The Talmud (16 page)

No complete manuscript of the Talmud exists from before this time.

Amongst the onlookers at the conflagration was Meir ben Baruch, a young student from the Rhineland, who had gone to Paris to study with Yehiel. Distraught at the events he followed the example of so many other traumatized scholars of his time. He expressed his grief in a lamentation:

Oh you who have been consumed with fire,

Pray for the peace of those who mourn you,

Who long to dwell in your court of your habitation,

Who choke in the dust of the earth,

Who grieve and are confounded by the immolation of your parchments.
14

The censor’s pen

Back in Rome, Gregory was already dead, and his successor Celestine only survived in the papal office for fifteen days. A new Pope, Innocent IV, was now on the throne. He seemed content to carry on Gregory’s anti-Talmud policy.

In 1244 he wrote to King Louis in Paris, encouraging him in his work and urging him to continue burning all copies of the Talmud, wherever they were found. But his policy would shortly change. Three years later after he had written to Louis, a delegation of French rabbis appeared before Pope Innocent, pleading that without the Talmud they could not understand the Bible and reminding him that the Church had long afforded the Jews the guarantee that they could practise their religion, as long as it did not harm or undermine the Christian faith.

Innocent listened. He modified his stance, now ordering that all Jewish books be inspected, by monks well versed in Hebrew. As long as any material ‘harmful’ to Christianity was removed, the books could continue in use. This was the beginning of the policy of Talmudic censorship, a policy which continued for many centuries. Censorship was the means of separating out material of which the Church did not approve, whilst allowing Jews access to their rabbinic law.
15
Most printed copies of the Talmud today still reflect the work of the censor’s pen.

The advent of censorship did not remove the physical threat to the Talmud. It continued to come under attack in France. Louis IX’s son Philip, who was a weaker character than his father, came under continuing pressure from the Church to legislate against the Jews. In 1283 he issued an edict which, alongside forbidding them to live in villages, chant loudly or build cemeteries, forbade the possession of the Talmud. Any copies in their possession were to be burnt.

The next king of France, Philip the Fair, expelled the Jews in 1306, probably for financial reasons.
16
He allowed them back nine years later at which time the burning of copies of the Talmud and other Jewish books in France resumed. The conflagrations continued until 1319, when the Dominican inquisitor Bernard Gui built a pyre in Toulouse.
17
By this time the Talmud had virtually disappeared from France.

But it would return.

In September 2008 Pope Benedict XVI met Jewish leaders in Paris. The weight of history, both recent and medieval, hung heavily on both communities. In his address to the Jews the Pope quoted from the Talmud. It was no accident. Relations between the Church and the Talmud have come a long way since the thirteenth century.

Maimonides under attack

The Talmud was not the first rabbinic book to be burnt. There had been an incident just a few years earlier, the consequence of a fierce dispute within Jewish intellectual circles. In this case however the burning had the cathartic effect of cooling tempers and restoring a sense of perspective to the disputants.

Over fifty years had elapsed since Maimonides had first published his philosophical treatise
Guide for the Perplexed
. The book had caused quite a stir. Maimonides’s attempts to reconcile the secular Aristotelian philosophy of the day with traditional Jewish belief had divided the intellectual world. The battle was between faith and reason. Traditionalists took exception to his view that there was no conflict between the Bible and philosophy, they held the position that a faith found on revelation could not, and should not, be subjected to rational examination; God’s word was all that was needed. The rationalists, on the other hand, could not conceive of a world in which God’s revelation could conflict with his creation.

The battle had started in the second century
bce
, when the Hebrew faith first encountered Greek rationalism. A parable in the Talmud tells of four scholars in the time of the Mishnah who engaged in mystical contemplation. They entered the ‘orchard’, a metaphor to describe the highest levels of spiritual elevation. It was not a comfortable experience for them. Ben Azzai died, Ben Zoma went mad, Elisha ben Abuya became a heretic and only Rabbi Akiva emerged unscathed.
18
The Talmud goes on to tell us that ‘Greek songs never ceased from Elisha ben Abuya’s mouth’ and ‘when he stood up in the study house many heretical books’ fell from inside his cloak.
19
Elisha’s heresy was his study
of Greek philosophy. The disparaging tales that the Talmud’s authors recount about him leave us in no doubt about their views on the matter.

The battle between faith and reason was ancient and in the thirteenth century it was by no means confined to the Jewish world. Christianity and Islam were experiencing the same tensions. It was the mood of the times. Although the Jews in Muslim lands had shared the long Islamic tradition of philosophical enquiry, many of them considered Maimonides’s ideological rationalism a step too far. All the more so for those in Christian Europe who’d had far less exposure to speculative thought.

Maimonides’s philosophical work
Guide for the Perplexed
was not written until he was in his fifties and was only made popularly available in Hebrew towards the end of his life. The storm over it did not erupt until after his death. But, as we saw previously, there had already been disquiet over his legal compendium,
Mishneh Torah,
and the embers of the earlier controversy were still hot. When his critics read the
Guide,
the storm erupted again. This time it was even more bitter.

And yet, as Joseph Dan has written, although the battle was between faith and reason, the letters and pamphlets which have survived from that time do not discuss whether Maimonides was right or wrong. They concentrate on only one thing; was there a contradiction between Maimonides and the Talmud? If there was no contradiction, if Maimonides could be shown to be in accord with tradition, then the veracity of his arguments would be proved. The rationalists, as Dan points out, succumbed to the values of their opponents, who accused Maimonides of being in conflict with the Talmud.
20

The argument was vitriolic and raged across Europe. It came to an end unexpectedly, in 1232, when the Dominicans, who were busy investigating the Church’s own Albigensian heresy,
21
suddenly turned their attention to the Jews and cast Maimonides’s works to the flames in 1232. Maimonides’s supporters hurled blame at their opponents for dragging the friars into the row, but whether the Dominicans burnt his works of their own initiative, or whether they were put up to it by the same type of fanatic who, some years later, desecrated his tomb in Tiberias, remains a mystery.

Disputation in Barcelona

The events that had taken place in Paris resonated throughout Europe. They particularly had an effect in Spain where the Christian reconquest of the country was proceeding apace. The Golden Age had drawn to a close, the Muslim rulers were being driven southwards as the Christian kingdoms in the north expanded their reach. When, in 1236, King Ferdinand III of Castile captured Cordova, the destiny of Spain’s Jewish communities would now be shaped by events in Christian France and Germany, instead of those in the Muslim world.

The Dominicans, the Order to which Nicholas Donin had belonged, pursued an active missionary agenda in Spain, just as they did in France. Charged with operating the Inquisition by Pope Gregory and faithful to their responsibilities, they were fanatical defenders of Orthodox Church dogma. Although they focused their attentions equally on Muslims, Jews and heretics, the Jews were the easiest group for the Dominicans to prey on. Unlike the Christian heretics, Jews made no attempt to conceal themselves or to disguise their religious beliefs.
22
Fewer and less organized than the Muslims, they posed little danger; they had no retreating co-religionists in the south who may turn and launch a counter-attack. The Jews, visible, unprotected and vulnerable, were an easy target.

To make things worse, several Jewish converts amongst the Dominican friars were actively agitating against the Talmud, as if they believed that by discrediting it they could hasten the abolition of the Jewish faith. Nicholas Donin had been a convert and now in Barcelona another convert, Pablo Christiani, began to foment against the Talmud.

Even though centuries of Muslim rule had left Spanish society more tolerant towards minorities than France, the Jews were nevertheless disenfranchised. They had long been obliged to attend forced sermons at the king’s command, to hear friars preach the gospels to them. In this atmosphere of strident invective, Christiani did not need to manufacture charges against the Talmud as Donin had done. He could simply take advantage of the polemical mood to persuade the Jews of the error of their ways and of the truth of Christianity. He prevailed upon the king to order a compulsory debate.

King James I of Aragon was more than willing to accede to Christiani’s request. He relished the idea of a debate, particularly if it could be open and
cordial. He ordered that it take place in the royal palace in Barcelona and summoned the leading rabbi in Spain, Moses ben Nachman. As is traditional for prominent rabbinic scholars, he was known by the acrostic formed by his title and initials. Ramban was to argue in favour of the Talmud.
23

Yehiel in Paris had been a well-known and respected rabbi, but Ramban was in a different league. A physician by profession, he was one of those people who seem able to do anything and to excel at whatever they do. He’d been the head of a rabbinic school in Gerona before being appointed chief rabbi of Catalonia, and, despite his religious and medical duties, he found the time to author over fifty works, principally on Talmud, philosophy and mysticism. He also wrote poetry. His works, particularly his commentaries on the Torah and the Talmud, are still read today.

Ramban was in his late sixties when he received the king’s summons. According to the account that he wrote of the debate, he only agreed to participate if he was allowed to speak freely and if the king himself agreed to take no active part. He didn’t want to get into an argument with the monarch. He repeated the request to speak freely to Friar Ramon, the head of the Dominical Order. Friar Ramon agreed, just as the king had already done.

The disputation took place over four days in July 1263. As in Paris, it was attended by the leading clergy and noblemen. Pablo Christiani was the main advocate for the Dominicans, supported by four colleagues. Ramban was the sole spokesperson for the Talmud although unlike the debate in Paris, other Jews were present.

Christiani opened by declaring it was his intention to prove from the Talmud that the Messiah had already come, that he was both human and divine and that he had died to atone for human sin. He quoted Talmudic homilies in support of his view.

Ramban argued that not only had Christiani misconstrued the passages he was quoting, but that in any event Jews were not obliged to take the folklore and stories in the Talmud literally. This is the same argument that Yehiel had used in Paris. He explained that there were three levels of Jewish literature; Bible, Talmud and
aggada
. The Bible was to be believed with perfect faith. The legal part of the Talmud, which explains the commandments in the Torah, is also to
be relied upon but
aggada
should be treated like sermons; ‘if one believes it, all well and good, if not, one will not be harmed spiritually’.
24

The debate proved inconclusive. Pablo Christiani was not able to persuade Ramban and the other Jews present that the Messiah had already come, and Ramban was not able to refute Christiani to a point where he could demand he cease his proselytizing activity. The king seems to have been won over by Ramban at least to some degree. At the end of the debate he presented him with three hundred
dineros
and said he had never heard someone who was wrong argue his case so well.
25

However the king also decreed that he would come to the synagogue the following Sabbath with Pablo Christiani and Friar Ramon, where they would preach the gospels to the Jews. Ramban remained behind in Barcelona for the occasion, to try to reassure the frightened congregation. He listened patiently whilst Christiani and Friar Ramon each preached to them, but leapt to his feet to protest when the Friar intimated that he had been won over by Christiani during the disputation.

Despite the goodwill that the king showed Ramban, he came under further pressure from the Dominicans to impose strictures upon the Jews and their Talmud. A month later he issued a series of royal edicts in which he ordered the Jews to attend Christiani’s missionary sermons whenever required. They were also required to show Christiani their books, which he would use to convince them of the truth of his case.

Two years later the Bishop of Gerona got hold of a copy of Ramban’s account of the debate. It clearly did not accord with his own understanding of what had been said because he charged him with blasphemy. Ramban appealed to the king, arguing that he had promised him freedom of speech. The king supported him, demanding that the trial be adjourned until he had the opportunity of judging it himself.

The trial never took place and the Dominicans now appealed to Pope Clement IV. He in turn ordered the Archbishop of Tarragona to seize all the
copies of the Talmud and other Jewish books in his kingdom and submit them to Pablo Christiania and his fellow friars for examination and censorship. The Pope instructed the censors to return to the Jews all books which accorded with the Bible and all which clearly did not contain blasphemies.
26