Though the conception of “nationalism” in its current sense is modern, the national sentiment itself has existed in our people at all times; and its existence and value have been realised in our literature in every period, from the Bible and the Talmud to the literature of Chassidism, though it used to be called by other names (“the love of Israel,” etc.). But the sentiment and its expression do not appear to the same extent or in the same form in all ages and in all individuals, and it is therefore legitimate to ask what was the attitude of any particular age or any particular thinker to the national sentiment. An interesting book might be written on the history of the national sentiment and consciousness in Israel, dealing with their different manifestations in different ages, their growth and decline, and their expression in the life of the nation and the thought of its great men in each period. Footnote 154: _Guide_, III., chap. xliii. Similarly in chap. xlviii. Footnote 155: End of _Mishneh Torah_. Footnote 156: See the _Iggereth Teman_ and the _Treatise of the Sanctification of the Name_. Footnote 157: A German Jewish scholar, Dr. D. Rosin, in his monograph on the ethics of Maimonides (_Die Ethik des Maimonides_, Breslau, 1876), finds under the heading of “Nationalism” (p. 148) only two laws in the whole _Mishneh Torah_ which allude to the duties of the Jew to his people. But in fact the two laws which he quotes (_Hilchoth T’shubah_, chap. iii. 11, and _Hilchoth Matnath ’Aniim_, chap. x. 2) emphasise rather the unity of the members of one faith. Footnote 158: Introduction to chapter _Chelek_. Footnote 159: See Albo, _Ikkarim_, Part I, chap. 1. Footnote 160: See his Introduction to the _Sepher Hammitzvoth_. Footnote 161: I remarked on this point years ago in “Past and Future.” [See _Selected Essays by Ahad Ha’am_, p. 87.] Footnote 162: Cf. _supra_, p. 10. Footnote 163: See the _Treatise on Resurrection_. Footnote 164: Luzzatto (_ubi supra_) seems to suspect that Maimonides’ whole treatment of resurrection was insincere, and that he was deliberately throwing dust in the reader’s eyes, in order to conceal his heresy. But this suspicion is absurd: Maimonides was a man who was not afraid openly to reject even the immortality of the soul, and to recast all the fundamental beliefs of Judaism. Any unbiassed reader of the treatise must realise that Maimonides defends resurrection with perfect sincerity, but that he is unable to find the real grounds of his own conviction, because he looks for them in his reason and not in his feelings. Footnote 165: _Commentary on the Mishnah, Aboth_, chap. i. 17. Footnote 166: See his letters to Joseph ben Gabar, to the community of Lunel, and to R. Samuel Ibn Tibbon (_Collected Responses of Maimonides_ (Leipsic), Part II., pp. 16, 27, 44).