In Search of an Explanation for the Suffering of the Jews: Johann Reuchlin's Open Letter of 1505 Posset, In Search of an Explanation Posset 1 http://escholarship.bc.edu/scjr/vol5 Studies in Christian-Jewish Relations A peer-reviewed e-journal of the Council of Centers on Jewish-Christian Relations Published by the Center for Christian-Jewish Learning at Boston College In Search of an Explanation for the Suffering of the Jews: Johann Reuchlin’s Open Letter of 1505 F r anz P os s et Volume 5 (2010) http://escholarship.bc.edu/scjr/vol5 Studies in Christian-Jewish Relations Volume 5(2010): Posset 1-11 Posset, In Search of an Explanation Posset 2 http://escholarship.bc.edu/scjr/vol5 In 1505, the humanist Johann Reuchlin (1455-1522) published a booklet titled Doctor iohanns Reuchlins tütsch missiue, warumb die Juden so lang im ellend sind 1 (Johann Reuchlin‘s German-language open letter [discussing] why the Jews have been in ―exile‖ 2 so long). One may debate whether or not Reuchlin‘s ―German open letter‖ is to be understood as merely repeating the ―conventional view that they [the Jews] were suffering for the sins of their forefathers who had mur- dered Jesus.‖ 3 However, such an interpretation is a far too simplified summary of this rather unusual, ―somewhat mysteri- ous tract.‖ 4 Reuchlin felt sincere concern over the continued suffering of the Jews and sought to understand it for many years. First of all, Reuchlin‘s macaronic text is far from ―con- ventional‖ as it is very unusual for a non-Jewish author of that 1 Reuchlin finished this work after Christmas 1505 and had it printed in his home town, Pforzheim, by Thomas Anshelm, as indicated in the colophon. I use the critical edition in Widu-Wolfgang Ehlers, Hans-Gert Roloff, and Peter Schäfer, Johannes Reuchlin Sämtliche Werke (Stuttgart: Frommann- Holzboog, 1996-), hereafter quoted as SW. Missiue is found in IV.1: 1-12. The original is available digitally at http://daten.digitale- sammlungen.de/~db/bsb00006194/image_1 and succeeding pages. 2 The English translation of ellend/elend is ‗exile‘; see Jonathan West, Early New High German - English Dictionary Part E, http://www.germanstudies.org.uk/enhg_dic/enhg_dice.htm (accessed October 2010). Max Brod translated ellend as ―Exil‖ in his book Johannes Reuchlin und sein Kampf. Eine historische Monographie (Stuttgart, Berlin, Cologne, Mainz: W. Kohlhammer, 1965), 170. Ellend also carries the modern German connotation of Elend (misery); see Erika Rummel, ―Why the Jews Have Lived in Misery for So Long,‖ in The Case against Johann Reuchlin: Religious and Social Controversy in Sixteenth-Century Germany (Toronto, Buffalo, London: University of Toronto Press, 2002), 7. 3 So says Rummel, The Case against Johann Reuchlin, 7. 4 David Price, ―Johannes Reuchlin,‖ in Dictionary of Literary Biography (De- troit: Gale Research, 1978-), 179:237. time to use Hebrew phrases, given in Hebrew characters, 5 with- in the Early New High German text. If Reuchlin had written the text in Latin as one scholar to another, it might not be particu- larly exceptional, but he writes in 1505 in the then non-scholarly vernacular language. The only other document of the very early sixteenth century written in German and Hebrew is the pam- phlet by the former Jew, Johann Pfefferkorn (1469–1523), titled The Enemy of the Jews and published in 1509, 6 i.e., four years after the Missiue. Pfefferkorn may have deliberately mimicked Reuchlin. Secondly, in terms of content, Reuchlin‘s Missiue repre- sents more of an expression of ―philosemitism‖ (for lack of a better word) 7 than of conventional anti-Judaism. It seems mis- placed among adversos iudaeos (Against the Jews) texts. Reuchlin is admittedly a rare exception to contemporary (i.e., pre-Reformational), antagonistic attitudes toward Jews. While more commonly discussed in connection to his role in the con- troversy over Jewish books (that would erupt about four years later, often referred to as the Reuchlin affair), his attitude to Jews can also be demonstrated from his Missiue, our focus here. 5 Earlier writers (such as Nigri) used transliterations of Hebrew phrases. 6 Ich bin ain Buchlinn der Juden veindt ist mein namen (Augsburg, 1509). 7 One may question Heiko A. Oberman‘s assertion that philosemitism did not exist in the sixteenth century, but one may simultaneously agree that Chris- tians as ―friends of Jews‖ are rare exceptions. See his The Roots of Anti- Semitism in the Age of Renaissance and Reformation (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1981), 101; and the critical comments by Stephen G. Burnett, ―Philo- semitism and Christian Hebraism in the Reformation Era (1500-1620),‖ in Geliebter Feind, gehasster Freund: Antisemitismus und Philosemitismus in Geschichte und Gegenwart: Festschrift zum 65. Geburtstag von Julius Schoeps, ed. Irene A. Diekmann and Elke-Vera Kotowski (Berlin: Verlag für Berlin-Brandenburg, 2009), 135. http://daten.digitale-sammlungen.de/~db/bsb00006194/image_1 http://daten.digitale-sammlungen.de/~db/bsb00006194/image_1 http://www.germanstudies.org.uk/enhg_dic/enhg_dice.htm Studies in Christian-Jewish Relations Volume 5(2010): Posset 1-11 Posset, In Search of an Explanation Posset 3 http://escholarship.bc.edu/scjr/vol5 The Missiue (and Reuchlin‘s other works) is better placed within a minority medieval tradition that was guided by tolerance, exemplified by Gilbert Crispin (ca. 1046-1117), a Benedictine monk at Westminster. 8 In his own time, Reuchlin‘s Missiue reflects the influence of the benevolent attitude toward the Jews of Emperor Frederick III (1440-1493). 9 Coming of age in this imperial milieu, Reuchlin apparently had no personal bi- as against Jews. This allowed Reuchlin and his work to play an important role in the beginnings of changes in social attitudes toward the Jews. The tendency to understand Reuchlin as sharing in the prejudices of his age and social class, and to find proof of this in his Missiue, began almost as soon as it was published. This understanding, though, accepts the perspective of Johann Pfef- ferkorn. He found certain passages in it to his liking and quoted from it for his own purposes in his Hand Mirror (1511), Fire Mir- ror (1512), and Compassionate Complaint over all Complaints (1521), 10 as part of his self-appointed task to convince Chris- tians to eliminate Jewish books as an aid to converting all Jews to Christianity. Reuchlin‘s Missiue appears to have been the 8 See Religionsgespräche mit einem Juden und einem Heiden: lateinisch- deutsch, trans. Karl Werner Wilhelm and Gerhard Wilhelmi (Freiburg: Herder, 2005) and Ole J. Thienhaus, Jewish-Christian Dialogue: The Example of Gil- bert Crispin (Frederick, 2006). As the prior of the abbey Crispin offered a Jewish scholar the opportunity to dialogue and conduct a rare, respectful ex- change of ideas concerning the interpretation of the Hebrew Bible. 9 On Emperor Frederick, see Paul-Joachim Heinig, Kaiser Friedrich III. (1440- 1493): Hof, Regierung und Politik (Cologne: Böhlau, 1997). For other aspects of this time period, see Dean Phillip Bell, Jewish Identity in Early Modern Germany: Memory, Power and Community (Aldershot, England; Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2007); Jews, Judaism, and the Reformation in Sixteenth- Century Germany, ed. Dean Phillip Bell and Stephen G. Burnett (Leiden: Brill, 2006). 10 See Hans-Martin Kirn, Das Bild vom Juden im Deutschland des frühen 16. Jahrhunderts dargestellt an den Schriften Johannes Pfefferkorns (Tübingen: Mohr, 1989), 184. main reason that Pfefferkorn submitted Reuchlin‘s name to Emperor Maximilian I (1493-1519) as a potential expert on the books of the Jews. 11 Some passages in Reuchlin‘s early work On the Wonder-Working Word (De verbo mirifico, 1494; re- printed 1514) 12 may also have been to the liking of the anti- Jewish Christian convert Pfefferkorn. The fact that Pfefferkorn could read (or better, misread) Reuchlin in this way may indeed have something to do with passages in Reuchlin‘s work that appear to be open to a variety of interpretations. However, the overriding tone and style of the Missiue demonstrate Reuchlin much more to be a friend of the Jews than their enemy, as is consistent with his overall biography. To understand Reuchlin‘s Missiue adequately, it is cru- cial to avoid two errors in interpreting it. First, Reuchlin lists three talking points that must be read within their context in the document itself. If one isolates these three points, one ends up reading the text as if based exclusively upon them, and then the entire document does indeed wrongly appear ―convention- al.‖ Secondly, the Missiue must be contextualized within the rather benevolent imperial attitude toward the Jews that domi- nated the reign of Emperor Frederick III and that presumably continued for some time after his death in 1493. Otherwise, one may mistakenly read the Missiue as just another expression of anti-Semitism. The medieval, anti-Jewish tradition of Western Christianity admittedly regained influence during the time of Frederick‘s successor, Maximilian I, but did not necessarily shape Reuchlin‘s own understandings. 11 See Matthias Dall'Asta and Gerald Dörner, ―Introduction,‖ in Johannes Reuchlin: Briefwechsel, ed. Heidelberger Akademie der Wissenschaften, vol. 3 (Stuttgart: Frommann-Holzboog, 2007), xiv; hereafter quoted as RBW with volume and page. 12 See SW I: 106-109. http://de.academic.ru/dic.nsf/dewiki/2090 http://de.academic.ru/dic.nsf/dewiki/2428 Studies in Christian-Jewish Relations Volume 5(2010): Posset 1-11 Posset, In Search of an Explanation Posset 4 http://escholarship.bc.edu/scjr/vol5 Motivation for Composing the Text Some suggest that Reuchlin‘s Missiue was his response to the request of a nobleman looking for help ―on how to con- vert Jews.‖ 13 However, neither the text of the Missiue itself nor Reuchlin‘s other writings support such a claim. In his Defensio of 1513, Reuchlin recalls the Sitz im Leben from which the question, ―Why the Jews are in exile for so long,‖ had arisen. Reuchlin explains that in early 1493, 14 an unnamed nobleman had asked him what he should talk about with ―his Jews‖ during times of leisure, but without giving cause for scandal. 15 There is no mention of a question of ―How to convert Jews.‖ In response, Reuchlin composed ―something short in which you in times of leisure may want to talk about with your Jews which would not cause offense, but real improvement.‖ 16 Reuchlin encourages dialogue. The nobleman should ask the Jews themselves what the main reason is why they must suffer ―imprisonment‖ (exile) for such a long time. Reuchlin then 13 Ronnie Po-chia Hsia, The Myth of Ritual Murder: Jews and Magic in Reformation Germany (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1988), 119. Com- pare Willehad Paul Eckert, ―Die Universität Köln und die Juden im späten Mittelalter,‖ in Die Kölner Universität im Mittelalter: Geistige Wurzeln und soziale Wirklichkeit, ed. Albert Zimmermann (Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1989), 493, 504. Charles Zika, Reuchlin und die okkulte Tradition der Renaissance (Sigmaringen: Thorbecke, 1998), 128-130, wants to see a con- nection between Reuchlin‘s Missiue and Pico‘s concept of employing the Cabala as a ―weapon against the Jews.‖ This appears to me more an eise- gesis than an exegesis of the given source. 14 About half a year before Emperor Frederick III died on 19 August 1493 at Linz, Austria, in Reuchlin‘s presence. 15 ...et ad dispusationem multa formavi argumenta, hinc inde tam gravia quam levia, qualia poteram excogitare, quorum sibi iusseram postulare solutiones (Defensio); SW IV.1: 370, 5-7. 16 Etwas kurtz zů verzeichen, dar inn ir euch zů müssigen zyten mitt ewern Juden möchten ersprachen, dar uß kein ergernüß, sunder mercklich bes- serung entstünde; SW, IV.1: 5. primarily delves into pertinent passages of the Scriptures in or- der to tackle this issue. Reuchlin hopes that he may find answers from dialoging on the controversial biblical texts. Reuchlin envisioned a friendly and private atmosphere in which his specific talking points would provide substance. This was its primary purpose. He apparently did not want to present theo- logical theses in the style of Martin Luther‘s so-called ―95 Theses‖ of 1517. Reuchlin‘s Missiue was also not meant for use in formal, public disputations, like, for example, the famous Leipzig Disputation of 1519 in which Martin Luther and Johann Eck attacked each other. In Reuchlin‘s Defensio, he points out that in the Missiue of eight years earlier he did not intend to provide dogmatic theological determinations or definite conclu- sions on faith-decisions. 17 This disclaimer suggests that he felt compelled to safe-guard himself against potential heresy charges that might result from his over-friendly views of the Jews. Thus, it is fully legitimate to place the origins of Reuch- lin‘s Missiue in the spiritual climate that had developed during the reign of Emperor Frederick III, one that was not poisoned by hatred of Jews. 18 In this rather relaxed atmosphere, conver- sations concerning the lives and the fate of Jews could address the key question that Reuchlin indicated in the title of his Missi- ue, the length of Jewish exile. Providing assistance ―on how to convert Jews‖ was at best a secondary goal. 19 The Missiue is a letter with discussion points meant for use in private. It was 17 See SW, IV.1: 370,6-12. 18 See Heinrich Graetz, History of the Jews vol. IV: From the Rise of the Kab- bala (1270 C. E.) to the Permanent Settlement of the Marranos in Holland (1618 C. E.) (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society of America, 1956); first English edition in 1894), 293. Salo W. Baron, A Social and Religious Vol. IX Under Church and Empire (New York, London: Columbia University Press, 1965), 31, 167-168. 19 This does not mean that one should take the Missiue as a document of tolerance. There was no tolerance in the modern sense of the word. Studies in Christian-Jewish Relations Volume 5(2010): Posset 1-11 Posset, In Search of an Explanation Posset 5 http://escholarship.bc.edu/scjr/vol5 made public in order to aid others like Reuchlin‘s anonymous nobleman who found themselves in similar situations. For such private talks with ―his‖ Jews, noblemen could rely on the talking points that Reuchlin offered. A “Moment of World-Historical Significance” Reuchlin‘s study of Hebrew began or continued at the court of Emperor Frederick III in 1492 with the emperor‘s Jew- ish physician, Jacob Jehiel Loans (Lohans) (d. 1505) as his teacher. 20 Reuchlin‘s acquaintance with Loans, whom the em- peror greatly favored and knighted, forms the immediate backdrop for the Missiue. Frederick‘s favor to Jews, especially to Loans, including his instruction to his son, co-regent, and successor Maximilian I to ―do good to Jews,‖ 21 may have been a decisive factor influencing Reuchlin. Loans was also aware of Reuchlin‘s interests in Hebraica. In the spring of 1492 Loans arranged that Reuchlin received from the emperor a particularly valuable 12-13 th century Bible manuscript, a parchment codex of the Pentateuch in Hebrew with the Aramaic translation Tar- gum Onqelos. This priceless codex was the emperor‘s farewell present to Reuchlin who received it at the end of his diplomatic mission at the imperial court in Linz. 22 The encounter between Reuchlin and Loans, which evidently developed into friendship, is a ―moment of world-historical significance,‖ as Ludwig Geiger convincingly wrote in his Reuchlin biography of 1871. 23 Reuch- lin‘s Missiue, written in the year of Loans‘ death in 1505, may be Reuchlin‘s literary monument to the memory of his Jewish 20 Loans‘ surname refers to the French town, Louhans. 21 As was rumored among the Jews themselves. See Baron IX: 168. 22 Now known as Codex Reuchlin 1 or the ―Reuchlin Bible.‖ See Greschat, Johannes Reuchlins Bibliothek Gestern & Heute, 69-72, 92 (with illustrations). 23 Johann Reuchlin: Sein Leben und seine Werke (reprint Elibron Classics, 2007), 105. friend. Whether or not it specifically referred to this friendship, the thorny question about the long Jewish exile raised in the title required an answer. An Open Letter in German and Hebrew Reuchlin‘s Missiue is probably best defined as an ―open letter‖ or a pamphlet in which he shared his benevolent thoughts on the ―Jewish Question‖ in German interspersed on every single page with numerous Hebrew phrases. For each Hebrew phrase Reuchlin provides a German translation. Such a mix of languages, i.e., of the vernacular with Hebrew, is quite rare in sixteenth-century texts written by non-Jews (while the mix of Latin and Hebrew is more common). Apparently, Reuch- lin employed the so-called ―Rashi script‖ for his Hebrew words, while in his later Rudiments of Hebrew he applied the common square form of the Hebrew alphabet. 24 A decade earlier, Reuchlin‘s De verbo mirifico had been printed without Hebrew or Greek characters (by Amerbach in Basel). The use of Hebrew characters makes one also wonder whether, indeed, this letter was meant as an answer to the question of a real or of an imagined German nobleman. The readers would also have to be familiar with the Cabala (see be- low), something that cannot be expected from an ordinary German nobleman of the time. Words given in Hebrew charac- ters were not something even a highly educated German nobleman would have been able to decipher. It is not incon- ceivable, then, that the anonymous nobleman is a literary fiction or represents Reuchlin himself. Emperor Frederick III had ele- vated him to the rank of nobility in 1492. However, Reuchlin‘s description of the situation at Frederick‘s court supports his claim that a real person had asked him to suggest discussion points for conversation with Jews. 24 Raschischrift, Brod, 174. Studies in Christian-Jewish Relations Volume 5(2010): Posset 1-11 Posset, In Search of an Explanation Posset 6 http://escholarship.bc.edu/scjr/vol5 Content For the imagined, private conversations that make up the Missiue, Reuchlin presents a series of talking points which are allegations to which he hopes Jews will be able to respond properly. Reuchlin‘s Christian nobleman should propose to the Jews the following allegations as talking points. 25 (1) This Jew- ish exile is lasting longer than the Babylonian captivity. Therefore, the sin which led to this punishment must be yet greater. (2) God has promised to punish a person‘s misdeed only up to the third and fourth generation. Yet, the punishment of the Jews has now endured for more than one hundred gen- erations. Evidently, this sin cannot be that of an individual, but rather that of the entire nation. (3) The reason why the Jews cannot recognize the reason for their punishment is that God himself has made them obdurate. Reuchlin comes up with the following explanations to prove that the Jewish people have sinned collectively: First, Reuchlin cites Dt 25:2 (in Hebrew with his own German translation added). A guilty person is to receive the number of stripes his guilt deserves. Evidently the greater the sin the greater the punishment should be. 26 However, God grants mercy (begnadet), as Ps 106:43-46 and Neh 9:16-20 teach. 27 Second, and in contrast, God gave them notice that he is a jealous God who does not tolerate idol worship; for this he will punish the children down to the third and fourth generation (Ex 20:5 and 34:7). The present day Jews are punished not 25 Dar vff moegen ir inen fürwerfen dry gegründte wahrhsafftige meinungen nemlich wie hernach volget; SW IV.1: 5,11-12. 26 Ye groesser die sünd ist ye mer die zal der straff soll sin; SW, IV.1: 5,24. 27 See SW, IV.1: 5,30-33. only to the fourth generation, but down to the hundredth gener- ation. From this fact, one must derive that these sins were not committed by just one or two Jews. If the sin were that of one person, the saying of Ez 18:20 would apply: ―Only the soul of the one who sins shall die. The son shall not be charged with the misdeed of the father.‖ Reuchlin seeks to harmonize these conflicting words of God. If it is true that an innocent child should not be charged with his parent‘s sin, then some other sin must have been committed, i.e., by all Jews, based upon the obvious experi- ence that Jews suffer continuously. He calls the sin under consideration the gemeine sünd, by which he means a sin which was committed publicly by an entire nation including all its members. 28 How is the Early New High German adjective gemein to be translated into English? The Latin equivalent is communis. In contemporary German it is allgemein, or perhaps, gemeinsam, ―common,‖ as it has something to do with ―com- munity‖ (Gemeinde). 29 Thus, Reuchlin‘s choice of words, gemeine sünd, means the common sin that is publicly commit- ted by the community as a whole; thus it is a universal, general, or, ―collective sin‖ of all generations (parents and children). It should not be translated, however, with ―collective guilt‖ 30 be- cause Reuchlin explicitly uses sünd and not schuld, although these may at times function as synonyms. 28 ...Darumb so můß es ein gemeine sünd syn ...eins gantzen volcks mit al- lenn iren glidern; SW, IV.1: 6,18. 29 But the expression has nothing to do with contemporary German gemein or Gemeinheit which means ―mean‖ and ―meanness.‖ 30 As found in Roots, 28. Whereas one may agree that the translation of ―col- lective‖ for gemein is not controversial, this is not necessarily the case for the translation of sünd as ―guilt.‖ A theological discussion of the distinction be- tween sin and guilt would go beyond the scope of this study. For the non- theologian, sin and guilt may be the same. The philological fact remains that Reuchlin used sünd, not schuld. Studies in Christian-Jewish Relations Volume 5(2010): Posset 1-11 Posset, In Search of an Explanation Posset 7 http://escholarship.bc.edu/scjr/vol5 In Reuchlin‘s view, another biblical saying applies to the situation of a collective sin, namely that God punishes the chil- dren down to the third and fourth generation (Ex 20:5). However, this applies only if the children are following the mis- deeds of their fathers. The targum on Ex 20:5 establishes this condition, which Reuchlin quotes in Hebrew characters along with the comments by Rashi (1040-1105) 31 and Nahmanides, whom he calls Moses Gerundensis (1194-1270) 32 on the same verses (Ex 20:5 and Ex 32:34). 33 These authors had connected the ancient crime of the golden calf with the Jews‘ miserable imprisonment in their day. Reuchlin disagrees with the interpre- tation by the great Jewish masters, on biblical grounds, because their view contradicts both Ez 18:20 (see above) and Neh 9:16-20. The latter reads: 34 But they, our fathers, proved to be insolent; they held their necks stiff and would not obey your commandments. They refused to obey and no longer remembered the miracles you had worked for them. They stiffened their necks and turned their heads to return to their slavery in Egypt. But you are a God of pardons, gracious and compassionate, slow to anger and rich in mercy; you did not forsake them. Though they made for themselves a molten calf, and proclaimed, ―Here is your God who brought you up out of Egypt,‖ and were guilty of great effronteries, yet in your great mercy you did not forsake them in the desert. The column of cloud did not cease to lead them by 31 The commentary on the Pentateuch by Rabbi Solomon of Troyes, who is known as Rashi, is now lost from Reuchlin‘s library; see Wolfgang von Abel and Reimund Leicht, eds., Verzeichnis der Hebraica in der Bibliothek Johan- nes Reuchlins (Ostfildern, 2005), no. 24. 32 Moses ben Na[c]hman; Rambon, Ramban, Moyses Gerundensis, Gerondi, i.e. from Gerona; Spanish, Talmudist, Cabalist and commentator on the Pen- tateuch; on him, see Verzeichnis, 228. 33 See SW, IV.1: 6,22-31. 34 New American Bible translation. day on their journey, nor did the column of fire by night cease to light for them the way by which they were to travel. Your good spirit you bestowed on them, to give them understanding. With this gift of the ―good spirit,‖ God forgave them all their sins of any kind. Furthermore, not all Jews sinned, as one finds among them those who hate sin. Nevertheless, the fact remains that the entire Jewish people finds itself in miserable exile. Reuchlin concludes from this that the sin for which they were dispersed is a different category of sin, the gemeine sünd of the entire people to which all Jews belong ―as long as they are Jews.‖ 35 Reuchlin seems to imply the element of an ―inher- ited sin,‖ perhaps implying the German term Erbsünde (inherited sin) usually translated with ―original sin‖ (which does not evoke the element of inheritance present in the German). The theological concept of ―original sin‖ refers to the general sinfulness that every human being inherits from Adam and his first (i.e., original) sin described in Gn 3. However, although Reuchlin discusses all kinds of biblical passages in his Missiue, the biblical story of Gn 3, the classical source of original sin is not among them. Nor does he use the technical language that points to this concept. Reuchlin‘s third deliberation about the sin for which the Jews have suffered for so long a time results in the statement that it must be the greatest sin that ever was. It was a gemeine sünd, and it was a sin that they themselves do not consider a sin. Were they to recognize it as the sin for which they were being punished, they would cease doing it in order that they might return home. But they remain blind, and such blindness is God‘s special punishment. They do not want to recognize their sin. You can tell them whatever you want; they do not want to hear any of it, as is written in Jb 21:14, ―They say to God, 35 Ein gemein sünd deß gantzen geschlechts ..., darin all Juden verharren so lang sie iuden sind; SW, IV.1: 7,17-19. Studies in Christian-Jewish Relations Volume 5(2010): Posset 1-11 Posset, In Search of an Explanation Posset 8 http://escholarship.bc.edu/scjr/vol5 ‗Depart from us, for we do not like to know your ways‘.‖ Even Isaiah was told to tell the people that they had become sluggish (Is 6:8-10). Even though God‘s word to Isaiah was communi- cated in its literal sense, 36 Reuchlin argues that according to cabalistic learning, it is to be understood as applying to Jesus. 37 Reuchlin‘s reference to Cabala draws from traditional Christian hermeneutics of the Hebrew Bible and he under- stands by ―cabalistic interpretation‖ the christianized (christological) version. Through this lens, the prophetic words are spoken as if addressed to ―Jesus our Lord God.‖ Only ―the learned Jew‖ (der gelert iud) may understand this if he knows the ―familiar art‖ (heimliche kunst). 38 He will understand that ―God Jesus‖ (got Jeschuh) 39 is the same one who said to his heavenly Father, ―Send me‖ (the words of Isa 6:8). It becomes clear, then, that Reuchlin‘s vernacular expression (inn der ho- hen heimlichkeit verstanden) is based upon the traditional 36 Nach dem buochstaben; SW, IV.1: 8,7. 37 ―Inn der hohen heimlichkeit verstanden vff Jeschuh vnsern hern got.” SW, IV.1:8,8-9, spelled here as haimlichkeit. Reuchlin‘s Early New High German keyword heimlichkeit should be rendered in English as something to do pri- marily with heim (English home) and Heimat. Heim is the realm which only members of the household are familiar with; to others it is unfamiliar, secret (i.e., heimlich). In medieval German it had the meaning of ―familiarity‖, ―pleas- antness‖, and ―joy.‖ See Der Große Duden: Etymologie, s. v. heimlich/Heimlichkeit. The original meaning is not ―secrecy‖; it has nothing to do with occultism. In medieval spirituality, heimlichkeit is a significant concept; see Marianne Heimbach-Steins, ―Gottes und des Menschen 'heimlichkeit': Zu einem Zentralbegriff der mystischen Theologie Mechthilds von Magdeburg‖ in Contemplata aliis tradere. Studien zum Verhältnis von Literatur und Spirituali- tät, eds Claudia Brinkler et. al. (Bern etc: Lang, 1995), 71-86. The expression hohe heimlichkeit is a synonym for Cabala, as Reuchlin defines Cabala with exactly this term in his Expert Opinion (Ratschlag) about Jewish books and he writes in his Eye Mirror (SW, IV,1: 28,27-28), Zum dritten find ich die hohe haimlichhait der reden vnd woerter gottes / die sie haissent Cabala. 38 Not to be misunderstood as ―occult practices.‖ 39 SW, IV.1: 8,11. Christian hermeneutics of the Hebrew Bible and it means the ―cabalistic interpretation‖ in the christianized (christological) version. In Reuchlin‘s macaronic language mix, his German sen- tence includes the Hebrew characters for God‘s name (Tetragrammaton, YHVH). As Reuchlin explains, by inserting the Hebrew consonant (shin) it becomes the Hebrew name for Jesus (YHShVH, Iehoshuha). 40 This insight allows Reuchlin to understand that the heavenly Father told Jesus to make the hearts of the people sluggish. The Messiah as the Son of God, sent by God, is thus the source of the Jews‘ trou- ble (plag, plague). Jews of their own free will (vß eigem frien willen) are blind and obstinate, with the fatal consequence that they do not acknowledge the sinful obstinacy for which they are punished. The highly learned Rabbi David Kimhi had under- stood this very well in his commentary on Is 6, says Reuchlin. 41 Reuchlin sums up his thoughts: You heard three essen- tial reasons (drüw wesenlich stück) about the sin for which God punished the Jews for such a long time, a sin that was the greatest sin there ever was: it was a gemeine sünd; it was a sin that they themselves did not consider a sin; and it is the sin of blasphemy which their forefathers committed against the true Messiah, our Lord Jesus, and which their children perpetuate, up to this day. 42 Reuchlin further elaborates on the charge of blasphemy as he continues with his christological interpretation of Ps 37:32 that ―the wicked man spies on the just [Jesus] and seeks to slay him.‖ The fact that Jesus indeed was a just man 40 Reuchlin proclaimed this discovery first in 1494 in his book on the Wonder- Working Word, De verbo mirifico. It is not the place here to discuss the flaws in Reuchlin‘s philology and theology. 41 He cites the original Hebrew and then translates it; SW, IV.1: 8,3-19. 42 See SW, IV.1: 9, 6-30. Studies in Christian-Jewish Relations Volume 5(2010): Posset 1-11 Posset, In Search of an Explanation Posset 9 http://escholarship.bc.edu/scjr/vol5 was witnessed by Pilate according to Lk 23:14-15. 43 The Jews‘ sin of blasphemy was that they supposedly labeled both Jesus a sinner and sorcerer (ein sünder vnd ein zouberer) who was hanged and the Virgin Maria as a haria. This which Reuchlin gives in transliteration, not in Hebrew letters, etymologically stems from the Hebrew word for ―getting angry,‖ . It is a de- liberate play of words (Maria – haria), i.e., (M)aria [Mary], the one ―who is full of anger‖ which in Reuchlin‘s vernacular is ren- dered with ein wüterin. In addition, they call Jesus‘ disciples ―heretics‖ (ketzer) and us Christians a ―non-people‖ (ein vnfolck oder nit volck) and foolish heathens. 44 All Jews as long as they are Jews ―participate‖ in this blasphemy. 45 After Reuchlin sums up all the essential talking points he offers some concluding thoughts which he draws from a great Jewish master. Reuchlin’s Concluding Thoughts Toward the end of the Missiue (for the first time in Reuchlin‘s entire opus), the work (Guide for the Perplexed) of the famous Jewish philosopher and theologian, Maimonides (died 1204) shows its impact as Reuchlin quotes it by its Hebrew title. 46 Reuchlin introduces Maimonides as the highly respected and learned master, Rabi Mose, the Jew from Egypt, 47 and gives two quotations in Hebrew characters from 43 See SW, IV.1: 9, 31 - 10,2. 44 See SW, IV.1: 11, 1-4. 45 An soelcher gotzlesterung teilhafftig syen, SW, IV.1:11,9. Reuchlin will refer to these statements in his Eye Mirror for further clarification, when he talks about Pfefferkorn‘s twenty-seventh lie; SW, IV.1:163,19-164, 3. 46 SW IV.1:11, 24-26. 47 Als do schreibt der hochgelert meister Rabi Mose, der Jud von Egiptten inn dem bůch genannt libro iij, capitulo .xxiiij...; SW, IV.1:11, 24-29. Maimonides is referred to in Eye Mirror (1511), SW IV.1: 40, 32; 114,19; 153, 24; and again in the Reuchlin‘s Preface of the Seven Penitential Psalms the Guide for the Perplexed III:23. We do not know from which version Reuchlin took them. We do know that Maimonides‘ book was available in print by 1480, 48 but it is not found in Reuchlin‘s library, and it remains a puzzle from whence Reuch- lin would have copied these quotations or if he even knew the Guide first hand. The fact that Reuchlin quotes Maimonides in his concluding deliberations signals to the reader that Reuchlin identifies with the wisdom of this medieval Jewish sage and that Reuchlin considers Maimonides‘ words to be the best an- swer to his question about the reasons for the continued suffering of the Jews. He cites only two brief passages. 49 The first states, ―Whoever commits evil must suffer condemna- tion.‖ 50 The second reads, ―Everything that happens to a person happens in justice, but we lack the knowledge of our defects for which we are punished.‖ 51 Reuchlin, the conservative Christian Hebraist, may have considered these two phrases by Maimoni- des good summaries of the issues that had been raised. (1512), but there, too, on a different subject, namely, on the purity of Hebrew; RBW 2: 325, line 143 (no. 206). 48 See Reimund Leicht, ―Johannes Reuchlin – der erste christliche Leser des hebräischen More Nevukhim,‖ in The Trias of Maimonides. Jewish, Arabic, and Ancient Culture of Knowledge / Die Trias des Maimonides: Jüdische, Arabische und Antike Wissenskultur, ed. Georges Tamer (Berlin: De Gruyter, 2005), 414. Reuchlin will make use of Maimonides‘ book also in his commen- tary on Athanasius (1519); I am grateful to Dr. Matthias Dall‘ Asta (Germany) for pointing this out to me. 49 Although Reuchlin has: capitulo xxiiij. 50 Wer boeß tůt der můß verdamnus liden; SW, IV.1: 11,20-21. He does not identify the reference to Daniel. 51 Vnsere gebrechenheitten alle, daruff die ver damnus gesetzt Ist verborgen vor vns ir missetat; SW IV.1: 11,26-29. Other possible translations could be: The fate of man is the result of justice, but we do not know all our shortcom- ings for which we are punished; or: Any definite insights into all our failings and sins, for which we deserve to be punished, remain hidden from us. Studies in Christian-Jewish Relations Volume 5(2010): Posset 1-11 Posset, In Search of an Explanation Posset 10 http://escholarship.bc.edu/scjr/vol5 Without starting a new paragraph, Reuchlin immediately connects the two Maimonides quotations with his prayer for the Jews: ―I pray that God may enlighten them and convert them to the right faith so that they may be liberated from the devil‘s prison, as the community of the Christian Church devoutly prays for them on Good Friday.‖ 52 Once the Jews recognize Jesus as the right Messiah everything will be fine here in this world and in eternity. However, Reuchlin‘s prayer is not so much a proof for his conscientiousness as a Christian mission- ary, but more an expression of his own Catholic faith conviction. He remains a Christian who is ready to discuss the- ological issues with the Jews. He is somewhat anxious to ask them for explanations of how they themselves see things and how they interpret the biblical texts which he cited. But Reuchlin does not do this with the zeal of a missionary like, for instance, Pfefferkorn. Reuchlin has a sincere desire to understand better the fate of the Jews while simultaneously thinking that it would be so much easier if all Jews would become Christians. Reuchlin’s Postscript In the final paragraph, clearly set apart typographically, Reuchlin states that this letter represents what he wants the (anonymous) nobleman to discuss with his Jews. 53 His final 52 Jch bit gott er woell sye erlüchten vnd bekern zů dem rechten glouben, das sye von der gefencknüs des düfels erledigt werden, als die gemeinschafft der Christenlichen kirchen an dem karfritag andechtiglich für sye bitt, SW, IV.1: 11,29-31. Five years later, in his Expert Opinion of 1510, Reuchlin will view the Good Friday intercession somewhat differently, i.e., from the Jewish per- spective, as a ―public scolding‖ (offenlich scheltten) which causes the Jews to defend themselves against Christian slander: Dan die weil wir sy alle iar ier- lichs inn vnsern kirchenn am karfreitag offenlich scheltten perfidos iudeos (Eye Mirror, SW, IV.1: 53,20-21); on this, see Friedrich Lotter, ―Der Rechtsstatus der Juden in den Schriften Reuchlins zum Pfefferkornstreit,‖ in Reuchlin und die Juden, eds Arno Herzig and Julius H. Schoeps (Sigma- ringen: Thorbecke, 1993), 86. 53 Das hab ich eüch für des erst woellen endecken mit inen zů redden, SW IV.1: 12, 2. words are an offer himself to talk with any Jew who really wish- es to be instructed about the Messiah and ―our true faith‖ (vnnserm rechten glauben). He is more than ready to help such a person, who would then not need to worry about temporal food, but would be able to serve God in peace and be free from all concerns (vnd aller sorg fry syn). 54 These are the last words of Reuchlin‘s Missiue. Apparently the wealthy Reuchlin himself was offering financial support to any Jewish dialogue partner in order to exchange ideas on the unsolved mystery of continued Jewish suffering. Dialogue, not mission, was his goal. It would be an over-interpretation to view him only as being in search of Jews for the purpose of preaching to them about Christian theological claims. Conclusions As Reuchlin had written at the beginning of the Missiue, his intention was not to ―cause offense,‖ but to achieve ―real improvement‖ (mercklich besserung). 55 Improvement and re- form of the relations between Christians and Jews appears to be the best interpretation of this phrase in this context. In other words, Reuchlin‘s booklet (and we must recall that it is in Ger- man, not Latin) likely functioned as a manual for non- theologians (primarily Christians but perhaps also Jews 56 ) who wanted to prepare for dialoguing about the serious question 54 SW, IV.1: 12, 2-6. 55 As to Reuchlin‘s noun besserung: it is connected to the verb bessern which means ―to improve.‖ The noun besserung also carries the meaning of ―re- pentance‖ or ―reformation‖; see Jonathan West, ―Early New High German - English Dictionary Part B/P,‖ http://www.germanstudies.org.uk/enhg_dic/enhg_dicbp.htm (accessed July 2010). 56 The fact that in his text so many phrases are given in Hebrew letters may lead even to the surmise that Reuchlin is offering a manual for Jews who are able to read Hebrew and who want to familiarize themselves with Christian thinking on the issue. http://www.germanstudies.org.uk/enhg_dic/enhg_dicbp.htm Studies in Christian-Jewish Relations Volume 5(2010): Posset 1-11 Posset, In Search of an Explanation Posset 11 http://escholarship.bc.edu/scjr/vol5 that preoccupied Reuchlin and that he articulated in the title. The primary motivation, however, appears not to be the con- version of Jews to the Christian faith. Reuchlin‘s Missiue and the rest of his works are situated better in the minority medieval tradition of relaxed relations between Christians and Jews. Reuchlin was a staunch Catholic, very convinced of his own faith. However, to see his Missiue simply as an instrument of converting Jews would mean to agree with Reuchlin‘s adver- sary, the converted Jew, Pfefferkorn. He read the pamphlet this way. Because such a misreading of his Missiue was possible Reuchlin was forced to clarify his position and his opposition to Pfefferkorn‘s claims. He refused to identify with the familiar ac- cusations against the Jews that he had listed in the Missiue (that the Jews blaspheme Jesus, the Son of God, and that they enjoy such blasphemy) and expressed more clearly his real motivation, to improve relations between Jews and Christians (what he calls mercklich besserung). Pfefferkorn became very upset and completely frustrated with Reuchlin‘s unexpected clarification and total opposition. As late as in his Compassion- ate Complaint over all Complaints (Ein mitleidliche clag) of 1521 Pfefferkorn quoted Reuchlin‘s Missiue of 1505 as a proof for his own claims. 57 Pfefferkorn had been convinced that Reuchlin originally himself was convinced that the Jews blas- pheme Jesus, the Son of God, and that they enjoy such blasphemy—accusations that Pfefferkorn kept quoting from the Missiue. Pfefferkorn declared Reuchlin a ―Judas‖ for 57 Fur das erst so zeych ich an ein Epistel die Reuchlin eine[m] Edelma[n] vnder ander[e]n worten[n] zo geschriebe[n] hat waru[m]b die Jude[n] so la[n]g in de[m] ellendt seint...; Ein mitleidliche clag, fol. B ii; digitized edition at Mu- nich library: http://daten.digitale- sammlungen.de/~db/0002/bsb00025516/image_1. (digital pages 19-20) (ac- cessed July 2010). disavowing this position, describing Reuchlin as a man who be- trayed him ―more than Judas betrayed the dear Lord God.‖ 58 In his Missiue, Reuchlin reviewed the critical, contradic- tory biblical texts that needed to be discussed in a Jewish- Christian dialogue. He interpreted them as a Christian lay theo- logian. Puzzled by his excellent personal experience with honorable Jewish men who did not personally deserve divine punishment, he reflected on the traditional biblical reasoning why Jews lived in miserable exile. The answer Reuchlin came up with in this regard was that ―collective sin‖ (gemeine sünd) was the root cause. This, he articulated through quotations from Maimonides. The concept of a ―collective sin‖, which Reuchlin had in- troduced in his open letter of 1505, does not emerge elsewhere in his works or in his correspondence. The issue was satisfac- torily settled, at least in Reuchlin‘s mind. His motivation and his wishes appear far from ―conventional.‖ Reuchlin‘s unconven- tional approach caused Pfefferkorn‘s increased distress. Pfefferkorn preferred Reuchlin to have had retained the position that he thought Reuchlin had expressed in the Missiue. It fitted his purposes so much better. 58 So hat er [Reuchlin] mich ... schalckhafftiger vn[d] luge[n]hafftiger verrate[n] dan[n] Judas vnsern liebe[n] hern gott...; Ein mitleidliche clag, fol. B ii, [digital page 19]. http://daten.digitale-sammlungen.de/~db/0002/bsb00025516/image_1 http://daten.digitale-sammlungen.de/~db/0002/bsb00025516/image_1