The Disputation of Barcelona

We read in Sanhedrin {43a}:

Our rabbis taught: Yeshu had five disciples - Matai, Nakai, Netzer, Buni, and Todah.

They brought Matai. They said to him, "Shall Matai be killed? It is written {Ps 42:2}, 'When (matai) shall I come and appear before God.'"

He said to them, "Yes, Matai shall be killed, for it is written {Ps 41:5}, 'When (matai) shall he die, and his name perish.'"

They brought Nakai. They said to him, "Shall Nakai be killed? It is written {Ex 23:7}, 'The innocent (naki) and the righteous you shall not slay.'"

He said to them, "Yes, Nakai shall be killed, for it is written {Ps 10:8}, 'In secret places he slays the innocent (naki).'"

They brought Netzer. They said to him, "Shall Netzer be killed? It is written {Isa 11:1}, 'A branch (netzer) shall grow out of his roots.'"

He said to them, "Yes, Netzer shall be killed, for it is written {Isa 14:19}, 'But you are cast out of your grave like an abominable branch (netzer).'"

They brought Buni. They said to him, "Shall Buni be killed? It is written {Ex 4:22}, 'My son (beni), my firstborn, Israel.'"

He said to them, "Yes, Buni shall be killed, for it is written {Ex 4:23}, 'Behold, I will slay your son (bincha), your firstborn.'"

They brought Todah. They said to him, "Shall Todah be killed? It is written {Ps 100:1}, 'A psalm of thanksgiving (todah).'"

He said to them, "Yes, Todah shall be killed, for it is written {Ps 50:23}, 'Whoever offers thanksgiving (todah) honors me.'"

And Rashi wrote: they were close to the royal power, and they had to answer every one of their vain proofs.

And in this same manner I write down the words I answered to the raving of Friar Paul, who made a public spectacle of his failure {literally: burned his own dish in public} before our lord the King and his sages and counselors - may his majesty be exalted and his kingdom lifted high.

Our lord the King commanded me to dispute with Friar Paul in his palace, before him (and before his counselors), in Barcelona. And I answered and said: I will do as my lord the King commands, if you give me leave to speak as I wish. And I ask (in this) the leave of the King and the leave of Friar Ramon de Penyafort and his companions who are here.

Friar Ramon (de Penyafort) answered: Only so long as you do not speak insults.

I said to them: I do not wish to stand under your judgment on that point; rather, I will say everything I wish concerning the matter of the disputation, just as you say everything you wish. And I have sense enough to speak with restraint (concerning the matter of the disputation, just as you say), but it shall be as my own will decides. And they all gave me leave to speak as I wished.

So then I answered and said: The dispute between the Gentiles and the Jews touches many points of religious practice on which the root of the faith does not hang. But I do not wish to debate in this honored court except about matters on which the whole case depends.

And they all answered and said: You have spoken well. And so we agreed to speak first about the Messiah - whether he has already come, as the Christians believe, or whether he is yet to come, as the Jews believe. After that we would speak about whether the Messiah is actual God, or wholly a man born of a man and a woman. And after that we would speak about whether the Jews hold the true Law, or whether the Christians practice it.

Then Friar Paul opened and said that he would prove from our own Talmud that the Messiah to whom the prophets bear witness has already come.

I answered and said: Before we argue about that, I ask that he instruct me and tell me how this is even possible. For ever since the king was in Provence, and in many other places, I have heard that he has said this very thing to many Jews, and I am utterly amazed at him. Does he mean to say that the sages of the Talmud believed in Yeshu, that he was the Messiah, and believed that he was wholly man and truly God, according to the thinking of the Christians? For surely it is a known fact that the affair of Yeshu took place in the days of the Second Temple; he was born and was killed before the destruction of the Temple, while the sages of the Talmud came after the destruction - such as Rabbi Akiva and his companions. And those who taught the Mishnah, Rabbi {Judah the Prince} and Rabbi Natan, lived many years after the destruction; all the more so Rav Ashi, who composed the Talmud and wrote it down, who lived about four hundred years after the destruction. If these sages believed in the messiahship of Yeshu, that he was true and that his faith and religion were true, and if they wrote these things which Friar Paul says he will use to prove it - then how did they remain in the religion of the Jews and in their former practice? For they were Jews, and they remained in the Jewish religion all their days, and they died Jews - they and their children and their disciples who heard all their words from their own mouths. (Why did they not apostatize and turn to the religion of Yeshu, as Friar Paul did, who understood from their words that the faith of the Christians is the true one - God forbid - and went and apostatized on the strength of their words? Yet they and their disciples, who received the Torah from their mouths,) lived and died Jews, like us this very day. And it is they who taught us the religion of Moses and Judaism, for all our deeds this day are according to the Talmud and according to what we have seen the sages of the Talmud practice and do from the day it was composed until now. For the whole Talmud exists only to teach us the customs of the Torah and the commandments, and how our fathers conducted themselves with it in the Temple, according to the mouth of the prophets and the mouth of Moses our teacher, peace be upon him. And if they believed in Yeshu and his religion, how is it they did not do as Friar Paul did - who understands their words better than they themselves do?

Friar Paul answered (and said): These are long speeches meant to void the disputation. But in any case you shall hear what I have to say.

And I said to them: Yet here (is) clear (and complete) proof for me that he will say nothing of any substance. But I will listen, because such is the will of our lord the King.

He began and said: Behold, Scripture says {Gen 49:10}, "The scepter shall not depart from Judah..." until Shiloh comes - that is, the Messiah. Thus the prophet says that Judah will always have power, until the Messiah who goes out from him. So then, today, since you have not one scepter and not one lawgiver, the Messiah, who is of his seed and whose is the rule, has already come.

I answered and said: The prophet's intent is not to say that the kingdom of Judah will never at any time be interrupted, but rather that it will not depart and cease from him completely and forever. And the meaning is that as long as there is kingship in Israel, it belongs by right to Judah; and if their kingdom should be annulled because of sin, it will return to Judah. And the proof of my words: for a long time before Yeshu the kingship was already removed from Judah, though not from Israel; and for a long time kingship had ceased from Israel and from Judah alike. For during the seventy years of the Babylonian exile there was no kingship at all, neither for Judah nor for Israel. And in the Second Temple no one of Judah reigned except Zerubbabel and his sons, for a few numbered days; and after that they went three hundred and eighty years, until the destruction, while the priests of the Hasmonean house and their servants reigned. And all the more so when the people is in exile: if there is no people, there is no king.

Friar Paul answered: In all those times, even though they had no kings, they had rulership. For thus they explained in the Talmud: "'The scepter shall not depart from Judah' - these are the exilarchs in Babylon, who rule the people with the scepter; 'and the lawgiver from between his feet' - these are the descendants of Hillel, who teach Torah publicly." And today you do not have the ordination known in the Talmud, so even that rulership has ceased; and there is no one among you today fit to be called "rabbi." And the fact that they call you Master today is an error, and you bear that name falsely.

I answered him as one mocking: This is no part of the disputation - but you are not speaking the truth. "Rabbi" is not "Master": "Rav" is "Master," and in the Talmud men are called Rav without ordination. But I confess that I am no master, and not even a good student.

This I said by way of humility.

I returned and said to him: I will show you that our rabbis of blessed memory did not intend to interpret this verse as speaking of anything but actual kingship. It is just that you do not understand law and halakhah - only a little of the aggadot, in which you have trained yourself. The point the sages were making is this: by the strict line of the law, no man may judge alone and be exempt from liability unless he has received authorization from the Nasi, that is, the king. And they said that in the time of exile, since there was one of the royal seed who held a measure of rulership from the Gentile kings - such as the exilarchs in Babylon and the Nesiim of the land of Israel - they had the power of authorization and ordination. And this practice continued among the sages of the Talmud for more than four hundred years after Yeshu. For it is not the view of the sages of the Talmud that this {exilarchate} is the scepter and the lawgiver of Judah's seed which the prophet promised; rather, the prophet promised Judah that the kingdom of Israel would be his - a full and real kingdom is what he promised him. And even so it was interrupted for long stretches, as I have mentioned: in the time of the Babylonian exile there was no scepter and no lawgiver at all, and in the Second Temple, when the kingship belonged to the priests and their servants, the tribe of Judah had no rulership whatsoever - no exilarch and no Nasi, for the office of Nasi and all headship belonged to the priest-kings and their judges and their officers, and to whomever pleased them.

Then Friar Peire of Genoa answered: This is true - the verse says only that it will not cease completely, but there may be a pause in it, "vagar" in the vernacular.

I said to the King: See, Friar Peire has ruled the case according to my words.

Friar Peire said: I did not rule the case. For the seventy years of Babylon were a short time, and many still remembered the First Temple, as it is written in the book of Ezra; and that may be called a suspension, "vagar" in the vernacular. But now that you have gone a thousand years and more, it is a complete departure.

I said: Now you are taking comfort in words. There is no "departure" in a thing that returns, and in the prophet's words there is no distinction between a long time and a short one. And besides, the periods I mentioned are long ones. And further: Jacob (our father), peace be upon him, did not promise Judah a scepter and lawgiver over his own tribe alone; it was the kingship over all Israel that he gave him, as it is written {Gen 49:8}, "Judah, you - your brothers shall praise you," and it is written {1 Chr 5:2}, "For Judah prevailed over his brothers, and from him came the ruler." And behold, the kingship over all [the tribes of] Israel was cut off (from him) when Solomon died, as it is written {1 Kgs 12:20}, "None followed the house of David except the tribe of Judah alone." If so, it is a plain matter that the prophet said only that it would not depart totally and forever. And the truth is that in the time of exile there is neither "departure" nor "annulment" at all, because it is not from Judah's side but from the people's side: the prophet did not promise Judah that Israel would never go into exile, for the sake of his being king over them at every moment.

Friar Paul returned and argued that in the Talmud they said the Messiah has already come, and he brought that aggadah in Midrash Eichah about a certain man who was (plowing), and his ox lowed. An Arab passed by and said to him: "Son of a Jew, son of a Jew - unyoke your ox, unyoke your plow, unyoke your plowshare, for the Temple has been destroyed." He unyoked his ox, unyoked his plow, unyoked his plowshare. The ox lowed a second time. He said to him: "Yoke your ox, yoke your plow, yoke your plowshare, for your Messiah has been born."

And I answered and said: I do not believe in this aggadah [at all] - but it is in fact a proof for my position.

Then that man cried out (and said): See - he denies their own books!

I said: Truly I do not believe that the Messiah was born on the day of the destruction, and this aggadah is either not true, or it carries another interpretation from the secrets of the sages. But I will accept it at face value, just as you stated it, for it is a proof for me. Look: it says that on the day of the destruction, after the Temple was destroyed, on that very day, the Messiah was born. If so, Yeshu is not the Messiah as you say he is, for he was born and killed before the destruction - his birth was nearly two hundred years before the destruction according to the true reckoning, and according to your reckoning, seventy-three years. At that the man was silenced.

Master Guillem, the King's justice, answered (and said): The disputation is not now about Yeshu. The question is whether the Messiah has come or not. You say he has not come, and this book of yours says he has come.

I said to him: You are choosing, after your custom, to answer with a lawyer's twist. Nevertheless I will answer you on this point. The sages did not say that he came; they [said] that he was born. For on the day Moses our teacher, peace be upon him, was born, he had not "come" and he was not a redeemer; but when he came to Pharaoh at the command of the Holy One, blessed be He, and said to him {Ex 5:1}, "Thus says the LORD: Let my people go," then he had come. So too the Messiah: when he comes to the Pope and says to him at God's command, "Let my people go," then he will have come. But to this day he has not come, and he is not yet the Messiah at all. For King David, on the day he was born, was not [king and not] anointed; but when Samuel anointed him, he was mashiach {anointed}. And on the day that Elijah anoints the Messiah at God's command, he will be called Messiah; and when he comes afterward to the Pope to redeem us, then it will be said that [the redeemer] has come.

That man argued: Look at the passage "Behold, my servant shall prosper" {Isa 52:13} - it tells the matter of the Messiah's death and his being handed over into hand, and that they set him with the wicked, just as happened with Yeshu. Do you believe that this passage speaks of the Messiah?

I said to him: According to its true meaning it speaks only of the people of Israel as a whole, for so the prophets call them constantly - "Israel my servant" {Isa 41:8}, "Jacob my servant" {Isa 44:1}.

Friar Paul said: But I will show from the words of your own sages that it speaks of the Messiah.

I said to him: It is true that our rabbis of blessed memory, in the books of aggadah, expound it of the Messiah. But they never said that he would be killed by the hand of his enemies. For you will never find in any book of Israel - neither in the Talmud nor in the aggadot - that the Messiah son of David will ever be killed, or that he will be handed over into the hand of his enemies, or that he will be buried among the wicked. For even the messiah whom you made for yourselves was not buried so {i.e., by your own account he was not buried among the wicked, but received an honorable burial}. And I will explain (to you) the passage, if you wish, with a good and clear interpretation, and there is nothing at all in it saying that he will be killed, as happened with your messiah. But they did not want to listen.

That man returned and said that in the Talmud it is stated plainly that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi asked Elijah when the Messiah would come, and he answered him: "Ask the Messiah himself." (He said:) "And where is he?" (He said:) "At the gate of Rome, among the sick." He went there and found him, and asked him, and so on. If so, he has already come - and he is in Rome, (and he is Yeshu, who rules in Rome).

I answered him: Is it not plain from this very passage that he has not come? For he asked Elijah when the Messiah would come. Likewise he asked the Messiah himself, "When will the master come?" So then, he has not yet come. But he has been born, according to the plain sense of these aggadot - though I do not believe that.

Then our lord the King answered: If he was born on the day of the destruction of the Temple, which is more than a thousand years ago, and he has not yet come, how shall he come? For it is not in the nature of man to live a thousand years.

I said to him: The terms were already set that I would not dispute with you, and that you would not take part in the disputation. But - among the ancients there were already Adam and Methuselah, close to a thousand years, and Elijah and Enoch more than that, since life belongs to God.

He said: And where is he today?

I said: That is not required by the disputation, and I will not answer you. But perhaps you will find him at the gates of Toledo, if you send there one of your couriers. I said this as one mocking (him).

Then they rose from there, and the King appointed a time to resume the disputation on the next {second} day.

On that day the King went to the cloister that is in the city, and there gathered all the men of the city, Gentiles and Jews. The bishop was there, and all the priests, and the scholars of the Franciscans and of the Preachers {Dominicans}. And that man stood up to speak.

I said to our lord the King: My lord, hear me.

And he said to me: Let him speak first, for he is the claimant.

I said: Allow me to make my position on the Messiah clear first; then he can answer on a clear target.

I rose and said: Hear, all you peoples {Mic 1:2}. Friar Paul asked me whether the Messiah of whom the prophets spoke has already come, and I said that he has not come. And he brought an aggadah-book in which it says that on the very day the Temple was destroyed, on that day the Messiah was born. And I said that I do not believe this. (Know that) we have three kinds of books. The first is the Bible [the Torah of Moses], and all of us believe in it with complete faith. The second is called Talmud, and it is a commentary on the commandments of the Torah; for the Torah contains six hundred thirteen commandments, and there is not one of them that is not explained in the Talmud, and we believe in it as to the explanation of the commandments. Further, we have a third book called Midrash, that is to say, "sermones" {sermons} - just as if the bishop here should stand up and give a sermon, and one of the hearers liked it and wrote it down. As for this book, whoever believes in it, well and good; and whoever does not believe in it does no harm. And we have sages who wrote that the Messiah will not be born until near the time of the end, when he comes to bring us out of the exile. Therefore I do not believe this book when it says he was born on the day of the destruction. Moreover, we call it the book of Aggadah, that is to say "razonamiento" - meaning that it is nothing but things one man tells another. But I will accept that aggadah at its plain sense, as you want it, because it is an explicit proof that your Yeshu is not the Messiah, as I told you: for he was not born on that day; his whole affair had already passed long before. And you, our lord the King, asked and pressed me well out of their own material - that it is not the way of man to live a thousand years. Now I will make plain to you the answer to your question. Adam, the first man, lived a thousand years less seventy. (And it is made plain in Scripture that he died because of his sin, and had he not sinned he would have lived) much longer, or forever. Gentiles and Jews, we all alike admit that the sin and punishment of Adam will be annulled in the days of the Messiah. If so, (after the Messiah comes it will be annulled for all of us, but in the Messiah himself it is annulled completely; if so,) it is fitting that the Messiah live a thousand years, or thousands, or forever. And so the Psalm says {Ps 21:5}, "He asked life of you..." - and this is clear.

Further you asked, our lord the King, where he now stands. It is plain from Scripture: Adam's station was in the Garden of Eden which is on earth, and when he sinned it is said {Gen 3:23}, "And the LORD God sent him out of the Garden of Eden." If so, this one who is exempt from Adam's punishment stands there, in the Garden of Eden. And so the sages said in the book of aggadot that I mentioned.

The King said: Did you not say, in that same aggadah, that he is in Rome?

I said to him: I did not (say that his station is in Rome), but that he appeared in Rome on a certain day; for Elijah told that sage that he would find him there on that day, and he appeared there. His appearing there was for a reason mentioned in the aggadot, but I do not wish to state it before so many people. (The matter was that I did not want to tell them what is said in the aggadah - that the Messiah will remain stationed in Rome until he destroys it, just as we find with Moses our teacher, peace be upon him, that he grew up in the house of Pharaoh until he called him to account and drowned all his people in the sea. And as it is said of Hiram king of Tyre {Ezek 28:18}, "I will bring forth a fire from your midst; it shall devour you." And this is what Isaiah said {Isa 27:10}, "There shall the calf feed, and there shall he lie down, and consume its branches." And in the Pirkei Heikhalot they said: "...until a man shall say to his fellow, 'Here, take Rome and all that is in it for one small coin,' and he will answer, 'I have no use for it.'") And all this I said to the King privately, between him and me.

I asked (and said further): Do you grant my claim that Adam's sin will be annulled in the time of the Messiah?

Our lord the King answered, and Friar Paul too: Yes - but not in the way you suppose. The matter is that all souls used to enter Gehenna on account of that punishment, and in the days of the messiah Yeshu it was annulled, for he brought them out of there.

And I answered and said: In our land they say, "He who wants to lie puts his witnesses far away." Many punishments are written out concerning Adam and Eve: {Gen 3:17-19} "Cursed is the ground for your sake"; "thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you"; "in the sweat of your face"; "for dust you are"; and of the woman, "in pain you shall bring forth children." All of it stands to this day. Everything that can be seen and felt was not atoned in the time of your messiah. But Gehenna - which is not written in the text - that, you say, was atoned, because no one can contradict you about it. Send one of your own and let him come back and report! And furthermore, God forbid - the righteous do not suffer the punishment of Gehenna for the sin of Adam their father. My soul is exactly as near to the soul of my father as to the soul of Pharaoh, and my soul will not enter Gehenna for Pharaoh's sin. The punishments fell on the body, because my body is from my father and my mother, and when it was decreed on those two that they were mortal, their offspring were mortal by nature forever after.

That man stood up and said: I will bring yet another proof that the time of the Messiah has already passed.

I said: My lord King, hear me [a little]. Our law and truth and justice do not principally rest on a messiah. For you are worth more to me than a messiah. You are a king and he is a king: you are a Gentile king and he is a king of Israel - for the Messiah is nothing but a king of flesh and blood like you. When I serve my Creator under your rule, in exile and affliction and servitude, under the reproach of the peoples who reproach us continually, my reward is great; for I am making of my own body a whole offering to God, and by this I merit the life of the world to come more and more. But when there will be a king of Israel of my own Law ruling over all the peoples, and I will have no choice but to remain in the law of the Jews, my reward will not be so great. No - the core of the quarrel and the case between Jews and Christians is in what you say about the core of the Godhead, a thing exceedingly bitter. And you, our lord the King, are a Christian son of a Christian [and of a Christian mother], and all your days you have heard priests [and Franciscans and Preachers speaking of the birth of Yeshu], and they have filled your brain and the marrow of your bones with this thing, and it has settled with you through that habituation. But the thing you believe - and it is the root of your faith - reason does not tolerate, nature does not allow, and the prophets never said it; even the miraculous cannot stretch to cover it, as I shall make plain with full proofs in its place and time: that the Creator of heaven and earth [and all that is in them] should withdraw and pass into the womb of a certain Jewess, and grow there seven months, and be born an infant, and afterward grow up, and afterward be handed over into the hand of his enemies, and they sentence him to death and kill him, and afterward - you say - he lived and returned to his first place. The mind of a Jew, or of any man, will not bear this. Vainly and emptily you speak your words - for this is the core of our quarrel. But let us speak of the Messiah too, since you so wish.

Friar Paul said: So do you believe that he has come?

I said: No. Rather, I believe and know that he has not come. And there has never been any man who said, or of whom it was said, that he was the Messiah - except Yeshu - and it is impossible for me (to believe) in his messiahship. For the prophet says of the Messiah {Ps 72:8}, "He shall have dominion from sea to sea, and from the river to the ends of the earth," while he had no dominion at all; in his lifetime he was fleeing from his enemies and hiding from them, and in the end he fell into their hand and could not save himself. How then should he save all Israel? And even after his death he had no dominion, for the dominion of Rome is not on his account. Before they believed in him the city of Rome ruled most of the world, and after they came to his faith they lost many dominions; and now the worshippers of Muhammad have more dominion than they.

Likewise the prophet says that in the time of the Messiah {Jer 31:34} "they shall teach no more every man his neighbor and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD, for they shall all know me," and so on. And it says {Isa 11:9}, "For the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the LORD as the waters cover the sea." And it says {Isa 2:4}, "They shall beat their swords into plowshares... nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more." Yet from the days of Yeshu until now the whole world has been full of violence and plunder - and the Christians spill more blood than the rest of the nations, and they also uncover nakedness. And how hard it would be for you, my lord King, and for these knights of yours, if they were to learn war no more! And further the prophet says of the Messiah {Isa 11:4}, "He shall strike the earth with the rod of his mouth." And in the aggadah-book in Friar Paul's own hand they explained it: "They say to the King Messiah, 'Such-and-such a province has rebelled against you.' He says, 'Let the locust come and destroy it.' They say to him, 'Such-and-such a district has rebelled against you.' He says, 'Let the raven come and finish it off.'" This was not so with Yeshu. And you his servants - you find armored horses better for you, and sometimes even all that is not enough for you.

And I will bring you yet many more proofs from the words of the prophets.

That man cried out and said: Such is his way always, to make long speeches - and I have a question to put.

The King said to me: Be silent, for he is the questioner. (And I was silent.)

He said: Look, their sages said of the Messiah that he is more honored than the angels - which cannot be true of anyone but Yeshu [theirs], who is (the Messiah and) God himself in one. And he cited what they said in the aggadah: {Isa 52:13} "'He shall be exalted and lifted up, and shall be very high' - exalted above Abraham, lifted up above Moses, higher than the ministering angels."

I said to him: Our sages say this constantly of all the righteous - "the righteous are greater than the ministering angels" {Sanhedrin 93a}. And Moses our teacher said to the angel, "In the place where I sit, you have no permission even to stand." And of Israel as a whole they said, "Israel is more beloved than the ministering angels" {Chullin 91b}. But the intent of the author of this aggadah about the Messiah is this: Abraham (our father, peace be upon him) made converts of Gentiles and would preach to the nations the faith of the Holy One, blessed be He, and he disputed with Nimrod and did not fear him. And Moses did more than he: in his lowliness he stood against Pharaoh, the great and wicked king, and showed him no deference in the great plagues with which he struck him, and brought Israel out from his hand. And the ministering angels are exceedingly zealous in the matter of the redemption, as it says {Dan 10:21}, "There is none that holds with me in these things except Michael your prince," and it says {Dan 10:20}, "And now I return to fight with the prince of Persia." And the Messiah will do more than all of them. His heart will be lifted high in the ways of the LORD {2 Chr 17:6}: he will come and command the Pope and all the kings of the peoples in the name of God, "Let my people go that they may serve me," and he will work among them signs and great and many wonders and will not fear them at all, and he will stand in their own city of Rome until he destroys it. And I will explain the whole passage, if you wish. He did not wish it.

He brought yet another aggadah, which says of the Messiah that he prays for Israel, that the Holy One, blessed be He, might forgive them (their iniquities), and that he took sufferings upon himself, but said before Him: "On this condition I accept the sufferings - that the resurrection of the dead be in my days; and not the dead of my own generation only, but all the dead who have died from Adam until now; and not the dead only, but even those who were thrown into the sea and drowned, and those whom wolves and wild beasts have eaten." And behold - the sufferings that the Messiah took upon himself are the killing of Yeshu, which he accepted upon himself of his own will.

I said: Woe to him who has no shame. None of this did Yeshu do. He did not raise the dead who have died from Adam until now, and he did none of this at all. Moreover, this prayer shows that he is a man and not a god, with no power in his own hand to raise the dead.

And these "sufferings" are nothing but his grief: he grieves over his own long delay, and sees his people in exile with no power in his hand to help them, and sees men worshipping what is no god, who deny him and make themselves another messiah, honored more than his own people.

He returned and said: Look, Daniel said {Dan 9:24}, "Seventy weeks are determined upon your people and upon your holy city, to finish the transgression and to make an end of sin and to atone for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up vision and prophet, and to anoint the most holy." Now the "seventy weeks" are weeks of years - the four hundred twenty years the Second Temple stood, plus the seventy years of the Babylonian exile. And "the most holy" {qodesh qodashim} is Yeshu.

I said to him: But was not Yeshu earlier than this time by more than thirty weeks according to our reckoning - which is the true one, attested by those who knew him and recognized him, the men of his own generation? And even by your reckoning he was earlier by more than ten weeks.

He said: So it was. But in the other verse it says {Dan 9:25}, "Know therefore and understand, from the going forth of the word to restore and to build Jerusalem, unto Messiah the Prince" - he is Messiah, he is the Prince, and he is Yeshu.

I said: This too is a well-worn error. For Scripture divides the seventy weeks it mentioned, and counts from them "unto Messiah the Prince" seven weeks; and after that it counts sixty-two weeks for the building of "street and moat"; and after that it counts one week [and half of the week] in which "he shall confirm covenant with many" - and so the seventy weeks are complete. Now Yeshu, whom you call "Messiah the Prince," did not come at the end of seven weeks, but after sixty weeks and more, by your own count. Explain me the whole passage according to your scheme and I will take up the answer - for you will not be able to explain it in any fashion in the world. But you are not ashamed to speak of what you do not know. And I will tell you: "Messiah the Prince" is Zerubbabel, and he came at the time of seven weeks, as is made clear in Scripture.

He said: And how can he be called "messiah"?

I said: Even Cyrus is called messiah {Isa 45:1}. And of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob it says {Ps 105:15}, "Touch not my anointed ones (meshichai)." And for this reason it calls him "prince" (nagid) and not king - because his kingship would not be exalted, yet he was honored and lifted up (among his people), as in {Ps 47:10} "the princes (nedivei) of the peoples are gathered together, the people of the God of Abraham." And look - I will lay out the whole passage for you with a clear interpretation, if you and these companions of yours are willing to learn, and if you have a heart to understand. And I say before our lord the King and all the peoples: there is no end-date for the coming of the Messiah in this passage, nor in all the words of Daniel, except at the end of the book. For so it is made clear in Scripture: after everything said to him in this passage and in the other passages, he kept praying to know the end, and at the last they told him the end, in the verse that says {Dan 12:11}, "And from the time the daily offering is taken away, and the abomination that desolates is set up, a thousand two hundred and ninety days." And now I will interpret this verse before the eyes of the peoples, even though it will sit hard on the Jews who are here. It says that from the time the daily offering was taken away, until "the desolator" who took it away - that is, the people of Rome, destroyer of the Temple - is himself given over to abomination and destruction, there shall be one thousand two hundred and ninety years. For the "days" mentioned here are years, as in {Lev 25:29} "days shall its redemption be," and {Ex 13:10} "from days to days," and {Gen 24:55} "days or ten." And afterward Daniel said {Dan 12:12}, "Blessed is he who waits, and comes to the thousand three hundred five and thirty days" - he added forty-five years. And the meaning is: at the first date the Messiah will come, and he will give the abomination that worships what is no god over to desolation, and finish it from the world; and after that he will gather the outcasts of Israel to "the wilderness of the peoples," as it is said {Hos 2:16}, "I will lead her into the wilderness and speak to her heart," and he will bring Israel to their own land, as Moses our teacher, peace be upon him, the first redeemer, did - and that will be forty-five years. And afterward Israel will rest on their land and rejoice in the LORD their God and in David their king. Blessed is he who waits (and arrives) at those good days. Now, from the time of the destruction until now there are one thousand one hundred ninety-five years; so from the number Daniel gave there remain ninety-five years. And we hope that the redeemer will come at that time, for this interpretation is right and fitting, and it is readily believable.

Friar Paul answered: Look, the sages said in the aggadah: "'These extra days' - what are they? These are the forty-five days when the redeemer will be revealed to them and then hidden from them. Just as Moses the first redeemer was revealed to them and then hidden from them, so the last redeemer will be revealed to them and then hidden." And since they said "day," they are actual days and not years.

I said: The midrash took hold of the wording of the verse, and mentioned "forty-five days" which are years - as the rabbis say, "it adopts the language of the text." Friar Paul said that there is no Jew in the world who would not admit that "day" (yom) means an actual day, and that I was changing the meaning of words at my pleasure. And he shouted for the King, and they brought the first Jew they found, and asked him: "What does yom mean in your language?" He said: "Dia."

I said: My lord King, this Jew is fit to be a judge over Friar Paul, but not over me. For yom in the language of Scripture is used of time in general, as in {Num 3:13} "in the day I struck down every firstborn"; and in the plural, yamim, it is said of years. And here Scripture uses it of years. And there was need for this, because he sought to seal the matter up, as the angel said to him twice {Dan 12:4}: "Shut up the words and seal the book until the time of the end; many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased." But I am speaking words of wisdom to one who does not know and does not understand - it is fitting that fools should judge in his favor.

Friar Arnau de Segarra answered: Look - Jerome interpreted "days" here as "the days of the people."

I rejoiced at his words. I said: You can recognize from his words that the "days" here are not in their plain sense as in other places - which is why he needed to supply an interpretation for them. And I hold that "the days of the people" of which he spoke are years, as when people say, "it is many days since that happened," meaning many years.

That man returned and said: Look, their sages said that the Messiah entered the Garden of Eden, and this is what it says there in the aggadah: "Why the Messiah? Because he saw his fathers worshipping idols, and he turned from their way and served the Holy One, blessed be He, and He stored him away in the Garden of Eden."

And I laughed at him and said: This is a proof for me - that he is the son of idol-worshippers, a complete man, and the Holy One, blessed be He, counted it to his credit that he turned from the way of his fathers and did not worship idols like them. Is this what one says of God himself? And I took his book and read them the aggadah from its beginning. It says that fourteen persons entered the Garden of Eden alive, and it counts among them Serach the daughter of Asher and Bityah the daughter of Pharaoh. Now if this were Yeshu, and he were God as you think, he would not be lodged with the women in the Garden of Eden - his throne would be in the heavens and the earth his footstool, God forbid. Rather it is as I say: he stands in the Garden of Eden, in the house of Adam before he sinned. For that is the view of the sages in the aggadah-book, and it is plain.

And then our lord the King rose, and they went their way.

On the third day after that, our lord the King arranged the place of the disputation in his palace and said it should be held in private, and we sat at the entrance of the palace. Friar Paul opened with words of vanity that had no substance, and afterward (he said): I will bring proof from a great sage of theirs, whose like they have not had these four hundred years - his name is Master Moses of Egypt {Maimonides} - and he says that the Messiah will die, and his son (and his son's son) will reign after him. So it is not as you said, that he will not die in the way of all men. And he asked that the book "Judges" {Mishneh Torah, Sefer Shofetim} be brought to him.

I said before them: It does not say that in that book. But I do concede that some of our sages say so - as I noted at the outset, that the view of the aggadah-books is that he was born on the day of the destruction and will live forever, while the view of the masters of the plain sense is that he will be born near the end, at the time of the redemption, and will live many years by count, and will die in honor and bequeath his crown to his son. And I have already said that this is what I believe. And between this world and the days of the Messiah, in this respect, there is nothing but the subjugation of the kingdoms alone.

And they brought the book he asked for, and he searched and did not find it. And I took the book from his hand and said: Hear the words of the book that he brought. And I read to them from the beginning of the chapter: "The King Messiah is destined to arise for Israel, and he will build the Temple and gather the outcasts of Israel."

Friar Arnau de Segarra said: He is lying to their faces.

I said: Until this moment he was "a great sage whose like there is not" - and now he is a liar?

And the King rebuked him and said: It is not proper to disparage the sages.

And I said to the King: He is not lying; and I will prove from the Torah and the Prophets that everything he said is truth. The Messiah must gather the outcasts of Israel and the dispersed of Judah, the twelve tribes - and your messiah Yeshu did not gather one man of them, and did not even live in the time of the exile. And the Messiah must build the Temple in Jerusalem - and Yeshu did no building there, nor any tearing down. And the Messiah will rule over all the peoples - and he did not rule even over himself. And I read to them the passage {Deut 30:1-7}, "And it shall come to pass, when all these things have come upon you, the blessing and the curse which I have set before you...," and I finished the passage as far as "And the LORD your God will put all these curses upon your enemies and upon those who hate you, who persecuted you." And I explained to them: "your enemies" - the Christians; "those who hate you" - the Ishmaelites, the two nations who have persecuted us. And he answered nothing. And they rose and left.

On the morrow, the fourth day, they set up ranks in the palace, and the King sat in his seat as usual, on the platform by the wall, on his throne. And there were the bishop and many nobles - Gilles de Sargon {likely Guillem de Cervello} and Peire Berga {Pere de Berga} - and many knights, and all the townsmen of the city, and the poor of the people.

And I said to the King: I do not wish to dispute any further.

The King said: And why?

I said: Look, most of the community is here, and they have all held me back and begged me about this, for they are in great fear of these men, the Preachers, who cast dread over the world. And even the greatest and most honored of the priests have sent me word that I should not go on. Likewise many knights of your own household, my lord King, told me that I do wrong to speak before them against their faith. And Friar Peire of Genoa, the sage of the Franciscans, told me that it was not good. And townsmen of the city said to some of the Jews that I should not go on. That is truly how it was. But when they saw the King's will, they all wavered and said I should proceed. And there were long exchanges among us over this. In the end I said that I would dispute - but justice requires that I be the questioner for one day, and Friar Paul answer me, since he has questioned me and I have answered for three days.

The King said: Nevertheless, you answer him. And I consented.

He stood and asked: The Messiah of whom the prophets spoke - do you believe he is to be wholly a man, or actual God?

I said: From the beginning we stipulated that we would speak first about the Messiah, whether he has come as you say, and afterward about whether he is God himself. And you have not proved that he came, since I have torn down every one of the vain proofs you brought. So I have won my case - for the burden of proof lies on you, and so you took it upon yourselves. If you will not grant that I have won this case, then I take it upon myself to bring complete proofs on the matter, if you will hear me. And once it has become plain that your Yeshu is not the Messiah, there is nothing for you to debate concerning the Messiah who is yet to come to us - whether he will be wholly a man, or what he will be.

And the learned judges who were there said that on this point the right was with me.

The King said to me: Answer nevertheless.

I said: In truth, the Messiah who is to come will be wholly a man, the son of a man and a woman from the union of the two of them, like me. And he will be of the lineage of David and of his seed, as it is written {Isa 11:1}, "And a shoot shall come forth from the stump of Jesse," and it says {Gen 49:10}, "until Shiloh comes" - "his son," from the word shilyah {afterbirth}, for he will be born like the rest of the children of men, with an afterbirth. And if he were the spirit of God, as you say, he would not be "of the stump of Jesse" - even if he lodged in the womb of a woman of Jesse's seed, he would not inherit his kingdom, for under the Torah daughters and their seed do not inherit where there is a male, and David always had male descendants.

He said: Look, the Psalm says {Ps 110:1}, "A psalm of David: The LORD said to my lord, Sit at my right hand..." Who is it that King David would call "my lord," except God? And how could a man sit at the right hand of God?

The King said: He asks well. For if the Messiah were wholly a man, of David's actual seed, David would not call him "my lord." If I had a son or a grandson of my own seed, even if he came to rule the whole world, I would not call him "my lord" - rather I would want him to call me "my lord," and to kiss my hand.

I turned my face to Friar Paul and said: Are you the clever Jew who discovered this novelty and apostatized on its account? Are you the one who told the King to gather the sages of the Jews for you, to debate with them about the novelties you have found? Have we never heard this thing before now? Why, there is not a priest or a child who does not put this difficulty to the Jews. The question is exceedingly stale.

The King said: Answer it nevertheless.

I said: Now hear me. King David was the psalmist: he composed the Psalms by the holy spirit, and he composed them so that they might be sung before the altar of the LORD. He himself did not sing them, nor was he permitted to do so, for that is forbidden to him by the law of the Torah; he gave the Psalms to the Levites to sing them. So it is written explicitly in Chronicles. Therefore, of necessity, he had to compose the psalm in the wording proper for the Levite to say. Had he written "The LORD said to me," the Levite singing it would be speaking a falsehood. It was proper, rather, for the Levite to say in the sanctuary, "The LORD said to my lord" - to David - "Sit at my right hand." And the sense of "sitting at the right hand" is that the Holy One, blessed be He, would guard him all his days and save him and make him prevail over his enemies. And so it was: for he raised his spear against eight hundred slain at one time {2 Sam 23:8}. Is there among these knights before you one who could do the like in his might? That is "the right hand of God." So it is written of David {Ps 18:36}, "Your right hand has held me up," and likewise {Ps 118:16}, "The right hand of the LORD does valiantly; the right hand of the LORD is exalted." And it is written of Moses our teacher, peace be upon him {Isa 63:12}, "Who caused his glorious arm to go at the right hand of Moses," and he himself said, at the downfall of Pharaoh {Ex 15:6}, "Your right hand, O LORD, shatters the enemy." Moreover, Scripture speaks this way in various places - "and Jephthah and Samuel" {1 Sam 12:11, each speaking of himself in the third person}, "the wives of Lamech" {Gen 4:23}, and so throughout all the words of Moses our teacher in the Torah. But here, in any case, he had to write it as I have described. And know that the Psalms were composed by the holy spirit, and they are said of David and of his son who will sit on his throne - that is, the Messiah. What happened to David in part will happen to the Messiah his son in full: the right hand of the Holy One, blessed be He, supported David until he prevailed over the enemies around him, and it will support the Messiah until He makes all the nations the footstool of his feet - for they are all his enemies: they enslave his people, they deny his coming and his kingdom, and some of them have made themselves another messiah. So this psalm was fit to be sung in the sanctuary in the days of David, and in the days of the Messiah his son, for it is said of the throne of David and of his kingdom.

Friar Paul answered: How can he say this, when their own sages say that it speaks of the Messiah - that the words are in their plain sense, that he sits at the right hand of God? And he brought an aggadah that says: "In the time to come, the Holy One, blessed be He, will seat the Messiah at his right hand and Abraham at his left."

I said: This too is as I say. I have already said that the intent is partly of David, and its full perfection is in the Messiah. And I asked for the book, and they gave it to me.

And I said: See how he was filching the passage. This aggadah says: "In the time to come, the Holy One, blessed be He, will seat the Messiah at his right hand and Abraham at his left; and Abraham's face darkens, and he says, 'My son's son sits at the right of the Holy One, blessed be He, and I at his left?' And the Holy One, blessed be He, appeases him..." and so on. So here it is explicit that the Messiah is not a god more honored than Abraham - or Abraham's face would not have darkened at all. And likewise he says "my son's son," not "my daughter's son": Yeshu, on your account, was not a son of Abraham's son at all. And the sitting at the right in the Messiah's case is exactly like the sitting at the left in Abraham's case - both of them wholly men. And it also follows of necessity that Yeshu is not the Messiah, since it says "in the time to come," and the sages who said this lived some five hundred years after him. But Friar Paul devours the beginning of the passage and its end, and is not ashamed. He returned and brought a proof from a midrash where they said: "It is written {Lev 26:12}, 'And I will walk among you.' A parable: to what may the thing be compared? To a king who went out to stroll with his tenant in his orchard, and that tenant kept hiding himself from before him. Said the king to him, 'Why do you hide? Behold, I am just like you.' So in the time to come the Holy One, blessed be He, will stroll with the righteous in the Garden of Eden, and the righteous will see him and tremble before him, and the Holy One, blessed be He, will say to them [to the righteous], 'Why do you tremble before me? Behold, I am just like you.' Might that mean my fear will not be upon you? Scripture teaches {ibid.}, 'And I will be your God, and you shall be my people.'" Since he said "Behold, I am just like you," it follows {said Friar Paul} that he became a man like them.

I said: Everything he brings testifies against him [if only he understood it]. For this (event), which is yet to be, will take place in the Garden of Eden - and Yeshu did not stroll with the righteous in the Garden of Eden while he was a man; he spent all his days fleeing from (his enemies and) his pursuers.

But this midrash is a parable, as it begins: "A parable: to what may the thing be compared?" And its meaning is this: the righteous in this world cannot attain the truth of prophecy, and cannot look on the radiance called "gloria," except in a mirror - as it says {Num 12:6}, "in a vision I make myself known to him." Even Moses our teacher trembled at the beginning of his prophecy, as it is said {Ex 3:6}, "And Moses hid his face, for he was afraid..." But in the time to come their souls will be clean of all sin and all disfigurement, and they will be permitted to gaze through the clear glass, like Moses our teacher, peace be upon him, of whom it is said {Ex 33:11}, "And the LORD spoke to Moses face to face, as a man speaks to his friend." And they said "Behold, I am just like you" by way of parable, meaning they will not tremble and fear - just as men do not fear one another. And that is the idiom Scripture uses, "as a man speaks to his friend" - for God did not turn into a man when he was speaking with Moses. And it is the idiom of the sages, as they said in Yelamdenu: "If you do my commandments, behold, you are like me." So too the wording of Scripture {Gen 3:5}, "and you shall be as God, knowing..."; and likewise {Gen 3:22}, "Behold, the man has become as one of us"; and likewise {Zech 12:8}, "And he that stumbles among them in that day shall be as David, and the house of David as God." Not that they are equal in likeness.

That man returned and argued that they said in Bereshit Rabbah: "'And the spirit of God hovered over the face of the waters' {Gen 1:2} - this is the spirit of the Messiah." If so, he is not a man but the spirit of God.

I said:

Woe to him who knows nothing and thinks he is wise and expert. Look, in that same place they also said, "'And the spirit of God hovered' - this is the spirit of Adam, the first man." Did they say, then, that Adam would be a god? Whoever does not know what stands above and what stands below in the books turns the words of the living God upside down. The expositor who expounded "this is the spirit of the Messiah" interpreted the verse as referring to the kingdoms {the four empires}, taking the wording of the text here as hinting at things to come. He said: "'And the earth was tohu' - this is Babylon, as it is said {Jer 4:23}, 'I beheld the earth, and, lo, it was tohu.'

'And bohu' - this is Media, as it is said {Est 6:14}, 'And they hastened (vayavhilu) to bring Haman.' 'And darkness' - this is Greece, who darkened the eyes of Israel with their decrees. 'Upon the face of the deep' - this is the wicked kingdom {Rome}. 'And the spirit of God' - this is the spirit of the Messiah. By what merit {does it hover}? 'Hovering over the face of the waters' - by the merit of repentance, which is likened to water."

See: the midrash passes the four kingdoms in review, with the fourth kingdom, which is Rome; and after that it brings in "the spirit of God," which is the Messiah - a complete man, full of wisdom, full of the spirit of God, like Bezalel, of whom it is said {Ex 31:3}, "And I have filled him with the spirit of God...," and Joshua, of whom it is said {Deut 34:9}, "And Joshua the son of Nun was full of the spirit of wisdom." And this makes plain that they said it of the Messiah who is to come after the fourth kingdom. But I could not convey to him the real character of the midrash - that these are allusions, expounded from the support of the wording, not that this is the primary sense of the verse - (and so it is) in most places in Bereshit Rabbah, as when they expounded "And Jacob went out." I said all this to show everyone that he does not even know how to read the book he brought - for he erred in reading the wording.

And the King rose, and they all rose.

This is the substance of all the disputations. I have not knowingly altered a word in them. Afterward, on that same day, I stood before our lord the King, and he said: "Let the disputation rest; for I have never seen a man who was in the wrong argue his case as well as you have done." And I heard in the court that it was the will of the King and of the Preachers to come to the synagogue on the Sabbath. So I stayed in the city eight days. And when they came there on the following Sabbath, I answered our lord the King fittingly, as was proper - for he preached at length, saying that Yeshu is the Messiah.

And I stood on my feet and said: The words of our lord the King are, in my eyes, noble and excellent and honored, coming as they do from the mouth of a prince noble and exalted and honored beyond any in the world - but I cannot praise them as true. For I have clear proofs and words as bright as the sun that the truth is not as he said; yet it is not proper to contend with him.

One thing only I will say, at which I marvel greatly. The words he speaks into our ears - that we should believe in Yeshu as Messiah - why, it was Yeshu himself who brought this claim to our ancestors; he himself exerted himself to tell it to them, and to his face they denied it with a complete and mighty denial - and he, on your reckoning, being God, knew better and could better say his case than the King can. Now if our fathers, who saw him and knew him, did not listen to him, how shall we believe and obey the voice of the King, who has no knowledge of the matter except by distant hearsay, heard from men who did not know him and were not from his land, as our fathers were - who knew him, and were eyewitnesses [who saw the like].

After that Friar Ramon de Penyafort rose and preached on the subject of the Trinity, and said that it is wisdom, will, and power. And he said in the synagogue: "And even the Master {Nachmanides} conceded this at Girona, agreeing with the words of Friar Paul."

I stood on my feet and said: Give ear and hear my voice, Jews and Gentiles.

Friar Paul asked me at Girona whether I believe in the Trinity.

I said to him: What is "the Trinity"? Is it that the Godhead is three coarse bodies, like the bodies of men?

He said: No.

- Or that it is three subtle things, such as souls, or three angels?

He said: No.

- Or that it is one thing compounded of three, as bodies are compounded of the four elements?

He said: No.

- Then what is "the Trinity"?

He said: Wisdom, and will, and power.

And I said: I concede that God is wise and not foolish, willing without passions, and powerful and not weak. But the term "trinity" is an outright error. For wisdom in the Creator is not an accident; rather, he and his wisdom are one, he and his will are one, he and his power are one - so the wisdom and the will and the power are all one thing. And even if these were accidents in him, the thing that is God would not be three: it would be one thing, bearing three accidents.

And our lord the King here quoted a comparison which the erring ones had taught him, saying: there are three things in wine - color, taste, and fragrance - and it is still one thing.

And this is an outright error. For the redness and the taste and the fragrance of wine are distinct things; each can be found without the others - for there are red wines and white wines and other hues, and so with taste and with fragrance. Moreover, the redness is not the wine, nor is the taste, nor the fragrance; the substance of the wine is the thing that fills the vessel. It is, then, a body bearing three distinct accidents, and there is no unity in it at all.

And if we were to count in that erroneous fashion, we would be forced to speak of a "quaternity": for the thing that is God, and his wisdom, and his will, and his power, would count as four. Nay, you would have to say "quinity" - for he is alive, and his life is in him on the same footing as his wisdom, so his definition would run: living, wise, willing, powerful - and the divine essence itself - five. All this is manifest error.

Then Friar Paul stood up and said that he believes in a complete unity, and that with all that, there is in it a trinity - and that it is an exceedingly deep matter, which even the angels and the princes on high do not comprehend.

I stood and said: It is a plain matter that a man does not believe what he does not know. Therefore the angels do not believe in the trinity. And his companions silenced him.

And our lord the King rose, and they came down from the ark-platform, and they went their way.

And on the morrow I stood before our lord the King, and he said to me: "Return to your city, to life and to peace." And he gave me three hundred dinars, and I took my leave of him with great affection. May God make me worthy of the life of the world to come. Amen.

This is a copy taken faithfully from a certain charter secured with the hanging seal of the Lord King, whose text runs as follows.

In the year of the Lord 1263, on the thirteenth day before the kalends of August [July 20], in the presence of the Lord King of Aragon and many other barons, prelates, religious, and knights, in the palace of the Lord King at Barcelona: whereas Moses, called "master," a Jew, had been summoned by the Lord King himself at the request of the Friars Preachers of Girona, and was present there together with many other Jews who seemed, and were believed, to be the most learned among the Jews,

Friar Paul, after deliberation held beforehand with the Lord King and with certain Friars Preachers and Friars Minor who were present, proposed to the said Jewish master - not so that the faith of the Lord Jesus Christ, which on account of its certainty is not to be put up for debate, should be dragged into the arena as if it were a doubtful matter among Jews [1], but so that the truth of that faith might be made manifest in order to destroy the errors of the Jews, and to strip away the confidence of many Jews who, since they could not defend their own errors, kept saying that the said Jewish master could answer sufficiently each and every argument put to them - that with God's help he would prove, from writings shared and authoritative among the Jews, the following points in order:

Namely: that the Messiah, which is interpreted "Christ," whom the Jews themselves were awaiting, has undoubtedly come. Likewise, that the same Messiah, as had been demonstrated, must be true God and true man. Likewise, that he truly suffered and died for the salvation of the human race. Likewise, that the legal or ceremonial observances ceased, and were bound to cease, after the coming of the said Messiah.

When therefore the said Moses had been asked whether he was willing to answer to the points stated above, he said, and steadfastly asserted, that yes - and that if it were necessary he would remain in Barcelona for this purpose not merely for a day or a week or a month, but even for a whole year.

And when it had been proved to him that he ought not to be called "master," since no Jew ought to have been called by that name from the time of the passion of Christ, he conceded at least this much: that it had been true for the last eight hundred years.

Then it was put to him that when Friar Paul had come to Girona to confer with him about the things that pertain to salvation, and among other matters had carefully expounded the faith of the Holy Trinity which the Christians hold - both concerning the unity of the divine essence and concerning the Trinity of persons - he had conceded that if Christians believed as it had been expounded to him, they believed what indeed ought to be held. And when this was repeated again before the Lord King, he did not contradict it, but kept silent; and so by keeping silent he conceded it.

Then in the palace of the Lord King the said Jew was asked whether the Messiah who is called Christ had come. He answered with assurance that he had not, and added that Messiah and Christ are one and the same, and that if it could be proved to him that the Messiah had come, it ought to be believed of no other than of him - namely, Jesus Christ - whom the Christians believe in, since no one else has come who dared to claim this name for himself, nor has there been anyone else who was believed to be the Christ. It was then plainly proved to him, both by authorities of the Law and the Prophets and by the Talmud, that the Christ had truly come, as Christians believe and preach. And when he could not answer, defeated by the necessary proofs and authorities, he conceded that the Christ, or Messiah, had been born in Bethlehem a thousand years ago now, and had afterward appeared to certain persons at Rome. And when he was asked where this Messiah is - the one you say was born and appeared at Rome - he answered that he did not know. Afterward, however, he said that he lives in the earthly Paradise with Elijah. And he kept saying that although he has been born, nevertheless he has not yet come, because the Messiah is said to have "come" only when he takes dominion over the Jews and delivers them, and the Jews will follow him.

Against this answer there was brought forward the authority of the Talmud which plainly says that he will come to them even today, if they hear his voice and do not harden their hearts, as it is said in the Psalmist: "Today, if you hear his voice," and so on. It was added further that for the Messiah to be born among men is for him to have come among men; it cannot be otherwise, nor be otherwise understood. And to this he could answer nothing.

Likewise, among the proofs advanced concerning the coming of the Messiah, there was brought forward the one from Genesis: "The scepter shall not depart from Judah," and so on. Since therefore it is agreed that in Judah there is neither scepter nor ruler, it is established that the Messiah who was to be sent has come. To this he would answer that the scepter has not been taken away but is merely suspended, just as it also was in the time of the Babylonian captivity. And it was proved to him that in Babylon they had heads of the captivity with jurisdiction, but that after the death of Christ they have had neither ruler nor prince nor heads of the captivity - according to the prophecy of Daniel - nor prophet nor any government at all, as is plainly evident today. By this it is certain that for them the Messiah has come. He nevertheless kept saying that he would prove that they did have the aforesaid heads after Christ, but he could produce nothing on the point; on the contrary, he confessed that they have not had the aforesaid heads for the last eight hundred - or five hundred - years. Thus therefore it is evident that the Messiah has come, since authority cannot lie.

Likewise, when the said Moses claimed that Jesus Christ ought not to be called the Messiah, because the Messiah, as he said, is not to die - as it is said in the Psalm, "He asked life of you, and you gave it to him," and so on - but is to live forever, both he himself and those whom he is going to deliver, he was asked whether that chapter of Isaiah 53, "Lord, who has believed" - which according to the Hebrews begins at the end of chapter 52, where it says, "Behold, my servant shall understand," and so on - speaks of the Messiah. When he steadfastly affirmed that it in no way speaks of the Messiah, it was proved to him by many authorities from the Talmud which speak of the passion and death of Christ, and which prove it by that very chapter, that the aforesaid chapter of Isaiah is understood of Christ - a chapter in which the death of Christ, and his passion and burial and resurrection, are most plainly contained. And he at last, compelled by the authorities, confessed that it is understood and expounded of the Christ; from which it is evident that the Messiah had to suffer and die.

Likewise, since he would not confess the truth unless compelled by authorities, when he could not explain the authorities away he said publicly that he did not believe those authorities that were cited against him - even though they stand in ancient and authoritative books of the Jews - because, as he claimed, they were sermons, in which their doctors, for the sake of exhorting the people, very often lied. By this he indicted both the doctors and the writings of the Jews.

Likewise, everything he confessed and everything that was proved against him - or nearly everything - he first denied, and afterward, refuted by the authorities and put to confusion, he was compelled to confess it.

Likewise, when he could not answer and had several times been publicly confounded, and both Jews and Christians were jeering at him, he said obstinately before everyone that he would by no means answer, because the Jews had forbidden him, and Christians - namely Friar P. of Genoa and certain honorable men of the city - had sent word advising him by no means to answer. Of this lie he was publicly convicted by the said Friar P. and by the honorable men themselves. From this it is evident that he was trying to slip out of the disputation by lies.

Likewise, although he had promised before the Lord King and many others that he would answer for his faith and his law before a small audience, when the Lord King was out of the city he secretly fled and departed. From this it is evident that he does not dare, and is not able, to defend his erroneous belief.

We, James, by the grace of God King of Aragon, Majorca, and Valencia, Count of Barcelona and Urgell, and Lord of Montpellier, truly acknowledge and attest that each and every one of these things was said and done in our presence and in the presence of many others, just as it is contained above in this present document. In testimony of which we have caused our seal to be affixed, for perpetual memory.

Signed: Bn. de Caderita, notary. Signed: Petrus Carbonell, notary. Signed: Petrus de Termino, notary, witness of this copy. Signed: Jacobus de Portu, public notary of Barcelona, who caused this copy to be written and closed it, with letters corrected in the fourth, ninth, and tenth lines, on the fifth day before the kalends of October [September 27], in the year of the Lord 1263.

Let all men know that whereas we, James, etc., caused Bonastrug de Porta, Jewish master of Girona, to come to Barcelona by reason of the accusation which the prior of the Friars Preachers of Barcelona, Friar R. de Penyafort [Raymond of Penyafort], and Friar A. de Socarra and Friar Paul of the same order had laid against him before us - asserting that he had spoken certain words in disparagement of our Lord and of the whole catholic faith, and had moreover made a book about those same matters, a transcript of which he had given to the Bishop of Girona:

the same Bonastrug, brought into our presence - there being present the venerable Bishop of Barcelona; Bg. A. de Angelaria; master Bg. de Turri, Archdeacon of Barcelona; master B. de Olorda, Sacristan of Barcelona; Bn. Vitalis, F. de Minorisa, and Bg. de Vico, jurists; and many others - answered thus: that he had spoken the aforesaid words in the disputation that took place between himself and the aforesaid Friar Paul, in our palace at Barcelona; and that at the beginning of that disputation license was given him by us to say whatever he wished in that disputation. Wherefore, by reason of the license given him in the said disputation by us and by the aforesaid Friar R. de Penyafort, he was not liable in any respect for the aforesaid - especially since he had written the aforesaid book, which he delivered to the said Bishop of Girona, at the bishop's own request.

Concerning these matters we, James, by the grace of God the aforesaid King, took counsel with the Bishop of Barcelona and the others named above as to how we ought to proceed in the case of the said Jew. But counsel having been taken with them - since it is certain to us that the said license was at that time given him by us and by Friar R. de Penyafort - we were willing to sentence the said Jew to exile from our land for two years, and to cause the books that had been written containing the aforesaid words to be burned. This sentence, however, the said Friars Preachers refused in any way to accept.

Wherefore we, James, by the grace of God the aforesaid King, grant to you, the said Bonastrug de Porta, Jewish master, that concerning the foregoing matters, or any one of them, you shall not be bound at any time to answer before any person whatsoever, but only before us and in our presence.

Given at Barcelona, on the second day before the ides of April [April 12], in the year of the Lord 1265.