קאווע שטיבל

מי אני האט געשריבן:און דאס קען אפשר מסביר זיין די מימרא פון דזשאן קיטס:
‏“Truth is beauty and beauty is truth.”

מי אני האט געשריבן:און דאס קען אפשר מסביר זיין די מימרא פון דזשאן קיטס:
‏“Truth is beauty and beauty is truth.”

מי אני האט געשריבן:

מי אני האט געשריבן:און דאס קען אפשר מסביר זיין די מימרא פון דזשאן קיטס:
‏“Truth is beauty and beauty is truth.”

דער בארימטער מאטעמאטיקער דר. הערמאן ווײַל האט געהאט געזאגט בנוגע זיין ארבעט אין מאטעמאטיקס, ״מיין ארבעט האט אלס פרובירט צאמצושטעלן דאס אמת מיט דאס שיינקייט. און ווען איך האב געדארפט בוחר זיין צווישן זיי צוויי, האב איך בדרך כלל בוחר געווען אין דאס שיינקייט״.

מי אני האט געשריבן:און דאס קען אפשר מסביר זיין די מימרא פון דזשאן קיטס:
‏“Truth is beauty and beauty is truth.”

[left]It has been noted that, however creative Jews have been in such fields as religion, law, literature, science, and economics, until recent times - that is, until large numbers of Jews, and with them their artistic traditions, were assimilated into non-Jewish cultures - no Jewish art was produced, nor were there Jewish artists of any great significance. There can thus be no surprise that there has never been any body of Jewish literature on art or aesthetics. How then Jewish aesthetics - that is, a Jewish theory of art?[/left]

Or as Hermann Cohen had put it, art depicts the Messiah; that is,
art is man's anticipatory construction of the world as it ought to be, as God
wants it to be.

The amazing fact should become clear to historians ... that
judaism, which for 2,000 years remained 'imageless,' has found in our century - with the help of the meditative process of modern art - a pictorial
expression of its own, a jewish art of its own

Goodenough has propounded the thesis that paganism deeply influenced Judaism during the Hellenistic period, that the rabbis had much less control over the people than Moore had postulated, and that, in fact, there was a “popular” Judaism with a mystic bent, as indicated by the symbolism of Hellenistic Jewish art, which cannot be regarded as merely decorative and which corresponds on the artistic plane to Philo on the literary and philosophical level; Goodenough further suggests that the literature that accompanied this artistic expression was proscribed by the rabbis at the time (ca 500) when the Talmud was completed. That this art, indeed, reflects a Hellenization that was already deep-seated may be deduced from the haphazard, rather than careful, character, in many cases, of the drawings of pagan symbols, as, for example, in the synagogue at Beth Shearim

Though, the archaeological evidence indicates that during the Hasmonean-Herodian period (150 B.C.E.–70 C.E.) the Jews were so completely under the spiritual domination of the Pharisees, who were so careful in the observance of both the written and the oral law (Josephus, Ant. 18.12), that they refrained from any attempt at painting and sculpture, religious or secular, whereas after that date rabbinical control ceased to be as effective both in the Diaspora and in Palestine

Alternatively, we may suggest, as does Smith, that the lack of decoration before 70 stems from the influence wielded by the Sadducean aristocracy, which, in the absence of concrete evidence, we may speculate, interpreted the prohibition of all artistic representation (Exod 20:4) literally. In that case, the increase after 70 may reflect the heightened influence of the Pharisees, who were more liberal in their outlook. We may also note, moreover, that decoration increased in Roman art after 70