Isidore Singer.

The Jewish encyclopedia : a descriptive record of the history, religion, literature, and customs of the Jewish people from the earliest times to the present day (Volume 8) online

. (page 47 of 169)
Online LibraryIsidore SingerThe Jewish encyclopedia : a descriptive record of the history, religion, literature, and customs of the Jewish people from the earliest times to the present day (Volume 8) → online text (page 47 of 169)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook

night in favor of the people of Sodom. The Alpha-
bet of Ben Sira (ed. Bagdad, jip. 2b, 17b, 19b),
apparently borrowing from the Koran (suras vii.

Lot's Wife Turned Into a Pillar of Salt.

(From the Sarajevo Haggadah of the fourteenth century.)

78-82, xxii. 43), calls Lot "a perfectly righteous
man" ("zaddik gamur") and prophet (comp. II
Peter ii. 7, 8; Epstein, "Mi-Kadmoniyyot ha-Yehu-
dim," 121).

Genesis Rabbah (1. 14) concludes that Lot had at
the time of the destruction of Sodom foiu- daugh-
ters, two married and two betrothed, and that the
latter escaped with their father. But he had previ-
ously had a daughter named Pelotet, who was mar-
ried to one of the inhabitants of Sodom. She
secretly practised hospitality, but being one day
discovered by the people of Sodom, was sentenced
to be burned (Pirke R. El. I.e.; "Sefer ha-Yashar,"
"Lek Leka," ed. Leghorn, p. 23a). Lot's wife,
called " 'Irit " or " 'Idit," desirous to see whether her
other two daughters followed her, looked behind
her; but she then saw the back of the Shekinah
and was accordingly punished for her imprudence
(Pirke R. El. I.e.). She was turned into a pillar of

salt because she
had previously
sinned by not
giving salt to
strangers (Targ.
pseudo -Jona-
than and Yer. to
Gen. xix. 26;
comp. Gen. R.
li. 7). According
to a legend, oxen
used to consume
every day the
pillar of salt by
licking it down
to the toes, but
it was restored
by the morning
(Pirke R. El.
I.e. ; Sefer ha-
Yashar, " Wa-
yera, " p. 28a, b).
Lot's wife, be-
ing turned into
a pillar of salt,
was not con-
sidered as a dead body, contact with which ren-
dered one unclean (Niddah 70b). The transfor-
mation was one of those miraculous occurrences
at sight of which one must recite a benediction
(Ber. 54a).
s. 8. M. Sel.

Critical View : Lot is regarded by the critics as

an eponym representing the supposed common An-
cestor of the two tribes or nations of Moab and Am-
mon. His relation to Abraham is in this view
intended to mark the ethnographic connection of
these two tribes with the Israelites; and his choice
of an eastern location may be taken as indicating a
voluntary relinquishment of all claims of the Moab-
itcs and Anunonites to Canaan. His relations with
his daughters probably represent some rough i)leas-
antry common among the Israelitish folk and indica-
ting their scorn for their nearest neighbors. Fenton,
however (" Early Hebrew Life "), suggests that in a
matriarchal state such unions would not be indeco-
rous, since in social stages where descent was traced




only through the mother the father would be no re-
lation to the children.

The story about Lot's wife, also, bears marks of
popular origin, and is regarded by critics and travel-
ers as a folk-legend intended to explain some pillar
of crystallized rock-salt resembling the female hu-
man form. Owing to its composition, such a j)illar
would soon dissolve. One in the neighborhood of
the Dead Sea was identified by Josephus (" Ant." i.
11, $i 4) as that of Lot's wife; and another (or the
same) had that name at the time of Clement of
Rome (I Cor. xi. 3).

As Lot is declared to liave dwelt in a cave (Gen.
xix. 30), Ewald (" History of Israel," i. 313) and
Dillmann {nd loc.) identify him with Lotan, the
leader of one of the tribes of Horites or cave-dwell-
ers (Gen. xxxvi. 22, 29). The Dead Sea is still
called "BahrLut."

K. G. H. J-

LOTS : Means of determining chances. Primi-
tive peoples, and occasionally those on a higher
plane of culture, resort to lots for the purposes of
augury. They spin a coconut or entangle strips of
leather in order to obtain an omen. Thieves espe-
cially are detected by the casting of lots, etc. (Tylor,
"Primitive Culture," German ed., i. 78-82). The
pagans on a ship with Jonah under stress of a storm
cast lots in order to find out who among them had
incurred the Divine anger (Jonah i. 7). Haman re-
sorted to the lot when he intended to destroy the
Jews (Esth. iii. 7). The Greek heroes cast their
lots into Agamemnon's helmet in order to ascertain
who should fight with Hector (" Iliad," vii. 171). In
ancient Italy oracles with carved lots were used.

The ancient Israelites likewise resorted to the lot
for the most varied purposes. Rhabdomancy was
known as late as Hosea (Hos. iv. 12); and Ezekiel
<Ezek. xxi. 26 et seq.) mentions the arrow-oracle of
the King of Babylon, which was still used a thou-
sand years later among the pagan
In Ancient Arabians (Wellhausen, " Reste Arabi-
Israel. schen Heidenthums," 2d ed., pp. 126 et
seq.; comp. Sprenger, "Leben und
Lehre des Mohammed," i. 259 et seq. ; Huber,
"Ueber das Meiser-Spiel der Heidnischen Araber,"
Leipsic, 1883). As the priestly lot-oracles are dis-
cussed under Ephod, Urim and Thummim, and
Teraphim, the present article deals merely with
the lot in secular life. Joshua discovers the thief,
and Saul the guilty one, by means of the lot (Josh,
vii. IQetseq.; I Sam. xiv. 42; comp. I Sam. x. 20
et seq.). Primitive peoples divide land and other
cbmmon property by means of the lot. In Hebrew
the word for " lot " (" goral ") has retained the mean-
ing of " share " ; it has also acquired the more gen-
eral meaning of " fate " (Isa. xvii. 14, Ivii. 6 ; Jer.
xiii. 25; Ps. xvi. 5; Dan. xii.). The land west
of the Jordan is divided among the several tribes
by lot (Num. xxvi. 55 et seq., xxxiii. 54, xxxiv.
13, xxxvi. 2; Josh. xiii. 6, xiv. 2, xv. 1, xvii.
1, xviii. 6-10, xix. 51, xxiii. 4; Ps. Ixxviii. 55,
cv. 11 ; comp. Ezek. xiv. 1, xlvii. 22). Jewish tra-
dition, finding oifeuse in this kind of allotment, de-
clared that the land was really divided under the
inspiration of the Holy Spirit, the lot being merely
the visible means of confirming the division for the

In Talmud



people (Sifre. Num. 132; B. B. 122a). Prov. xvi.
33 and xviii. 18 indicate that lots were cast in legal
controversies. The wicked "part my garments
among them, and cast lots upon my vesture" (Ps.
xxii. 19; comp. ]\Iatt. xxvii. 35; John xxix. 24).
Booty of war is divided by lot (Joel iv. 3; Nahum
iii. 10; Ob. 11; see also Judges xx. 9; Neh. x. 35,
xi. 1 ; I Chron. xxiv. 5, xxv. 8, xxvi. 13 (see Herzog-
llauck, "Rcal-Encyc." 3d ed., xi. 643 et seq.).

According to the etymology of the word "goral,"
the lots were probably small stones, or sticks, as Hos.
iv. 12 indicates. They were thrown, or po.ssibly
shaken (Prov. xvi. 33, "into thelap "), so that one
fell out, whereby the case in question was decided.
It can not be ascertained whether a tablet with wri-
ting on it is meant in Lev. xvi. 8, as the Mishnah
assumes (Yoma iii. 9, iv. 1). At the time of the
Second Temple the lot was prominent in the Tem-
ple cult, and customs were developed,
after Biblical example, whereby the
several oflices were apportioned by
lot. The priests drew lots in all cases
where differences might arise (Yoma
37a, 39a-41a, 62a-63b, 65b; Zeb. 1131); Men. 59b;
Ker. 28a). In Tamid i. 2 the overseer of the Tem-
ple calls for the lot; and Yoma 24b records a dis-
cussion whether the priests shall draw lots in holy
or in secular garments. Lots were cast four times in
succession (Yoma iv. 1). The Prophets increased the
four classes of priests that returned from the Dias-
pora to twenty-four ; they mixed up the names of
the additional ones and placed them in an urn (KdAvr;/)
and then let each of the four original classes of priests
draw five names (Tosef. , Ta'an. ii. 1, and parallel
passages). The urn was originally made of cypress-
wood ; but the high priest Ben Gamala had one
which was made of gold (Yoma iii. 9) ; hence draw-
ing lots from it created a sensation (Yer. Yoma 41b,
below). In the sanctuary the lots were taken out by
hand (Yoma 39b, 40a). The lot was either a black
or a white pebble (Yer. Yoma iv., beginning), or
was made of olive-, nut-, or cypress-wood (Yoma
37a). A third kind, consisting of pieces of paper
with writing on them {-mTTdKiov), is frequently men-

Many facts seem to indicate that choosing by lot
was common in post-Biblical times. Moses chose
the seventy elders (Num. xi. 26) by selecting six
men from each of the twelve tribes, and then placing
seventy-two pieces of paper (KiTTaKtov), of which two
were blank, into an urn, one being drawn by each
man. He proceeded similarly in determining the
273 first-born who were to pay each five shekels ran-
som, 22,273 tickets in all being drawn (Yer. Sanh.
19c, below, and parallel passages). Eldad and Me-
dad were, according to Targ. Yer. to Num. xi. 26,
among the elders who drew lots. Jacob's sons also
drew lots to decide who should take Joseph's coat to
their father (Gen. R. Ixxxiv.). Achan attempted to
bring the casting of lots into discredit when he said
to Joshua: "If I order you and the high priest Elea-
zar to draw lots, one of you will certainly be pro-
nounced guilty " (Sanh. 43b). Nebuchadnezzar's
casting of lots (Ezek. xxi. 25 et seq.) is mentioned;
but, according to the vernacular of the time, the
Greek word K?.7}pog is used, which occurs also in




Actsi. 26 (Lam. R., Preface, No. 5; Midr. Teh. x.
6; conip. ib. x. 5 on ousting of lots among the Ro-
mans, and Kiauss, " Lelmworter," ii. 545b).

In Palestine brothers divided their patrimony l)y
lot as late as, and probably nmcli later than, the
second century (B. B. 106b). Apparently the lot
Avas also occasionally used in ordaining teachers
(Yer. Bik. 65d. 1. 24). Under Grecian iutiuence the
drawing of lots degenerated into dice-playing. " No
one is accepted as witness who plays with little
stones [V'^of]," i.e., gambles professionally (Yer.
Sanh. iii. 6 and parallel passages). The same regu-
lation applies to the dice-player {kvi3evt>'/c and Kyjieia),
who is frequently referred to (see passages in
Krauss, I.e. ii. 501).

The drawing of lots and its companion practise,
the throwing of dice, were common in the Middle

Ages ; and they are even in vogue at

In the Mid- the present time. Moses of Coucy (c.

die Ages 1250) mentions xylomancy. Splinters

and in of wood the rind of which had been

Folk-Lore. removed on one side, were tossed up,

and according as they fell on the
peeled or the unpeeled side, augured favorably or
unfavorably (Giidemann, "Gesch." i. 82). An Ital-
ian teacher denounced the casting of lots {ib. ii.
221). Dice-playing was especially in vogue among
the Italian Jews of the Middle Ages, and was, as well
as other games of hazard, frequently forbidden {ib.
ii. 210). In Germany there was a game of chance,
called "Ruck oder Schncid," in which a knife was
used (Berliner, p. 22). Many books on games of
chance originated in the later Middle Ages (see bib-

saoekiuixt, etc., Jena, 1878; Herzog-Hauck, Rral-Eiu-yc. M.
ed., -xi. i'M ct seq.; B. Stade, (iCKcli. Israels, i. 471 it >£(;.; E. B.
Tylor, Primitive Culture, liidex; Germ.ed., i. 78, Leip-
sic, 1873; I. Wellliausen, Rcste Arahisiitoi HcidentJniins,
'M ed., i)p. Vi2 ct seq.; Winer, B. Ii. Ii. 31. On medieval and
tnodern lot-books: Benjacol), Ozar Jia-Sefarim, pp. 9i et ^i (f.;
A. Berliner, Aus drm Lcbrn <hr Dcut.'^rlien Judcn im Mit-
tdalter, Berlin, 190(1; M. (irunwald, Mittheihinijcn der (ie-
sellschaft fVtr JUdi.'tche V<ilk.-<hiuide, v. 12; M. (iiidemann,
Gcscli. i., ii.; Steinschneider, LDoshliclicr, In Hehr. Bibl. vl.
120; idem, JlldiscJie Literatur, cli. x.xii., end.
A. L. B.

LOTTERIES. See Gambmng.

LOUISVILLE. See Kentitky.

family that has held for many generations large pos-
sessions in Jamaica. A member of the family was
created Duke de Lousada and Marquis di San Miiii-
ato. It is tiie only Jewish family that has held so
exalted a title. Its members claim to be descendants
of the original Spanish grandees of Ihat name. Isaac
de Lousada was confirmed, in 1848, in the titles that
had been borne by his "ancestor" th(! Duke de Lou-
sada, grand chamberlain to Charles III., King of the
Two Sicilies. This monarch, when crowned King
of Spain, created the duke a grandee of the first
class. Isaac de Lousada died in 1857, and was suc-
ceeded by his eldest son, Emanuel, second duke (b.
1809; d. 1884). Emanuel was succeeded by his
nephew, Horace Francis, the third and present
(1904) duke, son of Count Francis (d. 1870), the sec-
ond son of the first duke. Count Francis married
Marianne, daughter of Sir Charles Wolsely ; he was
created Marquis di San Miniato by the Grand Duke
of Tuscany in 1846. Following is a pedigree of the
family :


Judith (daughter of
Baron d'Aguilar)

Isaac de Lousada
(d. 1831)


Moses Baruch Lousada = Bella Barrow
(d. 1826) of Jamaica




Isaac de Lousada

(1st Duke de Lousada, 1848 ;

d. 1857)

John Baruch

= Tryphena

(1832; daughter

of S. Barrow)

. I


6 sons 5 daughters


Isaac = Sarah

(daughter of Duke de

Losada y Lousada)

Arthur Bella = 2 others
Major wills

George :v


Herbert G.


Emanuel Sarah = Francis Herman

(1809-85; Isaac Lousada (Marquis di San (b. 1818 ;

2d duke) Miniato, 1846; d. 1881)

d. 1870) — Krancoise
— Marianne Tard


Horace Francis
(3d duke ; 2d marquis ;
b. 1837)

I. G. D.

liography below). The present writer has in his
possession a Bokhara manuscript containing a " Lot-
Book of Daniel." It mentions also means ("segul-
lot ") for detecting a thief. The Jews of the present
day, likewise, are not unacquainted with the various
modes of casting lots found among all peoples and
used for various and generally harmless purposes;
but among these remnants of ancient superstition
customs that are Jewish in origin are probably to be
found onl}' in Ilasidic circles and in the East.

Bibliography: T. W. Davles, yTaaic niriunlinn, and De-
miDiolfmii. pp. ~ictscq., Lotifloii and Lelpsic, 1898; Hastings.
Dirt. liittle, lil. 1.52 ct ser/.; Thoiria.s fiataker. Van drr JVntnr
und dim Orhravrhe dfr Ludsc, 1I)19; H. Guthe. Kiirzen
Bihrlwrirferl). p. 397, Tiibingen and Leipsic, 190:5; Ham-
burger. R. B. T. I. 723; A. Lehmann, Aherqlnnhe und Zau-
herei, p. 40, Stuttgart, 1898 ; Lenormant, Maaie und Wahr-

BiBLiOGKAPii Y : Uebreit, Peerage, 1901, p. 928 ; Isaac da (Usta,
Israel en de Volken, p. 46.5, Utrecht, 1876; Burke, Landed
Gentry, 1868, 1. 900; Rietstap, Arinfyrial General, i. 101,
Gouda, 1884.
J. H. Gut.

LOVE (ninx) : The deep affection by wiiicii
one person feels closely drawn to another and im-
pelled to give up much, or do much, for him with-
out regard of self. —Biblical Data: While the
word n^riN. like the Greek iiyanTj, denotes also sen-
sual love (IIos. ii. 7, 9, 12; Ezek. xxiii. 5, 9; Judges
xvi. 4; II Sam. xiii. 15), it becomes, owing to the
higher ethical spirit pervading Judaism, more and
more expressive of the purer sentiment so exqui-
sitely characterized in Cant. viii. 6-7 : " Love is strong
as death. . . . Many waters can not quench love.




neither can the floods chowu it: if a man would give
all the substance of his liouse for love, it would \it-
terly be contemned." Besides love of man for wom-
an, "ahabah" denotes parental love (Gen. xxv. 28,
xxxvii. 3), and it is transfencd to that love of man
for man which is better termed friendship, and which
is exemplilied in the love of David and Jonathan
and characterized by the former in the words, "My
brother Jonathan, very dear [A. V. "pleasant"]
hast thou been unto nie; thy love to me was won
derful, passing the love of women" (II Sam. i. 26,
Hebr.). Hence "lover" bi-c'omes identical with
"friend" (Prov. xviii. 24; Ps. xxxviii. 12 [A. V.
llj, Ixwviii. 19 [A. V. 18J). Gradually the entire
system of life is permeated by the principle of love,
and the relation between God and man as well as
between man and man is based upon it.

It is the prophet Hosea who, chastened by his ex-
perience in liis own life, gives to love a deeper and
purer meaning, while finding that God loves Israel
notwithstanding its backslidings (Hos. xi. 1). It is
a love of free will {ib. xiv. 5 [A.V. 4]). Upon love
Deuteronomy builds its entire system. God loved
the fathers (Deut. x. 15), and because He transferred
this love to their descendants, the entire people of
Israel, He chose them, though not on account of
their own merit, to be His own peculiar (nnssionary)
nation and shielded them against their foes {ib. vii.
6-8, xxiii. 6). He therefore demands their love in
return {ib. vi. 5; x. 12; xi. 1, 13, 22; xiii. 4; xix. 9:
XXX. 6, 16, 20). He loves also the stranger, and
demands love fen- the stranger in return {ib. x. 18-
19). The love of God for Israel is declared by
Jeremiah to be "an everlasting love" (Jer. xxxi. 3),
and both the exilic seer and the last of the prophets
accentuate this love of God (Isa. Ixiii. 9 ; Mai. i. 2).

The love of God for mankind in general is not ex-
pressed in Scripture by the term "love," but by
"mercy" (Ps. cxlv. 9); it is, however, extended to
all who observe His commandments (Ex. xx. 6;
Deut. vii. 9), who follow righteousness and speak
"right" (Prov. xv. 9, xvi. 13; Ps. cxlvi. 8), because
He loves righteousness and justice (Isa. Ixi. 8; Ps.
xi. 7, xcix. 4). Nor is the love of God for Israel
favoritism. "Whom the Lord loveth He chasten-
eth" (A. V. " correcteth " ; Prov. iii. 12). Love be-
ing the essence of God's holy nature, the law of hu-
man life culminates in the commandment "Thou
Shalt love thy neighbor as thyself" (Lev. xix. 18).
This love includes the enemy (Ex. xxiii. 4-5). The
words "Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thy
heart: thou shalt not bear sin against [A. V. "suffer
sin upon him "] him . . . nor bear any grudge
against the children of thy people" (Hebr.) show
in what manner the enemy can be loved — one must
remove the cause of hatred in order to be able to
love his neighbor (Lev. xix. 17). This includes the
stranger (Lev. xix. 34); the criminal also is called
"thy brother" (Deut. xxv. 3; see Brotherly

In Apocryphal and Rabbinical Litera-
ture : Love as a divine principle was especially
developed among the Hasidim, who made love of
God and love of man the guiding principles of their
lives (Philo, "Quod Omnis Probus Liber," § 12; see
EssENEs). To them God appeared as " the spirit of

Justice the

love for all men " (Wisdom i. 6). "Thou lovest all
things that are. . . . xS'ever wouldst Thou have
made anything if Thou hadst hated it. . . . Thou
sparest all, for they are Thine, O Lord, Thou Lover
of .souls" {ib. xi. 24-26). Philo also (" De Opiticiis
Mundi," i. 4; comp. Midler, "Buch von der Welt-
schopfung," 1841, p. 150) finds love, or goodness, to
be the principle and motive power of the divine
creation. So God says to Ezra, as he complains
about the ills of the world, "Thou canst not love
My creation more than I do " (IV Esdras viii. 45).
Love for God and man is accordingly declared to be
the principle of conduct in the Didaciik and in the
Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (Simeon, 3, 4;
Issachar, 5; Zebulun, 8; Dan, 5; Gad, 7; Benjamin,
8). Love of all creatures is taught Ijy Hillel (Abot i.
12 ; Wisdom xii. 19 ; Philo, " De Humanitate." §§ 12-
14; comp. Brotherly Love and Golden Hule).

The Rabbis also declare that the world was cre-
ated by the divine principle of love (Gen. R. xii.
15) and that the human world is founded on mercy
(Ab. R. N. iv.). "Beloved is man by
God, in whose likeness he is made; es-
pecial love was shown him in being
made aware of this godlikeness of
his" (Ab. iii. 14). Still, a deeper con-
ception of the Rabbis made justice the
fundamental principle of life, and not mere love.
" When God saw that the world could not stand on
rigid justice, then only He tempered it with love"
(Gen. R. I.e.). Love pardons but fails to eradicate
sin in individuals or society at large. Upon justice,
truth, and peace the world is founded (Ab. i. 15 ;
Deut. R. V. 1). Love is not strong and firm enough
to form the foundation of life, whether in individ-
uals, who must strive for character, or in society at
large, which can not afford to tolerate wrong-doing
(see Holiness; Judgment, Divine). Love pre-
vails only where God is recognized as Father, and
this tender relation works for pity and forgiveness
(Ber. 7a). All depends then upon whether that state
has been attained in which the will of God is done
from mere love.

Whether the heathen as well as Jews may attain
this state of true God-childship is a question at is-
sue between the Hellenistic and a few of the more
liberal Palestinian rabbis on the one hand and the
greater majority of the rabbis on the other. The
former insist that Job and Enoch attained this state
as well as Abraham ; the latter deny it, asserting that
fear and not love of God was the motive power of
the ancient heathen (comp. Testament
of Job, i. 24 [in Kohut Memorial
Volume, p. 171], Enoch, Ixxi. 14, and


Hellenistic Slavonic Enoch, Ixiv. 5, with Sotah
View. v. 5 and Gen. R. xxv.). Christianity
was partly influenced by the broader
Hellenistic views in stating that " God is love " and
that all men are children of God (I John iii. 1 ; iv. 7-8,
11-20; V. 3). Still, the prevailing view in the New
Testament is that of Paul, according to whom it is
the Holy Spirit which, through baptism, works love
and renders the believers "sons of God," for whom
there would otherwise be only salvaticm by right-
eousness (Rom. viii. 14-31; comp. i. 17). In other
words, only through belief in the especial God-son-




ship of the crucified Christ does the Christian dh-
tain the title of God's sou and tiic right to claim His
fatherlv love. This view is maintained also in Jolni
V. 20-34, X. 17, XV. 9. xvii. 26.

This conception of a divine love bought by sacri-
ficial blood was couibatted by the rabbis; K. Akiba,
for instance, declares: "Beloved are the Israelites
inasmuch as they are called children of God";
especially did that love manifest itself in making
known to them that they are children of God (Abot
iii. 1"), with i-eference to Deut. xiv. 1). The entire
relation between Israel and God is found by K.
Akiba to be typified in the Song of Songs, which
to him is "the holiest of all books," because it
allegorizes the divine love (Yad. iii. 5; Cant. R.,
Introduction). Whether Israel may claim God's love
as His children when disregarding His command-
ments is a matter of dispute between R. Mei'r (who
affirms) and R. Judah (who denies; Sifre, Deut. 96).
The love of God means the surrounding of life
with His commandments (Men. 43b) and is condi-
tioned by the love of the Torah (R.
God's Love H. 4a) ; God loves Israel in a higher
for Israel, degree than He does the Gentiles (Sifre,
Deut. 144; Yoraa 54a) because through
the Torah they stand closer to Him (Pesik. ii. 16-17) ;
they love Him, giving their very lives for the ob-
servance of His commandments (Mek., Yitro, 6, to
Ex. XX. 6). Indeed, love of God is voluntary sur-
render of life and all one has for God's honor (Sifre,
Deut. 32 ; Ber. 54a). It is unselfish service of God
(Abot i. 3 ; ' Ab Zarah 19a). There are chastisements
of love for the righteous to test their piety (Ber. 5a;
comp. Rom. v. 3). It is this unequaled love, bra-
ving suffering and martyrdom, which established
the unique relation between God and Israel, so that
"none of the nations can quench this love " (Cant.
R. viii. 7). This unique love is echoed also in the
liturgy (see Ah ABAii Rabbah). To be a true "lover
of God," however, means "to receive offense, and
resent not; to hear words of contumely, and answer
not; to act merely from love, and rejoice even in
trials as tests of pure love" (Shab. 88b; Sotah 31a;
comp. Rom. viii. 28).

Love as the highest aim of life is especially em-
phasized in Tanna debe Eliyahu R. xxvi. : "Love
should be perfectly unselfish, and regulate the con-
duct of man toward man." In the same sense it is
accentuated as the highest incentive of action by
Bahya ibn Pakuda, in " Hobot ha-Lebabot " (see
Jew. Encyc. ii. 454). Maimonides, in liis Yad ha-
Hazakah, devotes the whole tenth chapter of Ilil-
kot Teshubah, with reference to Abot
The High- i. 3, to love as the motive which gives
est Aim all human action its true ethical and
of Life. religious value. Similarly, Nahman-
ides in his commentary to Deut. vi.
4, with reference to Sifre, l.r., declares that love of
God involves the study and observance of the Law

Online LibraryIsidore SingerThe Jewish encyclopedia : a descriptive record of the history, religion, literature, and customs of the Jewish people from the earliest times to the present day (Volume 8) → online text (page 47 of 169)