THE SOUL
I
SRAELITIC psychology seems near and familiar to us, because such a great number of its forms of manifestation are part of our own mental capacity. We use biblical definitions, such as spirit and heart, when expressing states of mind, but it is not to be taken for granted that the words mean the same to us as to them. The words express a life determined by the totality- conception, but the Israelitic view of life is determined by other factors than ours. If we want to understand the mind of the Israelite, we must first of all examine what the psychic terms mean in their own context.The Israelitic conception of man is made clear to us through the myth of creation; even though the latter is adopted from other nations, it still preserves the stamp of the Israelitic manner of thinking. Like the Egyptian God Chnum, Yahweh, as a potter, moulded man of clay or earth, and into the moulded image he breathed his breath, in which manner man became a living soul.
It is not the object of the narrator to analyse the elements of man, but to represent his essential character. The basis of its essence was the fragile corporeal substance, but by the breath of God it was transformed and became a nephesh, a soul. It is not said that man was supplied with a nephesh, and so the relation between body and soul is quite different from what it is to us.
Such as he is, man, in his total essence, is a soul.
In the Old Testament we are constantly confronted with the fact that man, as such, is a soul. Abraham started for Canaan with his property and all the souls he had gotten (Gen. 12,5),
and when Abraham had taken booty on his warlike expedition against the great kings, the King of Sodom exhorted him to yield the souls and himself keep the goods (Gen. 14,21). Seventy souls
100 THE SOUL
of the house of Jacob came into Egypt (Gen. 46,27; Exod. 1,5).
Whenever a census is taken, the question always is: How many souls are there? In these and in numerous other places we may substitute persons for souls.
But if we read the priestly account of the creation, we learn that it is not only man who is a soul, but also the animals. The animal world in its various genera consists of mere souls. It is a swarm of living souls who fill the earth. 1.
That which the Israelite understands by soul is, first and fore- most. a totality with a neculiar stamp. It.is the different features or character whrch compose the essence of the souls and make the world a motley swarm of souls. A righteous man regardeth the soul of his cattle, says the proverb (Pr. 12,lO). The Israelites are told: Ye know the soul of a gZr; ye were gZrim in the land of Egypt (Exod. 23,9). He who lives among strange masters is a soul stamped by the special conditions under which he lives; the word expresses his whole manner and being, his pursuit of security, his fear of arbitrariness and the pain he feels under oppression.
Sensation forms the basis of the making of mental images, but all senses act together in one and constitute an immediate perception. The most important are, of course, the sensations of vision and hearing. It is characteristic that the word which means to see, rd’&, not only means the impression received through the eye, but it also applies to the hearing, to the touch and, upon the whole, to the reception of any mental impression: one “sees” heat, misery, hunger, life and death. 2 It shows how little interest the
Israelite takes in distinguishing the various kinds of sensation.
The sense of touch gives strong, but less definite impressions of the soul. Isaac tried to identify Jacob by touching him, but still he was mistaken. The Hebrew says that he feels the darkness
(Exod. 10,21), for in the darkness the sense of touch must take the place of the sense of vision. Taste is more narrowly circum- scribed, but also this sense may be identified with an ordinary mental sensation; the pious man tastes that Yahweh is good (Ps.
34,9), the housewife tastes that her merchandise is good (Pr. 31,lS).
Taste designates shrewdness, presumably because it is a particularly critical sense. A sense which is greatly weakened with us, i. e. the
SENSATION AND THE IDEA OF THE SOUL 101 sense of smelling, plays a great part among primitive peoples, and so also among the Israelites. Isaac smelt the clothes of his son, and the sense of smelling inspires one of his sayings: See, the smell of my son is as the smell of a field which Yahweh has blessed (Gen. 27,27). Men have known each other’s smell, and the smell entered into the consciousness of friends of each other. We know this, because when people become abhorrent to each other, then it is said that they have become stinking to each other. l
All sensations act together in the making of the mental image.
To the soul of a man pertain his appearance, his voice, the more or less hairy quality of his skin, his smell. To this must be added his manner of acting, all that he has done, all that belongs to him, which elements together constitute his soul. Among all the impressions received of him continuity obtains, the one im- mediately calling forth all the others, and of course, first and foremost, those which stamp the essence of his being with its special characteristics.
Therefore, the soul is at the same time something visible and invisible. Instinctively one senses only individual parts of the man one meets. One perceives a figure with a certain expression, cer- tain movements, a certain manner of speech, etc. This momentary impression only becomes the idea of a soul when the whole of its background is imagined, so that it finds its place in a whole. Thus we get the idea of the man in question, and this is what primitive peoples call soul. It is always present in the man, lies behind all that he does, manifests itself therein. If that is known, then all the individual impressions of the man in question will imme- diately call forth the totality. If, e. g., one hears his voice, then, if one knows it, one knows he is the son of so and so, and has such and such habits, etc. The sound of the voice produces the totality.
It is this totality which primitive peoples are always looking for.
If they meet a man whom they do not know, they ask who he is, in order to know to what totality they must refer the impression which they receive of him. If he answers: I am Saul, the son of Kish, then they have the totality image. They know Kish, the rich peasant; they are aware of his importance in Benjamin; they are familiar with the history of his kindred, and thus the essential
102 THE SOUL THE SOUL AS TOTALITY AND 1VILL 103 character of Saul is defined; they know his soul. The ideas of the
soul are thus the outcome of a pronounced sense of reality. Primi- tive peoples will not be content with the single, isolated impression, but demand to have it in its proper context.
The word generally rendered by soul is in Hebrew called nephesh, which word in various forms is found in all Semitic languages, and which presumably is the old Semitic designation of the soul. The Israelites had other words denoting the soul; the ones most frequently in use being ri@h, spirit, and l&h, heart.
The three expressions are not identical, but the likeness is greater than the difference. The two latter also designate the soul as the distinctive essence.
Caleb was to enter Canaan, because his spirit was different from that of the other men who were sent to spy out the land (Num.
14,24). It means that he was of quite a different essence. There are people in whom there is a spirit of whoredom (Hos. 5,4), a spirit of deep sleep (Is. 29,10), a spirit of uncleanness (Zech.
13,2) ; others in whom there is a spirit of grace (Zech. 12,lO) ; it defines their stamp and character. “The spirit of the terrible ones is as a cold rain” ( Is. 25,4). 1
The heart also designates the whole of the essence and the character. Concerning Samson we know that he was quite differ- ent from other people; he bursts seven ropes as a thread, and if he is locked in a city, he runs away with its gates. What is the secret of this enormous strength? The cunning woman succeeded in coaxing it out of him: He told her all his heart and said unto her: There has not come a razor upon mine head, for I have been a Nazarite of God from my mother’s womb; if I be shaven, then my strength will go from me; and I shall become weak and be like any other man. And Delilah saw that he had told her all his heart . . . (Judg. 16,17-l 8). The words of Samson imply more than that he told her things which “lay near to his heart”.
Samson’s heart is the whole of his peculiar stamp and essence, his strength and the conditions thereof - in short, his being a Nazarite. When Saul had been anointed king, God gave him another heart (1 Sam. 10,9). It means that the whole of his
essence changed; he was no more a common soul, but a royal soul.
The soul is thus an entirety with a definite stamp, and this stamp is transmuted into a definite will. The Israelite has no independent term for will as we understand the word. He does not recognize the -will as an independent feature or force of the soul. The soul is a totality; its sensations penetrate it entirely and determine its direction; the will is the whole of the tendency of the soul. We perceive that when considering the Hebrew expres- sions of volitional processes.
Abraham says: If it be with your soul to bury my dead from me.. . (Gen. 23,8). Yahweh wants a priest who “shall do accord- ing to that which is in my heart and in my soul” (1 Sam. 2,35).
We may even find passages such as: If it be your soul, I then let none go forth nor escape out of the city (2 Kings 9,15). In these places we can only render nephesh by volition, but this does not express what is implied by the Hebrew term: that the will is not something apart, but the tendency of the totality of the soul.
The soul can never exist without volition, because its special character directs it along a certain course. Where special emphasis is put on the tendency of the soul, the word heart is often used. When Jonathan wanted to go over to the garrison of the Philistines, and consulted his armour-bearer, the latter gave him the following reply: Do all that is in thine heart: go thither;
behold I am with thee according to thy heart (1 Sam. 14,7). ?
When Pharaoh had been influenced by the plagues of Egypt, his heart was directed towards letting the Israelites leave the country, but when they had gone, “the heart of Pharaoh and his servants was turned against the people” (Exod. 14,5). It means that their will was turned in another direction. The direction of the heart determines the act. The discontented spies spoke discouragingly of Canaan and kept the hearts of the children of Israel from entering it (Num. 329). Jeroboam fears that the hearts of his subjects shall return to the royal house of David, if they go up to Jerusalem in order to do sacrifice (1 Kings 12,27). If their hearts have turned from Yahweh, then the prophet begs of him to “turn their
_ 104 THE SOUL
heart back again” ( 1 Kings 18,37). The strong soul may turn the direction of the weak soul. If God “touches” a heart, then it is he who determines its will (1 Sam. 10,26).
Behind such expressions we are apt to trace a mood. It is true that feelings are involved, but they are not characterized with the passivity which we instinctively attribute to the emotions of the heart. With the Israelites the heart is the soul, being the organ which at the same time feels and acts. Therefore the skill of him who wants to do great acts consists in bending the hearts towards himself. It was this which David realized, and which Absalom for a time succeeded in doing. When Abimelech wanted to rule the Shechemites, he succeeded in bending their hearts towards himself (Judg. 9,3). This does not imply a merely sentimental affection for him on their part, but it means that they bent their will after his, and really acted as his adherents.
The relation between nephesh, soul, and Zi%h, heart, is not that the heart is the designation of certain special functions. The heart is the totality of the soul as a character and operating power, particular stress being laid upon its capacity; nephesh is the soul in the sum of its totality, such as it appears; the heart is the soul in its inner value. One may just as well say “that which is in your soul” as “that which is in your heart”. But whereas it can be said that Jacob came to Egypt with seventy souls, it cannot be said that he came there with seventy hearts.
The heart is the soul as an operating force, and the same holds good of the spirit, r~@. But whereas the heart is at the same time the centre of the soul and the substance gathering round it and determining its strength, the spirit is more particularly the motive power of the soul. It does not mean the centre of the soul, but the strength emanating from it and, in its turn, reacting upon it. Man in his totality is a nephesh, but he has a riiab and a heart.
The heart and the spirit act upon the centre and urge it in a certain direction, towards action. “Every one whose heart stirred him up, and every one whom his spirit made willing came and brought Yahweh’s offering” (Exod. 352 1).
The prompting to action is expressed by saying that the spirit is roused. Yahweh raised up the spirit of the kings of the Medes
SOUL, HEART AND SPIRIT 105
in order to destroy Babel (Jer. 51 ,l 1). He raised up the spirit of Gyros, so that he made a proclamation throughout all his kingdom, giving permission to the Jews to return and rebuild the temple (Ezr. 1,l ; 2 Chr. 36,22), just as he raised the spirit of Joshua, Zerubbabel and the people to build the temple (Hag. 1 ,14).
It is the motive power of the soul - the energy, as we would say - which is raised and leads the soul to certain acts. If a spirit of jealousy has been raised in a man, then it drives him forth to action, and does not cease until the innocence of the wife has been proved, or reparation has been made to the husband (Num.
5,14.30). When the prophet tells Israel that a new heart will be given them, and a new spirit will be put into them (Ez. 11,19 ;
18,31; 36,26), then it means that the soul of the people will be of quite a new kind and of a new essence, which will urge it to entirely different acts. But when all is said and done, all the terms by which the soul is expressed convey the same thing, because the soul is a connected whole. It is the spirit of the man which seeks God, as well as his soul and heart (Is. 26,9).
It is not an isolated part of the man that acts, but the soul
in its totality. When Isaac asks Esau to go hunting and get him some venison “that my soul may bless thee before I die” (Gen- 27,4 cf. 19.25.31), it does not mean that he wants to utter good wishes for his son, but that he will execute a real act: with all the strength of his soul he will make the blessing for his firstborn. In the same manner it is the soul that swears (Lev. $4). It is the soul that sins, not only in thoughts and passing feelings, but in real acts (Lev. 4,2.27; Num. 15,27; Ez. 18,4.20). It is the soul that offers its sacrificial gift to Yahweh (Lev. 2,l). The soul hears the words spoken, but also touches carrion or other unclean things, and thus becomes unclean (Lev. 5,2 f. ; 22,6). The soul may perform a trespass on the holy things of Yahweh (Lev. 5,15) and commit actions which are forbidden by the commandments of Yahweh (Lev. 5,17.21). A soul which is not righteous may drink blood (Lev. 7,27; 17,12) or eat carrion (Cev. 17,15). In all of these cases nephesh is generally used as the most comprehensive denomination of the totality of the soul; but also the heart may be mentioned as the acting power. The heart of the perpetrator of
_ 106 THE SOUL
violence will work iniquity, because it violates those who are sorely tried (Is. 32,6).
The soul can not, as long as it is a soul, desist from being a con- nected whole, characterized by volition and action. Therefore the Israelitic manner of thinkirzg is of a different kind from ours.
What we call objective, that is to say inactive, theoretical thinking without further implications, does not exist in the case of the
Israelite. He naturally knows mind-images, which are only flashes, or so peripheric as to leave no deeper impress upon the soul.
And yet there is a decisive difference between what is outside and what is inside the soul. That which is received into the soul must influence the character of the whole, just as, in its turn, it takes its character from the given stamp of totality. He who writes truth and faithfulness on the table of his heart (Prov. 3,7) lets these forces enter into his soul and determine its direction.
The mental process which takes place while something makes its way into, or rises in the soul, the Hebrew, like ourselves, desig- nates as that which “rises up”. By that he is not thinking of neutral mental images rising before the soul as in a kaleidoscope.
When something rises “upon the heart”, then it immediately influences the will. It came into the hearts of the Judaeans to bring silver to the house of Yahweh (2 Kings 12,5) implying that their will drove them to do it. “And they built the high places of Tophet, which is in the valley of the son of Hinnom, to burn their sons and daughters in the fire; which I commanded them not, neither came it into my heart”, it is said in Jeremiah (7,31 cf. 195; 32,35).
The last sentence means that it has not been the will of Yahweh.
The expression is used parallel with ziikhar, to remember, call to mind, commemorate. When the soul remembers something, it does not mean that it has an objective memory image of some thing or event, but that this image is called forth in the soul and assists in determining its direction, its action. When man remem- bers God, he lets his being and his actions be determined by him.
The Psalmist says: Seek Yahweh and his strength, seek his face evermore! Remember his marvellous works that he has done; his wonders, and the judgments of his mouth (Ps. 1054 f.). To remember the works of Yahweh and to seek him, i. e. to let one’s
HEBREW THINKlNG 107
acts be determined by his will, is in reality the same. The Israelite constantly asks his God to remember him, but just as often he begs him not to remember his sins; the sins are to pass out of
Yahweh’s soul and not to influence his actions.
When Shimei asks David not to remember the curses which he uttered in his hour of humiliation (2 Sam. 19,20), then we also quite instinctively understand the meaning thereof. But the peculiarity about the Israelite is that he cannot at all imagine memory, unless at the same time an effect on the totality and its direction of will is taken for granted. Therefore zizkhar may also mean to begin an action, to proceed to do something, as when Elihu says: Proceed (zckhdr) to magnify his work, which men sing of ( J o b 36,24). \JI ew and large experiences make one forget the lesser; they are displaced from the soul and exercise no influence.
When the new heavens and the new earth are created, then the Israelites no more shall remember the former, and it shall not rise in their hearts (Is. 65,17, cf. Jer. 3,16). It means that the new order of things shall fill their soul, so that the old no more stirs any emotion in it.
That something is remembered, and that it rises up upon the heart, thus means the same thing. For such stirrings in the soul nephesh is never used, though it ought to be possible to do so, but once we also find rti=b. Ezekiel says: And that which riseth upon your spirit shall not be at all (20,32), and in another place : I know the risings of your spirits (Ez. 11,5) i. e. that which rises upon your spirit and determines its impulse to act. 1 As a rule, however, the word used is the heart.
A man lays a matter “upon his heart” when he takes it up, and lets it act upon his soul. “The righteous perisheth, and no man layeth it to heart”, it is said (Is. 57,1), in the same manner as Jeremiah complains that the whole country has perished be- cause no man laid it to his heart (12,ll). ? In both cases it is said that nothing is done by anyone, because neither the righteous nor the country plays any part in their souls. When a man lays something to his heart it is an understood thing that it must create action (Mal. 2,2).
We now and again find the expression to “speak upon some-