History of the Jews, Vol. 4 (of 6). Graetz Heinrich
in Castile he was wounded and plundered by the lawless soldiery, and of his entire fortune, only his house, field, and collection of books remained. Don Samuel Abrabanel assisted him in his distress, so that he was enabled to recover somewhat from his misfortunes. Through his interposition Menachem was called from Alcala to assume the rabbinate of Toledo, where he opened an academy. As the disciple and successor of Jehuda Asheri, considerable Talmudical attainments were with justice expected of him. But he did not rise above the mediocrity of his times. To remedy the increasing ignorance of religious forms and duties, he wrote a compendium of theoretic and practical Judaism ("Zeda la-Derech," 1374), as comprehensible as it was short, for the use of prominent Jews, who, employed at court and by the grandees, had not sufficient leisure to search an extensive literature for instruction. His work is interspersed with scientific elements – psychological and religio-philosophical – but it is weak and commonplace, full of platitudes, and its several parts do not cohere. Even the Talmudical elements are neither profound nor original. The only redeeming feature is that it is conceived in a warm, sympathetic spirit, distinguishing it from the usually dry rabbinical disquisitions.
Only two men of this time are raised by their character and learning above the dead level of prevailing mediocrity: Chasdaï Crescas and Isaac ben Sheshet. They both lived in the kingdom of Aragon, where the Jews under Pedro IV and Juan I were neither so poor nor so oppressed as their brethren in Castile. Chasdaï Crescas and Isaac ben Sheshet were not sufficiently great to dominate their contemporaries, or prescribe their own views as rules of conduct; they were, however, the foci of large circles, and were frequently appealed to for final decisions on complicated and difficult questions. Both worked earnestly for the maintenance and furtherance of Judaism, for the preservation of peace in the communities at home and abroad, and for the consolation and re-animation of the broken in spirit, notwithstanding that their means were limited, and the times unpropitious.
Chasdaï ben Abraham Crescas (born 1340, died 1410), originally of Barcelona, and subsequently of Saragossa, where he ended his days, did not belong to the class of ordained rabbis, but he had been educated on Talmudical lines, and was an accomplished Talmudist. His wealth and his occupations seem to have indisposed him for this honorable position. Chasdaï Crescas was in close relation with the court of Juan I, of Aragon, was frequently consulted on important state questions, and also had much intercourse with the grandees of the kingdom. In the views of the various schools of philosophy he was well versed; the independence and depth of thought he evinced in dealing with them stamp him an original thinker. His ideas, of course, were largely based upon religious, or rather Jewish convictions, which, however, he presented in an original form. Chasdaï Crescas was the first to recognize the weak points of the prevailing Aristotelianism, and he attacked it with irresistible force. Of his youth nothing is known, and it is impossible to say under what influences those ripe powers of mind were developed which enabled him to question the authority not only of Maimonides and Gersonides, but of Aristotle himself. His ancestors were learned Talmudists, and his grandfather enjoyed a reputation equal to that of the famous Asheri family. In Talmudical studies he was a disciple of Nissim Gerundi, of Barcelona. Chasdaï Crescas was kind and gentle, a friend in need, and a faithful defender of the weak. During the unhappy days which broke upon the Jews of Spain in his lifetime, he devoted all his powers to the mitigation of the disasters which befell his brethren.
Similar in character, but fundamentally opposed to him in the disposition of his mind, was his friend and senior, Isaac ben Sheshet Barfat (Ribash, born 1310, died about 1409). A native of Barcelona, and having studied under Ben Adret's son and pupils, Isaac ben Sheshet may, in a measure, be considered a disciple of Ben Adret. He acquired his teacher's capacity for seizing the spirit of the Talmud and expounding it lucidly, and far surpassed him in hostility to secular studies. Ben Adret had permitted the circumstances of his times to extort from him the prohibition of such studies, as far as raw youths were concerned; Ben Sheshet, in his rigid orthodoxy, took the view that even mature men should hold aloof from them, although at that period there was but little fear of heresy. The physical sciences and philosophy, he held, should be completely avoided, as they were calculated to undermine the two essential supports of the Torah, the doctrines of the creation, and of a Providence; because they exalted reason over faith, and generated doubts of miracles. In Gersonides, and even Maimuni, Ben Sheshet found illustrations of the pernicious effects of philosophic speculation. He granted that they were men of incomparable genius, but he insisted that they had been seduced by philosophy to adopt heterodox views, and explain certain miracles of the Bible rationalistically. Ben Sheshet was of high moral character; his disposition was kindly, and on several occasions he willingly sacrificed his personal interests to advance the common good and to promote peace. But when he suspected the violation of a Talmudical precept or the non-observance of even an unessential custom, his mildness was immediately transformed into most obdurate severity.
On account of his Talmudical learning, his clear, penetrating intellect, and his irreproachable character, he was much sought after. The important community of Saragossa elected him its rabbi. Immediately on taking office, Isaac ben Sheshet gave an illustration of the tenacity with which he clung to the letter of the Law, even when it conflicted with the spirit. He observed, with regret, that the practice obtained of reading the book of Esther on the feast of Purim in a Spanish translation, for the benefit of the women. This practice had been introduced into other Spanish communities, and was not only applauded by all men of common sense, but had even been authorized by a few rabbis, who considered it unobjectionable from a Talmudical point of view. Ben Sheshet raised a cry of alarm, as if Judaism had been threatened with ruin. He called to his assistance the authority of his teacher, Nissim Gerundi, and together they opposed the excellent custom with sophistical argument. They appear to have been successful in abolishing it.
Still more characteristic of Isaac ben Sheshet is his quarrel with Chayim ben Gallipapa, a rabbi, stricken in years, whose opinions differed from those of the rabbi of Saragossa. This man (born 1310, died 1380), rabbi of Huesca and Pampeluna, was a singular figure in the Middle Ages, whom it is difficult to classify. Whilst the rabbis of the time, particularly since the rise of the Asheride teaching, exceeded all bounds in the imposition of burdensome observances, and always, in cases of doubt, decided in favor of their most rigorous fulfillment, Gallipapa took the opposite view, and maintained that the aim of all Talmudical exegesis should be to disencumber life. The times, he considered, had improved, and neither the ignorance of the people nor the fear of defection was so great as to warrant such severity. This principle was no mere theory with Gallipapa, for he followed it practically. The freedom he suggested concerned matters of comparative insignificance, but at that time every trifle was regarded as important. On certain dogmas, also, Gallipapa held independent views. The Messianic belief which, since the time of Maimonides, had become an article of faith, to deny which was heresy, he boldly set aside. Gallipapa considered that the prophecies, in Isaiah and Daniel, of the great prosperity of Israel in the future, had been fulfilled in the days of the Maccabees, and wrote a work on the subject. Against this hardy innovator, a storm naturally arose. A neighboring rabbi, Chasdaï ben Solomon, of Tudela, a man of not over-fine sensibilities, denounced him to Isaac ben Sheshet, and the latter lectured the venerable Gallipapa, who had sent disciples into the world, as if he had been a mere schoolboy. He adjured Chayim Gallipapa to avoid scandal and give no opportunity for schism amongst his brethren. The modest attempt at reform went no further.
This severe tendency in matters of religion was the natural outcome of the prevailing spiritual needs; and it must be confessed that the more rigorous, the better it was adapted to them. Isaac ben Sheshet and his friend Chasdaï Crescas, who, although no enemy of secular learning, entertained the same view as his colleague, and defended his orthodoxy on philosophic grounds, were considered, after the death of Nissim Gerundi, the most eminent rabbinical authorities of their day, not in Spain only. From far and near, inquiries were addressed to them, principally to Isaac ben Sheshet, but also to Chasdaï Crescas. The proudest rabbis and the largest communities invoked their counsel, and were content to abide by their decisions. The court of Aragon also regarded them as the leaders of the Jewish communities, but this operated to their disadvantage. In consequence of the denunciation of some malevolent person, the ground of which is unknown, the king, Don Pedro IV, ordered Chasdaï Crescas, Isaac ben Sheshet, his brother, Crescas Barfat, the aged Nissim Gerundi of Barcelona, and two others, to be thrown into prison. After a long time, they were released on bail. We may believe Isaac