Introduction
Ahad Haam essays were one source of spiritual national movement in Europe. From the essay titled ‘Past and Future’ he tried to explain the term ‘self’ and argued that Adam was one of the greatest philosophers of their time. He came up with the word ‘I’ that until today, no scholar has been able to proper define.
Body
Ahad stipulated that the word, ‘self’ could be defined in two aspects; on an individual and a nation basis. Both criteria were based on the combination of the past and future. On the individual basis, he wrote that man believes that he poses a force that unites all the memories and impressions of the past with all his hopes and desires for the future. His spiritual entity grew together with his physical form. This growth was related inversely, in the sense that, when one criterion was old the other was young (Golomb 113).
Ahad noted that, when a man was young, his speech was comprised of proverbs but when he was old, he became a pessimist. This situation arose because: the young individual was poor in memories but rich in desires and hope. When he attained middle age, equilibrium was established in that he had a past to look into and future to look forward to it. When the individual was of old age, pessimism was a way of seeking comfort. Ahad concluded that, not all elderly people were wise because they lacked the strength to find comfort and peace.
On a nation basis, Ahad pointed out that the Nation did grow the same way as an individual, but it never got old. It had desired for a future and demanded a life. He went on and concluded that a nation would require proper spiritual food, which would preserve and maintain it for many years. He used Israel as an example for his works. When it was at the old stage, the Babylonians captured Israel. Israelites were encouraged to be hopeful that one day they would be a free nation. This essay encouraged nations not to despair but to be hopeful.
Ahad essay titled ‘Priest and Prophet’ talked about the two forces that were assumed to influence people lives. These two forces were good and evil. Both forces tried to win an individual to their side and were constantly in conflict. Ahad noted that there was never an instance where the two forces were at peace with each other (Shoham 58).
The two forces influenced the ideas generated by individuals. It was at that point the priest and prophets were at loggerheads in their beliefs. The prophet was assumed to be a one-sided individual. They would embrace an idea which would make them desire to live a perfect life. The prophet would spend his entire life fighting for this idea and ensure that harmony existed while the idea was embraced. The prophet was assumed to be a primal force and his actions affected the harmony that existed around people. The prophets were part of the harmony created but extremists of their own ideas. They were ever angry because their ideas were not achievable.
The priests appeared, at a time when the prophecy was proclaimed, and managed to formulate an idea that would influence the society. The priest lacked the strength to fight continuously and would rather come to terms with situations that made his life comfortable. It was because of that ideology the prophets left the results of their work to be managed by the priests. The priests were to ensure that the universal dominion of absolute justice was observed.
The prophets remained true to the people of Israel as they preached the gospel of charity and justice to the entire human race. That journey was not that smooth because they met forces that hindered the progress. It was from those complications that the prophets saw it necessary to teach the priests their ideologies.
At first, the prophets were so hostile to the priests as compared to the general population. This hostility died out with the decay of prophecy. The priests were allowed to give guidance to the people and ensured independence of the prophet’s ideas to the whole world. The visible effects of the prophet’s ideas became less visible because of the foreign influences did not prevail in their own country. That meant that Israelites would not be warmly welcomed in Palestine. This essay criticized Herzl opinions publicly.
Conclusion
In his essay titled ‘Moses’, Ahad believed that influential men created history and the masses that followed them were the results of their work. In his essay, he tried to refute the fact that most scholars tried to convince Jews that Moses was a fictitious character. Ahad explained to them that, the Moses engraved in their heart would never change. He would remain their leader for the next generation to come. Other nations began to follow these teachings because it advocated for justice. Many nations believed that Ahad’s message was the key to ensure justice across the world (Goell 35).
Moses was perceived as a character that enforced justice. This essay was to enlighten the world that, even though they would not bow to the laws provided, it will come a point when the whole world would follow them. Ahad believed that the world would become just, and this would be due to the assimilation of laws.
Works Cited
Goell, Yohai. Bibliography of Modern Hebrew Literature: In English Translation. Jerusalem [u.a.: Executive of the World Zionist Organization [u.a., 1970. Print.
Golomb, Jacob. Nietzsche and Zion. Ithaca (N.Y.: Cornell university press, 2004. Print.
Shoham, Reʼuven. Poetry and Prophecy: The Image of the Poet As a Hero, a “prophet” and an Artist : Studies in Modern Hebrew Poetry. Boston: Brill, 2002. Print.