Isaac Samuel Reggio - His Philosophy

His Philosophy

Reggio's most important works are Ha-Torah weha-Pilusufiah, Mafteaḥ el Megillat Ester, and Beḥinat ha-Ḳabbalah. The first, a religious-philosophical essay in four sections ("ma'amarim"), was written as an answer to the rabbis of the old school who protested against the establishment of the rabbinical college at Padua. It should be explained that Reggio applies the term "philosophy" to all studies outside the Talmud and rabbinics. Reggio not only endeavors to reconcile the Jewish religion with modern science, but attempts to prove that they are indispensable to each other. One chapter, entitled "Ha-'Olam weha-Adam," was republished by Martinet in his Tif'eret Yisrael (Bamberg, 1837). Another chapter, in which was discussed whether the Torah is in opposition to the Kabala, was stricken out by the censor. Later this chapter was plagiarized by S. M. Rosenthal, who published it in Fürst's edition of Leon of Modena's Ari Nohem (pp. 92-97, Leipsic, 1840).

The Mafteaḥ el Megillat Ester is an introduction to the Book of Esther, and deserves special notice in consideration of its originality. Having concluded that the Persian king in that book was Darius Hystaspes, Reggio shows that the main object of the writer was to prove that Darius was the first to establish the post. Analyzing the text carefully, Reggio maintains that Mordecai was by no means such a great man as the Rabbis declare him to have been, but that, on the contrary, he was an ordinary Jew; for he not only gave no religious education to his adopted daughter Esther, but he even commanded her to deny her race and religion. His refusal to bow before Haman was unnecessary, as such an act would not have violated any Jewish religious law. Even when he was informed of the imminence of the danger to his co-religionists consequent upon his senseless refusal, he did not resort to prayer and fasting; it was Esther who did that. His inhumanity is evidenced by his command to slaughter women and children (Esth. viii. 11). Afterward, when Mordecai attained great power, he did nothing to better the lot of his brethren in Jerusalem (comp. Neh. ix. 36-37). This view of Reggio's provoked a protest from Isaac Bär Lewinsohn (Bikkure Ribal, p. 115, Warsaw, 1889), and was violently criticized by Mendelson (Orient, Lit. viii. 314 et seq.).

The Beḥinat ha-Ḳabbalah is an edition of Leon of Modena's two pamphlets Ḳol Sakal and Sha'agat Aryeh; these Reggio provided with a preface, and with one hundred critical notes forming the second part of the work. In the preface Reggio outlined Leon of Modena's biography. The notes are independent treatises reviewing Modena's works chapter by chapter, now supplementing, now refuting his views. Reggio's main point is that most of the Talmudic ordinances were not intended for perpetual observance; they were practiced only by the rigorous Pharisees. It was not until much later, he declares, that the casuists ("poseḳim") established such ordinances as a part of the Law. Consequently, Modena was, in many cases wrong in attacking the Talmudists. Reggio's theory has been refuted by Simon Stern in the preface to his German translation of Modena's works published under the title Der Kampf des Rabbiners Gegen den Talmud im XVII. Jahrhundert.