The Renascence of Hebrew Literature (1743-1885) | Page 5

imitation of the pastorals of his time, though it may be with more
genuine feeling, Luzzatto sings the praises of the shepherd's life:
"How beautiful, how sweet, is the lot of the young shepherd of flocks!
Between the folds he leads his sheep, now walking, now running hither
and thither. Poor though he is, he is full of joy. His countenance reflects
the gladness of his heart. In the shade of trees he reposes, and
apprehends no danger. Poor though he is, yet he is happy....
"The maiden who charms his eyes, and attracts his desire, in whom his
heart has pleasure, returns his affection with responsive gladness. They
know naught but delight--neither separation nor obstacle affrights them.
They sport together, they enjoy their happiness, with none to disturb.
When weariness steals over him, he forgets his toil on her bosom; the
light of her countenance swiftly banishes all thought of his travail. Poor
though he is, yet he is happy!" (Act III, scene I.)
Alas, this call to a more natural life, after centuries of physical
degeneration and suppression of all feeling for nature, could not be
understood, nor even taken seriously, in surroundings in which air,
sunlight, the very right to live, had been refused or measured out
penuriously. The drama remained in manuscript, and did not become
known to the public at large.
It was Luzzatto's chief work that exercised decisive influence on the
development of Hebrew literature. _La-Yesharim Tehillah_ ("Glory to
the Righteous"), another allegorical drama, which appeared in 1743, is
considered a model of its kind until this day. It introduced a new epoch,
the modern epoch, in the history of Hebrew literature. The master

stands revealed by every touch. Everything betrays his skill--the style,
at once elegant, significant, and precise, recalling the pure style of the
Bible, the fresh and glowing figures of speech, the original poetic
inspiration, and the thought, which bears the imprint of a profound
philosophy and a high moral sense, and is free from all trace of
mystical exaggeration.
From the point of view of dramatic art, the piece is not of the highest
interest. The subject, purely moral and didactic, gives no opportunity
for a serious study of character, and, as in all allegorical pieces, the
dramatic action is weak.
The theme was not new. Even in Hebrew and before Luzzatto, it had
been treated several times. It is the struggle between Justice and
Injustice, between Truth and Falsehood. The allegorical personages
who take part in the action are, arrayed on one side, Yosher
(Righteousness) aided by Sekel (Reason) and Mishpat (Justice), and, on
the other side, Sheker (Falsehood) and her auxiliaries, Tarmit (Deceit),
Dimyon (Imagination), and Taäwah (Passion). The two hostile camps
strive together for the favor of the beautiful maiden Tehillah (Glory),
the daughter of Hamon (the Crowd). The struggle is unequal.
Imagination and Passion carry the day in the face of Truth and
Righteousness. Then the inevitable _deus ex machina_, in this case
God Himself, intervenes, and Justice is again enthroned.
This simple and not strikingly original frame encloses beautiful
descriptions of nature and, above all, sublime thoughts, which make the
piece one of the gems of Hebrew poetry. The predominant idea of the
book is to glorify God and admire the "innumerable wonders of the
Creator."
"All who seek will find them, in every living being, in every plant, in
every lifeless object, in all things on earth and in the sea, in whatsoever
the human eye rests upon. Happy he who hath found knowledge and
wisdom, happy he if their speech hath fallen upon an attentive ear!"
(Act II, scene I.)
But the Creator is not capricious. Reason and Truth are His attributes,

and they appear in all His acts. Humanity is a mob, and two opposing
forces contend for the mastery over it: Truth with Righteousness on one
side, Falsehood and her ilk on the other. Each of these two forces seeks
to rule the crowd and prevail in triumph.
The Reason personified by the poet has nothing in common with the
positive Reason of the rationalists, which takes the world to be directed
by mechanical and immutable laws. It is supreme Reason, obeying
moral laws too sublimated for our powers of appreciation. How could it
be otherwise? Are we not the continual plaything of our senses, which
are incapable of grasping absolute truths, and deceive us even about the
appearance of things?
"Truly, our eyes are deluded, for eyes of flesh they are. Therefore they
change truth into falsehood, darkness they make light, and light
darkness. Lo, a small chance, a mere accident, suffices to distort our
view of tangible things; how much more do we stray from the truth
with things beyond the reach of our senses? See the oars in the water.