THE JEWISH EN'CYCLOPEDIA
407 monarchy with
sharp (in) ami rapid (7p) antiEupiiratcs (Pcral) is IJiinii- llie destroyer (TEjn). the wine-press (mi3, Isa. Ixiii. I!) of the Lord ((><-ii. K. xvi. -J). Sucii leehiiieal matJowisli
ters as
I
covered
ment
its
jefrislatioii
lie
hi'
preeeiilseoiieerniiif; clean
liy allef,'ori/.alion
hut
it
iiiiiiiials
iiuist
are also
never fora mo-
li)r;;otten that tliroiiii;lioiit Palestinian alle-
the literal word of the Law is endowed w itii coniplele reality, and any alleirorieal ineanini; found in it is always secondary to the import of its literal senso and does not in any way displace it. Thus in Lev. .i. 4-H, "the camel" means lial>ylon " hecauselie dieweth the cud." for the Haliylonians praise God
gorism
iv. ;il); "and thi' coney." that is jMedia, because the Medians likewise |)nuse God; "and the hare becau.se he chewelh the cud," that means Greece, for Alexander the Gicat praised God "and the swine," that is Kdom (Home); "he cheweth not the cud," he not alone prais<'th not God l)ul cur.seth and blasphemelh Ilim (Lev. R. xiii. '>). The precedini; e.am|iles of Palestinian alle;;ory were concerned with Israel and its history; but there are also many ethical doctrines in the form of alleirories. lhoU!;h jii'rhaps they are not so numerous as the preeedinir species. Thus, for instance. H. .lohanan explains the iiassage. Num. X.xi. 27; "Wherefore they that speak in proverbs say." so as to refer to those who control their pas-
(Dan.
sions (D'i'tlOn);
"come
into
Heshtjon,"
is
inter-
preted as "let us estimate [JiaCTll the good and the bad and weigh them against each oilier." " I,et it lie biiill and set up." "if thou doest thus, measuring good and evil, thou slialt be built iipand established
and in the world to come," etc. (B. whole is interesting inasmuch as it showstliattheallegorizationof liiblical proper names was by no means exclusively the characteristic of Alexanilrian allegorisni; the Palestinians were very fond of it. as shown by their interpretation of the gi'iiealogical lists in ('hroni<les. fragnieiils of which in this world The B. 784).
liave
B.
wav into the 'IVilnnid. .Meg. V,i/j, Num. 7S. and Kulli K. repeatedly.
found their
!•!,
Sifre
B.
—
Of anagogic allegory which. iK-cording to Origen. was a favorite mode among the .lews in the inthere terpretation of the Song of Songs especially ail' but very few siieciniens in rabbinical literature. Thus a passage in Pirke U. K.l. xxi., the close relationship of which with (inoslie ideas has been demoiisliatid by Gin/.beig (" MoMatsschrift." IH'JU. 224). in coninieiiiinir on Gen. iii. 3. interprets the sin of ])aradise as lieiiig sensual gratilication. Alli'gory ill the Turgums is lianlly different from Onkelos is almost entirely free that of the Midiiish. easionally uses it. from it. though h llii' I'aleslinian Taras on Gen. xlix. The Targums. gums frecpienlly make use of it. The Targuni to the Prophets, especially that upon Isaiah, frecpieiilly eniploysalh-gory. The Targum to the Song of Solomon is an allegorical .Midrash in itself. presi'rve<l in part in the Midiash Ujibbah upon the book. Even those two jiromineni defeiidiTs of lilinil in terpretalion(/i('«//'(Ol*a'*'i'"""l "'" I'-'ra. alsoal limes siK'cumbeil to till' intliienee of allegor Kashi and iealexposilion. This is especially true
—
Ibn Ezra.
which inlerpT'led allegorically by both
eoneerningtheSoiigof is
Soloinoii,
writers, alllioiigh in varying fiusliion, Kashi. the head of the I'Vench school of exegesis, sees in the book, like .kiba. the history of Isniel, or. more properly,
the history of Israel's siitlerings, while Ibn V./.m. like a philosoplier, descries in it an allegory of the inii mall- union of the soul with the universal intelli gence. and ('xplains il accordingly.
It
would seem
Allegorical Interpretation
that
when
the Araliian- Greek phi-
losophy took root among the Jews, a pliilosophicoallegorical treatment of Scripture gradually developed. The Karaite Solomon b. Jeroham mentions lienjamin Nahaweiidi as the first Jew-
Philosophic
ish allegorisi (Piiisker.
"Likkute Kad-
AUegory.
moniot," ii. KJtl), lint the illustration he gives is quoted literally from the Midrash Kalibah on Ecclesiastcs, so that he can scarcely be said to prove Ids statement by it. Shaliaraslaiii (Ilaarbritcker, p. 2")(!)indeed relat"es of Jiidgan of Ilamadiin. a conteniiiomry of Benjamin (about 8(J0), that lie explains Scripture allegorically and in opposition to the custoni of the Jews, i low ever niueh the
Jewish ]ihilosophers of the Middle Ages may have agreed with the Alexandrians that revelation and philosophy taught the same truth, they contrived generally to avoid the mistakeof the latter in straining to iirove this by means of the most artificial and far-fetched allegorization. Saadia. the pioneer in Jewish religious philosophy, laid Saadia. down a rule for the em|iloynient of allegory which was recognizeil generally until the time of Maimonides; it was that Allegorical Interpretation is only admissible in the four following cases: where the text contnidicts (<i) reality. {/>) reason, (c) another text, or tinally (//) rabbinical tradition (.sec. vii. p. 212 of the Arabic text in Landauer). Saadia himself uses the.se rules in interpreting the anthropomorphisms of the Bible as conllicting alike with reason and tniilition. He also shows how dangerous a free treat iiieiit of the literal word might become by showing how the Biblical account of Creation, and the history of the Patriarchs, and even the precepts themselves, could be so allegorized away that nothing of Holy Scripture would remain. Saadia's view of the proper use of Allegorical Interpretation was accepted by Baliyaibn Pakiida, Abniliani b Iliyya, Abraham ibn Daud. and Judah ha Levi. The last-named, by virlue of his anlipliiloso|ilii('al bent, even found a way to defend the literal conception of the Bible'sanlhropomorphic expres.sions; comiiare also S..mi'KI. n. Hoi'iiM. t^uile apart stands Solomon ibn (iabirol, who in his philosophy gave no consideration to Judaism, iiut in his exegesis frenuenlly made Solomon useofAllegiu-ical Interpretation. His method is ipiile Philonie, wilhout beibn however, either diiiig inlluenced, Gabirol. Here is rectly or indirectly by I'liilo. an example of Gabirol's Allegorical Interpretation " Die Bibelas (pioted by Ilm Ezra (compare Baelier, exege.se der JUdisehen Keligioiisphilosophen," p. 46; ICaiifniann. " Stiidien liber Solomon b. Gabirol") in hiseoinmenlarv ujion (ieiiisis. Paradise is the world supernal the garden, the visibli' world of the pious. The river going forth out of Eden is universal mailer, lis four separating streams are the four elements. Adam, Kr. and the .serpent represent the three souls; Adam, who bestows names. repres<'iiling the rational soul. Eve the animal soul (the living nin). Thus, when it is anil the serpent the vegetative. said that the serpent shall eat dust, it indicates that llie vegelalive soul cleaves to the dust of materialisiii. The coats of skins typify the body the tree of life is the pereeplioli of the upper intelligible worhl, just as the cherubim, the angels, are the intelligible In addition to this allebeings of the upper world.
gory of Gabirol's. Ibn Ezra i|Uoti'S another interbut while it is possible preiation of Jacob's dream that he may have applied this iiielhod to visions or
similar pii'isages of the Bible, it is allopelher >mlikelv that he prisuineil to apply it either to the Ij»w or to the historical events chronicled in Scripture.
