Exegesis and Politics Between East and West: Nachman Krochmal, Moses Mendelssohn, and Modern Jewish Thought

Recent scholarship on modern Jewish thought has sought to overcome the field’s Germanocentrism by recovering diverse visions of Jewish life across eastern and western Europe. While studies typically emphasize either striking differences or surprising affinities between these settings, I use the neglected eastern European philosopher Nachman Krochmal to highlight a strategy of creative appropriation and redirection—an eastern European strategy of breaking with German-Jewish philosophy precisely by deploying that tradition’s own resources. One of modern Jewish philosophy’s early episodes, I argue, is a politically charged engagement with biblical exegesis involving Krochmal and the German-Jewish thinker Moses Mendelssohn. Implicitly drawing on yet revising the treatment of biblical interpretation in Mendelssohn’s Hebrew writings, Krochmal seeks to retrieve what he sees as a vital element of Jewish politics: possessing neither a shared land nor military strength, he insists, Jews have long sustained their diasporic collective through hermeneutical endeavors such as rabbinic midrash, and they should continue to do so by launching a transnational project of historically sensitive exegesis. The resulting image of a transnational Jewish collective whose fate is separate from that of non-Jewish polities breaks with Mendelssohn’s political vision, pointing to an east-west dynamic of creative repurposing—an instance of an eastern European thinker drawing on a German-Jewish predecessor to develop a sharply contrasting philosophical vision.

Diaspora in Modern Jewish Thought

This chapter explores the broad contours of concepts of diaspora in modern Jewish thought. Philosophers, intellectuals, religious thinkers, and non-Zionist nationalists who disagreed on the ideal political structure for Jewish collective life (including Moses Mendelssohn, Hermann Cohen, Franz Rosenzweig, Simon Dubnow, Hannah Arendt, Mordecai Kaplan, and Horace Kallen) shared a commitment to diaspora as a value, rather than just a fact, of modern Jewish life. Yet the emergence of the terminology of diaspora in tandem with the rise of nationalism and Zionism shaped the theoretical evolution of diaspora as the binary opposite to homeland and statist visions of Jewish identity. As a result, seminal Zionist theorists deeply critical of diaspora life, such as Theodor Herzl, Achad Ha’am, and David Ben-Gurion, also had a key role in framing the significance of diaspora. Modern theories of diaspora internalized and contested the privileged position of territory and sovereignty demanded by the rise of nationalism in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.

Bible translation and the centrality of the synagogue

This chapter analyzes Zunz’s Bible translation, situating it within the context of Zunz’s critique of the traditional Ashkenazic system of Jewish education that he experienced personally. Zunz’s assessment of Moses Mendelssohn and his vision for Jewish education that steers a middle path between the “sham Enlightenment“ of Jewish youth and the “blind faith” of older Jewish traditionalists are presented. The role of gender in Jewish education and the centrality of the synagogue in Zunz’s Bible translation project are explored. Zunz’s Bible translation is set in relation to that of his teacher, the Bible critic Wilhelm De Wette as a way of comparing liberal German Protestantism and liberal German Judaism in the second quarter of the nineteenth century. It is shown how Zunz uses Protestantism and Catholicism as exemplary categories aligning his vision of Judaism with Protestantism while rejecting forms of Judaism that he deems “Catholic.”

The Jewish Reformation

Beginning in the late eighteenth century, Jews entered the German middle class with remarkable speed. This process has often been identified with Jews’ increasing alienation from religion and Jewish nationhood. In fact, this period was one of intense engagement with Jewish texts and traditions. An expression of this was the remarkable turn to Bible translation. In the century and a half between Moses Mendelssohn’s pioneering translation and the final one by Martin Buber and Franz Rosenzweig, German Jews produced fifteen different translations of at least the Pentateuch. Buber and Rosenzweig famously critiqued bourgeois German Judaism as a craven attempt to establish social respectability to facilitate Jews’ entry into the middle class through a vapid, domesticated account of Judaism. Exploring Bible translations by Moses Mendelssohn, Leopold Zunz, and Samson Raphael Hirsch, the author argues that each sought to ground a “reformation” of Judaism along bourgeois lines, which involved aligning Judaism with a Protestant concept of religion. They did so because they saw in bourgeois values the best means to serve God and the authentic actualization of Jewish tradition. Through their learned, creative Bible translations, Mendelssohn, Zunz, and Hirsch presented distinct visions of middle-class Judaism that affirmed Jewish nationhood while lighting the path to a purposeful, emotionally rich, spiritual life grounded in ethical responsibility.

The Third Paralogism

This chapter analyses the third paralogism of ‘personality’ (or, equivalently, of ‘personhood’), situating the paralogistic argument in its Wolffian context. The chapter contends that Kant treats personality as an epistemic state. It offers accounts of Kant’s envisaged ‘practical use’ of the concept of a person and of his conception of what immortality would have to consist in if there were to be such a state. It scrutinizes in detail Kant’s criticisms of the separate arguments of Moses Mendelssohn and of David Fordyce for the immortality of the soul. Finally, it examines Kant’s sympathetic adaptation of Fordyce’s argument to his own, rather less ambitious, purposes—namely, the justification, or, more accurately, production and stabilization, of a ‘doctrinal belief’ in an afterlife. It offers an evaluation of the argument when it is so construed.