of his never-to-be-forgotten father-in-law, 
 the Grand-Eabbin Zadoc-Kahn. M. Zadoe-Kahn made 
 a name for himself in Jewish letters by his Etudes sur le 
 livre de Joseph le Zelateur, dealing with one of the 
 most curious domains of that literature in which Eashi 
 was the foremost representative. One of his last public 
 acts was the appeal which he issued on the occasion of 
 the Eashi centenary. It is not a slight satisfaction to 
 me to know that these pages passed under his eyes in 
 manuscript. 
 
 M. LiBEE 
 
 ChAlons-sxjb-Mabnb, March, 1906 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 PEEFACE 
 (page 3) 
 
 INTEODUCTIO]^ 
 (page 13) 
 
 BOOK I— EASHI THE MAK 
 CHAPTER I 
 
 The Jews of France in the Eleventh Centuet 
 Dispersion of the Jews — Tlieir Appearance in Gaul. 
 
 I. Material and Political Conditions of the Jews of 
 France in the Eleventh Century — Their Occupations — Their 
 Relations with the Christians — General Instruction and 
 Religious Life — Limitations of their Literature. 
 
 IL Rabbinical Culture — Part played by Italy — The 
 Kalonymides — The Schools of Lorraine — Rabbenu Gershom, 
 Meor ha-Golah — His Work and Influence — Contemporaries 
 and Disciples of Gershom — Movement reaches its Climax 
 with Rashi page 17 
 
 CHAPTER II 
 
 The Youth and Education of Rashi 
 
 Difficulties of Writing a Biography of Rashi— History 
 and Legend. 
 
 I. The Periods into which Rashi's Life may be divided 
 — ^His Names — Rashi and Yarhi — Troyes in the Middle of 
 the Eleventh Century — The Fairs of Champagne — The Com- 
 munity of Troyes — The Family of Rashi and its Fame in 
 Legend — Childhood — Education of Children among the 
 Jews of France in the Middle Ages— Higher Instruction 
 among the Jews and the Christians — Alleged Journeys and 
 Adventures of Rashi. 
 
 II. Rashi in Lorraine — Position of the Jews in Lorraine 
 — Their Relations with the Jews of France — Schools of 
 Worms and Mayence — Masters of Rashi and their Influence 
 upon him — ^His Colleagues and Correspondents page 31 
 
8 CONTENTS 
 
 CHAPTER III 
 
 Rashi at Troyes — Last Years 
 
 Rashl settles in his Birthplace. 
 
 I. New Centre of Studies— Rashi and the City of Troyes 
 —Spiritual Activity and Authority of Rashi— Rashi founds 
 a School- His Authority and Teachings— His Relations 
 with his Teachers— He writes his Commentaries— Mar- 
 riage of his Three Daughters— His Sons-in-law and Grand- 
 children—A Jewish Marriage in the Middle Ages— The 
 Domestic Virtues — The Education and Position of Woman 
 among the Jews. 
 
 II. The Crusades— What they actually were— Massa- 
 cres in the Jewries along the Moselle and the Rhine — 
 Rashl and the Apostates— Rashi and Godfrey of Bouillon- 
 Consequences of the Crusades — End of Rashi's Life — 
 Legends connected with his Death — Rashi's Death at 
 Troyes page 53 
 
 CHAPTER IV 
 
 Chaeacteb and Leaenihg of Rashi 
 
 Rashi's Spiritual Physiognomy — Sources. 
 
 I. The Man and his Intellect — Depth and Naivete of his 
 Faith — His Goodness, Extreme Modesty, and Love of Truth 
 • — Attitude in Regard to his Masters — His Correspondents 
 and his Pupils. 
 
 II. The Scholar — Alleged Universality of his Knowledge 
 — Wherein his Knowledge was limited, and wherein ex- 
 tended — Rashi's Library — The Authors he cites, and the 
 Authorities to whom he appeals — Lacunae in his Knowledge 
 — Sureness of his Knowledge page 73 
 
 BOOK II— THE WORK OF EASHI 
 CHAPTER V 
 
 The Commentabies — General Chahacteeistics 
 
 Composition of the Commentaries on the Bible and the 
 
 Talmud — Their Character and their Limitations 
 
 The Explanations — Clearness, Accuracy, Brevity — The 
 French Glosses, or Laazim — Their Function — Their 
 Phllologic Importance — The Works treating of 
 them page 89 
 
CONTENTS 9 
 
 CHAPTER VI 
 The BiBLicAi Commextaeies 
 
 Rashi, the Commentator par excellence of the Bible — His 
 Authorities — The Targumim, the Massorah — The Tal- 
 mud and the Midrash — Exegesis before Rashi — The 
 Peshat and the Derash (Literary Method and Free 
 Method) — The Study of the Bible among the Christians 
 and among the Jews^The Extent to which Rashi used 
 the Two Methods — "Various Examples — Anti-Christian 
 Polemics — Causes of the Importance attached to Derash 
 — Rashi and Samuel ben Meir — Rashi's Grammar — 
 Rashi and the Spaniards — His Knowledge of Hebrew — 
 Rashi compared with Modern Exegetes and with 
 Abraham Ibn Ezra — ^Homely Character of the Biblical 
 Commentaries — Their Popularity page 104 
 
 CHAPTER VII 
 The Talmtjdic Commentabies 
 
 Differences between the Biblical and the Talmudic Com- 
 mentaries — Composition — Wherein Rashi imitates and 
 wherein he is Original — His Predecessors — His Method 
 — Establishment of the Text — The Commentary a 
 Grammatical Guide — Accuracy and Soundness of his 
 Explanations — Examples — ^Rashi as an Historian — 
 Rashi and the Halakah — Rashi and the Haggadah — ■ 
 Citations — Value and Fortune of the Talmudic Commen- 
 taries page 135 
 
 CHAPTER VIII 
 
 The Responsa 
 
 Rashi decides Questions of Law — Rabbinical Responsa as a 
 Form of Literature — Historic Interest attaching to 
 those of Rashi — Relations between Jews and Christians 
 — Rashi and the Apostates — He preaches Concord in 
 Families and Communities — Rashi's Character as mani- 
 fested in his Responsa — The NaivetS, Strength, and 
 Tolerance of his Faith page 159 
 
 CHAPTER IX 
 
 Works Composed Under the Influence of Rashi 
 
 Character of these Works — The Sefer lia-Pardes and the 
 Sefer ha-Orah — The Mahzor Titry — The Elements and 
 the Redactors of these Works — Their Interest and 
 their Value page 169 
 
10 CONTENTS 
 
 CHAPTER X 
 
 PoETBY Attributed to Rashi 
 
 Liturgical Poetry at the Time of Rashi— The Selihot attrib- 
 uted to Rashi— Their Technique — Sentiments therein 
 expressed— Quotations— Their Poetic Value page 173 
 
 BOOK III— THE INELUBNCE OP EASHI 
 
 CHAPTER XI 
 
 Feo:ii the Death op Rashi to the Bxpttlsion of the Jews 
 Peom France 
 
 Rashi's Influence upon Biblical and Talmudlc Literature. 
 
 I. Rashi and the Talmudlc Movement in France — His 
 Principal Disciples — Shemaiah — His Two Sons-in-law, Ju- 
 dah ben Nathan and Meir ben Samuel — The School of Ra- 
 meru — The Four Sons of Meir — Samuel Ben Meir, his Intel- 
 lect and his Works — Jacob Tam, his Life and Influence — 
 His Disciples and Works — The Tossafot — Method of the 
 Tossafists and their Relation to Rashi — The School of Dam- 
 pierre — Isaac ben Samuel the Elder and his Disciples — The 
 School of Paris — Judah Sir Leon; his Chief Pupils — Jehiel 
 of Meaux and his French and German Disciples — Redaction 
 of the Tossafot. 
 
 II. Rashi and the Biblical Movement in France — The 
 Commentary on the Petateuch by Samuel ben Meir — ^His 
 Disciples — Joseph Kara and Joseph Bekor-Shor — Their 
 Rational Exegesis — Decadence of Biblical Exegesis — The 
 Tossafot on the Pentateuch; Chief Collections; their Char- 
 acter — Rashi and Christian Exegesis — Nicholas de Lyra and 
 Luther — Decadence of French Judaism from the Expulsion 
 of 1181 to that of 1396. 
 
 III. Rashi's Influence outside of France — Rashi in the 
 Orient; in the Provence — Evidences of his Reputation ;in 
 Italy; in Spain — How Abraham Ibn Ezra judged Rashi — 
 David Kimhi — Kabbalistic Exegesis — Nahmanides — Solomon 
 ben Adret, Nissim Gerundi, and Asher ben Jehiel. page 183 
 
 CHAPTER XII 
 
 From the Expulsion or the Jews from France to the 
 Present Time 
 
 Rashi in Foreign Countries — Rashi's Influence on the Ital- 
 ians; on the Last Spanish Talmudists — Elijah Mizrahi 
 
CONTENTS 11 
 
 — ^Rashi's Popularity — His Descendants — The Family of 
 Lurla — The Authors of Super-Commentaries and of Hid- 
 dushim — Rashl and Printing — The Renaissance — Rashi 
 and the Hebrew Scholars among the Christians of the 
 Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries — Brelthaupt— 
 Rashi in the Eighteenth Century — Moses Mendelssohn 
 and the Biurlsts — Rashi In the Nineteenth Century — 
 The Eighth Centenary of his Death page 210 
 
 CONCLUSION 
 (page 222) 
 
 APPENDIX I 
 
 THE FAMILY OF RASHI 
 (page 227) 
 
 APPENDIX II 
 
 BIBLIOGRAPHY 
 (page 231) 
 
 NOTES 
 (page 241) 
 
 INDEX 
 (page 261) 
 
INTRODUCTION 
 
 A people honors itself in honoring the great men who 
 have interpreted its thought, who are the guardians of 
 its genius. It thus renders merited homage and pays 
 just tribute to those who have increased the treasures of 
 its civilization, and added a new feature to its moral 
 physiognomy; it establishes the union of ideas that 
 assures the conservation of the national genius, and 
 maintains and perpetuates the consciousness of the 
 nation. Finally, it manifests consciousness of its future 
 in taking cognizance of its past, and, in turning over the 
 leaves of its archives, it defines its part and mission in 
 history. The study of men and facts in the past permits 
 of a sounder appreciation of recent efforts, of present 
 tendencies; for "humanity is always composed of more 
 dead than living," and usually " the past is what is most 
 vital in the present." 
 
 No people has greater need than the Jews to steep 
 itself again in the sources of its existence, and no period 
 more than the present imposes upon it the duty of bring- 
 ing its past back to life. Scattered over the face of the 
 globe, no longer constituting a body politic, the Jewish 
 people by cultivating its intellectual patrimony creates 
 for itself an ideal fatherland; and mingled, as it is, 
 with its neighbors, threatened by absorption into sur- 
 rounding nations, it recovers a sort of individuality by 
 the reverence it pays to men that have given best 
 expression to its peculiar genius. 
 
14 EASHI 
 
 But the Jewish people, its national life crushed out 
 of it, though deprived of all political ambitions, has 
 yet regained a certain national solidarity through com- 
 munity of faith and ideals; and it has maintained the 
 cohesion of its framework by the wholly spiritual bonds 
 of teaching and charity. This is the picture it presents 
 throughout the middle ages, during the period which, 
 for Christianity, marked an eclipse of the intellect and, 
 as it were, an enfeeblement of the reason to such a 
 degree that the term middle ages becomes synonymous 
 with intellectual decadence. " But," said the historian 
 Graetz, " while the sword was ravaging the outer world, 
 and the people devoted themselves to murderous strife, 
 the house of Jacob cared only that the light of the mind 
 burn on steadily and that the shadows of darkness be 
 dissipated. If a religion may be judged by its principal 
 representatives, the palm must be awarded to Judaism in 
 the tenth to the thirteenth century." Its scholars, 
 therefore, its philosophers, and its poets render Judaism 
 illustrious, and by their works and their renown shed a 
 radiant light upon its history. 
 
 Maimonides is one of those eminent spirits in whom 
 was reflected the genius of the Jewish people and who 
 have in turn contributed to the development of its 
 genius." Maimonides, however, was also more than this ; 
 perhaps he presents as much of interest from the point 
 of view of Arabic as of Jewish culture; and expressing 
 more than the Jewish ideal, he does not belong to the 
 Jews entirely. Of Rashi, on the contrary, one may say 
 that he is a Jew to the exclusion of everything else. 
 He is no more than a Jew, no other than a Jew. 
 
BOOK I 
 RA8HI THE MAN 
 
BOOK I 
 
 Kashi The Man 
 
 CHAPTEE I 
 
 The Jews op Prastce in the 
 Eleventh Century 
 
 Great men — and Eashi, as we shall see, may be counted 
 among their number — arrive at opportune times. 
 Sometimes we congratulate them for having disap- 
 peared from history in good season; it would be just 
 as reasonable, or, rather. Just as unreasonable, to be 
 grateful to them for having come at exactly the right 
 juncture of affairs. The great man, in fact, is the man 
 of the moment; he comes neither too soon, which spares 
 him from fumbling over beginnings and so clogging his 
 own footsteps, nor too late, which prevents him from 
 imitating a model and so impeding the development of 
 his personality. He is neither a precursor nor an 
 epigone, neither a forerunner nor a late-comer. He 
 neither breaks the ground nor gleans the harvest : he is 
 the sower who casts the seed upon a field ready to receive 
 it and make it grow. 
 
 It is, therefore, of some avail for us to devote several 
 pages to the history of the Jews of Northern France in 
 the eleventh century, especially in regard to their intel- 
 
18 EASHI 
 
 lectual state and more especially in regard to their rab- 
 binical culture. If another reason were needed to justi- 
 fy this preamble, I might invoke a principle long ago 
 formulated and put to the test by criticism, namely, that 
 environment is an essential factor in the make-up of a 
 writer, and an intellectual work is always determined, 
 conditioned by existing circumstances. The principle 
 applies to Eashi, of whom one may say, of whom in fact 
 Zunz has said, he is the representative par excellence of 
 his time and of his circle. 
 
 In the great migratory movement beginning at the 
 dawn of the Christian era, which scattered the Jews 
 to the four corners of the globe, and which was accen- 
 tuated and precipitated by the misfortunes that broke 
 over the population of Palestine, France, or, more ex- 
 actly, Gaul, was colonized by numbers of Jews. If we 
 believe in the right of the first occupant, we ought to 
 consider the French Jews more French than many 
 Frenchmen. Conversions must at first have been num- 
 \erous, and the number of apostates kept pace with the 
 ■progress of Christianity. 
 
 In the south of France, there were Jewish communi- 
 ties before the fifth century ; in Burgundy and Touraine, 
 in the first half of the sixth century; and in Austrasia, 
 at the end of the same century. From the Provence, 
 they ascended the Ehone and the Saone. Others reached 
 Guienne and Anjou.' 
 
 Although disturbed at times by the canons of various 
 distrustful Church councilB, or by the sermons of a few 
 
THE JEWS OP PEANCE 19 
 
 vehement bishops, the Jews on the whole led a peaceful, 
 though not a very prosperous, existence, which has left 
 scarcely any traces in history and literature. Aside from 
 a few unimportant names and facts, these centuries mark 
 a gap in the history of the Jews of France, as in that of 
 their Christian neighbors; and literature, as it always 
 does, followed the political and economic destinies of the 
 nation. Prom the fifth to the tenth century, letters fell 
 into utter decay, despite the momentary stimulus given 
 by Charlemagne. The human intellect, to borrow from 
 Guizot, had reached the nadir of its course. This epoch, 
 however, was not entirely lost to civilization. The Jews 
 applied themselves to studies, the taste for which devel- 
 oped more and more strongly. If as yet they could not 
 fly with their own wings, they remained in relation with 
 the centres of rabbinical life, the academies in Baby- 
 lonia, exchanging the products of the mind at the same 
 time that they bartered merchandise. This slow process 
 of incubation was perforce fruitful of results. 
 
 It was in the tenth century, when the political and 
 social troubles that had agitated Europe since the fall of 
 the Eoman Empire were calmed, that the Jews came 
 forth from their semi-obscurity, either because their 
 numbers had increased, or because their position had be- 
 come more stable, or because they were ready, after 
 mature preparation, to play their part in the intellectual 
 world. 
 
 At this time, the Jews of Northern France nearly 
 ■m'thout exception enjoyed happy conditions of existence. 
 
20 EASHI 
 
 From their literature, rather scholarly than popular, we 
 learn chiefly of their schools and their rabbis; yet we 
 also learn from it that their employments were the same 
 as those of the other inhabitants of the country. They 
 were engaged in trade, many attaining wealth; and a 
 number devoted themselves to agriculture. They pos- 
 sessed fields and vineyards, for neither the ownership 
 of land nor residence in the country was forbidden them ; 
 and they were also employed in cattle raising. Often 
 they took Christians into their service. 
 
 But the Jews, although they attached themselves to 
 the soil and tried to take root there, were essentially an 
 urban population. They owned real estate and devoted 
 themselves to all sorts of industries. They were allowed to 
 be workmen and to practice every handicraft, inasmuch 
 as the guilds, those associations, partly religious in char- 
 acter, which excluded the Jews from their membership 
 rolls, did not begin to be established until the twelfth 
 century. Sometimes a Jew was entrusted with a public 
 office, as a rule that of collector of taxes. Not until 
 later, about the twelfth century, when forced by men and 
 circumstances, did the Jews make a specialty of money- 
 lending. 
 
 The strength of the Jews resided in the fact that they 
 were organized in communities, which were marked by 
 intense solidarity, and in which harmony and tran- 
 quillity were assured by the rabbinical institutions. 
 Failure to respect these institutions was punished by 
 excommunication — a severe penalty, for the excommuni- 
 cated man encountered the hate of his co-religionists and 
 was driven to baptism." 
 
THE JEWS OF PEANCE 21 
 
 At the head of the communities ■were provosts 
 (praepositi) , charged with surveillance over their in- 
 terests, and doubtless their representatives before the 
 civil authority. Many Jews were highly esteemed by 
 the kings or seigneurs, holding positions of honor and 
 bearing honorific titles; but in general the Jews of 
 France, unlike those of Spain, were not permitted to take 
 part in the government, or even have a share in the po- 
 litical life of the nation. They contented themselves with 
 the enjoyment of the fruits of their labor and the peace- 
 ful practice of their religion. They were the less dis- 
 turbed because they lived under a special regime. Being 
 neither French nor Christian, they were therefore not 
 citizens ; they formed a state within the state, or rather a 
 colony within the state, and, being neither nobles nor 
 serfs, they did not have to render military service. They 
 administered their internal affairs, and in general were 
 not amenable to civil or ecclesiastical legislation. For 
 the solution of their legal difficulties they applied to 
 the rabbinical tribunals. In all other respects they 
 were dependent upon the lord of the lands upon which 
 they established themselves, provided they were not under 
 the tutelle et mainbournie of the king. In either case 
 they had to pay taxes and constitute themselves a con- 
 stantly flowing source of revenues for their protectors. 
 
 The Jews lived on a basis of good understanding with 
 their neighbors, and came into frequent intercourse with 
 them. Even the clergy maintained relations with Jew- 
 ish scholars. It was the incessant efforts of the higher 
 ecclesiastics and of the papacy that little by little created 
 animosity against the Jews, which at the epoch of Eashi 
 was still not very apparent. The collections of canon- 
 
23 EASHI 
 
 ical law by force of tradition renewed the humiliating 
 measures prescribed by the last Eoman emperors. 
 
 The Jews throughout France spoke French; and they 
 either had French names or gave their Hebrew names a 
 French form. In the rabbinical writings cities are desig- 
 nated by their real names, or by Hebrew names more or 
 less ingeniously adapted from the Latin or Eomance. 
 With the secularization of their names, the Jews adopted, 
 at least partially, the customs and, naturally, also the 
 superstitions of their countrymen. The valuable re- 
 searches of Giidemann and Israel Levi show how much 
 the folk-lore of the two races have in common. More- 
 over, when two peoples come in contact, no matter how 
 great the differences distinguishing them, they are bound 
 to exert mutual influence upon each other. No imper- 
 vious partitions exist in sociology. 
 
 It would thus be an anachronism to represent the Jews 
 of the eleventh century as pale and shabby, ever bearing 
 the look of hunted animals, shamefaced, depressed by 
 clerical hate, royal greed, and the brutality of the masses. 
 In the Jewries of France at this time there was nothing 
 sad or sombre, no strait-laced orthodoxy, no jargon, no 
 disgraceful costume, none of that gloomy isolation be- 
 tokening distrust, scorn, and hate. 
 
 The practical activity of the Jews, their business 
 interests, and their consequent wealth did not stifle 
 intellectual ideals. On the contrary, thanks to the 
 security assured them, they could devote themselves to 
 study. Their rich literature proves they could occupy 
 themselves at the same time with mental and material 
 pursuits. "For a people to produce scholars, it is 
 necessary that it be composed of something other than 
 
THE JEWS OP PEAITCE 23 
 
 hard-hearted usurers and sordid business men. The 
 literary output is a thorough test of social conditions." ' 
 Moreover, the intellectual status of a people always bears 
 relation to its material and economic condition, and 
 so, where the Jews enjoyed most liberty and happiness, 
 their literature has been richest and most brilliant. 
 
 Erom an intellectual point of view the Jews resembled 
 the people among whom they lived. Like them, they 
 were pious, even extremely devout; and they counted few 
 unbelievers among their number. Sometimes it hap- 
 pened that a religious person failed to obey precepts, but 
 no one contested the foundations of belief. In the matter 
 of religion, it is true, outward observance was guarded 
 above everything else. The Jews, settled as they were on 
 foreign soil, came to attach themselves to ceremonials as 
 the surest guarantees of their faith. Naturally supersti- 
 tions prevailed at an epoch marked by a total lack of 
 scientific spirit. People believed in the existence of men 
 without shadows, in evil demons, and so on. The Jews, 
 however, were less inclined to such conceptions than the 
 Christians, who in every district had places of pilgrimage 
 at which they adored spurious bones and relics. 
 
 It would be altogether unjust not to recognize the 
 ethical results of the constant practice of the law, which 
 circumscribed the entire life of the Jew. Talmudic 
 legislation must not be regarded, as it sometimes is, as an 
 oppressive yoke, an insufferable fetter. Its exactions do 
 not make it tyrannical, because it is loyally and freely 
 accepted, accepted even with pleasure. The whole life 
 of the Jew is taken into consideration beforehand, its 
 boundaries are marked, its actions controlled. But this 
 submission entails no self-denial ; it is voluntary, and the 
 
24 EASHI 
 
 reason is provided with sufficient motives. Indeed, it is 
 remarkable what freedom and breadth thought was able 
 to maintain in the very bosom of orthodoxy. 
 
 " The observance of the Law and, consequently, the study 
 of the Law formed the basis of this religion. With the fall 
 of the Temple the one place disappeared in which the 
 Divine cult could legitimately be performed; as a result 
 the Jews turned for the expression of their religious senti- 
 ment with all the more ardor toward the Law, now become 
 the real sanctuary of Judaism torn from Its native soil, 
 the safeguard of the wandering race, the one heritage of 
 a glorious and precious past. The recitation and study of 
 the Law took the place of religious ceremonies — hence the 
 name "school" (Schul) for houses of worship in France 
 and in Germany. The endeavor was made to give the Law 
 definite form, to develop it, not only in its provisions re- 
 maining in practical use, such as the civil and penal code, 
 regulations in regard to the festivals, and private ob- 
 servances, but also in its provisions relating to the Temple 
 cult which had historical interest only. This occupation, 
 pursued with warmth and depth of feeling for a number 
 of centuries, appealed at once to the intellect and the heart. 
 It may be said that the entire Jewish race shared in the 
 work, the scholar being removed from the general mass 
 only in degree, not in kind." * 
 
 The high level of general instruction among the Jews 
 was all the more remarkable since only a small number 
 of literary works were known. Though copies were 
 made of those which enjoyed the greatest reputation, 
 the number of manuscripts was limited. Nevertheless, 
 soon after their appearance, important productions in 
 one country came into the hands of scholars of other 
 countries. Just as Christendom by force of its spiritual 
 bond formed a siagle realm, so two strong chains bound 
 together Jews of widely separated regions: these were 
 their religion and their language. Communication was 
 difficult, roads were few in number and dangerous; yet, 
 
THE JEWS OP PEANCE 25 
 
 countervailing distance and danger was devotion to 
 religion and to learning. 
 
 But religion and learning were one and the same 
 thing. As was the case in Christianity, and for the same 
 reasons, religion filled the whole of life and engrossed 
 all branches of kaowledge. There was no such thing as 
 secular science; religion placed its stamp on everything, 
 and turned the currents of thought into its own channels. 
 One must not hope therefore to find, among the Jews of 
 Northern France, those literary species which blossomed 
 and flourished in Spain ; philosophy did not exist among 
 them, and poetry was confined to a few dry liturgic 
 poems. Their intellectual activity was concentrated in 
 the study of the Bible and the Talmud; but in this 
 domain they acquired all the greater depth and pene- 
 tration. Less varied as were the objects of their pur- 
 suits, they excelled in what they undertook, and inferior 
 though they were in the fields of philosophy and poetry, 
 they were superior in Biblical exegesis, and still more 
 so, possibly, in Talmudic jurisprudence. 
 
 II 
 
 The history of the beginnings of rabbinical learning 
 in Prance is wrapped in obscurity. Tradition lias 
 it that Charlemagne caused the scholar Kalonymos to 
 come from Lucca to Mayence. With his sons he is said 
 to have opened a school there, which became the centre of 
 Talmudic studies in Lorraine. Legends, however slight 
 their semblance to truth, are never purely fictitious 
 in character; they contain an element of truth, or, 
 at least, symbolize the truth; and this tradition, which 
 cannot be accepted in the shape in which it has been 
 
26 EASHI 
 
 handed down, seeing that Kalonymos lived in the tenth 
 century, is nevertheless a fairly exact representation 
 of the continuity of the intellectual movement. If the 
 fact is not established that Charlemagne accomplished 
 for the Jews what he did for the Christians, that is, 
 revived their schools and promoted their prosperity, 
 it seems more certain that rabbinical learning penetrated 
 into the northwest of Europe through the intermedi- 
 ation of Italy, which bridged the gap between the Orient 
 and the Ehine lands. 
 
 As is well known. Christian Italy during the early 
 middle ages, despite the successive invasions of the 
 barbarians, remained the centre of civilization and the 
 store-house of Occidental learning. It is in Italy, with- 
 out doubt, that the Eomanesque style of architecture had 
 its origin, and in Italy that the study of the Eoman law 
 was vigorously resumed. It is to Italy also that Charle- 
 magne turned when he sought for scholars to place at the 
 head of his schools. Moreover, it was on Italian soil, 
 in the fifteenth century, that the magnificent blossom 
 meriting its name, the'Eenaissance, was destined to open 
 and unfold its literary and artistic beauties. 
 
 Italy owes its glorious part in the world's history both 
 to its geographical position and its commercial impor- 
 tance. So likewise with the Jews of Italy, their commer- 
 cial activities contributed to their intellectual prosperity. 
 In the ninth century they possessed rabbinical authori- 
 ties, and in the tenth century, centres of Talmudic study. 
 At this period, the celebrated family of the Kalonymides 
 went to Lorraine to establish itself there. For some 
 time Mayenee was the metropolis of Judaism in the 
 Ehine countries; and by its community the first acade- 
 
THE JEWS OP PEANCE 37 
 
 mies were established, the first Tahnudic commentaries 
 were composed, and decisions were made which were 
 accepted by all the Jews of Christian Europe. Soon 
 this intellectual activity extended to Worms, to Speyer, 
 and a little later to the western part of Germany and the 
 northern part of France.' A veritable renaissance took 
 place, parallel with the movement of ideas which went 
 on in the schools and convents of the eleventh and 
 fourteenth centuries f for Jewish culture is often bound 
 up with the intellectual destinies of the neighboring 
 peoples. 
 
 For some time the schools of Lorraine stood at the 
 head of the Talmudic movement, and it was to them that 
 Eashi came a little later to derive instruction. 
 
 One of the most celebrated offspring of the family of 
 the Kalonymides is Meshullam ben Kalonymos, who 
 lived at Mayence in the second half of the tenth century. 
 He was a Tahnudist held in high regard and the com- 
 poser of liturgie poetry. He devoted himself to the 
 regulation of the material and spiritual affairs of his 
 brethren. Although he stood in correspondence with the 
 Babylonian masters, he was in a position to pass judg- 
 ment independently of them. Communication with the 
 East was frequent. The communities of France and 
 Germany sent disciples to the Babylonians and submitted 
 difficulties to them. Tradition relates that the Gaon 
 Natronai (about 865) even visited France. However 
 that may be, the Jews of France at an early period were 
 acquainted with Babylonian works, both the chronicles 
 and the legal codes. 
 
 Other Talmudists of the tenth century are known, but 
 rabbinical literature may be said to have commenced 
 
28 EASHI 
 
 only with Gershom ben Judah (about 960-1038). Ac- 
 cording to tradition his master was his contemporary Hai 
 Gaon; in reality he was the disciple of Judah ben Meir 
 ha-Cohen, surnamed Leontin (about 975). Originally 
 from Metz, Gershom established himself at Mayence, 
 to which a large number of pupils from neighboring 
 countries soon flocked in order to attend his school. 
 Thus he was the legatee of the Babylonian academies, 
 the decay of which became daily more marked. In his 
 capacity as head of a school as in many other respects, 
 he was the true forerunner of Eashi, who carried on his 
 work with greater command of the subject and with more 
 success. 
 
 Eabbenu Gershom not only gave Talmudic learning 
 a fresh impetus and removed its centre to the banks 
 of the Ehine, but he also exerted the greatest and most 
 salutary influence upon the social life of his co-religion- 
 ists, through his " Decrees," religious and moral, which, 
 partly renewing older institutions, were accepted by all 
 the Jews of Christian countries. Among other things, 
 he forbade polygamy. He merits consideration in two 
 aspects, as a Gaon and as one to whom his disciples gave 
 the surname which still attaches to him, " the Light of 
 the Exile," Meor hcu-Oolah. Eashi said of him : " Eab- 
 benu Gershom has enlightened the eyes of the Captivity ; 
 for we all live by his instruction; all the Jews of these 
 countries call themselves the disciples of his disciples." 
 
 Gershom seems to have been the first Ehenish scholar 
 who resorted to the written word for the spread of his 
 teachings. He devoted himself to the establishment of a 
 correct text of the Bible and the Talmud, and his chief 
 work is a Talmudical commentary. 
 
THE JEWS OF PEANCE 29 
 
 Since liis time the continuity of learning has been un- 
 interrupted. The seed sown by Eabbenu Gershom was 
 not long in germinating. Schools began to multiply and 
 develop in Lorraine. The one at Mayence prospered for 
 a long time, and was eclipsed only by the schools of 
 Champagne. 
 
 A rabbi, Machir, the brother of Gershom, by his 
 Talmudic lexicon contributed likewise to the devel- 
 opment of rabbinical knowledge. His four sons were 
 renowned scholars, contemporaries and doubtless fellow- 
 students of Eashi. 
 
 The disciples of Gershom, who continued the work of 
 their master, are of especial interest to us, because one of 
 them, Simon the Elder, was the maternal uncle of Eashi, 
 and three others were his masters. These were Jacob 
 ben Takar, Isaac ha-Levi, and Isaac ben Judah. The 
 latter two were disciples also of Eliezer ben Isaac the 
 Great, of Mayence. Jacob ben Yakar and Isaac ha-Levi 
 went to Worms, where they became rabbis, while Isaac 
 ben Judah remained at Mayence, and directed the Tal- 
 mudic school there. 
 
 About the middle of the eleventh century, then, an 
 intellectual ferment took place in Prance and Lorraine, 
 earnest literary and scientific activity manifested itself, 
 and above all elements of profound rabbinical culture 
 became visible. But one who should regulate these 
 forces was lacking, a guide to direct these activities and 
 to serve as a model to others. In order that the move- 
 ment might not come to a premature end, a master was 
 needed who would give it impetus and define its course, 
 who would strike the decisive blow. Such a man there 
 3 
 
30 EASHI 
 
 was, a man who impressed his contemporaries as a scholar 
 of high degree and noble character, and whose memory 
 as such is still cherished by posterity. This man was 
 Eashi. 
 
CHAPTEE II 
 The Youth and Education of Eashi 
 
 Little is known concerning the life of Eashi. Owing to 
 various causes not a single work is extant that might he 
 used as a guide for the establishment of minor facts. 
 Generally speaking, Jewish literature in the middle ages 
 was of an impersonal character; practically no memoirs 
 nor autobiographies of this period exist. The disciples of 
 the great masters were not lavish of information con- 
 cerning them. They held their task to be accomplished 
 when they had studied and handed on the master's 
 works; regard for his teachings ranked above respect 
 for the personality of the author. But the figure of 
 Eashi, as though in despite of all such obstacles, has 
 remained popular. People wanted to know all the 
 details of his life, and they invented facts according to 
 their desires. Fiction, however, fell short of the truth. 
 Legend does not represent him so great as he must 
 actually have been. In the present work, too, I shall be 
 obliged to resort to comparisons and analogies, to sup- 
 plement by hypotheses the scanty information afl:orded 
 by history, yet I shall distinguish the few historic facts 
 from the mass of legends in which they are smothered. 
 
 As of old many cities in Greece asserted that they were 
 the birthplace of Homer, the national poet, so a number 
 of cities disputed for the honor of being the birthplace 
 
38 EASHI 
 
 of Eashi, or of having been his residence, or the scene of 
 his death. Worms claimed him as one of its rabbis, 
 Lunel, thanks to a confusion of names, has passed as 
 his birthplace, and Prague as the city of his death. One 
 historian set 1105 as the year of his birth, though in fact 
 it is the year of his death. Others placed it in the 
 thirteenth century, and still others even in the four- 
 teenth. 
 
 In the course of this narrative other such instances will 
 occur — of fables, more or less ingenious, collected by 
 chroniclers lacking discrimination. They may make 
 pleasant reading, although they contain no element of 
 authenticity. Besides, they are of relatively recent date, 
 and emanate to a large extent from Italy and Spain, 
 whose historians could count upon the credulity of their 
 readers to impose their inventions upon Jews and 
 Christians alike. 
 
 Confusion of this sort reigned in regard to Eashi's life 
 until 1823, the year in which the illustrious Zunz 
 published the essay which established, not only his own, 
 but also Eashi's reputation, and brought Eashi forth 
 from the shadow of legend into the full light of history. 
 
 We owe a debt of gratitude to Zunz and other scholars, 
 such as Geiger, Weiss, Berliner, and Epstein, because, 
 with the legendary often superimposed upon the true, 
 they have made it easy to pick out the genuine from the 
 false. Now that the result of their labors is before us, 
 no great difficulty attaches to the task of casting off 
 legend from history, and extracting from the legendary 
 whatever historic material it contains. 
 
YOUTH AND EDUCATION 33 
 
 In brushing aside all the myths with which the bio- 
 graphy of Eashi is cobwebbed, one finds, not a varied 
 life, rich in incident, but an entirely intellectual life, 
 whose serenity was undisturbed by excitement. 
 
 An event dividing Eashi's life into almost equal parts 
 is his taking up his residence at Troyes. During the 
 earlier period he received his education, at first in the 
 city of his birth, then in the academies of Lorraine. On 
 his return to Troyes, he had matured and was thoroughly 
 equipped. In the school he founded there, he grouped 
 pupils about him and wrote the works destined to per- 
 petuate his influence. 
 
 First of all, it is necessary to make Eashi's acquaint- 
 ance, as it were, to know the names he bore and those he 
 did not bear. An example of the fantastic stories of 
 which he was the hero is afforded by the name Yarhi, 
 which is sometimes still given to him. It does not date 
 further back than the sixteenth century, before which 
 time he was called E. Solomon (Shelomo) by the Jews 
 of France, and E. Salomon ha-Zarfati (the Frenchman) 
 by Jews outside of France. Christian scholars likewise 
 called him E. Salomo Gallicus, and also briefly E. Solo- 
 mon, as the most celebrated rabbi who ever bore that 
 name. So said Abbe Bartolocci, one of the first and 
 most eminent bibliographers of rabbinical literature, ex- 
 plaining that the short appellation had the same force as 
 when Saint Paul is designated simply as " the apostle." 
 
 The usual name applied to Eashi (E Sh I) is formed, 
 in accordance with a well-known Jewish custom, from 
 the initials of his name and patronymic in Hebrew, 
 
34 EASHI 
 
 Eabbi Shelomo Izhaki," which the Christians translated 
 by Solomon Isaacides, just as they made Maimonides of 
 Moses ben Maimon. Eaymond Martini, the celebrated 
 author of the Pugio fidei, seems to have been the first 
 who saw in Eashi the initials of the words, E. Solomon 
 Yarhi. He confused Eashi either with a Solomon of 
 Lunel, mentioned by the traveller Benjamin of Tudela, 
 or with a grammarian, Solomon ben Abba Mari, of 
 Lunel, who lived in the second half of the fourteenth 
 century. Sebastian Miinster, the German Hebraist 
 (1489-1552), and the elder Buxtorf (1564-1629), 
 the humanist and highly esteemed Hebrew scholar, 
 popularized the mistake, which soon gave rise to an- 
 other. L'Bmpereur, also a scholar in Hebraica, of 
 the seventeenth century, went even further than his 
 predecessors, in holding Lunel " to have been the birth- 
 place of Eashi, while Basnage (1653-1725), the cele- 
 brated historian of the Jews, spoke of " Solomon the 
 Lunatic." 
 
 Though as early a writer as Eichard Simon (1638- 
 1712) protested against the error of making Lunel the 
 native city of Eashi, the mistake crept even into Jewish 
 circles. Since this city of Languedoc was one of the 
 principal centres of Jewish learning in the Provence 
 during the middle ages, Eashi, in most unexpected fash- 
 ion, came to swell the number of " scholars " of Lunel, of 
 whom mention is frequently made in rabbinical litera- 
 ture. It even seems that at the beginning of the nine- 
 teenth century, Jews of Bordeaux went to Lunel on a 
 pilgrimage to his tomb. 
 
 In point of fact Eashi was neither a German nor a 
 Provengal; he was born and he died in Champagne, at 
 Troyes. At that time Prance was divided into a dozen 
 
YOUTH AFD EDUCATION 35 
 
 distinct countries, one of the most important of which 
 was the countship of Champagne, to the northeast, be- 
 tween the Ile-de-France and Lorraine. There were 
 Jews in all the important localities of the province, es- 
 pecially in the commercial cities. In the period with 
 which we are dealing, fairs took place every year success- 
 ively at Lagny, Bar-sur-Aube, Provins, Troyes, and 
 again Provins and Troyes. The principal city was 
 Troyes, which at the end of the ninth century, when it 
 contained about twelve thousand inhabitants, was chosen 
 as their capital by the counts of Champagne. 
 
 In a wide plain, where the Seine divides into several 
 branches, rises the city of Troyes, maintaining to some 
 extent its medieval character, with its narrow, ill- 
 paved streets, which of old swarmed with geese and 
 porkers, and with its houses of wooden gables and over- 
 hanging roofs. Manufactures prospered at Troyes. 
 Many tanneries were established there, and parchment 
 was exported from all parts of the district. In fact it 
 has been suggested that the development of the parch- 
 ment industry at Troyes furthered the literary activity 
 for which the province was noted, by providing writing 
 material at a time when in general it was so rare. But 
 manufactures in that period had not attained a high 
 degree of perfection, and the main instrument for obtain- 
 ing wealth was commerce, chieily the commerce carried 
 on at fairs, those great lists periodically opened to the 
 commercial activity of a whole province or a whole 
 country. Troyes, celebrated for its fairs, was the scene 
 of two a year, one beginning on St. John's Day (the 
 warm fair), and one beginning on St. Eemy's Day (the 
 
36 EASHI 
 
 cold fair) . They covered a quarter so important that it 
 constituted two large parishes by itself. 
 
 Although religon had already begun to intervene in 
 the regulation of the fairs, Jews took a large part in. 
 them, and somewhat later, like the Jews of Poland in the 
 seventeenth century, they used them as the occasions for 
 rabbinical synods. In the Jewish sources, the fairs of 
 Troyes are frequently mentioned. The relations that 
 sprang up among the great numbers of Jews that went 
 to them were favorable to the cause of science, since the 
 Jews in pursuing their material interests did not forget 
 those of learning. Thus the fairs exercised a certain 
 influence upon the intellectual movement. 
 
 Troyes was also the seat of a permanent Jewish com- 
 mujiity of some importance ; for a Eesponsum of the first 
 half of the eleventh century declared that the regulations 
 of the community should have the force of law for each 
 member, and when the regulations deal with questions 
 of general import they were to hold good for neighboring 
 communities as well. Another Eesponsum dating from 
 the same period shows that the Jews of France owned 
 land and cultivated the vine. Troyes no longer bears 
 visible traces of the ancient habitation of the Jews. It 
 is possible that the parish of St. Probert occupies the 
 ground covered by the old Jewry; and probably the 
 church of St. Probert, now in ruins, and the church of 
 St. Pantaleon were originally synagogues. But in 
 Eashi's works there are more striking evidences that 
 Jews were identified with Troyes. Certain of his ex- 
 pressions or other indications attach them to the city 
 of Troyes, " our city," as he says. 
 
YOUTH AND EDUCATION 37 
 
 EasM, then, was born at Troyes in 1040 — ^the year of 
 Gershom's death, some authors affirm, who are more 
 concerned with the pragmatism of history than its truth, 
 more with scientific continuity than with the sequence 
 of events. But if it is almost certain that the rahbi, 
 who, as I said, was the precursor of Eashi, had been 
 dead for twelve years, 1040 (possibly 1038) is probably 
 the year of the death of another authority, no less cele- 
 brated, Hai Gaon, whose passing away marks the irre- 
 parable decadence of the Babylonian Gaonate. The 
 French rabbi and his Spanish colleagues were destined to 
 harvest the fruits of this Gaonate and carry on its work, 
 exemplifying the words of the Talmud: "When one 
 star is extinguished in Israel, another star rises on the 
 horizon." 
 
 In order that Eashi should have a setting in accord 
 with so high a position, legend has surrounded his family 
 with a nimbus of glory. History, it is true, does not 
 make mention of his ancestors, and this silence, joined 
 to the popularity which Eashi came to enjoy, inspired, 
 or was an added stimulus to, the fantastic genealogic 
 theories of those who in their admiration of him, or 
 through pride of family, declared him to have been 
 descended from a rabbi of the third century, Johanan 
 ha-Sandlar."^ All that can be said with certainty is, 
 that his maternal uncle was Simon the Elder, a dis- 
 ciple of Gershom and a learned and respected rabbi. 
 Eashi's father Isaac appears to have been well-educated. 
 Eashi on one occasion mentions a certain bit of in- 
 struction he had received from him. Tradition, fond 
 of ascribing illustrious ancestors to its heroes, would 
 see in this Isaac one who through his knowledge and 
 
38 EASHI 
 
 godliness deserved to share in the renown of his son, 
 and to whom his son, moreover, rendered pious homage 
 by quoting him in the opening passage " of the commen- 
 tary on Genesis. We would willingly believe Eashi 
 -capable of a delicate attention of this kind, only we 
 know that the Isaac cited is a certain Talmudic scholar. 
 Tradition, letting its fancy play upon the lives of 
 great men, delights also in clothing their birth with 
 tales of marvels. Sometimes the miraculous occurs 
 even before they are born and points to their future 
 greatness. The father of Eashi, for instance, is said to 
 have possessed a precious gem of great value. Some 
 Christians wanted to take it away from him, either 
 because they desired to put it to a religious use, or 
 because they could not bear the sight of such a treasure 
 in the hands of a Jew. Isaac obstinately refused their 
 offers. One day the Christians lured him into a boat, 
 and demanded that he give up his gem. Isaac, taking a 
 heroic stand, threw the object of their ardent desires 
 into the water. Then a mysterious voice was heard in 
 his school pronouncing these words : " A son will be 
 bom to thee, Isaac, who will enlighten the eyes of all 
 Israel." According to a less familiar tradition, Isaac 
 lived in a seaport town, where he earned a poor liveli- 
 hood as stevedore. Once he found a pearl in the harbor, 
 and went in all haste to show it to his wife, the daughter 
 of a jeweler. Eealizing the value of the pearl, she could 
 not contain herself, and went forthwith to a jeweler. 
 He oifered her ten thousand ducats, double its value, 
 because the duke was anxious to buy it as an adornment 
 for the bishop's cope. The woman would not listen to 
 the proposition, and ran back to her husband to tell him 
 
YOUTH AND EDUCATION" 39 
 
 to what use the pearl was going to be put. Eather than 
 have it adorn a bishop's vestment, Isaac threw it into 
 the sea, sacrificing his fortune to his God. 
 
 The scene of another tradition is laid at Worms. 
 One day his wife, who had become pregnant, was 
 walking along a street of the city when two carriages 
 coming from opposite directions collided. The woman 
 in danger of being crushed pressed up close against a 
 wall, and the wall miraculously sank inward to make 
 way for her. This made Isaac fear ar. accusation of 
 witchcraft, and he left Worms fop Troyes, where a son 
 was bom to him, whom he named Solomon. 
 
 To turn from the mythical to the hypothetical — ^the 
 yoimg Solomon probably received his early education in 
 his own family, and what this education was, can easily 
 be conceived. It was the duty of the father himself to 
 take charge of the elementary instruction of his son and 
 turn the first glimmerings of the child's reason upon the 
 principles of religion. This instruction was concentrated 
 upon the observance of laws and customs. " From the 
 tenderest age," says Dr. M. Berliner, " the child was ini- 
 tiated into the observance of religious precepts, and was 
 put upon his guard against their transgression. His 
 parents had but one aim, to inculcate in him the religion 
 of his ancestors and render the Law, the source of this 
 religion, accessible to him. He was thus inured to the 
 struggle of life, in which his shield was beKef in God. 
 The mother also took part in the rearing of her child. 
 Her lullabies were often prayers or Biblical hymns, and 
 although the women, as a rule, did not receive a thorough 
 education, they effectually helped to make observant de- 
 votees of the Law of their children." " Five or six was 
 
40 EASHI 
 
 the age at which Hebrew was begun to be taught to the 
 child, and the occasion was usually celebrated by a pic- 
 turesque ceremony full of poetic feeling. On the morning 
 of the Pentecost, the festival which commemorates the 
 giving of the Law on Mt. Sinai, or on the morning of 
 the Eejoicing of the Law, the day devoted above all 
 others to honoring the Law, the child, dressed in his 
 holiday clothes and wrapped in a Tallit, was led to the 
 synagogue by his father or by a scholar who acted as 
 sponsor. In the synagogue the child listened to the 
 reading of the Law; then he was led to the house of the 
 teacher to whom his education was to be entrusted. The 
 teacher took him in his arms, " as a nursing-father ear- 
 rieth the sucking child," and presented him with a tab- 
 let, on which were written the Hebrew alphabet and some 
 verses from the Bible applicable to the occasion. The 
 tablet was then spread with honey, which the child ate 
 as if to taste the sweetness of the Law of God. The 
 child was also shown a bun made by a young maiden, 
 out of flour kneaded together with milk and with oil or 
 honey, and bearing among other inscriptions the words 
 of Ezekiel : " Son of man, cause thy belly to eat, and 
 fill thy bowels with this roll that I give thee. Then did 
 I eat it ; and it was in my mouth as honey for sweetness." 
 Other Biblical passages were inscribed on the shell of an 
 egg, and after they were read, the bun and the egg as 
 well as apples and other fruit were eaten by the pupils 
 present. 
 
 This ceremony, marred only by the introduction of 
 superstitious practices, such as the conjuring up of evil 
 demons, was well adapted to stamp itself on the child's 
 mind, and its naive symbolism was bound to make a 
 
YOUTH AND EDUCATION" 41 
 
 profound impression upon his imagination. Pagan an- 
 tiquity knew of nothing so delicate and at the same time 
 so elevated in sentiment. Piadar, and Horace after him, 
 conceived the fancy that the bees of Hymettus alighted 
 on the child's brow and dropped rich honey upon it. 
 The Jewish celebration of a new period in childhood, 
 though not a poetic fiction, is none the less charming and 
 picturesque. It shows how precious was the cultivation 
 of the mind to a people whom the world delights to rep- 
 resent as absorbed by material interests and consumed 
 by the desire for wealth. Education has always been 
 highly valued among the Jews, who long acted up to 
 the saying of Lessing : " The schoolmaster holds the 
 future in his hands." The religious law is a system of 
 instruction, the synagogue is a school. It will redound 
 to the eternal honor of Judaism that it raised the dis- 
 semination of knowledge to the height of a religious 
 precept. At a time when among the Christians kaowl- 
 edge was the special privilege of the clergy, learning was 
 open to every Jew, and, what is still finer, the pursuit of 
 it was imposed upon him as a strict obligation. The 
 recalcitrant, say the legalists, is compelled to employ a 
 tutor for his child. Every scholar in Israel is obliged 
 to gather children about him; and the rabbinical works 
 contain most detailed recommendations concerning the 
 organization of schools and methods of instruction. One 
 comes upon principles and rules of pedagogy unusually 
 advanced for their time. For instance, teachers were 
 forbidden to have more than forty pupils, and were not 
 to use a more severe means of punishment than whipping 
 with a small strap. In Christian schools, on the con- 
 trary, pedagogic methods were backward and barbarous. 
 
43 EASHI 
 
 It was considered an excellent plan to beat all pupils 
 with the ferule, in order to make knowledge enter the 
 heads of the bad and to keep the good from the sin of 
 pride. 
 
 Among the Jews instruction was tempered to suit the 
 faculty of the learner. First the child was taught to 
 read Hebrew, translate the daily prayers, and recite the 
 more important of them by heart. Then the Penta- 
 teuch beginning with Leviticus was explained to him, 
 and, if necessary, it was translated into Prench. It 
 was read with a special chant. Rashi, be it said paren- 
 thetically, by his commentary gave this Bible instruction 
 a more solid basis. Not until the pupil was a little 
 older did he study the Talmud, which is so well qualified 
 to develop intelligence and clear-headedness. His ele- 
 mentary education completed, and provided he had shown 
 taste and inclination for the more diflQcult studies, the 
 young man went to special schools. But if he had not 
 shown signs of progress, he was taught simply to read 
 Hebrew and understand the Bible. 
 
 The author of a curious pedagogic regulation in the 
 middle ages fixes the whole term of study at fourteen 
 years: the seven years preceding the religious majority 
 of the child are spent in the local school, at the study of 
 the Pentateuch (two years), at the study of the rest of 
 the Bible (two years), and at the study of the easier 
 Talmudic treatises (three years). The remaining seven 
 years are devoted to the higher study of the Talmud in 
 an academy outside the birthplace of the youth. This 
 education was obtained sometimes from private teach- 
 ers, and sometimes in schools founded and maintained at 
 the expense of the community or even of educational 
 societies. 
 
YOUTH AND EDUCATION 43 
 
 A sufficiently clear idea may thus be obtained of 
 Eashi's early education; and in assuming that he soon 
 distinguished himself for precocity and for maturity of 
 thought^ we shall not be shooting wide of the mark. But 
 legend will not let its heroes ofE so cheaply ; legend will 
 have it that Eashi, in order to complete his education, 
 travelled to the most distant lands. Not satisfied with 
 having him go to the south of France, to Narbonne, to 
 the school of Moses ha-Darshan (who had doubtless died 
 before Eashi's coming to his school was a possibility), 
 or to Lunel, to attend the school of Zerahiah ha-Levi 
 (not yet bom), tradition maintains that at the age of 
 thirty-three Eashi made the tour of almost the whole 
 world as then known, in order to atone for a mistake 
 made by his father, who regretted having lost a precious 
 object, and also in order to assure himself that his 
 commentaries had not been surpassed. He is said to 
 have traversed Italy, Greece, Egypt, Palestine, and 
 Persia, returning by way of Germany. 
 
 So long a voyage must, of course, have been marked by 
 a number of events. In Egypt, Eashi became the dis- 
 ciple — ^the more exigent say, the intimate friend — of 
 Maimonides, who, as we all know, was bom in 1135, 
 nearly a century later than Eashi. Maimonides, as 
 fiction recounts, conceived a great affection for Eashi, 
 and imparted to him all his own learning. Not to fall 
 behind Maimonides in courtesy, Eashi showed him his 
 commentaries, and Maimonides at the end of his life 
 declared that he would have written more commentaries, 
 had he not been anticipated by the French rabbi. 
 
 While in the Orient Eashi is represented as having 
 met a monk, and the two discussed the superiority of 
 
44 EASHI 
 
 their respective religions. At the inn the monk sudden- 
 ly fell sick. Eashi, caring for him as for a brother, 
 succeeded in curing him by means of a miraculous 
 remedy. The monk wanted to thank him, but Eashi 
 interrupted, saying : " Thou owest me nothing in 
 return. Divided as we are by our religions, we are 
 united by charity, which my religion imposes upon me as 
 a duty. If thou comest upon a Jew in misfortune, aid 
 him as I have aided thee." Fictitious though the 
 story be, it is not unworthy the noble character of Eashi. 
 He was noble, therefore noble deeds are ascribed to him. 
 On his return Eashi is said to have passed through 
 Prague, whither his reputation had preceded him. On 
 his entrance into the synagogue, the acclamations of the 
 faithful proved to him the admiration they felt for the 
 young rabbi of only thirty-six years. The pleasure man- 
 ifested by the Jews irritated Duke Vratislav, who had 
 the famous rabbi arrested, brought before him, and 
 questioned in the presence of his counsellor, the Bishop 
 of Olmiitz. The bishop raising his eyes recognized in 
 the prisoner the Jew who had saved his life, and he told 
 the story to the duke. The order was immediately given 
 to set Eashi free; but the people, thinking the Jews lost, 
 had fallen upon the Jewish quarter. Eashi threw him- 
 self at the feet of the sovereign, and begged protection 
 for his brethren. Provided with a safe-conduct, Eashi 
 went forth to appease the mob. The Jews in their 
 great joy saluted him as their savior. Tradition adds 
 that the duke conceived great admiration for the Jewish 
 scholar, and made him one of his advisers. 
 
 Another, even sweeter reward, awaited him. Eebecca, 
 the daughter of his host, fell in love with him, and, as 
 
YOUTH AND EDUCATION 45 
 
 Eashi returned the feeling, her father consented to the 
 marriage. 
 
 But all this is on the face of it romance. Certain 
 passages in Eashi's works give abundant proof that 
 Eashi never visited either Palestine or Babylonia, and 
 his conception of the geography of the two countries is 
 utterly fantastic. For instance, he believed that the 
 Euphrates flowed from the one land into the other. 
 Moreover, he himself admitted that his ideas concerning 
 them were gathered only from the Bible and the 
 Talmud." 
 
 Though Eashi did not let his curiosity carry him to 
 all parts of the globe, he did not confine himself to his 
 birthplace. He went first to Worms and then to May- 
 ence, remaining some length of time in both places. He 
 was moved to the step, not by taste for travel, but by 
 taste for study, in accordance with the custom of his 
 time, by which a student went from school to school in 
 order to complete his knowledge. Of old, it was custom- 
 ary for the workman to make the tour of France for the 
 purpose of perfecting himself in his trade and finding 
 out the different processes of manufacture. Similarly, 
 the student went from city to city, or, remaining in the 
 same place, from school to school, in order to study a 
 different subject under each master according to the 
 manuscripts which the particular master happened to 
 possess, and which he made his pupils copy. So far from 
 being disqualified from entering a school on account of 
 vagabondage, the stranger student was accorded a warm 
 welcome, especially if he was himself a scholar. 
 Strangers found open hospitality in the community, and 
 were sometimes taken in by the master himself. Knowl- 
 4 
 
46 EASHI 
 
 edge and love of knowledge were safe-conducts. In 
 every city the lettered new-comer found hosts and 
 friends. 
 
 Eashi probably stood in need of such hospitality and 
 protection, for, if an obscure remark made by him may 
 be relied upon, his life as a student was not free from 
 care, and he must have suffered all sorts of privatioiis. 
 Nor was it rare that fortune failed to smile upon the 
 students, and — not to give a list of examples — cases of 
 poverty were fairly frequent in the Christian universities, 
 at which mendicancy itself was almost respectable. The 
 temptation might be legitimate to sentimentalize over 
 this love of knowledge, this zeal for work, as they mani- 
 fested themselves in Eashi, causing him to brave all the 
 evil strokes of fortune for their sake; but one must 
 strain a point to take him literally when he says, as he 
 does in a certain somewhat involved passage, that he 
 studied " without nourishment and without garments." 
 However that may be, the same passage shows that while 
 still a student whose course was but half completed, he 
 married, ia conformity with the Talmudic maxim, 
 which recommends the Jew to marry at eighteen years of 
 age. Prom time to time he went to visit his family at 
 Troyes, always returning to Worms or Mayenee. 
 
 The fact that the academies of Lorraine which Eashi 
 frequented were in his day the great centres of Talmudic 
 learning, is due to the happy lot which the Jews enjoyed 
 in that country. The chief trading route of Europe at 
 that time connected Italy with Ehenish Germany, and 
 the Jews knew how to render themselves indispensable in 
 the trafBc along this route. Moreover, they lived on good 
 terms with their neighbors. The explanation of the 
 
YOUTH AXD EDUCATION 47 
 
 cordial relations between Jews and Christians lies in the 
 ease with which the Jews rose to the level of general 
 culture. The architecture of their synagogues is a strik- 
 ing example. The cathedral of Worms was built in 1034, 
 at the same period as the synagogue there. The two 
 structures display so many similarities that one is 
 tempted to believe they represent the handiwork of the 
 same builders. At all events, it is clear that the Jews 
 cultivated the Eomanesque style, so majestic in its sim- 
 plicity.'" 
 
 Lorraine was not at that time a province of the 
 German Empire; and Eashi leaving the banks of the 
 Seine for those of the Ehine did not expatriate himself 
 in the true sense of the word. Lorraine, or, as it was 
 then called, Lotharingia, the country of Lothair (this is 
 the name that occurs in the rabbinical sources), was more 
 than half French. Situated between France and Ger- 
 many, it came within the sphere of French influence. 
 French was the language in current use, spoken by Jew 
 and Christian alike. German words, in fact, were galli- 
 cized in pronunciation. In Eashi's day the barons of 
 Lorraine rendered homage to the king of France, 
 Henry I. Naturally, then, the Jews of Lorraine and 
 those of Northern France were in close intellectual com- 
 munion. The academies along the Ehine and the 
 ^loselle formed, as it were, the link between France and 
 Germany. In general, and despite the rarity and diffi- 
 culty of communication, the Jews of France, Germany, 
 and Italy entered freely into relations with one another." 
 
 No testimony exists to prove that Eashi, as has been 
 said, studied at Speyer, at which, without doubt, E. 
 Eliakim had not yet begun to teach. Possibly, Eashi 
 
48 EASHI 
 
 did go to Germany, if confidence is to be placed in some 
 information lie gives concerning "the country of Ash- 
 kenaz," and if the fact may be deduced from the occur- 
 rence in his commentaries of some dozen German words, 
 the authenticity of which is not always certain. 
 
 Though doubt may attach to Eashi's journeys, it is 
 certain that Eashi passed the larger number of his years 
 of study (about 1055-1065) in Worms. For a long 
 time it was thought — and the belief still obtains — ^that he 
 also gave instruction in Worms ; and recently a street in 
 the city was named after him. Tradition has connected 
 many things with this alleged stay of Eashi as rabbi at 
 Worms. Even in our days visitors are shown the school 
 and the little synagogue attached to it as recalling his 
 sojourn in the place ; and a small building touching the 
 eastern wall of the great synagogue is also supposed to 
 perpetuate his memory, and it is still called the " Eashi 
 Chapel." At the bottom of the wall a recess is visible, 
 miraculously caused in order to save his mother when 
 her life was endangered by the two carriages." Some 
 say that Eashi taught from this niche, and a seat in it, 
 raised on three steps, called the Eashi Chair, is still 
 pointed out. 
 
 These traditions do not merit credence. Moreover, 
 they are of comparatively recent origin. For a long 
 time the school bore the name, not of Eashi, but of 
 Eleazar of Worms, and it was not built until the begin- 
 ning of the thirteenth century. Destroyed in 1615, it 
 was restored in 1780 through the generosity of Loeb 
 Sinzheim, of Vienna, and at present it is the Jewish hos- 
 pital. Alongside the school was a little chapel, belonging 
 to it, which was destroyed in 1615, restored several years 
 
YOUTH AND EDUCATION 49 
 
 later, and finally burned by the French in 1689. The 
 other chapel, the so-called " Eashi Chapel," his Yeshibah 
 (school), is so tiny that it could hardly have held the 
 crowd of hearers who thronged there, as tradition has it, 
 in order to listen to him. Besides, the building did not 
 bear the name of Eashi when in 1623 David Joshua 
 Oppenheim, head of the community, erected the school 
 and adjoining chapel, as a Hebrew inscription in the 
 southern wall of the chapel declares. The chapel having 
 lost its utility was closed in 1760, and from this time on 
 it has been consecrated to the memory of Eashi. It was 
 restored in 1855. 
 
 At Worms Eashi first studied under the head of the 
 Talmudic academy there, Jacob ben Yakar, by that time 
 a man well on in years. His age doubtless explains the 
 respect and veneration paid him, to which his disciple 
 gave touching expression. But we kaow besides how 
 siacere was his piety, his humility, and his spirit of self- 
 denial. One day a Christian delivered several tuns of 
 wine to a Jew of Worms under peculiar conditions. 
 Jacob did not want to decide so complicated and delicate 
 a question, and he fled. Eashi and another disciple 
 pursued and overtook him. Then he authorized the use 
 of the wine. 
 
 Once when the community was going to pay its re- 
 spects to the emperor or the governor, Jacob declined the 
 honor of heading the procession. " I am nothing but a 
 poor man," he said. " Let others bring their money, I 
 can offer only my prayers. Each should give of that 
 which he has." Other characteristics of his are men- 
 tioned. Once he and his colleague, Eliezer, surnamed the 
 Great, took an animal they had bought to the slaughter 
 
60 EASHI 
 
 house. There it was found that there was an imperfec- 
 tion in its body; according to Eliezer the imperfection 
 rendered it unfit for eating; according to Jacob it was 
 of no importance. The animal having been divided, 
 Eliezer threw his share away. Then Jacob did the same, 
 saying that he would not eat the meat of an animal 
 when another denied himself the enjoyment of it. Later 
 it is told of Jacob that in his humility he swept the floor 
 of the synagogue with his beard. To cite Eashi himself, 
 " I never protest against the usages in the school of my 
 master, Jacob ben Yakar : I know that he possessed the 
 finest qualities. He considered himself a worm which 
 is trodden underfoot, and he never arrogated to himself 
 the honor — though he would have been justified in so 
 doing — of having introduced any innovation whatso- 
 ever." 
 
 It seems that Eashi, who spoke of Jacob ben Yakar 
 with the utmost respect, and called him "my old mas- 
 ter," studied not only the Talmud but also the Bible 
 under his guidance. 
 
 The scholar who desired to obtain a grasp on all the 
 studies, if not in their full content, at least in all their 
 variety, had to devote many years to study at a school, 
 not necessarily the same school, throughout his student 
 years, for since the celebrity of a school depended upon 
 the knowledge and renown of its head, it gained and lost 
 pupils with its master. 
 
 Thus, on the death of Jacob ben Yakar, Eashi 
 studied under the guidance of his successor, Isaac ben 
 Eleazar ha-Levi," though not for long, it seems. Wish- 
 ing in a way to complete the cycle of instruction, 
 he went to Mayence, the centre of great Talmudic activi- 
 
YOUTH AND EDUCATION 51 
 
 ty. The school here was directed by Isaac ben Judah 
 (about 1050-1080), sometimes called the " Frenchman." 
 Eashi considered Isaac ben Judah his master par excel- 
 lence. In this school were composed the Talmudic com- 
 mentaries generally attributed to E. Gershom and some- 
 times cited under the title of " Commentaries of the 
 Scholars of Mayence." Isaac ben Judah — not to be con- 
 founded with Isaac ha-Levi, both having been the dis- 
 ciples of Eliezer the Great — was scrupulously pious, and 
 absolutely bound by traditional usage. 
 
 Eashi, it thus becomes apparent, was not content to 
 learn from only one master, he attended various schools, 
 as if he had had a, prevision of his future task, to sum up 
 and, as it were, concentrate all Talmudic teachings and 
 gather the fruits of the scientific activities of all these 
 academies. Similarly, Judah the Saint, before he be- 
 came the redactor of the Mishnah, placed himself under 
 a number of learned men, " as if," says Graetz, " he had 
 had a presentiment that one day he would collect the 
 most diverse opinions and put an end to the juridical 
 debates of the Tannaim." 
 
 Eashi's intellectual status during these years of study 
 must not be misunderstood. Pupil he doubtless was, 
 but such a one as in course of time entered into discus- 
 sions with his teachers, and to whom questions were 
 submitted for decision. It may even be that toward the 
 end of his school period, he commenced to compose his 
 Talmudic commentaries, or, rather, revise the notes of 
 his masters. 
 
 At Worms as at Mayence, his fellow-students probably 
 counted among their number those young scholars who 
 remained his friends and correspondents. Such were 
 
52 EASHI 
 
 Azriel ben Kathan, his kinsman Bliakim ha-Levi ben 
 Meshullam, of Speyer (bom about 1030), Solomon ben 
 Simson, JSTatban ben Machir and his brothers Menahem 
 and Yakar, Meir ha-Cohen and his son Abraham, 
 Samuel ha-Levl and, chief of all, his brother David, 
 Ifathan ben Jehiel and his brothers Daniel and Abra- 
 ham, Joseph ben Judah Ezra, Durbal, and Meir ben 
 Isaac ben Samuel" (about 1060), acting rabbi and 
 liturgical poet, mentioned by Eashi in terms of praise 
 and several times cited by him as an authority. Meir 
 of Eameru, later the son-in-law of Eashi, also studied at 
 the academies of Lorraine, though probably not at the 
 same time as Eashi, but a short while after. 
 
 As is natural, it was of his teachers that Eashi pre- 
 served the most faithful recollections, and he refers to 
 them as authoritative even after he had surpassed them 
 in knowledge and reputation. He does not always men- 
 tion their names in repeating their opinions. If it 
 were possible to make a distinction and decide the 
 authorship of each sentence, it would be found that we 
 are not far from the truth in asserting that the greater 
 part of the pupil's work was the work of his masters." 
 
 But in literature, as elsewhere, honor does not redound 
 to the workmen who have gotten the material together, 
 but to the architect, wise and skilful, who conceives and 
 carries out the plan for the entire edifice, and, with the 
 stones others have brought, constructs a monument of 
 vast proportions. 
 
CHAPTEE III 
 
 Eashi at Teotes — Last Ybaes 
 
 The youth Eashi has now completed his apprentice- 
 ship; in his studies and travels he has amassed a vast 
 store of information, which he will use for the profit of 
 his contemporaries and of posterity ; and he now believes 
 himself in possession of sufficient knowledge and exper- 
 ience to strike out for himself. Moreover, he must now 
 provide for his family — we have seen that he married 
 while still a student. But he does not give up his studies. 
 
 His change of abode was the only change in his life, 
 a life of remarkable unity, the life of a student. Eashi 
 gave himself up entirely to study, to study without ces- 
 sation, and to teachiag; but teaching is only a form of 
 pursuing one's studies and summing them up. 
 
 Detailed and comprehensive though the Tahnudic 
 studies were, nevertheless the student, especially if he 
 was gifted, completed the course when he was not much 
 more than twenty years of age. Eashi, then, was proba- 
 bly close to twenty-five years old when he returned from 
 Mayence. This return marks an epoch in the history of 
 rabbinical literature. Prom that time, the study of the 
 Talmud was cultivated not alone upon the banks of the 
 Ehine, but also in Champagne, which came to rival and 
 
54 EASHI 
 
 soon supplant Lorraine, and having freed itself from the 
 subjection of the Ehenish schools, radiated the light of 
 science. Jews from all over Christian Europe gathered 
 there to bask in the warmth of the new home of Jewish 
 learning. Less than ten centuries earlier, the same thing 
 had happened when Eab transplanted the teaching of the 
 Law from Palestine to Babylonia, and founded an 
 academy at Sura, which, for a while rivalling the Pales- 
 tinian schools, soon eclipsed them, and finally became the 
 principal centre of Jewish science. The Kabbalist was 
 not so very far from the truth when he believed that the 
 soul of Eab had passed into the body of Eashi. 
 
 It is noteworthy that this upgrowth of Talmudic 
 schools in Champagne coincides with the literary move- 
 ment then beginning in Christian Prance. In emerging 
 from the barbarous state of the early middle ages, it 
 seems that the same breath of life quickened the two 
 worlds. The city of Troyes played an especially import- 
 ant role in matters intellectual and religious. A number 
 of large councils were held there, and the ecclesiastical 
 school of Troyes enjoyed a brilliant reputation, having 
 trained scholars such as Olbert, Pierre Comestor, Pierre 
 de Celle, and William of the White Hands. And it was 
 near Troyes that the mighty voices of Abelard and Saint 
 Bernard resounded. 
 
 . There is a curious reminder of Eashi's sojourn at 
 Troyes. As late as 1840 an ancient butcher shop was 
 still standing, into which, it was remarked, flies never 
 entered. Jewish tradition has it that the shop was built 
 on the spot previously occupied by Eashi's dwelling — 
 hence its miraculous immunity. The same legend is 
 found among the Christians, but they ascribe the free- 
 
AT TEOYES 55 
 
 dom from flies to the protection of Saint Loup, the 
 patron saint of the city, who himself worked the miracle. 
 Eashi is linked with Troyes in ways more natural as 
 well. As I have said, certain expressions occur in his 
 works which he himself says refer to his city. Some 
 scholars have even stated that they recognized in the 
 language he used the dialect of Troyes, a variety of the 
 speech of Champagne, itself a French patois. 
 
 It is probable that Eashi — ^who was never at the head 
 of the Talmudic schools of Worms or Prague, as the 
 legends go — exercised the functions of a rabbi at Troyes, 
 that he never kept himself exclusively within the confines 
 of his school, and that he felt it his duty to instruct all 
 his fellow-Jews. In conjunction with his intellectual 
 endowments, he possessed faith and charity, the true 
 sources of strength in religious leadership. He was the 
 natural champion of the weak,"* the judge and super- 
 visor of all acts. He pronounced judgment in cases 
 more or less distantly connected with religion, that is, 
 in nearly all cases at a period so thoroughly religious in 
 character. Either because he had been appointed their 
 rabbi by the faithful, or because he enjoyed great pres- 
 tige, Eashi was the veritable spiritual chief of the com- 
 munity, and even exercised influence upon the surround- 
 ing communities. The man to preside over the religious 
 affairs of the Jews was chosen not so much for his birth 
 and breeding as for his scholarship and piety, since the 
 rabbi was expected to distinguish himself both in learn- 
 ing and in character. " He who is learned, gentle, and 
 modest," says the Talmud, " and who is beloved of men, 
 he should be judge in his city." As will soon be made 
 clear, Eashi fulfilled this ideal. His piety and amia- 
 
56 EASHI 
 
 bility, in as great a degree as his learning, -won for him 
 the admiration of his contemporaries and of posterity. 
 At Troyes there was no room for another at the head of 
 the community. 
 
 Like most of the rabbis of the time, Eashi accepted no 
 compensation from the community for his services, and 
 he probably lived from what he earned by viticulture. 
 Once he begs a correspondent to excuse the shortness of 
 his letter, because he and his family were busy with the 
 vintage. "All the Jews," he said, " are at this moment 
 engaged in the vineyards." In a letter to his son-in-laAv 
 Meir, he gives a description of the wine-presses of Troyes, 
 in the installation of which a change had been made. 
 It was deemed fitting that the scholar should provide for 
 the needs of his family ; the law in fact imposed it upon 
 him as a duty. "Eeligious study not accompanied by 
 work of the hands is barren and leads to sin." The 
 functions of a rabbi were purely honorific in character, 
 dignifying, and unrelated iu kind to mercantile goods, 
 for which one receives pay. It was forbidden to make the 
 law a means of earning one's living or a title to glory, 
 " He who profits by his studies or who studies for his own 
 interest, compromises his salvation." 
 
 When the religious representative showed such devo- 
 tion and disinterestedness, the pious willingly submitted 
 themselves to his authority. The spiritual heads of the 
 communities had as great ascendency over believing Jews 
 as a king had over his subjects ; they were sovereigns in 
 the realm of the spirit. And Eashi in his time, because 
 of his learning and piety, exercised the most undisputed 
 authority. His influence though not so great was com- 
 parable, in the sphere in which it could be exercised, 
 
AT TEOYBS 57 
 
 with that of the great Saint Bernard upon the entire 
 Christian world, or with that of Maimonides upon Juda- 
 ism in the Arabic countries. 
 
 People in all circumstances and from all the sur- 
 rounding countries addressed themselves to him ; and to 
 the list of his correspondents ia Lorraine may be added 
 the names of several French rabbis, the " vnse men " of 
 Auxerre, the scholar Solomon of Tours, whom Eashi 
 calls his dear friend, his kinsman Eleazar, and R. 
 Aaron the Elder. His correspondence on learned 
 questions was so large that sometimes, as when he was 
 ill, for instance, he would have his disciples or relatives 
 help him out with it.°° 
 
 About 1070 Eashi founded a, school at Troyes, which 
 soon became the centre of instruction in the Talmud 
 for the whole region. As we have seen, Gershom 
 trained a number of disciples who directed schools, 
 each of which pursued a particular course. Eashi 
 united these various tendencies, as, later, his work put 
 an end to the activity of the commentators of the Tal- 
 mud. An explanation is thus afforded of the legend 
 repeated by Basnage in these words : " He made a col- 
 lection of the difficulties he had heard decided during 
 his travels. On his return to Europe he went to all the 
 academies and disputed with the professors about the 
 questions which they were discussing; then he threw to 
 the floor a page of his collections, which gave a solution 
 of the problem, and so ended the controversy, without, 
 however, mentioning the name of the author of the de- 
 cision. It is alleged that these leaves scattered in 
 thousands of places were gathered together, and that 
 from them was composed the commentary on the Tal- 
 
58 EASHI 
 
 mud." The legend attests Eashi's great reputation. 
 While he was still quite young, his renown had rapidly 
 spread. 
 
 When in Lorraine, he had from time to time paid a 
 visit to Troyes, and so, later, when definitely established 
 in Champagne, he maintained relations with his masters, 
 especially with Isaac ha-Levi, whom he visited and with 
 whom he corresponded in the interim of his visits. 
 Isaac ha-Levi was no less fond of his favorite pupil, and 
 he inquired of travellers about him. He addressed Ee- 
 sponsa to Eashi on questions of Talmudic jurisprudence. 
 In fact, Eashi continued to solicit advice from his 
 teachers and keep himself informed of everything con- 
 cerning schools and Talmudic instruction. In this way 
 he once learned that a Talmudic scholar of Eome, E. 
 Kalonymos (ben Sabbata'i, born before 1030) had come 
 after the death of Jacob ben Yakar to establish himself 
 at Worms, where he died, probably a martyr's death, 
 during the First Crusade. Kalonymos, who enjoyed a 
 great reputation, wrote Talmudic commentaries and 
 liturgical poems. His was a personality rare in that 
 period. 
 
 Eashi's masters, in turn, often applied to their pupil 
 for advice, choosing him as arbiter and consulting him 
 with a deference more fitting toward a colleague than 
 a disciple. Isaac ha-Levi wrote the following words, 
 in which one detects real esteem and admiration under- 
 lying epistolary emphasis and the usual exaggeration of 
 a compliment: "Blessed be the Lord who willed that 
 this century should not be orphaned, who has steadied 
 our tottering generation by eminent teachers, such as my 
 dear and respected friend, my kinsman E. Solomon. 
 
AT TKOYES 59 
 
 May Israel boast many another such as he ! " Equally 
 sincere seems the salutation of a letter written to Eashi 
 by Isaac ben Judah : " To him who is beloved in heaven 
 and honored on earth, vrho possesses the treasures of the 
 Law, who knows how to resolve the most subtle and pro- 
 found questions, whose knowledge moves mountains 
 and shatters rocks, etc." 
 
 After the death of Eashi's teachers (about 1075) his 
 school assumed even more importance. It eclipsed the 
 academies of Lorraine, and from all the neighboring 
 countries it attracted pupils, who later went forth and 
 spread the teachings of their master abroad. Eashi 
 came to be considered almost the regenerator of Tal- 
 mudic studies, and in the following generation Eliezer 
 ben ITathan said with pious admiration : " His lips were 
 the seat of wisdom, and thanks to him the Law, which 
 he examined and interpreted, has come to life again." 
 
 In this school, justly renowned as the centre of Jewish 
 science, master and pupil were animated by equal love 
 for their work. Entire days were spent there in study, 
 and often, especially in winter, entire nights as well. 
 The studies were regulated by a judicious method. The 
 teacher began to explain a treatise of the Talmud on the 
 first of the month, in order that the students might take 
 their measures accordingly, and not delay coming until 
 after the treatise had been begun. The pupils took notes 
 dictated by the teacher, and thus composed manuscripts 
 which are still of great value. In so doing they fixed all 
 the minutiae of a detailed process of argumentation. On 
 the other hand, books were rare, and students poor. The 
 master himself, in order to facilitate his task, wrote ex- 
 planations during the lesson, and these served as text- 
 
60 EASHI 
 
 books, which, like the students' notebooks, became treas- 
 ure houses for later generations. 
 
 Eashi not only imparted knowledge to his pupils, but 
 received knowledge from them in turn. He set great 
 store by their observations. His grandson Samuel ben 
 Meir once drew his attention to a certain form of Bibli- 
 cal parallelism, in which the second hemistich completes 
 the first, as in the following verse from Psalm xciii: 
 
 " The floods have lifted up, O Lord, 
 The floods have lifted up their voice." 
 
 After this, each time Eashi came across a similarly 
 constructed verse, he would say with mock gravity: 
 " Here's a verse for my Samuel." 
 
 The Jewish student led a pure, regulated existence, 
 with only wholesome distractions, such as the little cele- 
 brations when the study of a Talmudic treatise had been 
 completed. His greatest pleasure he found in the sword- 
 play of miad against mind, in the love of knowledge and 
 religion. 
 
 Eashi did not content himself with giving instruction 
 only to students under his immediate influence. He 
 desired that his teachings should not be lost to men 
 unknown to him and to unborn generations. He realized 
 that everything so far accomplished in the field of 
 Talmudic and even Biblical exegesis was inadequate, and 
 he therefore undertook the works that were to occupy 
 him the rest of his life. His school was, so to speak, the 
 laboratory of which his Biblical and Talmudic commen- 
 taries were the products. They involved a vast amount 
 of toil, and though death overtook him before his task 
 was accomplished, he doubtless began the work early in 
 
AT TEOYES 61 
 
 life."" A legend goes that lie -was forbidden to \mte 
 commentaries on the Bible before he was a hundred 
 years old. Eashi with all his ardor for learning could 
 not curb himself and postpone his activity for so long a 
 time, and he turned the prohibition in his own favor by 
 explaining that the sum of the Hebrew letters forming 
 the word " hundred " amounted to forty-six. 
 
 Eashi's disciples were in very truth his sons, for no 
 sons were born to the illustrious rabbi. But he had 
 thre^.daughters, who each married a Talmudist, so that 
 EaSii's descendants, no less than himself, were the 
 bearers of rabbinic learning in France. Eashi did not 
 limit his association with his pupils to the school-house, 
 but invited them to enter his family circle. Indeed, this 
 was the highest honor to which they could aspire. It has 
 always been the greatest piece of good fortune for a Jew 
 to marry the daughter of a learned and pious man, and 
 the suitors most desired by and for young girls were 
 scholars. In this way arose veritable dynasties of rabbis, 
 who cherished learning as a heritage, a family treasure, 
 and the Eashi " dynasty " was one of the greatest and 
 most renowned among them. 
 
 Tradition has delighted in representing Eashi's 
 daughters as highly endowed. Unfortunately, it seems 
 that the education of women among the Jews of the 
 middle ages was greatly neglected, though they were 
 taught the principles of religion and the ordinances 
 which it was their special duty to fulfil. They possessed 
 the domestic virtues, and above all modesty and charity. 
 They helped their husbands in business, thus enabling 
 them to devote themselves more freely to study, and 
 though the women themselves lacked learning, they con- 
 
63 EASHI 
 
 cemed themselves with the learning of their men-folk, 
 and were eager to contribute to the support of schools 
 and pupils. They were extremely pious, often scrupu- 
 lously so. The women in a family of scholars had suf- 
 ficient knowledge to be called upon in ritual questions, 
 as, for instance, Bellette, sister of Isaac ben Menahem 
 the Great, of Orleans, a contemporary of Eashi, who 
 appealed to her authority. Other cases of the same kind 
 are mentioned, some occurring in Eashi's own family, 
 his granddaughter Miriam having been asked to adjudi- 
 cate a doubtful case. One of Eashi's daughters, also 
 called Miriam, married the scholar Judah ben Nathan. 
 Eachel, another daughter, given a French epithet, 
 Bellassez,^ also seems to have been learned. Her union 
 with a certain Eliezer, or Jocelj'n, was unhappy. Not so 
 the marriage of the third daughter of Eashi, Jochebed, 
 whose husband was the scholar Meir, son of Samuel, of 
 Eameru, a little village near Troyes. She had four 
 sons, named Samuel, Jacob, Isaac, and Solomon. The 
 three first, and in a less degree the fourth, too, continued 
 in glorious wise the traditions of their grandfather. I 
 shall have occasion again to mention them, their life, 
 and their work. 
 
 The renown of his posterity, far from dimming 
 Eashi's brilliance, only added fresh lustre to the name 
 of him who was both father and revered master. Even 
 in his life-time Eashi could reap the harvest of his ef- 
 forts, and though death intervened before his work was 
 completed, he saw at his side collaborators ready to con- 
 tinue what he had begun. 
 
 A marriage among the Jews of France of that epoch 
 must have been a charming and touching ceremony, to 
 
AT TEOYES 63 
 
 judge from a picturesque description, given by an 
 author of the fourteenth century, of a wedding at May- 
 ence, a city in which the community had preserved 
 ancient customs. 
 
 Several days before the ceremony the beadle invited 
 all the faithful; for it was a public festival, and every- 
 body was supposed to share in the joy of the bride and 
 bridegroom. On the day of the wedding, the bride- 
 groom, attended by the rabbi and men of standing in the 
 community and followed by other members of the con- 
 gregation, proceeded to the synagogue to the accom- 
 paniment of music. At the synagogue he was awaited 
 by the bride, who was siixrounded by her maids of honor 
 and by a number of women. The rabbi presented the 
 young girl to the bridegroom, and he took her hand, 
 while the by-standers showered grains of wheat upon 
 them and small pieces of money, which were picked up 
 by the poor. Then, hand in hand, the couple walked to 
 the door of the synagogue, where they paused a while. 
 After this the bride was led to her own home so that she 
 might complete her toilet. Under a large mantle of silk 
 and fur, with puffed sleeves, she wore a white robe, sym- 
 bol of the mourning for Zion, the memory of which was 
 not to leave her even on this day of joy. The sign of 
 mourning adopted for the bridegroom was a special 
 headgear. 
 
 After the bridegroom had returned to the synagogue 
 and placed himself near the Ark of the Law, the morning 
 service was held. Meanwhile the bride was led to the 
 door of the synagogue, always to the accompaniment of 
 music, and the bridegroom, conducted by the rabbi and 
 the heads of the community, went to receive her there. 
 
64 EASHI 
 
 He placed himself on her left, and preceded by his 
 mother and the mother of the bride, he guided her to the 
 pulpit in the centre of the synagogue. Here was pro- 
 nounced the nuptial benediction. 
 
 The ceremony oyer, the husband hastened to his home 
 to meet his wife and introduce her to the dwelling of 
 which she was to be the mistress. Here it was that the 
 wedding feast was spread. Festivities continued for 
 several days, and the following Saturday special hymns 
 were inserted in the service in honor of the newly- 
 wedded couple.'" No parade or pomp marred the beauty 
 and grace of this ceremony, every act of which bespoke 
 pure poetry and religion. 
 
 From this it is evident how much domestic virtues 
 were prized among the Jews of the middle ages. The 
 family was expected to be a model of union and harmony, 
 of tenderness of mate toward mate and parents toward 
 children. Gentleness and a spirit of trust were to pre- 
 side over the household. Eashi, as we shall see," speaks 
 in moving terms of the high regard which a man owes 
 his wife. 
 
 II 
 
 But it was not given to Eashi to pass untroubled 
 through his fruitful life of study. A terrible shock 
 surprised him. The eleventh century set in a sea of 
 blood. 
 
 Some legends have a hardy life. Not the least re- 
 markable of these is the myth that the Crusades were 
 wholly inspired by religious zeal. These great European 
 movements are always represented as having been called 
 forth by enthusiasm and thirst for self-sacrifice. A 
 
AT TEOYES 65 
 
 great wave of faith, we are told, swept over the masses, 
 and carried them on to the conquest of the Holy Sepul- 
 chre. There is another side to the shield — faith fawning 
 on political expediency and egoism, and turning brigand. 
 Without doubt many Christians went on the Crusades 
 impelled by religious conviction. But how many nour- 
 ished less vague ideas in their hearts? Not to men- 
 tion those whose only a.im was to escape from the conse- 
 quences of their misdeeds and obtain absolution and 
 indulgences, not to mention those who were animated 
 by a foolish sense of chivalry, by love of adventure, of 
 perilous risks, drawn by the attraction of the unknown 
 and the marvellous — apart from these, there was the 
 great mass, impelled by greed and thirst for pillage. 
 
 Complaisant historians express their admiring wonder 
 at these " hundreds of thousands of men fighting with 
 their eyes doggedly fixed upon the Holy Sepulchre and 
 dying in order to conquer it." They pity these " multi- 
 tudes of men who threw themselves on Islam the 
 unknown, these naive, trusting spirits, who each day 
 imagined themselves at Jerusalem, and died on the road 
 thither." Would it not be well for them to reserve a 
 little of their admiration and pity for the unfortunates 
 that were the victims of these " naive " multitudes ? 
 Ought they not to say that this religious fervor was a 
 mixture chiefly of blind hate and bloody fanaticism? 
 After a victory the Crusaders would massacre the popu- 
 lations of the conquered cities, including in the slaughter 
 not only the Mohammedans but also the Oriental Chris- 
 tians. Then why should we wonder if on the road to 
 Palestine they laid- violent hands on the Jews they found 
 by the way ? " 
 
66 EASHI 
 
 It is known what an important part France played in 
 the First Crusade. From France issued the spark that 
 set the entire Occident aflame, and France furnished 
 the largest contingent to the Crusades. 
 
 However, the disorders in France were merely local. 
 If the rage for blood enkindled by the First Crusade 
 scarcely affected the Jews of Prance, it is because the 
 population was concentrated on the banks of the Ehine. 
 But here its murderous frenzy knew no bounds. The 
 people threw themselves on the Jewish communities of 
 Treves, Speyer, Worms, Mayence, -and Cologne, and put 
 to death aU who refused to be converted (May to July, 
 1096). The noise of events such as these perforce 
 " found a path through the sad hearts " of the Jews of 
 Champagne; for they maintained lively and cordial 
 relations with their brethren in the Ehine lands, many 
 being bound to them by ties of kinship. Among the 
 martyrs of 1096 was Asher ha-Levi, who was the dis- 
 ciple of Isaac ben Eleazar, Eashi's second teacher, and 
 who died together with his mother, his two brothers, and 
 their families. From a Hebrew text we learn that the 
 Jews of France ordered a fast and prayers in commemo- 
 ration of these awful massacres, the victims of which 
 numbered not less than ten thousand. 
 
 But all could not sacrifice their lives for the sake of 
 their faith. Though so large a number were slain by 
 the pious hordes or slew one another in order to escape 
 violence, others allowed themselves to be baptized, or 
 adopted Christianity, in appearance at least. After the 
 Crusaders were at a distance, on the way to their death 
 in the Orient, the Jews left behind could again breathe 
 freely. Of many of them, Gregory of Tours might have 
 
AT TROYES 67 
 
 said that " the holy water had washed their bodies but 
 not their hearts, and, liars toward God, they returned to 
 their origiaal heresy." The emperor of Germany, 
 Henry IV, it seems, even authorized those who had been 
 forced into baptism to return to Judaism, and the 
 baptized Jews hastened to throw ofE the hateful mask. 
 This benevolent measure irritated the Christian clergy, 
 and the Pope bitterly reproached the Emperor. 
 
 What sadder, more curious spectacle than that which 
 followed? Many of those Jews who had remained 
 faithful to their religion would not consider the apos- 
 tates as their brethren, unwilling apostates though they 
 had been, and strenuously opposed their re-admission to 
 the Synagogue. 
 
 This unwillingness to compound, showing so little 
 generosity and charity, must have distressed Rashi pro- 
 foundly. For, when consulted ia regard to the repulsed 
 converts, he displayed a loftiness of view and a breadth 
 of tolerance which Maimonides himself could not 
 equal. In similar circumstances Maimonides, it 
 seems, in intervening, yielded a little to personal pre- 
 possession. " Let us beware," wrote Eashi, " let us be- 
 ware of alienating those who have returned to us by re- 
 pulsing them. They became Christians only through 
 fear of death; and as soon as the danger disappeared, 
 they hastened to return to their faith." 
 
 Though the First Crusade affected the Jews of France 
 only indirectly, it none the less marks a definite epoch 
 in their history. The fanaticism it engendered wreaked 
 its fury upon the Jews, against whom all sorts of odious 
 charges were brought. They were placed in the same 
 category as sorcerers and lepers, and among the crimes 
 
68 EASHI 
 
 laid at their door were ritaal murder and piercing of the 
 host. The instigations of the clergy did not remain 
 without effect upon a people lulled to sleep by its igno- 
 rance, but aroused to action by its faith. The kings and 
 seigneurs on their side exploited the Jews, and expelled 
 them from their territories. 
 
 Eashi had the good fortune not to know these troub- 
 lous times. But he discerned in a sky already overcast 
 the threatening premonitions of a tempest, and as 
 though to guard his fellow-Jews against the danger, 
 he left them a work which was to be a viaticum and 
 an asylum to them. When one sees how Eashi's work 
 brought nourishment, so to speak, to all later Jewish 
 literature, which was a large factor in keeping Israel 
 from its threatened ruin, one is convinced that Eashi, 
 aside from his literary efforts, contributed no slight 
 amount toward the preservation and the vitality of the 
 Jewish people. 
 
 Even if the Crusades had not involved persecution of 
 the Jews and so provoked the noble intervention of 
 Eashi, they would nevertheless have made themselves 
 felt in Champagne. Count Hugo, among others, re- 
 mained in the Holy Land from 1104 to 1108; and his 
 brother was killed at Eamleh in 1103. According to 
 a rather wide-spread legend, Eashi stood in intimate 
 relations with one of the principal chiefs of the Crusade, 
 the famous duke of Lower Lotharingia, Godfrey of 
 Bouillon. Historians have found that the part actually 
 played by the duke in the Crusades is smaller than that 
 ascribed to him by tradition, yet the profound impres- 
 sion he made on the popular imagination has remained, 
 and legend soon endowed him with a fabulous gene- 
 
AT TROYES 69 
 
 alogy. Tasking of him an almost mythical personage. 
 A favorite trick of the makers of legends is to connect 
 their heroes with celebrated contemporaries, as though 
 brilliance was reflected from one upon the other. Thus 
 Saladin was connected with Maimonides and with 
 Eichard the Lion-Hearted, and, similarly, Eashi with 
 Godfrey of Bouillon. 
 
 The story goes that Godfrey, having heard rumors of 
 the knowledge and wisdom of the rabbi of Troyes, 
 summoned Eashi to his presence to consult with him 
 upon the issue of his undertaking. Eashi refused to 
 appear. Annoyed, Godfrey accompanied by his cavaliers 
 went to the rabbi's school. He found the door open, but 
 the great building empty. By the strength of his magic 
 Eashi had made himself invisible, but he himself could 
 see everything. " Where art thou, Solomon ? " cried the 
 cavalier. " Here I am," a voice answered ; " what does 
 my lord demand ? " Godfrey not seeing a living soul 
 repeated his question, and always received the same 
 answer. But not a man to be seen! Utterly con- 
 founded, he left the building and met a disciple of 
 Eashi's. " Go tell thy master," he said, " that he should 
 appear ; I swear he has nothing to fear from me." The 
 rabbi then revealed himself.^ "I see," Godfrey said 
 to him, "that thy wisdom is great. I should like to 
 know whether I shall return from my expedition victor- 
 ious, or whether I shall succumb. Speak without fear." 
 
 " Thou wilt take the Holy City," Eashi replied, " and 
 thou wilt reign over Jerusalem three days, but on the 
 fourth day the Moslem will put thee to flight, and when 
 thou retumest only three horses will be left to thee." 
 
70 EASHI 
 
 " It may be," replied Godfrey, irritated and disil- 
 lusioned in seeing his future pictured in colors so 
 eombre. " But if I return with only one more horse than 
 thou sayest, I shall wreak frightful vengeance upon thee. 
 I shall throw thy body to the dogs, and I shall put to 
 death all the Jews of Prance." 
 
 After several years of fighting Godfrey of Bouillon, 
 ephemeral king of Jerusalem, took his homeward road 
 back to France, accompanied by three cavaliers, in all, 
 then, four horses, one more than Eashi had predicted. 
 Godfrey remembered the rabbi's prophecy, and deter- 
 mined to carry out his threat. But when he entered the 
 city of Troyes, a large rock, loosened from the gate, fell 
 upon one of the riders, killing him and his horse. Amazed 
 at the miracle, the duke perforce had to recognize that 
 Eashi had not been wrong, and he wanted to go to the 
 seer to render him homage, but he learned that Eashi 
 had died meanwhile. • This grieved him greatly. 
 
 This legend was further embellished by the addition 
 of details. Some placed the scene at Worms; others 
 asserted that the duke asked Eashi to accompany him to 
 Lorraine; but Eashi nobly refused, as Maimonides did 
 later. All forgot that Godfrey of Bouillon after he left 
 for the Crusades never saw his fatherland again, but 
 died at Jerusalem, five years before Eashi. 
 
 Eashi's life ofEers no more noteworthy events. He 
 passed the balance of his days in study, in guiding the 
 community, and in composing his works. Without 
 doubt, our lack of information concerning his last years 
 is due to this very fact — to the peace and calm in which 
 that time was spent. 
 
AT TEOYES 71 
 
 A naive legend has it that he wanted to know who 
 would be his companion in Paradise. He learned in a 
 dream that the man lived at Barcelona, and was called 
 Abraham the Just. In order to become acquainted with 
 him while still on earth, Eashi, despite his great age, 
 started forth on a journey to Barcelona. There he found 
 a very rich man, but, as was alleged, he was also very 
 impious. However, Eashi was not long in discoveriag 
 that for all his life of luxury he was just and generous 
 of spirit. Eashi even composed a work ia his honor 
 entitled " The Amphitryon," in Hebrew, Ha-Parnes. 
 Do you think the work was lost? Not a bit of it. It 
 still exists, but it is called HoPardes. The legend is 
 based upon a copyist's mistake. However, it is found in 
 different forms in other literatures. 
 
 Beyond a doubt Eashi died and was buried in his 
 birthplace. Nevertheless the story is told, that as he was 
 about to return to France with his young wife, the 
 daughter of his host at Prague, aiter his long trip of 
 study and exploration, which I have already described, 
 an unknown man entered his dwelling and struck him a 
 mortal blow. But the people could not resign them- 
 selves to accept so miserable an end for so illustrious a 
 man, and the legend received an addition. At the very 
 moment Eashi was to be buried, his wife ran up and 
 brought him back to life by means of a philtre. His 
 father-in-law, in order not to excite the envy of his 
 enemies, kept the happy event a secret, and ordered the 
 funeral to be held. The coflBn was carried with great 
 pomp to the grave, which became an object of veneration 
 for the Jews of Prague. In fact, a tomb is pointed out 
 as being that of the celebrated rabbi, and, as the inscrip- 
 
73 EASHI 
 
 tion is effaced, the assertion can safely be made that 
 Eashi died in the capital of Bohemia. 
 
 Eashi's death was less touching and less tragic. We 
 learn from a manuscript dated Thursday, the twenty- 
 ninth of Tammuz, in the year 4865 of the Creation 
 (July 13, 1105), that Eashi died at Troyes. He was 
 then sixty-five years of age. 
 
 It is as though the echo of the regrets caused by 
 Eashi's death resounded in the following note in an old 
 manuscript : " As the owner of a fig-tree knows when it 
 is time to cull the figs, so God knew the appointed time 
 of Eashi, and carried him away in his hour to let him 
 enter heaven. Alas ! he is no more, for God has taken 
 him." These few lines, without doubt the note of some 
 copyist, show with what deep respect the memory of 
 Eashi came to be cherished but shortly after his death. 
 Like Eabbenu Gershom he was awarded after his death 
 the title of "Light of the Captivity." But later the 
 title was applied only to Gershom, as though Eashi had 
 no need of it to distinguish him. 
 
 Eashi died " full of days," having led a life of few 
 incidents, because it was uniformly devoted to study 
 and labor. He was like a patriarch who is surrounded 
 by the affection of his children and by the respect of his 
 contemporaries. To future generations he bequeathed 
 the memory of his virtues and the greatness of his work. 
 And his memory has survived the neglect of time and 
 the ingratitude of man. Posterity has enveloped his 
 brow with a halo of glory, and after the lapse of eight 
 centuries the radiance of his personality remains un- 
 diminished. 
 
CHAPTEE IV 
 Charaotee and Lkarninq of Eashi 
 
 'Not only is there little information concerning the 
 incidents of Eashi's life, but also there are only a few 
 sources from which we can learn about his mental make- 
 up and introduce ourselves, so to speak, into the circle of 
 his thoughts and ideas. Generally one must seek the 
 man iu his work. But into ■writings so objective as those 
 of a commentator who does not even exert himself to set 
 forth his method and principles in a preface, a man is 
 not apt to put much of his own personality. More- 
 over, Eashi was disposed to speak of himself as little as 
 possible. From time to time, however, he lets a confi- 
 dence escape, and we treasure it the more carefully be- 
 cause of its rarity. 
 
 Fortunately we can get to know him a little better 
 through his letters, that is, through the Eesponsa 
 addressed by him to those who consulted him upon 
 questions of religious law. Another source, no less 
 precious, is afforded by the works of his pupils, who 
 noted with pious care the least acts or expressions of 
 their master that were concerned with points of law. 
 
 I shall endeavor to sum up all this information, so 
 that we may get a picture of the man and trace his 
 features ia as distinct lines as possible. 
 
74 EASHI 
 
 Needless to say, Eashi's conduct was always honorable 
 and his manners irreproachable. To be virtuous was not 
 to possess some special merit ; it was the strict fulfilment 
 of the Law. We have seen that Eashi's life wa^ pure; 
 and his life and more particularly his work reveal a firm, 
 controlled nature, a simple, frank character, clear judg- 
 ment, upright intentions, penetrating intelligence, and 
 profound good sense. The Talmudie maxim might be 
 applied to him : " Study demands a mind as serene as a 
 sky without clouds." His was a questioning spirit, ever 
 alert. He had the special gift of viewing the outer world 
 intelligently and fixing his attention upon the particular 
 object or the particular circumstance that might throw 
 light upon a fact or a text. For instance, although he 
 did not know Arabic, he remembered certain groups of 
 related words in the language, which had either been 
 called to his attention or which he had met with in 
 reading. He noticed of his own accord that "Arabic 
 words begin with ' al '." To give another example of 
 this discernment: he explains a passage of the Talmud 
 by recalling that he saw Jews from Palestine beating 
 time to mark the melody when they were reading the 
 Pentateuch. 
 
 The clearness and poise of Eashi's intellect — qualities 
 which he possessed in common with other French rabbis, 
 though in a higher degree — stand in favorable contrast 
 with the sickly symbolism, the unwholesome search for 
 mystery, which tormented the souls of ecclesiastics, from 
 the monk Eaoul Glaber up to the greart Saint Bernard, 
 that man, said Michelet, " diseased by the love of God." 
 
CHAEACTER AND LEAENING 75 
 
 Yet the Jews of Northern France were not, as one 
 might suppose from their literature, cold and dry of 
 temperament. They were sensitive and tender-hearted. 
 They did not forever lead the austere life of scholarly 
 seclusion ; they did not ignore the affections nor the cares 
 of family ; they knew how to look upon life and its daily 
 come and go. 
 
 But they did not go to the other extreme and become 
 philosophers. Traditional religion was to them the 
 entire truth. They never dreamed that antagonism 
 might arise between faith and reason. From a theolo- 
 gical point of view — if the modem term may be employed 
 — Eashi shared the ideas of his time. In knowledge or 
 character one may raise oneself above one's contempo- 
 raries; but it is rare not to share their beliefs and 
 superstitions. Now, it must be admitted, the Jews of 
 Northern France did not cherish religion in all its ideal 
 purity. The effect of their faith, their piety, upon these 
 simple souls was to make them somewhat childish, and 
 give their practices a somewhat superstitious tinge. 
 Thus, Eashi says in the name of his teacher Jacob ben 
 Yakar, that one should smell spices Saturday evening, 
 because hell, after having its work interrupted by the 
 Sabbath, begins to exhale a bad odor again in the 
 evening. This naive faith at least preserved Eashi from 
 pursuing the paths not always avoided by his co-religion- 
 ists of Spain and the Provence, who dabbled in philos- 
 ophy. Eashi never was conscious of the need to justify 
 certain narratives or certain beliefs which shocked some 
 readers of the Bible. Not until he came upon a passage 
 in the Talmud which awakened his doubts did he feel 
 called upon to explain why God created humanity. 
 
76 EASHI 
 
 though He knew it would become corrupt, and why He 
 asks for information concerning things which cannot 
 escape His omniscience. But Eashi was not bewildered 
 by certain anthropomorphic passages in the Bible, the 
 meaning of which so early a work as the Targum had 
 veiled. Wor was he shocked by the fact that God let 
 other peoples adore the stars, and that altars had been 
 consecrated to Him elsewhere than at Jerusalem. 
 Thus his plaia common sense kept him from wandering 
 along by-paths and losing himself in the subtleties in 
 which the Ibn Ezras and the ISTahmanides were en- 
 tangled. His common sense rendered him the same 
 service in the interpretation of many a Talmudic pas- 
 sage that Saadia and ISTissim had thought incapable of 
 explanation unless wrested from its literal meaning. 
 Since justice requires the admission, I shall presently 
 dwell upon the points in which Eashi's lack of philoso- 
 phic training was injurious to him. Here it is necessary 
 merely to note wherein it was useful to him. It was not 
 he, for instance, who held Abraham and Moses to have 
 been the precursors — ^no, the disciples — of Aristotle. 
 Ought we to complain of that ? 
 
 In discussing the fundamental goodness of Eashi's 
 nature, no reserves nor qualifications need be Aade. 
 Historians have vied with one another in praising his 
 humanity, his kindliness, his indulgent, charitable 
 spirit, his sweetness, and his benevolence. He appealed 
 to the spirit of concord, and exhorted the communities 
 to live in peace with one another. His goodness appears 
 in the following Eesponsum to a question, which the 
 interrogator did not sign : " I recognized the author of 
 the letter by the writing. He feared to sign his name, 
 
CHAEACTEE AND LEAENING 77 
 
 because he suspects me of being hostile to him. But I 
 assure him I am not; I have quite the contrary feeling 
 for him." A still quainter characteristic is illustrated 
 by the following decision which he rendered : " If, 
 during the prayer after a meal, one interrupts oneself to 
 feed an animal, one does not commit a reprehensible act, 
 for one should feed one's beasts before taking nourish- 
 ment, as it is written : ' And I will send grass in thy 
 fields for thy cattle, that thou mayest eat and be full.' " 
 But the quality Eashi possessed in the highest degree 
 was simplicity, modesty, one may almost say, humility; 
 and what contributed not a little to the even tenor of his 
 existence was his capacity for self-eSacement. 
 
 Such was his nature even when a youth ia the acade- 
 mies of Lorraine. He himself tells how once, when he 
 was in the house of his teacher, he noticed that a ritual 
 prescription was being violated in dressing the meat of 
 a sheep. His teacher, occupied with other matters, did 
 not notice the infringement of the law, and the pupil 
 was in a quandary. To keep quiet was to cover up the 
 wrong and make it irreparable; to speak and pronounce 
 a decision before his master was to be lacking in respect 
 for him. So, to escape from the embarrassing situation, 
 Eashi put a question to his master bearing upon the 
 dressing of the meat. 
 
 Toward all his teachers Eashi professed the greatest 
 respect. On a certain question they held wrong opinions, 
 and Eashi wrote : " I am sure they did not cause irre- 
 mediable harm, but they will do well in the future to 
 abstain from such action." This shows at the same time 
 that Eashi did not hesitate to be independent, did not 
 blindly accept all their teachings. When he believed an 
 
78 EASHI 
 
 opinion wrong, he combated it; when he believed an 
 opinion right, he upheld it, even against his masters. 
 On one occasion, Isaac ha-Levi delivered a sentence 
 which to his pupil seemed too strict. " I plied him with 
 questions," says Eashi, " to which he would not pay 
 attention, although he could not give any proof in 
 support of his opinion." To the pupils of Isaac, he 
 wrote : " I do not pretend to abolish the usages that you 
 follow, but as soon as I can be with you, I shall ask 
 you to come over to my opinion. I do not wish to 
 discuss the stricter practices adopted in the school of 
 Jacob ben Yakar (Isaac's predecessor), until I shall 
 have established that my idea is the correct one. He 
 will then acknowledge that I am right, as he did once 
 before." 
 
 This is the circumstance referred to. While still a 
 pupil of Isaac ha-Levi, Eashi had accepted a decision of 
 his without having thoroughly studied it. Later he 
 became convinced that his teacher was mistaken, but he 
 bore it in mind until he went to Worms and persuaded 
 his teacher to his own belief. 
 
 Eashi displayed the same reserve in the exercise of 
 his rabbinical functions, especially when the community 
 appealing to him was not that of Troyes. That of 
 Chalons-sur-Saone once consulted him concerning an 
 interdiction imposed by E. Gershom, and asked him to 
 repeal it; but Eashi modestly declined to give an 
 opinion.^ 
 
 Eashi's modesty is also illustrated by the tone of his 
 correspondence. Deferential or indulgent, he never 
 adopted a superior manner, was never positive or dog- 
 matic. When his correspondents were wrong, he sought 
 
CHARACTEK AND LEARNING 79 
 
 to justify their mistakes; when he combated the expla- 
 nation of another, he never used a cutting expression, 
 or a spiteful allusion, as Ibn Ezra did, and so many 
 others. 
 
 Finally, it seems, he did not hesitate to recognize his 
 own mistakes, even when a pupil pointed them out to 
 him, and it is possible to select from his commentaries a 
 number of avowals of error. In his Eesponsa he wrote : 
 " The same question has already been put to me, and I 
 gave a faulty answer. But now I am convinced of my 
 mistake, and I am prepared to give a decision better 
 based on reason. I am grateful to you for having drawn 
 my attention to the question; thanks to you, I now see 
 the truth." This question concerned a point in Tal- 
 mudic law ; but he was willing to make a similar admis- 
 sion in regard to the explanation of a Biblical verse. 
 "In commenting on Ezekiel I made a mistake in the 
 explanation of this passage, and as, at the end of the 
 chapter, I gave the true sense, I contradicted myself. 
 But in taking up the question again with my friend 
 Shemaiah,"" I hastened to correct this mistake." 
 
 An old scholar named E. Dorbal, or Durbal, addressed 
 a question to Eashi, and Eashi in his reply expressed his 
 astonishment that an old man should consult so young a 
 man as he. Assuredly, said Eashi, it was because he 
 wanted to give a proof of his benevolence and take the 
 occasion for congratulating Eashi on his response, if it 
 were correct. 
 
 It would take too long to enumerate all the passages 
 in which Eashi avows his ignorance, and declares he 
 cannot give a satisfactory explanation. 
 
80 EASHI 
 
 We have seen that Eashi did not hesitate to acknowl- 
 edge that he owed certain information to his friends and 
 pupils, and that his debates with them had sometimes led 
 him to change his opinion. The confession he made one 
 day to his grandson Samuel about the inadequacy of his 
 Biblical Commentary " has become celebrated, and justly 
 so. There is something touching in the way he listened 
 to the opinions of his grandson, and accepted them 
 because they appeared correct to him — the man who 
 loved truth and science above everything else. Like 
 many noble spirits, he considered his work imperfect, 
 and would have liked to do it all over again. This 
 modesty and this realization of the truth are the ruling 
 qualities of his nature. 
 
 II 
 
 The ideal Jew combines virtue with knowledge, and 
 tradition ascribes to Eashi universal knowledge. In the 
 first place he was a polyglot. Popular admiration of 
 him, based upon the myth concerning his travels and 
 upon a superficial reading of this works, assigned to him 
 the old miracle of the Apostles. The languages he was 
 supposed to know were Latin, Greek, Arabic, and Per- 
 sian. He was also said to be acquainted with astronomy. 
 and even with the Kabbalah, of which, according to the 
 Kabbalists, he was an ardent adept. After his death, 
 they say, he appeared to his grandson Samuel to teach 
 him the true pronunciation of the Ineffable Fame. 
 Medical knowledge was also attributed to Eashi, and a 
 medical work ascribed to his authorship. One scholar 
 went so far as to call him a calligrapher." Prom his 
 infancy, it was declared, he astonished the world by his 
 
CHARACTEE AND LBAENING 81 
 
 learning and by his memory ; and when, toward the end 
 of his life, he went to Barcelona, he awakened every one's 
 admiration by his varied yet profound knowledge. 
 
 These errors, invented, or merely repeated, but, at all 
 events, given credence by the Jewish chroniclers and the 
 Christian bibliographers, cannot hold out against the 
 assaults of criticism. To give only one example of 
 Eashi's geographical knowledge, it will suffice to recall 
 how he represented the configuration of Palestine and 
 Babylonia, or rather how he tried to guess it from the 
 texts.'" His ignorance of geography is apparent in his 
 commentaries, which contain a rather large number of 
 mistakes. In addition, Eashi was not always familiar 
 with natural products, or with the creations of art, or 
 with the customs and usages of distant countries. Still 
 less was a rabbi of the eleventh century likely to have 
 an idea of what even Maimonides was unacquainted with, 
 the local color and the spirit of dead civilizations. 
 Eashi — ^to exemplify this ignorance — explained Biblical 
 expressions by customs obtaining in his own day : " to 
 put into possession," the Hebrew of which is " to fill the 
 hand," he thinks he explains by comparing it with a 
 feudal ceremony and discovering in it something analo- 
 gous to the act of putting on gatmtlets. In general, the 
 authors of Eashi's time, paying little regard to historic 
 setting, explained ancient texts by popular legends, or 
 by Christian or feudal customs. Therefore, one need 
 not scruple to point out this defect in Eashi's knowledge. 
 Like his compatriots he did not know the profane 
 branches of learning. He was subject to the same limi- 
 tations as nearly the entire body of clergy of his day. 
 While the Arabs so eagerly and successfully cultivated 
 
82 EASHI 
 
 philosophy, medicine, astronomy, and physics. Christian 
 Europe was practically ignorant of these sciences. 
 Finally, one will judge still less severely of Eashi's 
 knowledge — or lack of knowledge — if one remembers 
 what science was in the Christian world of the middle 
 ages — ^it was chUdish, tinged with superstition, extrava- 
 gantly absurd, and fantastically naive. Eashi believed 
 that the Nile flooded its hanks once every forty years; 
 but Joinville, who lived two centuries later, and who was 
 in Egypt, tells even more astonishing things than this 
 about the marvellous river, which has its source in the 
 terrestrial Paradise. 
 
 Besides French, the only profane language Eashi 
 knew was German. The explanations he gives according 
 to the Greek, the Arabic, and the Persian, he obtains 
 from secondary sources. Indeed, they are sometimes 
 faulty, iand they reveal the ignorance of the man 
 who reproduced without comprehending them. No 
 great interest attaches to the mention of his chrono- 
 logical mistakes and his confusion of historical facts. 
 His astronomic knowledge is very slight, and resolves 
 itself iato what he borrowed from the Italian Sabbatai 
 Donnolo, of Oria (about 950). 
 
 But limited as his knowledge was to Biblical, Tal- 
 mudic, and Eabbinical literature, it was for that reason 
 all the greater in the province he had explored in its 
 inmost recesses. This is shown by his numerous 
 citations, the sureness of his touch, and his mastery of 
 all the subjects of which he treats. 
 
 Thanks to the citations, we can definitely ascertain 
 what we might call his library. 
 
CHAEACTEE AND LEARNING 83 
 
 Needless to say, the first place was held by the Bible, 
 which, as will be seen, he kaew perfectly. He wrote 
 commentaries upon the Bible almost in its entirety, 
 besides frequently referring to it in his Talmudic com- 
 mentaries. His favorite guide for the explanation of 
 the Pentateuch is the Aramaic version by Onkelos. 
 For the Prophets he used the Targum of Jonathan ben 
 Uzziel." He was entirely ignorant of the Apocryphal 
 hooks. The "Wisdom of Ben Sira, for instance, like the 
 Megillat Taanit, or EoU of Pasts,°° were known to him 
 only through the citations of the Talmud. 
 
 On the other hand Eashi was thoroughly conversant 
 with the whole field of Talmudic literature — first of all 
 the treatises on religious jurisprudence, the Mishnah," 
 Tosefta" the Babylonian and, in part, the Palestinian 
 Gemara"; then, the Halakic Midrashim, such as the 
 MeJcilta, the Sifra, the Sifre" and Haggadic compila- 
 tions, such as the Babhot'' the Midrash on the Song of 
 Songs, on Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, the Psalms, and 
 Samuel, the PesiMa" the Tanhuma" and the Pirke de 
 Rabhi Eliezer." 
 
 According to tradition, Eashi has set the Talmudic 
 period as the date of composition of two works which 
 modem criticism has placed in the period of the Geonim. 
 These works are the historic chronicle Seder Olam °" 
 and the gnostic or mystic treatise on the Creation, the 
 Sefer Yezirah, the forerunner of the Kabbalah. Besides 
 these anonymous works, Eashi knew the Eesponsa of 
 the Geonim, which he frequently cites, notably those 
 of Sherira " and his son Ha'i," the Sheeltot of E. Aha,'° 
 and the Halahot Gedolot, attributed by the French 
 school to Yehudai Gaon." In the same period must be 
 
84 EASHI 
 
 placed two other writers concerning whom we are not 
 wholly enlightened, Eleazar ha-Kalir and the author of 
 the Jewish chronicle entitled Yosippon. Eleazar, who 
 liyed in the eighth or ninth century, was one of the first 
 liturgical poets hoth as to time and as to merit. The 
 author of the Yosippon undoubtedly lived in Italy in 
 the tenth century. Rashi, like all his contemporaries, 
 confounded the two respectively with the Tanna 
 E. Eleazar and the celebrated Josephus. They were 
 considered authorities by all the rabbis of the middle 
 ages, the first for his language and his Midrashic tradi- 
 tions, the second for his historical knowledge." 
 
 So far as the literature contemporary, or nearly con- 
 temporary, with Eashi is concerned, it must be stated 
 that Eashi had read all the works written in Hebrew, 
 while the whole of Arabic literature was inaccessible to 
 him. Without doubt he knew the grannnarian Judah 
 Ibn Koreish'" only by the citations from him. On the 
 other hand he made much use of the works of the two 
 Spanish grammarians, Menahem ben Saruk and 
 Dunash ben Labrat," likewise the works of Moses ha- 
 Darshan, of ISTarbonne. ISTaturally, he was still better 
 versed in aU the rabbinical literature of ISTorthern France 
 and of Germany. He frequently cites E. G-ershom, whom 
 he onoe called " Father and Light of the Captivity," as 
 well as his contemporaries Joseph Tob Elem, Eliezer 
 the Great, and Meshullam ben Kalonymos, of Mayence. 
 I have already mentioned — and will repeat further on — 
 how much he owed his teachers. 
 
 For the sake of completeness, it is necessary to add to 
 this list all the contemporaries from whom Eashi learned 
 either directly or indirectly. For information concern- 
 
CHAEACTEE AND LEAENING 85 
 
 ing the Talmud, Isaac ben Menahem the Great, of 
 Orleans, may be mentioned among these; and for infor- 
 mation concerning the Bible, Menahem ben Helbo, whom 
 Eashi probably cited through the medium of one of his 
 pupils or his writings, for he himself was not known to 
 Eashi, his younger contemporary. 
 
 If one also takes into consideration the less important 
 and the anonymous persons whose books or oral teachings 
 Eashi cited, one will be convinced that he had what is 
 called a well-stocked brain, and that his knowledge in 
 his special domain was as vast as it was profound, since 
 it embraced the entire field of knowledge which the Jews 
 of Northern Prance of that time could possibly cultivate. 
 His learning was not universal ; far from it ; but he was 
 master of all the knowledge his countrymen possessed. 
 
 Thanks to this erudition, he could fill, at least in part, 
 the gaps in his scientific education. In fact, an under- 
 standing of Talmudic law presupposes a certain amount 
 of information — ^geometry and botany for questions con- 
 cerning land, astronomy for the fijxation of the calendar, 
 zoology for dietary laws, and so on. Eashi's knowledge, 
 then, was less frequently defective than one is led to 
 suppose, although sometimes he lagged behind the Tal- 
 mud itself. It has been noted that of 137 or 128 French 
 glosses bearing upon the names of plants, 63 are abso- 
 lutely correct. In history Eashi preserved some tradi- 
 tions which we can no longer verify, but which seem to 
 be derived from sources worthy of confidence; and if it 
 had not been for Eaahi, we would not have become 
 acquainted with them. 
 
 What he knew, therefore, he knew chiefly through 
 reading and through the instruction of his teachers, to 
 
86 EASHI 
 
 whom he often appealed; for he possessed that most 
 precious quality in a scholar, conscience, scientific 
 probity. One example will suffice to give an idea of his 
 method. Once, when he was searching for a text in his 
 copy of the Talmud, he found it corrected. But he did 
 not remember if he himself or his teacher had made the 
 correction. So he consulted a manuscript in which he 
 had noted down the variants of his teacher Isaac of 
 Mayence. Not being able to determine from this, he 
 begged his correspondent to look up the manuscript of 
 Isaac and to let him know the reading. 
 
 This characteristic leads us back to a consideration of 
 Eashi's nature, upon which one likes to dwell, because it 
 makes him a sage in the most beautiful and the largest 
 meaning of the word, because it makes him one of the 
 most sympathetic personalities in all Jewish history. 
 If Eashi had left nothing but the remembrance of an 
 exemplary life and of spotless virtue, his name would 
 have merited immortality. 
 
 But Eashi bequeathed more than this to posterity ; he 
 left one, nay, two monuments to awaken admiration and 
 call forth gratitude. They assure him fame based on 
 a solid foundation. What matter if we Jews faU to 
 honor our great men with statues of marble and bronze, 
 if they themselves establish their glory on pedestals that 
 defy the ravages of time? Statues raised by the hand 
 of man are perishable as man himself; the works con- 
 structed by a genius are immortal as the genius himself. 
 
BOOK II 
 THE WORK OF RASHI 
 
BOOK II 
 
 The Work of Eashi 
 
 CHAPTEE V 
 The Comm:en"taeies — Geneeal Chaeacteeistios 
 
 Eashi stands before us a teacher distinguished and 
 original, a religious leader full of tact and delicate 
 feeling, a scholar clear-headed and at the same time 
 loviag-hearted. In which capacity, as teacher, religious 
 leader, scholar, does he evoke our deepest admiration? 
 Shall we accord it to the one who made a home for 
 Talmudie studies on the banis of the Seine, ajid so gave 
 a definite impetus to French Jewish civilization? Or 
 shall we accord it to the one who for nearly forty years 
 presided over the spiritual destinies of an active and 
 studious population and fulfilled the duties of a rabbi; 
 with all the more devotion, without doubt, because he 
 did not have the title of rabbi ? Or should we not rather 
 pay our highest tribute to Eashi the man, so upright and 
 modest, so simple and amiable, who has won for himself 
 the veneration of posterity as much by the qualities of 
 his heart as by those of his intellect, as much by his 
 goodness and kindliness as by the subtlety and acumen 
 of his mind, in a word, as much by his character as by 
 his knowledge? Nevertheless his knowledge was extra- 
 
90 EASHI 
 
 ordinary and productive of great ■works, wHeh we sliall 
 consider in the following chapters. 
 
 As spiritual chief of the French Jews, it was natural 
 that Eashi should occupy himself with the source of their 
 intellectual and religious activity, with the Bible. But 
 in his capacity of Talmudist and teacher, it was equally 
 natural that he should devote himself to the explanation 
 of the Talmud, which formed the basis of instruction in 
 the schools, besides serving to regulate the acts of every- 
 day life and the practices of religion. And as a rab- 
 binical authority he was called upon to resolve the 
 problems that arose out of individual difficulties or out 
 of communal questions. We need no other guide than 
 this to lead us to an understanding of his works. But 
 not to omit anything essential, it would be well to 
 mention some collections which were the result of his 
 instruction, and some liturgical poems attributed to 
 him. 
 
 Eashi owes his great reputation to his commentaries 
 on the two great works that comprehend Jewish life in 
 its entirety, and lie at the very root of the intellectual 
 development of Judaism, the Bible and the Talmud. 
 His commentaries involving an enormous amoxmt of 
 labor are all but complete ; they fail to cover only a few 
 books of the Bible and a few treatises of the Talmud. 
 The conjecture has been made that at first he set himself 
 to commenting on the Talmud, and then on the Bible, 
 because at the end of his life he expressed the wish that 
 he might begin the Biblical commentary all over again. 
 But this hypothesis is not justified. The unfinished 
 
THE COMMENTAEIES 91 
 
 state of both commeiitaries, especially the one on the 
 Talmud, shows that he worked on them at the same time. 
 But they were not written without interruption, not " in 
 one spurt," as the college athlete might say. Eashi 
 worked at them intermittently, going back to them 
 again and again. It is certain that so far as the Tal- 
 mudic treatises are concerned, he did not exert himself 
 to follow the order in which they occur. He may have 
 taken them up when he explained them in his school. 
 But in commenting on the Bible, it seems, he adhered 
 to the sequence of the books, for it was on the later books 
 that he did not have the time to write commentaries. 
 Moreover, he sometimes went back to his commentary on 
 a Biblical book or a Talmudic treatise, not because he 
 worked to order, like Ibn Ezra, and as circumstances 
 dictated, but because he was not satisfied with his former 
 attempt, and because, in the course of his study, the same 
 subject came up for his consideration. Though the com- 
 mentaries, then, were not the result of long, steady ap- 
 plication, they demanded long-continued efforts, and they 
 were, one may say, the business of his whole life. The 
 rabbi Isaac of Vienna, who possessed an autograph com- 
 mentary of Eashi, speaks of the numerous erasures and 
 various marks with which it was embroidered. 
 
 The commentaries of Eashi, which do not bear special 
 titles, are not an uninterrupted exposition of the entire 
 work under consideration, and could not be read from 
 cover to cover without recourse to the text explained; 
 they are rather detached glosses, postils, to borrow an 
 expression from ecclesiastical literature, upon terms or 
 phrases presenting some difSculties. They are always 
 preceded by the word or words to be explained. 
 
92 EASHI 
 
 It is evident, then, that Eashi's works do not bear 
 witness to great originality, or, better, to great creative 
 force. Eashi lacks elevation in his point of view, 
 breadth of outlook, and largeness of conception. He 
 possessed neither literary taste nor esthetic sense. He 
 was satisfied to throw light upon an obscurity, to fill up 
 a lacuna, to justify an apparent imperfection, to explain 
 a peculiarity of style, or to reconcile contradictions. 
 He never tried to call attention to the beauties of the 
 text or to give a higher idea of the original; he never 
 succeeded in bringing into relief the humanity of a law, 
 or the universal bearing of an event. 
 
 Eashi failed also to regard a thing in its entirety. 
 He did not write prefaces to his works setting forth the 
 contents of the book and the method to be pursued." In 
 the body of the commentaries, he hardly ever dwells on 
 a subject at length, but contents himself with a brief 
 explanation. In short, his horizon was limited and he 
 lacked perspective. It is to be regretted that he did not 
 know the philosophic works of Saadia, who would have 
 opened up new worlds to him, and would have enlarged 
 the circle of his ideas. If he had read only the Biblical 
 commentaries of the great Gaon, he would have learned 
 from him how to grasp a text in its entirety and give a 
 general idea of a work. 
 
 Even if he had limited himself to the Talmud, Eashi, 
 without doubt, would have been incapable of raising a 
 vast and harmonious edifice, like the Mishneh Torah of 
 Maimonides. He did not possess the art of developing 
 the various sides of a subject so as to produce a well- 
 ordered whole. He lacked not only literary ambition, 
 but also that genius for organizing and systematizing 
 
THE COMMENTAEIES 93 
 
 which classifies and co-ordinates all the laws. Though 
 methodical, he lacked the power to generalize. 
 
 This defect, common to his contemporaries, arose, 
 possibly, from a certain timidity. He believed that he 
 ought to efface himself behiad his text, and not let his 
 own idea take the place of the author's, especially when 
 the text was a religious law and the author the Divine 
 legislator. But it seems that his power of creative 
 thought was not strong, and could exercise itself only 
 upon the more original works of others. We find analo- 
 gous features ta scholastic literature, which developed 
 wholly ia the shadow of the Scriptures, the Fathers of 
 the Church, and Aristotle. 
 
 This narrow criticism, this eye for detail, this lack of 
 general ideas and of guiding principles at least guarded 
 Eashi against a danger more original spirits failed to 
 escape, namely, of reading preconceived notions into the 
 text, of interpreting it by an individual method, and, 
 thus, of gathering more meaning, or another meaning, 
 than was intended by the author. Unlike the Jewish 
 and Christian theologians, Eashi felt no need to do 
 violence to the text in order to reconcile it with his 
 scientific and philosophic beliefs. 
 
 Though Eashi, as I said, had not a creative intellect, 
 he yet had all the qualities of a commentator. First of 
 all, he possessed clearness, the chief requisite for a 
 commentary, which imdertakes to explain a work unin- 
 telligible to its readers. " To write like Eashi " has 
 become a proverbial expression for " to write clearly and 
 intelligibly." Eashi always or nearly always uses the 
 expression one expects. He finds the explanation that 
 obtrudes itself because it is simple and easy; he excels 
 
94 EASHI 
 
 in nnra.vftlliTig difficulties and illuminating obscurities. 
 To facilitate comprehension by the reader Eashi re- 
 sorted to the use of pictures and diagrams, some of 
 which still appear in his Talmudic commentary, though 
 a number have been suppressed by the editors. Once, 
 when asked for the explanation of a difficult passage in 
 Ezekiel, he replied that he had nothing to add to what 
 he had said in his commentary, but he .would send a 
 diagram which would render the text more intelligible. 
 It is remarkable with what ease, even without the aid 
 of illustrations, he unravelled the chapters of Ezekiel 
 in which the Prophet describes the Temple of his 
 fancy; or the equally complicated chapters of Exodus 
 which set forth the plan of the Tabernacle. 
 
 Essentially this power of exposition is the attribute of 
 intelligent insight. Eashi's was the clearest, the most 
 transparent mind — ^no clouds nor shadows, no ambi- 
 guities, no evasions. He leaves nothing to be taken for 
 granted, he makes no mental reservations. He is clear- 
 ness and transparency itself. 
 
 But Eashi's language is not merely clear; it is ex- 
 tremely precise. It says with accuracy exactly what it 
 sets out to say. Eashi did not hesitate sometimes to 
 coin new words for the sake of conveying his thought. 
 He always heeded the connotation of a word, and took 
 the context iuto account. Once, in citing a Talmudic 
 explanation of a verse in Jeremiah, he rejected it, 
 because it did not square with the development of the 
 thought; and often he would not accept an interpre- 
 tation, because a word in the text was given a meaning 
 which it did not have in any other passage. He grasped, 
 and rendered in turn with perfect accuracy, shades of 
 
THE COMMENTAKIES 95 
 
 tneaning and subtleties of language; and tlie fine ex- 
 pression of relations difficult to solve surprises and 
 charmB the reader by its precision. 
 
 Commentators in the effort to be clear are often 
 wordy, and those who aim at brevity often lack per- 
 spicuity. The latter applies to Abraham Ibn Ezra, who 
 might have said with the poet, "I avoid long-winded- 
 ness, and I become obscure." Samuel ben Meir, on 
 the other hand, grandson and pupU of Eashi, is, at least 
 in his Talmudie commentaries, so long-winded and 
 prolix that at first glance one can detect the additions 
 made by him to the commentaries of his grandfather. 
 It is related, that once, when Eashi was ill, Samuel 
 finished the commentary Eashi had begun, and when 
 Eashi got well he weighed the leaves on which his pupil 
 had written and said : " If thou hadst commented on 
 the whole Talmud after this fashion, thy commentary 
 would have been as heavy as a chariot." The story, 
 which attributes somewhat uncharitable words to Eashi, 
 yet contains an element of truth, and emphasizes the 
 eminent quality of his own commentaries. 
 
 He rarely goes into very long explanations. Often 
 he solves a difficulty by one word, by shooting one flash 
 of light into the darkness. The scholar and biblio- 
 grapher Azulai scarcely exaggerated when he said that 
 Eashi could express in one letter that for which others 
 needed whole pages. A close study of the Talmudie 
 commentaries shows that he replied in advance and 
 very briefly to the questions of many a Talmudist. 
 
 It is only in considering the difficult passages that 
 he goes to greater length to note and discuss explana- 
 tions previously propounded. Take for example what 
 
96 EASHI 
 
 he says on the words p^ ni» "70, the euperscription 
 of Psalm ix, which are a crux interpretum. At the 
 same time the reader will observe how ancient are certain 
 interpretations of modern exegetes. Eashi begins by 
 refuting those who allege that David wrote this Psalm 
 on the death of his son Absalom; for in that case pn 
 and not p^ would have been necessary, and nothing in 
 the text bears out this explanation. Others transposed 
 the letters of p? to read ^33, but there is no reference 
 to Nabal in this Psalm. Others again, like the Great 
 Massorah, make a single word of nmbv. Menahem and 
 Dimash," each proposes an explanation which seems to 
 be incorrect. The PesiMa, in view of verse 6, thinks the 
 Psalm refers to Amalek and Esau; and this, too, is not 
 satisfying. Finally, Eashi gives his own explanation, — 
 scarcely better than the others, — that the Psalm deals 
 with the rejuvenation and purity of Israel when it 
 wiU have been redeemed from the Eoman captivity. 
 
 When diEQcult questions are propounded by the Tal- 
 mud, or arise out of a consideration of the Talmud, 
 Eashi cites previous explanations or parallel texts. 
 But this is exceptional. As a rule he finds with mar- 
 vellous nicety and without circumlocution the exact 
 word, the fitting expression, the necessary turn. One 
 or two words suffice for him to sum up an observation, 
 to anticipate a question, to forestall an unexpressed 
 objection, to refute a false interpretation, or to throw 
 light upon the true meaning of word or phrase. This 
 is expressed in the saying, " In Eashi's time a drop of 
 ink was worth a piece of gold." It w&s not without 
 justification — though, perhaps, the practice was carried 
 to ezcess — that for centuries commentaries were written 
 
THE COMMENTAEIES 97 
 
 upon these suggestive words of Ms imder the title 
 Dihduhe Bashi, the " Niceties of Eashi." Even at the 
 present day his commentaries are minutely studied for 
 the purpose of finding a meaning for each word. In 
 fact, because of this concise, lapidary style, his com- 
 mentaries called into existence other commentaries, 
 which set out to interpret his ideas, — and frequently 
 found ideas that did not belong there. Though the 
 authors of these super-commentaries were Eashi's 
 admirers, they were scarcely his imitators. 
 
 In this regard it is of interest to compare the com- 
 mentary of Eashi upon the beginning of the treatise 
 Baba Batra with that of Samuel ben Meir upon the end 
 of the treatise, which Eashi did not succeed in reaching. 
 An even more striking comparison may be made with 
 the commentary of Nissim Gerundi upon the abridg- 
 ment of the Talmud by Alfasi, which is printed opposite 
 to that of Eashi." Eashi's style is unmistakable, and 
 prolixness in a commentary attributed to him is proof 
 against the alleged paternity. 
 
 By virtue of these qualities, possessed by Eashi in so 
 high a degree, he is true to the traditions of French 
 literature, which is distinguished for simplicity and 
 clearness among all literatures. Besides, he compares 
 with the French writers of the middle ages in his disre- 
 gard of "style." It is true, he handles with ease 
 Hebrew and Aramaic, or, rather, the rabbinical idiom, 
 which is a mixture of the two. But he is not a writer 
 in the true sense of the word. His language is simple 
 and somewhat careless, and his writing lacks all traces 
 of esthetic quality. 
 
98 EASHI 
 
 Since the Bible and the Talmud made appeal to 
 readers of another time and another language than those 
 in which they were -written, Eashi's first duty was to 
 explain them, then, if necessary, translate them, now to 
 add clearness to the explanation, now to do away with 
 it wholly. These translations, sometimes bearing upon 
 entire passages, more often upon single words, were 
 called glosses, Hebrew laazim (better, leazim), the plural 
 of laaz. They were French words transcribed into 
 Hebrew characters, and they formed an integral part of 
 the text. Eashi had recourse to them in his teaching 
 when the precise Hebrew expression was lacking, or 
 when he explained difBcult terms, especially technical 
 terms of arts and crafts. The use of a French word 
 saved him a long circumlocution. Sometimes, the laaz 
 followed a definition or description, in a strikiag 
 manner giving the meaning of the word or expression. 
 
 In employing these French laazim, Eashi introduced 
 no innovation. His predecessors, especially his masters, 
 had already made use of them, perhaps in imitation of 
 the Christian commentators, who likewise inserted 
 words of the vernacular in their Latin explanations. 
 The Latin-speaking clergy were often forced to employ 
 the common speech for instructing the people; and in 
 the eleventh century beginnings were made in the trans- 
 lation of the Old and Few Testament by the 
 rendition of important passages. But while it per- 
 turbed the Church to see the Scriptures spread too 
 freely before the gaze of the layman, the rabbis never 
 feared that the ordinary Jew might know his Bible too 
 well, and they availed themselves of the laazim without 
 scruple. The frequent occurrence of the laazim is one of 
 
THE COMMENTAEIES 99 
 
 a mimber of proofs that Prencli was the current speech 
 of the Jews of Prance. Hebrew, like Latin among the 
 Christian clergy, was merely the language of literature 
 and of the liturgy. It is noteworthy that the treatises 
 containing most laazim bear upon questions affecting the 
 common acts of daily life — ^upon the observance of the 
 Sabbath (treatise Shabbat), upon the dietary laws, 
 (Hullin), and upon laws concerning the relations of 
 Jews with non-Jews (AbodaJi Zarah). Eashi extended 
 the use of the laazim, developing this mode of explana- 
 tion; and the commentaries of his disciples, who con- 
 tinued his method, are strewn with French words, which 
 were then inserted in the Hebrew-Erench glossaries. 
 Several of these glossaries are about to be published. 
 After Eashi's commentaries became a classic wherever 
 there were Jews, the laazim were often translated into a 
 foreign language, as into German or Italian. The 
 Pseudo-Eashi on Alfasi," following the manuscripts, 
 sometimes presents a German translation now with, now 
 without the French word. 
 
 Eashi's Biblical and Talmudic commentaries contain 
 3157 laazim, of which 967 occur in the Biblical com- 
 mentaries and 2190 in the Talmudic, forming in the 
 two commentaries together a vocabulary of about two 
 thousand different words. In the Biblical commen- 
 taries, concerned, as a rule, not so much with the ex- 
 planation of the meaning of a word as with its gram- 
 matical form, the laazim reproduce the person, tense, 
 or gender of the Hebrew word; in the Talmudic com- 
 mentaries, where the difficulty resides in the very sense 
 of the word, the laazim give a translation without regard 
 to grammatical form. 
 
100 RASHI 
 
 At the present time these laazim are of interest to us, 
 not only as the expression of Eashi's ideas, but also as 
 vehicles of information concerning the old French. As 
 early an investigator as Zunz remarked that if one could 
 restore them to their original form, they would serve 
 as a lexicon of the French language at the time of 
 the Crusades. But even Zunz did not realize the full 
 value to be extracted from them. The rare specimens 
 that we possess of the langue d'o'il °° of the eleventh 
 century belong to the Norman dialect and to the 
 language of poetry. Written, as they were, in Cham- 
 pagne, the laazim of Eashi represent almost the pure 
 French (the language spoken in Champagne lay 
 between the dialect of the Ile-de-France and that of 
 Lorraine"), and, what is more, they were words in 
 common use among the people, for they generally 
 designated objects of daily use. These laazim, then, 
 constitute a docimient of the highest importance for the 
 reconstruction of old French, as much from a phonetic 
 and morphologic point of view, as from the point of 
 view of lexicography; for the Hebrew transcription 
 fixes to a nicety the pronunciation of the word because 
 of the richness of the Hebrew in vowels and because of 
 the strict observance of the rules of transcription. 
 Moreover, in the matter of lexicography the laazim 
 offer useful material for the history of certain words, 
 and bring to our knowledge popular words not to be 
 found in literary and official texts. In the case of 
 many of these terms, their appearance in Eashi is the 
 earliest known ; otlierwise they occur only at a later date. 
 And it is not difficult to put the laazim back into French, 
 because of the weU-defined system of transcription 
 
THE COMMENTAEIES 101 
 
 employed. Even the laws of declension (or what re- 
 mained of declension in the old French) are observed. 
 
 Unfortunately, the great use made of Eashi's com- 
 mentaries necessitated a large number of copies, and 
 frequent copying produced many mistakes. Naturally, 
 it was the laazim that suffered most from the ignorance 
 and carelessness of the copyists and printers, especially 
 in the countries in which French was not the current 
 language. Efforts have been made within the last two 
 centuries to restore the laazim. Mendelssohn and 
 his associates applied themselves to the commentary 
 on the Pentateuch, Lowe, to the Psalms, Neumann, to 
 the Minor Prophets, Jeitteles and Laudau, to the whole 
 of the Bible, and the Bondi brothers, Dormitzer, and, 
 above all. Landau, to the Talmudic commentaries. But 
 these authors, not having consulted the manuscripts and 
 knowing the French language of the middle ages only 
 imperfectly, arrived at insufficient results. Even the 
 identifications of Berliner in his critical edition of the 
 commentary on the Pentateuch are not always exact 
 and are rarely scientific. 
 
 Arsene Darmesteter (1846-1888), one of the elect of 
 French Judaism and a remarkable scholar in the phil- 
 ology of the Romance languages, realized that in the 
 commentaries of Eashi "the science of philology pos- 
 sesses important material upon which to draw for the 
 history of the language in an early stage of its develop- 
 ment." With the aim of utilizing this material, he 
 visited the libraries of England and Italy, and gathered 
 much that was important ; but his numerous occupations 
 and his premature death prevented him from finishing 
 and publishing his work. In the interests of French 
 
103 EASHI 
 
 philology a3 well as for a complete understanding of 
 the text of Eashi, it would be advantageous to publish 
 the notes that he collected. In fact, such a work will 
 appear, but unfortunately not in the proportions 
 Darmesteter would have given it. Nevertheless, it will 
 be found to contain information and unique infor- 
 mation, upon the history, the phonetics, and the ortho- 
 graphy of medieval French; for the first literary works, 
 which go as far back as the eleventh century, the life 
 of Saiat Alexius and the epic of Eoland, have not come 
 down to us in the form in which they were written. 
 "What would the trouv^res of Eoland and the clerics 
 of Saint Alexius have said if they had been told that 
 one day the speech of their warrior songs and their 
 pious homilies would need the aid of the Ghetto to 
 reach the full light of day, and the living sound of their 
 words would fall upon the ears of posterity through the 
 accursed jargon of an outlawed race ? " " 
 
 In this chapter I have made some general observa- 
 tions upon the composition and the method of the 
 Biblical and Talmudic Commentaries of Eashi. Con- 
 cerniag their common characteristics there is little to 
 add, except to remark that the explanations are gen- 
 erally simple, natural, and unforced. This is especially 
 true of the Talmudic commentaries. Eashi in large 
 part owes the foundations upon which his works are 
 built to his predecessors, and no higher praise could be 
 accorded him than to say that he knew the great mass 
 of traditions and the explanations made before him. 
 
 However, Eashi rather frequently gave his own per- 
 sonal explanation, either because he did not know 
 another, or because those propounded before him did 
 
THE COMMENTAEIES 103 
 
 not seem adequate or satisfying. In the latter case, he 
 usually put down the rejected explanation before setting 
 forth his own. Yet there are cases in which intelligence 
 and imagination fail to supply knowledge of some 
 special circumstance; and such lack of knowledge led 
 Eashi into many errors. On the whole, however, the 
 commentaries contain invaluable information, and are 
 of the very highest importance for Jewish history and 
 literature, because of the citations in them of certain 
 lost works, or because of hints of certain facts which 
 otherwise would be unknown. Modern historians Justly 
 recognize in Eashi one of the most authoritative repre- 
 sentatives of rabbinical tradition, and it is rare for them 
 to consult him without profit to themselves. 
 
CHAPTBE VI 
 
 The Biblical Commeittaeies 
 
 " Thanks to Eashi the Torah has been renewed. 
 The word of the Lord in his mouth was truth. His 
 way was perfect and always the same. By his commen- 
 tary he exalted the Torah and fortified it. All wise 
 men and all scholars recognize him as master, and 
 acknowledge that there is no commentary comparable 
 with his." This enthusiastic verdict of Eliezer ben 
 Nathan " has been ratified by the following generations, 
 which, by a clever play upon words, accorded him the 
 title of Parshandata, Interpreter of the Law.°° And, 
 verily, during his life Eashi had been an interpreter of 
 the Law, when he explained the Scriptures to his 
 disciples and to his other co-religionists; and he pro- 
 longed this beneficent activity in his commentaries, in 
 which one seems to feel his passionate love of the law 
 of God and his lively desire to render the understanding 
 of it easy to his people. Yet it is true that all scholars 
 did not share in the general admiration of Eashi, and 
 discordant notes may be heard in the symphony of 
 enthusiasm. 
 
 Of what avail these eulogies and what signify these 
 reservations ? 
 
 If one reflects that the Bible is at the same time the 
 most important and the most obscure of the books that 
 
THE BIBLICAL COMMENTAEIBS 105 
 
 antiquity has bequeathed to us, it seems natural that 
 it should soon have been translated and commented 
 upon. The official Aramaic translation, or Targum, of 
 the Pentateuch is attributed to Onkelos and that of the 
 Prophets" to Jonathan ben Uzziel. Rashi constantly 
 draws inspiration from both these works, and possibly 
 also from the Targumim to the Hagiographa, which are 
 much moTe recent than the other two Targumim. 
 Sometimes he simply refers to them, sometimes he re- 
 produces them, less frequently he remarks that they do 
 not agree with the text. 
 
 Por the establishment of the text Rashi scrupulously 
 follows the Massorah, the " Scriptural Statistics," the 
 work of scholars who lived in the period between the 
 seventh and the tenth century, and who assured the in- 
 tegrity of the Bible by counting the number of verses 
 in each book and the number of times each word, phrase, 
 OA expression recurs. The Massorah soon came to have 
 great authority ; and many scholars, such as R. Grershom, 
 for example, copied it with their own hands in order to 
 have a correct and carefully made text of the Bible. 
 The Massorah was Eashi's constant guide. From a 
 calculation made of the number of times he transgressed 
 its rules, the infractions do not appear to be numerous, 
 and sometimes they seem to have been involuntary. 
 As a consequence, variants from the text of the Bible 
 are extremely rare in Rashi, and the copyists eliminated 
 them entirely. In general at his time the text was 
 definitely established to the minutest details, and vari- 
 ants, if there were any, were due to blunders of the 
 copyists. Rashi, who probably carefully compared 
 manuscripts, once remarked upon such faulty readings. 
 
106 EASHI 
 
 It is to the Massoretes that some attribute the ac- 
 cents which serve to mark at once the punctuation 
 and the accentuation of the Biblical text. Eashi nat- 
 urally conformed to this system of accentuation, and if 
 he departed from it, it seems he frequently did so 
 inadvertently. 
 
 But the two great sources upon which Eashi drew 
 for his exegesis were the Talmudic ajid the Midrashic 
 literature, with their two methods of interpreting the 
 Scriptures. As a knowledge of these two methods is 
 indispensable to an understanding of Eashi's exegesis, I 
 will give some pages from the work of a recent French 
 exegete, L. Wogue, who presents an excellent charac- 
 terization of them in his Histoire de la Bible et de 
 I'exegese iiblique: 
 
 Whatever diversities may exist in the point of view 
 adopted by the investigators of the Bible, in the aims they 
 pursued, and in the methods they employed, the methods 
 are necessarily to be summed up in the two terms, peshat 
 and derash. This is a fact which scarcely requires demon- 
 stration. There are only two ways of understanding or 
 explaining any text whatsoever, either according to the 
 natural acceptation of its meaning, or contrary to this 
 acceptation. At first glance it seems as though the former 
 were the only reasonable and legitimate method, and as 
 though the second lacked either sincerity or common sense, 
 and had no right to the title of method. Yet we shall see 
 how it came about, and how it was bound to come about, 
 that the Derash not only arose in the Synagogue, but as- 
 sumed preponderating importance there. 
 
THE BIBLICAL COMMENTAEIBS 107 
 
 From very ancient times the Pentateuch and certain 
 chapters of the Prophets were read or translated in the 
 sjoiagogue every Saturday. Accordingly, the inter- 
 pretation of the Law could not be slavishly literal. 
 
 Destined for the edification of the ignorant masses in- 
 clined to superstition, it perforce permitted itself some 
 freedom in order to avoid annoying misconceptions. Some- 
 times the literal rendition might suggest gross errors con- 
 cerning the Divine Being, sometimes it might appear to be 
 in conflict with practices consecrated by the oral law or by 
 an old tradition, and sometimes, finally, it might in itself 
 be grotesque and unintelligible. Hence a double tendency 
 in exegesis, each tendency asserting itself in the synagogue 
 at different epochs and with varying force .... Two 
 sorts of Midrash are to be distinguished; if the ques- 
 tion concerns jurisprudence or religious practice, it is 
 called Midrash Halakah, Halakic or legal exegesis; if the 
 subject bears upon dogmas, promises, the consolations of 
 religion, moral truths, or the acts of daily life, the Midrash 
 is called Midrash Haggadah, the Haggadic or ethical exe- 
 gesis. The first is intended to regulate the form and the 
 external exercise of religion; the second, to sanctify and 
 perfect man's inward being. Each brings to the examina- 
 tion of the text a preconceived notion, as it were; and it 
 reconciles text and preconceived notion sometimes by tradi- 
 tional, sometimes by arbitrary, methods, often more ingeni- 
 ous than rational. The Peshat, on the contrary, subordi- 
 nates its own ideas to the text, wishes to see in the text only 
 what is actually there, and examines it without bias 
 
 The pious instructors of the people felt the need of 
 utilizing and applying to daily life as much as possible these 
 Holy Scriptures, the one treasure that had escaped so many 
 shipwrecks. That a word should have but one meaning, 
 that a phrase should have but one subject, this seemed 
 mean, shabby, inadequate, unworthy the Supreme Wisdom 
 that Inspired the Bible. The word of God was perforce 
 more prolific. Each new interpretation of the Biblical text 
 
108 EASHI 
 
 added richness and new value to tlie precious lieritage. . . . 
 Another very important circumstance, if It did not originate 
 the Midrashic method, at all events tended strongly to 
 bring it into vogue. I speak of the religious life, such as 
 It was among the Israelites, especially in the time of the 
 second Temple. A number of practices, more or less sacred 
 and more or less obligatory, were established in, or after 
 this period, either by rabbinical institution, or by virtue of 
 the oral law or of custom; and these practices, sanctioned 
 by long usage or by highly esteemed authorities, had no 
 apparent basis in the written law. To maintain them and 
 give them solidity in the regard of the people, it was natural 
 to seek to prove by exegesis ad hoc that the Holy Text had 
 imposed or recommended them in advance, if not expressly, 
 at least by hints and allusions .... The application of this 
 method was called forth not only by the religious practices, 
 but also by the ideas and opinions that had been formed or 
 developed in the same period. After the Babylonian Exile 
 the successive influence of the Chaldeans, the Persians, and 
 the Greeks produced among the Jews of Asia as well as 
 among the Jews of Egypt certain theories concerning cos- 
 mogony, angels, and the government of the world, which 
 rapidly gained credence, and were generally held to be in- 
 contestable. These theories provided a complete apparatus 
 of doctrines so attractive and so enthusiastically accepted 
 even by our teachers, that the people could not resign them- 
 selves to the belief that they were not contained in the 
 Bible, or, worse still, that they were contradicted by this 
 store-house of wisdom and truth. But these doctrines — for 
 the most part, at least — are not to be found in the literal 
 text of the Bible, and, as a consequence, the scholars turned 
 to the Midrashic method as the only one calculated to read 
 the desired meaning into the text. 
 
 Now the general character of Judaism had not 
 changed perceptibly during ten centuries. In the 
 eleventh century the Jews had the same needs as in the 
 first, and the same method of satisfying their needs. 
 
THE BIBLICAL COMMENTAEIES 109 
 
 They found it quite natural to briag their ideas into 
 agreement with the Bible — or, rather, they did so uncon- 
 sciously — and to twist the text from its natural mean- 
 ing, so as to ascribe to the Biblical authors their own 
 ideas and knowledge. 
 
 Yet, however great the favor attaching to this method, 
 the Peshat was never entirely deprived of its rights. 
 It was even destined to soar high into prominence. 
 The appearance of the Karaites (eighth century), who 
 rejected the Talmud and held exclusively to the Scrip- 
 tures, brought into existence, either directly or in- 
 directly, a rational, independent method of exegesis, 
 though the influence of this sect upon the development 
 of Biblical studies has been grossly magnified. It was 
 the celebrated Saadia (892-943) who by his translation 
 of, and commentary upon, the Bible opened up a new 
 period in the history of exegesis, during which the 
 natural method was applied to the interpretation of 
 Biblical texts. The productions of this period deserve a 
 commanding position in Jewish literature, as much for 
 their intrinsic value as for their number. 
 
 While, however, in the countries of Arabic culture, 
 natural exegesis made its way triumphantly, ia the coun- 
 tries of Christian Europe, it freed itself from the tradi- 
 tional Midrash only with difi5culty. Moreover, Derash — 
 to carry a Jewish term into an alien field — ^was the 
 method always employed by the Christian theologians. 
 Throughout the medieval ages they adhered chiefly 
 to a spiritual, allegoric, moral, and mystic interpre- 
 tation. In the employment of this method the literary, 
 grammatical, philologic, and historical aspect is perforce 
 neglected. Nevertheless, even among Christian scholars 
 
110 EASHI 
 
 the rational method found some worthy representatives, 
 especially among the Belgian masters." 
 
 The deplorable ease of the Midrashic method readily 
 accounts for its vogue. The Haggadist is not compelled 
 to hold fast to his text, his imagination has free play, 
 and is untrammelled by the leading-strings of grammar 
 and good sense. The task of the exegete properly so 
 called is quite different. He may not find in the text 
 anything which is not actually there. He must take 
 heed of the context, of the probable, and of the rrdes of 
 the language. The exegete searches for the idea in the 
 text; the Haggadist introduces foreign ideas into the 
 text. 
 
 " At the same time, whatever the attraction of the Mi- 
 drashic method for the Jews of Prance and Germany, and 
 however great the wealth of their material, neither this 
 attraction nor this wealth could take the place of a pure, 
 simple explanation of the genuine meaning of Scriptures, 
 a meaning which often served as a basis for the Midrash, 
 and in a vast number of cases would have remained obscure 
 and incomplete. Here there was a yawning gap in an essen- 
 tial matter, and the man who had the honor of filling up 
 this gap — and with marvellous success, considering the 
 insufficiency of his scientific resources — was one of the most 
 eminent scholars of the Synagogue, the leader of Jewish 
 science, Rashi." " 
 
 It would be unjust to ignore the efforts of two of 
 Eashi's predecessors, Moses ha-Darshan (first half of 
 the eleventh century) and Menahem ben Helbo, who pre- 
 pared the way and rendered the task easier for him. 
 The principal work of Moses ha-Darshan, often cited 
 by Eashi under the title of Yesod, " Foundation," is a 
 Haggadic and mystic commentary, giving, however, 
 
THE BIBLICAL COMMENTAEIBS 111 
 
 some place to questions of grammar and of the natural 
 construction of the text. As to Menahem ben Helbo, 
 a certain number of his explanations and fragments of 
 his commentaries have been preserved; but Eashi prob- 
 ably knew him only through the intermediation of his 
 nephew Joseph Kara. Following the example of Moses 
 ha-Darshan and possibly, also, of Menahem ben Helbo, 
 Eashi used both the Peshat and the Derash in his 
 Biblical commentaries. "Eashi," says Berliner, "em- 
 ployed an in-between method, in which the Peshat and 
 the Derash were easily united, owing to the care he 
 exercised, to choose from the one or the other only what 
 most directly approximated the simple meaning of the 
 text. Eashi was free in his treatment of traditional 
 legends, now transforming, now lengthening, now 
 abridging them or joining several narratives in one, 
 according to expediency." 
 
 This opinion is comprehensive; but it is necessary to 
 emphasize and differentiate. 
 
 As a rule, when the Midrash does no violence to the 
 text, Eashi adopts its interpretation; and when there 
 are several Midrashic interpretations, he chooses the one 
 that accords best with the simple sense; but he is 
 especially apt to fall back upon the Midrash when the 
 passage does not offer any diiSculties. On the contrary, 
 if the text cannot be brought into harmony with the 
 Midrash, Eashi frankly declares that the Midrashic 
 interpretation is irreconcilable with the natural meaning 
 or with the laws of grammar. He also rejects the Mi- 
 drashic interpretation if it does not conform to the 
 context. " A passage," he said, " should be explained, 
 not detached from its setting, but according to the con- 
 
112 EASHI 
 
 text." In other cases lie says, " The real meaning of 
 the verse is different," and again, " This verse admits 
 of a Midrashic interpretation, but I do not pretend to 
 give any but the natural meaning." Kashi was fond 
 of repeating the following Talmudic saying, which he 
 elevated into a principle: "A verse cannot escape its 
 simple meaning, its natural acceptation." Eashi, then, 
 cherished a real predilection for rational and literal 
 exegesis, but when he could not find a satisfactory ex- 
 planation according to this method, or when tradition 
 offered one, he resigned himself to the Haggadic method, 
 saying: "This verse requires an explanation according 
 to the Midrash, and it cannot be explained in any other 
 way." 
 
 A few quotations will facilitate the comprehension 
 of this characteristic method. 
 
 1. Ceeation of the Woeld (Genesis 1. 1) 
 
 In the beginning}. R. Isaac "^ says: The Law ought to 
 have begun with the rule enjoining the celebration of Pass- 
 over, which is the first of the Mosaic precepts. But God 
 " showed his people the power of His works, that He may 
 give them the heritage of the heathen." " If the heathen 
 nations say to Israel: You are robbers, for you have seized 
 the land of the seven nations (Canaanites), the Israelites 
 can reply: The entire earth belongs to God, who, having 
 created it, disposes of it in favor of whomsoever it pleases 
 Him. It pleased Him to give it to the seven nations, and 
 it pleased Him to take it away from them in order to give 
 it to us. In the beginning, etc. Bereshit bara]. This 
 verse should be interpreted according to the Midrash, and 
 it is in this way that our rabbis apply it to the Torah as 
 having existed " before His works of old," ^ or to Israel, 
 called " the first-fruits of His Increase." " But if one wishes 
 to explain these words in their natural meaning, it is 
 
THE BIBLICAL COMMEISTTAEIES 113 
 
 necessary to observe the following method. In the begin- 
 ning of the creation of the heaven and the earth, when 
 the earth was confusion and chaos, God said: " Let there 
 be light." This verse does not set forth the order of the 
 creation. If it did, the word n3EJ'S?"i3 would have been 
 necessary, whereas the word JTK'N") is always in the con- 
 struct, as in Jer. xxvli. 1, Gen. x. 10, Deut. xviii. 4; " like- 
 wise t<13 must here be taken as an infinitive^{^3; the same 
 construction occurs in Hosea i. 2. Shall we assert that 
 the verse intends to convey that such a thing was created 
 before another, but that it is elliptical (just as ellipses 
 occur in Job ili. 10, Is. vlii. 4, Amos vl. 12, Is. xlvi. 10)? 
 But this difficulty arises: that which existed first were the 
 waters, since the following verse says, that " the Spirit of 
 God moved upon the face of the waters," and since the 
 text did not previously speak of the creation of the waters, 
 the waters must perforce have preceded the land, etc. 
 
 Eashi's exegesis is a bit complicated, because his 
 beliefs prevented Mm from realizing that the narrative 
 of Genesis presupposes a primordial chaos; but his 
 explanations are ingenious, and do away with other 
 difficulties. They have been propounded again as 
 original explanations by modern commentators, such 
 as Ewald, Bunsen, Schrader, Geiger, etc. Botticher 
 even proposed the reading Kia. I did not give the 
 preceding commentary in its entirety, because it is fairly 
 long and, in this respect, not typical. Consequently, 
 other quotations will serve a purpose. 
 
 2. The Sacbitice or Isaac (Gen. xxii. 1) 
 
 1. After these words]. Some of our teachers explain the 
 expression: "after the words of Satan," who said to God: 
 Of all his meals Abraham sacrifices nothing to Thee, neither 
 a bull nor a ram. He would sacrifice his son, replied God, 
 if I told him to do it. Others say: "after the words of 
 
114 EASHI 
 
 Ishmael," who boasted of having undergone circumcision 
 when he was thirteen years old, and to whom Isaac 
 answered: If God demanded of me the sacrifice of my entire 
 being, I would do what he demanded. Abraham said: 
 Behold, here I am]. Such is the humility of pious men; 
 for this expression indicates that one is humble, ready to 
 obey. 
 
 2. God said: Take now]. This is a formula of prayer; 
 God seems to say to Abraham: I pray thee, submit thyself 
 to this test, BO that thy faith shall not be doubted. Thy 
 son]. I have two sons, replied Abraham. Thine only son]. 
 But each is the only son of his mother. Whom thou lov- 
 est]. I lore them both. Isaac]. Why did not God name 
 Isaac immediately? In order to trouble Abraham, and also 
 to reward him for each word, etc. 
 
 All these explanations are drawn from Talmndic 
 (Sanhedrin SQ*") and Midrasliic (Bereshit Rahba and 
 Tanhuma) sources. The meaning of the passage being 
 clear, Eashi has recourse to Haggadic elaborations, 
 which, it must be admitted, are wholly charming. 
 Eashi will be seen to be more original in his commen- 
 tary on the Song of the Eed Sea, the text of which 
 offers more difficulties. 
 
 3. Song of the Red Sea (Ex. xt. 1) 
 
 1. Then sang Moses]. "Then": when Moses saw the 
 miracle, he had the idea of singing a song; similar construc- 
 tion In Josh. X. 12, I Kings vii. 8. Moses said to himself 
 that he would sing, and that is what he did. Moses and 
 the children of Israel " spake, saying, I will sing unto the 
 Lord." The future tense is to be explained in the same way 
 as in Josh. x. 12 (Joshua, seeing the miracle, conceived the 
 idea of singing a song, " and he said in the sight of Israel," 
 etc.), in Num. xxi. 17 (" Then Israel sang this song, Spring 
 up, O well; sing ye unto it"), and in I Kings xi. 7 (thus 
 explained by the sages of Israel: " Solomon wished to build 
 a high place, but he did not build it "). The " yod " (of the 
 
THE BIBLICAL COMMENTAEIBS 115 
 
 future) applies to the conception. Such is the natural mean- 
 ing of the verse. But, according to the Midrashio interpre- 
 tation, our rabbis see in it an allusion to the resurrection, 
 and they explain it in the same fashion as the other pas- 
 sages, with the exception of the verse in Kings, which they 
 translate: " Solomon wished to build a high place, hut he did 
 not build it." But our verse cannot be explained like those 
 in which the future is employed, although the action takes 
 place immediately, as in Job i. 5 (" Thus did Job ") ; Num. 
 ix. 23 (" The Israelites rested in their tents at the com- 
 mandment of the Lord") and 20 ("when the cloud was a 
 few days "), because here the action is continued and is ex- 
 pressed as well by the future as by the past. But our song 
 having been sung only at a certain moment, the explanation 
 does not apply. 
 
 ns5 n'K3 '3 ]. As the Targum " translates. Another ex- 
 planation : " He is most exalted," above all praise, and 
 however numerous our eulogies, I could add to them; such 
 is not the human king whom one praises without reason. 
 The horse and his rider'\. The one attached to the other; 
 the waters carried them off and they descended together 
 into the sea. nDT(hath He thrown)] like yb^n ; the same 
 as in Dan. iii. 21. The Haggadic Midrash"' gives this ex- 
 planation: one verse employs the verb HI', the other the 
 verb nD"l, which teaches us that the Egyptians mounted into 
 the air in order then to descend into the ocean. The same 
 as in Job xxxviii. 6, "who laid ( m*) the corner stone 
 thereof " from top to bottom? 
 
 2. nriB'i^ »!? \T1 n* mOTl ''IVl. Onkelos translates: my 
 strength and my song of praise. He therefore explains 'II? 
 as 'W and HIDtl as 'JTlttTl. But I am astonished at the 
 vowelling of the first word, which is unique in Scriptures, 
 if an exception is made of the three passages in which the 
 two words are joined. In all other places it is provided 
 with the vowel " u ", for example in Jer. xvi. 19 and Psalms 
 lix. 10. In general, when a word of two letters contains the 
 vowel " o ", if it is lengthened by a third letter, and if the 
 second letter has no " sheva ", the first takes an " u " : lb 
 
116 EASHI 
 
 makes '-tl?, p'^ makes ''\?f, p'n makes ''i?n, h'V makes iVl? '° 
 Vs makes lb?, as in Exodus xiv. 7. On the contrary, the 
 three other passages, namely, our passage, the one in Is. 
 (xil. 2), and that in Psalms (cxviii. 14), have '<W vowelled 
 with a short " o"; moreover, these verses do not have 'niDIl 
 but niDn, and all continue with nUlB'i^ ''b 'n»1. And to 
 give a full explanation of this verse, it is in my opinion 
 necessary to say that 'Tlf is not equivalent to »It? nor JTlDII 
 to 'mDTl, but that 'tl? is a substantive (without a posses- 
 sive suffix, but provided with a paragogic "yod"), as in 
 Psalm cxxiii. 1, Obadiah 3, Deut. xxxiii. 16. The eulogy 
 (of the Hebrews) therefore signifies: It is the strength and 
 the vengeance of God that have been my salvation. mon 
 is thus in the construct with the word God, exactly as in 
 Judges v. 23, Is. ix. 18, Bccl. iii. 18. As for the word JTlDtl, 
 it has the meaning which the same root has in Lev. xxv. 4 
 ("thou Shalt not prune") and in Is. xxv. 5; that is to 
 say, "to cut". The meaning of our verse, then, is: "The 
 strength and the vengeance of our Lord have been our sal- 
 vation." One must not be astonished that the text uses 
 ^HM (imperfect changed to past) and not 'ITn (perfect) : for 
 the same construction occurs in other verses; for exampla, 
 I Kings vi. 5, II Chron. x. 17", Num. xiv. 16 and 36, Ex. 
 ix. 21. 
 
 Se is my O-od]. He appeared to them in His majesty, 
 and they pointed Him out to one another with their 
 finger." The last of the servants saw God, on this occasion, 
 as the Prophets themselves never saw Him. iniJNI 1. The 
 Targum sees in this word the meaning of " habitation " " 
 as in Is. xxxiii. 20, Ixv. 10. According to another explana- 
 tion the word signifies " to adorn," and the meaning would 
 be: "I wish to celebrate the beauty and sing the praise of 
 God in all His creatures," as it is developed in the Song of 
 Songs; see v. 9 et seqJ' My father's Ood]. He is; and 
 I will exalt Him. My father's God]. I am not the first 
 who received this consecration; but on the contrary His 
 holiness and His divinity have continued to rest upon me 
 from the time of my ancestors. 
 
THE BIBLICAL COMMENTAEIES 117 
 
 In the above the text calls only for the embellishments 
 of the Haggadah. In the following passage from Eashi's 
 commentaries the place allotted to Derash is more lim- 
 ited. 
 
 4. Co^^STEUCTION OF THE TABEENACtE (EX. XXV. 1 Ct Seq.) 
 
 2. Speak unto the children of Israel, that they bring 
 me an offering]. To me; in my honor. An offering 
 ( nonn), a levy; let them make a levy upon their goods. 
 Of every man that giveth it willingly with his heart 
 ( 1J3T )], same meaning as riDIJ. that is to say, a volun- 
 tary and spontaneous gift." Ye shall take my offering]. 
 Our sages say: Three offerings are prescribed by this pas- 
 sage, one of a Befco from each person, used for a pedestal, 
 as will be shown in detail in Eleh Pekude "; the second, 
 the contribution of the altar, consisting of a ieka from each 
 person, thrown into the coffers for the purchase of congre- 
 gational sacrifices; and, third, the contribution for the 
 Tabernacle, a free-will offering. The thirteen kinds of ma- 
 terial to be mentioned were all necessary for the construc- 
 tion of the Tabernacle and for the making of priestly vest- 
 ments, as will be evident from a close examination. 
 
 3. Gold, and silver, and irass]. All these were offered 
 voluntarily, each man giving what he wished, except silver, 
 of which each brought the same quantity, a half-shekel a 
 person. In the entire passage relating to the construction 
 of the Tabernacle, we do not see that more silver was 
 needed; this is shown by Ex. xsxviii. 27. The rest of the 
 silver, voluntarily offered, was used for making the sacred 
 vessels. 
 
 4. nPan ]. Wool dyed in the blood of the halazon" and 
 of a greenish color. [DJnNI ]. Wool dyed with a sort of 
 coloring matter bearing this name. B'B'l]. Linen. D'Tl?]- 
 Goats' hair; this is why Onkelos translates it by V1?D, 
 but not " goats," which he would have rendered by S'Tr- 
 
 5. And rams' skins dyed red]. Dyed red after having 
 been dressed. D'C'Tin] A sort of animal created for the 
 purpose and having various colors; that Is why the Tar- 
 
118 EASHI 
 
 gum translates the word by N315DD\ "he rejoices in Ills 
 colors and boasts of them."" And shittim wood]. But 
 whence did the Israelites in the desert obtain it? R. Tan- 
 huma explains: The patriarch Jacob, thanks to a Divine 
 revelation, had foreseen that one day his descendants would 
 construct a Tabernacle in the desert. He, therefore, carried 
 shittim trees into Egypt, and planted them there, advising 
 his sons to take them along with them when they left the 
 country. 
 
 6. Oil for the lighf]. "Pure oil olive beaten for the 
 light, to cause the lamp to burn always." " Spices for 
 anointing oil]. Prepared for the purpose of anointing 
 both the vessels of the Tabernacle and the Tabernacle itself. 
 Spices entered into the composition of this oil, as is said in 
 Ki-Tissa.'' And for sweet incense] which was burned 
 night and morning, as is described in detail in Tezaweh."- As 
 to the word mt3p, it comes from the rising of the smoke 
 ( llDp ). 
 
 7. Onyx stones]. Two were needed for the ephod, de- 
 scribed in Te«aweh." And stones to be set] for an ouch 
 of gold was made in which the stones were set, entirely fill- 
 ing it. These stones are called " stones t& be set." As to 
 the bezel it is called riV3CD- In the ephod, and in the 
 breastplate] . Onyx stones for the ephod and "stones to be 
 set" for the breastplate. The breastplate as well as the 
 ephod are described in Tezaweh"; they are two sorts of 
 ornaments. 
 
 If these citations did not suffice, his anti-Christian 
 polemics would furnish ample evidence of the wise use 
 Eashi made of the Peshat. The word polemics, per- 
 haps, is not exact. Eashi does not make assaults upon 
 Christianity; he contents himself with showing that a 
 verse which the Church has adopted for its own ends, 
 when rationally interpreted, has an entirely different 
 meaning and application. Only to this extent can Eashi 
 be said to have written polemics against the Christians. 
 
THE BIBLICAL COMMBNTAEIES 119 
 
 Ho-wever that may be, no other course is possible ; for the 
 history of Adam and Eve or the blessing of Jacob cannot 
 be explained, unless one takes a stand for or against 
 Christianity. It was not difficult to refute Christian 
 doctrines; Eashi could easily dispose of the stupid or 
 extravagant inventions of Christian exegesis. Some- 
 times he does not name the adversaries agaiast whom 
 he aimed; sometimes he openly says he has ia view the 
 Minim or " Sectaries," that is, the Christians. The 
 Church, it is well known, transformed chiefly the 
 Psalms into predictions of Christianity. In order to 
 ward off such an iuterpretation and not to expose them- 
 selves to criticism, many Jewish exegetes gave up that 
 explanation of the Psalms by which they are held to be 
 proclamations of the Messianic era, and would see in 
 them allusions only to historic facts. Eashi followed 
 this tendency ; and for this reason, perhaps, his commen- 
 tary on the Psalms is one of the most satisfying from 
 a scientific point of view. Eor instance, he formally 
 states : " Oux masters apply this passage to the 
 Messiah; but in order to refute the Minim, it is better 
 to apply it to David." 
 
 One would wish that Eashi had on aU occasions 
 sought the simple and natural meaning of the Biblical 
 text. That he clothed the Song of Songs, in part at 
 least, in a mantle of allegory, is excusable, since he was 
 authorized, nay, obliged, to do so by tradition. In the 
 Proverbs this manner is less tolerable. The book is 
 essentially secular in character ; but Eashi could not take 
 it in this way. To him it was an allegory; and he trans- 
 formed this manual of practical wisdom into a pro- 
 longed conversation between the Torah and Israel. 
 
120 EASHI 
 
 Again, though Raahi discriminated among the Midra- 
 shim, and adopted only those that seemed reconcilable 
 with the natural meaning, his commentaries none the 
 less resemble Haggadic compilations. This is true, 
 above all, of the Pentateuch. And if the Haggadah " so 
 far as religion is concerned was based upon the oral law, 
 and from an esthetic point of view upon the apparent im- 
 proprieties of the Divine word," it nevertheless " serves 
 as a pretext rather than a text for the flights, some- 
 times the caprice or digressions, of religious thought." " 
 'Now, Rashi was so faithful to the spirit of the Midrash 
 that he accepted without wincing the most curious and 
 shocking explanations, or, if he rejected them, it was 
 not because he found fault with the explanations them- 
 selves. Sometimes, when we see him balance the simple 
 construction against the Midrashic interpretation of the 
 text, we are annoyed to feel how he is drawn in opposite 
 directions by two tendencies. We realize that in con- 
 sequence his works suiler from a certain incoherence, 
 or lack of equilibrium, that they are uneven and mixed 
 in character. To recognize that he paid tribute to the 
 taste of the age, or yielded to the attraction the Midrash 
 exercised upon a soul of naive faith, is not sufficient, for 
 in point of fact he pursued the two methods at the same 
 time, the method of literal and the method of free 
 interpretation, seeming to have considered them equally 
 legitimate and fruitful of results. Often, it is true, he 
 shakes off the authority of tradition, and we naturally 
 query why his good sense did not always assert itself, 
 and free him from the tentacles of the Talmud and the 
 Midrash. 
 
THE RASHI CHAPEL AT WORMS 
 
 FROM A PHOTOGRAPH 
 
THE BIBLICAL COMMENTAEIES 131 
 
 Now that we have formulated our grievance against 
 Rashi, it is fair that we try to justify him by recalling 
 the ideas prevailing at the time, and the needs he wished 
 to satisfy. 
 
 The Midrashim, as I have said, have a double object, 
 on the one hand, the exposition of legal and religious 
 practices, on the other hand, the exposition of the beliefs 
 and hopes of religion. So far as the Halakic Midrash 
 is concerned, it was marvellously well adapted to the 
 French-Jewish intellect, penetrated as it was by Tal- 
 mudism. The study of the Talmud so completely filled 
 the lives of the Jews that it was difficult to break away 
 from the rabbinical method. Eashi did not see in the 
 Bible a literary or philosophic masterpiece. 'Not did he 
 study it with the unprejudiced eyes of the scholar. He 
 devoted himself to this study — especially of the Penta- 
 teuch — ^with only the one aim in view, that of finding 
 the origin or the explanation of civil and ritual laws, 
 the basis or the indication of Talmudic precepts. Some- 
 times he kicked against the pricks. When convinced 
 that the rabbinical explanation did not agree with a 
 sane exegesis, he would place himself at variance with 
 the Talmud for the sake of a rational interpretation. 
 What more than this can be expected? Nor need we 
 think of him as the unwilling prisoner of rules and a 
 victim of their tyranny. On the contrary, he adapted 
 himself to them perfectly, and believed that the Midrash 
 could be made to conform to its meaning without vio- 
 lence to the text. That he always had reason to believe 
 so was denied by so early a successor as his grandson 
 Samuel ben Meir. Samuel insisted that one stand face 
 to face with the Scriptures and interpret them without 
 
133 EASHI 
 
 paying heed and having recourse to any other work. 
 This effort at intellectual independence in which the 
 grandson nearly always succeeded, the grandfather was 
 often incapable of making. In commenting upon the 
 Talmud Eashi preserved his entire liberty, unrestrained 
 by the weight of any absolute authority; but in com- 
 menting on the Bible he felt himself bound by the 
 Talmud and the Midrash. Especially in regard to the 
 Pentateuch, the Talmudic interpretation was unavoid- 
 able, because the Pentateuch either explicitly or impli- 
 citly contains all legal prescriptions. In point of fact, 
 in leaving the Pentateuch and proceeding to other parts 
 of the Bible, he gains in force because he gains in inde- 
 pendence. He no longer fears to confront " our sages " 
 with the true explanation. For example, there is little 
 Derash in the following commentary on Psalm xxiii : 
 
 A Psalm of David]. Our rabbis say: The formula 
 " Psalm of David " Indicates that David at first played the 
 Instrument, then was favored by Divine Inspiration. It, 
 therefore, signifies. Psalm to give inspiration to David. On 
 the other hand, when it is said " To David, a Psalm," " the 
 formula Indicates that David, having received Divine Inspi- 
 ration, sang a song in consequence of the revelation. 
 
 1. The Lord is my Shepherd; I shall not want]. In 
 this desert in which I wander I am full of trust, sure that 
 I shall lack nothing. 
 
 2. Se maketh me to lie down in green pastures]. In 
 a place to dwell where grass grows. The poet, having be- 
 gun by comparing his sustenance to the pasturing of ani- 
 mals. In the words, " The Lord is my Shepherd," continues 
 the Image. This Psalm was recited by David in the forest 
 of Hereth, which was so called because It was arid as 
 clay (heres), but It was watered by God with all the delights 
 of the next world (Midrash on the Psalms). 
 
THE BIBLICAL COMMENTAEIES 123 
 
 3. Se win restore my somZ]- My soul, benumbed by 
 misfortunes and by my flight. He 'will restore to its former 
 estate. Se will lead me in the paths of righteousness'] 
 along the straight highway so that I may not fall into the 
 hands of my enemies. 
 4. Tea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow 
 of death, I will fear no evil]. In the country of shadows; 
 this applies to the wilderness of Ziph." The word HId'jV 
 here employed always signifies " utter darkness " "; this 
 is the way in which it is explained by Dunash ben Labrat." 
 Thy rod and thy staff they comfort me]. The sufferings 
 I have undergone and my reliance, my trust, in Thy good- 
 ness are my two consolations, for they bring me pardon for 
 my faults, and I am sure that 
 
 5. Thou wilt prepare a table before me], that is, roy- 
 alty. Thou hast anointed my head with oil]. I have 
 already been consecrated king at Thy command. My cup 
 runneth over]. An expression signifying abundance. 
 
 Prom this commentary one realizes, I do not say the 
 perfection, but the simplicity, Rashi could attain when 
 he was not obliged to discover in Scriptures allusions 
 to laws or to beliefs foreign to the text. As Mendels- 
 sohn said of him, " No one is comparable with him when 
 he writes Peshat." Even though Eashi gave too much 
 space to the legal exegesis of the Talmud, Mendels- 
 sohn's example will make us more tolerant toward him 
 — Mendelssohn who himself could not always steer clear 
 of this method. 
 
 Moreover, the commentary on the Bible is not exactly 
 a scholarly work; it is above all a devotional work, 
 written, as the Germans say, fiir Schule und Ham, for 
 the school and the family. The masses, to whom Eashi 
 addressed himself, were not so cultivated that he could 
 confine himself to a purely grammatical exposition or 
 
134 EASHI 
 
 to bare exegesis. He had to introduce fascinating 
 legends, subtle deductions, ingenious comparisons. The 
 Bible was studied, not so much for its own sake, as for 
 the fact that it was the text-book of morality, the foun- 
 dation of belief, the source of all hopes. Every thought, 
 every feeling bore an intimate relation to Scriptures. 
 The Midrash exercised an irresistible attraction upon 
 simple, deeply devout souls. It appealed to the heart as 
 well as to the intelligence, and in vivid, attractive form 
 set forth religious and moral truths. Granted that 
 success justifies everything, then the very method with 
 which we reproach Eashi explains the fact that he has 
 had, and continues to have, thousands of readers. The 
 progress of scientific exegesis has made us aware of 
 what we would now consider a serious mistake in method. 
 We readily understand why Derash plays so important 
 a role in Eashi's commentaries, and to what require- 
 ments he responded; but that does not make us any 
 more content with his method. To turn from Eashi 
 to a more general consideration of the Midrashic exe- 
 gesis, we also xmderstand its long continuance, though 
 we do not deprecate it less, because it is unscientific and 
 irrational. 
 
 In spite of all, however, the use of the Derash must be 
 considered a virtue in Eashi. Writing before the author 
 of the Yalkut Shimeord" he revealed to his contem- 
 poraries, among whom not only the masses are to be 
 included, but, owing to the rarity of books, scholars as 
 well, a vast number of legends and traditions, which 
 have entered into the very being of the people, and have 
 been adopted as their own. Eashi not only popularized 
 numerous Midrashim, but he also preserved a number 
 
THE BIBLICAL COMMENTAKIES 135 
 
 the sources of which are no longer extant, and which 
 without him would be unknown. His Biblical commen- 
 tary is thus the store-house of Midrashic literature, the 
 aftermath of that luxuriant growth whose latest pro- 
 ducts ripened in the eighth, ninth, and even tenth 
 centuries. 
 
 It is hardly proper, then, to be imduly severe in our 
 judgment of Eashi's work. In fact, why insist on his 
 faults, since he himself recognized the imperfections of 
 his work, and would have bettered them if he had had 
 the time? The testimony of his grandson upon this 
 point is explicit : 
 
 " The friends of reason," said Samuel ben Meir, " should 
 steep themselves in this principle of our sages, that natural 
 exegesis can never be superseded. It is true that the chief 
 aim of the Torah was to outline for us rules of religious 
 conduct, which we discover behind the literal meaning 
 through Haggadic and Halakic interpretation. And the 
 ancients, moved by their piety, occupied themselves only 
 with Midrashic exegesis as being the most important, and 
 they failed to dwell at great length upon the literal mean- 
 ing. Add to this the fact that the scholars advise us not to 
 philosophize too much upon the Scriptures. And R. Solo- 
 mon, my maternal grandfather, the Torch of the Captivity, 
 who commented on the Law, the Prophets, and the Hagio- 
 grapha, devoted himself to the development of the natural 
 meaning of the text; and I, Samuel son of Meir, discussed 
 his explanations with him and before him, and he confessed 
 to me that if he had had the leisure, he would have deemed 
 it necessary to do his work all over again by availing him- 
 self of the explanations that suggest themselves day after 
 day." *■ 
 
 It seems, therefore, that Eashi only gradually, as the 
 result of experience and discussion, attained to a full 
 
136 EASHI 
 
 consciousness of the requirements of a sound exegesis 
 and the duties of a Biblical commentator. What the 
 grandfather had not been able to do was accomplished 
 by the grandson. The commentary of Samuel ben Me'ir 
 realized Eashi's resolutions. Though Eashi may not 
 have been irreproachable as a commentator, he at least 
 pointed out the way, and his successors, enlightened by 
 his example, could elaborate his method and surpass it, 
 but only with the means with which he provided them. 
 We must take into account that he was almost an origi- 
 nator, and we readily overlook many faults and flaws in 
 remembering that he was the first to prepare the 
 material. 
 
 Grammar and lexicography are the two bases of exe- 
 gesis. Eashi was as clever a grammarian as was possible 
 in his time and in his country. At all events he was 
 not of the same opinion as the Pope, who rebuked the 
 Archbishop of Vienna for having taught grammar in his 
 schools, because, he said, it seemed to him rules of gram- 
 mar were not worthy the Sacred Text, and it was 
 unfitting to subject the language of Holy Scriptures to 
 these rules. Eashi in his explanations pays regard to 
 the laws of language, and in both his Talmudic and 
 Biblical commentaries, he frequently formulates scien- 
 tific laws, or, it might be saiJ, empiric rules, regarding, 
 for instance, distinctions in the usage of words indicated 
 by the position of the accent, different meanings of the 
 same particle, certain vowel changes, and so on. Thus, 
 we have been able to construct a grammar of Eashi, 
 somewhat rudimentary, but very advanced for the time. 
 
THE BIBLICAL COMMENTAEIES 137 
 
 Nevertheless, in this regard, a wide gap separates the 
 commeiitaries of Eashi and the works of the Spanish 
 school of exegetes, which shone with such lustre in that 
 epoch. Under the influence and stimulus of the Arabs, 
 scientific studies took an upward flight among the Jews 
 of Moslem Spain. The Midrash was abandoned to the 
 preachers, while the scholars cultivated the Hebrew 
 language and literature with fruitful results. In 
 France, on the contrary, though rabbinical studies were 
 already flourishing, the same is not true of philological 
 studies, which were introduced into Prance only through 
 the influence of the Spaniards. French scholars soon 
 came to know the works, written in Hebrew, of Mena- 
 hem ben Saruk and Dunash ben Labrat," and Eashi 
 availed himself of them frequently, and not always 
 uncritically. Thus, like them, he distinguishes triliteral, 
 biliteral, and even uniLiteral roots ; but contrary to them, 
 he maintains that contracted and quiescent verbs are 
 triliteral and not biliteral. Unfortunately, he could 
 have no knowledge of the more important works of 
 Hayyoudj, "father of grammarians," and of Ibn 
 Djanah, who carried the study of Hebrew to a perfection 
 surpassed only by the modems ; " for these works were 
 viTitten in Arabic, and the translations into Hebrew, 
 made by the scholars of Southern Prance, did not appear 
 until the twelfth -and thirteenth centuries. Though the 
 Spanish Jews did not yet cultivate the allegoric and 
 mystic exegesis, their philosophic sense was rather re- 
 fined and they did not always approach the study of the 
 Bible without seeking something not clearly expressed 
 in the text, without arriere-pensee, so to speak. Eashi's 
 
128 EASHI 
 
 exegesis was more ingenuous and, therefore, more ob- 
 jective. 
 
 Moreover, even if Eashi was not in complete posses- 
 sion of grammatical rules, he had perfectly mastered 
 the spirit of the Hebrew language. Like the Spaniards, 
 he had that very fine understanding for the genius of 
 the language which arises from persevering study, from 
 constant occupation with its literature. We have cited 
 the sources upon which he drew ; it would be unjust not 
 to remark that he made original investigations. For 
 example (and the examples might be multiplied) 
 apropos of a difficult passage in Ezekiel, he asserted that 
 he had drawn the explanation from inner stores, and 
 had been guided only by Divine inspiration — a formula 
 borrowed from the Geonim. He was frequently con- 
 sulted in regard to the meaning of Biblical passages, and 
 one response has been preserved, that given to the 
 scholars of Auxerre when they asked for an explanation 
 of several chapters of the Prophets. This fact shows 
 that the Jews gave themselves up with ardor to the 
 study of the Bible, men of education making it their 
 duty to copy the Bible with the most scrupulous care 
 and according to the best models, to the number of which 
 they thus made additions. Among these copies are the 
 ones made by Gershom, by Joseph Tob Elem, and by 
 Menahem of Joigny. The Jews were almost the only 
 persons versed in the Bible. I have mentioned how 
 much the Church feared the sight of the Bible in the 
 hands of the common people, and in clerical circles an 
 absolutely anti-scientific spirit reigned in regard to these 
 matters. It was the triumph of symbolism, allegory, 
 and docetism. All the less likely, then, were they to 
 
THE BIBLICAL COMMBNTAEIBS 129 
 
 know Hebrew. An exception was the monk Sigebert 
 de Gemblours, a teacher at Metz in the last quarter of 
 the eleventh century, who maintained relations with 
 Jewish scholars. He is said to have known Hebrew. 
 
 Eashi's thorough knowledge of Hebrew enabled him 
 to depend upon his memory for quoting the appropriate 
 verses, and in all his citations there is scarcely a mistake, 
 natural though an error would have been in quoting 
 from memory. Distinguishing between the Hebrew of 
 the Bible and that of the Talmud, he sees in the Hebrew 
 of the Mishnah a transition between the two. Often, for 
 the purpose of explaining a word in the Bible, he has 
 recourse to Talmudic Hebrew or to the Aramaic. He 
 pays careful attention to the precise meaning of words 
 and to distinctions among synonyms, and he had per- 
 ception for delicate shading in syntax and vocabulary. 
 Owing to this thorough knowledge of Hebrew he readily 
 obtained insight into the true sense of the text. By 
 subjecting the thought of the Holy Scriptures to a 
 simple and entirely rational examination, he not seldom 
 succeeds in determining it. Thus, as it were by divin- 
 ation, he lighted upon the meaning of numerous Biblical 
 passages. A long list might be made of explanations 
 misunderstood by his successors, and revived, consciously 
 or unconsciously, by modern exegetes. An illustration 
 in point is his explanation of the first verse of Genesis, 
 quoted above. Long before such Biblical criticism had 
 become current it was he who said that the " servant of 
 God" mentioned in certain chapters of the second part 
 of Isaiah represents the people of Israel. 
 
 ISTeedless to say Eashi never tampers with the text. 
 At most, as is the case with Ibn Djanah, he says that 
 
130 EASHI 
 
 a letter is missing or is superfluous. Sometimes, too, 
 he changes the order of the words. Neither copyists' 
 mistakes nor grammatical anomalies existed for him. 
 Yet he believed in all siacerity that the ancient sages 
 could have corrected certaia Biblical texts to remove 
 from them a meaning startling or derogatory when 
 applied to the Divinity. 
 
 Eashi wholly ignored what modern criticism calls the 
 Introduction to the Scriptures, that is to say, the study 
 of the Bible and the books of which it is composed from 
 the point of view of their origin, their value, and the 
 changes they have undergone. But rarely, here and 
 there in his commentaries, does one find any references 
 to the formation of the canon. To give an example 
 showing how he justified a classification of the Hagio- 
 grapha given by a Talmudic text and disagreeing with 
 the present classification: Euth comes first, because it 
 belongs to the period of the Judges ; Job follows, because 
 he lived at the time of the Queen of Sheba; then come 
 the three books of Solomon, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, both 
 gnomic works, and the Song of Songs, written in 
 Solomon's old age; Lamentations, Daniel, Esther, Ezra 
 (comprising the present Nehemiah), and Chronicles are 
 likewise placed in chronological order. In the same 
 passage of the Talmud the question is put as to why the 
 redaction of the prophecies of Isaiah is attributed to 
 King Hezekiah and his academy. Eashi explained that 
 the prophets collected their speeches only a short time 
 before their death, and Isaiah having died a violent 
 death, his works could not enjoy the benefit of his own 
 redaction. 
 
THE BIBLICAL COMMBNTAEIES 131 
 
 Still less need one expect to find in EasM modern 
 exegesis, that criticism which applies to Scriptures an 
 investigation entirely independent of extraneous consid- 
 erations, such as is brought to bear upon purely human 
 works. Eashi's candid soul was never grazed by the 
 slightest doubt of the authenticity of a Biblical passage. 
 We can admire the genial divinations of an Abraham Ibn 
 Ezra, but we also owe respect to that sincere faith of 
 Eashi which was incapable of suspecting the testimony 
 of tradition and the axioms of religion. 
 
 Ibn Ezra "^ and Eashi present the most vivid contrast. 
 Though Ibn Ezra was open-minded and clear-sighted, 
 he was restless and troubled. He led an adventurous 
 existence, because his character was adventurous. 
 Eashi's spirit was calm, without morbid curiosity, lean- 
 ing easily upon the support of traditional religion, 
 frank, throughout his life as free from the shadows of 
 doubt as the soul of a chUd. Ibn Ezra had run the 
 scientific gamut of his time, but he also dipped into 
 mysticism, astrology, arithmolatry, even magic. Eashi, 
 on the contrary, was not acquauited with the profane 
 sciences, and so was kept from their oddities. With 
 his clear, sure intelligence he penetrated to the bottom 
 of the text without bringing it into agreement with 
 views foreign to it. But the characteristic which dis- ■ 
 tinguishes him above all others from Ibn Ezra is the 
 frankness of his nature. He never seemed desirous of 
 knowing what he did not know, nor of believing what 
 he did not ' believe. Finally, and in the regard that 
 specially interests us, Ibn Ezra, who belonged to the 
 school of Arabic philosophers and scholars, who knew 
 the Spanish grammarians, and was their inheritor. 
 
133 EASHI 
 
 always employed the Peshat — that is, when he was not 
 biassed by his philosophic ideas. In this case he saw 
 the true meaning of the text, perhaps more clearly than 
 any other Jewish commentator. Eashi did not possess 
 the same scientific resources. He knew only the Tal- 
 mud and the Midrash, and believed that all science was 
 included in them. Moreover, though he stated in so 
 many words his preference for a literal and natural 
 interpretation of the text, he fell short of always obeying 
 his own principle. 
 
 There is one characteristic of Eashi's Bible commen- 
 taries which I have already touched upon, but to which 
 it is well to revert by way of conclusion, since it makes 
 the final impression upon a student of the commentaries. 
 I refer to a certain intimacy or informality of the work, 
 a certain easy way of taking things. The author used 
 no method. ISTow he explains the text simply and nat- 
 urally; now he enjoys adorning it with fanciful embel- 
 lishments. One would say of him, as of many an author 
 of the Talmud, that in writing his work he rested from 
 his Talmudic studies; and one seems to hear in these 
 unceremonious conversations, these unpretentious homi- 
 lies, the same note that even in the present day is some- 
 times struck in synagogues on Saturday afternoons. 
 What clearly shows that Eashi unbent a little in com- 
 posing his Biblical commentaries are the flashes of wit 
 and humor lighting them, the display of his native grace 
 of character, his smiling geniality. If he yielded some 
 credence to the most naive inventions, this does not 
 mean that he was always and entirely their dupe. They 
 
THE BIBLICAL COMMENTAEIES 133 
 
 simply gave him the utmost delight. He did not 
 refrain from piquant allusions; and the commentary on 
 the Pentateuch presents a number of pleasantries, some 
 of which are a bit highly-spiced for modem taste. 
 Fundamentally, they are a heritage of the old Midrashic 
 spirit grafted upon the gaiety of " mischievous and fine 
 Champagne," as Michelet said. Assuredly, there were 
 hours in -which good humor reigned over master and 
 pupils, and we seem to see the smile that accompanied 
 the witty sallies, and the radiance of that kindly charm 
 which illuminated the dry juridic discussions. All this 
 forms an attractive whole, and everyone may feel the 
 attraction; for the commentaries on the Bible, which 
 can be read with pleasure and without mental fatigue, 
 are iatelligible to persons of most mediocre mind and 
 cultivation. The words of a certain French critic upon 
 another writer of Champagne, La Fontaine, might be 
 applied to Eashi, though a comparison between a poet 
 and a commentator may not be pressed to the utmost. 
 "He is the milk of our early years, the bread of the 
 adult, the last meal of the old man. He is the familiar 
 genius of every hearth." 
 
 For many centuries the Biblical commentaries held 
 a position — and still hold it — similar to that of La 
 Fontaine's Fables. Few works have ever been copied, 
 printed, and commented upon to the same extent. 
 Immediately upon their appearance, they became pop- 
 ular in the strongest sense of the word. They cast iato 
 the shade the work of his disciples, which according to 
 modem judgment are superior. Preachers introduced 
 some commentaries of his into their sermons, and made 
 his words the subject of their instruction; and Eashi 
 
134 EASHI 
 
 ■was taught even to the children. The mass of readers 
 assimilated the Halakic and Haggadic elements. 
 Those who were not students, through Eashi got a 
 smattering of a literature that would otherwise have 
 been inaccessible to them; and the commentaries threw 
 into circulation a large number of legends, which 
 became the common property of the Jews. Eashi's 
 expressions and phrases entered into current speech, 
 especially those happy formidas which impress them- 
 selves on the memory. His commentary is printed in 
 all the rabbinical Bibles; it has become to the Jews 
 inseparable from the text, and even Mendelssohn's com- 
 mentary, which has all of Eashi's good qualities and 
 none of his faults, did not succeed in eclipsiag it. In 
 short, it is a classic. 
 
CHAPTEE VII 
 
 The Talmudic Commentaeies 
 
 The commentaries on the Bible, especially those on 
 the Pentateuch, constitute a work for general reading 
 and for devotion as well as for scientific study. Their 
 general scope explains both their excellencies and their 
 defects. On the other hand, the commentary on the 
 Talmud is an academic work. It originated in the 
 school of Rashi, and was elaborated there during a long 
 time. The one is a popular work for the use of the 
 masses, the other, a learned treatise for the use of 
 students. The explanation of the Scriptures was writ- 
 ten for the benefit of the faithful in popular, attractive, 
 and comprehensible form; the explanation of the Tal- 
 mud constituted matter for serious study in the acad- 
 emies. Or, rather, after the long, exhaustive, and often 
 dry-^as-dust Talmudic discussion, the master took 
 pleasure in interrupting his instruction in the school 
 to give his interpretation of Biblical passages. 
 
 This is the reason why the Talmudic commentaries," 
 which are, as it were, the summing-up of Rashi's teach- 
 ings, of his own studies, and of the observations of his 
 pupUs, have a more mature, more thoughtful character 
 than the Biblical commentaries. They undoubtedly 
 represent a greater amount of labor. It seems that 
 Rashi himself made two or three recensions of his com- 
 mentary, at least for many of the Talmudic treatises. 
 
136 EASHl 
 
 Testimony to this iaci is given by the variations of 
 certain passages in the extant text and that cited by the 
 ancient authors, notably the Tossafists. Moreover, the 
 Tossafists explicitly mention corrections made by Eashi 
 in his own work. The query naturally arises whether 
 the corrections indicate that Eashi worked the entire 
 commentary over and over again. The answer is no; 
 for certain treatises remained incomplete, and others 
 seem never to have been begun. Presumably, then, 
 Eashi revised a treatise according to the needs of the 
 occasion, as, for instance, when it came imder his eyes 
 in the course of instruction. However that may be, 
 the work that we now possess is a mixture of the first 
 and the last recension, though we cannot always tell 
 which is the later and which the earlier. 
 
 Another fact explains the difference I have pointed 
 out between the Biblical and the Talmudic commen- 
 taries. For the Biblical commentaries there had been 
 no precedent, and if they possess the merit of originality, 
 they also illustrate the errors of a man who tries his 
 powers in a field of work devoid of all tradition. For the 
 Talmudic commentaries, on the contrary, models were 
 not lacking. The example of Gershom was sufficiently 
 notable to evoke imitation, though his work was not so 
 complete as to discourage it. We must not forget 
 Eashi's predecessors because he eclipsed them. This 
 would be contrary to his intentions, since he frequently 
 cites them, rendering value in return for value received. 
 In fact, he knew well how to use their works to advan- 
 tage. He submitted them to a judicial and minute 
 examination, collecting all the material he needed 
 furnished by the Geonim as well as by his immediate 
 
THE TALMTJDIC COMMENTAEIES 137 
 
 masters. It would be as inexact to assert that lie only 
 made a resume of their works as to say that he worked 
 along entirely original lines and relied solely upon his 
 own resources. If we could compare his commentaries 
 with previous commentaries (for some this comparison 
 has been made), we should be forced into the admission 
 that his part is smaller than one would suppose. The 
 best proof of this fact is that the usual basis of his com- 
 mentary for each treatise was the explanation of the 
 master under whom he had studied it. He often cites 
 the writings of his masters, to which he gives the title 
 Tesod, " Foundation," probably either collections made 
 by the teachers themselves or notebooks edited by their 
 pupils. As a result of the love of brevity which is one 
 of Eashi's marked characteristics, he does not quote in 
 its entirety the source upon which he draws, but more 
 frequently reproduces the sense rather than the exact 
 words. 
 
 I must hasten to add that the Talmudic commentaries 
 of Eashi's masters were inadequate, and did not meet 
 all needs. We can judge of the lacunae in them both 
 from the commentaries that have been preserved and 
 from the criticisms which Eashi frequently added as an 
 accompaniment to his citaJtions. Sometimes the com- 
 mentaries were too diffuse, sometimes toO' concise; their 
 language was obscure and awkward; no stress was laid 
 upon explaining all details, and the commentaries them- 
 selves stood in need of explanation; they addressed 
 themselves to accomplished Talmudists rather than to 
 students. Eashi's commentaries, on the contrary, could 
 be understood by men of small learning — Whence their 
 influence and popularity. Moreover, the commentaries 
 
138 EASHI 
 
 of his masters often contradicted one another, coming 
 as they did from scholars who did not shrink from dis- 
 cussion. Eashi wished to put an end to these debates 
 and introduce some unity into rabbinical tradition, 
 and generally his purpose in refraining from a quota- 
 tion of his predecessors was exactly to avoid an opening 
 into the field of controversy. Finally, their commen- 
 taries, it seems, were not comprehensive ; they bore upon 
 only one or several treatises ; whereas Eashi's bore on all 
 or nearly all the treatises of the Gemara.°° With Eashi 
 execution rose to the height of his conception. 
 
 Eashi availed himself so little of the work of his 
 masters that he began by establishiag a correct text of 
 the Talmud and subjecting it to a severe revision. The 
 mistakes of his predecessors oftenest arose from the 
 faultiness of the texts, marred by ignorant copyists or 
 presumptuous readers. What is more, the use to which 
 the Talmud was put in the academies and the discussions 
 to which it gave rise, far from sheltering it from alter- 
 ations made by way of correction, modified it in every 
 conceivable fashion, according to the views of the chiefs 
 of the schools. Like every book in circulation, the 
 Talmud was exposed to the worst changes, and this all 
 the more readily, because at that time no one had a 
 notion of what we call respect for the text, for the idea 
 of the author. As rigidly as the text of the Bible was 
 maintained intact in the very minutest details, so lax was 
 the treatment of the Talmud, which was at the mercy of 
 individual whim. Naturally, the less scrupulous and 
 less clear-sighted allowed themselves the most emenda- 
 tions. Accordingly, Eabbenu Gershom felt called upon 
 to put a severe restriction upon such liberties, Though 
 
THE TALMUDIC COMMENTAEIES 139 
 
 he succeeded in moderating the evil, it could not he 
 suppressed retroactively. Eashi realized that corrections 
 made wittingly were indispensable, and that it was neces- 
 sary to clear the Talmudie forest of entangling briers. 
 Moreover, as we learn from Eashi himself, Gershom 
 had already undertaken the task. Eashi also tells us 
 that he had Gershom's autograph manuscript before 
 him, hot to mention other copies he was consulting and 
 collating. Further testimony, apart from this internal 
 evidence, is provided by Eashi's references to terfs 
 parallel to the Talmud, among them the Tosefta. Some- 
 times he records two readings without giving either the 
 preference, though as a rule the reasoning or the context 
 shows that he leans one way or the other, so that his 
 alterations, which are usually correct, do not necessarily 
 represent the early text. When Eashi has good cause 
 for deciding a point in a certain way, he does not pay 
 attention to possible errors or contradictions on the 
 part of the Talmudists. In other words, though his 
 text may be the most rational, it is not always the most 
 authentic. 
 
 Eashi exercised this criticism of the text to a wide 
 extent, yet prudently. I have already mentioned what 
 Isaac of Vienna said concerning the numerous erasures 
 that covered an autograph manuscript of his." Many 
 readings that Eashi rejected might have been kept — in 
 fact they sometimes were kept — ^by force of finesse and 
 subtlety. His method affords a striking contrast to 
 that of the Talmudist Hananel," who either eliminates 
 the phrases unacceptable to him or preserves them only 
 by doing violence to the sense. Eashi, on the contrary, 
 compared the different versions of difScult or suspicious 
 
140 EASHI 
 
 passages and prefers the one not requiring a subtle 
 explanation. It is only when no reading satisfies him 
 that he assumes an interpolation or an error, in this 
 event frequently resorting to the Eesponsa of the 
 Geonim. Needless to say, he also paid heed to the 
 revision of Gershom ; but since he deemed that Gershom 
 had himself preserved faulty readings, he took up the 
 virork again, despite Gershom's prohibition. He realized 
 that this careful and detailed critical revision of his 
 predecessor, however ungrateful the soil might appear, 
 was nevertheless fertile ground, and might serve as the 
 solid basis of a thorough commentary. 
 
 He acquitted himself of the task with such success 
 that his has become the ofBeial text, the " Vulgate," of 
 the Talmud. In fact, his disciples inserted into the 
 body of the Gemara the greater part of his corrections 
 or restitutions (but not all; and one does not always 
 comprehend the reasons for their choice), which have 
 now become an integral part of the test. Thus a 
 single, definite, and ofBcial text was established — a thing 
 of great value in assuring the stability of rabbinical 
 tradition in France and Germany. 
 
 From what I have already said, the reader can gather 
 how individual was Eashi's method. The foundation 
 for his commentaries, it is true, was provided by 
 tradition and by the instruction he received from his 
 masters. But over and above the circumstance that he 
 preserved only what seemed fitting to him, is the fact 
 that value attached rather to the setting given the 
 material than to the material itself. Herein resides 
 Eashi's merit — and the merit is great. He was occupied 
 not so much in extracting from the discussion of the 
 
THE TALMUDIC COMMENTAEIES 141 
 
 Talmud the essential ideas, the principles indicating 
 rules of practice, as in rendering the discussion com- 
 prehensible both in its entirety and in its details. He 
 wrote a grammatical commentary which provides the 
 exact meaning, not only of the opinions set forth, but 
 also of the phrases and expressions employed. A Jewish 
 scholar of our day, I. H. Weiss, who has accomplished 
 much toward acclimatizing the scientific study of the 
 Talmud in Eastern Europe, Justly remarked — and what 
 he says is a lesson to the rabbis of his country : 
 
 How many Talmudists are there nowadays who take 
 pains to understand exactly the meaning of such and such 
 a passage of the Talmud, or who are capable of explaining 
 it grammatically? They do like the predecessors of Rashi, 
 whose method it was to give an exposition of an entire 
 discussion merely by simplifying its terms. They wrote 
 consecutive commentaries, not notes; and they often failed 
 to explain difficult words. Rashi, on the contrary, always 
 definitely determined the meaning of the various terms. 
 
 He does this with a sure touch, and the precision of 
 his explanations is all the more remarkable as he did 
 not know — ^whatever one may say to the contrary — 
 the Talmudic lexicon of Nathan ben Jehiel, of Eome, 
 which was not brought to a conclusion until four years 
 after Eashi's death. It is a favorite trick of legend to 
 establish relations between illustrious contemporaries, 
 especially when their activities were exercised in the 
 same field, and tradition has made Eashi the pupil of 
 Nathan. The idea of such a relationship, however, is 
 purely fantastic, the two rabbis probably not having 
 ever known each other."* 
 
 Eashi carried the same spirit of exactness and pre- 
 cision into the whole of this work — qualities indispen- 
 
142 EASHI 
 
 sable but difficult of attainment; for as A. Darmesteter 
 
 well says: 
 
 Whoever has opened a page of the Talmud understands 
 how necessary is a commentary upon a text written in 
 Aramaic and treating of often unfamiliar questions in con- 
 cise, exasperatingly obscure dialectics. The language, too, 
 is obscure, and the lack of punctuation renders reading 
 difiacult to novices. No mark separates question from 
 answer, digressions from parenthetical observations. The 
 phrases form only a long string of words placed one after 
 the other, in which one distinguishes neither the beginning 
 nor the end of the sentences. 
 
 The difficulty presented by the obscurity of the style 
 is increased by allusions to facts and customs which are 
 no longer known and cannot always be guessed at. 
 Now, thanks to Eashi's commentary, a reader possessing 
 a knowledge of the elements of the language and some 
 slight knowledge of Jewish law, can decipher it without 
 overmuch difficulty. 
 
 Earely superficial, Eashi explains the text simply yet 
 thoroughly. He sifts his matter to the bottom. His 
 reasoning is free from subtleties and violations of the 
 sense. This characteristic comes out in bold relief 
 when we compare Eashi with his disciples, the Tossafists, 
 who carry their niceties to an excess. It would be 
 wrong to hold Eashi responsible for the abuse later made 
 of controversy ; while, on the other hand, praise is owing 
 to him for the happy eSorts he made to unravel the 
 texts, not only for the purpose of explaining their mean- 
 ing, but also to indicate possible objections and reply 
 to them in a few words. One must marvel at the clear- 
 sighted intelligence, the sureness, the mastery with 
 which Eashi conveys the gist of a discussion as well as 
 
THE TALMUDIC COMMENTARIES 143 
 
 the value of the details, easily taking up each link in 
 the chain of question and answer, pruning away super- 
 fluities, but not recoiling before necessary supplementary 
 developments. In addition, rather than resort to forced 
 explanations, he did not hesitate to avow that certain 
 passages puzzled him, or that his knowledge was insuf- 
 ficient — a scruple not always entertaiaed by his suc- 
 cessors. 
 
 To determine the meaning of a text, Eashi frequently 
 referred to parallel passages, contained not only in the 
 Gemara itself, but also in other collections, such as the 
 Tosefta, or the Halakic Midrashim." Sometimes the 
 Gemara cites them, or refers to them, at other times it 
 makes no allusion whatsoever to them. In the latter 
 case, it may be stated, Eashi, even when he does not say 
 so explicitly, himself found the text for comparison and 
 was inspired by it. 
 
 Moreover, on occasion, he points out general rules to 
 which he conforms, some of them indicated in the Tal- 
 mud itself, others provided by the Geonim, and others 
 again evolved by himself ia the course of his studies. 
 Those who are competent to judge admire the precision 
 with which he lays down these principles. By com- 
 bining them, an excellent, although very incomplete, 
 Talmudic methodology might be drawn up. 
 
 Some examples will give a better idea than a mere 
 description of Eashi's method. I will separate his com- 
 mentary from the text of the Gemara by square brackets, 
 so as to show how he inserts his commentary, and how 
 perfectly he adapts it to the Gemara. 
 
 The following passages deal with the proclamation 
 of the new moon, made by the supreme tribvmal, upon 
 
144 EASHI 
 
 the evidence of two persons who declare that they have 
 seen the new moon. 
 
 MisJinah: If he Is not known [if the tribunal does not 
 know the witness, does not know if he is honest and worthy 
 of confidence], they [the tribunal of his city] will send 
 another person with him [to bear witness concerning the 
 new moon before the great tribunal, which proclaims the 
 new month]. At first, evidence concerning the new moon 
 was accepted from any and every body; since the Boethu- 
 sians"" turned to evil [this is explained In the Gemara], 
 it was decided that only the testimony of persons who were 
 known would be taken. 
 
 Gemara: What does " another " signify? Another in- 
 dividual ? Does it mean that a single person is thought 
 [worthy of confidence in declaring the first night of the 
 new moon]? Is it not taught in a Baraita: "It once 
 happened that a man came [to the tribunal, on the 
 Sabbath, in order to give evidence concerning the new 
 moon], accompanied by Ms witnesses, to testify con- 
 cerning himself " [to declare him worthy of confidence] ? 
 Rab Papa replies: "Another" signifies "another couple 
 of witnesses." This explanation seems to be the true 
 one; for otherwise what would these words signify: 
 "If he is not known?" If this individual is not known? 
 But does it mean that a single person is believed [in bear- 
 ing witness in regard to the new moon] ? In connection 
 with this, do not the Scriptures use the word law [in the 
 verse: For this was a statute for Israel, and a law of the 
 God of Jacob '"] ? Here, then, " the witness " signifies " the 
 couple "of witnesses; similarly the previous " another " sig- 
 nifies " another couple." But is it quite certain that a single 
 man is not enough? However, it is taught in a Baraita: 
 " It once happened on a Sabbath that R. Nehorai accom- 
 panied a witness to give evidence concerning him at Usha " 
 [at the time when the Sanhedrin had its seat in that city, 
 and the new moon was proclaimed there]. R. Nehorai was 
 accompanied by another witness, and if this witness is not 
 
THE TALMUDIC COMMENTAEIES 145 
 
 mentioned, it is out of regard for R. Nehorai [for R. Nehoral 
 Is mentioned only that we may infer from his case that so 
 prominent an authority Inclined to leniency in the circum- 
 stances stated; but it is not fitting for us to appeal to the 
 authority of his less important companion]. Rab Ashi 
 replies: There was already another witness at Usha [who 
 knew the one that was coming to give evidence], and R. 
 Nehorai went to join him. If this is so, what is it that is 
 meant to be conveyed to us? This: we might have thought 
 in case of doubt [possibly this second witness might not 
 be at home], the Sabbath must not be trangressed; we are 
 thus taught that one should do it, etc. (Bosh hOrShanah 
 22a bottom). 
 
 The following passage deals with the Lulab, which 
 is used at the celebration of the Feast of Tabernacles, 
 and must be flawless. 
 
 MisJinah: A Lulab [referring to the palm branch; far- 
 ther on it will be stated that the myrtle and the willow of 
 the brook are dealt with separately] that has been stolen [is 
 unfit; for it is said: '"^ "And ye shall take you": what 
 belongs to you], or is dry [we demand that the ritual be 
 carried out with care, in conformity with the words of 
 Scripture: "° " I will exalt Him "], is unfit. Coming from an 
 Ashera [a tree adored as an idol; the Gemara gives the 
 reason for the prohibition] or from a city given up to idola- 
 try [for it is considered as burnt down, as it is said: " And 
 thou Shalt gather all the spoil of it." "* Now, the Lulab 
 should have the length of four palms, as will be said far- 
 ther on, "° and since it is destined to be given up to the 
 flames, it no longer has the desired length, being considered 
 as burnt], it is unfit. If its end is cut [it is unfit; for it is 
 not "beautiful"], or if its leaves have fallen off [from the 
 central stem, and are united only by a band like the broom, 
 in French called " escoube." '™ In this case, also, it is not 
 "beautiful"], it is unfit. If its leaves are separated 
 [attached to the stem, but at the top separated on each side, 
 like the branches of a tree], it is good. R. Judah says: It 
 
146 EASHI 
 
 should be bound [If Its leaves are separated, they should be 
 bound so that they are fixed to the stem as with other Lu- 
 labim]. The stony palm of the mountain-of-iron [the Gemara 
 explains that these are palms] are good [they are Lulablm, 
 although their leaves are very small and do not extend the 
 length of the stem]. A Lulab having the length of three 
 palms, so that it can be shaken [the Gemara explains: the 
 stem should measure three palms, as much as the myrtle 
 branch, and, in addition, another palm for shaking, for we 
 require that the Lulab be shaken in the way told farther on 
 (376): " It is shaken vertically and horizontally," so as to 
 exorcise the evil spirits and evil shades], is good. 
 
 Gemara: The Tanna is brief in showing [that the Lulab 
 is unfit] without distinguishing between the first day of the 
 festival [the celebration of which is made obligatory by 
 the Torah] and the second day [for which the ceremony of 
 the Lulab is prescribed only by the Rabbis, Scriptures say- 
 ing "on the first day"'°°]. It must certainly refer to the 
 dry Lulab [it may be unfit, even from a rabbinical point 
 of view, for since it is a rite instituted in commemoration 
 of the Temple, we require that it be practiced with care], 
 for we require that it be " beautiful," and in this case the 
 condition is not fulfilled. But so far as the stolen Lulab 
 is concerned, I understand that it should not be used the 
 first day, for in regard to the first day it Is written: " And 
 ye shall take you: " of what belongs to you; but why not 
 the second day [whence does one know that one may not use 
 it then?] ? R. Johanan replies in the name of R. Simon ben 
 tohai: because then a regulation would be fulfilled through 
 the commission of a trangression, for it is said [for we 
 find a verse which forbids the fulfilment of a regulation 
 through committing a transgression] : " And ye brought 
 that which was stolen, and the lame, and the sick."'" 
 The stolen animal is likened to the lame; and just as 
 it is irremediably unfit [it can never be offered as a 
 sacrifice, because its imperfection is perpetual], so the 
 one that is stolen is irremediably unfit [we deduce from 
 this verse that It can never more become of use, even if 
 
THE TALMUDIC COMMENTAEIES 147 
 
 there has been a renunciation; that is, if we have heard 
 the owner renounce the object by saying, for example, 
 "Decidedly, I have lost this purse;" although in regard to 
 the ownership of the animal, we said, in the treatise Baba 
 Kama (68a), that the holder became the possessor, if the 
 first owner renounced it; however, he cannot offer it as a 
 sacrifice upon the altar], whether this be before or after 
 the renunciation. If before the renunciation, because the 
 Torah says, " If any man of you bring an offering;™ now, 
 the stolen animal does not belong to him, but after the re- 
 nunciation the holder becomes the possessor of it through 
 the fact of this renunciation [why, then, does the prophet 
 forbid its being used as an offering?]. Is it not exactly 
 because this would be to fulfil a regulation by committing 
 a transgession? R. Johanan says again In the name of 
 R. Simon ben Tohai: what does this verse signify: "For 
 I the Lord love judgment, I hate robbery for burnt offer- 
 ing " ? '" [for the burnt offering that you bring me, I hate 
 the theft of which you make yourself guilty in stealing these 
 animals, although everything belongs and always has be- 
 longed to Me]. Let us compare this case with that of a 
 mortal king, who, passing before the house of a publican, 
 says to his servants: " Give the toll to the publican." They 
 object and say: " But is it not to thee that all the tolls 
 return?" To which the king replies: "May all travellers 
 take an example from me and not escape the payment of 
 toll." In the same way God says: " I hate robbery for 
 burnt offerings; may My children take an example from 
 Me and escape the temptation to theft." 
 
 It has likewise been shown [that the motive of the Mish- 
 nah in declaring the stolen Lulab unfit for use on the second 
 day of the festival, is that it would be the fulfilment of a 
 regulation through the commission of a transgression]. 
 Rabbi Ammi says: etc., {Sukkafi 296). 
 
 From these two citations it is evident that Eashi does 
 not shrink from complicated explanations, and that he 
 does not comment on the easy passages. In the follow- 
 
148 EASHI 
 
 ing quotation, the discussion is somewhat more difficult 
 to follow. 
 
 Mishnah: A slave [non-Jewish] who has been made pris- 
 oner and ransomed [by other Jews] in order to remain a 
 slave, remains a slave [this will be explained by the 
 Gemara] ; In order to be free, becomes free. R. Simon ben 
 Gamaliel says: In the one case as in the other, he remains 
 a slave. 
 
 Oemara: With which case do we concern ourselves? If 
 it is before the renunciation of the right of possession [by 
 the first master, who has bought him from the hands of the 
 non-Jew], ransomed in order to become free, why should 
 he not remain a slave? It is, then, after this renunciation. 
 But, bought to be a slave, why should he remain a slave? 
 [Understand: of his first master; why should he remain a 
 slave, since there was a renunciation by which rights upon 
 him as a slave have been renounced?]. Abaye says: The 
 case under debate is always that in which the first owner 
 has not yet renounced his rights upon the slave, and if the 
 slave has been bought to remain a slave [on condition of 
 being restored to his first master, or even upon condition 
 of belonging to him who bought him], he remains the slave 
 of his first master [the second, in fact, has not acquired 
 him, for he knows that his master remains his master, 
 until the master has given him up; he would, therefore, be 
 stealing the slave] ; if the slave Is ransomed to become 
 free, he is the slave neither of the first nor of the second; 
 not of the second, since he ransomed the slave to set him 
 free, nor of the first who possibly abandoned him and did 
 not buy him back. R. Simon b. Gamaliel, on the other 
 hand, says: In one case as in the other he remains a slave; 
 in fact, he admits that just as it is a duty to ransom free 
 men, so it is a duty to ransom slaves [it is not, therefore, 
 to be supposed that the first master would have abstained 
 from buying back his slave]. 
 
 Raba says: We are always dealing with the case In which 
 the first master has already renounced his right of posses- 
 
THE TALMUDIC COMMENTAEIES 149 
 
 sion. And if the slave has been ransomed in order to be a 
 slave, he serves his second master [farther on the question 
 will be asked, from whom the second master bought him] ; 
 if ransomed to be free, he serves neither his first nor his 
 second master; not his second master, since he bought the 
 slave to give him his liberty; and not the first, since he 
 liad already renounced the slave. R. Simon b. Gamaliel, 
 on the other hand, says: la the one case as in the other he 
 remains a slave [of his first master], according to the prin- 
 ciple of Hezekiah, who said: Why is it admitted that he 
 remains a slave in either case? So that it should not be 
 possible for any slave whatsoever to deliver himself up to 
 the enemy and thus render himself independent of his 
 master. 
 
 It is objected: R. Simon b. Gamaliel [we have been 
 taught] said to his colleagues : " Just as it is a duty to ran- 
 som free men, so it is a duty to ransom slaves." This 
 Baraita is to be understood according to Abaye, who takes 
 It that there had been no renunciation [who applies the 
 Mishnah to the case in which there has been previous renun- 
 ciation; then the first paragraph of the Mishnah ia motived 
 by the abstention of the owner, who did not ransom his 
 slave] : we thus explain to ourselves the expression " just 
 as " [of R. Simon b. Gamaliel, for he does not suppose that 
 the owner abstained, granted that it is a duty to ransom 
 the slave]. But, according to Raba, who takes it that there 
 has been renunciation [who applies the Mishnah to the 
 case in which there was renunciation, and the first para- 
 graph of the Mishnah is motived by the abstention of the 
 owner, which is equivalent to a renunciation], this "just 
 as" [of R. Simon b. Gamaliel, what does it signify?], 
 since R. Simon b. Gamaliel bases his opinion upon the prin- 
 ciple of Hezekiah [since the reason of R. Simon b. Gamaliel 
 is the principle of Hezekiah: " so that the slave should not 
 go and deliver himself up to the enemy"]. Raba replies, 
 etc., (Oittin 37&). 
 
 What one least expects to find in a Talmudist is 
 historic veracity. Yet it is not lacking in Rashi, either 
 
150 EASHI 
 
 because he was guided by ancient and authentic tradi- 
 tions, or because he was inspired by his clear-sightedness, 
 or — but this is apt to have been the case less frequently — 
 because he was well served by his power of divination. 
 Eashi took good care not to confound the different 
 generations of Tannaim and Amoraim, or the difEerent 
 rabbis in each. He knew the biographies of all of them, 
 the countries of their birth, their masters and disciples, 
 the period and the scene of their activity. Such knowl- 
 edge was necessary not only in order to grasp the mean- 
 ing of certain passages, but also in order to decide which 
 opinion was final and had the force of law. Eashi also 
 tried to understand, and in turn render comprehensible, 
 the customs and the by-gone institutions to which the 
 Talmud alludes. He gave information concerning the 
 composition of the Mishnah and the Gemara, and the 
 relations of the Mishnahs and the Baraitas. Because it 
 contains all these data, Eashi's commentary is still a 
 very valuable historical document, and Jewish historians 
 of our days continue frequently to invoke its authority. 
 Yet in spite of this scattered information, the com- 
 mentary is marked by certain deficiencies which indicate 
 a deficiency in his mental make-up. When he explains 
 an historical passage of the Talmud, he is incapable of 
 criticising it. Apart from the fact that he would not 
 believe legend to be legend, nor the Gemara capable of 
 mistakes, he had neither the knowledge nor the scien- 
 tific culture requisite for an historian. To be convinced 
 of this, it is necessary to read only the following passage, 
 in which the Talmud characteristically relates the final 
 events before the downfall of the Jewish State. As 
 before, I reproduce the Gemara along with the com- 
 
THE TALMUDIC COMMENTAEIES 151 
 
 mentary of Eashi; but in translating the Gemara 
 I anticipate what Eashi says. It must be borne in miiid 
 that Eashi explains in Hebrew — ia rabbinical Hebrew — 
 a text written in Aramaic. 
 
 R. Johanan says: what signifies this verse (Prov. xxvili. 
 14) : " Happy is the maa that feareth always [who trem- 
 bles before the future and says to himself: provided that 
 no misfortune befall me if I do such and such a thing], 
 but he that hardeneth his heart shall fall into mischief " ? 
 For Kamza and Bar Kamza Jerusalem was destroyed; for 
 a cock and a hen the Royal Tower '^'' was destroyed; for 
 the side of a litter (PESOn) [the side of a lady's chariot, 
 called reitwage (?) in German, as is said in the chapter 
 " The mother and her young " : ™ If thou yokest the mule to 
 the litter pBD'T for me], Betar was destroyed. For Kamza 
 and Bar Kamza [names of two Jews] Jerusalem was de- 
 stroyed. A man whose friend was Kamza [the name of 
 whose friend was Kamza] and whose enemy was Bar 
 Kamza prepared a banquet. He said to his servant: "Go, 
 invite Kamza." The servant went to Bar Kamza. Finding 
 him seated, the host said: " Since this man is (thou art) my 
 enemy, why comest' thou hither? Go, leave me." The 
 other replied : " Since I have come, let me remain here, 
 and I will give the price of what I shall eat and drink." 
 "No," he answered [I will not let thee remain here]. "I 
 will give thee," he [the other] insisted, " the half of the 
 cost of the banquet." " No." " I will give thee the price 
 of the entire banquet." But he took him by the arm, and 
 made him rise and go out. [The expelled man] said to 
 himself: " Since the rabbis present at this scene did not 
 protest, it must be that it pleased them. Very well! I shall 
 go and eat the morsel [of calumny] upon them in the pres- 
 ence of the governor." He went to the governor and said 
 to Caesar: "The Jews are revolting against thee." Caesar 
 replied: " Who told it thee ? " " Send to them," replied the 
 other, "a victim [to sacrifice it upon the altar; for we 
 deduce from the repetition of the word "man" (in Lev. 
 
153 EASHI 
 
 xvil.) that tlie non-Jews can offer voluntary sacrifices, like 
 the Israelites]; thou wilt see if they sacrifice it." Cssar 
 sent a calf without a blemish, but In transit a blemish 
 appeared on the large lip [the upper lip], others say on 
 the lid of the eye ( ypM ) [ " tela," "^ as in Is. xl. 22 
 pn ], which constitutes a blemish for us, but not for the 
 Romans [they could offer it to their gods on the high 
 places, provided It did not lack a limb]. The rabbis were 
 in favor of sacrificing the animal in the interest of public 
 peace. Rabbi Zechariah b. Eukolos objected: " It will be 
 said that you offer imperfect victims upon the altar." Then 
 they wanted to kill [the messenger] so that he could not 
 return and report what had happened. R. Zechariah ob- 
 jected: " It will be said that he who causes a blemish on a 
 victim should be condemned to death " [it will be thought 
 that because he caused a blemish on the victim, and because 
 he thus trangressed the prohibition : " There shall be no 
 blemish therein" (Lev. xxii. 21), he was put to death]. R. 
 Johanan concluded: It is this complaisance of R. Zechariah 
 b. Eukolos [who did not wish to put the messenger to 
 death] which destroyed our Temple, burned our Sanctuary, 
 and exiled us from the land of our fathers {Qittin 556). 
 
 This passage is less historic than legendary in char- 
 acter; it forms part of the Haggadic element of the 
 Talmud. In the explanation of the Haggadah Eashi has 
 preserved its method, so wise, yet so simple. Others 
 have attempted to be more profound in interpreting it 
 allegorically. Eashi, with his fund of common sense, 
 was nearer to the truth. His conception of the naive 
 tales and beliefs was in itself naive. Moreover, before 
 his time it was the legislative part of the Talmud that 
 received almost exclusive attention. The rabbis occu- 
 pied themselves with questions of practice and with 
 making decisions, and they tried to unknot the entangle- 
 ments of the discussions for the sake of extracting the 
 
THE TALMUDIC COMMENTAEIES 153 
 
 norm, the definitive law. This is the case with 
 Hananel, Eashi's predecessor, as well as with Alfasi,"* 
 Eashi's contemporary. Although, as we shall see, the 
 French rabbi had studied the Talmud for the sake of 
 practical needs, he adopted, so to speak, a more disin- 
 terested point of view. He did not pretend to write a 
 manual of Talmudic law, but an uninterrupted running 
 commentary for the use of all who wanted to make a 
 consecutive study of the Talmud. 
 
 In the treatise Baha Batra (73^), the ©emara haviag 
 exhausted the few observations it had to present upon 
 the Mishnah, which speaks of the sail of a vessel and 
 its rigging, falls back upon some popular narratives, 
 " Tales of the Sea." 
 
 Raba said [all the facts that will be recounted are in 
 lllustratioa of the verse (Psalms civ. 24), "0 Lord, how 
 manifold are thy works ! " Some of the facts show that 
 the righteous are recompensed in the world to come, or 
 they serve to explain the verses of Job that speak of large 
 birds, of the Behemot, and of the large cetaceans; In fact, 
 " even the simple conversations of the rabbis must be in- 
 structive"]: Some sailors reported to me what follows: 
 " The wave which engulfs [which tries to engulf] a ves- 
 sel seems to have at its head [seems to be preceded by] a 
 ray of white fire [a white flame, which is a wicked angel]. 
 But we beat it with rods (Knil7S) [rods, as in these words 
 ' neither with a rod (n?X ) nor with a lance ' in the treatise 
 Shab'bat (63a)], which bear these words graven on them: 
 ' I am He who is. Yah, Eternal Zebaot, Amen, Selah ' [such 
 Is the lesson of the text "*] and then it is laid to rest " [from 
 its agitation]. 
 
 Raba recounts: Some sailors related to me that which 
 follows : " Between one wave and another wave there are 
 three hundred parasangs ™ [it Is necessary to give us this 
 detail, for later on It will be said that the one wave raised 
 
154 RASHI 
 
 Its voice to speak to the other; now, one can make oneself 
 heard at a distance of three hundred parasangs], and the 
 height of a wave is likewise three hundred parasangs. 
 Once we were on a voyage, when a wave raised us [up 
 to the heavens, higher than its own height; or the heat of 
 the heavens is so great that it extends to a distance which 
 one could traverse in nearly five hundred years, the dis- 
 tance of the heavens from the earth"'], so high that we 
 saw the encampment [the dwelling] of a little star [of the 
 smallest of stars] ; It appeared so large to us, that one 
 would have heen ahle to sow on its surface forty measures 
 of mustard seed [which is larger than other seeds], and 
 if it had raised us more, we would have heen burned by its 
 fumes [by the heat of the star]. Then a wave raised its 
 voice [that is, called, just as it is said, " Deep calleth unto 
 deep" (Psalms xlii. 7) ; or it may mean angels placed over 
 the stars] and said to its companion: 'My companion, 
 have you left something in the world which you have not 
 swallowed up [for it had lifted itself so high, you might 
 have thought it had sprung from the bed of the sea and 
 had engulfed the world] ? In that case I will go destroy 
 it' [on account of the sins of man]. It said [the one wave 
 replied to the other]: 'Behold the might of the Lord: I 
 cannot by one thread [by the breadth of a thread] go 
 beyond the sand '[that is to say: I cannot leave the bed of 
 the sea] ; thus it is said [it is the Gemara that cites this 
 verse]: 'Fear ye not me?' saith the Lord. 'Will ye not 
 tremble at my presence, which have placed the sand for the 
 hound of the sea by a perpetual decree, that it cannot pass 
 It?'" (Jer. V. 22). 
 
 Eaba says: Hormin appeared to me, the son of Lilllt 
 [Hormin with an " n," such Is the text which should be 
 adopted, and which I get from my father; but I have 
 learned from my masters that it should be read " Hormiz," 
 with a " z," a word which means demon, as we see in San- 
 hedrin (39a) "the lower half of thy body belongs to Hor- 
 miz"'], running along the edge of the wall of Mahuza 
 [This account makes us realize the goodness of God 'who 
 
THE TALMUDIC COMMENTAEIES 155 
 
 loves his creatures and does not permit evil spirits to In- 
 jure them; It also teaches us that one must not risk oneself 
 alone on a voyage] ; at the same moment a horseman gal- 
 loped hy [without thinking of evil], and he could not catch 
 up to him [for the demon ran so quickly, that the horseman 
 could not think of overtaking him]. 
 
 In conclusion I will give one more extract, from the 
 last chapter of Sanhedrin (93''), which contains a vast 
 number of curious legends. 
 
 Our rabbis taught: Six miracles occurred on that 
 day [the day on. which Nebuchadnezzar threw the friends 
 of Daniel into the furnace]. These are: the furnace 
 raised itself [for it was sunk in the ground, like a 
 lime-kiln; on that day it raised itself to the surface 
 of the ground, so that all could see the miracle] ; the fur- 
 nace was rent in two [a part of its walls was riven so that 
 all could look in]; 1"i1D pOin [its height was lowered, as 
 In the phrase n 1"llD (Kiddusmn 82a) ; another reading 
 ion pDin . like niD*. its base was thrown. This is the 
 explanation taught me by R. Jacob ben Yakar; but my mas- 
 ter "" reads n*D pDin ; the lime of the furnace melted as a 
 result of the great heat. Such are the explanations of my 
 masters. It was from the heat thrown out by the lime that 
 those men were consumed who cast Hananlah, Mishael, and 
 Azariah into the burning fiery furnace and that the golden 
 image of the king was transformed before his eyes] ; the 
 image of the king was transformed before his eyes; the 
 four empires were consumed by the flames [the kings and 
 their subjects, who aided Nebuchadnezzar in casting Hana- 
 nlah, Mishael, and Azariah into the fire]; finally, Ezekiel 
 brought the dead to life in the plain of Dura."' 
 
 What has been said up to this point indicates the 
 position taken by Eashi with regard to the Halal^ah. 
 Unlike Maunonides in his commentary of the Mishnah, 
 he did not as a rule concern himself with the fixation of 
 
156 EASHI 
 
 legal principles and practice, or with the definite solutian 
 of questions under controversy. He confined himself lo 
 his task of commentator and interpreter. The brevity 
 he imposed upon himself made it an obligation not to 
 enter into long and detailed discussions; for he would 
 have had to dispose of varying opinions and justify his 
 choice. He carried his principle to such an extent that 
 it could be said of him, " Rashi is a commentator, he 
 does not make decisions." "° 
 
 But there are numerous exceptions to the rule. Often 
 Rashi deems it necessary to state a definite solution, 
 either because it has been the subject of controversies on 
 the part of his masters, or because it was difiBcult to 
 separate it from the rest of the discussion, or because 
 it served as the point of departure for another dis- 
 cussion. Finally, the explanation of such and such a 
 passage of the Talmud presupposes the solution of a 
 question, unless the solution changes with the expla- 
 nation of the passage. When the question is left in 
 suspense by the Talmud, Eashi usually determines it in 
 the strictest sense; but when it receives contradictory 
 solutions, he either falls back upon analogous cases or 
 adduces rules of Talmudic methodology. Often, how- 
 ever, his conclusion is nothing else than a statement 
 of the practice observed in his time. 
 
 In all these cases Rashi's authority carries great 
 weight; so much so, in fact, as to overbalance that of 
 Alfasi and Maimonides. Frequent appeal was made 
 to it by casuists of a later date, and it would have been 
 invoked still oftener had his Decisions been gathered 
 together, like those of the Spanish and German rabbis, 
 
THE TALMUDIC COMMENTAEIBS 157 
 
 instead of having been scattered through a large number 
 of compilations. 
 
 By reason of these and other qualities the Talmudic 
 commentaries of Eashi without doubt outweigh his 
 Biblical commentaries. I should be inclined flatly to 
 contradict the opinion ascribed to Jacob Tam, Eashi's 
 grandson : " So far as my grandfather's commentary 
 on the Talmud is concerned, I might do as much, but it 
 would not be in my power to undertake his commentary 
 upon the Pentateuch." The Biblical commentary is 
 not always absolutely sure and certain, and the defects 
 are marked. The Talmudic commentary remains a 
 model and indispensable guide. Although numerous 
 Biblical commentaries have been composed with Eashi's 
 as a standard and in order to replace it, no one has dared 
 provide a substitute for his Talmudic commentary. 
 From an historical point of view, the value of the Tal- 
 mudic commentary is no less great. At the same period, 
 in three countries, three works were composed which 
 complemented one another and which came to form the 
 basis of Talmudic studies. At the time when Eashi com- 
 mented on the Talmud, Nathan ben Jehiel "^ composed 
 the Talmudic lexicon, which is still used to a great 
 extent, while Isaac Alfasi in his Halakot codified all 
 the Talmudic regulations. Of the three works the first 
 was the most celebrated. The exaggerated statement 
 was made of Eashi, that " without him the Talmud 
 would have remained a closed book."""* And Menahem 
 ben Zerah "° said : " There was no one so illuminating, 
 and so concise as Eashi in the commentary he wrote as 
 
158 EASHI 
 
 if by Divine inspiration. Without him, the Babylonian 
 Talmud would have been forgotten in Israel." The 
 echo of this enthusiastic opinion is heard in the words 
 of the Hebrew scholar H. L. Strack, a Christian, and 
 the modern Jewish scholar A. Darmesteter. The one 
 says : " Eashi wrote a commentary which the Jews hold 
 in extraordinarily high regard and which all must 
 concede is of the greatest value." Darmesteter wrote: 
 " Suppress the commentary of Eashi, that masterwork 
 of precision and clearness, and even for a trained 
 Talmudist, the Talmud becomes almost enigmatical." 
 Can more be said? The commentary has become, in 
 brief. The Commentary, the Commentary par excellence, 
 Konteros (Commentarius). 
 
CHAPTEE VIII 
 
 The Kesponsa 
 
 In the previous chapter we saw that Eashi, though 
 chiefly concerned with the mere explanation of the 
 Talmud, nevertheless iutrenched sometimes upon the 
 domain of practice. It must not he forgotten that at 
 that epoch the life of the Jews was based upon, and 
 directed by, rabbinical jurisprudence and discipline. 
 The study of the Talmud was taken up for the sake of 
 findiug in it rules for the daily conduct of existence. 
 Apart from certain questions purely theoretic in char- 
 acter and having no practical application, Talmudic 
 studies, far from being confined to the school, responded 
 to the needs of life and were of real, vital interest. But 
 since the Talmud is not aU-comprehensive, the rabbis 
 in drawing inspiration from its rules, from precedents 
 it had already established, and from analogous instances 
 contained in it, were Justified in rendering decisions 
 upon new points arising out of circumstances as they 
 occurred. Thus, measures are cited passed by Eashi 
 upon the payment of taxes, Christian wiue, the Mezuzah, 
 phylacteries, etc. These measures resulted not so much 
 from his own initiative as from the requests preferred 
 to him by his disciples, or by other rabbis, or even by 
 private individuals. 
 
160 EASHI 
 
 The Eesponsa addressed by rabbinical authorities to 
 individuals or to communities who had submitted 
 difficult cases and questions to them for solution^ consti- 
 tute a special genus of post-Biblical literature. Not to 
 mention their legislative value, how precious they are 
 as documents in proof of the fact that no distances were 
 too long, no obstacles too great to prevent the people 
 from obtaining the opinion of a scholar! They even 
 sent special messengers to him, when there were no 
 favoring circumstances, such as a fair at the rabbi's 
 place of residence, or a Journey to be undertaken thither 
 for other reasons than the purpose of the consultation. 
 Thus lively relations were established among the Jews 
 of the most widely separated countries; and an active 
 correspondence went on between scholars of Babylon, 
 Northern Africa, Spain, Prance, G-ermany, and Italy. 
 
 The circle of Eashi's connections, however, was limited 
 to France and Lorraine. His chief correspondents were 
 his teachers and their disciples.™ It was only after 
 Eashi's day, when communication between the Christian 
 and the Moslem worlds became more frequent, that 
 rabbinical authorities were appealed to from all the 
 corners of Europe and Africa. 
 
 Though his correspondents were not so widely 
 scattered, the subjects touched upon by Eashi in his 
 Eesponsa are very varied in character. He was con- 
 sulted on the meai !ng of a Biblical or a Talmudic 
 passage, on the text of the liturgy, on rules of grammar, 
 on Biblical chronology, and, especially, on new cases 
 arising in the practice of religion. These Eesponsa, 
 inspired, so to speak, by actualities, by the come and go 
 of daily affairs, introduce the reader to the material and 
 
THE EESPONSA 161 
 
 intellectual life of the Jews of the time, besides furnish- 
 ing interesting information concerning the master's 
 method. 
 
 One of the questions most frequently agitated 
 regarded wine of the Gentiles, the drinking of which was 
 prohibited to the Jews because it was feared that the 
 wine had been employed for idolatrous libations. Cases 
 of this kind turned up every day, because the Jews 
 occupied themselves with viticulture "° and maintained 
 constant communication with the Christians. Eashi 
 showed himself rather liberal. Though, of course, 
 forbidding Jews to taste the wine, he permitted them 
 to derive other enjoyment from it, the Christians not 
 being comparable to the pagans, since they observed the 
 Woachian laws. Eashi's grandson, Samuel ben Meir, 
 explicitly states in Eashi's name that the laws set forth 
 by the Talmud against the Gentiles do not apply to the 
 Christians. 
 
 The brother of Samuel, Jacob Tam, tells us that 
 Eashi forbade the payment of a tax by using a sum 
 of money left on deposit by a Christian. This decision, 
 Jacob Tam adds, was intended to apply to the whole 
 kingdom and, in fact, was accepted throughout France, 
 This testifies not only to the great authority Eashi 
 enjoyed, but also to the uprightness, the honesty of his 
 character. Another of his qualities becomes apparent 
 in a second Eesponsum treating of the relations between 
 Jews and Christians. They carried on trade with each 
 other in wheat and cattle. Now, the Mishnah forbids 
 these transactions. "When this prohibition was pro- 
 mulgated," wrote Eashi, "the Jews all dwelt together 
 and could carry on commerce with one another; but at 
 
162 EASHI 
 
 present, when we are a minority in the midst of our 
 neighbors, we cannot conform to so disastrous a 
 measure." Eashi, it is therefore evident, knew how to 
 take into account the needs of the moment, and accom- 
 modate rules to conditions. 
 
 Eelations, then, between the Jews and their fellow- 
 citizens were cordial. The horizon seemed serene. But 
 if one looked closer, one could see the gathering clouds 
 slowly encroaching upon the calm sky, clouds which 
 were soon to burst in a storm of bloody hate and mur- 
 derous ferocity. Although the change came about im- 
 perceptibly and the Jews enjoyed the calm preceding 
 the tempest, despite this and despite themselves, they 
 entertained a smothered distrust of the Christians. For 
 instance, they used ugly expressions to designate objects 
 the Christians venerated. The Christians responded in 
 kiad. The ecclesiastical works of the time are full of 
 insults and terms of opprobrium aimed at the Jews. If 
 one reads the narrative of the Crusades, during which 
 the blood of innocent massacred Jews flowed in streams, 
 one must perforce excuse, not so much real hostility 
 toward the Christians, as the employment of malicious 
 expressions directed against their worship. The feeling 
 that existed was rather the heritage of tradition, the 
 ancient rivalry of two sister religions, than true ani- 
 mosity. As for tolerance, no such thing yet existed. It 
 was difficult at that time for people to conceive of 
 benevolence and esteem for those who professed a 
 different belief. The effect of the First Crusade upon the 
 inner life of the communities was to create anomalous 
 situations within families, necessitating the intervention 
 of rabbinical authorities. The Eesponsa of Eashi deal- 
 
THE EESPOFSA 163 
 
 ing with martyrs and converts no doubt sprang from 
 these sad conditions. A woman, whose husband died 
 during the persecution, married again without having 
 previously claimed her jointure from the heirs of her 
 dead husband; but she wanted to insist on her rights 
 after having contracted the new union. Kashi, in a 
 Eesponsum, the conclusions of which were attacked 
 after his death by several rabbis, declared that the 
 claim of the woman was entitled to consideration. 
 
 The echo of the Crusades is heard in other instances. 
 I have already spoken of the liberal, tolerant attitude "° 
 assumed by Eashi in regard to the unfortunates who 
 deserted the faith of their fathers in appearance only, 
 and sought refuge in that of their persecutors. He 
 excused the hypocrisy of these weak beings, who 
 accepted baptism only externally and in their hearts 
 remained Jews. 
 
 In general, so far as questions in regard to lending 
 on interest, to giving testimony, and to marriage 
 relations were concerned, Eashi held the apostate to be 
 the same as the Jew. He was once asked if the testi- 
 mony of an apostate was valid in law. " It is neces- 
 sary," he replied "to distinguish in favor of those who 
 follow the Jewish law in secret and are not suspected 
 of transgressing the religious precepts which the 
 Christians oblige them to transgress outwardly. At 
 bottom they fear God. They weep and groan over the 
 constraint put upon them, and implore pardon of God. 
 But if there is a suspicion that they committed trans- 
 gressions without having been forced to do so, even if 
 they have repented with all their heart, and all their 
 soul, and aU their might, they cannot bring evidence 
 
164 EASHI 
 
 ex post facto concerning facts which they witnessed 
 before they repented." 
 
 Eashi, then, was indulgent above all toward those who 
 had been converted under the compulsion of violence, 
 and who sincerely regretted their involuntary or im- 
 posed apostasy. On one occasion, he was asked if the 
 wine belonging to such unfortunates should be for- 
 bidden, though they had proved their return to the 
 Jewish faith by a long period of penitence. Eashi 
 replied : " Let us be careful not to take measures for 
 isolating them and thereby wounding them. Their 
 defection was made under the menace of the sword, and 
 they hastened to return from their wanderings." Else- 
 where Eashi objects to recalling to them their momen- 
 tary infidelity. A young girl was married while she and 
 her bridegroom were in the state of forced apostasy. 
 Eashi declared the union to be valid, for " even if a Jew 
 becomes a convert voluntarily, the marriage he contracts 
 is valid. All the more is this true in the case of those 
 who are converted by force, and whose heart always stays 
 with God, and especially, as in the present case, if they 
 have escaped as soon as they could from the faith they 
 embraced through compulsion." 
 
 Since internal union is the surest safeguard against 
 persecution from without, Eashi earnestly exhorted his 
 brethren to shun intestine strife. " Apply yourselves 
 to the cultivation of peace," he once wrote. " See how 
 your neighbors are troubled by the greatest evils and how 
 the Christians delight in them. Concord will be your 
 buckler against envy and prevent it from dominating 
 you." In a community, doubtless that of Chllons-sur- 
 Saone, in Burgundy,"' there were two families that 
 
THE EESPONSA 165 
 
 quarrelled contimially. The community had intervened 
 to stop the strife, but one of the two families declared 
 in advance that it would not submit to its decision. A 
 member of the other family, irritated, reproached one 
 of his enemies with having been baptized. Now Eab- 
 benu Gershom, under penalty of excommunication, had 
 forbidden people to recall his apostasy to a converted 
 Jew. Eashi was asked to remove this prohibition; but 
 he declined, not wishing to intervene in the internal 
 administration of a strange community. "What ajn I 
 that I should consider myself an authority in other 
 places? .... I am a man of little importance, 
 and my hands are feeble, like those of an orphan. If I 
 were in the midst of you, I would join with you in 
 annulling the interdiction." From this it is evident 
 that the strongest weapon of the rabbinical authorities 
 against the tatractable was, as in the Church, excom- 
 munication; but that sometimes individuals asserted, 
 and even swore ia advance, that they would not jrield to 
 the decree against them. Eashi considered that this 
 oath, being contrary to law, was nuU and void. 
 
 Eashi, guided by the same feelings, was pitiless in his 
 condemnation of those who fomented trouble, who 
 sowed discord in families, sometimes in their own house- 
 holds. A man, after having made promise to a young 
 girl, refused to marry her and was upheld in his in- 
 trigues by a disciple of Eashi. Eashi displayed great 
 severity toward the faithless man for his treatment of 
 the girl, and he was not sparing even in his denunci- 
 ation of the accomplice. Another man slandered his 
 wife, declaring that she suffered from a loathsome 
 disease, and through his lying charges he obtained a 
 
166 EASHI 
 
 divorce from her. But the truth came to light, and 
 Rashi could not find terms sufBciently scathing to 
 denounce a man who had recourse to such base calum- 
 nies and sullied his own hearth. "He is unworthy," 
 Eashi wrote, " to belong to the race of Abraham, whose 
 descendants are always full of pity for the unfortunate; 
 and all the more for a woman to whom one is bound 
 in marriage. We see that even those who do not believe 
 in God respect the purity of the home, — and here is a 
 man who has conducted himself so unworthily toward a 
 daughter of our Heavenly Father." After indicating 
 what course is to be pursued in case of divorce, Eashi 
 concluded: "But it would be better if this man were 
 to make good his mistake and take back his wife, so 
 that God may take pity on him, and he may have the 
 good fortune to build up his home agaiu and live in 
 peace and happiaess." 
 
 The Eesponsa, providing us, as we have seen, with 
 interesting information concerning Eashi's character, 
 are no less important for giving us knowledge of his 
 legal and religious opinions. As a result of the poise 
 of his nature, and in the interest of order, he attached 
 great importance to traditional usages and customs. 
 Innovations are dangerous, because they may foment 
 trouble; to abide by custom, on the contrary, is the 
 surest guarantee of tranquillity. In casuistical ques- 
 tions not yet solved, he did not adopt as his principle 
 the one prevailing with so many rabbis, of rendering the 
 strictest decision; on the . contrary, in regard to many 
 matters, he was more liberal than his masters or his 
 colleagues. Nevertheless, he congratulated those whose 
 interpretation in certain cases was more severe than his 
 
THE EESPONSA 167 
 
 own. In Ihis scrupulous piety, he observed certain 
 practices, althougli lie refused to set them up as laws 
 for others, since, one of his disciples tells us, he did not 
 wish to arrogate to himself the glory of instituting a 
 rule for the future. He contented himself with saying : 
 " Blessed be he who does this." Since he stuck to the 
 rigid observance of religion, and feared to open the door 
 to abuses, he advised his pupils not to give too much 
 publicity to certain of his easy interpretations of the 
 Law. 
 
 If he did not approve of laxity, he had stUl less sym- 
 pathy with the extreme piety bordering on folly of those 
 whom he called "crazy saints." Enemy to every ex- 
 aggeration, he blamed those who, for example, imposed 
 upon themselves two consecutive fast days. Once when 
 the East of Esther fell on a Thursday, a woman applied 
 to Eashi for advice. She told him she was compelled 
 to accompany her mistress on a trip, and asked him 
 whether she might fast the next day. Eashi in his 
 Eesponsum first recalled the fact that the East of Esther 
 was not mentioned either in the Bible or in the Talmud, 
 and then declared that the over-conscientious Jews who 
 fast on Friday in order to make a feast day follow close 
 upon a fast day, deserve to be called fools who walk in 
 darkness."^ 
 
 Finally, although Eashi was very scrupulous in 
 matters of religion, he was tolerant toward faults and 
 failings m others. Sinners and, as I have shown, even 
 apostates found grace with him. He liked to repeat 
 the Talmudic saying to which, ia generalizing it, he 
 gave a new meaning, " An Israelite, even a sinful one, 
 remains an Israelite." 
 
168 EASHI 
 
 There is little to say conceming the style of Eashi's 
 Eesponsa. In the setting forth and the discussion of 
 the questions under consideration, his usual qualities are 
 present — precision, clearness, soberness of judgment. 
 But the preambles — sometimes a bit prolix — are written 
 after the fashion prevailing among the rabbis of the 
 time, in a complicated, pretentious style, often affecting 
 the form of rhymed prose and always in a poetic jargon. 
 With this exception, the Eesponsa do not betray the least 
 straining after effect, the least literary refinement. The 
 very fact that Eashi did not himself take the precaution 
 to collect his Eesponsa, proves how little he cared to 
 make a show with them, though, it is true, the custom 
 of gathering together one's Eesponsa did not arise until 
 later, originating in Spain, and passing on to Germany. 
 As I shall immediately proceed to show, it was Eashi's 
 disciples who collected the Eesponsa of their master and 
 preserved them for us, at least in part, 
 
CHAPTEE IX 
 WoEKs Composed undee the Influence of Rashi 
 
 After having passed in review the works which are 
 the result of Rashi's own labor and which have come 
 down to us in the shape in which they emerged from his 
 hands, or nearly so, several works remain to be described 
 that present a double character; they did not spring 
 directly from Eashi's pen, but were written by his 
 pupils under his guidance, or, at least, as the result of 
 his inspiration and influence. They have reached us in 
 altered form, amplified, and sometimes improved, some- 
 times spoiled by various authors. The confusion reign- 
 ing in these works has contributed toward an inexact 
 appreciation of their function. Prom the first they 
 were meant to be compilations, collections of rules, 
 rather than works having a specified object. 
 
 To point out the fact once again, Eashi's pupils 
 became his collaborators; and, it must be added, they 
 established a veritable cult of their master. They 
 neglected nothing concerning him; they carefully noted 
 and piously recorded his slightest deed and gesture, on 
 what day they had seen him, under what circumstances, 
 how he felt that day, and how he conducted himself at 
 the table. When a case similar to some previous one 
 arose, they contented themselves with referring to the 
 former and reproducing the discussion to which it had 
 given rise. 
 
170 EASHI 
 
 It is to this veneration, bordering on religions deTO- 
 tion, that we owe the preservation of Eashi's Eesponsa 
 and Decisions. Some entered into the collections of the 
 Babylonian Geonim, — a fact which shows how highly 
 people regarded the man who was thus ranked with the 
 greatest rabbinical authorities, — ^but most of them 
 formed the basis of several independent works : the Sefer 
 hor-Pardes (Book of Paradise) , the Sefer hoOrah (Book 
 of Light?), the Sefer Issur-we-Eeter (Book of Things 
 Prohibited and Things Permitted), and the Mahzor 
 Yiiry. The first work was edited at the beginning, the 
 last, at the end, of the nineteenth century, and part 
 of the second was introduced into the first by the editor 
 of the first. The whole of the second has just been 
 published by Mr. Solomon Buber. The third work, 
 which offers many resemblances to the Mahzor Yiiry, is 
 still in manuscript; but Mr. Buber has recently prom- 
 ised us its publication in the near future, as well as a 
 Siddur, or ritual, of Eashi, related to the Mahzor Vitry 
 and to a Sefer ha-Sedarim. 
 
 In aU these collections it is sometimes difficult to 
 determine what is Eashi's handiwork, or which of his 
 pupils is responsible for certain passages. The com- 
 position of the works is, in fact, original and merits 
 brief characterization. 
 
 The Sefer ha-Pardes, though commonly attributed 
 to Eashi himself, cannot possibly have been his work, 
 since it contains rules, decisions, and Eesponsa made by 
 several of his contemporaries, and even by some of his 
 successors. Among others are additions by Joseph Ibn 
 Plat or his disciples (second half of the twelfth cen- 
 tury). But in respect of one of its constituent elements, 
 
WOEKS INFLUENCED BY RASHI 171 
 
 it was a creation of Eashi's. It was formed, in fact, by 
 the fusion of two collections. The author of the one 
 containing the customs of the three cities of Speyer, 
 Worms, and Mayence, must have been one of the Machi- 
 rites; while the author of the other, comprising Eashi's 
 practices and Eesponsa, must have been his disciple 
 Shemaiah."" 
 
 The Sefer ha-Pardes is a widely-read book, and it has 
 been used, sometimes under other titles, by the greater 
 number of legal compilations made in France and 
 Germany. It passed through various redactions, and 
 the one now extant is not the most complete. 
 
 The Sefer horOrah, the redaction of which is some- 
 times attributed, though wrongly so, to Nathan ha- 
 Machiri, is a compilation of several works, which seem 
 to have been written in Spain at the beginning of the 
 fourteenth century. It consists of two principal ele- 
 ments; the first, German in origin, is similar to the 
 Pwrdes now extant; the second is the work of the Span- 
 iard, Judah ben Barzillai, of Barcelona (twelfth cen- 
 tury). It is, of course, in the first that one finds 
 fragments of works which date back to the disciples of 
 Eashi. 
 
 The Mahzor Yitry is a more or less homogeneous 
 work. It contains rules of jurisprudence and of reli- 
 gious practice, Eesponsa by Eashi, by his predecessors, 
 and by his contemporaries, prayers and liturgic poems, 
 "Minor" Talmudic treatises, the whole divided into 
 chapters following the yearly cycle, and bearing upon 
 the various circumstances of life. The work contains 
 many additions due to Isaac ben Durbal, or Durbalo, 
 who visited the countries of Eastern Europe and was 
 
172 EASHI 
 
 the disciple of Eabbenu Tarn (about 1150). He is 
 wrongly considered to be the redactor of the Mahzor 
 Yitry. The author of the work is, without doubt, 
 Simhah ben. Samuel, of Vitry, a disciple of Eashi (about 
 1100), who availed himself, moreover, of the works of 
 other pupils of the master. 
 
 The Mahzor Yitry is of great importance not only 
 for the historian of Eashi, but also for the historian of 
 Franco-Jewish culture and literature at that time. The 
 same may be said of the Sefer h(i-Pardes. Yet this 
 material must be used with the utmost caution; for it 
 has come to us in a sad condition, disfigured by the 
 compilers and copyists, who introduced elements from 
 various sources and different epochs. The original 
 works disappeared during the persecutions and autos-dw- 
 fe which followed one another in France and Germany. 
 The redactions now extant come from Spain and Italy. 
 
 These short analyses may give an idea of the col- 
 lections not yet edited ; for they all stand in relation one 
 with the other, and are in great part formed of the 
 same elements and derived from the same material. 
 
CHAPTEE X 
 PoETET Attributed to Rashi 
 
 Almost immediately upon the birth, of liturgical 
 poetry in the time of the Geonim, an illustrious repre- 
 sentative arose in the person of Eleazar ha-Kalir/" -who 
 came to exercise a profound influence upon his succes- 
 sors, and in Eashi's day this poetry attained a high 
 degree of development. That was the time vrhen Jews, 
 instead of merely listening to the officiating minister, 
 commenced to accompany him with their voices in 
 antiphonal chants. 
 
 Like most of the rabbis of his time, Eashi wrote 
 liturgical poems, the number of which Zunz, with more 
 or less surety, places at seven. Three are still preserved 
 in some rituals. According to Luria, Eashi composed 
 more than this number. 
 
 It is fair to question whether a Talmudist is fashioned 
 to be a poet, and whether it is possible for love of dis- 
 cussion and dialectics to accord with poetic sensibility 
 and imagination. Indeed, the liturgical poetry of the 
 Jews of France and Germany has not the least artistic 
 value. It shows neither concern for originality, nor 
 knowledge of composition, and the poets were strangers 
 to the conception of art and beauty. Moreover, they 
 imposed upon themselves rather complicated rules, the 
 most simple forms adopted being rhyme and acrostic. 
 
174 EASHI 
 
 Sometimes they accomplislied veritable feats of mental 
 gymnastics, •whose merit resided in the mere fact that 
 a diiSculty was overcome. Too often a play upon words 
 or alliteration takes the place of inspiration, and ideas 
 give way to factitious combinations. 
 
 These defects disappear in a translation, which is all 
 the more acceptable for the very reason that it does not 
 reproduce the vivid coloring of the original. The fol- 
 lowing, recited on the Past of G-edaliah (innnj Diois), 
 may serve as an example. Eashi uses certain Midra- 
 shim in it which describe the throne of God and the 
 heavenly court. Such poetry as there is — and there is 
 some — is overlaid and submerged by the slow develop- 
 ment of the thought and the painfully detailed eniimera- 
 tions, strongly reminiscent of the Bible. It should be 
 said that the language of Eashi is far simpler than that 
 of his contemporaries. 
 
 Before yet the clouds were gathered in a canopy. 
 
 Before yet the earth was rounded as a sphere, 
 
 Thou didst prepare seven in Thy abode : 
 
 The sacred Law, the splendid throne, the backslider's 
 
 return. 
 Paradise in all its beauty, and insatiable hell. 
 The atonement place for sacrificial offerings. 
 And the resplendent name of him who delays to come be- 
 cause of aU our sins. 
 Two thousand years before our globe were these. 
 Set as jewels in the sky, whence earthward gleamed their 
 
 light; 
 In the realms above they ready stand round Him en- 
 throned between the Cherubim, 
 
POETKY 175 
 
 Finn established is tlie heavenly throne for the King 
 
 supreme 
 Whose glory is shed upon all within His presence : 
 By His right hand the Law engraved with flaming let- 
 ters 
 He caresses like a child beloved. 
 Toward the south lies the ever-fragrant Garden, 
 Hell with its ever-burning flames to the north. 
 Eastward Jerusalem buUt on strong foundations. 
 In the midst of it the sanctuary of God, 
 And in the sanctuary the altar of expiation. 
 Weighted with the corner-stone of the world. 
 Whereon is graven the Messiah's holy name 
 Beside the great Ineffable Name. 
 In the centre before Him who is the source of all bless- 
 ings stands Eepentance, 
 The healing balm for the sufferiag and afSicted soul, 
 Appointed to remove each blemish, array the repentant 
 
 in unsoiled garments. 
 And pour precious oil on the head of sorrowing sinners. 
 Thus we all, both old and young, appear before Thee. 
 Wash off our every taint, our souls refine from every sin. 
 Backsliding children, we come to Thee as suppliants. 
 Seeking Thee day by day with humble, urgent prayers. 
 Account them unto us as blood and fat of offerings. 
 Like sacrificial steers and rams accept our contrite words. 
 that our sins might be sunk in abysmal depths, 
 And Thy brooding infinite mercy bring us near to Thee. 
 
 In the first part of this poem the imagination dis- 
 played cannot be said to call forth admiration either by 
 reason of fertility or by reason of brilliance. Any ordi- 
 
176 EASHI 
 
 naiy student of the Talmud and the Midrash might 
 have produced it. Nevertheless Kashi awakens a certain 
 sort of interest, it may even be said that he touches the 
 emotions, when he pours out all his sadness before God, 
 or rather — for his grief is impersonal — the sadness of 
 the Jew, the humble sinner appealing to the mercy of 
 God. When his feelings rise to their most solemn pitch, 
 their strong pulsations visible through the unaccus- 
 tomed poetic garb, the cloak of learned allusions drops 
 of itself, and emotion is revealed under the strata of 
 labored expressions. All the poems by Eashi belong un- 
 der the literary form called Selihoi, penitential psalms, 
 recited on fast days. 
 
 What has been said of the first specimen quoted ap- 
 plies equally to the next ( D'3rS;>3 Niia niK3xn tiSk " ) , 
 for the eve of the Day of Atonement. It would have 
 been more effective, had there been less emphasis and a 
 more consecutive development of the thought. 
 
 .... Of all bereft we appear before Thee, — 
 
 Thine is the justice, ours the sin, — 
 
 Our faces flushed with shame we turn to Thee, 
 
 And at Thy gates we moan like doves. 
 
 Vouchsafe unto us a life of tranquil |oy. 
 
 Purge us of our stains, make us white and pure. 
 
 that our youthful faults might vanish like passing 
 
 clouds ! 
 Eenew our days as of old, 
 Eemove defilement hence, set presumptuous sins at 
 
 naught ; 
 The purifying waters of truth sprinkle upon us. 
 
POETEY 177 
 
 For we confess our transgressions, we rebellious, faith- 
 less children. 
 
 that a contrite spirit, a broken, repentant heart 
 
 Be acceptable to Thee as the fat of sacrifices ! 
 
 Accomplish for the children Thy promise to the fathers. 
 
 From Thy celestial abode hearken unto us who cry to 
 Thee! 
 
 Strengthen the hearts of those inclined to pay Thee 
 homage. 
 
 Lend Thy ear unto their humble supplication. 
 
 Yet once more rescue Thy people from destruction. 
 
 Let Thy olden mercy speedily descend on them again. 
 
 And Thy favored ones go forth from judgment justi- 
 fied, — 
 
 They that hope for Thy grace and lean upon Thy lov- 
 ing-kindness. 
 
 The final specimen ( impS nban ) is still more 
 paithetic in its tearful contrition. The last lines even 
 rise to unusual beauty when they point down a shining 
 vista of happy, serene days. 
 
 At mom we order our prayers, and wait to offer them to 
 Thee. 
 
 Not sacrificial rams we bring to Thee, but hearts contrite 
 and tender. 
 
 that the tribute of our lips might plead our cause. 
 
 When suppliants we stand before Thy threshold, watch- 
 ing and waiting. 
 
 The early dawn awakens us, and our faces are suffused 
 with shame. 
 
178 EASHI 
 
 Our hearts beat fast, we whisper softly, hoarse and 
 
 weary with calling on Thee. 
 We are cast down, affrighted, — Thy judgment comes. 
 To Thy teaching we turned deaf ears. 
 And unto evil were seduced. 
 Eebellious were we, when Thou earnest to guide ua 
 
 aright, 
 And now we stand abashed with lowered eyes. 
 
 Our ruin Thou didst long past see — 
 
 Is Thy fiery wrath still imappeased? 
 
 We sinned in days agone, we suffer now, our wounds are 
 open. 
 
 Thy oath is quite accomplished, the curse fulfilled. 
 
 Though long we tarried, we seek Thee now, timid, anx- 
 ious, — we, poor in deeds. 
 
 Before we perish, once more unto Thy children joia 
 Thyself. 
 
 A heavenly sign foretells Thy blessing shall descend on 
 us. 
 
 Brute force is shattered, and with night all round about, 
 Thy affianced spouse, loving, yearning, 
 
 Calls on Thy faithfulness ; she pleads with her eyes, and 
 asks, is still she Thine, 
 
 Is hers Thy love for aye? 
 
 The uniformity and monotony of this poetry, it must 
 be admitted, weary the reader. The author never goes 
 beyond a narrow circle of ideas, and general ideas at 
 that. It is impossible to make out whether the allu- 
 sions are to contemporaneous events, the persecutions 
 connected with the First Crusade, for instance, or 
 
POETEY 179 
 
 whether they refer to the ancient, traditional wrongs 
 and sufferings. Nowhere is Eashi's poetry relieved by a 
 touch of personal bias. It cannot be denied, however, 
 that the poems testify to a fund of sincerity and enthu- 
 siasm, and that is noteworthy in a period of literary 
 decadence, when it often happens that sincerity of sen- 
 timent fails by a good deal to find sincere expression for 
 itself. Esthetic inadequacy should by no means be taken 
 as synonymous with insincerity. Eashi proves, that 
 without being an artist one can be swayed by emotion 
 and sway the emotions of others, particularly when the 
 dominant feeling is sadness. " The prevailing charac- 
 teristic of Eashi's prayers," says Zunz, the first historian 
 of synagogue poetry as well as the first biographer of 
 Eashi, " is profound sadness ; all of them are filled with 
 bitter plaints." Finally, if the Selihot by Eashi fall 
 far short of our idea and our ideal of poetry, they at 
 least possess the interest attaching to all that relates to 
 their illustrious author. 
 
BOOK m 
 THE mFLUEI^CE OF RASHI 
 
BOOK III 
 
 THE lETLUENCE OF EASHI 
 
 CHAPTEE XI 
 
 From Eashi's Death to the Expuisiok 
 OF THE Jews from France 
 
 The preceding chapters show how volumiaous and 
 varied was Eashi's work. And yet we are far from 
 possessing everything he wrote; a number of texts have 
 disappeared, perhaps are lost forever. But this fertility 
 is not Eashi's sole literary merit. If the excellence of a 
 work is to be measured not only by its intrinsic value, but 
 also by its historical influence, by the scientific move- 
 ment to which it has given the impulse, by the literature 
 which it has called into being, in short, by its general 
 effect, no work should receive a higher estimate than 
 that of Eashi, for, it may be said without exaggeration, 
 no other work was ever the occasion of so much comment 
 and discussion, and none exerted an influence so far- 
 reaching and enduring. Prom the moment of their 
 appearance his writings spread rapidly, and were read 
 with enthusiasm. After profoundly affecting his con- 
 temporaries, Eashi continued to guide the movement 
 he had started. His influence upon rabbinical liter- 
 
184 EASHI 
 
 ature is comparable only with that of Maimonides. 
 Indeed, it was more wholesome than his. The Talmudie 
 codex established by Maimonides aimed at nothing 
 less than to shut off the discussions and to give the oral 
 law firm, solid shape. Eashi, on the contrary, safe- 
 guarded the rights of the future, and gave his successors 
 full play. Again, not having introduced into his work 
 philosophic speculations, he was shielded against criti- 
 cism, and his renown was therefore more immaculate 
 than that of the author of the Mishneh Torah, who had 
 to undergo furious attacks. 
 
 Eashi dominates the entire rabbinical movement in 
 France and Germany. Generally, the influence of a 
 writer wanes from day to day; but as for Eashi's, it 
 may be said to have increased by force of habit and as 
 the result of events, and to have broadened its sphere. 
 Limited at first to French, Lotharingian, and German 
 centres of learning, it soon extended to the south of 
 Europe, to Africa, and even to Asia, mauitaiaing its 
 force both ia the field of Biblical exegesis and of Tal- 
 mudie jurisprudence. 
 
 Since it is impossible to mention all the authors and 
 works following and preceding Eashi, it must suffice to 
 point out some characteristic facts and indispensable 
 names in order to bring into relief the vitality and 
 expansive force of his achievement, and to show how it 
 has survived the ravages of time, and, what is more, how 
 it has overcome man's forgetfulness — edax tempus, 
 edacior homo. We shall see that Eashi directed the 
 course of the later development at the same time that 
 he summed up in his work all that had previously been 
 accomplished. 
 
THE INFLUENCE OE EASHI 185 
 
 " The example of a man as revered as Rashi for his piety, 
 his character, and his immense learning was bound to 
 make a profound and lasting impression upon his contem- 
 poraries. His descendants and his numerous disciples, 
 pursuing with equal zeal the study of the Talmud and that 
 of Scriptures, took as their point of departure in either 
 study the commentaries of their ancestor and master, to 
 which they added their own remarks, now to enlarge upon 
 and complete the first work, now to discuss it, refute it, 
 and substitute new views. Thus arose the Tossafot, or 
 additional glosses upon the Talmud, and thus in the follow- 
 ing generations arose new commentaries upon the Penta- 
 teuch or upon the entire Bible, in which the rational spirit 
 evoked by Rashi assumed a more and more marked and 
 exclusive form." "" 
 
 Finally, EasM's influence was not confined either 
 within the walls of the Jewries or within the frontiers 
 of France, but it radiated to foreign lands and to 
 ecclesiastical circles. 
 
 I 
 
 It may be said without exaggeration that Eashi's 
 Talmudic commentary renewed rabbinical studies in 
 France and in Germany. It propagated knowledge of 
 the Talmud there and multiplied the academies. In 
 fact, schools were founded ia all localities containing 
 Jewish communities no matter how insignificant; and it 
 is difficult for us to obtain any idea of the number and 
 importance of these "Faculties," scattered over the 
 length and breadth of Northern France, which thus 
 became a very lively centre of Jewish studies and the 
 chief theatre of the intellectual activity of the Occi- 
 dental Jews. Its schools eclipsed those of the Ehenish 
 countries and rivalled in glory those of Spain. 
 
186 RASHI 
 
 What in the first instance contributed to the success of 
 the movement begun by Eashi, is the fact that he 
 moulded numerous disciples — in this more fortunate 
 than Maimonides, who was unable to found a school and 
 who sowed in unploughed land. It was only with the 
 lapse of time that his work little by little made its way, 
 while Eashi through his teaching exerted an absolutely 
 direct and, as it were, living influence. Eashi's authority 
 was such that Troyes became the chief centre of studies. 
 Many pupils flocked to it and there composed important 
 works, easting into sure and permanent form the intel- 
 lectual wealth they had gathered while with their 
 master. They put the finishing touches to his work and 
 labored to complete it, even during his life, and as 
 though under his protection. 
 
 I have already spoken of Simhah ben Samuel de Vitry, 
 author of the liturgical and ritual collection, Mahzor 
 Vitry.'^ Among other disciples not so well known are 
 Mattathias ben Moses, of Paris, Samuel ben Perigoros, 
 Joseph ben Judah, and Jacob ben Simson (1123), who 
 lived at Paris or Palaise and wrote Eesponsa at the 
 dictation of his master, and, besides commentaries, a 
 Mahzor, and an astronomic work. He was in turn the 
 master of Jacob Tarn. 
 
 Judah ben Abraham, of Paris, aided by suggestions 
 from his master, wrote a ceremonial for the Passover. 
 In carrying out his task, he availed himself of the notes 
 of his older fellow-disciple Simhah, and his collaborator 
 was Shemaiah, who had already worked on Eashi's com- 
 mentary on Ezekiel. Besides, Shemaiah made additions 
 to Eashi's Talmudic commentaries, and composed 
 several commentaries under his guidance. He also 
 
THE INFLUENCE OE EASHI 187 
 
 collected and edited EasM's Decisions and Eesponsa, 
 servtag, as it were, as Eashi's literary executor. More- 
 over, he was a relative of Eashi's, though the degree of 
 kinship is not known, the evidence of authors upon the 
 subject being contradictory. Some maintaia he was 
 Eashi's grandson, or son-in-law, or the son-in-law of his 
 sister ; according to others — and this seems more exact — 
 he was the father-in-law of a brother of Jacob Tam. 
 
 At all events, it was Eashi's relatives who contributed 
 most to his renown. " In regard to his family Eashi 
 enjoyed unexampled good fortune," says Zunz. " It 
 was not only through his disciple, but also through his 
 family that the founder of rabbinical literature in 
 Erance and Germany established his reputation, spread 
 his works, and added to the lustre of his name." A fact 
 which no doubt helped to assure the direction of the 
 studies made by Eashi's descendants, is that they pos- 
 sessed the manuscripts written and corrected by their 
 ancestor; and these autographs were veritable treasures 
 at a time when books were rare and copies inexact. 
 
 One of Eashi's sons-in-law, Judah ben Nathan,"' was 
 a scholarly and highly esteemed Talmudist. At the 
 suggestion of his father-in-law, he completed Eashi's 
 commentaries and continued the work after Eashi's 
 death, using as his chief aid the oral explanations he had 
 received from him. The son of Judah, Yomtob, was 
 also a good Talmudist. 
 
 The other son-in-law, Meir ben Samuel (about 
 1065-1135), was originally from the little town of 
 Eameru,"* which through him and his sons became an 
 important intellectual centre for more than a half- 
 century. Meir was a distinguished scholar whom his 
 
188 EASHI 
 
 sons sometimes cite as an authority. He ■wrote Ee- 
 sponsa in association with his master and father-in- 
 law. As I have already stated, Meir ben Samuel 
 married a daughter of Eashi, Jochebed, by whom he 
 had four sons and a daughter, Miriam, the wife of 
 Samuel of Vitry. One of the sons, Solomon, has been 
 known to us for only about twelve years, although he 
 had a reputation as a Talmudic and Biblical scholar, 
 chiefly the latter, having received the surname of 
 " father of grammarians." His reputation, however, 
 was eclipsed by that of his three brothers, who have 
 poetically been called the three vigorous branches of 
 the tree of which Eashi was the trunk. These were 
 Samuel ben Meir, suxnamed Eashbam, Jacob ben Meir, 
 sumamed Jacob Tam, or Eabbenu Tam, and finally 
 Isaac ben Meir, sumamed Eibam. The last, who 
 lived without doubt at Eameru and there composed 
 Tossafot,"' died during the life-time of his father, leav- 
 ing seven young children. He did not equal his brothers 
 either in knowledge or renown. 
 
 Samuel ben Meir (about 1085-1158) studied under 
 his grandfather. As we have seen"" he discussed exe- 
 getic questions with Eashi, and went so far as to express 
 opinions in his presence concerning points of casuistry. 
 On Eashi's death, it seems, he assumed the direction of 
 the school at Troyes; but he was more prominently 
 identified with the academy which he, following in the 
 steps of his master, founded at Eameru, and which 
 soon became prosperous. It was at Eameru, too, that 
 he wrote his valuable Talmudic commentaries."' Among 
 his pupils are said to have been Isaac ben Asher ha-Levi, 
 of Speyer, and Joseph Porat ben Moses, known also 
 
THE INFLUENCE OP EASHI 189 
 
 as Don Bendit. Samuel ben Meir's was a bold, in- 
 dependent spirit. In some instances he sacrificed a 
 Talmndic explanation for the sake of one that seemed 
 more natural to him. In addition he had a fair amount 
 of scientific and philosophic knowledge, and he was very 
 productive in the field of literature. 
 
 But Eashbam's authority, if not his knowledge, was 
 exceeded by that of his younger brother Jacob. Jacob 
 Tarn, born about 1100, was still a very young child when 
 Eashi died. He studied under the guidance of his 
 father, on whose death he assumed the direction of the 
 academy of Eameru in his father's place. Then he went 
 to Troyes, where he was surrounded by numerous pupils, 
 some from countries as distant as Bohemia and Eussia. 
 One of his best known disciples was Eliezer ben Samuel, 
 of Metz (died about 1198), author of the Sefer Yereim 
 (Book of the Pious). Other pupils of his mentioned 
 were Moses ben Abraham, of Pontoise, to whom he wrote 
 ia particularly affectionate terms, and Jacob of Orleans, 
 a scholar held in high regard, who died at London in 
 1189 in the riot that broke out the day of Eichard I's 
 coronation. A year later, in 1190, the liturgical poet 
 and Biblical commentator Yomtob de Joigny died at 
 York. It seems that Jacob Tam, like his successors, had 
 to suffer from the popular hate and excesses. In fact 
 he teUs how, on one occasion, on the second day of 
 Pentecost (possibly at the time of the troubles resulting 
 from the Second Crusade), he was robbed and wounded, 
 and was saved ftom death only through the interven- 
 tion of a lord. The end of his life was saddened by the 
 auto-da-fe of Blois, at which numerous Jews suffered 
 martyrdom. He perpetuated the memory of that occa- 
 
190 EASHI 
 
 sion by ingtituting a fast day. He died in 1171, univer- 
 sally regretted for his clear and accurate intellect, his 
 piety, uprightness, amiability, and modesty. His con- 
 temporaries considered him the highest rabbinical 
 authority, and he was consulted by persons as remote 
 as in the south of France and the north of Spain. He 
 possessed a remarkably original, broad yet subtle in- 
 tellect, and his writings display keen penetration and 
 singular vigor of thought. He devoted himself chiefly 
 to Biblical exegesis; but in this domain he obtained a 
 reputation less through the purely exegetical parts than 
 through the critical work in which he defended the 
 grammarian Menahem against the attacks of Dunash.'" 
 His liturgical compositions and the short poems with 
 which he sometimes prefaced his Eesponsa show that he 
 was a clever poet, an imitator of the Spaniards. Abra- 
 ham Ibn Ezra while on his rovings in France was one 
 of his correspondents. 
 
 However, Jacob Tarn, or, to call him by his title of 
 honor, Eabbenu Tarn, — in allusion to Gen.xxv.37, where 
 Jacob is described as "tam," a man of integrity — owed 
 his renown to his Talmudic activity, which he exerted in 
 an original line of work though he was not entirely free 
 from the influence of Eashi. If he was not the creator of 
 a new sort of Talmudic literature, he was at least one 
 of its first representatives. Either because he considered 
 the commentaries of his grandfather impossible to imi- 
 tate, or because he could not adapt himself to their 
 simplicity and brevity, he took pleasure in raising in- 
 genious objections against them and proposing original 
 solutions. These explanations joined to his Decisions 
 and Eesponsa were collected by him in a work called 
 
THE INFLUENCE OP BASHI 191 
 
 fie/er ha-Yashar (Book of the Just), of which he him- 
 self made two redactions. The one we now possess was 
 put together— rather inaccurately — after the death of 
 the author accordiag to the second recension. The Sefer 
 horYashar was used a great deal by later Talmudists. 
 It may be said to have inaugurated the form of litera- 
 ture called Tossafot. 
 
 As the word signifies, the Tossafot are "additional 
 notes," " Novellae," upon the Talmud. They display 
 great erudition, ingenuity, and forcible logic, and they 
 represent a prodigious effort of sharp analysis and hard- 
 bound dialectics. The authors of the Tossafot, the 
 Tossafists, were marvellously skilful at turning a text 
 about and viewing it in all its possible meanings, at 
 discovering intentions and unforeseen consequences. 
 Their favorite method was to raise one or more ob- 
 jections, to set forth one or more contradictions between 
 two texts, and then to propound one or more solutions, 
 which, if not marked by simplicity and verisimilitude, 
 none the less bear the stamp of singularly keen insight. 
 In their hands the study of the Talmud became a 
 sturdy course in intellectual gymnastics. It refined the 
 intellect and exercised the sense of logic. Yet it would 
 be a mistake to see in the Tossafot nothing but the taste 
 for controversy and love of discussion for the sake of 
 discussion. The Tossafists, even more than Eashi, 
 sought to deduce the norm, especially the practical 
 norm, from the Talmudic discussions, and discover 
 analogies permitting the solution of new cases. Thus, 
 while Eashi's commentary is devoted to the explanation 
 of words, and, more generally, of the simple meaning 
 of the text, the Tossafot enter into a searching con- 
 
192 EASHI 
 
 sideration of the debates of tKe Talmud. Moreover, 
 Eashi composed short but numerous notes, while tie 
 Tossafists wrote lengthier but less consecutive commen- 
 taries. At the same time one of Eashi's explanations is 
 a fragment of the Tossafot explanation. Thus, the com- 
 mentary of the Tossafists exists in abridged form, as it 
 were, in germ, in the commentary of Eashi. Bashi was 
 the constant guide of the Tossafists. His commentary, 
 " the Commentary," as they called it, was ever the basis 
 for their " additions." They completed or discussed it; 
 in each case they made it their point of departure, and 
 his influence is apparent at every turn. The species of 
 literature called Tossafot is not only thoroughly French 
 in origin, hut, it may said, without Eashi it would 
 never have come into existence. The authors of the 
 Tossafot are as much the commentators of Eashi as they 
 are of the Talmud."" The Tossafot bear the same 
 relation to his Talmudic commentary as the Gemara to 
 the Mishnah. Like the Amoraim in regard to the 
 Tannaim, the Tossafists set themselves the task of com- 
 pleting and correcting the work of the master; for, 
 despite their veneration for Eashi, they did not by any 
 means spare him in their love of truth. 
 
 The first Tossafists, both in point of age and worth, 
 were not only the disciples, but also, as we have seen, 
 even the descendants of Eashi. " We drink," said 
 E. Tam, " at the source of E. Solomon." One of the 
 most celebrated Tossafists was a great-grandson of 
 Eashi, Isaac ben Samuel (about 1120-1195) surnamed 
 the Elder, son of a sister of E. Tam and grandson, on 
 his father's side, of Simhah, of Vitry. Bom without 
 doubt at Eameru, he attended the school of his two 
 
THE INFLUENCE OF EASHI 193 
 
 uncles, Samuel ben Meir and Jacob Tarn. When Jacob 
 Tarn left for Troyes, Isaac ben Samuel took his place. 
 Later he founded a school at Dampierxe/" where, it is 
 said, he had sixty pupils, each of whom knew one of the 
 treatises of the Talmud by heart. Through his depart- 
 ure, Kameru lost its importance as a centre of study. 
 He collected and co-ordinated various explanations grow- 
 ing out of Eashi's commentaries. Thus he established 
 the foundations for the Tossafot, on every page of which 
 his name appears. 
 
 He was the teacher of the most learned Talmudists 
 of the end of the twelfth and the beguming of the thir- 
 teenth century. His son and collaborator Elhanan, a 
 highly esteemed rabbi, died before him, some say as a 
 martyr. Among his disciples are said to have been 
 Baruch ben Isaac, originally from Worms, later resident 
 of Eatisbon, author of the Sefer ha-Terumah (Book 
 of the Heave-Offering), one of the first and most 
 influential casuistic collections (about 1200) ; Isaac ben 
 Abraham, called the Younger to distinguish him from his 
 master, whom he succeeded and who died a little before 
 1210; and the brother of Isaac, Samson of Sens (about 
 1150-1230), whose commentaries, according to the testi- 
 mony of Asheri, exercised the greatest influence upon 
 the study of the Talmud. He was one of the most illus- 
 trious representatives of the French school, and his 
 authority was very great. His usual abiding place was 
 Sens in Burgundy, but about 1211 he emigrated to 
 Palestine in the company of some other scholars. He 
 met his death at St. Jean d'Acre. 
 
 By this time Champagne had proved too contracted 
 a field for the activity of so many rabbis. Flourishing 
 
194 EASHI 
 
 schools arose in Ile-de-France and Normandy; and it 
 is related that at Paris, in the first half of the twelfth 
 century, lived the scholarly and pious Elijah ben Judah, 
 who carried on a controversy about phylacteries with his 
 kinsman Jacob Tarn. But the most celebrated Tossafist 
 of Paris without reserve was Judah Sir Leon, born in 
 1166 and died in 1234, a descendant of Eashi. The 
 school of Paris having been closed after the expulsion of 
 1181, Judah went to study at Dampierre under the 
 guidance of Isaac and his son Elhanan. Among his 
 fellow-disciples, besides the rabbis already mentioned, 
 were Samson Sir of Coucy, Solomon of Dreux, Simon of 
 Joinville, Abraham ben ISTathan, of Lunel, and others. 
 In 1198 Philip Augustus recalled the Jews he had 
 expelled, and the community again prospered. Judah 
 re-established the school, which soon assumed the first 
 place in the list of academies. Among his numerous 
 pupUs mention is made of Moses ben Jacob, of Coucy, 
 brother-in-law of Samson and author of the famous 
 Sefer Mizwot Gadol (Great Book of Precepts), abbrevi- 
 ated to Semag, which shows the mingled influence of 
 the Mishneh Torah of Maimonides and of the Tossafot 
 of the French masters ; Isaac ben Moses, of Vienna, who 
 carried into Austria the methods and teachings of his 
 French masters, surnamed Or Zarua after the title 
 of his work, a valuable ritual compilation; and Samuel 
 ben Solomon Sir Morel,'" of Palaise (about 1175-1253), 
 whose most celebrated pupil was Meir of Eothenburg, 
 the greatest authority of his country and his time, 
 known for his dramatic end as well as for his great 
 intellectual activity (1325-1293). 
 
THE INFLUENCE OF EASHI 195 
 
 The successor of Judah Sir Leon was Jehiel ben 
 Joseph, or Sir Vives, of Meaux. At this time the school 
 is said to have counted three hundred pupils. In the 
 disputation of 1240/" Jehiel ben Joseph together with 
 Moses of Coucy, Samuel of Falaise, and another less 
 well-known rabbi, Judah ben David, of Melun, repre- 
 sented the Jews. A Christian source calls Jehiel "the 
 cleverest and most celebrated of all the Jews." When 
 he left for Palestine in 1260 the school of Paris was 
 closed not to be opened again. 
 
 Jehiel left behind him in France two important 
 disciples, his son-in-law, Isaac ben Joseph, of Corbeil 
 (died in 1280), who in 1277 published the " Columns of 
 ExUe," also called Sefer Mizwot Katan (Little Book of 
 Precepts), abbreviated to Semak, a religious and eth- 
 ical collection, which enjoyed great vogue; and Perez 
 ben Elia, of Corbeil (died about 1295), who mentions 
 Isaac as his master also. Perez visited Brabant and 
 Germany, where he maintained relations with Meir of 
 Eothenburg. Among his pupils there was Mordecai ben 
 HiUel, an authority highly esteemed for his decisions, 
 who died a martyr at Nuremberg in 1298. Another 
 master of his was Samuel ben Shneor, of Evreux (about 
 1225), a much-quoted Tossafist, who studied under the 
 guidance of his elder brother Moses, editor of the 
 " Tossaf ot of Evreux," largely used for the present 
 printed editions of the Tossafot. In the second half of 
 the thirteenth century, Eliezer of Touques compiled the 
 Tossafot of Sens, of Evreux, etc., adding his own ex- 
 planations on the margin. His work forms the chief 
 basis for our present Tossafot to the Talmud. 
 
196 EASHI 
 
 As always with redactions and compilations, these 
 mentioned here are a sign of the discontinuance of 
 studies, worn threadbare by two centuries of intense 
 activity. Decadence, moreover, was brought about more 
 rapidly, as we shall see, by the misfortunes that succes- 
 sively befell the Jews of France. 
 
 II 
 
 Eashi's influence was no less enduring and no less 
 wholesome in the province of Biblical exegesis. An idea 
 of the impression he made may be gained from the fact 
 that more than fifty super-commentaries were written on 
 his commentary on the Pentateuch, to explain or to 
 complete it, to defend it, and occasionally to combat it. 
 But Eashi's influence was productive of still more than 
 this. It called into being original works superior even 
 to his own. His disciples shook ofE the yoke of Tal- 
 mudic and Midrashic tradition that had rested upon 
 him. But even when they surpassed him, it was never- 
 theless his influence that was acting upon them and his 
 authority to which they appealed. 
 
 Samuel ben Meir, diffuse as were his Talmudic com- 
 mentaries, was admirably brief in his commentary on 
 the Pentateuch, which is a model of simplicity and ac- 
 curacy, and is marked by insight and subtlety. It is 
 possibly the finest product of the French exegetic school. 
 It sets forth general rules of interpretation, as, for 
 instance, that the Bible should be explained through 
 itself and without the aid of the Haggadic or even 
 Halakie Midrash. Literal exegesis, said Samuel ben 
 MeiT, is more forceful than Halakie interpretation. 
 He so resolutely pursued the method of Peshat, that 
 
THE INFLUENCE OF EASHI 197 
 
 Naiunanides felt justified in declaring he sometimes 
 overdid it. The same admirable qualities exist in Eash- 
 bam's commentaries on the Prophets and the Hagio- 
 grapha, in which he everywhere turns to excellent ac- 
 count the works of his ancestor, sometimes merely 
 referring to them, but also combating Eashi's expla- 
 nations, though in this case he does not mention Eashi. 
 
 Eliezer of Beaugency and Moses of Paris (middle of 
 the twelfth century) were doubtless among the disci- 
 ples of Samuel ben Meir. Moses of Paris, in turn, had 
 a pupil by the name of Gabriel. 
 
 Occasionally Eashbam did not disdain the Midrash. 
 But the same cannot be said of his friend and collabo- 
 rator Joseph ben Simon Kara (born about 1060-1070, 
 died about 1130-1140), a nephew and disciple of Mena- 
 hem ben Helbo, and the friend if not the disciple of 
 Eashi, to whom he acknowledges himself indebted. He 
 wrote additions to Eashi's commentaries, and on Eashi's 
 advice wrote a part of his Biblical commentaries, several 
 of which have been published. They enjoyed great vogue, 
 and in certain manuscripts they are set alongside of, 
 or replace, Eashi's commentaries. They fully deserve 
 the honor ; for, in fact, Joseph Kara surpasses Eashi and 
 rivals Eashbam in his fair-minded criticism, his scrupu- 
 lous attachment to the literal meaning, and his abso- 
 lutely clear idea of the needs of a wholesome exegesis, 
 to say nothing of his theological views, which are always 
 remarkable and sometimes bold. He frankly rejected 
 the Midrash, and compares the person making use of it 
 to the drowning man who clutches at a straw. Con- 
 trary to tradition he denies that Samuel was the author 
 of the Biblical book bearing his name. 
 
198 EASHI 
 
 Side by side with Joseph Kara belongs his rival and 
 younger contemporary Joseph Bekor-Shor, doubtless the 
 same person as Joseph ben Isaac^ of Orleans, who was a 
 disciple of Eabbenu Tarn, and must, therefore, have 
 lived in the middle of the twelfth century. His com- 
 mentary on the Pentateuch, which has been published in 
 part, is frequently cited by later exegetes, and its repu- 
 tation is justified by its' keen insight and its vein of odd 
 originality. Joseph Bekor-Shor had felt the influence 
 of the Spaniards, but he had yielded to the attractions 
 of Talmudic dialectics, which he had acquired at a good 
 school, although, like his master, he cites, in connection 
 with the Bible, a certain Obadiah. 
 
 Quae secutae sunt magis defleri quam narrari possunt. 
 In the works of the second half of the twelfth century 
 this fault becomes more and more perceptible, and signs 
 of decadence begin to appear. Moreover, the writings 
 at this time were very numerous, fostering, and, in turn, 
 stimulated by, anti-Christian polemics. The greater 
 number of the Tossafists study the Bible in conjunction 
 with the Talmud. Citations are made of explanations 
 or Biblical commentaries by Jacob of Orleans, Moses of 
 Pontoise, Isaac the Elder, Isaac the Younger, Judah Sir 
 Leon, Jehiel of Meaux, and Moses of Coucy. All these 
 rabbis wrote Tossafot to the Bible as well as to the Tal- 
 mud. This comparative study of Bible and Talmud 
 was continued for some time, until at the beginning of 
 the thirteenth century intellectual activity was ex- 
 hausted. Original works were replaced by a large 
 number of compilations, all related to one another, since 
 the authors copied without scruple and pillaged without 
 shame. 
 
THE INFLUENCE OE EASHI 199 
 
 Chief among tliese works, which bear the general title 
 of Tossafot to the Torah and some of which have been 
 printed, are Hazzelcuni, by Hezekiah ben Manoah 
 (about 1340), Gan"" (Garden), by Aaron ben Joseph, 
 (about 1250), Daat Zehenim (Knowledge of the 
 Ancients), in which many exegetes are cited (after 
 1252), Paaneah Razah (Kevealer of the Mystery), by 
 Isaac ben Judah ha-Levi (about 1300), Minhat 
 Yehudah (Offering of Judah), by Judah ben Eliezer 
 (or Eleazar), of Troyes (1313), Eadar Zehenim (Glory 
 of the Ancients; beginning of the fourteenth century), 
 and Imre Noam (Pleasant Words), by Jacob of lUescaa 
 (middle of the fourteenth century) . 
 
 AH these works were more or less inspired by Eashi, 
 and some, such as Hazzelcuni, might be called super-com- 
 mentaries to Eashi. But these disciples were not true 
 to the spirit of the master. They gave themselves up 
 to the Haggadah more than he did, and also to a thing 
 unknown to him, Gematria and mystical exegesis. 
 Thus this Erench school, which for nearly a century 
 had shone with glowing brilliance, now threw out only 
 feeble rays, and abandoned itself more and more to the 
 subtleties of the Midrash, to the fancifulness of the 
 Gematria. It almost consigned to oblivion the great 
 productions in rational exegesis, always excepting 
 Eashi's commentaries, the popularity of which never 
 waned, as much because of the author's renown as 
 because of his concessions to the Midrash. 
 
 It remained for a Christian exegete to free rational 
 exegesis from the discredit into which it had fallen. 
 The ecclesiastical commentators even more than the 
 authors of the Biblical Tossafot were steeped in aHe- 
 
300 RASHI 
 
 gorism and mysticism; but among them were some who 
 cultivated the interpretation of the literal meaning of 
 Scriptures, and even appealed to Jewish scholars for 
 explanations. Unfortunately, Eashi's works, written in 
 a language unintelligible to the Christians, could not in 
 any degree influence a general intellectual movement. 
 
 However, exception must be made of the celebrated 
 Franciscan monk ISTicholas de Lyra (born about 1293, 
 died in 1340), author of the Postillae perpetuae on the 
 Bible which brought him the title of doctor planus et 
 utilis. Mcholas de Lyra possessed knowledge rare 
 among Christians, knowledge of the Hebrew language, 
 and he knew Hebrew so well that he was thought to be 
 a converted Jew. In his works, polemical in character, 
 he comes out against the mystical tendencies in the 
 interpretations of the rabbis, and does not spare Eashi, 
 even attributing to him explanations nowhere existing 
 in Eashi's writings. But these criticisms of his, as he 
 himself says, are " extremely rare." Moreover he does 
 not refrain from accepting for his own purposes a large 
 number of Midrashim borrowed from Eashi. It was 
 from Eashi's commentaries, in fact, that he learned to 
 know rabbinical literature — only to combat it. On one 
 occasion he said, "I usually foUow Eabbi Solomon, 
 whose teachings are considered authoritative by modem 
 Jews." He sometimes modified the text of the Vulgate 
 according to the explanations of the rabbi, and his com- 
 mentary on the Psalms, for instance, is often only a 
 paraphrase of Eashi's. For this reason Nicholas de 
 Lyra was dubbed, it must be admitted somewhat irre- 
 verently, dmia Bdlomonis, Eashi's Ape. ITevertheless, 
 he exercised great influence in ecclesiastical circles. 
 
O 
 
 5 
 
 LU 
 
 D. 
 < 
 
 I 
 
 o 
 
 i 
 
 CO 
 
 < 
 
 CC o 
 
 tu i 
 
 t- ° 
 
 Si 
 
 o 
 
 I- 
 z 
 
 Q 
 
 z 
 < 
 
 CC 
 
 o 
 
 CC 
 ul 
 
 K 
 X 
 
THE INPLUBNCB OF EASHI 301 
 
 comparable to that of Eashi among the Jews. His 
 commentary was called "the common commentary." 
 Possibly it was in imitation of Nicholas's work that the 
 name glosa hehraica (the Hebrew commentary), or 
 simply glosBj was bestowed upon Eashi's work by a 
 Christian author of the thirteenth century, who, if not 
 the famous scholar and monk Eoger Bacon, must have 
 been some one of the same type. Another Christian 
 ezegete of the same period, William of Mara, cites 
 Eashi's commentary under the title of Perus. The 
 admiration felt for Nicholas de Lyra, which now seems 
 somewhat excessive, is expressed in the well-known 
 proverb: Si Lyra non lyrasset, toius mondus deli- 
 rasset. A modification of the proverb, si Lyra non 
 lyrasset, Lutherius non saltasset, is not an exaggeration ; 
 for the works of the Franciscan monk were soon trans- 
 lated into German, and they exercised a profound 
 influence on the leader of the Eeformation when he 
 composed the translation of the Bible, epoch-making in 
 the history of literature as well as of religion. It is 
 known that Luther had large knowledge of the Hebrew 
 and a strong feeling for it, a quality he owed to Nicholas 
 de Lyra and, through him, to the Jewish exegetes, 
 although his scornful pride would never permit him to 
 concede that " Eashi and the Tossafists made Nicholas 
 de Lyra and Nicholas de Lyra made Luther." 
 
 At the time when Eashi's influence was thus ex- 
 tended to Christian circles, the Jewish schools called 
 into being by his work and his teachings fell into decay 
 on account of the persecutions that shook French 
 Judaism to its foundations and almost deprived it of 
 existence. This shows how firmly intellectual activities 
 
302 EA8HI 
 
 are bound up with temporal fortunes — a truth mani- 
 fested in the period of growth and maturity and illus- 
 trated afresh in the period of decadence. 
 
 Even after the First Crusade, the situation of the 
 Jews of France had remained favorable. It did not 
 perceptibly change as a result of the various local dis- 
 orders marking the Second Crusade. Nevertheless, the 
 second half of the twelfth century witnessed the uprise 
 of accusations of ritual murder and piercings of the 
 host. Popular hatred and mistrust were exploited by 
 the greedy kings. Philip Augustus expelled the Jews 
 from his domain in 1181, though he recalled them in 
 1198. Yet the example had been set, and the security 
 of the Jews was done for. The lords and bishops 
 united to persecute them, destroy their literary treas- 
 ures, and paralyze their intellectual efforts. They found 
 the right king for their purposes in St. Louis, a 
 curious mixture of tolerance and bigotry, of charity 
 and fanaticism. " St. Louis sought to deprive the Jews 
 of the book which in all their trials was their supreme 
 consolation, the refuge of their souls against outside 
 clamor and suffering, the only safeguard of their mo- 
 rality, and the bond maintaining their religious oneness 
 —the Talmud." In 1239 an apostate, Nicholas Donin, 
 of La Eochelle, denounced the Talmud to Gregory' IX. 
 The Pope ordered the seizure of all copies, and an in- 
 vestigation of the book. In France the mandate was 
 obeyed, and a disputation took place at Paris. Natur- 
 ally, the Talmud was condemned, and twenty-four cart- 
 loads of Hebrew books were consigned to the flames. 
 The auto-da-fe of 1242 marks the decadence of an 
 entire literature, the ruin of brilliant schools, and the 
 
THE INPLUENCE OP EASHI 203 
 
 cheek to the moyement so gloriously inaugurated by 
 Eashi. All the living forces of French Judaism were 
 deeply affected. 
 
 But the fall was neither complete nor sudden. It 
 ■was not until 1306 that the Jews were exiled from 
 Prance by Philip , the Pair, and a hundred thousand 
 persons had to leave the country in which their nation 
 had long flourished and to whose prosperity they had 
 materially contributed. ' 
 
 The expulsion of 1306 withdrew French Judaism to 
 the provinces directly attached to the crown. In vain 
 were the Jews recalled in 1315 "at the general cry of 
 the people." Only a very few profited by the tolerance 
 shown them. After that their existence was troubled 
 by riots, and broken in upon by expulsions. The 
 schools, of old so flourishing, fell into a state of utter 
 decay. About 1360 France could not count six Jewish 
 scholars, and the works of the time show to what degree 
 of degradation rabbinical studies had sunk. With the 
 expulsion of 1394 Charles VI dealt the finishing stroke. 
 Thereafter French Judaism was nothing but the shadow 
 of itself. Having received a mortal wound in 1306, its 
 life up to the final expulsion in 1394 was one long 
 death-agony. 
 
 Thus disappeared that French Judaism which con- 
 tributed so large a portion to the economic and intel- 
 lectual civilization of its fatherland during the time 
 the sun of tolerance shone on its horizon, but which 
 was destined to perish the moment the greed of princes 
 and the fanaticism of priests, hoodwinking the masses, 
 united to overwhelm it. ISTevertheless the three centu- 
 ries of fruitful activity were not entirely lost to the 
 
204 EASHI 
 
 future; and the Jews of France, who had gone in 
 numbers to foreign lands, carried with them their books 
 and their ideals. 
 
 Ill 
 
 For a long time previous to the events just recorded, 
 Eashi and the Tossafists — the two words summing up 
 the whole intellectual movement of the Jews of France 
 — ^had brought to all Judaism the reputation of the 
 academies of Champagne and of Ile-de-France. "He- 
 brew literature in France," wrote E. Carmoly, "exer- 
 cised upon the Jewish world the same influence that 
 French literature esercised upon European civilization 
 in general. Everywhere the Biblical and Talmudic 
 works of Troyes, Eameru, Dampierre, and Paris became 
 the common guides of the synagogues." Eashi's com- 
 mentaries, in especial, spread rapidly and were widely 
 copied, sometimes enlarged by additions, sometimes 
 mutilated and truncated. It is for this reason that 
 certain commentaries of his no longer exist, or exist in 
 incomplete form. 
 
 In view of the fact that at the beginning of the thir- 
 teenth century relations between remote countries and 
 Christendom were rare, and that the Christian and the 
 Mohammedan worlds had scarcely begun to open up to 
 each other and come into contact, it is readily under- 
 stood why Eashi was not known in Arabic countries 
 in his life-time, or even immediately after his death, 
 and why he exercised no influence upon Maimonides, 
 who died exactly a hundred years after him. In the 
 Orient there are no signs of his influence until the end 
 of the twelfth century, In 1192; barely eighty years 
 
THE INFLUENCE OF EASHI 205 
 
 after Eashi's death, an exilarch had one of his commen- 
 taries copied; and at the beginning of the thirteenth 
 century we find the commentator Samuel ben Nissim, of 
 Aleppo, making a citation from Eashi. 
 
 But it is naturally in the regions nearest to France 
 that Eashi's influence made itself most felt. The pro- 
 found Talmudist, Zerahiai ha-Levi, who lived at Lunel 
 (1125-1186), rather frequently cites "E. Solomon the 
 Frenchman," and contents himself with merely re- 
 ferring to Eashi's commentary without quoting in full, 
 a fact which shows that the work was widely spread in 
 the Provence. A number of years later, about 1245, 
 Meir, son of Simon of Narbonne, wrote in his apologetic 
 work, " The Holy War " : " The commentaries are un- 
 derstood by all readers, for the least as well as the most 
 important things are perfectly explained in them. 
 Since their appearance, there is not a rabbi who has 
 studied without using them." I have already referred 
 to the testimony of Menahem ben Zerah ; "* to his may 
 be added that of another Provengal, Estori Parhi, who 
 left France in 1306 to visit Spain, and wrote an in- 
 teresting book of Halakah and of recollections of his 
 travels. About 1320, David d'Estella, philosopher and 
 poet, wrote: "It is from France that God has sent 
 us a bright light for all Israel in the person of E. Solo- 
 mon ben Isaac." Eashi was also cited in terms of 
 praise by the brilliant commentator and philosopher 
 Menahem ben Solomon Meiri, of Perpignan (1249- 
 1306), and by the casuist and theologian Jacob de 
 Bagnols (about 1357-1361), grandson of David d'Es- 
 tella. 
 
206 EASHI 
 
 Prom the Provence, Eashi's renown spread on the one 
 side to Italy, and on the other to Spain. His Biblical 
 commentary was used by Benjamin ben Abraham Anaw 
 (about 1240), of Eome, whose brother Zcdekiah was the 
 author of the Halakic and ritual collection Shibhole 
 ha^Leket (The Gleaned Sheaves), a work written in the 
 second half of the thirteenth century, which owes much 
 to Eashi and his successors. The celebrated scholar and 
 poet Immanuel ben Solomon Eomi (about 1365-1330) 
 seems to have known Eashi, one of whose Biblical 
 explanations he cites for the purpose of refuting it. 
 The influence of the French commentator is more 
 apparent in the works of the Italian philosopher and 
 commentator Solomon Yedidiah (about 1285-1330) 
 and the commentator Isaiah da Trani (end of the 
 thirteenth century). 
 
 Eashi's influence was more fruitful of results in 
 Spain, where intellectual activity was by far more 
 developed than in Italy. His renovm soon crossed the 
 Pyrenees, and, curiously enough, the Spanish exegetes, 
 disciples of the Hayyoudjes and the Ibn-Djanahs 
 availed themselves of his Biblical commentary, despite 
 its inferiority from a scientific point of view. They did 
 not fail, it is true, occasionally to dispute it. This was 
 the case with Abraham Ibn Ezra, who possibly came to 
 know Eashi's works during his sojourn in France, and 
 combated Eashi's grammatical explanations without 
 sparing him his wonted sharp-edged witticisms. To 
 Abraham Ibn Ezra has been attributed the following 
 poem in Eashi's honor, without doubt wrongfully so, 
 although Abraham Ibn Ezra never recoiled from con- 
 tradictions. 
 
THE INFLUENCE OF EASHI 307 
 
 A star hath arisen on the horizon of France and shineth 
 afar. 
 
 Peaceful it came, with all its cortege, from Sinai and 
 Zion. 
 
 .... The blind he enlightens, the thirsty delights with 
 his honey-comb, 
 
 He whom men call Parshandata, the Torah's clear in- 
 terpreter. 
 
 All doubts he solves, whose books are Israel's joy. 
 
 Who pierceth stout walls, 'and layeth bare the law's mys- 
 terious sense. 
 
 For him the crown is destined, to him belongeth royal 
 homage. 
 
 When one sees with what severity and injustice 
 Abraham Ibn Ezra treats the French commentator, one 
 may well doubt whether this enthusiastic eulogy sprang 
 from his pen, capricious though we know him to have 
 been. " The Talmud," he said, " has declared that the 
 Peshat must never lose its rights. But following gen- 
 erations gave the first place to Derash, as Eashi did, who 
 pursued this method in commenting upon the entire 
 Bible, though he believed he was using Peshat. In 
 his works there is not" one rational explanation out of a 
 thousand." As I have said, Eashi and Ibn Ezra were 
 not fashioned to understand each other.'" The com- 
 mentaries of David Kimhi'" contain no such sharp 
 criticisms. By birth Kimhi was a Provengal, by literary 
 tradition a Spaniard. He often turned Eashi's Biblical 
 commentaries to good account for himself. Sometimes 
 he did not mention Eashi by name, sometimes he re- 
 ferred to him openly. 
 
208 EASHI 
 
 A pompous eulogy of Eashi was written by Moses ben 
 Nahman, or Nahmanides/" in the introduction to Ms 
 commentary on the Pentateuch; and the body of the 
 work shows that he constantly drew his inspiration from 
 Eashi and ever had Eashi before his eyes. At the same 
 time he also opposes Eashi, either because the free ways 
 of the French rabbi shocked him, or because the French- 
 man's naive rationalism gave offense to his mysticism. 
 In fact, it is known that Nahmanides is one of the first 
 representatives of Kabbalistic exegesis, and his example 
 contributed not a little toward bringing it into credit. 
 Even the author of the ZoTiar — ^that Bible of the 
 Kabbalah, which under cover of false authority exercised 
 so lasting an influence upon Judaism — whether or not 
 he was Moses of Leon (about 1250-1305) used for his 
 exegesis the commentary of Eashi, without, of course, 
 mentioning it by name, and sometimes he even repro- 
 duced it word for word. The Kabbalist esegete Bahya 
 or Behaia ben Asher, of Saragossa, in his commentary 
 on the Pentateuch (1291) cites Eashi as one of the prin- 
 cipal representatives of Peshat — ^behold how far we have 
 gotten from Ibn Ezra, and how Eashi is cleared of 
 unjust contempt. 
 
 Although ISTahmanides was wrongly held to have 
 been the disciple of Judah Sir Leon, it was he who 
 introduced into Spain the works and the method of 
 French Talmudists, whom he possibly came to know 
 through his masters. Thus the Spanish Talmudists, 
 though they boasted such great leaders as Alfasi and 
 Maimonides, nevertheless accepted also the heritage of 
 the French academies. Eashi's influence is perceptible 
 and acknowledged in the numerous Talmudic writings 
 
THE INFLUENCE OP EASHI 209 
 
 of Solomon ben Adret/" and it is clearly manifest in the 
 commentary on Alfasi by Nissim Gerundi (about 1350), 
 who copies Eashi literally, at the same time developing 
 his thought, not infrequently over-elaborating it. He 
 also refutes Eashi at times, but his refutation is often 
 wrong. The man, however, who best represents the 
 fusion of Spanish and French Talmudism was assuredly 
 Asher ben Jehiel,"' who, a native of the banks of the 
 Ehine, implanted in Spain the spirit of French Ju- 
 daism, and in his abridgment of the Talmud united 
 Spanish tradition, whose principal representative was 
 Alfasi, with Franco-German tradition, whose uncon- 
 tested leader was Eashi. 
 
 Since that time Talmudic activity, the creative force 
 of which seems to have been exhausted, has been imder- 
 goiag a change of character. Asher ben Jehiel, or, as 
 he has been called, Eosh, terminated an important 
 period of rabbinical literature, the period of the 
 RisJionim. We have seen how during this period 
 Eashi's reputation, at first confined within the limits 
 of his native province, extended little by little, until it 
 spread over the surrounding countries, like the tree of 
 which Daniel speaks, "whose height reached unto the 
 heaven, and the sight thereof to all the earth; whose 
 leaves were fair, and the fruit thereof much " (Dan. iv. 
 30-31), 
 
CHAPTEE XII 
 
 Peom the Expulsion of the Jews feom 
 Eeancb to the Peesent Time 
 
 It might be supposed that the Jews of France, chased 
 from their fatherland, and so deprived of their schools, 
 would have disappeared entirely from the scene of 
 literary history, and that the intellectual works brought 
 into being by their activity in the domains of Biblical 
 exegesis and Talmudic jurisprudence would have been 
 lost forever. Such was by no means the case. It has 
 been made clear that the French school exerted influence 
 outside of France from the twelfth to the fourteenth 
 century, and we shall now see how the Jews of France, 
 saving their literary treasures in the midst of the dis- 
 turbances, carried their literature to foreign countries, 
 to Piedmont and to Germany. When the Jews of Ger- 
 many were expelled in turn, Poland became the centre 
 of Judaism, and the literary tradition was thus main- 
 tained without interruption up to the present time. It 
 is an unique example of continuity. The vitality of 
 Judaism gained strength in the misfortunes that suc- 
 cessively assailed it. 
 
 Per damna, per caedes, ab Ipso 
 Ducit opes animumque ferro. 
 
 A large number of Jews exiled from France estab- 
 lished themselves in the north of Italy, where they 
 
THE INFLUENCE OF EASHI 211 
 
 formed distinct communities faithful to the ancient 
 traditions. Thus they propagated the works of the 
 French rabbis. Eashi's commentaries and the ritual 
 collections following his teachings were widely copied 
 there, and of course, truncated and mutilated. They 
 served both as the text-books of students and as the 
 breviaries, so to speak, of scholars. 
 
 They also imposed themselves, as we have seen, upon 
 the Spanish rabbis, who freely recognized the superiority 
 of the Jews of France and Germany in regard to Tal- 
 mudic schools. Isaac ben Sheshet "° said, " From France 
 goes forth the Law, and the word of Grod from 
 Germany." Eashi's influence is apparent in the Tal- 
 mudic writings of this rabbi, as well as ia the works, 
 both Talmudic and exegetic in character, of his successor 
 Simon ben Zemah Duran,"' and in the purely exegetic 
 works of the celebrated Isaac Abrabanel (1437-1509), 
 who salutes in Eashi " a father ia the province of the 
 Talmud." It was in the fifteenth century that some of 
 the super-commentaries were made to Eashi's commen- 
 tary on the Pentateuch. The most celebrated — and justly 
 celebrated — is that of Elijah ben Abraham Mizrahi, a 
 Hebrew scholar, mathematician, and philosopher, who 
 lived in Turkey. His commentary, says Wogue, "is a 
 master-piece of logic, keen-wittedness, and Talmudic 
 learning." 
 
 However, as if the creative force of the Jews had been 
 exhausted by a prolific period lasting several centuries, 
 Eashi's commentaries were not productive of original 
 works in a similar style. Accepted everywhere, they 
 became the law everywhere, but they did not stimulate 
 
213 EASHI 
 
 to freBh effort. Scholars followed him, as the poet said, 
 in adoring his footsteps from afar. 
 
 For if his works had spent their impulse, his person- 
 ality, on the other hand, became more and more popular. 
 Legends sprang up ascribing to him the attributes of a 
 saint and universal scholar, almost a magician.""" He 
 was venerated as the father of rabbinical literature. In 
 certain German communities, he, together with a few 
 other rabbis, is mentioned in the prayer recited in com- 
 memoration of the dead, and his name is followed by the 
 formula, " who enlightened the eyes of the Captivity by 
 his commentaries." shi's commentaries not only exer- 
 cised profound influence upon the literary movement of 
 the Jews, but also wove a strain into the destinies of 
 the Jews of France and Germany. During this entire 
 period of terror, the true middle ages of the Jews, for 
 whom the horrors of the First Crusade, like a "disas- 
 trous twilight," did not draw to an end until the bright 
 dawn of the French Eevolution, the thing that sustained 
 and animated them, that enabled them to bear pillage 
 and exploitation, martyrdom and exile, was their unre- 
 mitting study of the Bible and the Talmud. And how 
 could they have become so passionately devoted to the 
 reading of the two books, if Eashi had not given them the 
 key, if he had not thus converted the books into a safe- 
 guard for the Jews, a lamp in the midst of darkness, a 
 bright hope against alien persecutions ? 
 
 Eashi's prestige then became so great that the prin- 
 cipal Jewish communities claimed him as their own,"' 
 and high-standing families alleged that they were con- 
 nected with him. It is known that the celebrated mystic 
 Eleazar of Worms (1160-1230) is a descendant of his. 
 
THE INFLUENCE OE EASHI 213 
 
 A certain Solomon Sinihah, of Troyes, in 1297 wrote a 
 casuistic, ethical work in which he claims to belong to 
 the fourth generation descended from Eashi beginning 
 with Eashi's sons-in-law. The family of the Erench 
 rabbi may be traced down to the thirteenth century. 
 At that time mention is made of a Samuel ben Jacob, of 
 Troyes, who lived in the south of Erance. And it is also 
 from Eashi that the family Luria, or Loria, pretends to 
 be descended, although the titles for its claim are not 
 iacontestably authentic. The name of Loria comes, not, 
 as has been said, from the river Loire, but from a little 
 city of Italy, and the family itself may have originated 
 in Alsace. Its head, Solomon, son of Samuel Spira 
 (about 1375), traced his connection with Eashi through 
 his mother, a daughter of Mattathias Treves, one of the 
 last Erench rabbis. The daughter of Solomon, Miriam 
 (this name seems to have been frequent in Eashi's 
 family), was, it appears, a scholar. It is certain that 
 the family has produced illustrious offspriag, among 
 them Yosselmann of Eosheim (about 1554), the famous 
 rabbi and defender of the Jews of the Empire; Elijah 
 Loanz (about 1564-1616), wandering rabbi, Kabbalist, 
 and commentator; Solomon Luria'" (died in 1573 at 
 Lublin), likewise a Kabbalist and Talmudist, but of the 
 highest rank, on account of his bold thinking and sense 
 of logic, who renewed the study of the Tossafists; and 
 Jehiel Heilprin (about 1725), descended from Luria 
 through his mother, author of a valuable and learned 
 Jewish chronicle followed by an index of rabbis. He 
 declared he had seen a genealogical table on which 
 Eashi's name appeared establishing his descent from so 
 remote an ancestor as Johanan ha-Sandlar and includ- 
 
214 EASHI 
 
 ing Eashi in the steps.""" This family, which was divided 
 into two branches, the Heilprins and the Lurias, still 
 counts among its members renowned scholars and esti- 
 mable merchants. 
 
 As if the numberless copies of his commentaries had 
 not sufficed to spread Eashi's popularity, the discovery 
 of printing lent its aid in giving it the widest possible 
 vogue. The commentary on the Pentateuch is the first 
 Hebrew work of which the date of printing is known. 
 The edition was published at Eeggio at the beginning of 
 1475 by the printer Abraham ben Garton. Zunz 
 reckoned that up to 1818 there were seventeen editions 
 in which the commentary appeared alone, and one 
 hundred and sixty in which it accompanied the text. 
 Some modiiications were introduced into the commentary 
 either because of the severity of the censors or because of 
 the prudence of the editors. Among the books that the 
 Inquisition confiscated in 1753 in a small city of Italy, 
 there were twenty-one Pentateuchs with Eashi's com- 
 mentary. 
 
 All the printed editions of the Babylonian Talmud 
 are accompanied by Eashi's commentaries in the inner 
 column and by the Tossaf ot in the outer column. 
 
 Eashi's authority gained in weight more and more, 
 and he became representative in ordinary, as it were, of 
 Talmudic exegesis. This fact is made evident by a 
 merely superficial survey of the work Bet Yosef (House 
 of Joseph), which is, one may say, an index to rabbinical 
 literature. Eashi is mentioned here on every page. He 
 is the official commentator of the Talmudic text. The 
 author of the Bet Yosef, the learned Talmudist and 
 Kabbalist Joseph ben Ephraim Karo (born 1448, died 
 
THE INFLUENCE OF EASHI 215 
 
 at Safed, Palestine, at 87 years of age), places Eashi's 
 Biblical commentary on the same plane as the Aramaic 
 translation of the Bible. He recommends that it be 
 read on the Sabbath, at the same time as the Pentateuch 
 and the Targum. Luria goes even further. According 
 to him, when the Targum and Eashi cannpt be read at 
 the same time, preference should be given to Eashi, 
 since he is more easily understood, and renders the text 
 more intelligible. 
 
 Eashi's commentary, therefore, entered into the re- 
 ligious life of the Jews. It is chiefly the commentaries 
 on the Five Books of Moses and the Five Megillot, the 
 Scriptural books forming part of the synagogue liturgy, 
 t"hat were widely circulated in print and were made the 
 basis of super-commentaries. The best of these are the 
 super-commentary of Simon Ashkenazi, a writer of the 
 seventeenth century, born in Frankfort and died at Jeru- 
 salem, and the clear, ingenious super-commentary of 
 Sabbatai ben Joseph Bass, printer and bibliographer, 
 born in 1641, died at Krotoszyn in 1718. 
 
 The other representatives of the French school of 
 exegetes have fallen into oblivion. Eashi alone survived, 
 and what saved him, I greatly fear, were the Halakic 
 and Haggadic elements pervading his commentary. An 
 editor who ventured to undertake the publication (in 
 1705) of the commentary on the Pentateuch by Samuel 
 ben Meir,"" complains in the preface that his contem- 
 poraries found in it nothing worth occupying their time. 
 Eashi's commentary was better adapted to the average 
 intellects and to the Talmudic culture of its readers. 
 
 Eashi's Talmudic commentary, also, was more gener- 
 ally studied than other commentaries, and gave a more 
 
316 KASHI 
 
 stinmlating impulse to rabbinical literature. Teachers 
 and masters racked their brains to discover in it unex- 
 pected difficulties, for the sake of solving them in the 
 most ingenious fashion. This produced the kind of liter- 
 ature known as Hiddushim, Novellae, and DikduMm, 
 subtleties. A rabbi, for example, would set himself the 
 task of counting the exact number of times the expres- 
 sion " that is to say " occurs in the commentary on the 
 first three Talmudic treatises. Jacob ben Joshua Falk 
 (died 1648), who believed Eashi had appeared to him in 
 a dream, attempted in his " Defense of Solomon " to 
 clear the master of all attacks made upon him. Solomon 
 Luria and Samuel Edels (about 1555-1631), or, as is 
 said in the schools, the Maharshal and the Maharsha, 
 explain the difficult passages of Eashi's Talmudic com- 
 mentary, sometimes by dint of subtlety, sometimes by 
 happy corrections. Still more meritorious are the efforts 
 of Joel Sirkes (died in 1640 at Cracow), who often 
 skilfully altered Eashi's text for the better. 
 
 By a curious turn in affairs it was the Christians who 
 in the province of exegesis took up the legacy be- 
 queathed by Eashi. While grammar and exegesis by 
 reason of neglect remained stationary among the Jews, 
 the humanists cultivated them eagerly. Taste for the 
 classical languages had aroused a lively interest in 
 Hebrew and a desire to know the Scriptures in the 
 origiaal. The Eeformation completed what the Eenais- 
 sance had begun, and the Protestants placed the Hebrew 
 Bible above the Vulgate. Eashi, it is true, did not gain 
 immediately from this renewal of Biblical studies j 
 greater inspiration was derived from the more method- 
 ical and more scientific Spaniards. But his eclipse was 
 
THE INFLUENCE OE EASHI 317 
 
 only momentary. Eichard Simon^ who gave so vigorous 
 an impulse to Biblical studies in France, and who, if 
 Bossuet had not forestalled him, would possibly have 
 originated a scientific method of exegesis, profited by 
 the commentaries of the man he called major et prae- 
 siantior iheologus. All the Christians with pretensions 
 to Hebrew scholarship, who endeavored to understand 
 the Bible in the original, studied Eashi, not only because 
 he helped them to grasp the meaning of the text, but 
 also because in their eyes he was the official rabbinical 
 authority. He was quoted, abridged, and plagiarized — 
 a clear sign of popularity. Soon the need arose to render 
 him accessible to all theologians, and he was translated 
 into the academic language, that is, into Latin. Partial 
 translations appeared in great number between 1556 and 
 1710. Finally, J. F. Breithaupt made a complete 
 translation, for which he had recourse to various manu- 
 scripts. His work is marked by clear intelligence and 
 great industry. This translation as well as the com- 
 mentary of Nicholas de Lyra might still be consulted 
 with profit by an editor of Eashi. 
 
 Since the Christians did not devote themselves to the 
 Talmud as much as to the Bible, they made but little 
 use of the Talmudic commentaries of the French rabbi. 
 Nevertheless John Buxtorf the Elder, who calls Eashi 
 consummatissimus ille theologiae judaicae doctor, fre- 
 quently appeals to his authority in the " Hebrew and 
 Chaldaic Lexicon." Other names might be mentioned 
 besides Buxtorf s. 
 
 Nor did Eashi fail to receive the supreme honor of 
 being censored by the Church. Under St. Louis autos- 
 dorfe were made of his works, and later the Inquisition 
 
318 EASHI 
 
 pursued them with its rigorous measures. They were 
 prohibited in Spain and burnt in Italy. The ecclesiasti- 
 cal censors eliminated or corrected whatever seemed to 
 them an attempt upon the dignity of religion. At the 
 present time many French ecclesiastics know Eashi only 
 for his alleged blasphemies against Christianity. 
 
 While the Catholics and Protestants who possessed 
 Hebrew learning applied themselves to the study of 
 Eashi, among the Jews 
 
 " he was always revered, always admired, even as an 
 exegete, but he was admired to so high a degree that no one 
 thought of continuing his work and of deepening the furrow 
 he had so vigorously opened. It seemed as though his 
 commentary had raised the Pillars of Hercules of Biblical 
 knowledge and as though with him exegesis had said its 
 last word. During this period the grammatical and ra- 
 tional study of the word of God fell into more and more 
 neglect, and its real meaning became increasingly obscured. 
 The place of a serious and sincere exegesis was taken by 
 frivolous combinations, subtle comparisons, and mystical 
 interpretations carried out according to preconceived 
 notions and based on the slightest accident of form in the 
 text. Rashl had many admirers, but few successors." '" 
 
 Isaiah Horwitz (1570-1630), whose ritual and ethical 
 collection is still very popular in Eastern Europe, com- 
 pares Eashi's commentaries to the revelation on Sinai. 
 " In every one of his phrases," he says, " marvellous 
 things are concealed, for he wrote under Divine inspira- 
 tion." His son Sabbatai Sheftel is even more striking in 
 his expressions ; he says, " I know by tradition that who- 
 ever finds a defect in Eashi, has a defect in his own 
 brain." It was related that when Eashi was worried by 
 some dlEBcult question, he shut himself up in a room, 
 
THE INFLUENCE OP EASHI 319 
 
 where God appeared to throw light upon his doubts. 
 The apparition came to him when he was plunged in pro- 
 found sleep, and he did not return to his waking senses 
 until some one brought him an article from the wall of 
 his room. Thus a superstitious, sterile respect replaced 
 the intelligent and productive admiration of the earlier 
 centuries. 
 
 To revive the scientific spirit and the rational study 
 of the Scriptures, a Moses Mendelssohn (1739-1786) 
 was needed. With the year 1780, when his translation 
 of the Pentateuch and his commentary upon it appeared, 
 the renaissance of Jewish learning commenced ; even the 
 study of the Talmud, regenerated by the critical spirit 
 of the time, was resumed. Mendelssohn himself drew 
 largely upon Eashi's commentary, correcting the text 
 when it seemed corrupt, trying to decipher the French 
 laazim, and paying attention to the essential meaning of 
 Eashi's explanations, either for the sake of completing or 
 defending them, or for the sake of refuting them in the 
 name of taste and good sense. His collaborators and 
 disciples, the Biurists, — as they are called, after Biur, 
 the general title of their works — desirous of reconciling 
 the natural meaning of the test with the traditional 
 interpretations, often turned to good account the views 
 of the French commentator. These writings, which 
 renewed the rational study of Hebrew and the taste for a 
 sound exegesis, worthily crown the work begun by the 
 rabbi of the eleventh century. At this day the Perush 
 of Eashi and the Biur of Mendelssohn are the favorite 
 commentaries of orthodox Jews. 
 
 Since Mendelssohn the glorious tradition of learning 
 has not been interrupted again, and Eashi's work con- 
 
220 EASHI 
 
 tirnies to be bound up with the destinies of Jewish 
 literature. The nineteenth century will make a place 
 for itself in the annals of this literature; for the love 
 of Jewish learning has inspired numerous scholars, and 
 the renown of most of them is connected with Eashi. 
 Zunz (1794-1886) became known in 1833 through his 
 essay on Eashi, a model of critical skill and learning, 
 despite inevitable mistakes and omissions. Geiger™ 
 won a name for himself by his studies on the French 
 esegetic school. Heidenheim"" wrote a work dis- 
 tinguished for subtlety, to defend the explanations of 
 Eashi from the grammatical point of view. Samuel 
 David Luzzatto (1800-1865), with his usual brilliancy, 
 made a warm defense of Eashi; and, finally, I. H. 
 Weiss ^°° dedicated to him a study dealing with certain 
 definite points in Eashi's life and work. When Luzzatto 
 took up the defense of Eashi with ardor, it was to place 
 him over against Abraham Ibn Ezra, who, in Luzzatto's 
 opinion, was too highly exalted. The considerable 
 progress made by exegesis and philology rendered many 
 scholars aware of the defectiveness of Eashi's Biblical 
 commentaries; while Ibn Ezra was more pleasing to 
 them on account of his scientific intellect and his daring. 
 But the French commentator lost nothing of his author- 
 ity in the eyes of the conservative students of Hebrew, 
 who continued to see in him an indispensable help. 
 This influence of Eashi's contains mixed elements of 
 good and evil. In some measure he created the fortune 
 of Midrashic exegesis, and he is in a slight degree 
 responsible for the relative stagnation of Biblical as 
 compared with Talmudic studies in Eastern Europe. 
 
THE IKFLUENCE OF EASHI 231 
 
 In Talmudic literature, on the contrary, Eashi's 
 authority is uncontested, in fact, cannot be contested. 
 Its stimulating impulse is not yet exhausted. While 
 the Talmudists of the old school saw in him the official, 
 consecrated guide, the Eapoports,'"* the Weisses, tho 
 Frankels,"^ all who cultivated the scientific and historic 
 study of the Talmud, lay stress upon the excellence of 
 his method and the sureness of his information. About 
 twelve years ago, an editor wanted to publish the entire 
 Talmud in one volume. He obtained the authorization 
 of the rabbis only upon condition that he printed Eashi's 
 commentary along with the test. 
 
 Thus Eashi's reputation has not dimiaished in the 
 course of eight centuries. On the first of August, 1905, 
 it was exactly eight hundred years that the eminent 
 scholar died at Troyes. As is proper, the event was 
 marked by a commemoration of a literary and scientific 
 character. Articles on Eashi appeared in the Jewish 
 journals and reviews. Such authorities as Dr. Berliner, 
 Mr. W. Bacher, and others, sketched his portrait and 
 published appreciations of his works. Dr. Berliner, 
 moreover, issued a new edition of Eashi's Pentateuch 
 Commentary in honor of the anniversary, and, as was 
 mentioned above, Mr. S. Buber celebrated the occasion 
 by inaugurating the publication of the hitherto unedited 
 works of Eashi, begimung vith the Sefer ha-Orah. 
 
CONCLUSION 
 
 The beautiful unity of his life and the noble simplicity 
 of his nature make Eashi's personality one of the most 
 sympathetic in Jewish history. The writings he left 
 are of various kinds and possess various interests for us. 
 His Decisions and Eesponsa acquaint us with his 
 personal traits, and with the character of his contempo- 
 raries ; his religious poems betray the profound faith of 
 his soul, and his sensitiveness to the woes of his brethren. 
 But above all Eashi was a commentator. He carved 
 himself a niche from which he has not been removed, 
 and though his work as a commentator has been copied, 
 it will doubtless remaia impossible of absolute imitation. 
 Eashi, then, is a commentator, though as such he cannot 
 aspire to the glory of masters like Maimonides and 
 Jehudah ha-Levi. But the task he set himself was to 
 comment upon the Bible and the Talmud, the two living 
 sources that feed the great stream of Judaism, and he 
 fulfilled the task in a masterly fashion and conclusively. 
 Moreover he touched upon nearly all branches of Jewish 
 literature, grammar, exegesis, history, and archaeology. 
 In short his commentaries became inseparable from the 
 texts they explain. For, if in some respects his work 
 despite all this may seem of secondary importance and 
 inferior in creative force to the writings of a Saadia or 
 a Maimonides, it gains enormously in value by the dis- 
 cussion and comment it evoked and the influence it 
 exercised. 
 
CONCLUSION 233 
 
 Eashi, one may say, is one of the fathers of rabbinical 
 literature, vrhich he stamped with the impress of his 
 clear, orderly intellect. Of him it could be written : 
 "With him began a new era for Judaism, the era of 
 science imited to profound piety." 
 
 His influence was not limited to scholarly circles. He 
 is one of the rare writers who have had the privilege 
 of becoming truly popular, and his renown was not 
 tarnished, as that of Maimonides came near being on 
 account of bitter controversies and violent contests. He 
 was not the awe-inspiring master who is followed from 
 afar; he was the master to whom one always listens, 
 whose words are always read; and the writers who imi- 
 tate his work — with more or less felicity — believe them- 
 selves inspired by him. The middle ages knew no 
 Jewish names more famous than those of Jehudah ha- 
 Levi and Maimonides; but how many nowadays read 
 their writings and understand them wholly? The 
 " Diwan " as well as the " Guide of the Perplexed " 
 are products of Jewish culture grafted upon Arabic 
 culture. They do not unqualifiedly correspond to present 
 ideas and tastes. Eashi's work, on the contrary, is 
 essentially and intimately Jewish. Judaism could re- 
 nounce the study of the Bible and of that other Bible, 
 the Talmud, only under penalty of intellectual suicide. 
 And since, added to respect for these two monuments, 
 is the diSiculty of understanding them, the commen- 
 taries holding the key to them are assured of an exist- 
 ence as along as theirs. 
 
 Eashi's writings, therefore, extend beyond the range 
 of merely occasional works, and his influence will not 
 soon die out. His influence, indeed, is highly productive 
 
234 EASHI 
 
 of results, since his commentaries do not arrest the 
 march of science, as witness his disciples who enlarged 
 and enriched the ground he had ploughed so vigorously, 
 and whose fame only adds to the lustre of Eashi's name. 
 The field he commanded was the entire Jewish culture 
 of France — of France, which for a time he turned into 
 the classic land of Biblical and Talmudic studies. " In 
 him," says M. Israel Levi, " is personified the Judaism 
 of Northern France, with its scrupulous attachment to 
 tradition, its naive, untroubled faith, and its ardent 
 piety, free from all mysticism." Nor was Eashi confined 
 to France; his great personality dominated the whole of 
 Judaism. Dr. M. Berliner writes : " Even nowadays, 
 after eight hundred years have rolled by, it is from him 
 we draw our inspiration, — we who cultivate the sacred 
 literature, — it is his school to which we resort, it is hia 
 commentaries we study. These commentaries are and 
 will remain our light in the principal department of 
 our intellectual patrimony." 
 
 Doubtless Eashi is but a commentator, yet a com- 
 mentator without peer by reason of his value and 
 influence. And, possibly, this commentator represents 
 most exactly, most powerfully, certain general propen- 
 sities of the Jewish people and certain main tendencies 
 of Jewish culture. Eashi, then, has a claim, universally 
 recognized, upon a high place of honor in our history 
 and in our literature. 
 
APPENDIX I 
 THE FAMILY OF RASHI 
 
a 
 
 XI . 
 
 
 S3 
 123! 
 
 h- 1 
 
 Q 
 <i1 
 
 o 
 
 M 
 
 g 
 
 H 
 
 B 
 H 
 
 ho 
 3 
 
 - = A 
 
 r3 
 
 
 ■S:3 f^ 
 
 
 in 
 
 ^ I" 
 
 ►- .2 
 
 O .3 
 
 O 
 
 t3 
 S 
 
 d 
 o 
 
 s e 
 
 O o 
 
 a.9 
 
 Is 
 
 H 
 
 
 
 a o 
 
 
 >^ 
 
 « 2g 
 
 d 
 
 a — 
 
 
 = Mir: 
 
 theE 
 1130-11 
 
 anan 
 1184 
 
 O ii -; jj fl . 
 
 0) 
 
 ^ g Sg 3' 
 
 
 J d OP 
 
 
 a 
 
 a i « 
 
APPENDIX II 
 BIBLIOGRAPHY 
 
APPENDIX II 
 
 BIBLIOGRAPHY 
 
 A. The Woeks op Rashi 
 
 A critical revision of Rashi's works remains to be made. 
 They were used to such an extent, and, up to the time when 
 printing gave definiteness to existing diversities, so many 
 copies were made, that some of the works were preserved 
 In bad shape, others were lost, and others again received 
 successive additions. 
 
 1. Biblical Commentaeies. — They cover nearly all the 
 twenty-four books of the Bible. 
 
 Jot. — " On JoT} the manuscripts are divided into series, 
 according to whether or not they break off at xl. 28 of the 
 text. The one series gives Rashl's commentary to the end; 
 the other, on the ground that Rashi's death prevented him 
 from finishing his work, completes the commentary with 
 that of another rabbi, R. Jacob Nazir " (Arsene Darmeste- 
 ter). Geiger attributes this supplementary commentary, 
 which exists in several versions, to Samuel ben Meir; others 
 attribute it to Joseph Kara. Some regard it as a compila- 
 tion; others, again, assert that the entire commentary was 
 not written by Rashi. 
 
 Ezra and Jfe^iemiaft.— Some authors deny that Rashi com- 
 posed commentaries on Ezra and Nefiemiah. 
 
 Chronicles. — It is certain that the commentary on Chroni- 
 cles, which does not occur In the good manuscripts, and 
 which was published for the first time at Naples in 1487, 
 is not to be ascribed to Rashi. This was observed by so 
 early a writer as Azulai, and it has been clearly demon- 
 strated by Weiss (Kerem Hemed, v., 232 et seq.). It 
 seems that Rashi did not comment upon Chronicles at all 
 (in spite of Zunz and Weiss). Concerning the author of 
 
233 EASHI 
 
 the printed commentary there is doubt. According to Zunz 
 (Zur Oesehichte und Literatur, p. 73), it must have been 
 composed at Narbonne about 1130-1140 by the disciples of 
 Saadia (?). 
 
 2. Talmudic Commentaries. — Rashi did not comment on 
 the treatises lacking a Gemara, namely, Eduyot, Middot 
 (the commentary upon which was written by Shemaiah), 
 and Tamid (in the commentary on which Rashi is cited). 
 It is calculated that, in all, Rashi commented on thirty 
 treatises (compare Azulai, Shem Jia-GedoUm, s. v., Weiss, 
 and below, section B, 2). 
 
 Pesahim. — The commentary on Pesahim, from 996 on is 
 the work of Rashbam. 
 
 Taanit. — So early a writer as Emden denied to Rashi the 
 authorship of the commentary on Taanit; and his conclu- 
 sions are borne out by the style. There was a commentary 
 on Taanit cited by the Tossafot, which forms the basis of 
 the present commentary; and this may have belonged to 
 the school of Rashi. 
 
 Moed Katan. — The commentary on Moed Katan is attri- 
 buted by Reifmann to Gershom {Monatsschrift, III). Ac- 
 cording to B. Zomber (Rashi's Commentary on Nedarim 
 and Moed Katan, Berlin, 1867), who shows that Gershom's 
 commentary is different, the extant commentary is a first 
 trial of Rashi's and was later recast by him. This would 
 explain the differences between the commentary under con- 
 sideration and the one joined to the En Jacob and to Rif, 
 which is more complete and might be the true commentary 
 by Rashi. These conclusions have been attacked by Rab- 
 binowicz {Dikduke Soferim, II), who accepts Reifmann's 
 thesis. Zomber replied in the Moreh Derek, Lyck, 1870; and 
 Rabbinowicz in turn replied in the Moreh ha-Moreh, Munich, 
 1871. To sum up, both sides agree in saying that the basis 
 of the present commentary was modified by Rashi or by 
 some one else. According to I. H. Weiss various versions of 
 Rashi's Commentary were current. The most incomplete 
 is the present one. That accompanying Rif is more com- 
 plete, though also not without faults. 
 
BIBLIOGEAPHY 333 
 
 Nedarim. — The commentary on Isfedarim, from 226 to 
 256, may contain a fragment ty R. Gershom. Nor, to judge 
 from the style, does the remainder seem to belong to Rashi. 
 Good writers do not cite it. Reifmann attributes it to 
 Isaiah da Trani, Zomber to the disciples of Rashi. 
 
 Nazir. — Several critics deny to Rashi the authorship of 
 the commentary on 'Sazir. Although there are no strong 
 reasons for so doing, the doubt exists; for differences are 
 pointed out between this and the other commentaries. P. 
 Chajes holds that Rashi's disciples are responsible for the 
 commentaries on Nedarim and Taanit. 
 
 Zebahim. — The commentary on ZelaTiim is corrupt and 
 has undergone interpolations; but there are no strong rea- 
 sons why it should not be ascribed to Rashi. 
 
 Baba Batra. — Rashbam completed his grandfather's com- 
 mentary on Baba Batra from 29a on, or, rather, later 
 writers supplemented Rashi's commentary with that of his 
 grandson. This supplement is to be found at the Bodleian 
 In a more abridged and, without doubt, in a more authen- 
 tic form. 
 
 Makkot. — The commentary on MaTchot, from 196 on, was 
 composed by Judah ben Nathan (see note in the editions). 
 It seems that a commentary on the whole by Rashi was 
 known to Yomtob ben Abraham. 
 
 noralot. — The commentary on Hora'iot was not written 
 by Rashi (Reifmann, Ha-Maggid xxi. 47-49). 
 
 MeiUn. — It is more certain that the commentary on 
 Me'ilah was not written by Rashi. Numerous errors and 
 additions have been pointed out. According to a manu- 
 script of Halberstamm it would belong to Judah ben 
 Nathan. 
 
 Keritot and BeJcorot. — The commentary on Keritot is 
 not Rashi's, and that on Bekorot, after 576, according to 
 Bezalel Ashkenazi, is also not Rashi's. 
 
 3. PiEKE Abot. — The commentary on the Pirke Abot, 
 printed for the first time at Mentone in 1560, was cited by 
 Simon ben Zemah Duran (d. 1444) as being by Rashi. But 
 Jacob Emden (d. 1776) denies Rashi's authorship, and 
 
334 EASHI 
 
 justly so. One manuscript attributes the commentary to 
 Isaiah da Tranl, another to Klmhi. Though the numerous 
 copies present differences, it is not Impossible that they 
 are derived from a common source, 'which might be Rashi's 
 commentary; for despite some dlffuseness in certain pas- 
 sages, the present commentary Is in his style. The Italian 
 laazim. may have been made by Italian copyists. 
 
 4. Beeeshit Rabbah. — The commentary on Bereshit RaJ>- 
 tah. According to A. Epstein (Magazin of Berliner, xlv. 
 Ha-Hoker I), this commentary, incorrectly printed (the 
 first time at Venice, 1568), is composed of two differ- 
 ent commentaries. The basis of the first is the commen- 
 tary of Kalonymos ben Sabbatai, of Rome; the second la 
 anonymous and of later date. A third commentary exists 
 in manuscript, and Is possibly of the school of Rashl. 
 
 Mention should be made of a commentary on the Thirty- 
 two Rules by R. Jos6 ha-Gellli, attributed to Rashl and 
 published in the Yeshurun of Kobak. 
 
 5. Responsa. — The Responsa of Rashi have not been 
 gathered together Into one collection. Some Responsa 
 mixed with some of his decisions occur in the compilations 
 already cited and in the following Halaklc compilations: 
 Eben ha-Ezer by Ellezer ben Nathan (Prague, 1670), Or 
 Zarua by Isaac ben Moses of Vienna (I-II. Zhitomir, 1862; 
 III-V, Jerusalem, 1887), SMhtole ha-Leket by Zedeklah ben 
 Abraham Anaw (Wilna, 1887, ed. Buber), Mordecai, by 
 Mordecal ben HlUel (printed together with Rif), Responsa 
 by Meir of Rothenberg (Cremona, 1557; Prague, 1608; Lem- 
 berg, 1860; Berlin, 1891-92; Budapest, 1896), etc. (see below, 
 section B, and Buber, Introd. to Sefer Ua-Orah, pp. 152 et 
 seq. 
 
 6. In rabbinical literature we find quotations from Re- 
 sponsa collections bearing upon special points in Talmudlc 
 law, such as ablutions, the making and the use of Teflllin, the 
 Zizit, the order of the ParasMot, the blessing of the priests, 
 the ceremony of the Passover eve, the slaughter of animals, 
 the case of diseased animals. Impurity in women, etc. 
 
BIBLIOGEAPHY 235 
 
 7. These collections have penetrate'! In part into the 
 Setee ha-Paedes, the Mahzoe Vitey, and the other compila- 
 tions mentioned in chap. IX. Upon this point see chap. IX 
 and articles by A. Epstein and S. Poznansici published in 
 the Monatsschrift, xll. 
 
 8. The Lituegicai, Poems by Rashi, some of which are 
 printed in the collections of Selihot of the German ritual, 
 are enumerated by Zunz in Synagogale Poesie des Mittel- 
 alters, Berlin, 1865, pp. 252-4. 
 
 Three books have been wrongly attributed to Rashi: a 
 medical work, Sefer ha-Befuah; a grammatical work, Le- 
 shon Limmudim, actually composed by Solomon ben Abba 
 Marl of Lunel; and an entirely fanciful production called 
 Sefer ha-Parnes (incorrect for Sefer ha-Pardes). 
 
 B. The Editions of Rashi's Wobks 
 
 I. The Biblical Commentaeies I. — According to A. Dar- 
 mesteter " twenty different editions have been counted of 
 Rashi's commentary, complete or partial, without the He- 
 brew text. As for the editions containing the Bible 
 together with Rashi's commentary, their number amounts 
 to seventeen complete editions and 155 partial editions, of 
 the latter of which 114 are for the Pentateuch alone." 
 The list of these editions is to be found in Furst, BMio- 
 theca judaica (Leipsic, 1849, 2d vol. 1851), II, pp. 78 et 
 seq.; Steinschneider, Catalogue of the Hebrew Books in the 
 Bodleian Library (Berlin, 1852-1860), col. 2340-57; Ben 
 Jakob, Ozar ha-Sefarim (Wilna, 1887), pp. 629 et seq. The 
 first two works enumerate also the super-commentaries on 
 Rashi. 
 
 II. Latin Translations. — Besides numerous partial trans- 
 lations, also listed in the works of Fiirst and Steinschnei- 
 der, a complete translation exists by J. F. Breithaupt, 
 Gotha, 1710 (Pentateuch) and 1713-1714 (Prophets and 
 Hagiographa) in quarto. 
 
 III. O-erman Translations.— L. Haymann, R. Solomon 
 larcM, AusfUhrlicher Oommentar iiber den Pentateuch. 
 1st vol.. Genesis, Bonn, 1883, in German characters and 
 
236 EASHI 
 
 without the Hebrew text. Leopold Dukes, Rashi eum Pen- 
 tateuch, Prague, 1833-1838, in Hebrew characters and with 
 the Hebrew text opposite. J. Dessauer, a translation Into 
 Judseo-German with a vowelled text, Budapest, 1863. Some 
 fragmentary translations Into Judaso-German had appeared 
 before, by Broesch, in 1560, etc. 
 
 2. The Talmudic Commentabies.— All the editions of the 
 Talmud contain Rashl's commentary. Up to the present 
 time forty-five complete editions of the Talmud have been 
 counted. 
 
 3. Responsa. — Some Responsa addressed to the rabbis 
 of Auxerre were published by A. Geiger, Melo Hofnaim, 
 Berlin, 1840. Twenty-eight Responsa were edited by B. 
 Goldberg, Hofes Matmonim, Berlin, 1845, thirty by J. Miil- 
 ler, Reponses faites par de celebres rabiins frangais et 
 lorrains des xie et xiie sidcles, Vienna, 1881. Some isolated 
 Responsa were published in the collection of Responsa of 
 Judah ben Asher (50a, 526), Berlin, 1846, in the Omr 
 Nehmad II, 174, in Bet-Talmud II, pp. 296 and 341, at the 
 end of the study on Rashi cited below In section C, etc. 
 
 4. The Sefer ha-Pabdes was printed at Constantinople 
 In 1802 according to a defective copy. The editor Inter- 
 calated fragments of the Sefer ha-Orah, which he took 
 from an often illegible manuscript. 
 
 The Mahzob Vitkt, the existence of which was revealed 
 by Luzzatt'o, was published according to a defective manu- 
 script of the British Museum, under the auspices of the 
 literary Society Mekise Nirdamim, by S. Hurwitz, Berlin, 
 1890-1893, 8°. 
 
 C. Ceiticai. 'Woeks or Refeeence 
 Book I. Chap. I. — On the situation of the Jews in France 
 in general, the following works may be read with profit: 
 Zunz, Zur OeschicJite und Literatur, Berlin, 1845. 
 Giidemann, OeschicJite des Erziehungswesens und der 
 Cultur der Juden in FranTcreich und Deutschland, 
 Vienna, 1880, 8° (Hebrew translation by Frledberg 
 under the title Ha-Torah weha-Hayim, ed. Achiassaf, 
 Warsaw, 1896). 
 
BIBLIOGEAPHY 337 
 
 Berliner, Aus dem Leben der deutschen Juden im Mittelal- 
 
 ter, Berlin, 1900. 
 Abrahams, Jewish Life in the Middle Ages, Jewish Publi- 
 cation Society of America, Philadelphia, 1896. Con- 
 cerning Gershom ben Judah, see Gross, Oallia judor 
 ica, Paris, 1897, pp. 299 et seq. 
 Chap. II-IV. — Works in general. Besides the accounts of 
 Rashi in the works of the historians of the Jewish people 
 and literature (especially Graetz, Oeschichte der Juden, 
 Leipsic, 1861, vol. vi; English translation published by the 
 Jewish Publication Society of America, Philadelphia, 1895, 
 vols, ill and iv; Hebrew translation by L. Rabblnovitch, 
 Warsaw, 1894, vol. iv), there are two most important stud- 
 ies of Rashi: 
 
 1. Zunz, Salomon ten Isaac, genannt Raschi, in Zunz's 
 Zeitschrift fUr die Wissenschaft des Judenthums, 1823, pp. 
 277-384. Additions by Zunz himself in the preface to Gottes- 
 dienstliche Vortrage, and in the catalogue of the library at 
 Leipsic, by Berliner in the Monatsschrift xi and xii, by 
 Klein, Hid. xi. One appreciates the originality of this study 
 all the more if one reads In the Histoire litUraire de la 
 France, xvl., the passage in which are collected all the le- 
 gends retailed concerning Rashi in the world of Christian 
 scholars at the time when Zunz wrote. 
 
 Zunz's essay was translated into Hebrew and enriched 
 with notes by Samson Bloch, Vita R. Salomon Isaki, Lem- 
 berg 1840, 8°. Second edition by Hirschenthal, Warsaw, 
 1862. The essay was abridged by Samuel Cahen in the 
 Journal de VInstitut historique, I, and plagiarized by 
 the AbbS Btienne Georges, Le rahiin Salomon Raschi (sic) 
 in the Annuaire administratif . . . . du d^partement de 
 VAuhe, 1868. Compare Clement-Mullet, Documents pour 
 servir d, Vhistoire du rablin Salomon fils de Isaac In the 
 M4moires de la Society d' Agriculture . . . . de VAuhe, xix. 
 
 2. I. H. Weiss, R. Salomon iar Isaac (in Hebrew), in the 
 Bet Talmud II, 1881-82, Nos. 2-10 (cf. iii. 81). Off-print 
 under the title Biographien jUdischer Gelehrten, 2nd leaflet, 
 Vienna, 1882. 
 
338 EASHI 
 
 Other -works on RashI are: M. H. Frledlaender, RascM, 
 In Jiidisches Litteraturblatt, xyU. M. Griinwald, Rasclil's 
 Leben und Wirken, ibid. x. 
 
 Concerning the date of Rashi's death, see Luzzatto, In 
 the Orient, vii. 418. 
 
 Book II. Chap. V. — Concerning the laazim see A. Dar- 
 mesteter in the Romania I. (1882), and various other essays 
 reprinted in the Reliqiies scientifiques, Paris, 1890, vol. i. 
 The deciphering of the laaeim by Berliner in his edition 
 of the commentary on the Pentateuch is defective, and that 
 of Landau in his edition of the Talmud (Prague, 1829; 2d 
 ed., 1839) is still more inadequate. A. Darmesteter's essay 
 on the laazim of all the Biblical commentaries will soon 
 appear. 
 
 Chap. VI. — On Moses ha-Darshan there is a monograph 
 by A. Epstein, Vienna 1891; and on Menahem ben Helbo 
 one by S. Poznanski, Warsaw, 1904. 
 
 Concerning the Biblical commentaries see.. 
 
 A. Geiger, T<[ite Naamanim, Oder Sammlung aus alien 
 schdtzbaren Manuscripten, Berlin, 1847. 
 
 ParsTiandata, die Nordfranzosische Exegetenschule, Leip- 
 sic, 1855. 
 
 Antoine L4vy, Die Exegese bei den franzosiscJien Juden 
 vom 10 bis H Jahrhundert (translated from the French), 
 Leipsic, 1873. 
 
 Nehemiah Kronberg, RascM als Exeget . . . , Halle 
 [1882]. In Winter und Wiinsche, Die jUdische Litteratur, 
 ii, Berlin, 1897, Die Bibelexegese, by W. Bacher. 
 
 Chap. VII. — See especially the above mentioned essay of 
 Weiss, and by the same author. Dor Dor we-DorscUaw, Zur 
 GeschicMe der jildischen Tradition, Vienna, Iv, 1887. 
 
 In Winter und Wiinsche ibid, ii, Die Halaoha in Italien, 
 Franlcreich und Deutschland, by A. Kaminka. 
 
 Chap. VIII. — A. Berliner, Zur Charakteristik Raschi's in 
 G-edenkbuch zur Erinnerung an D. Kaufmann (published 
 also separately), Breslau, 1900. 
 
 Chap. IX. — Weiss, ibid.; Epstein in the Monatsschrift, xll. 
 
BIBLIOGEAPHY 339 
 
 Chap. X.— Zunz, Die Bynagogale Poesie, Berlin, 1855. 
 ClSment-Mullet, Poesies ou Selichot attributes d, Baschi, in 
 the Memoir es de la Bociete acad^mique de I'Aube, xx; pub- 
 lished by itself, Troyes, 1856. 
 
 Book III. Chaps. XI-XII.— The history of Rashl's Influ- 
 ence forms part of the general history of later rabbinical 
 literature. Mention, therefore, may be made of the follow- 
 ing works, besides the history of Graetz, the works of Gel- 
 ger and of A. Lgvy, and the references in Winter und 
 Wiinsche, II: 
 
 Zunz, Zur OesoMcJite und Literatur. 
 
 Renan [and Neubauer], Les raHlns frangais (Histoire 
 littiraire de la France), Paris, 1877. 
 
 L. Wogue, Histoire de la Bihle et de Vexig&se Hilique, 
 Paris, 1881. 
 
 I. H. Weiss, Dor Dor we-DorsJiaw, iv and v. 
 
 Gross, Oallia judaica, Paris, 1897, passim. 
 
 Berliner, Beitrage zur Oeschichte der RascM-Commen- 
 tare, Berlin, 1903. 
 
 It is impossible to enumerate all the monographs and all 
 the magazine articles. Concerning Samuel b. Meir, see 
 Rosin, B. Samuel Jyen Meir als Schrifterkliirer, Breslau, 
 1880; concerning Jacob Tam, see Weiss, Bailienu Tarn, in 
 the Bet Talmud, iii; concerning Jacob b. Simson, see 
 Epstein in the Revue des etudes juives, xxxt, pp. 240 et seq.; 
 concerning Shemaiah, see A. Epstein in the Monatsschrift, 
 xli, pp. 257, 296, 564; concerning Simson b. Abraham, see 
 H. Gross in the Revue des etudes juives, vii and viii; con- 
 cerning Judah Sir Leon, see Gross in Berliner's Magazin, 
 iv and v. 
 
 The influence of Rashi upon Nicholas de Lyra and Luther 
 is the subject of an essay by Siegfried in Archiv fiir wis- 
 senschaftliohe Erforschung des Alien Testaments, i and li. 
 For Nicholas de Lyra alone, see Neumann in the Revue des 
 etudes juives, xxvi and xxvii. 
 
 Concerning Rashi's descendants, see Epstein, Mishpahat 
 Luria et Kohen-Zedek In Ha-Ooren, i. Appendix. 
 
NOTES 
 
NOTES 
 
 ' See W. Bacher, BascM und Maimuni, Monatsschrift, 
 XLIX, pp 1 et seq. Also D. Yellin and I. Abrahams, Mair 
 monides. Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society of 
 America, 1903. 
 
 ' A legend has it that Vespasian made some Jews embark 
 on three vessels, which were then abandoned on the open 
 sea. One of the ships reached Aries, another Lyons, and 
 the third Bordeaux. See Gross, Gallia judaioa, p. 74. 
 
 ' See, for example, p. 164. 
 
 ' See Note 10. 
 
 ' Israel Lgvi. 
 
 ' Th6odor Reinach, La Grande Encyclopedic, s. v. Juifs. 
 
 'However, there had been Talmudists in Franco before 
 this period. 
 
 " In the first quarter of the eleventh century Burchard, 
 bishop of Worms, wrote the famous compilation which 
 became one of the sources of canonical law. Concerning 
 Lorraine, its Jews and Talmudical schools, see chap. II, 
 p. 46 et seq. 
 
 'Not, as has been said with more Ingenuity than verity, 
 from Rosh Shibte lehudah, chief of the tribes of Judah. 
 Others, transposing the letters of " Rashi," called him 
 Yashar, " the Just." He himself signed his name Solomon 
 bar (not ben) Isaac, or Berabi Isaac. Once he wrote his 
 signature Solomon of Troyes. 
 
 >° Since " lune," moon, in Hebrew " yerah," is contained 
 in " Lunel," a number of scholars coming from Lunel bore 
 the surname " Yarhi." The city, In fact, is sometimes 
 called " Jericho," as "a result of that system of geographical 
 nomenclature to which we owe the name " Kiryat Yearim " 
 for Ntmes (derived from the Latin nemus), and " Har " 
 for Montpellier, etc. Through an analogy, based not so 
 
244 FOTBS 
 
 much upon the significance of the -n'ords as upon a sort ot 
 assonance, Spain, France, and Britain in rabbinical litera- 
 ture received the Hebrew names of Sefarad, Zarfat, and 
 Rlfat. Likewise the city of Dreux is called Darom, and 
 so on. 
 
 "A spurious Rashi genealogy from Johanan ha-Sandlar 
 was worked out in Italy at the end of the seventeenth cen- 
 tury. In Appendix I is given a table of the connections and 
 immediate descendants of Rashi. In chap. XII, p. 212 
 et seq. there are references concerning some of his later and 
 more doubtful descendants. 
 " For this passage, see p. 112. 
 
 " See pp. 61-2. Also Berliner, Aus dem Leien der deut- 
 sohen Juden. The data that follow are taken from the 
 Kolbo, the Mahzor Titry, and other sources cited by Zunz, 
 Zur GescMchte, pp. 167 et seq. 
 » See p. 81. 
 
 '" See Epstein, Die naoh Raschi genannten Oebdude in 
 Worms. 
 
 " This is the epoch which marks the arrival of Jews In 
 Great Britain. They went there, it seems, in the suite of 
 William the Conqueror (1066). They always remained in 
 touch with their co-religionists on the Continent, and were 
 sometimes called by these " the Jews of the Island." For 
 a while they enjoyed great prosperity, which, joined to their 
 religious propaganda, drew upon them the hatred of the 
 clergy. Massacred in 1190, exploited and utterly ruined in 
 the thirteenth century, they were finally exiled in 1290. 
 " See p. 39. 
 
 "= Surnamed " Segan Leviya," supposed — doubtless incor- 
 rectly — to have come originally from Vitry in Champagne. 
 He was a very conscientious pupil of Bliezer the Great. 
 Died about 1070. 
 
 "He is the author of the famous Aramaic poem read at 
 the Pentecost, beginning with the words Akdamot Millin. 
 He must not be confounded with his contemporary of the 
 same name, Mei'r ben Isaac (of Orleans?), to whom also 
 some liturgic poems are attributed. Another rabbi of Or- 
 
NOTES 245 
 
 leans, Isaac ben Menahem (according to Gross, Gallia 
 judaica, pp. 32-3, probably the father of Meir), was older 
 than Rashi, who quotes some of his Talmudic explanations, 
 and some of the notes written on his copy of the Talmud. 
 There is nothing to prove, as Gross maintains, that Rashi 
 was his pupil. It is not even certain that he knew him 
 personally. 
 
 *" See p. 77 for Rashi's relations to his teachers. 
 
 ''A Responsum signed by Rashi shows that he was the 
 tutor of the children of a certain Joseph, whose father had 
 been administrator of the community. 
 
 ^ For a long time it was thought and said that once when 
 Rashi was sick, he dictated a Responsum to his daughter. 
 As Zunz was the first to show, this story about Rashi's sec- 
 retary is based upon the faulty reading of a text. Another 
 legend proved false! Science is remorseless. See Sefer ha- 
 Pardes, ed. Constantinople, 33d,where one must read, ^2 pbl 
 not '^^ pSl- See Zunz, Zur Geschichte, p. 567, and Ber- 
 liner, Hetraische Bibliographie, XI; also, Monatsschrift, 
 XXI. 
 
 *As has been shown (chap. II, p. 51) Rashi may have 
 begun to write commentaries upon the Talmud during his 
 sojourn in Lorraine. However that may be, it is difficult 
 to distinguish in this huge production between the work of 
 his youth and that of his maturity or old age. 
 
 =* That is to say " very beautiful." It is a name frequently 
 borne by French Jewesses in the middle ages. Some give 
 the name of her husband as Ephraim. In chap. XI, pp. 187 
 et seq. the sons-in-law and grandchildren of Rashi will 
 receive further consideration. See also Appendix I. 
 
 "= According to Jacob Molin ha-Levi, called Maharil, 
 rabbi of Mayence, later of Worms, where he died in 1427. 
 Christian marriages bore many points of resemblance to 
 Jewish marriages. See the work of Lecoy de la Marche, 
 La chaire frangaise au moyen-dge. 
 
 " See pp. 165-6. 
 
 "The economic influence of the Crusades has also been 
 exaggerated. The Crusaders In Palestine came Into rela- 
 
246 NOTES 
 
 tions with scarcely no other Turks than those but slightly 
 civilized, and thus saw little of the brilliant Arabic ciyiliza- 
 tlon. The Jews certainly contributed more than the Cru- 
 sades to the development of commerce and the increase of 
 wealth. 
 
 * According to a less popular form of the legend, Godfrey 
 of Bouillon disguised himself as a beggar, and obtained 
 entrance into Rashi's home by asking for alms. But the 
 night before, the visit of the lord had been announced to 
 Rashl in a dream, and on his approach Rashi arose and 
 hailed him by the title of hero. It was in this way that 
 Joan of Arc recognized Charles VII lost in the crowd of 
 his courtiers. 
 
 " See chap. VIII, pp. 164 et seq. for further details. The 
 same chapter throws more light on Rashi's spiritual nature. 
 
 ^ Concerning this enigmatical kinsman of Rashi, see 
 chap. XI, pp. 186-7. 
 
 « See chap. VI, p. 125. 
 
 "The mistake arises from the fact that certain cursive 
 writing is called " Rashi script." It was generally em- 
 ployed in copying rabbinical works, among others, the 
 works of Rashi. The term indicates the wide popularity 
 enjoyed by the works of Rashi. 
 
 "= See p. 45. 
 
 " See chap. VI, p. 105. 
 
 " The Megillat Taanit is a collection of ephemerides or 
 calendars, indicating the days on which happy events oc- 
 curred, and on which it is forbidden to fast. The little 
 work, written in Aramaic, but enlarged by Hebrew glosses, 
 is attributed by the Talmud to Hananiah ben Hezekiah ben 
 Garon, or Gorion (first century) ; the nucleus about which 
 the book was built up seems to go back as far as Maccabean 
 times. 
 
 " See Note 94. 
 
 " Collection of texts not incorporated in the Mishnah, 
 the order of which is followed, now to explain it, now to 
 complement it, and sometimes to contradict it. The re- 
 daction of the Tosefta is attributed to R. Hiyyah bar Abba 
 (third century). 
 
NOTES 247 
 
 "When the aim of the Midrash Is to interpret the legal 
 and ritual portions of the Pentateuch, it Is called Halakic; 
 it is Haggadic when its aim is to interpret the narrative 
 and moral portions (see chap. VI, p. 107). The Halakic 
 Midrashim nevertheless contain much Haggadah. The 
 redaction of the Mekilta, the commentary on Exodus, is 
 attributed to R. Ishmael; that of the Slfra, or Torat Koha- 
 nim, the commentary on Leviticus, to R. Judah ben IlaT; 
 that of the Slfre, the commentary on Numbers and Deuter- 
 onomy, to R. Simon ben Yohai and to the school of Rab, 
 all scholars of the second and third centuries. The Slfra 
 that Rashl employed was more complete than the one now 
 available, and he cites a second Slfre, at present unknown. 
 
 "The Midrash Rahba, or Rabbot, consists of Haggadic 
 compilations on the Pentateuch and the Five Rolls; the ele- 
 ments of this Midrash are comparatively ancient, but Its 
 definite redaction without doubt does not go farther hack 
 than the eighth century. Rashl did not know those por- 
 tions of the Midrash Rabba which explain the Books of 
 Exodus and Numbers. 
 
 * By this name are designated Haggadic collections for 
 various distinguished times and seasons of the year. There 
 are two Peslktas, the Peslkta attributed to R. Kahana, a 
 Babylonian Talmudlst, though Its redaction falls In the 
 seventh century, and the Peslkta Rabbatl, or Great Peslkta, 
 doubtless compiled In Southern Italy In the ninth century. 
 Rashl knew the first of these collections; and his citations 
 aided Zunz In the reconstruction he made of this Midrash 
 before the discovery of a manuscript by Buber confirmed 
 his clear-sighted suppositions. 
 
 " Name of a Midrash on the Pentateuch, redacted by 
 the pupils of R. Tanhuma. Quite recently the endeavor 
 was made to prove that Rashl did not know the Tanhuma 
 either in the current text or in the more extended text 
 published by Buber In 1885, and that he called Tanhuma 
 the Midrash Yelamdenu, which is lost, and which Is said to 
 be the prototype of the two rerslons of the Tanhuma. See 
 Grunhut, in Festschrift Berliner, pp. 156-63. 
 
248 NOTES 
 
 "A Mldrashlc compilation, partly mystic In character, 
 of the eighth century, but attributed to the Tanna R. Ellezer 
 ben Hyrkanos the Great. 
 
 ♦^ Collection in three " gates," relating to history, especi- 
 ally to Biblical chronology. Its redaction is commonly 
 attributed to R. Jos6 ben Halafta (second century). 
 
 " Sherira bar Hananiah, Gaon of Pumbedlta, about 930- 
 1000, a scholar of great activity, who left Responsa. The 
 one bearing upon the chronology of the Talmudic and 
 Gaonic periods is the chief source for the history of those 
 times. 
 
 " Hai Gaon, born about 940, collaborator, then successor, 
 of his father. He wrote much, and his reputation reached 
 Europe. Philosopher, scholar, didactic poet, and commen- 
 tator of the Bible, he left authoritative Responsa, Talmudic 
 commentaries, collections of rabbinical jurisprudence, and 
 a Hebrew dictionary, which has been lost. 
 
 "Aha or Ahai of Shabha wrote, about 760, one hundred 
 and ninety-one Sheeltot (Questions), casuistic homilies, 
 connected with the Five Books of Moses. 
 
 "Yehudai bar Nahman, Gaon of Sura (about 759 or 
 762), eminent Talmudist and adversary of the Karaites. 
 He wrote Responsa and possibly the Halakot, a collection 
 of legal and ritual rules. He is said to have been blind. 
 
 " Isaac Abrabanel was possibly the only Jew who un- 
 masked Josephus and revealed his lies and flatteries. Ju- 
 dah Sir Leon (see chap. XI, p. 194) recognized that Kallr 
 was not Identical with the Tanna Eleazar ben Simon. 
 
 " Of Tahort, Northern Africa. He lived at the end of the 
 ninth century and the beginning of the tenth. 
 
 "See chap. VI, p. 127 and Note 91. 
 
 "Exception can scarcely be made In favor of the pream- 
 ble to the Song of Songs and the shorter one to Zecharlah. 
 In the one he briefly characterizes the Haggadic method; 
 in the other he speaks of the visions of Zecharlah, which, 
 he says, are as obscure as dreams. 
 
 "^At the end of the gloss the explanations of Menahem 
 ben Saruk and Dunash ben Labrat are reproduced. This is 
 
NOTES 249 
 
 without doubt a later addition. For these two Spanish 
 grammarians, see Note 91. 
 
 ^ Evidently it was not Rashi who commented on the work 
 of Alfasi, his contemporary. It was a German Jew, who 
 abridged the commentary of the French rabbi in order to 
 malie it harmonize with the work of the illustrious Spanish 
 Talmudist. For several treatises the German Jew had 
 more authentic texts than are now available. He some- 
 times cites Rashi by name. See J. Perles, Die Berner Hand- 
 schrift des kleinen Aruch, in Jutelschrift Qraets, 1887. 
 
 " See Note 53. 
 
 " The Gallo-Roman dialects are divided into two groups, 
 the dialects of the langue d'oc (southern) and those of the 
 langue d'oi'l (northern). It was Dante who introduced 
 this somewhat irrational distinction based upon the differ- 
 ent ways of saying "yes," that is, oc and oil (Latin, hoc 
 and ille). 
 
 " In the middle of the eleventh century, it must be added, 
 differences between neighboring dialects were^ not yet very 
 pronounced. 
 
 " James Darmesteter, Introduction to the Reliques scien- 
 tifigues, of his brother ArsSne Darmesteter (Paris, 1890), 
 vol. I, p. XVIII. 
 
 ^Eliezer ben Nathan, of Mayence (about 1145), corres- 
 pondent of Me'ir and of his sons Samuel and Jacob, author 
 of the work Eben hOrEzer, whence the passage quoted has 
 been taken (§ 107, p. 36a). 
 
 " The Persian word Parshandata, name of one of the sons 
 of Haman, was divided into ParsJian and data, " expounder 
 of the Law." This epithet is applied to Rashi in the poem 
 attributed to Ibn Ezra, cited in chap. XI, p. 207. 
 
 "Rashi seems also to have known about the Targum of 
 the Pseudo-Jonathan upon the Pentateuch. See Note 72. 
 
 "Concerning the development of Biblical studies in gen- 
 eral, among Jews as well as Christians, see pp. 127 et seq 
 
 "1,. Wogue, Histoire de la Bible et de I'exegdse tiWgue, 
 p. 250. 
 
 " See p. 38. This Midrash is taken from the Tanhuma. 
 
250 NOTES 
 
 "Psalms cxl. C. Rashi cites the Bftllcal verses them- 
 selves, often only in part; but he did not know the division 
 of the Bible into chapters and verses, which was made at 
 a later day and was of Christian origin. Sometimes Rashi 
 cites a verse by indicating the weekly lesson in which it 
 occurs, or by giving the paragraph a title drawn from its 
 contents, or from the name of the hero of the narrative. 
 
 " Proverbs viil. 22. 
 
 "» Jeremiah 11. 3. 
 
 " The rule, however, has exceptions. Even according to 
 Rashi's opinion, the word is in the absolute in Dent, xxxlii. 
 21 and Is. xlvi. 10. It Is true that strictly speaking one 
 might say the exceptions are only apparent. 
 
 ■* " We will praise and we will celebrate." 
 
 °' For the meaning of this expression, see p. 107. The 
 source here is still the Talmudic treatise Sanhedrin 916. 
 
 ™ Rashi here cites Is. xiv. 25, inaccurately. 
 
 " Here Rashi might have cited also I Kings xil. 17. 
 
 " This interpretation, taken without doubt from Pseudo- 
 Jonathan (see Note 60), explains the demonstrative pro- 
 noun. What follows is taken from the Mekilta (see Note 
 38). 
 
 " In fact the Targum translates it, " I will build Him a 
 temple." 
 
 "Still according to the Mekilta. The Song of Songs is 
 often applied by Jewish exegetes to the events of the Exo- 
 dus from Egypt. 
 
 " The French laaz is corrupted In the editions. The read- 
 ing should be D"jty ns . 
 
 "Name of the last portion of Exodus. Rashi alludes to 
 Ex. xxxviii. 27. 
 
 " Without doubt the murex, which gives the purple dye. 
 The details are taken from the Talmud (treatise Menahot 
 44a at the top). 
 
 " A fantastic bit of etymology taken from the Talmud. 
 
 "Ex. xxvii. 20. 
 
 "Next to last portion of Exodus (xxx. 22 et seq.). 
 
 " Portion preceding next to last of Exodus, 
 
NOTES 351 
 
 "Ex. xxTlIi. 6. 
 
 ^n. and 15. The first of these passages Is noteworthy, 
 Rashl says about it: "If I tried to explain how these two 
 objects are made according to the text, the explanation 
 would be fragmentary, and the reader would not get an 
 Idea of the whole. So I will first give a complete descrip- 
 tion of them, to which the reader can refer. After that 
 I will explain the text verse by verse. The ephod resem- 
 bles the robe worn by the Amazons," etc. 
 
 "L. Wogue. 
 
 " This is a distinction made in Hebrew but not rendered 
 in the English version. 
 
 *' I Sam. xxiii. 14. 
 
 " And not " shadow of death," which is etymologically 
 impossible, though it is a rendition employed by most com- 
 mentators. 
 
 "« See Note 91. 
 
 " Collection of Midrashim long attributed to Simon Kara, 
 father of a disciple of Rashi. This valuable compilation, 
 which deals with the entire Bible, dates without doubt from 
 the first half of the thirteenth century. An unsuccessful 
 attempt has been made to prove that Rashi knew the 
 Yalkut. His silence shows, on the contrary, that it was a 
 later work. The Simon (sometimes Simson) whom he 
 quotes is not the author of the Yalkut. 
 
 " Commentary on Gen. xxxvii. 1. 
 
 " Menahem ben Saruk, of Tortosa, lived at Cordova about 
 960 with the celebrated minister and Maecenas, the Jew 
 Hasdai Ibn Shaprut. He was the author of the Mahberet, 
 one of the first complete lexicons of the Biblical language, 
 full of interesting grammatical digressions. 
 
 His rival, Dunash ben Labi-at, born at Fez, was both poet 
 and grammarian. He wrote " Refutations " against Mena- 
 hem, in rhyme and prose, which were full of impassioned 
 criticisms and abundantly displayed fresh, correct insight. 
 The polemics of these two scholars were continued by their 
 disciples and were ended by Jacob Tarn, Rashi's grandson. 
 
 "Abul-Walid Merwan ibn Djanah (among the Jews, R. 
 
252 NOTES 
 
 Jonah), the most eminent representative of the Spanish 
 school, born at Cordova about 985; he studied at Lucena, 
 and died at Saragossa about 1050. Besides small polemic 
 worti;s, he left a long one, "The Book of Detailed Re- 
 search," including a grammar and a dictionary. Ibn 
 Djanah was an original and profound grammarian. Unfor- 
 tunately his disciples in popularizing weakened him. 
 
 Judah ben David (Abu Zakaria Yahia ibn Daud) Hay- 
 youdj, who may be looked upon as the master of Djanah, 
 was originally trom Fez but lived for the greater time at 
 Cordova (end of the tenth and beginning of the eleventh 
 century). He inspired remarkable disciples, among others 
 the statesman Samuel ha-Naggid Ibn Nagdela. He was the 
 first to discover the triliteral character of all Hebrew roots. 
 
 "Abraham ben Melr Ibn Ezra (1092-1167), born at Toledo, 
 died at Rome. He left Spain in about his fortieth year, 
 and travelled through Europe, reaching also Asia and 
 Africa. The European countries he visited are Italy, 
 France, England, and the Provence. It was on his second 
 visit to Italy that he died at Rome. He wrote for his liv- 
 ing and by way of compensation to his hosts. He was a 
 philosopher, excellent mathematician, clever poet, and 
 highly subjective writer. In the domain of philology he 
 brought to the knowledge of Christian Europe the works 
 of his great predecessors, and if he was not a very original 
 grammarian, he was at least a clear-sighted exegete. His 
 Biblical commentaries are held in high esteem. 
 
 Concerning Rashi and Ibn Ezra see also chap. XI, pp. 
 206-7, and chap. XII, p. 220. 
 
 " At this point I think it well to give once for all a sum- 
 ming up of Talmudic literature. The Talmud is the united 
 mass of the documents and texts of the oral law. It com- 
 prises the Mishnah and the Gemara, the latter being called 
 also Talmud. The Mishnah, a collection in six parts and 
 forty-nine treatises, is the work of numerous generations 
 of scholars. Its final redaction (setting aside somewhat 
 later additions) was made by Judah the Saint, or Rabbi 
 (about 150-210). The texts not incorporated by Rabbi are 
 
NOTES 253 
 
 called Baraitas. The Gemara is the commentary and the 
 development of the Mishnah, which it follows step by step, 
 in discussing it and completing its statements. There 
 are two Gemara collections: one elaborated in Palestine 
 under the influence of R. Johanan (199-279) and termin- 
 ated toward the end of the fourth century, which is called 
 the Palestinian or Jerusalem Talmud; the other drawn up in 
 Babylonia under the influence of Rab and of Samuel (third 
 century), and brought to a conclusion about 500 through 
 the initiative of R. Ashi and his disciples; this is called the 
 Babylonian Talmud. The latter covers the greater part of 
 the Mishnah. It is by far the more important of the two 
 Talmuds from the juridic point of view, and it is the one 
 that has been the chief subject of studies and commentaries. 
 The Talmud comprises two elements: the Halakah, "rule 
 of conduct," legislation, and the Haggadah, " exposition," 
 which embraces non-Halakic exegesis, history, legend, 
 profane learning, etc. The scholars whose discussions are 
 given in the Mishnah are called Tannaim, and those who 
 figure only in the Gemara, Amoraim. 
 •= See Appendix II, pp. 232-4. 
 " See p. 91. 
 
 "Hananel ben Hushiel, of Kairuan, first half of the 
 eleventh century, commented upon the Talmud and the 
 Pentateuch. 
 
 " This false notion gained currency through the existence 
 of Responsa addressed by Nathan to a certain Solomon 
 ben Isaac: but this Solomon is an Italian. See Vogelstein 
 and Rieger, Gesehichte der Juden in Bom, I, pp. 366 et seq. 
 For further information concerning Nathan ben Jehiel, see 
 Note 121. With regard to recurring names for different 
 individuals — the plague of Jewish literature — it should be 
 said that a French rabbi named Solomon ben Isaac lived 
 about a century after Rashi, who corresponded with R. 
 Tarn. He has been confounded with his illustrious pre- 
 decessor of the same name. See Gross, Gallia judaica, p. 
 34. Buber, Introduction to the Sefer hOrOrah, p. 13. 
 " See Notes 37 and 38. 
 
254 NOTES 
 
 '°° Another name for the Sadduceans, from their chief 
 Boethus (first century of the Common Era). 
 
 "' Psalm Ixxxi. 5, ■which refers to the new moon. Now, 
 in every case at least two witnesses are necessary. 
 
 "=Lev. xxiii. 40. 
 
 "'Ex. XV. 2. 
 
 ^°*"And Shalt turn with fire the city" (Deut. xiil. 16). 
 
 "" Sukkah 326. These references placed in parentheses in 
 Rashi's commentary are the work of the printers, who 
 adopted the conventional division into folios. Rashi refers 
 only to the treatise or chapter, at most simply saying 
 " above," or " below." 
 
 ^'o It is the Latin " scopae." 
 
 '"Mai. i. 13. 
 
 ™Lev. i. 2. 
 
 "' Is. Ixi. 8. 
 
 "° A city of Judea, called also Tower of Simon. 
 
 ™ Fifth chapter of Hullin,79o. 
 
 ^' The French toile, curtain. 
 
 "' Concerning Hananel, see Note 97. R. Isaac b. Jacob al- 
 Fasi (the initials form Rif) was born in 1013 near Fez, 
 whence his name. In 1088 he went to Spain, where he 
 directed the important school of Lucena. He died in 1103, 
 lamented by all his fellow-citizens. Besides Responsa, 
 he left the " Halakot," or " Little Talmud," which Is a 
 pruning down of the entire Talmud, so as to present only 
 what is useful for establishing the norm, deduced by Alfasi 
 himself. It is an important work, which still enjoys great 
 authority. I have already remarked (Note 53) that the 
 Rashi commentary was abridged to make it fit the text of 
 Rif. 
 
 "♦ In these words Rashi displaces another lesson. 
 
 "Tarasang is a Persian measure equivalent to 5250 
 metres, a fact of which Rashi seems to have been ignorant. 
 
 "" According to Hagigah 13a. 
 
 '" In the first case it refers to Ahriman, the spirit of evil, 
 in the second, to Ormuzd, the spirit of good among the Per- 
 sians. Lilllt in Oriental mythology is a female demon, 
 who wanders at night and attacks chiefly children. 
 
NOTES 355 
 
 "* Isaac ben Judah, his master par excellence. Concern- 
 ing Eashi's teachers see chap. I, p. 29; chap. II, pp. 49 et 
 seq.; chap. Ill, p. 58, etc. 
 
 "»Dan. ill. 1. 
 
 ""David Ibn Abl Zimra (Radbaz), rabbi of Cairo, who 
 died, it is said, at Safed in 1589 at the age of 110 years. He 
 left an important collection of Responsa. 
 
 ™ Nathan ben Jehiel, of Rome, born about 1035, died In 
 the first years of the twelfth century, author of the Aruk, 
 a highly valued Talmudic dictionary, in which he explains 
 the words of Talmudic and Midrashic literature, as well as 
 the Halakic and Haggadic passages presenting difllculties. 
 The numerous quotations are no less valuable than the 
 explanations. Concerning Alfasi, see Note 113. 
 
 ■^Quoted from Bezalel Ashkenazi, who lived in Egypt 
 (died in 1530). He compiled a Talmudic collection called 
 BMtta Mekulezet, in which he gathered together extracts 
 from French, Spanish, and other rabbis. Before him Isaac 
 ben Sheshet (see Note 150) had said: "The greatest light 
 that has come to us from France is Eashi. Without his 
 commentary, the Talmud would be a closed book " (Re- 
 sponsa, No. 394). 
 
 ^Menahem ben Zerah (about 1312-1385), son of a Jew 
 expelled from France, wrote in Spain a Talmudic manual 
 entitled Zedah lOrDerek. 
 
 "^Concerning Rashi's correspondents see chap. II, pp. 
 51-2, and chap. Ill, p. 57. 
 
 "" See chap. I, p. 20, and chap. Ill, p. 56. 
 
 '^ See chap. Ill, p. 67. 
 
 "' And not, as has been supposed, that of Cavaillon, in 
 the county Venaissin, where, possibly, there were not yet 
 any Jews, and where, at all events, Rashi was not known, 
 as was the case throughout the south of France, until after 
 his death. 
 
 '^An application, according to the Talmud, of Eccl. il. 
 14. 
 
 ""This resume Is taken from Epstein on Shemalah, in 
 
256 ISrOTES 
 
 Monatsschrift, XLI, also that of Sefer Jia-Orah. Concern- 
 ing the Machirites, see chap. I, p. 29, and chap. II, p. 52; 
 concerning Shemaiah, chap. XI, pp. 186-7. The three com- 
 munities are sometimes called by the initials of their names, 
 " communities of Shum " (D"V'j»>) 
 
 In connection with the Sefer ha-Pardes must be men- 
 tioned the work hearing the title of LiKkute ha-Pardes 
 (Extracts from Paradise), a compilation edited in Italy 
 by the disciples of Isaiah da Trani. 
 
 "" See chap. IV, p. 84. 
 
 '"L. Wogue, Histoire de la Bible et de Vexig^se Milique, 
 pp. 254-5. 
 
 >== See chap. IX, pp. 171-2. 
 
 ^ See p. 162. 
 
 ^"•Rameru, or Ramerupt, situated six miles from Troyes 
 on a tributary of the Aube. Of old it formed an entire 
 county, proof of which is furnished by the ditches surround- 
 ing it and the ruins of a castellated stronghold. At the 
 present day it is the chief city of the Departement de 
 I'Aube. 
 
 "" The sort of literature designated by this word will be 
 defined later on, pp. 191-2. 
 
 "" Chap. VI, p. 125. 
 
 •"Concerning the Biblical exegesis of Samuel ben Meir 
 see pp. 196-7. 
 
 >» See Note 91. 
 
 "• It has been said that " Tossafot " signifies " supple- 
 ments to Rashi;" this is not true, but it is noteworthy that 
 the expression is open to such a misconstruction. 
 
 '*> Dampierre on the Aube, at present part of the canton 
 of Rameru, counted, after the twelfth century, among the 
 most important lordships in the region. 
 
 '" The name " Morel," customary among English Jews, 
 corresponds to the Hebrew name " Samuel." 
 
 "= See pp. 202-3. 
 
 ""The numeric value of the letters composing the word 
 Gan in Hebrew is 53, the number of Pentateuch lessons In 
 the annual cycle. 
 
NOTES 357 
 
 '"See chap. VII, pp. 157-8. 
 
 "" Concerning Rashi and Ibn Ezra, see chap. VI, p. 131. 
 
 ""David Kimhi (1160-1235), of Narbonne, a philosopher, 
 a follower of Maimonides, a grammarian, and an exegete, 
 who popularized the works of the Spaniards by his Biblical 
 commentaries, his grammar, and his dictionary. He en- 
 joyed and still enjoys a deserved reputation for clearness 
 and simplicity. 
 
 "'Moses ben Nahman, also called Bonastruc da Porta, 
 born at Gerona in 1195, was a Talmudist, Kabbalist, philoso- 
 pher, and physician. In 1263 he carried on a disputation 
 at Barcelona with the apostate Pablo Christiano. On this 
 account he went to live in Palestine, where he died in 1270. 
 His was one of the most original personalities in Spanish 
 Judaism. 
 
 '"Solomon ben Abraham ben Adret (1235-1310), born at 
 Barcelona, rabbi and head of an influential school there. 
 The extent of his knowledge as well as his moderation won 
 for him a wide reputation, proof of which Is afforded by 
 his intervention as arbiter in the quarrel between the par- 
 tisans and the adversaries of Maimonides, and by his nu- 
 merous Responsa, of which about three thousand have been 
 published. Besides, he wrote Talmudic commentaries and 
 casuistic collections. 
 
 "' Asher ben Jehiel, disciple of Meir of Rothenburg, born 
 about 1250, died in 1327 at Toledo, where he was rabbi. 
 Besides numerous and important Responsa he wrote Tal- 
 mudic commentaries and a compendium of the Talmud 
 bearing his name. 
 
 '"His initials read Ribash (1336-1408). He exercised 
 rabbinical functions in several cities of Spain. After 
 the persecutions of 1391, he went to Algiers, where he was 
 appointed rabbi. He was well-informed in philosophy, 
 but he owes his great reputation chiefly to his Talmudic 
 knowledge, as Is proved by his numerous Responsa. 
 
 ""Rashbaz, born in 1361 on Majorca, of a family origin- 
 ally from the Provence. At first he practiced medicine, but, 
 reduced to poverty by the persecutions of 1391, he resigned 
 
258 NOTES 
 
 himself, not without scruples, to accepting the emoluments 
 of a rabbi. He died in 1444 at Algiers, where he had been 
 the co-worker, then the successor, of Ribash. He is known 
 chiefly for his commentaries and his Responsa. The passage 
 in question is taken from these Responsa, No. 394. See also 
 Note 122. 
 
 "'See chap. II, p. 31, and chap. IV, p. 80. 
 
 "" See chap. II, pp. 31-2. 
 
 "* The daughter of Solomon Luria married a brother of 
 the famous Talmudist of Cracow, Moses Isserles (1530- 
 1572). I will add that the families of Treves, PoUak, Hel- 
 ler, and Katzenellenbogen also maintain that they are con- 
 nected with Rashi. On the descendants of Rashi, see Ep- 
 stein, Mishpahat Lurie we-EoherirZedek, in Ha-Qoren, I, 
 Appendix. 
 
 ^" See chap. II, p. 37. 
 
 "'This defective edition was replaced by a good critical 
 edition by David Rosin (Breslau, 1881). 
 
 "'L. Wogue, Histoire de la Bible et de Vex6g&se iibliqiie, 
 p. 319. 
 
 "* Abraham Gelger, born in 1810 at Frankfort, died at 
 Berlin in 1874, one of the finest Jewish scholars of the nine- 
 teenth century. His prolific activity was exerted in all 
 provinces of Jewish history and literature. Besides works 
 upon the Talmud, the poets, the philosophers, and the 
 exegetes of the middle ages, he wrote numerous articles in 
 two journals, which he successively edited. Theologian 
 and distinguished preacher, he promoted the reform of the 
 Jewish cult in Germany. 
 
 "•Wolf Heidenheim (1757-1832), Talmudist, Hebrew 
 scholar, and editor. He deserves the sobriquet of the Henri 
 Estienne of Hebrew letters. The commentary in which he 
 defends Rashi is entitled Habanat ha-Mikra. Only the be- 
 ginning, up to Gen. xliii. 16, has appeared. 
 
 ""Isaac Hirsch Weiss (1815-1905), professor at the Bet 
 ha-Midrash of Vienna, wrote many studies scattered through 
 two literary magazines edited by him successively, and also 
 an Important History of Jewish Tradition, in five volumes. 
 
NOTES 259 
 
 '" Solomon Judah Rapoport, born in 1790, died rabbi of 
 Prague in 1867. Together with Zunz, he was the founder 
 of modern Jewish science. A distinguished man of letters, 
 he was known above all for his biographies of celebrated 
 rabbis, for historic and archaeologic studies, and for an un- 
 finished encyclopedia. 
 
 "'Zechariah Frankel, born at Prague in 1801, after 1854 
 director of the Seminary at Breslau, where he died in 1875. 
 He left historic studies on the Mosaic-Talmudic law, intro- 
 ductions to the Septuagint, the Jerusalem Talmud, and the 
 Mishnah, and numerous critical and historical works In 
 the Programs of the Seminary and in the MonatsscJirift, a 
 magazine edited by him from 1851 on. 
 
INDEX 
 
INDEX 
 
 Aaron ben Joseph, Biblical commen- 
 tary by, 199. 
 
 Aaron the Elder, correspondent of 
 Raahi, 57. 
 
 Abelard, scholar, alluded to, 54. 
 Atodah Zaraht laasim bearing on, 
 99. 
 
 Abrabanel. £166 Isaac Abrabanel. 
 
 Abraham ben Garten, printer of 
 Rashi's commentary, 214. 
 
 Abraham ben Jehiel, fellow-student 
 of Raahi, 52. 
 
 Abraham ben Melr, fellow-student of 
 Rashi, 52 
 
 Abraham ben Nathan, Tossaflst, 194. 
 
 Abraham Ibn Ezra, contrasted with 
 Rashi, 76, 79, 131-2; alluded to, 
 91; obscurity of, 95; correspond- 
 ent of Jacob Tarn, 190 ; com- 
 bats Rashi, 206-7; poem by, on 
 Rashi, 206-7; Luzzatto on, 220; 
 data about, 252, n. 93. 
 
 Abraham the Just, Rashi's com- 
 panion in Paradise, 71. 
 
 Absalom, subject of Psalm IX, 96. 
 
 Africa, Northern, the scholars of, 
 make use of Responsa, 160. 
 
 Ag^riculture, pursued by Jews, 20. 
 
 Aha, Gaon, cited by Rashi, 83, 248, 
 n. 46. 
 
 Akdamot Milling poem, author of, 
 244, n. 19. 
 
 Alexius, Saint, life of, alluded to, 
 102. 
 
 AHasi. See Isaac Alfasi. 
 
 Amalek, subject of Psalm IX, 96. 
 
 Amoraim the, the generations of, 
 distinguished by Rashi, 150 ; 
 term explained, 253, n. 94, 
 
 " Amphitryon, The." See Ha-Par- 
 nes. 
 
 Apocrypha, the, not known to Rashi, 
 83. 
 
 Arabic, Rashi supposed to have 
 known, 80, 82. 
 
 Arabs, the, and the sciences, 81-2; 
 stimulate grammatical studies, 
 127. 
 
 Aramaic, handled easily by Rashi, 
 97; used by Rashi, 129. 
 
 Aristotle, alluded to, 76, 93, 
 
 Aries, alluded to, 243, n. 2. 
 
 Ashi, redactor of the Talmud, 253, 
 n. 94. 
 
 Asher ben Jehiel (Asheri, Rosh), on 
 Samson of Sens, 193; influenced 
 by Rashi, 209; data about, 257, 
 n. 149. 
 
 Asher ha-Levi, martyr, 66. 
 Asheri, See Asher ben Jehiel. 
 Asia, the Jews of, influenced by the 
 
 Babylonian Exile, 108. 
 Astronomy, supposed to be known by 
 
 Rashi, 80, 82. 
 Atonement, eve of the Day of, poem 
 
 for, 176-8. 
 Austrasia, early settlement of Jews 
 
 in, 18. 
 Autobiographiea, Jewish, paucity of, 
 
 31. 
 Auto-da-fS, at Blois, 189; under St. 
 
 Louis, 217. 
 Auxerre, the ** wise men *' of, corre- 
 spondents of Rashi, 57, 128. 
 Azriel ben Nathan, fellow-student of 
 
 Rashi, 52. 
 Azulal, bibliographer, on Rashi, 95. 
 
 Baba Batra, Talmudical treatise, 
 
 commentary on, 97, 
 Baha Batra 73a, as interpreted by 
 
 Rashi, 153-5. 
 Babylon, the scholars of, make use 
 
 of Responsa, 160, 
 Babylonian academies, the, the de- 
 cline of, 28. 
 Babylonian Exile, the, the Influence 
 
 of, 108. 
 Babylonian influences in the West, 
 
 27. 
 Bacon, Roger, alluded to, 201. 
 Bacher, W., on Rashi, 221. 
 Bahya. See Beljaia ben Asher. 
 Baptism. See Conversions; Converts, 
 Bar-sur-Aube, fairs held at, 35, 
 Baraitas, the, Rashi on, 150; term 
 
 explained, 253, n. 94, 
 Barcelona, alluded to, 71, 81. 
 Bartolocci, bibliographer, on the 
 
 name of Rashi, 33. 
 Baruch ben Isaac, casuist, 193. 
 Basnage, historian, on the name of 
 
 Rashi, 34; quoted, 57. 
 Behaia ben Asher. uses Rashi's Bible 
 
 ' commentary, 208. 
 Bellassez, daughter of Rashi, 62, 245, 
 
 n. 24. 
 Bellette, renders ritual decisions, 62. 
 Ben Sira, the wisdom of, how known 
 
 to Rashi, 83. 
 Benjamin ben Abraham Anaw, uses 
 
 Rashi's commentary, 206. 
 Benjamin of Tudela, trftveller, allud- 
 ed to, 84. 
 
264 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Bereshit Rahha^ Midrash, used by 
 Rashi in his Bible commentary, 
 114. 
 
 Berliner, M., on Rashi, 32, 111, 221, 
 224; on Jewish education, 39; on 
 the laazim, 101; edits a new 
 edition of Rashi 's Pentateuch 
 commentary, 221. 
 
 Bernard, Saint, alluded to, 64, 57, 74. 
 
 Bet Yosef, index to rabbinical liter- 
 ature, 214-15. 
 
 Bezalel Ashkenazi, on Rashi, 157, 
 255, n. 122. 
 
 Bible, the, place of, in Jewish edu- 
 cation, 42; thoroughly known by 
 Rashi, 83; Raahi'e devoted study 
 of, 90; need of commentaries on, 
 105; two methods of interpre- 
 ting, 106-8; in the synago^e, 
 107; devoted study of, by Jews, 
 128; copies of, made, 128; the 
 text of, and Rashi, 129-30; the 
 canon of, 130. 
 See also Commentaries, Biblical; 
 Commentaries, Pentateuch; Com- 
 mentaries, the, by Rashi; Com- 
 mentary, the Biblical, by Rashi; 
 Commentary, the Pentateuch, by 
 Rashi; Exegesis, Biblical; Penta- 
 teuch, and the various books of 
 the Bible. 
 
 Biblical expressions explained by 
 Rashi, 81. 
 
 Bibliography of Rashi's works, 231- 
 43. 
 
 Biur, the Mendelssohn commentary 
 on the Bible, 219. 
 
 Blois, Auto-da-f6 at, fast day com- 
 memorating, 189. 
 
 Boethus, alluded to, 254, n. 100. 
 
 Bonastruc da Porta. 8ee Moses ben 
 Naljman. 
 
 Bondi, the brothers, on the laazim, 
 101. 
 
 Bordeaux, alluded to, 243, n, 2. 
 
 Botany, Rashi conversant with, 85. 
 
 B5tticher, exegesis of, 113 
 
 Breithaupt, J. F., translator of 
 Rashi's Bible Commentary, 217. 
 
 Britain, rabbinical name for, 244, 
 n. 10. 
 
 Buber, S. , publishes various works 
 by Rashi, 170, 221. 
 
 Bunsen, exegesis of, 113. 
 
 Burchard, bishop of Worms, writer 
 on canonical law, 243, n. 3. 
 
 Burgundy, early settlement of Jews 
 in, 18. 
 
 Buxtorf, John, Hebraist, on the 
 name of Rashi, 34 ; on Rashi, 217. 
 
 Calligrapher, Rashi supposed to have 
 
 been, 80. 
 Carmoly, E., on Hebrew literature 
 
 in France, 204. 
 
 Cattle raising, pursued by Jews, 20. 
 
 Celie, Pierre de, scholar, alluded to, 
 54. 
 
 Chaldeans, the, the influence of, on 
 the Jews, 108. 
 
 Chalons-sur-SaOne, the Jews of, con- 
 sult Rashi, 78, 164-5. 
 
 Champagne, the Talmudic studies in, 
 29; native province of Rashi, 34-5; 
 the Talmud schools of, 53-4; dia- 
 lect of, spoken by Rashi, 55; 
 the language of, and the laazim, 
 100. 
 
 Charlemagne, stimulates letters, 19; 
 and Jewish scholars, 25-6 ; and 
 Italian scholars, 26. 
 
 Charles VI, of France, expels the 
 Jews, 203. 
 
 Charles VII, of France, alluded to, 
 246, n. 28. 
 
 Christianity, polemics against, 118- 
 19, 198. 
 
 Christians, employed by Jews, 20 ; 
 the relation of, to Jews, 162 ; 
 and Bible exegesis, 216-17; use 
 Rashi's work, 217. 
 
 Chronicles, the, Rashi on, 130. 
 
 Cologne, the Jews of, and the First 
 Crusade, 66. 
 
 " Columns of Exile." See Sefer 
 Mizwot Katan, 
 
 Commentaries, Biblical, by Mosea 
 ha-Darshan, 110 ; by Menahem 
 ben Helbo, 111; by Samuel ben 
 Merr,'126, 196-7; by Moses Men- 
 delssohn, 134, 219 ; by Joseph 
 ben Simon Kara, 197; by Joseph 
 Bekor-Shor, 198; by the Tossa- 
 fists, 198; called Tossafot, 198-9. 
 See also Commentaries, Penta- 
 teuch ; Commentaries, the, by 
 Rashi ; Commentary, the Bibli- 
 cal, by Rashi; Commentary, the 
 Pentateuch, by Rashi; Exegesis, 
 Biblical. 
 
 Commentaries, Pentateuch, by Sam- 
 uel ben MeTr, 196-7, 215 ; by 
 Joseph Bekor-Shor, 198; by 
 Moses ben Nahman, 208. 
 See also Commentaries, Biblical ; 
 Commentary, the Biblical, by 
 Rashi ; Commentary, the Penta- 
 teuch, by Rashi. 
 
 Commentaries, Talmudic, by Ger- 
 shom ben Judah, 28; by the 
 scholars of Mayence, 51; by 
 Kalonymos ben Sabbatal, 58; by 
 Samuel ben Melr, 95, 97, 188; 
 laazim in, 99. 
 See also Commentary, the Tal- 
 mudic, by Rashi. 
 
 Commentaries, the, by Rashi, com- 
 pleteness of, 90-1; order in which 
 composed, 91; arrangement of, 
 91; literary limitations of, 92; 
 
INDEX 
 
 265 
 
 diagrams in, 94; felicitous lan- 
 guage of, 96-7; the laazim in, 
 98-102; numerous copies made of, 
 101; common characteristics of, 
 102-3; value of, 103; well known, 
 204 ; not productive of original 
 works, in the fifteenth century, 
 211-12; Isaiah Horwitz on, 218. 
 See also Commentary, the Biblical, 
 by Rashi; Commentary, the Tal- 
 mudic, by Rashi, 
 
 Commentaiy, the Biblical, by Rashi, 
 and Jewish education, 42; Rashi's 
 dissatisfaction with, 80, 125; 
 completeness of, 90-1; how com- 
 posed, 91 ; peculiarity of the 
 laazim in, 99; translations, etc., 
 used for, 105-6 ; methods em- 
 ployed in, 111-12 ; specimens 
 taken from, 112-18, 122-3; a 
 Haggadic compilation, 120; con- 
 ventionality of, 122; devotional 
 character of, 123-4; pays heed 
 to grammar, 126-8 ; informality 
 of, 132-3; gaiety of, 133; place 
 held by, 133-4; scope of, 135; 
 compared with the Talmudic 
 commentary, 135-7, 157; origi- 
 nality of, 136; Buper-commen- 
 tariee on, 199, 215; used in 
 Italy, 206; used in Spain, 206, 
 207; used by Kabbalists, 208; 
 Joseph Karo on, 215; its part in 
 Jewish religious life, 215; reason 
 for the popularity of, 215; trans- 
 lations of, 217. 
 See also Commentary, the Penta- 
 teuch, by Rashi; Commentaries, 
 the, by Rashi. 
 
 Commentary, the Pentateuch, by 
 Rashi, gaiety of, 133; super-com- 
 mentariea on, 196, 211 ; early 
 date of printing of, 214; modifi- 
 cations of, 214; in Jewish reli- 
 gious life, 215; anniversary edi- 
 tion of, 221. 
 See also Commentary, the Bibli- 
 cal, by Rashi; Commentaries, 
 the, by Rashi. 
 
 Commentary, the Talmudic, by 
 Rashi, completeness of, 90-1; 
 how composed, 91; diagrams in, 
 94 ; peculiarity of the laazim 
 in, 99; simple explanations in, 
 102; uneonventionality of, 122; 
 pays heed to grammar, 126; 
 scope of, 135; compared with the 
 Biblical commentary, 135-7, 157; 
 recensions of, 135-6; models for, 
 136-8; popularity of, 137; com- 
 prehensiveness of, 138; individual 
 method used in, 140; precision 
 of, 140-2; usefulness of, 142: 
 moderation of, 142-3; parallel 
 texts used for, 143; methodology 
 
 m, 143; specimen passages from, 
 144-9, 151-2, 153-5; opinions on, 
 157-8; renews rabbinical studies, 
 185; additions to, 186, 187; com- 
 pared with the Tossafot, 191-2; 
 accompanies the Babylonian Tal- 
 mud, 214; popularity of, 215-16; 
 super-commentaries on, 216; not 
 much used by Christians, 217. 
 See also Commentaries, the, by 
 Rashi. 
 
 Comestor, Pierre, scholar, alluded 
 to, 54. 
 
 Communal organization among the 
 Jews, 20. 
 
 Conversions, numerous in France, 18; 
 excommunication the cause of, 
 20; during the First Crusade, 
 66-7. 
 
 Converts, forced, Rashi on, 67; Re- 
 sponsa on, 163-4. 
 
 Cracow, alluded to, 216. 
 
 Creation, the, as explained by Rashi, 
 112-13. 
 
 Crusade, the First, victim of, 58; 
 the effect of, on the relation 
 between Jews and Christians, 
 162. 
 See also Crusades, the. 
 
 Crusades, the, effects of, 64-5, 66-7, 
 67-8, 162; the economic influence 
 of, 245, n. 27. 
 See also Crusade, the First. 
 
 Daat Zekenim, Biblical commen- 
 tary, 199. 
 
 Dampierre, Talmud school at, 193, 
 194; data about, 256, n. 140. 
 
 Daniel, Rashi on, 130; quoted, 209. 
 
 Daniel ben Jehiel, fellow-student of 
 Rashi, 52. 
 
 Dante, alluded to, 249, n. 55. 
 
 Darmesteter, Ars&ne, on the laazim, 
 101-2; on the Talmud, 142; on 
 Rashi's Talmud commentary, 158. 
 
 David, fellow-student of Rashi, 52. 
 
 David, the author of Psalm IX, 96. 
 
 David d'Estella, on Rashi, 205; 
 grandson of, 205. 
 
 David Ibn Abi Zimra (Radbaz), on 
 Rashi, 156, 255, n. 120. 
 
 David Kimhi, uses Rashi's Bible 
 commentary, 207 ; data about, 
 257, n. 146. 
 
 Decrees, by Gershom ben Judah, 28. 
 
 ** Defense of Solomon," by Jacob 
 ben Joshua Falk, 216. 
 
 Derash, method of interpreting 
 Scriptures, 106, 107 ; vogue of, 
 108-9, 110; employed by Chris- 
 tian theologians, 109-10; ease of, 
 110; used by Rashi, 111-12, 114, 
 119-20, 124; Abraham Ibn Ezra 
 on, 207. 
 See also Haggadic Midrash, the; 
 Midrash. 
 
266 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Deuteronomy, the Book of, Midrash 
 on, 247, n. 38. 
 
 Dilcdukim, on Rashi's Talmudic 
 commentary, 97, 216. 
 
 Dietary laws, the, laazim bearing 
 on, 99. 
 
 Disputation at Paris, 202; at Bar- 
 celona, 257, n. 147. 
 
 " Diwan," by Jehudah ha-Levi, as 
 a Jewish product, 223. 
 
 Don Bendit. See Joseph Porat ben 
 
 Donin, Nicholas, apostate, denounces 
 
 the Talmud, 202. 
 Dorbal. 8ee Durbal. 
 Dormitzer, on the laazim, 101; on 
 
 Psalm IX, 96, 248, n. 62. 
 Dunash ben Labrat, grammarian, the 
 
 works of, used by Rashi, 84, 127; 
 
 opposed by Jacob Tam, 190; 
 
 data about, 251, n. 91. 
 Durbal, fellow-student of Rashi, 52; 
 
 consults Rashi, 79. 
 
 Ecclesiastes, Rashi conversant with 
 the Midrash on, 83; Rashi on. 
 130. 
 
 Edels, Samuel. Bee Samuel Edels. 
 
 Education, early, of a Jewish child, 
 39-42. 
 
 Egypt, Rashi's supposed journey 
 through, 43; the Jews of, influ- 
 enced by the Babylonian Exile, 
 108. 
 
 Elhanan ben Isaac, collaborator of 
 his father, Trasaflst, 193; disci- 
 ples of, 194. 
 
 Eleazar ben Simon, Tanna, alleged 
 author of liturgical poems, 84, 
 248, n. 48. 
 
 Eleazar ha-Kalir, liturgical poet, 
 known to Rashi, 84, 173; Judah 
 Sir Leon on, 248, n. 48. 
 
 Eleazar of Worms, mystic Talmud 
 teacher, 48; descendant of Rashi, 
 212. 
 
 Eliakim, teacher at Speyer, 47. 
 
 Eliakim ha-Levi ben MeshuUam, fel- 
 low-student of Rashi, 52. 
 
 Eliezer (Jocelyn), son-in-law of 
 Rashi, 62. 
 
 Eliezer ben Hyrkanos, supposed com- 
 piler of the Pirke de Rabhi 
 Eliezer, 248, n. 42. 
 
 Eliezer ben Isaac, the Great, pupils 
 of, 29, 244, n. 18; and Jacob 
 ben Yakar, 49-50; cited by 
 Rashi, 84. 
 
 Eliezer ben Nathan, on Rashi, 59, 
 104, 249, n. 58. 
 
 Eliezer ben Samuel, disciple of Jacob 
 Tam, 180. 
 
 Eliezer of Beaugency, disciple of 
 Samuel ben Meir, 197. 
 
 Eliezer of Touques, Tossafist, 195. 
 
 Elijah ben Abraham Mizrahi, author 
 
 of a finper-commentary on Rashi, 
 
 21L 
 Elijah ben Judah, Tossaflst, 194. 
 Elijah Loanz, Kabbalist, descended 
 
 from Rashi, 213. 
 Eleazar, kinsman of Rashi, and his 
 
 correspondent, 57. 
 Ephraim, alleged husband of Bellaa- 
 
 sez, 245, n. 24. 
 Epstein, on Rashi, 32. 
 Esau, subject of Psalm IX, 96. 
 Esther, Rashi on, 130. 
 Esther, the Fast of, Rashi on, 167. 
 Estori Parhi, on Rashi, 205. 
 Evreux, Tossafot of, 195. 
 Ewald, exegesis of, 113. 
 Excommunication practiced by the 
 
 Jews, 20. 
 Exegesis, Biblical, pursued by the 
 
 Jews of France, 25; and Chris- 
 tians, 216-7. 
 See also Derash ; Haggadic Mid- 
 rash, the; Halakic Midrash, the; 
 
 Midrash, Peshat. 
 Exodus XV, 1, as interpreted by 
 
 Rashi, 114-16. 
 Exodus, Midrash on, 247, n. 38. 
 Exodus XXV, 1, as interpreted by 
 
 Rashi. 117-18. 
 Ezekiel, the Book of, quotation 
 
 from, 40; passage in, interpreted 
 
 by Rashi, 128. 
 Ezra, Rashi on, 130. 
 
 Fairs, in Champagne, 35; Jews par- 
 ticipate in, 36. 
 
 Falk. See Jacob ben Joshua Falk, 
 
 '* Father and Light of the Captiv- 
 ity," Rashi calls R. Gershom, 
 84. 
 
 " Father of grammarians," Hay- 
 youdj, 127; Solomon ben Meir, 
 188. 
 
 Fathers of the Church, the, alluded 
 to, 93. 
 
 Five Books of Moses. See Penta- 
 teuch. 
 
 " Foundation." See Yesod. 
 
 France, early settlement of Jews in, 
 18; and the Crusades, 66; the 
 scholars of, make use of Re- 
 sponsa, 160; the rabbinical move- 
 ment in, dominated by Rashi, 
 184, 185 ; Rashi's influence in, 
 205; rabbinical name for, 244, 
 n. 10. 
 See also France, the Jews of; 
 France, Northern. 
 
 France, the Jews of, intellectual 
 pursuits of, 13-10 ; Babylonian 
 influences on, 27; institute pray- 
 ers for the victims of the First 
 Crusade, 66; adverse fortunes of, 
 202, 203-4; exiled, 203; the in- 
 tpllectualitv of, 204; after the 
 expulsion from France, 210-11. 
 
INDEX 
 
 267 
 
 See also France, Northern, the 
 Jews of. 
 France, Northern, beginning of Jew- 
 ish studies in, 27; centre of 
 Jewish studies, 185. 
 France, Northern, the Jews of, 17-18; 
 happy condition of, 19-20; occu- 
 pations of, 20; organized in com- 
 munities, 20; political position 
 of, 21; relation of, to Christians, 
 21; language and names of, 22; 
 intellectuality of, 23 ; supersti- 
 tions of, 23 ; devotion to the 
 Law of, 23-4 ; literary produc- 
 tions of, 25; connected with 
 those of Lorraine, 47; tempera- 
 ment of, 75; theology of, 75. 
 Frankel, Zecharias, on Rashi, 221; 
 
 data about, 259, n. 162. 
 Frankfort, alluded to, 215. 
 French, spoken by Rashi, 82; the 
 current language of the Jews of 
 France, 99. 
 Frobert, Saint, the parish of, the 
 old Jewry of Troyes, 36. 
 
 Gabriel, disciple of Moses of Paris, 
 197. 
 
 Oan, by Aaron ben Joseph, 199. 
 
 Gedaliah, the Fast of, poem for, 174. 
 
 Geiger, Abraham, on Rashi, 32; exe- 
 gesis of, 113; data about, 258, 
 n. 158. 
 
 Gemaraj the. See Talmud, the. 
 
 Gematria, on the To^afot to the 
 Bible, 199. 
 
 Genesis I, 1, as interpreted by Rashi, 
 112-3. 
 
 Genesis XXII, 1, interpreted by 
 Rashi, 113-14. 
 
 Geographical knowledge of Rashi, 
 81, 82. 
 
 Geonim, the, cited by Rashi, 83, 
 128; used by Rashi, 143. 
 
 Geonim, the, the Responsa of, used 
 by Rashi, 140; contain some of 
 Rashi*s, 170. 
 
 German, spoken by Rashi, 82 ; the 
 laazim translated into, 99. 
 
 Germany, beginning of Jewish stu- 
 dies in, 27; Rashi's supposed 
 journey through, 43; the scholars 
 of, make use of Responsa, 160; 
 the rabbinical movement in, 
 dominated by Rashi, 184, 185; 
 abode of the exiled Jews of 
 France, 210. 
 
 Gershom ben Judah (Rabbenu Ger- 
 Bhom), Talmudist, 28-9; teach- 
 er of, 28; influence of, 29; work 
 of, 29; disciples of, 29; alleged 
 date of death of, 37; comraen- 
 tariea attributed to, 51; schools 
 founded by disciples of, 57; al- 
 luded to, 72, 78; cited bv Rashi, 
 84; and the Massorah. 105; 
 
 makes a copy of the Bible, 128; 
 predecessor of Rashi, as a Tal- 
 mud commentator, 136; restricts 
 text emendations in the Talmud, 
 138-9 ; autograph manuscript of 
 the Talmud used by Rashi, 139, 
 140. 
 
 Qittin 37b, as interpreted by Rashi, 
 148-9. 
 
 Qittin 55b, as interpreted by Rashi, 
 151-2. 
 
 Glaber, Raoul, alluded to, 74. 
 
 Gleaned Sheaves, The. See 8hiT)'bole 
 ha-Leket. 
 
 Glosa hehraica^ title given to 
 Rashi's Bible commentary, 201. 
 
 Godfrey of Bouillon, duke of Lower 
 Lotharingia, and Rashi, 68-70, 
 246, n. 28. 
 
 Graetz, H., quoted, 51. 
 
 Grammar, heeded by Rashi, 126-8, 
 141; neglected by the Jews, 216. 
 
 Grammatical studies, in Spain, 127. 
 
 Great Book of Precepts. See Sefer 
 Mizioot Gadol. 
 
 Great men, characterized, 17. 
 
 Greece, Rashi's supposed journey 
 through, 43. 
 
 Greek, supposed to be known by 
 Rashi, 80, 82. 
 
 Greeks, the, the influence of, on the 
 Jews, 108. 
 
 Gregory IX, Pope, the Talmud de- 
 nounced to, 202. 
 
 Gregory of Tours, quoted, 67. 
 
 Gtidemann, M., alluded to, 22. 
 
 ** Guide of the Perplexed, The," by 
 Maimonides, as a Jewish prod- 
 uct, 223. 
 
 Guizot, quoted, 19. 
 
 Hadar Zeheninij Biblical commen- 
 tary, 199. 
 
 Haggadah, the, Rashi's method of 
 explaining, 152; in the Tossafot 
 to the Bible, 199; in the Tal- 
 mud, 253, n. 94. 
 
 Haggadic elements, the, in Rashi's 
 commentary, make it popular, 
 215. 
 
 Haggadic Midrash, the, explained, 
 107, 247, n. 38; vogue of, 108, 
 110; ease of, 110; quoted by 
 Rashi, 115. 
 See also DerasH. 
 
 Haggadic Midrashim, the, Rashi 
 conversant with, 83. 
 
 Hagiographa, the, Targumim of, 105; 
 the commentary on, by Samuel 
 ben Meir, 197. 
 
 Hal Gaon, supposed master of Ger- 
 shom ben Judah, 28; date of 
 death of, 37; cited by Rashi, 83; 
 data about, 248, n. 45. 
 
 Halakah, the, Rashi's attitude to, 
 155-7; in the Talmud, 253, n. 94.. 
 
368 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Halakic elements, the, in Rashi's 
 
 commentary, make it popular, 
 
 215. 
 Halakic Midraah, the, explained, 107, 
 
 247, n. 38 ; adapted to the 
 
 French-Jewish intellect, 121. 
 See also Derash; Midrash, Pe- 
 
 shat. 
 Halakic Midrashim, the, Rashi con- 
 versant with, 83; used by Rashi 
 
 for his Talmud commentary, 143. 
 Halakot Oedolot, the, cited by 
 
 Rashi, 83. 
 Hananiah ben Hezekiah ben Garon, 
 
 supposed author of the Megillat 
 
 Taanit, 246, n. 35. 
 Hananel ben Hushiel, Talmudiat, 
 
 compared with Rashi, 139-40; 
 
 method of, 153; data about, 253, 
 
 n. 97. 
 Ea-Pardes. See Sefer Tia-Pardes. 
 Ha-Parnes, work by Rashi, 71. 
 Har, name for Montpellier, 243, n. 
 
 10. 
 HasdaT Ibn Shaprut, alluded to, 
 
 251, n. 91. 
 Hayyoudj, not known to Rashi, 127; 
 
 data about, 252, n. 92. 
 Hazzekuni, by Hezekiah ben Ma- 
 
 noah, 199; super- commentary to 
 
 Rashi, 199. 
 Heave Offering', the, Book, of, by 
 
 Baruch ben Isaac, 193. 
 Hebrew, handled easily by Rashi, 
 
 97; a literary language for the 
 
 Jews, 99; Rashi's discriminating 
 
 knowledge of, 128-9; Mishnic and 
 
 Talmudic development of, 129 ; 
 
 interest in, among Christiana, 
 
 216. 
 *' Hebrew and Chaldaic Lexicon," by 
 
 Buxtorf, 217. 
 Heidenheim, Wolf, on Rashi, 220; 
 
 data about, 258, n. 158. 
 Heilprin, .Jehiel, on the genealogy 
 
 of Rashi, 213-4; the family of, 
 
 reno^vned, 214. 
 Heller, the family of, connected with 
 
 Rashi, 258, n. 154. 
 Henry I, suzerain of the barons of 
 
 Lorraine, 47. 
 Heni-y IV, emperor of Germany, and 
 
 forced converts, 67. 
 Hezekiah, alleged redactor of Isai- 
 ah's prophecies, 130. 
 Hezekiah ben Manoah, Biblical com- 
 mentary by, 199. 
 Biddushim, on Rashi's Talmudic 
 
 commentary, 216. 
 Histoire de la Bible et de Vex6- 
 
 g&se Ml) lique, by L. Wogue, 
 
 quoted, 106-8. 
 Hiyyah bar Abba, supposed redactor 
 
 of the Tosefta, 246, n, 37. 
 
 " Holy War, The," by MeJr ben 
 
 Simon, 205. 
 Horace, alluded to, 41. 
 Horwitz, Isaiah. See Isaiah Hor- 
 
 witz. 
 House of Joseph. See Bet Yosef. 
 Hugo, Count of Champagne, in the 
 
 First Crusade, 68. 
 Hnllin, Talmudical treatise, laazim 
 
 bearing on, 99. 
 
 Ilin Djanah, not knovm to Rashi, 
 127; alluded to, 129; data about, 
 251 n. 92. 
 
 Ile-de-France, dialect of, 100; Tal- 
 mud schools in, 194. 
 
 Immanuel ben Solomon Romi, and 
 Rashi, 206. 
 
 Imre Noam, by Jacob of lUescas, 
 199. 
 
 Inquisition, the, confiscates Rashi's 
 commentaries, 214 ; hostile to 
 Rashi's works, 217-18. 
 
 Interpreter of the Law, epithet 
 given to Rashi, 104. 
 
 Isaac, father of Rashi, alleged dis- 
 tinction of, 37-8; legend about, 
 38-9. 
 
 Isaac, quoted at the beginning of 
 Rashi's commentary on Genesis, 
 38. 
 
 Isaac, the sacrifice of, as explained 
 by Rashi, 113-14. 
 
 Isaac Abrabanel, on Rashi, 211; on 
 Josephus, 248, n, 48. 
 
 Isaac Alfasi, Talmudist, alluded to, 
 97, 99, 208, 209; method of, 153; 
 authority of, 156; the work of, 
 compared with Rashi's, 157 ; 
 commentary on, 249, n. 53; data 
 about, 254. n. 113. 
 
 Isaac ben Abraham the Younger, 
 Tossafist, 193; Biblical commen- 
 tary by, 198. 
 
 Isaac ben Asher ha-Levi, pupil of 
 Samuel ben Melr, 188. 
 
 Isaac ben Durbal (Durbalo), sup- 
 posed redactor of the Mahzor 
 Vitry, 171-2. 
 
 Isaac ben Eleazer ha-Levi, teacher 
 of Rashi, 50-1, 66; surname of, 
 244, n. 18. 
 
 Isaac ben Joseph, Tossafist, 195. 
 
 Isaac ben Judah, disciple of Ger- 
 shom ben Judah, 29; teacher of 
 Rashi, 51; on Rashi, 59; and 
 variants in the Talmud, 86. 
 
 Isaac ben Judah ha-Levi, Biblical 
 commentary by, 199. 
 
 Isaac ben Melr (Ribam), grandson of 
 Rashi, son of Merr ben Samuel, 
 Tossafist, 62, 188. 
 
 Isaac hen Menahem, alluded to, 62; 
 and Rashi, 85; Talmudist. 245, 
 n. IL 
 
INDEX 
 
 269 
 
 Isaac ben Moses of Vienna, on era- 
 sures in Rashi's autograph manu- 
 script of the Talmud, 91, 139; 
 ToBsafist, 194. 
 
 Isaac ben Samuel the Elder, great- 
 grandson of Rashi, Tossafist, 192- 
 3; establishes the foundation for 
 the Tossafot, 193; son of, 193; 
 disciples of, 193, 194 ; Biblical 
 commentary by, 198. 
 
 Isaac ben Sheshet (Ribash), on the 
 influence of French Talmudic 
 science, 211 ; on Rashi, 255, n. 
 122; data, about, 257, n. 150. 
 
 Isaac ha-Levi, disciple of Gershom 
 ben Judab, 29; in correspond- 
 ence with Rashi, 58; on Rashi, 
 68-9; Rashi differs with, 78. 
 
 Isaacides, Solomon, name of Rashi, 
 34. 
 
 Isaiah, Rashi on, 129, 130. 
 
 Isaiah da Trani, influenced by Rashi, 
 206; alluded to, 256, n. 129. 
 
 Isaiah Horwitz, on Rashi's commen- 
 taries, 218; son of, 218. 
 
 Ishmael» ledactor of the Mekilta, 
 247, n. 38. 
 
 Italian, the laazim translated into, 
 99. 
 
 Italy, learning in, 26; Jewish 
 scholars of, 26; Rashi's supposed 
 journey through, 43; the scholars 
 of, make use of Responsa, 160; 
 abode of the exiled Jews of 
 France, 210-11; Rashi's works 
 burnt in, 218. 
 
 Izhaki, Shelomo, name of Rashi, 84. 
 
 Jacob ben Joshua Falk, defends 
 Rashi, 216. 
 
 Jacob ben MeTr (Rabbenu Tarn ; 
 Jacob Tam), grandson of Rashi, 
 62, 188 ; on Rashi's Talmudic 
 commentary, 157; quotes Rashi's 
 view of deposits, 161; master of, 
 186; Shemaiah connected with, 
 ]87; prominence of, 189; disci- 
 ples of, 189; sufferings of, 180; 
 fast day instituted by, 189-00; 
 death of, 190; intellectual quali- 
 ties and works of, 190 ; inge- 
 nuity of, as a Talmudist, 190-1 ; 
 on Rashi, 102; nephew of, 192-3; 
 and Elijah ben Judah, 194; dis- 
 ciple of, 198; ends a grammati- 
 cal controversy, 251, n. 91. 
 
 Jacob ben Simson, disciple of Rashi, 
 186. 
 
 Jacob ben Takar, disciple of Ger- 
 shom ben Judah, 29; teacher of 
 Rashi, 49-50; humilitv of, 40; 
 and Eliezer the Great, 49-50; 
 alluded to, 58; qnntpd, 75. 
 
 Jacob de Bagnols, casuist, on Rashi, 
 205. 
 
 Jacob Molin ha-Levi (Maharil) , on 
 Jewish marriage ceremonies, 64, 
 245, n. 25. 
 
 Jacob of Illescas, Biblical commen- 
 tary by, 199. 
 
 Jacob of Orleans, disciple of Jacob 
 Tam, 189; Biblical commentary 
 by, 198. 
 
 Jacob Tam. See Jacob ben Melr. 
 
 Jehiel ben Joseph (Sir Vives), Tos- 
 safist, 195; disciples of, 195; 
 Biblical commentary by, 198. 
 
 Jehudah ha-Levi, alluded to, 222, 
 223. 
 
 Jeitteles, and the laasim, 101. 
 
 Jeremiah, Talmudic explanation of a 
 verse in, rejected by Rashi, 94. 
 
 Jericho, name for Lunel, 243, n. 10. 
 
 Jerusalem, alluded to, 215. 
 
 Jews, the, and the First Crusade, 
 67-8; the relation of, to Chris- 
 tians, 162; middle ages of, 212; 
 in England, 244, n. 16; develop 
 commerce, 246, n. 27. 
 See also under France. 
 
 Joan of Arc, alluded to, 246, n. 28. 
 
 Job, Rashi on, 130. 
 
 Jocelyn, son-in-law of Rashi, 62. 
 
 Jocbebed, daughter of Rashi, wife of 
 Meir ben Samuel, 62, 188. 
 
 Joel Sirkes, explains Rashi's Tal- 
 mudic commentaries, 216. 
 
 Johanan ha-Sandlar, supposed an- 
 cestor of Rashi, 37, 213-4, 244, 
 n. 11. 
 
 Joinville, geographical notions of, 
 82. 
 
 Jonathan ben Uzziel, Aramaic Bible 
 translation by, 83, 105. 
 
 Jos6 ben Halafta, alleged author of 
 the Se'fJrr Olam, 248, n. 43. 
 
 Joseph Bekor-Shor (Joseph ben 
 Isaac), Biblical commentary by, 
 198. 
 
 Joseph ben Ephraim Karo, Talmu- 
 dist, on Rashi, 214-15. 
 
 Joseph ben Judah, disciple of Rashi, 
 186. 
 
 Joseph ben Judah Ezra, fellow-stu- 
 dent of Rashi, 52. 
 
 Joseph ben Simon Kara, and Mena- 
 hem ben Helboj 111; Biblical 
 commentaries by, 107. 
 
 Joseph Ibn Plat, additions by, to 
 the Mahzor Vitry, 170. 
 
 Joseph Porat ben Moses, disciple of 
 Samuel ben IMoTr, 188. 
 
 Joseph Tob Elem, cited by Rashi, 
 84; makes a copy of the Bible, 
 128. 
 
 Josephns, alleged author of the 
 Yosippon, 84; Isaac Abrabanel 
 nn. 248, n. 47. 
 
 Judah ben Abraham, disciple of 
 Rashi. 186. 
 
270 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Judah ben BarzillaT, part compiler 
 of the Sefer ha-Orah, 171. 
 
 Judah ben David, at the disputation 
 of Paris, 195. 
 
 Judah ben Eliezer, Biblical commen- 
 tary by, 199. 
 
 Judah ben Ilal, redactor of the Sifra, 
 247, n. 38. 
 
 Judah ben Meir ha-Cohen (Leon- 
 tin), master of Gershom ben 
 Judah, 28. 
 
 Judah ben Nathan, scholar, son-in- 
 law of Rashi, 62, 187. 
 
 Judah Ibn Koreish, grammarian, how 
 known to Rashi, 84, 248, n. 49, 
 
 Judah Sir Leon, Tossafist, 194; re- 
 establishes the Talmud school at 
 Paris, 194; disciples of, 194; suc- 
 cessor of, 194; Biblical commen- 
 tary by, 198 ; Nahmanides sup- 
 posed disciple of, 208; on Elea- 
 zar ha-Kalir, 248, n. 48. 
 
 Judah the Saint, redactor of the 
 Mishnah, 51, 252, n. 94. 
 
 Just, the, Book of. See Jacob Tam. 
 
 Kabbalah, the, Rashi supposed to be 
 an adept of, 80; forerunner of, 
 83. 
 
 Kahana, Talmudist, the Pesikta at- 
 tributed to, 247, n. 39. 
 
 Kalonymides, the, family of Jewish 
 scholars, 27. See Kalonymos, 
 and Meshullam ben Kalonymos. 
 
 Kalonymos, Jewish scholar, at May- 
 ence, 25-6. 
 
 Kalonymos ben Sabbatai, Talmudic 
 scholar, alluded to, 58. 
 
 Kara. See Joseph ben Simon Kara; 
 Simon. 
 
 Karo. See Joseph ben Ephraim 
 Karo. 
 
 Karaites, the, exegesis of, 109. 
 
 Katzencllenbogen, the family of, con- 
 nected with Rashi, 258, n. 154. 
 
 Kiryat Yearim, name for NImes, 243, 
 n. 10. 
 
 KonteroSf Rashi's Talmud commen- 
 tary, 158. 
 
 Krotoszyn, alluded to, 215. 
 
 Laazim {leazim) , glosses, in 
 Rashi's commentaries, 98-102; 
 French words in Hebrew char- 
 acters, 98 ; no innovation, 98-9 ; 
 words for common acts, 99; in 
 commentaries by disciples of 
 Rashi, 99; translated into other 
 languages, 99; number of, 99; 
 philological value of, 100-1; cor- 
 rupted by copyists, 101; restora- 
 tion of, 101; deciphered by Men- 
 delssohn, 219. 
 
 La Fontaine, compared with Rashi, 
 133. 
 
 Lagny, fairs held at, 35. 
 
 Lamentations, the Midrash on, Rashi 
 conversant with, 83 ; Rashi on, 
 130. 
 
 Laudau, and the laazim, 101. 
 
 Languages spoken by Rashi, 55, 82. 
 
 Langue d'o'il, fewness of the monu- 
 ments of, 100. 
 
 Latin, Rashi supposed to have 
 known, 80 ; Rashi's Bible com- 
 mentary translated into, 217. 
 
 Law, the. See Bible, the; Penta- 
 teuch, the; Talmud, the. 
 
 Legends, value of, 25. 
 
 Legends about Rashi, 37-9, 43-5, 48, 
 54-5, 38-9, 57, 61, 68-70, 71-2, 141, 
 218-9. 
 
 L'Empereur, Hebraist, on the birth- 
 place of Rashi, 34. 
 
 Leontin. See Judah ben Melr ha- 
 Cohen. 
 
 Lessing, W. E., quoted, 41. 
 
 L6vi, laraSl, alluded to, 22; on 
 Rashi, 224. 
 
 Leviticus, the Book of, taught to 
 children, 42 ; Midrash on, 247, 
 n. 38. 
 
 Lexicon, Talmudic, by Machir, 29; 
 by Menahera ben Saruk, 251, n. 
 91. 
 
 Light, Book of. See Sefer ha- 
 Orah. 
 
 " Light of the Captivity," epithet 
 given to Rashi, 72. 
 
 " Light of the Exile, The," epithet 
 of Gershom ben Judah, 28. 
 
 Likkute ha-Pardes, alluded to, 
 256, D. 129. 
 
 Little Book of Precepts. See Sefer 
 Mizwot Katan. 
 
 Liturgical poem, by Jacob Tam, 190. 
 
 Liturgical poems, by Rashi, num- 
 ber of, 173; style and language 
 of, 174; quoted, 174-5, 176-8; 
 emotional character of, 176; 
 monotony of, 178-9; interest at- 
 taching to, 179. 
 
 Liturgical poetry, by the Jews of 
 France and Germany, 173-4. 
 
 Loria. See Luria, 
 
 Lorraine, Talmud studies in, 25, 26- 
 7. 
 
 Lorraine, good fortune of the Jews 
 of, 46-7 ; French character of, 
 47; the Jews of, and those of 
 Northern France, 47; dialect of, 
 100. 
 See also Mayence. 
 
 Lothair, the country of, Lorraine, 47. 
 
 Lotharingia, Lorraine, 47. 
 
 Lowe, and the laazim, 101. 
 
 Lucca, home of the Kalonymides, 25. 
 
 Lulah, the, Talmudic passage on, 
 145-7. 
 
 Lunel, alleged birthplace of Rashi, 
 32, 34; Rashi supposed to have 
 
INDEX 
 
 271 
 
 studied at, 43; name of, in 
 
 Hebrew, 243, n. 10. 
 Lxiria, the family of, descended from 
 
 Rashi, 213; origin of name of, 
 
 213; renowned, 214. 
 See Solomon ben Samuel Spira; 
 
 Solomon Luria; Yosselmann of 
 
 Rosheim; Elijah Loanz; Heil- 
 
 prin ; Jehiel. 
 Luther, influenced by Rashi, 201. 
 Luzzatto, Samuel David, defends 
 
 Rashi, 220. 
 Lyons, alluded to, 243, n. 2. 
 
 Machir, author of a Talmudic lexi- 
 con, 29; the sons of, 29, 62. 
 
 Machirites, the, one of, makes addi- 
 tions to the Sefer ha-Pardes, 
 171. 
 
 Maharil. See Jacob Molin ha-Levi. 
 
 Maharsha. See Samuel Edels. 
 
 Maharshal. See Solomon Luria. 
 
 Mahheret, by Menahera ben Saruk, 
 251, n. 91. 
 
 Malizor, by Jacob ben Simson, 186. 
 
 Mdl}tsor Vitry, work composed un- 
 der the influence of Rashi, 170; 
 contents of, 171; author of, 172, 
 186; importance of, 172. 
 
 Maimonides, Moses, contrasted with 
 Raahi, 14; alluded to, 57, 67, 
 69, 70, 81, 92, 155, 208, 222, 223; 
 supposed intercourse of, with 
 Rashi, 43; authority of, 156; 
 influence of, compared with 
 Rashi's, 184; has no disciples, 
 186. 
 
 Manumission of slaves, Talmudic pas- 
 sage on, 148-9. 
 
 Manuscripts, limited number of, 
 owned by Jews, 24. 
 
 Marriages, among the Jews of 
 France, 62-4, 245, n. 25. 
 
 Martini, Rajinond, on the name of 
 Rashi, 34. 
 
 Marti-rs, Responsa on, 163. 
 
 Massorah, the, used by Rashi, 105-6. 
 
 Maaaorah, the Great, on Psalm IX, 
 96. 
 
 Mattathiaa ben Moses, disciple of 
 Rashi, 186. 
 
 Mattathiaa Treves, daughter of, de- 
 scended from Rashi, 213. 
 
 Maycnce, Talmudic studies at, 25, 
 26-7, 28, 29; Rashi's sojourn at, 
 45-6, 50-1; commentaries of the 
 scholars of, 61; the Jews of, and 
 the First Crusade, 66; customs 
 of, in the Sefer ha-Pardes, 171. 
 
 Medicine, Rashi supposed to have 
 known, 80. 
 
 Megttlat TnanU, how known to 
 Rashi, 83; contents of, 246, n. 
 
 Megillut, the Ave, Rashi's commen- 
 tary on, 216. 
 
 Metr ben Isaac, liturgical poet, 244, 
 n. 19. 
 
 Metr ben Isaac ben Samuel, liturgi- 
 cal poet, fellow-student of Rashi, 
 62, 244, r. 19. 
 
 Melr ben Samuel, of Rameru, son-in- 
 law and fellow-student of Rashi, 
 62, 62, 187-8; alluded to, 66; 
 family of, 188. 
 
 Melr ben Simon, on Rashi, 205. 
 
 Mefr ha-Cohen, fellow-student of 
 Rashi, 52. 
 
 Melr of Rothenburg, Topsaflst, 194, 
 196. 
 
 MelciUa, the, Rashi conversant 
 with, 83, 247, n. 38. 
 
 Memoirs, Jewish, paucity of, 31. 
 
 Menahem ben Helbo, and Rashi, 85; 
 commentary by, 110-11; nephew 
 of, 197. 
 
 Menahem ben Machir, fellow-student 
 of Rashi, 62. 
 
 Menahem ben Saruk, grammarian, 
 known to Rashi, 84; on Psalm 
 IX, 96, 248, n. 62; works of, 
 used by Rashi, 127; defended by 
 Jacob Tam, 190; data about, 
 261, n. 91. 
 
 Menahem ben Solomon Meiri, on 
 Rashi, 205. 
 
 Menahem ben Zerah, on Rashi's Tal- 
 mudic commentary, 157-8; on 
 Rashi, 205; data about, 255, n. 
 123. 
 
 Menahem of Joignv, makes a copy 
 of the Bible, 128. 
 
 Mendelssohn, Moses, and the laazim, 
 101; on Rashi, 123; the Biblical 
 commentary by, compared with 
 Rashi's 134; uses Rashi, 219. 
 
 Meor ha-Golali, epithet of Ger- 
 shom ben Judah, 28. 
 
 Meshullam ben Kalonymos, Talmu- 
 dist, 27; cited by Rashi, 84. 
 
 Metz, home of Gershom ben Judah, 
 28. 
 
 Mezusahj the, Responsa by Rashi 
 on, 169. 
 
 Michelet, quoted, 74, 133. 
 
 Middle Ages of the Jews, 212. 
 
 Midrash, the, purpose of, 121; de- 
 votional uses of, 123-4; popu- 
 larized by Rashi, 124-5, 220; in 
 Spain, 127; rejected by Joseph 
 Kara as a method of Bible inter- 
 pretation, 197. 
 See also Derash; Exegesis, Bibli- 
 cal; Haggadic Midrash; Halakic 
 Midrash; Peshat; Babbot, the, 
 etc. 
 
 Midrash Rabba. See Balltot. 
 Midraahim, used by Nicholas de 
 
 L.iTa, 200. 
 Midrashim, the Haggadic. See Hag- 
 gadic Midrashim, the, 
 
S72 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Midrashim, the Halakic. See Hala- 
 kic Midrashim, the. 
 
 Minliat Yehudah, by Judah ben 
 Eliezer, 199. 
 
 Minim, the, Chriatians, 119. 
 
 Miriam, a name frequently used in 
 Rashi's family, 213. 
 
 Miriam, daughter of Raahi, 62. 
 
 Miriam, daughter of Solomon ben 
 Samuel Spira, scholar, 213. 
 
 Miriam, granddaughter of Rashi, 
 daughter of Meir ben Samuel, 
 Wife of Samuel of Vitry, 62, 188. 
 
 Mishnah, the, the redaction of, 51; 
 Rashi conversant with, 83; Rashi 
 on the composition of, 150; on 
 trade between Jews and Chris- 
 tians, 161; explanation of, 252, 
 n. 94. 
 
 Mishneh Torah, the, by Maimon- 
 idea, alluded to, 92, 184, 194. 
 
 Money-lending, occupation of the 
 Jews, 20. 
 
 Montpellier, name for, 243, n. 10. 
 
 Mordecai ben Hillel, Toasafist, 195. 
 
 Mosea ben Abraham, disciple of Ja- 
 cob Tarn, 189. 
 
 Moses ben Jacob, Tossafist, 194. 
 
 Moses ben Nahman (Bonastruc da 
 Porta, Nahmanides) , contrasted 
 with Rashi, 76; on Samuel ben 
 Melr, 197; on Rashi, 208; Kabba- 
 list, 208; introduces the works of 
 the French Talmudists into 
 Spain, 208; data about, 257, n. 
 147. 
 
 Moses ben Shneor, Tossafist, 195. 
 
 Moses ha-Darshan, alleged teacher 
 of Rashi, 43; known to Rashi, 
 84; commentary by, 110-11. 
 
 Mosea Isserles, connected with the 
 Rashi family, 258, n. 154. 
 
 Moses of Coucy, at the disputation 
 of Paris, 195; Biblical commen- 
 tary by, 198. 
 
 Moses of Leon, uses the Bible com- 
 mentary of Rashi, 208. 
 
 Moses of Paris, disciple of Samuel 
 ben MeIr, 197. 
 
 Moses of Pontoise, Biblical commen- 
 tary by, 198. 
 
 Milnster, Sebastian, Hebraist, on the 
 name of Rashi, 34. 
 
 Nabal, subject of Psalm IX, 96. 
 
 NaJjmanides. See Moses ben Nah- 
 man. 
 
 Narbonne, Rashi supposed to have 
 studied at, 43. 
 
 Nathan ben Jehiel^ fellow-atudent of 
 Rashi, 52. 
 
 Nathan ben Jehiel, lexicographer, 
 legendary relation of, to Rashi, 
 141; the work of, compared with 
 Rashi's, 157; and Rashi, 353, 
 n. 98; data about, 255, n. 121. 
 
 Nathan ben Machir, fellow-student of 
 
 Rashi, 52; alleged compiler of 
 
 Sefer ha-Orah, 171. 
 Natronai, Gaon, supposed visit of» 
 
 to France, 27. 
 Nehemiah, Rashi on, 130. 
 Neumann, and the laazim, 101. 
 New moon, the, Talmudic passage 
 
 on, 143-5. 
 Nicholas de Lyra, Hebraist, and 
 
 Rashi, 200-1; commentary of, on 
 
 Rashi's Bible commentary, 217. 
 Nile, the, crude notions about, 82. 
 Nimes, name for, 243, n. 10. 
 NisSim Gerundi, compared with 
 
 Rashi as a commentator, 76, 97; 
 
 influenced by Rashi, 209. 
 Normandy, Talmud schools in, 194. 
 Numbers, the Book of, Midrash on, 
 
 247, n. 38. 
 
 Obadiah, Bible scholar, cited by 
 
 Joseph Bekor-Shor, 198. 
 Olbert, scholar, alluded to, 54. 
 Olmtitz, Bishop of, and Rashi, 43-4. 
 Onkelos, the Bible translation by, 
 
 used by Rashi, 83, 105; quoted 
 
 by Rashi, 115, 117. 
 Oppenheim, David Joshua, builds the 
 
 school at Worms, 49. 
 Or Zarua, by Isaac ben Mosea, 194. 
 Orient, the, Rashi's influence in, 
 
 205. 
 
 Paaneafp Ratsah, by Isaac ben Ju- 
 dah ha-Levi, 199. 
 
 Pablo Christiano, alluded to, 257, u. 
 147. 
 
 Palestine, Rashi's supposed journey 
 through, 43. 
 
 Pantal6on, Saint, the church of, 
 originally a synagogue, 36. 
 
 Paradise, Book of. See Sefer ha- 
 Pardcs. 
 
 Paris, Talmud school at, 194, 195. 
 
 ParsTianclata, epithet given to 
 Rashi, 104, 249, n. 59. 
 
 Passover, ceremonial for, 186. 
 
 Pentateuch, the place of, in Jewish 
 education, 42 ; in the synagogue, 
 107; Derash freely used by Rashi 
 for, 120; Rashi's attitude toward, 
 121, 122. 
 See also Bible, the; Commentaries, 
 Biblical; Commentaries, Penta- 
 teuch ; Commentaries, the, by 
 Rashi ; Commentary, the Bibli- 
 cal, by Rashi; Commentary, the 
 Pentateuch, by Rashi; Exegesis, 
 Biblical. 
 
 Pentecost, Jewish children begin 
 their education on, 40. 
 
 Perez ben Elia, Tossafist, 195. 
 
 Persia, Rashi's supposed journey 
 through, 43. 
 
INDEX 
 
 273 
 
 Persian, Rashl supposed to have 
 
 known, 82. 
 Persians, the, the influence of, on 
 
 the Jews, 108. 
 Perus, title siven to Rashi's Bible 
 
 commentary, 201. 
 Peshat, method of interpreting 
 
 Scriptures, 106, 107; persistence 
 
 of, 109; used by Rashl, 111, 117, 
 
 118, 122; used by Abraham Ibn 
 
 Ezra, 132; used by Samuel ben 
 
 Meir, 196; Abraham Ibn Ezra on, 
 
 207. 
 See also Halakic Midrash, the. 
 Pesikta, the, Rashi conversant with, 
 
 83; on Psalm IX, 96; contents 
 
 of, 247, n. 39. 
 Pesikta Rabliatij 247, n. 39. 
 Philip Augustus, of France, and the 
 
 Jews, 194, 202. 
 Philip the Fair, of France, exiles 
 
 the Jews, 203. 
 Phylacteries, Responsa by Rashi on, 
 
 159. 
 Piedmont, abode of the exiled Jews 
 
 of France, 210. 
 Pindar, alluded to, 41. 
 Pious, the. Book of, by Eliezer ben 
 
 Samuel, 189. 
 Pirke de Rahhi Eliezer, the, Rashi 
 
 conversant with, 83; character 
 
 of, 248, n. 42. 
 Poland, the centre of Judaism, 210. 
 Polemics against Christianity, 118- 
 
 19, 198. 
 Pollak, the family of, connected 
 
 with Rashi, 258, n. 154. 
 Polygamy, forbidden by Gershom 
 
 ben Judah, 28. 
 Prague, Rashi supposed to .have died 
 
 at, 32; Rashi'a supposed visit 
 
 to, 44-5; the Jews of, venerate 
 
 the grave of Rashi, 71. 
 Printing, the discovery of, increases 
 
 Rashi's popularity, 214. 
 Prophets, the, in the synagogue, 107; 
 
 the commentary on, by Samuel 
 
 ben MeIr, 197. 
 Provence, early settlement of Jews 
 
 in, 18; Rashi's influence in, 205. 
 Proverbs, the, allegorically inter- 
 preted by Rashi, 119; Rashi on, 
 
 130. 
 Provins, fairs held at, 35. 
 Psalm IX, Rashi on, 96. 
 Psalm XXIII, as interpreted by 
 
 Rashi, 122-3. 
 Psalm XCin, quoted. 60. 
 Psalms, the, Rashi conversant with 
 
 the Midrash on, 83; Rashi's in- 
 terpretation of, 119. 
 Pseudo-Jonathan, a Targum, known 
 
 to Rashi, 249, n. 60; 250, n. 72. 
 Pseudo-Rashi on Alfasi, and the 
 
 laazim, 99. 
 
 Pugio fidei, work of Raymond 
 Martini, 34. 
 
 Rab, Babylonian Amora, alluded to, 
 54, 253, n. 94. 
 
 Rabbenu Gershom. See Gershom ben 
 Judah. 
 
 Rabbenu Tarn. 8ee Jacob ben Meir. 
 
 Rahhotj a Midrash, Rashi conver- 
 sant with, 83; contents of, 247, 
 n. 39. 
 See also BeresMt Rahha. 
 
 Rachel (Bellassez), daughter of 
 Rashi, 62. 
 
 Radbaz. See David Ibn Abi Zimra. 
 
 Rameru (Ramerupt), home of Rash- 
 bam, 62 ; centre for Jewish 
 studies, 187, 188 ; decline of, 
 193; data about, 256, n. 134. 
 
 Ramleh, alluded to, 68. 
 
 Rapoport, Solomon Judah, on Ra- 
 shi, 221; data about, 258, n. 
 161. 
 
 Rashbam. See Samuel ben Meir. 
 
 Rashi, contrasted with Malmonidea, 
 14; the forerunner of, 28; fellow- 
 students of, 29, 51-2; need for, 
 29-30 ; teachers of, 29, 49-51, 
 58, 84; scant information about, 
 31 ; cities claiming, 31-2, 34 ; 
 writers on, 32 ; periods in the 
 life of, 33; names of, 33-4, 243, n. 
 9. Troyes in the worka of, 36; 
 date of birth of, 37; illustrious 
 ancestry of, 37-8 ; legends con- 
 nected with the birth of, 38-9; 
 early education of, 39, 43; Bible 
 commentary of, and Jewish edu- 
 cation, 42 ; travels of, 43-6 ; in 
 Prague, 44-5; geographical no- 
 tions of, 45; privations of, 46; 
 in Germany, 47-8; in Worms, 48- 
 50; on Jacob ben Yakar, 50; 
 compared with Judah the Saint, 
 51 ; on Meir ben Isaac ben 
 Samuel, 52; on his teachers, 52; 
 the marriage of, 53; unity of 
 life of, 53; in Champagne, 53; 
 Kabbalistic belief about, 54; 
 legend about dwelling of, 54-5; 
 languages spoken by, 55, 82; 
 connected with Troyes, 65-6; 
 spiritual qualities of, 55; quoted, 
 56; authority of, 56-7; corres- 
 pondents of, 57, 160; and God- 
 frey of Bouillon, 68-70, 246, n. 
 28; and his companinn in Para- 
 dise, 71; death of, 71-2; founds 
 a Talmud school, 57, 59-60; as 
 head of a Talmud school, 57-8; 
 Isaac ha-Levi on. 58-9; Isaac ben 
 Judah on, 59; Eliezer ben Na- 
 than on. 59; and his disciples, 
 60. 186-7, 187-93; daughters of, 
 61-2, 245; n. 22 ; attitude of. 
 
274 
 
 INDEX 
 
 toward forced converts, 67, 164; 
 sources of information about, 73; 
 virtues of, 74, 76-9, 80; intellec- 
 tual qualities of, 74; theology of, 
 75-6; a Responsum of, 76-7; at- 
 titude of, toward his teachers, 
 77-8; in his capacity aa rabbi, 
 78 ; aa a correspondent, 78-9 ; 
 ready to avow errors and ignor- 
 ance, 79; Bible commentary of, 
 80 ; supposed learning of, 80-2 ; 
 the limitations of, 81-2 ; books 
 known to, 83-4, 247, notes 38-41, 
 249, n. 60; and hig relation to 
 his contemporaries, 84-5 ; scien- 
 tific knowledge of, 85; scientific 
 probity of, 86; debt of posterity 
 to, 86; threefold functions of, 89- 
 90; characterization of the com- 
 mentaries of, 90-103 ; lacks 
 creative force and literary 
 ability, 92, 93, 97; not a sys- 
 tematizer, 92-3 ; clearnesa of, 
 93-4; precision of, 94-5 ; brevity 
 of, 95-6; on Samuel ben Meir, 
 95; Azulai on, 95; on Psalm IX, 
 96; suggestive language of, 96-7; 
 the French glosses (laazim) of, 
 98-102; Eliezer ben Nathan on, 
 104; interpreter of the Law, 104; 
 translations of the Bible, etc. , 
 used by, 105-6; and methods of 
 interpretation, 110-11; and the 
 Bible commentators preceding 
 him, 110-11 ; and the Midrash, 
 111-12, 114, 119-20; specimen pas- 
 sages from the Bible commentary 
 of, 112-18, 122-3; on Christianity, 
 118-19 ; allegorical exegesis by, 
 119; attitude of, to the Bible and 
 the Talmud, 121; as popularizer, 
 124-5 ; recognizes the imperfec- 
 tion of his Bible commentaries, 
 125; originality of, 126, 128; as 
 a grammarian, 126-8; and the 
 Spanish- Jewish grammarians, 127; 
 adept in Hebrew, 128-9; and the 
 text of the Bible, 129-30; and the 
 canon, 130; the faith of, 131; 
 contrasted with Abraham Ibn 
 Ezra, 131-2 ; various recensions 
 of his Talmudic commentaries 
 made by, 135-6 ; Talmud com- 
 mentators preceding, 136-8 ; re- 
 vision of the Talmud text by, 
 138-9; uses Gershom's auto- 
 graph manuscript of the Talmud, 
 139, 140; uses texts parallel to 
 the Talmud, 139; compared with 
 Hananel, 139-40 ; uses the Re- 
 sponsa of the Geonim, 140, 148; 
 Talmud text of, accepted, 140; 
 specimen pass.npres from the Tal- 
 mudic commentaries of, 144-9, 
 151-2, 153-5; historical veracity of. 
 
 149-50; lacki historical criticism, 
 150-1; method of, with Haggadah 
 and Halakab, 152-3; attitude of, 
 to the Halakah, 165-7; authority 
 of, in the Halakah, 156-7; Re- 
 Bponsa by, 159, 160, 161, 161-2, 
 163-4; advocates communal and 
 domestic peace, 164-6; religious 
 and legal opinions of, 166-7; 
 style of, 168; the disciples of, his 
 collaborators, 169; Responsa by, 
 collected by his pupils, 170; 
 works composed under the influ- 
 ences of, 170; number of liturgical 
 poems by, 173; poems by, quoted 
 and analyzed, 174-9; works by, 
 lost, 183; fertility of, 183; in- 
 fluence of, 183-4; dominates the 
 rabbinical movement in France 
 and Germany, 184; relatives, 
 connections, and descendants of, 
 187-93, 212-14, 227, 244, n. 
 11; manuscripts of, used by 
 his descendants, 187; relation of, 
 to the Tossafists, 191-3; the in- 
 fluence of, on Bible exegesis, 196; 
 and Joseph ben Simon Kara, 
 197; influence of; on Nicholas de 
 Lyra, 200; influences Luther, 201; 
 extent of the influence of, 204-5; 
 influence of, in France, 205; 
 influence of, in Italy, 206; in- 
 fluence of, in Spain, 206-9, 211; 
 Abraham Ibn Ezra on, 206-7; 
 the commentaries of, not pro- 
 ductive of original works in the 
 fifteenth century, 211-12; person- 
 ality of, steadily popular, 212; 
 mentioned in prayers, 212 ; and 
 the discovery of printing, 214; 
 number of editions of works of, 
 214; authority of, increases, 214- 
 15; reason for the popularity of, 
 215; super-commentaries on the 
 works of, 216; used by Chris- 
 tians, 216-17 ; the works of, 
 burned, 217-18 ; feeling of the 
 Jews toward, 218-19; and mod- 
 ern Jewish scholars, 219-20; in- 
 fluence of, in Bible and Talmud 
 studies, 220-1 ; eight hundredth 
 anniversary of the death of, 221; 
 appreciation of 222-24. 
 See also Bible, the; Commentaries, 
 the, by Rashi ; Commentary, the 
 Bible, by Rashi; Commentary, 
 the Talmudic, by Rashi; Com- 
 mentary, the Pentateuch, by 
 Rashi; Responsa, the, by Rashi; 
 Talmud, the. 
 
 Rashi Chair, 48. 
 
 Rashi Chapel, 48. 49. 
 
 " Rashi script," 246, n. 32, 
 
 Rebecca, wife of Rashi, 44-5. 
 
INDEX 
 
 275 
 
 Reformation, the, and Bible studies, 
 216. 
 
 Reggie, Rashi'8 commentary printed 
 at, 214. 
 
 Rejoicing of the Law, the, Jewish 
 children begin their education 
 on, 40. 
 
 Renaissance of Jewish learning, 219. 
 
 Renaissance, the, and Bible studies, 
 216. 
 
 Responsa, on Troyes, 36; by Isaac 
 ha-Levi, 58; by the Geonim, cited 
 by Rashi, 83; definition of, 159- 
 60; by the Geonim, contain some 
 of Rashi's, 170; by various 
 authorities, in the Sefer ha- 
 Pardes, 170 ; by disciples of 
 Rashi, 186; by Meir ben Samuel, 
 188; by Jacob Tarn, 190; by 
 Sherira, 248, n. 44; by Hal, 248, 
 n. 45; by Yehudal, 248, n. 47 
 by Nathan ben Jehiel, 253, n. 98 
 by Alfasi, 254, n. 113; by David 
 Ibn Abi Zimra, 255, n. 120; by 
 Solomon ben Adret, 257, n. 148; 
 by Asher ben Jehiel, 257, n. 149. 
 
 Responsa, the, by Rashi, give infor- 
 mation about him, 73; by Rashi, 
 quoted, 76-7, 79, 159, 160, 161, 
 161-2, 163-4, 165-6, 245, n. 21; 
 varied in character, 160; serve a 
 practical purpose, 160-1; Indicate 
 Rashi's character and views, 
 166-7; style of, 168; collected by 
 his disciples, 168, 170; in the 
 Sefer ha-Pardes, 170-1; in the 
 Mahzor Vitry, 171; edited by 
 Shemaiah, 187; character of, 222. 
 
 Rhone, the, early settlement of Jews 
 along, 18. 
 
 Ribam. See Isaac ben Melr. 
 
 Ribash. See Isaac ben Sheshet. 
 
 Richard I., of England, alluded to, 
 69, 189. 
 
 Rif. See Isaac Alfasi. 
 
 Rifat, name for Britain, 244, n. 10. 
 
 Ritual murder charges in France, 
 202. 
 
 Roland, the epic of, alluded to, 102. 
 
 Roll of Fasts, how known to Rashi, 
 83. 
 
 Rosh. See Asher ben Jehiel. 
 
 Ro&h ha-Shanah 22a, aa interpreted 
 by Rashi, 144-5. 
 
 Rosh Shibte lehudah, Rashi, 243, n. 
 9. 
 
 Ruth, the Book of, Rashi on, 130. 
 
 Saadia, contrasted with Rashi, 76; 
 works of, not known to Rashi, 
 92; exegesis of, 109; alluded to, 
 222. 
 
 SabbataT ben Joseph Bass, bibliogra- 
 pher, super- commentary on 
 Rashi, by, 215. 
 
 Sabbatal Donnolo. and Rashi, 82. 
 
 Sabbatai Sheftel. on Rashi, 218. 
 
 Sabbath, laazim bearing on the ob- 
 servance of the, 99. 
 
 Sacrifice of Isaac, the, as explained 
 by Rashi, 113-14. 
 
 Safed. alluded to, 215. 
 
 Sl. Jean d'Acre, alluded to, 193. 
 
 St. Louis, of France, and the Jews, 
 202; Rashi's works burned imder, 
 217. 
 
 Saladin, sultan, alluded to, 69. 
 
 Salome GallicuB, name under which 
 Rashi was known, 33. 
 
 Solomon ha-Zarfati, name under 
 which Rashi was known, 33. 
 
 Samson of Sens, Tossafist, 193. 
 
 Samson Sir of Coucy, Tossafist, 194; 
 brother-in-law of, 194. 
 
 Samuel, Amora, alluded to, 253, u. 
 94. 
 
 Samuel, the Book of, Rashi convers- 
 ant with the Midrash on, 83; 
 Joseph Kara on, 197. 
 
 Samuel ben Jacob, descendant of 
 Rashi, 213. 
 
 Samuel ben Meir (Rashbam), grand- 
 son of Rashi, on Biblical paral- 
 lelism, 60 ; son of Meir ben 
 Samuel, 62 ; relation of, to 
 Rashi, 80; prolixity of, 95; com- 
 pared with Rashi as a commen- 
 tator, 97; on the method of in- 
 terpreting Scriptures, 121-2; on 
 Rashi's Bible commentary, 125; 
 Bible commentaries by, 126, 215; 
 on laws against Gentiles, 161; 
 directs schools at Troyes and Ra- 
 meru, 188 ; disciples of, 188-9, 
 193, 197; character of, 189; Bible 
 exegesis by, 196-7 ; Midrash oc- 
 casionally used by, 197; sur- 
 passed by Joseph ben Simon 
 Kara, 197. 
 
 Samuel ben Nissim, cites Rashi, 205. 
 
 Samuel ben Perigoros, disciple of 
 Rashi, 186. 
 
 Samuel ben Solomon Sir Morelj Tos- 
 safist, 194; at the disputation of 
 Paris, 195. 
 
 Samuel ben Shneor, Tossafist, 195. 
 
 Samuel Edels (Maharsha), explains 
 Rashi's Talmudic commentary, 
 216. 
 
 Samuel ha-Levi, fellow-student of 
 Rashia, 52. 
 
 Samuel Ibn Nagdela, alluded to, 
 252, n. 92. 
 
 Samuel of Vitry, son-in-law of Meir 
 bon Samuel, 188. 
 
 Sanhedrin^ Talmudical treatise, 
 used by Rashi in his Bible com- 
 mentary, 114. 
 
 Sanhedrin 92b, as interpreted by 
 Rashi. 155. 
 
276 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Saftne, the, early settlement of Jewg 
 along, 18. 
 
 Scholastic literature, alluded to, 93. 
 
 Schrader, exegesis of, 113. 
 
 Seder Olam, the, Rashi conversant 
 with, 83; description of, 248, n. 
 43. 
 
 Sefarad, name for Spain, 244, n. 10. 
 
 Sefer ha-Orah work composed un- 
 der the influence of Rashi, 170; 
 published by Buber, 170, 221; 
 elements of, 171. 
 
 Sefer ha-Pardes, work composed 
 under the influence of Raahi, 70, 
 170, 256, n. 129; concents of, 
 170-1; popularity of, 171; import- 
 ance of, 172. 
 
 Sefer ha-Terumah, by Baruch ben 
 Isaac, 193. 
 
 Sefer ha-Yashar, by Jacob Tarn, 
 inaugurates the Tossafot litera- 
 ture, 191. 
 
 Sefer Jssur-tce-'Heter, work com- 
 posed under the influence of 
 Rashi, 170. 
 
 Sefer Mizwot Oadol, by MoseB ben 
 Jacob, 194. 
 
 Sefer Mizwot Katan, by Isaac ben 
 Joseph, 195. 
 
 Sefer Yere'im^ by Eliezer ben 
 . Samuel, 189. 
 
 Sefer Yezirah, Rashi conversant 
 with, 83. 
 
 " Segan Leviya," surname of Isaac 
 ben Eleazar ha-Levi, 244, n. 18. 
 
 Selihot, penitential poems, by 
 Rashi, 176. 
 See Liturgical poems by Rashi. 
 
 Semag. See Sefer Mizwot Gadol. 
 
 SemaJc. See Sefer Mizwot Katan. 
 
 Sens, Tossafot of, 195. 
 
 Shabbat, Talmudical treatise, laa- 
 zim bearing on, 99. 
 
 Sheeltot, the, cited by Rashi, 83; 
 the author of, 248, n. 46. 
 
 Shelomo, name under which Rashi 
 was known, 33. 
 
 Shemaiah, disciple of Rashi, addi- 
 tions by, to the Sefer ha-Par- 
 des, 171, 255, n. 129. 
 
 Sherira bar Hananiah, Oaon, cited 
 by Rashi, 83; works of, 248, n. 
 44. 
 
 SMbhole ha-LeTcet, by Zedekiah 
 ben Abraham Anaw, 206. 
 
 Shitta Mehubezet, by Bezalel Ash- 
 kenazi, 255, n. 122. 
 
 Sifra (Torat Kohanim), the, Rashi 
 conversant with, 83, 247, n. 38. 
 
 Sifre, the, Rashi conversant with, 
 83, 247, n. 38. 
 
 Sigebert de Gemblours, monk, He- 
 braist, 129. 
 
 Simhah ben Samuel, disciple of 
 Rashi, author of the Mahzor 
 
 Vitry, 172, 186; grandson of, 
 192. 
 
 Simon Ashkenazi, super-commentary 
 of, on Rashi, 215. 
 
 Simon ben Yohal, redactor of the 
 Sifre, 247, n. 38. 
 
 Simon ben Zemalj Duran, Rashi's 
 influence on, 211 ; data about, 
 257, n. 151. 
 
 Simon Kara, alleged author of the 
 Yalkut Shimconi, 251, n. 89. 
 
 Simon of Joinville, Tossafist, 194. 
 
 Simon the Elder, disciple of Ger- 
 shom ben Judah, 2y ; maternal 
 uncle of Rashi, 37. 
 
 Simon, Richard, exesrete, on the 
 birthplace of Rashi, 34; uses 
 Rashi's work, 217. 
 
 Sinzheim, Loeb, restores the school 
 at Worms, 48. 
 
 Sir Vives. See Jehial ben Joseph. 
 
 Sirkes, Joel. See Joel Sirkes. 
 
 Slaves, manumission of, Talmudic 
 passage on, 148-9. 
 
 Solomon, name of Rashi, 33. 
 
 Solomon ben Abba Mari, gram- 
 marian, confused with Rashi, 34. 
 
 Solomon ben Adret, influenced by 
 Rashi, 209; data about, 257, n. 
 148. 
 
 Solomon ben Isaac, confused with 
 Rashi, 253, n. 98. 
 
 Solomon ben Meir, grandson of 
 Rashi, scholar, 62, 188. 
 
 Solomon ben Samuel Spira, descen- 
 dant of Rashi, 213; daughter of, 
 213. 
 
 Solomon ben Simson, fellow-student 
 of Rashi, 52. 
 
 Solomon Luria (Maharshal), Kabba- 
 list and Talmudist, on the litur- 
 gical poems by Rashi, 173; de- 
 scended from Rashi, 213, 258, n. 
 154; on Rashi's commentary, 215, 
 216. 
 
 Solomon of Dreux, Tossafist, 194. 
 
 Solomon of Lunel, confused with 
 Rashi, 34. 
 
 Solomon of Tours, correspondent of 
 Rashi, 57. 
 
 Solomon Simhah, casuist, descendant 
 of Rashi, '213. 
 
 Solomon Ycdidiah, influenced by 
 Rashi, 206. 
 
 Song of Songs, the, Rashi conversant 
 with the Midrash on, 83; alle- 
 gorically interpreted by Rashi, 
 119; Rashi on, 130, 248, n. 51. 
 
 Song of the Red Sea, the, as ex- 
 plained by Rashi, 114-16. 
 
 Spain, the Jews of, compared with 
 those of France, 25; exegesis by 
 the Jews of, 127; the scholars 
 of, make use of Responsa, 160; 
 
INDEX 
 
 277 
 
 Rashi's works, prohibited in, 218; 
 
 rabbinical name for, 244, n. 10. 
 Speyer, beginning of Jewish studies 
 
 at, 27; Rashi said to have studied 
 
 at, 47; the Jews of, and the First 
 
 Crusade, 66; customs of, in the 
 
 Sefer ha-Pardes, 171. 
 Strack, H. L., on Raahi'a Talmud 
 
 commentary, 158. 
 Student life, among Jews, 45-6, 59- 
 
 60. 
 Sukkah 29b, as interpreted by 
 
 Rashi, 145-7. 
 Superstitions, of the Jews of France, 
 
 23, 40. 
 Sura, Academy of, alluded to, 64. 
 
 Tabernacle, the, construction of, as 
 explained by Rashi, 117-18. 
 
 Tahort, alluded to, 248, n. 49. 
 
 Talmud, the, honored by the Jews of 
 France, 23-4, 25; the study of, in 
 liOrraine, 26-7, 28, 29 ; quoted, 
 37, 55, 74, 112, 167; place of, in 
 Jewish education, 42; Rashi con- 
 versant with, 83; and scientific 
 knowledge, 85; variants in, 86; 
 Rashi devoted study of, 90; de- 
 votion to the study ot, 121; on 
 the Scriptural canon, 130; the 
 text of, emended, 137-8; Rashi's 
 revision of the text of, 140; 
 Weiss on the study of, 141 ; 
 Rashi on the composition of, 
 150 ; practical purpose of the 
 study of, 159; laws against Gen- 
 tiles, in, 161; treatises of, in the 
 Mahzor Vitry, 171; the study 
 of, by the Tossafists, 191; de- 
 nounced by Nicholas Donni, 
 202; burnt, 202; the Babylonian, 
 accompanied by Rashi's com- 
 mentaries, 214; term explained, 
 252, n. 94. 
 
 Talmud school, in Champagne, 63-4; 
 at Troyes, 57; of Rashi, 69-60. 
 
 Talmud schools, in Ile-de-France and 
 Nonnandy, 194. 
 
 Talmud schools, the, in France, de- 
 cay, 201-2. 
 
 Tarn. See Jacob ben Meir. 
 
 Tanhuma, the Midrash, Rashi con- 
 versant with, 83, 247, n. 41; used 
 by Rashi in his Bible commen- 
 tary, 114. 
 
 Tannaim, the, the generations of, 
 distinguished by Rashi, 150; term 
 explained, 253, n. 9-1. 
 
 Targum, Aramaic translation of the 
 Bible, 83, 105: quoted by Rashi, 
 ]15; and Rashi's commentaries, 
 215. 
 
 Taxes, the pa\ment of, Responsa by 
 Rashi on, 159. 
 
 Things Prohibited and Things Per- 
 mitted, Book of. See Sefer 
 Issur-we-Heter. 
 
 Torah. See Pentateuch. 
 
 Torat Kohanim, See Sifra. 
 
 Tosefta, the, a text parallel to the 
 Talmud, Rashi conversant with, 
 83, 139, 143; contents of, 246, n. 
 37. 
 
 Tossafists, the, disciples of Rashi, on 
 variations in passages of Rashi's 
 Talmudic commentaries, 136 ; 
 extremists, 142; ingenuity of, 
 191; deduce the norm, 191; com- 
 mentators of Rashi, 192; early 
 disciples of Rashi, 192-3; later, 
 194-6 ; and the study of the 
 Bible, 198-9; the study of, re- 
 newed, 213. 
 See also Tossafot, the. 
 
 Tossaf ot, the, origin of, 185 ; de- 
 fined, 191 ; compared with 
 Rashi's commentaries, 191-2; 
 foundations of, established, 193 ; 
 accompanies the Babylonian Tal- 
 mud, 214. 
 See also Tossafists, the. 
 
 " Tossafot of Evreux," edited by 
 Moses ben Shneor, 195. 
 
 Tossafot of Sens, edited by Eliezar of 
 Touques, 195. 
 
 Tossafot to the Bible, 198-9. 
 
 Touraine, early settlement of Jews 
 in, IS. 
 
 Trade between Jews and Christians, 
 Responsa on, 161-2. 
 
 Translations of the Bible, 83, 105. 
 
 Treves, the family of, connected 
 with Rashi, 258, n. 164. 
 
 Treves, the Jews of, and the First 
 Crusade, 66. 
 
 Troyes, fairs held at, 35; descrip- 
 tion of, 35; Jewish community 
 of, 36; Responsa on, 36; import- 
 ance of, 54; Rashi connected 
 with, 54-6; wine-presses at, 56; 
 Talmud school at, 57; centre 
 of Jewish studies, 186; Vespasian, 
 alluded to, 243, n, 2. 
 
 Vineyards, owned by Jews, 20. 
 Viticulture, occupation of Jews, 36; 
 
 occupation of Rashi, 56, 
 Vitry. alluded to, 244, n. 18. 
 Vratislav, Duke of Bohemia, and 
 
 Rashi, 44. 
 Vulgate, the, and the Hebrew Bible, 
 
 216. 
 
 Weiss, I. H., scholar, on Rashi, 32, 
 220, 221; on the study of the 
 Talmud, 141; data about, 258, n. 
 160. 
 
 William of Mara, calls Rashi's com- 
 mentary Penis, 201. 
 
278 
 
 INDEX 
 
 William of the White Hands, scholar, 
 alluded to, 54. 
 
 William the Conqueror, alluded to, 
 244, n. 16. 
 
 Wine, Christian, Responsa by Rashl 
 on, 159, 161. 
 
 Wisdom, the, of Ben Sira, how 
 known to Rashi, 83. 
 
 Wogue, L., on two methods of in- 
 terpreting Scripture, 106-8; on 
 Rashi's influence, 185, 256, n. 
 131 ; on Elijah ben Abraham Miz- 
 rahi, 211; on Rashi'g influence 
 among the Jews, 218, 258, n. 
 157. 
 
 Women, Jewish, the education of, 
 61-2. 
 
 Worms, beginning of Jewish studies 
 at, 27 ; rabbis at, 29 ; claims 
 Rashi as rabbi, 32; legendary ac- 
 count of Rashi's birth at, 39; 
 Rashi's sojourn at, 45-6; the 
 synagogue at, 47 ; chapel at, 
 called by Rashi's name, 48; 
 Rashi Chair at, 48; the Jews 
 of, and the First Crusade, 66; 
 customs of, in the Sefer ha- 
 Pardes, 171. 
 
 Yakar ben Machir, fellow-student of 
 
 Rashi 52. 
 TalJcut Shimeoni, the, alluded to, 
 
 124; alleged author of, 251, n. 
 
 89. 
 Yarhi, name given to Rashi, 83, 243, 
 
 h. 10. 
 Tashar, Rashi, 243, u. 9. 
 
 Yehuda!, Gaon, cited by Rashi. 83; 
 data about, 248, n. 47. 
 
 Yelamdenu, Midrash, alluded to, 247, 
 n. 41. 
 
 Yesodt Rashi calls Moses ha-Dar- 
 shan's commentary, 110; Rashi 
 calls the writings of his masters, 
 137. 
 
 Yomtob ben Judah, grandson of 
 Rashi, Talmudist, 187. 
 
 Yomtob de Joigny, poet and com- 
 mentator, 189. 
 
 Yosippon, chronicle, attributed to 
 Josephus, 84. 
 
 Yosselmann of Rosheim, descended 
 from Rashi, 213. 
 
 Zarfat, name for France, 244, n. 10. 
 
 Zechariah, the Book, of, Rashi on, 
 248, n. 51. 
 
 Zcddh la-Derek, by Menahem ben 
 Zeralj, 255, n. 123. 
 
 Zedekiah ben Abraham Anaw, in- 
 fluenced by Rashi, 206. 
 
 Zerahiah ha-Levi, supposed teacher 
 of Rashi, 43; cites Rashi, 205. 
 
 Zohar, the, and Rashi, 208. 
 
 Zunz, Leopold, quoted, 18; essay on 
 Rashi by, 82, 220 ; on the 
 laazim, 100; on the liturgical 
 poems by Rashi, 173, 179; on the 
 relatives of Rashi, 187; on the 
 editions of Rashi's works, 214 ; 
 on Rashi's daughter, 245, n. 22; 
 reconstructs the Pesikta, 247, ti. 
 40. 
 
 BAI/nMORS, UD., U. 3. A.