Jewish Theology Part 12

6. A deeper insight into the problem of free will is offered in two other Talmudic sayings; the one is: "Whosoever desires to pollute himself with sin will find all the gates open before him, and whosoever desires to attain the highest purity will find all the forces of goodness ready to help him."(722) The other reads: "It can be proved by the Torah, the Prophets, and the other sacred writings that man is led along the road which he wishes to follow."(723)

As a matter of fact, no person is absolutely free, for innumerable influences affect his decisions, consciously and unconsciously. For this reason many thinkers, both ancient and modern, consider freedom a delusion and hold to determinism, the doctrine that man acts always under the compulsion of external and internal forces. In opposition to this theory is one incontestable fact, our own inner sense of freedom which tells us at every step that _we_ have acted, and at every decision that we have decided. Man can maintain his own power of self-determination against all influences from without and within; his will is the final arbiter over every impulse and every pressure. Moreover, as we penetrate more deeply into the working of the mind, we see that a long series of our own voluntary acts has occasioned much that we consider external, that the very pressure of the past on our thoughts, feelings and habits, which leaves so little weight for the decision of the moment, is really only our past will influencing our present will. That is, the will may determine itself, but it does not do so arbitrarily; its action is along the lines of its own character. We have the power to receive the influence of either the n.o.ble or the ign.o.ble series of impressions, and thus to yield either to the lofty or the low impulses of the soul.

In this way the rabbis interpret various expressions of Scripture which would seem to limit man's freedom, as where G.o.d induces man to good or evil acts, or hardens the heart of Pharaoh so that he will not let the Israelites go, until the plagues had been fulfilled upon him and his people.(724) They understand in such an instance that a man's heart has a prevailing inclination toward right or wrong, the expression of his character, and that G.o.d encouraged this inclination along the evil course; thus the freedom of the human will was kept intact.

7. The doctrine of man's free will presents another difficulty from the side of divine omniscience. For if G.o.d knows in advance what is to happen, then man's acts are determined by this very foreknowledge; he is no longer free, and his moral responsibility becomes an idle dream. In order to escape this dilemma, the Mohammedan theologians were compelled to limit either the divine omniscience or human freedom, and most of them resorted to the latter method. It is characteristic of Judaism that its great thinkers, from Saadia to Maimonides and Gersonides,(725) dared not alter the doctrine of man's free will and moral responsibility, but even preferred to limit the divine omniscience. Hisdai Crescas is the only one to restrict human freedom in favor of the foreknowledge of G.o.d.(726)

8. The insistence of Judaism on unrestricted freedom of will for each individual entirely excludes hereditary sin. This is shown in the traditional explanation of the verse of the Decalogue: "Visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate Me."(727) According to the rabbis the words "of them that hate Me" do not refer to the fathers, according to the plain meaning of the pa.s.sage, but to the children and children's children. These are to be punished only when they hate G.o.d and follow the evil example of their fathers.(728) Despite example and hereditary disposition, the descendants of evildoers can lead a virtuous life, and their punishment comes only when they fail to resist the evil influences of their parental household. To ill.u.s.trate the Biblical words, "Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean?"(729) the rabbis single out Abraham, the son of Terah, Hezekiah, the son of Ahaz, and Josiah, the son of Mana.s.seh.(730) Man, being made in G.o.d's image, determines his own character by his own free choice; by his will he can raise or lower himself in the scale of being.

9. The fundamental character of the doctrine of free will for Judaism is shown by Maimonides, who devotes a special chapter of his Code to it,(731) and calls it the pillar of Israel's faith and morality, since through it alone man manifests his G.o.d-like sovereignty. For should his freedom be limited by any kind of predestination, he would be deprived of his moral responsibility, which const.i.tutes his real greatness. In endeavoring to reconcile G.o.d's omnipotence and omniscience with man's freedom, Maimonides says that G.o.d wants man to erect a kingdom of morality without interference from above; moreover, G.o.d's knowledge is different in kind from that of man, and thus is not an infringement upon man's freedom, as the human type of knowledge would be. However, Abraham ben David of Posquieres blames Maimonides for proposing questions which he could not answer satisfactorily in the Code, which is intended for non-philosophical readers. The fact is that this is only another of the problems insoluble to human reasoning; the freedom of the will must remain for all time a postulate of moral responsibility, and therefore of religion.

Chapter x.x.xVIII. The Meaning of Sin

1. Sin is a religious conception. It does not signify a breach of law or morality, or of popular custom and sacred usage, but an offense against G.o.d, provoking His punishment. As long as the deity is merely dreaded as an external power, not adored as a moral power ruling life from within for a holy purpose, sin, too, is considered a purely formal offense. The deity demands to be worshiped by certain rites and may be propitiated by other formal acts.(732) For Judaism, however, sin is a straying from the path of G.o.d, an offense against the divine order of holiness. Thus it signifies an abuse of the freedom granted man as his most precious boon. Therefore sin has a twofold character; formally it is an offense against the majesty of G.o.d, whose laws are broken; essentially it is a severance of the soul's inner relations to G.o.d, an estrangement from Him.

2. Scripture has three different terms for sin, which do not differ greatly in point of language, but indicate three stages of thought. First is _het_ or _hataah_, which connotes any straying from the right path, whether caused by levity, carelessness, or design, and may even include wrongs committed unwittingly, _shegagah_. Second is _avon_, a crookedness or perversion of the straight order of the law. Third is _pesha_, a wicked act committed presumptuously in defiance of G.o.d and His law. As a matter of course, the conception of sin was deepened by degrees, as the prophets, psalmists and moralists grew to think of G.o.d as the pattern of the highest moral perfection, as the Holy One before whom an evil act or thought cannot abide.

The rabbis usually employed the term _aberah_, that is, a transgression of a divine commandment. In contrast to this they used _mitzwah_, a divine command, which denotes also the whole range of duty, including the desire and intention of the human soul. From this point of view every evil design or impulse, every thought and act contrary to G.o.d's law, becomes a sin.

3. Sin arises from the weakness of the flesh, the desire of the heart, and accordingly in the first instance from an error of judgment. The Bible frequently speaks of sin as "folly."(733) A rabbinical saying brings out this same idea: "No one sins unless the spirit of folly has entered into him to deceive him."(734) A sinful imagination lures one to sin; the repet.i.tion of the forbidden act lowers the barrier of the commandment, until the trespa.s.s is hardened into "callous" and "stubborn" disregard, and finally into "reckless defiance" and "insolent G.o.dlessness." Such a process is graphically expressed by the various terms used in the Bible.

According to the rabbinical figure, "sin appears at first as thin as a spider's web, but grows stronger and stronger, until it becomes like a wagon-rope to bind a man." Or, "sin comes at first as a pa.s.ser-by to tarry for a moment, then as a visitor to stay, finally as the master of the house to claim possession." Therefore it is inc.u.mbent upon us to "guard"

the heart, and not "to go astray following after our eyes and our heart."(735)

4. According to the doctrine of Judaism no one is sinful by nature. No person sins by an inner compulsion. But as man has a nature of flesh, which is sensuous and selfish, each person is inclined to sin and none is perfectly free from it. "Who can say: I have made my heart clean, I am pure from any sin?"(736) This is the voice of the Bible and of all human experience; "For there is not a righteous man upon earth, that doeth good, and sinneth not."(737) The expression occurs repeatedly in Job: "Shall mortal man be just before G.o.d? Shall a man be pure before his Maker?"(738) Even Moses is represented in numerous pa.s.sages as showing human foibles and failings.(739) In fact, "the greater the personality, the more severely will G.o.d call him to account for the smallest trespa.s.s, for G.o.d desires to be 'sanctified' by His righteous ones."(740) The Midrash tells us that no one is to be called holy, until death has put an end to his struggle with the ever-lurking tempter within, and he lies in the earth with the victor's crown of peace upon his brow.(741) When we read the stern sentence: "Behold, He putteth no trust in His holy ones,"(742) the rabbis refer us to the patriarchs, each of whom had his faults.(743) Measured by the Pattern of all holiness, no human being is free from blemish.

5. In connection with the G.o.d-idea, the conception of sin grew from crude beginnings to the higher meaning given it by Judaism. The ancient Babylonians used the same terminology as the Bible for sin and sin-offering, but their view, like that of other Semites, was far more external.(744) If one was afflicted with disease or misfortune, the inference was that he had neglected the ritual of some deity and must appease the angered one with a sacrificial offering. Any irregularity in the cult was an offense against the deity. This became more moralized with the higher G.o.d-idea; the G.o.d became the guardian of moral principles; and the calamities, even of the nation, were then ascribed to the divine wrath on account of moral lapses. The same process may be observed in the views of ancient Israel. Here, too, during the dominance of the priestly view the gravest possible offense was one against the cult, a culpable act entailing the death penalty-_asham_, or "doom" of the offender. We shudder at the thought that the least violation of the hierarchical rules for the sanctuary or even for the burning of incense should meet the penalty of death. Yet such is the plain statement of the Mosaic law and such was the actual practice of the people.(745)

The more the prophetic conception of the moral nature of the Deity permeated the Jewish religion, the more the term sin came to mean an offense against the holiness of G.o.d, the Guardian of morality. Hence the great prophets upbraided the people for their moral, not their ceremonial failings. They attacked scathingly transgressions of the laws of righteousness and purity, the true sins against G.o.d, because these originate in dullness of heart, unbridled pa.s.sion, and overbearing pride, all so hateful to Him. The only ritual offenses emphasized as sins against G.o.d are idolatry, violation of the name of G.o.d and of the Sabbath, for these express the sanct.i.ty of life.(746) Except for these points, the prophets and psalmists insisted only on righteous conduct and integrity of soul, and repudiated entirely the ritualism of the priesthood and the formalism of the cult.(747) This view is antic.i.p.ated by Samuel, the master of the prophetic schools, when he says:

"Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, And to hearken than the fat of rams.

For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, And stubbornness is as idolatry and teraphim."(748)

As soon as we realize that obedience to G.o.d's will means right conduct and purity of soul, we see in sin the desecration of the divine image in man, the violation of his heavenly patent of n.o.bility.

6. Sin, then, is in its essence unfaithfulness to G.o.d and to our own G.o.d-like nature. We see this thought expressed in Job:(749)

"If thou hast sinned, what doest thou against Him?

And if thy transgressions be multiplied, what doest thou unto Him?

If thou be righteous, what givest thou unto Him?

Or what receiveth He of thy hand?

Thy wickedness concerneth a man as thou art; And thy righteousness a son of man."

Thus the source of sin is the human heart, the origin of all our thinking and planning. We know sin chiefly as consciousness of guilt. Man's conscience accuses him and compels him to confess, "Against Thee, Thee only, have I sinned."(750) Not only the deed itself, but even more the will which caused it, is condemned by conscience. Such self-accusation constantly proves anew that there is no place for original sin through the fall of Adam. "I could have controlled my evil desire, if I had but earnestly willed it," said King David, according to the Talmud.(751)

7. Sin engenders a feeling of disunion with G.o.d through the consciousness of guilt which accompanies it. It erects a "wall of separation" between man and his Maker, depriving him of peace and security.(752) Guilt causes pain, which overwhelms him, until he has made atonement and obtained pardon before G.o.d. This is no imaginary feeling, easily overcome and capable of being suppressed by the sinner with impunity. Instead, he must pay the full penalty for his sin, lest it lead him to the very abyss of evil, to physical and moral death. Sin in the individual becomes a sense of self-condemnation, the consciousness of the divine anger. Hence the Hebrew term _avon_, sin, is often synonymous with punishment,(753) and _asham_, guilt, often signifies the atonement for the guilt, and sometimes doom and perdition as a consequence of guilt.(754) Undoubtedly this still contains a remnant of the old Semitic idea that an awful divine visitation may come upon an entire household or community because of a criminal or sacrilegious act committed, consciously or unconsciously, by one of its members. Such a fate can be averted only by an atoning sacrifice. This accords with the rather strange fact that the Priestly Code prescribes certain guilt offerings for sins committed unwittingly, which are called _asham_.(755)

8. But even these unintentional sins can be avoided by the constant exercise of caution, so that their commission implies a certain degree of guilt, which demands a measure of repentance. Thus the Psalmist says: "Who can discern errors? Clear Thou me from hidden faults."(756) He thus implies that we feel responsible in a certain sense for all our sins, including those which we commit unknowingly. The rabbis dwell especially on the idea that we are never altogether free from sinful thoughts. For this reason, they tell us, the two burnt offerings were brought to the altar each morning and evening, to atone for the sinful thoughts of the people during the preceding day or night.(757)

9. At any rate, Judaism recognizes no sin which does not arise from the individual conscience or moral personality. The condemnation of a whole generation or race in consequence of the sin of a single individual is an essentially heathen idea, which was overcome by Judaism in the course of time through the prophetic teaching of the divine justice and man's moral responsibility. This sentiment was voiced by Moses and Aaron after the rebellion of Korah in the words: "O G.o.d, the G.o.d of the spirits of all flesh, shall one man sin, and wilt Thou be wroth with all the congregation?"(758) In commenting upon this, the Midrash says: "A human king may make war upon a whole province, because it contains rebels who have caused sedition, and so the innocent must suffer together with the guilty; but it does not behoove G.o.d, the Ruler of the spirits, who looks into the hearts of men, to punish the guiltless together with the guilty."(759) The Christian view of universal guilt as a consequence of Adam's sin, the dogma of original sin, is actually a relapse from the Jewish stage to the heathen doctrine from which the Jewish religion freed itself.

10. According to the Biblical view sin contaminates man, so that he cannot stand in the presence of G.o.d. The holiness of Him who is "of eyes too pure to behold evil"(760) becomes to the sinner "a devouring fire."(761) Even the lofty prophet Isaiah realizes his own human limitations at the sublime vision of the G.o.d of holiness enthroned on high, while the angelic choruses chant their thrice holy. In humility and contrition he cries out: "Woe is me, for I am undone! Because I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips; For mine eyes have seen the King, the Lord of hosts."(762) The prophet must undergo atonement in order to be prepared for his high prophetic task. One of the Seraphs purges him of his sins by touching his lips with a live coal taken from the altar of G.o.d.

Under the influence of Persian dualism, rabbinical Judaism considers sin a pollution which puts man under the power of unclean spirits.(763) In the later Cabbalah this idea is elaborated until the world of sin is considered a cosmic power of impurity, opposed to the realm of right, working evil ever since the fall of Adam.(764) Still, however close this may come to the Christian dogma, it never becomes identical with it; the recognition is always preserved of man's power to extricate himself from the realm of impurity and to elevate himself into the realm of purity by his own repentance. Sin never becomes a demoniacal power depriving man of his divine dignity of self-determination and condemning him to eternal d.a.m.nation. It ever remains merely a going astray from the right path, a stumbling from which man may rise again to his heavenly height, exerting his own powers as the son of G.o.d.

Chapter x.x.xIX. Repentance Or the Return To G.o.d

1. The brightest gem among the teachings of Judaism is its doctrine of repentance or, in its own characteristic term, the return of the wayward sinner to G.o.d.(765) Man, full of remorse at having fallen away from the divine Fountainhead of purity, conscious of deserving a sentence of condemnation from the eternal Judge, would be less happy than the unreasoning brute which cannot sin at all. Religion restores him by the power to rise from his shame and guilt, to return to G.o.d in repentance, as the penitent son returns to his father. Whether we regard sin as estrangement from G.o.d or as a disturbance of the divine order, it has a detrimental effect on both body and soul, and leads inevitably to death.

On this point the Bible affords many historical ill.u.s.trations and doctrinal teachings.(766) If man had no way to escape from sin, then he would be the most unfortunate of creatures, in spite of his G.o.d-like nature. Therefore the merciful G.o.d opens the gate of repentance for the sinner, saying as through His prophets of old: "I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live."(767)

2. The great value of the gift of divine grace, by which the sinner may repent and return to G.o.d with a new spirit, appears in the following rabbinical saying: "Wisdom was asked, 'What shall be the sinner's punishment?' and answered, 'Evil pursues sinners';(768) then Prophecy was asked, and answered, 'The soul that sinneth, it shall die';(769) the Torah, or legal code, was consulted, and its answer was: 'He shall bring a sin-offering, and the priest shall make atonement for him, and he shall be forgiven.'(770) Finally G.o.d Himself was asked, and He answered:(771) 'Good and upright is the Lord; therefore doth He instruct sinners in the way.' "(772) The Jewish idea of atonement by the sinner's return to G.o.d excludes every kind of mediatorship. Neither the priesthood nor sacrifice is necessary to secure the divine grace; man need only find the way to G.o.d by his own efforts. "Seek ye Me, and live,"(773) says G.o.d to His erring children.

3. _Teshubah_, which means return, is an idea peculiar to Judaism, created by the prophets of Israel, and arising directly from the simple Jewish conception of sin. Since sin is a deviation from the path of salvation, a "straying" into the road of perdition and death, the erring can return with heart and soul, end his ways, and thus change his entire being. This is not properly expressed by the term repentance, which denotes only regret for the wrong, but not the inner transformation. Nor is _Teshubah_ to be rendered by either penitence or penance. The former indicates a sort of bodily self-castigation, the latter some other kind of penalty undergone in order to expiate sin. Such external forms of asceticism were prescribed and practiced by many tribes and some of the historical religions. The Jewish prophets, however, opposed them bitterly, demanding an inner change, a transformation of soul, renewing both heart and spirit.

"Let the wicked forsake his way, And the man of iniquity his thoughts; And let him return unto the Lord, and He will have compa.s.sion upon him, And to our G.o.d, for He will abundantly pardon."(774)

Judaism considers sin merely moral aberration, not utter corruption, and believes in the capability of the very worst of sinners to improve his ways; therefore it waits ever for his regeneration. This is truly a return to G.o.d, the restoration of the divine image which has been disfigured and corrupted by sin.

4. The doctrine of _Teshubah_, or the return of the sinner, has a specially instructive history, as this most precious and unique conception of Judaism is little understood or appreciated by Christian theologians.

Often without intentional bias, these are so under the influence of the Paulinian dogma that they see no redemption for man corrupted by sin, except by his belief in a superhuman act of atonement. It is certainly significant that the legal code, which is of priestly origin, does not mention repentance or the sinner's return. It prescribes various types of sin-offerings, speaks of reparation for wrong inflicted, of penalties for crime, and of confession for sins, but it does not state how the soul can be purged of sin, so that man can regain his former state of purity. This great gap is filled by the prophetic books and the Psalms. The book of Deuteronomy alone, written under prophetic influence, alludes to repentance, in connection with the time when Israel would be taken captive from its land as punishment for its violation of the law. There we read: "Thou shalt return unto the Lord thy G.o.d, ... with all thy heart, and all thy soul, then the Lord thy G.o.d will turn thy captivity, and have compa.s.sion upon thee."(775)

Amos, the prophet of stern justice, has not yet reached the idea of averting the divine wrath by the return of the sinner.(776) Hosea, the prophet of divine mercy and loving-kindness, in his deep compa.s.sion for the unfaithful and backsliding people, became the preacher of repentance as the condition for attaining the divine pardon.

"Return, O Israel, unto the Lord thy G.o.d; For thou hast stumbled in thine iniquity.

Take with you words (of repentance), And return unto the Lord; Say unto Him, "Forgive all iniquity, And accept that which is good; So will we render for bullocks the offering of our lips.' "(777)

The appeal of Jeremiah is still more vigorous:

"Return, thou backsliding Israel, saith the Lord....

Only acknowledge thine iniquity, that thou hast transgressed against the Lord thy G.o.d....

Break up for you a fallow ground, and sow not among thorns....

O Jerusalem, wash thy heart from wickedness, that thou mayest be saved; How long shall thy baleful thoughts lodge within thee?...