Letters to Shimon Dubnow

I received your letter, and thank you for everything you told me about. . . .

I have already heard about the classes you are giving on Genesis, and I have also heard that female Christian students are attending your lessons with far more enthusiasm than the Jewish women. Is that so? And, if it is so, does it not imply—I can’t say: “evidence for the matter,” but at least, “a hint of the matter,” that the atmosphere outside of the Land of Israel is not capable of giving rise in our nation to the desire for independent national development, and the matter does not depend upon autonomy? If lack of will is the main impediment, then the party most capable of inner autonomy (as you say)—let us say, for example, in the United States—is not capable of removing this internal impediment, rooted in the exile itself, and our being few among the many, who influence us with their spirit against our benefit. But this “old disagreement,” apparently, will not be ended, until life decides between us. And may it be that both of us live to see this ruling with our own eyes, however it goes. [ . . . ]

The things you told me about the Encyclopedia¹ were entirely new to me. Indeed, earlier it had seemed very strange to me, that the editorial committee included men very distant from one another in their views of Judaism, and when I was asked a few weeks ago from a certain city, what is the nature and spirit of this Encyclopedia, and whether “kosher” [appropriate] nationalist Jews were permitted to support this project, I answered that, although I was not privy to the details, judging by the composition of the committee, there was no “spirit” to it at all, and those who are involved in it simply want “to show the nations and the ministers the beauty” of Judaism. Still, I never would have imagined that there could be so much poverty of thought among the heads of this project. Two or three weeks ago I received a letter signed by D. Gintsburg and [Yuli] Gessen, from which it appears to me (contrary to your words), that the spiritual foundation is already rather strong, and the main thing is: the necessary money. Apparently, they do not yet feel the lack on the spiritual side.

As for your proposal, that I should take on the editing of a section [of the Encyclopedia], I reply: Please, my friend, “do not mock the poor.” . . . Though I will not deny, that even if there had not been these obstacles, I could not have overcome one ethical obstacle, which shows some “selfishness,” though it is stronger than me. This obstacle is the feeling of envy in my heart, because the Russian Encyclopedia has found saviors, and the Hebrew one that I had hoped and worked for, has remained simply a dream. Please do not laugh at me if I tell you, that were I to participate in this work on a permanent basis as an editor, I would feel a kind of “subduing the queen in my own home.”² [ . . . ]

After I wrote to you last week I received your letter from the fifth of this month [May 17], and meanwhile I also managed to read here and there in your book,³ especially the end of the seventh chapter, and I will not deny that I am very amazed by all of your arguments against me, which imply that you are attributing a strange opinion to me: that we should not try to improve the situation of our national life in exile! Where and when did I say that? If that were my opinion, you and I would not be found together at the head of those fighting for national education against the Society for the Promotion of Culture Among the Jews of Russia [OPE]. The essence of the difference of opinion between us is about the boundary of the possible. In my opinion, this possibility is very limited, and cannot in any way sustain our needs, to the degree that we can say: Behold, we are living our national life to its full extent, and our spirit finds a broad field for its development and fulfillment in original creations according to its power. And since we cannot reach that level in the exile, the question of our nation remains as it was, and all our work in the exile has no purpose or goal unless we try with it to attain a truly free national center in the land of our forefathers. And then will the work in the exile be directed to its goal: to preserve our scattered national powers and to unite them around the center.

But it is difficult for me to write at length in this letter. Most likely I will write a special article about your book, especially about the differences of opinion between us.