[To THE EDITOR OP THE "SPECTATOR. "] Sin,—It is hard to
understand why Mr. Montefiore (Spectator, March 18th) should affect so virtuous an indignation towards the writer of the interesting article entitled "A Dual People" that appeared in your issue of the 11th inst. In common with other Jews, I read the article in question with consider- able interest, and was much struck by its fair and sympathetic tone. It is seldom, unfortunately, that non-Jews are able to write so sympathetically and with such conspicuous fairness about a race which must always present so many puzzling problems to the psychologist and ethnologist. Mr. Moatefiore insists that an accurate conception of Judaism and the Jewish character cannot be gleaned from a study of the Book of Proverbs alone. No one has yet asserted the contrary, least of all your contributor. The book does undoubtedly throw a flood of light on the character, philosophy, and religious aspirations of the Jew of Biblical times. It would, of course, be unfair to quote it as a reliable guide to the character of the modern Jew or to modern aspects of Judaism. To do so would be to leave out of account the many influences which have been at work moulding and trans- forming that character, and in a. lesser degree that religion, for over two thousand years. The influences of many centuries of persecution and oppression, of the cramped, unnatural life of the Ghetto, of the contact with new peoples, new creeds, and new civilisations,—all these have left their marks in greater or less degree. But the asionhillieg thing is that, so far as the Jewish character is concerned, these marks are relatively so slight that much of the Jew of Proverbs is still recognisable in his twentieth-century descendant. Mr. - Montefiore thinks otherwise, and would apparently assign a far greater measure of influence to the teachings of the Rabbis. But it is one thing to pick out fine and ennobling thoughts from these teachings, and quite another matter to prove that these thoughts have sunk in and produced any permanent effect on the mass of the people. It is true that the same criticism may be levelled at other religions. To what extent, for example, it may be asked, does the teaching of the Sermon on the Mount. inform and control the daily life and conduct of the average Christian P To what extent is it a living force, supplying the mainspring of his every action, his every thought P In. many cases it has had about as much effect on the formation of his character as the Book of Isaiah on the conduct and dealings of a Jewish
usurer.—I am, Sir, &c., ERNEST LESSER.
Previous page
