It is impossible to deny that the “remembrance of the covenant” and the “remembrance of the land” here go together. If we allegorize the one, we must allegorize the other as well, and then there is neither land, people, covenant, prophets nor law――an obvious absurdity which at once refutes itself. The fundamental Mosaic principle is clear, plain and positive. The land is to be held in perpetuity by the Jewish nation, provided the conditions of the covenant are fulfilled. The infringement of the covenant subjects the rebel to bondage and makes him an outcast from the land of his inheritance. The promise of redemption is a rescue from the penalties thus incurred. Therefore, he explains, the _Agadist_ did not say _heglom_, “He drove them out,” which is the usual expression, but _pizrom_, “He spread, scattered them,” because, so long as the _Galuth_ lasts, they have to live in various countries. Yet it is absurd to think that the state of _Galuth_, predicted by _Moses_ as a curse, is a blessing. Here we have in short Manasseh’s ideas as to the _Galuth_ and Restoration. We know that he also acted in full accord with these ideas.¹ ¹ The British Museum has a copy of the _Nishmath Chayyim_, Amsterdam, 1651, with autograph annotations of _R._ Jacob Emden [Jacob Israel] (1697‒1776) _ben_ Zebi Hirsch Ashkenazi (1658‒1718). Two of these annotations are of special interest. Manasseh writes (_fol. 6b_) about the physical weakness of the Jews when compared with Gentiles. On this Emden remarks: I admit this only with regard to the Jews in the _Galuth_; when the Jews lived in their own land they amazed the Romans by their great heroes and athletes, and more so at the time of the First Temple. In another passage (_fol. 8a_), where Manasseh writes about the shorter life of those who keep the Law as compared with others, Emden again remarks: But in Palestine the Jews distinguished themselves by much greater longevity. (M. Seligsohn, the author of Emden’s biography in the _Jewish Encyclopedia_, who enumerates various books with Emden’s autograph annotations, does not seem to have had any knowledge of these annotations.)