21. Vayyikra R. 27.
22. Ber. R. 16, 21, and often.
23. Ber. R. 5, 12, 10; comp. also Midr. on Eccl. vii. 13; and viii. 1, and Baba B. 17 a.
24. Ber. R. 9.
25. Bemidb. R. 19.
26. According to Deut. xxxiii. 2; Hab. iii. 3.
27. Ab. Zar. 2 b.
28. Ab. Z. 5 a.
29. By a most ingenious theological artifice the sin of the golden calf, and that of David
are made matter for thanksgiving; the one as showing that, even if the whole people
sinned, God was willing to forgive; the other as proving, that God graciously
condescended to each individual sinner, and that to each the door of repentance was open.
30. In the Talmud (Shabb. 55 a and b) each view is supported in discussion, the one by a
reference to Ezek. xviii. 20, the other to Eccles. ix. 2 (comp. also Sip hré on Deut. xxxii.
49). The final conclusion, however, greatly inclines towards the connection between
death and the fall (see especially the clear statement in Debar. R. 9, ed. Warsh., p. 20 a).
This view is also supported by such passages in the Apocrypha as Wisdom ii. 23, 24; iii.
1, &c.; while, on the other hand, Ecclus. xv. 11-17 seems rather to point in a different
direction.
When, however, we pass from the physical to the moral sequences of the fall, our Jewish
authorities wholly fail us. They teac h, that man is created with two inclinations - that to
evil (the Yetser ha-ra ), and that to good;31 the first working in him from the beginning,
the latter coming gradually in the course of time.32 Yet, so far from guilt attaching to the
Yetser ha-ra, its existence is absolutely necessary, if the world is to continue.33 In fact, as
the Talmud expressly teaches,34 the evil desire or impulse was created by God Himself;
while it is also asserted35 that, on seeing the consequences, God actually repented having
done so. This gives quite another character to sin, as due to causes for which no blame
attaches to man.36 On the other hand, as it is in the power of each wholly to overcome sin,
and to gain life by study and works;37 as Israel at Mount Sinai had actually got rid of the
Yetser ha-ra; and as there had been those, who were entirely righteous 38 - there scarcely
remains any moral sequence of Adam's fall to be considered. Similarly, the Apocrypha
are silent on the subject, the only exception being the very stro ng language used in II.
Esdras, which dates after the Christian era.39 40
31. Targum Ps.-Jon. on Gen. ii. 7.
32. Nedar. 32 b; Midr. on Eccl. iv. 13, 14, ed. W. p. 89 a; ix. 15; ib. p. 101 a.
33. Ber. R. 9.
34. Ber. 61 a.
35. Sukk. 52 a, and Yalkut ii. p. 149 b.
36. Comp. also Jer. Targum on Ex. xxxii. 22.
37. Ab. Z. 5 b; Kidd. 30 b.
38. For example, Yoma 28 b; Chag. 4 b.
39. Comp. IV. Esd. iii. 21, 22, 26; iv. 30; and especially vii. 46-53.
40. There can be no question that, despite its strong polemical tendency against
Christianity, the Fourth Book of Esdras (II. Esdras in our Apocrypha), written at the close