V
:1
68 to
of
of
he
see
his his
the the
was
69
that
to
of
to
one
of
to
of
careful
writing
years
to position
objectiv
century,
personal
which
examined
historians
interest result
IN
his many
in
effect
many
those forty
threats
The that
by
tendency paying
as
era the approach
for
a
first
and
by
historical
secondary
the
and
and
seventeenth
Simonsohn
the
their
wrote.
continuous
as consideration
times,
and
resolved.
however,
current
importantly and of called on
in
the
restricted
and
his
view
be
problems
DETERMINISM
were
ofVenice to were was
Sifiomo
1946,
THOUGHT been
More
leader,
and
lived
during
presentism
Modena
would
and AND
insufficient
has
he tend
by
until
of
Rabbi
address
dissertation Italy
scholars writing
Rabbi
methodology as
to
MODENA
not
in
today
given
JEwIsH
might which
Cohen,
the
role
DA community
marred
had
community.
was controversies
in
picture
of
earlier
Jews
what
It
as
his
he
FREEDOM
breaking
(1571-1648)
REISSBERG
Mark Modena’s
scholar
times
contextual
of
life:
role
faced
Jewish
LEONE
RON
rabbi:
religious
nonetheless,
the
complete
use history.
his ground Venice
intrigued
as
consistently
Safran,
Much
to
of
which
in
also
approaching
have,
more
role
that
Modena’s
RABBI
understanding
been
a
APPROACH:
but
important
independent
general
of
whatever
Rivkin’s his
began
or
of
an
Bezaleel
had
actions.
Modena
and
Modena
by
problems
of
scholars
as
anything
foe
Ellis
de
and
SEVENTEENTh-CENTURY
accurate
aspects
or
writings,
reader
such
with
with
Jewish
leader
unique
demonstrate
historians
contradictions lay
Leone
more
a
scholarship
friend
CONTEXTUAL him
the
determined
both a
considering writings
will
and
life,
1946,
to
A
and
of
important
Modena’s
Scholars
Rabbi
By In his
Contemporary
which
him.
about
were
prominent study
on
Modena
only
most
a
Modena
richer
INTRODUCTION
scholars about
wrote ity.
Rabbi. a in Modena’s
not the mysteries as
role
attention people ideas goals.
this lived. V
by
all
to
the
an Via
too
the the
was the
1674.
In in
At
death.’ Moshe
Riti works
by
Jewish
spread
descrip
in
was disposed state
partisan
example,
with
influence
a
in
his
his
leaders
the undermine
souls
Nohem
for even
of
the
ofKabbalah,
For
Rabbi
to
by
Judaism, of
anti-Christian Riti,
Jewry claimed after
French
An
had
of and
ofModena. greatest
Jewish some
customs
favorably particular.
any and
works study
reprinted
1683
was
into
and order
in
the
on
it
work,
written.
the
in Jews
from
study
was
in
Riti
Those
European
had
student
Jewish
surrounding
Nohem
1754
was
based
Riti
of
immediately
Modena’s
it
in
Modena
against transmigration
An
poisonous
not
between
His
Modena’s
period
former
published
scientific
bibliographies; on
for
opposition
and
a
PsE using
Christians translated Judaism,
were which
were
this
the
of of
and
polemic to
in
When controversy
ofModena
Christianity.
1753;
of
impression
stance
serious
that of
arguments Hebrew ideas
EARLY Jews, polemic
dormant.
in
the
Jews
in his
relationship
spirit for
Nahmias,
During
start
THE
hostile
scholars
hater
tolerance
the
with
the
the
a
as
customs
the
teachings. favorable
perceptions
for
defended
in
Modena’s
source
relatively
published
Samuel
a
and
tic
Judah.
recanted it
anti-Kabbalah
encountered
the
anti-Jewish
Jewish
mentioned
define
as
of
Jews until
lay
who
that
promote
Jewish the
to
had
to
used
was $cHoiiusHIP: connection
of
Life
Scholar’s
expresses
among
forces kabbalis
he
in
priest affair
Luzzatto
and
previously effort
Modena
works,
countered dissembler
his
encyclopedia
inRiti
countered
written a
Modena called
portrayed voluminous
in
MOBENA
of
1730s
a
Simon
an
as
Christian
OF
Catholic is
that tendency
in
Luzzatto
reactions;
work
the forces
a
ofPadua.
else.3
Morosini,
and
Modena’s
translated,
customs
in
interest
Napoleon’s
anti-Luzzatto
con
Christians
the
because
Morosini
of
WISSENSCHAFr
Modena
Azulai,
presentation
the
much
parallel
extreme
and
Giulio
OVERVIEW
Simon,
with
read,
ANT)
Two
began
Jewish
Luzzatto
A
Judaic by
in
introduction,
From
non-Jews.2
Fede,
pro
of
Europe
summarized
pro-Luzzatto
his
Jews
BRIEF
both
the
A
tion of
Anti-Jewish portraying to Richard
In opposite
apostate
Modena’s
delta Chaim over bias. quoted battles to the
MODENA
usual Wissensehaft, were kabbalist, occupied autobiographical
engage
70 a
of
of for
as by
the
des
fail
in
and
the that
and
that own
that
This
went then
71
here
light.
have
were
their
of
Geiger
him Graetz
by
and
hater
his
Jew history.
Modena
founders
debates, used
bad
source
tradition.
history
knowingly
“a
movement; a
would
Modena Reform
in
claimed periods
was in
it
purposes
challenged
oral ofthe
deprive flaws.
writings
become
Jewish
did
suggestions
Wissensehaft
presented
supported
to
more
description of
one
Judah,
legitimize
was portrayed subject.
Modena excellent
had
objective
appropriate
the and
Rabbi
Geiger
of to anti-Talmudic.
Kabbalah was Jewish
involved
an
to
they
the
order
partisan
Geiger, therefore
the
Kabbalah
life proto-Reformed
as
Enlightenment,
what
with
misuse so He to
character
a
in
Life
the
Reformation
less was agenda for
examples
labeled
complete
on
suppressed
that
as its
cast
entire Judaism,
be
a
unbiased
century.
unless
writings
The
(1784-1855),
the
claimed
to
fight an
early
and and
the
much
Jewish century
of
Graetz,
have
stand
of writing
Reform
Modena’s
to continued
approach
Karaites. on
writings
Luzzatto
Reform
numerous
Modena
and
present interpreted
the
time, time,
of
Kabbalah
His
Gorizia the
to
copy
the views,
to
would
Modena’s
of his
a
and
priori
chance
for
attack
seventeenth
David
anything,
of
movement historians
life.
a
manuscripts
Modena’s
than Modena
nineteenth
falsely
Judaism,
ofModena. of
an
paper
the
in Modena’s
present
fighting
an
the
which
promoting
Regglo
the
haskatah,
in
precursor
Modena’s
was
on
more
in this rabbis
was
Renaissance
late view
distorted the in
that life
again, proof
Reform Samuel
problems
used
in
Jewish
possessed
from of
Reform
the
ignored
to
he the
as
interpretations
of
of
the late
justification
in
Samuel
based
by
a times
Once who
interest century
up when
stance
scope
interest Talmud
revived unblemished
the
Geiger, as
objective
an
scholar
Kabbalah
works
Kabbalah
Modena’s
an personal
his
father
Isaac
the
in a
the
an
their
1846 as
Scholars
was
of
consistency
had
of
changing
of
the
the
tendency
the ushered disdained
had
in
life
and
with
no
scholarship:
history
to
Judaism.
possible
facts
scholarship
who
much
intimidated
and
beyond era
of
seventeenth scholarship
scholarship,
employ recanted
Modena’s
was
works example,
Modena
is
a trends
as
any
Graetz
against Rabbi.”7
Geiger,
was
it
to in
Jewish
scholars of
use marked person
Mishna
use
For the Those
faulty This appeared
he, Modena
and have
Reform
he
impossible.
a
Talmud.6 there
a
to
personal
the
Jewish
in
of
opposition
Modena
doctrine,
stance
first by
of
with
the
way.
Reform Graetz.
may
that was
wished
of
Interest
destroyed
Abraham
Geiger’s
Although
unstable
precedent
because
useless
sages
“first
modern
an
attack
tradition
the
beginning
partisan Judentums. Modena understanding
of unevaluated.4 suppressed
Reggio
Enlightenment Modena’s tendency Geiger.”6 the
a
positions Only Modena’s
to
Heinrjch Nevertheless,
further as of asserted
the
been demonstrate
politics controversies,
subverted
Modena particular a
of
of no
the
For
the
had
and
Kot
Kot
but
that
self- time.
such
Ph.D.
New
in
in was prove
of
having
heresy,
lack
Rivkin, Rivkin Shiomo Pullan support
view
instead
carried
$akhat,
to
preacher,
Scholars as
of
of
to
who
them.”9
author
1946
sources effort.”
like but Simonsohn and
defender and
Kot
Rabbi
1970s.
“Modena
tried
Brian
Scholars its Modena
him a
is published
contradictions
1980s,
supposed
Raz
particular
States,
the
from
the
as
wrote points
as
and authorship charge
the
Law,
in
Ibn
heresy
$akhat
respected
that
appeared.
not
Rivkin’s
places
scholars,
in
a heresy place
to
Areyh.
only
conclude anachronistically whose
of published
sustained
The
Modena
Kot
Simonsohn
it Oral
to United
Simonsohn,
as
to
perceived to
portrayed
of
work
Modena
Ellis
and work
it Such century
on
something
Modena
history Grendler,
conflicting
the the
Law.
hagath
of
rabbi
$
liberal,”
currents
supposed
required in
goes
with Rivkin
concluded
scholars
Paul
century. in
Modena,
learn
London.
Oral
Boksenboim
many viewed
the limited attributes
dabbler
Jewish
questioned heretical
contradictions,
Rivkin’s
of study
on
of scholars.
also
a
authorship
he
the
which
came
ideas
the
nineteenth attributed
could
Rivkin
who
the
inclined
saw
of
He
life.
Yacob
the
Modena’s
previous
was
that
he
fifteenth
works
intellectual
and
the
of Modena
of
is Ruderman,
Tradition tasks
Venetian
and
dissertation
as he
presented
tolerant
with
Those the
the
of
University
to
heretical
autobiography,
that failure.”
validity
texts
his published in
and
was continued
long
deal rate; Modena’s
and
David
its
the
failure
scholarship
against
Cohen, exist.’° perspective
the
breaking
and
on
the
as
of
evidence debate.
at
research
on
not
studies
manuscripts.
who
the
of on of
Spain
$akhal.
not
proving
“humanistically
nineteenth-century
own
Modena
Bonfil,
did
Venice
second
Mark
Modena’s
in
a scholars
new in
years
them,
by
from did
ground
character,
attack
Modena
Kot
research.”
on Modena
examine
liberal as
working
Modena that
Rivldn’s attack
source
matter their of and
conscientiously
in were
available frustration
to lived
forty
of
a
Carpi,
own
Other
on
their Reuven
of
on
things
wrote interest
was
opposed
from his
resulted
major
who
about
first
Rivldn’s
Simonsohn imagined
Relying
SCHOLARSHIP been
point
works Modena
he
and
accepted
himself
defended
heretical
Ravid,
it.
these
writing methods the
The Daniele
weakness
a
and
“democratic
sand
feelings projects.
weakness directly were
Rivkin
had himself
having
poet.
a
on
it publishing
much
Modena
always and
was
attached
RECENT
and
as
seventeenth-century turning
refute
present
The
from
where
who
IN
other
Judaism and
was
Modena’s
applying
of
to information
has
A how
and
to
base
heretic
While context.
Benjamin
to
contains After
1970s
contextual
Modena
successfully
as
viewed
not
out
Geiger
Modena
Simonsohn’s
order
the
MODENA
context dissertation
He hypocrisy, scholar,
“suffered trouble
Rivkin, himself.8
did
matter Modena
Simonsohn
used
in which proper
Sakhat as known $akhat
that Rabbinic set contradictions in character
felt, archival
turned such on
in
72 is
of
In be
life
his
the
The
the
over
that
that
73
head
from
more fights are
There about
Jews
for
explain
example
attitude true.
preached
religious
the
interest
should
responded
uncovered Jewish
Jews
their shows
were
is
an
fought
proved
and
Rabbi much innovation.
Responsum.
of
on
had
an
as a He
approach.
distinguished
Rite.3
their
an
uncovering
are
Modena, while
be
as Jews
historians.
of
be
in
stand
reveal
also community.
influx
a to
Jews, head-covering,
opposite
Historical
Modena
they
seventeenth-century and
that
lax
him removing
is
observance
of Italian interest from wrote
responsum
the
the
particular
objective to
also
of
the
of
take
were
to its
information
law.
of
circumstances.12 holier-than-thou
the
rage,
were
the about
to
Levantine
a
of place”
this bare-headed.
of
charges
they
more
connotation
due
us practice.
posed
and
to
Levantine
a
still to
longer the
question
Jewry,
they
attention and
Kabbalah,
or
origin
practice
the
origin from
certain
and
no
about
Jews
source
For
a
the
therefore
teach
that the a is
in
ordinances that
unacceptable,
the
go Ghetto
elicit
“time
that to
custom
to
respond
to
are
problems
can to
those
and
hat
Judaism
the thought
was
sensitivity over
derived
Furthermore,
make
milieu,
to attempted
to
of of
It
longer Ashkenazic Jew
be
assert
Modena
his
charges
accepted
than
what a
one’s
Rabbinic
no
to
it. to
between
have
for response
Jews ofAshkenazic
within of
asked
by
custom
be
for
debate
communities.
on reference
school
Responsa
according
a
and
cultural
to
his Jew.”
like
to
was
by
a
reveals
that
responses
branches
in
points
remove
posed
the
is
went
was community.
conflict Modena
to
came
His Law Jewish
curiosity varied
in
of
of
chutzpah; others
Rabbinate
God-fearing,
it
distinguish
Rabbinic
the
point
permitted
then
“who
controversies
writing or Modena
Jews
to
is
Rabbis
of
and
Orthodox the
He
it
advocated
contemporary
more
important
while
various modest
connotations studies Venice.
Italian
case,
customs
ofJewish
within
commandments
respectftil evidence
and
issue
that
interested
the
Modena’s
MODENA
idle
made Italian
is
the
one doctrinal
place.
amongst never
Modena’s
more
question
it
to OF
for point
disrespect,
In important several
recent
a sects
this
for
a
he also
and
Jewish
therefore
political
of
particular
the
stand
on
on
Reform are
head
sermon
was
as
most
Scriptural century
to
world.
example, act
and
interesting
threat
it any
time
Europe
historians
S’mDIEs
the
the
certain
himself.
of of
different to
an
longer
the
The
For
Modena
such There
Deciding
for
important
although
is as position
customs.
centered
no
Sabbath
over
proof seventeenth-century
a
Modena,
provides
was
CURRENT
nineteenth are or
between issues
Italy. now
in value Modena in coverings, that, covering relative
head Christian head
their observant, it community
It amongst all
element
observance.
form To I a
in
be
of
to
of
so
by
we
his
war
out- had
role
to who
based
one
would
among
Venice
himself
and
have claimed
being
mystical
what history.’4 alchemy
their to
alchemy.
have
statement
were
mysticism
unusual of
of
to
with
advanced
man
its
Modena, studies
Modena’s
dismissed
with
threatened
may would
came
Modena
was
Modena is
Modena
Jewish
the
is
interpretation
Much
been
between
he
Shrug
it,
examine that
in
Palestine, against
of
rivalry
It
then
that
and
to
the
which
issue
opposition
that
have
and
core
and
Safed
circumstances
personally believe
studied turned
accused
experiments
the
ofkabbalistic
interest thinkingin
head.’5
to
perspective
personal
later followers.
studied
unlikely
connection
felt
a
from he
quoted
Kabbalah, is
the
the
Kabbalah
have
of
his
own
it
of
He suggested
school
of
himself
the
some
reveals
Kabbalah
have
father’s
a
historical
Italy
possibilities
difficult
head-covering
may
of
historical
of which
to is
historical
generally his
form
who
of been Law. was
the may and
It
in
much
because covering
to
study
Modena’s
on
and
Similarly,
has
This
Several came founded
Jews
day understand
strains due
one. Modena
there Kabbalah
It
the
ill
example
To
his
the who
who in Modena
particular
cultures,
that
writings, among
of
Italy.
mentions
Italian
determine
the
against
custom.
Responsa
early RENAISSANCE
to
flourished, host
became Although
age.’6
decidingJewish
disciplines.
that tangential
of Shrug,
an
thought.
trend
steeped
a
war
in
as
arrival,
who
distinguish
suggested
their
especially
against (1534-1572) Modena’s ITALIAN was
early
Cordovero.’7
to
Zohar
Modena’s
seen
son,
Shrug.
an
separate matters
continues THE
Kabbalali
been
of from
be
from
Modena’s
Luria
The his
Modena’s Shrug’s
Kabbalah
essentially
intellectual
turning two
of AND is
of
Moses
can in
that also
from explanations.
Israel
the
which
seventeenth-century
for generation
fact,
on
popularity,
was the
of necessary
aspect
of
and
deciding
has
in
oflssac Before of
historians. it
customs major
In
death
Shrug
aspect
It
a
in
use
first
era
passage
based
time the
unlikely
is KABBALAM,
reasons
arrival
a
Kabbalah
Kabbalah
this
of growing
an
it
Another
Modena’s
Zohar.
conflated
climate student
are
about
in
the
a
against
Kabbalah,
The
the adherents.
be
appropriated considered
Modena’s MODENA,
prohibiting of-hand against contemporary
studied
studies explain
in to personal on with Shrug’s Kabbalah know charlatan.’8
and because These lived
falsely turn times. its
74 to to
to of
by
the
the
the
and
not
and
will
find 75
della
many
about
result
pagan Greek
agree
which
by
divine
as
applies to gained
makes ,
a
unprec
Platonic was
mitzvot,
who
medieval fifteenth accurate, access
of
Orpheus.
hints
as
revelatory
Pico
method
different
the or he
and
philosophic sometimes
antiquity
Jewish the
for such
the
a
as
sefirot
and Scriptures
find
more
method curiosity
and
which
late
experiences
with was theology,
translated a to
in
for is
of
in
with
“Messiah
It such this
Partially (1455-1522)
fundamental
called
of”Platonist”
between
had
synthesizing
demonstrated
something
era
word
essentially the
kabbalistic
in
Kabbalah,
doctrines
continuation
Christians
Pagan
of search
is develop used
an
a
mystical
label
an
Messiah. with the Jews
meaning
a
writings
to
Christians,
concerned
as commandments,
powers,
being
Pythagoaras,
literal revived.
anthropomorphic
as thinkers
as
Reuchlin
Beginning
Renaissance The
is
was with
among ecstatic
developed as
was
Christians.
the
doctrine
Christian
was
between
and
contributed
more divine among tradition
seen century,
in divine
adapted
Jesus
kabbalists
and
scholars
experience.
seen interpret is
concerned
of
Italian
desire
the
apocryphal
It
He
to
and
was Hebrew.
whom
dialogue
common Jewish
contrast,
Jews concerned Renaissance
Kabbalah,
the is
instructors, were
were
of
philosophy
philosophy.19
in Trismegistus,
common
of
meaning
Platonism
the
By
into
Kabbalah
the
mystical
knowledge
Christian Christian
fourteenth
Birth,
growing and
(1465-1532), more
existence
each
for
attribute
Fundamental
of reason,
a
mitzvotY
and
held
led
is
the performing This
between
with to doctrine, and
the
Kabbalah.
theology
reach
hidden
works
of
Platonic gematria, the
aspects by
Hermes
was
Virgin
to
of
they
roots
theosophical Viterbo
realms.
philosophers
end
Aristotelian
human
thinkers,
the
rejected
Jewish Man, or
da
Jewish
there translators
synthesis
finding
characterized
substituted
the
order
on
and Kabbalah,
connected
What
Christian
postulates
Plato.2’
intercourse
was
by
and
for in
of
Christianity. equivalents, and
a perrenis.”2°
technique,
It
common
Zoroaster,
Neoplatonists fascinating
true;
world.
were often
heavenly Egidio
Until
Trinity,
of
philosophical
God
based
Jewish
performance
as
closely
form
Renaissance
desire
was this
find
Kabbalah, the
of
the
theology,
by
is Renaissance
create
mare
have
come”
to
1494),
predated
to in
of
mysticism.
on
Christian
to
Scriptures
The that
Christian
such
intellectual
numerical
universe. lower
philosophy.
support
the
kabbalistic
has
God
a of
scholasticism “phitosopha
name
names
the of
Through
say
and reverse of
that
Renaissance
the and
both. induced non-Jewish for (1463- belief
a
as
their
intellectuals. to
of
Christian
philosophy,
of
who
variety
One Jewish
from
level
the
to
attempt
for
figures Historians attempt
works.
One
Pica’s
Mainstream
to
influence
divine
with
to
history
wide
of
this
a
however, doctrine, Aristotelian to the
tradition, tendency pagan
Platonic knowledge theosophy, edented ment
of Christian
century
philosophy,
access important Kabbalah. Jewish Mirandola first
come.” references analyzing
interpreting “Messiah sources structure
exerts emanate
necessarily referred
use
of
to
at
as
he
its
10)
the
the
the
and
and
side
who
such
of
1291),
result
power
Spain,
magic,
and
religion
concern
with
cultural
practice
interpre
in
Kabbalah
the
somewhat
The of
convert
Hebrew
Christians
its
writer
scholars
conversion.
became
(1235-13
of
condition
(1240-
controversial
scholars
Modena,
to
the
by
growth
mind
Conceptions
and
dangerous
and
with
of of
messianism
the
a
fostered
environment.
their
Kabbalah,
the
system
Adret
new-found
prolific
aware
Christian
Trinity.
on
Jews
magic
of
arts.
Christianity,
a
Christian
also
unwelcome
Greek
apostates
Abulafia
ibn was
on
magic,
the
Christian
also
their
of
which
their
used
ofAdret,
studies
rejection
and
accessible.
of
Moslem
was
prophetic
in
Jews
by
in
entice
Renaissance
a
Ricci,
many
Some
availability
was
his
and
with
used
mystical
works
to
in
by
more he
the
there
Abraham
Abraham
Kabbalah,
other
fabric
Paul
esoteric
that
the
and
professorship
to
Professor
Judaism
doctrine
a
thought
some
by
mysticism
interest
to
used
used
a
in
excessive
communities,
as
of
growing
into
enticing,
when
rabbi
into
and
became
apostates.
Kabbalah,
was
also
flourished
ecstatic
the
appeal
as
well
both
of
example,
between
offered
of delve
Christians,
of
community,
interest much
as
Christian system
in
criticized
a
was
woven
preached
role
I
to
they
a
Christian
theosophic
rediscovered
above,
For
occurred
of
and
was
would
It
Judaism
the
forms
his
for
need
was
becoming
was
the
and
aware
in
to
in
with
were
began
manuscripts
where
common
not
for
Jews
both
leader
that
basis a
trend.3°
disciplines
close
society.
realms,
Modena
did
also
practitioners
rare
As
Maximilian
mentioned
how
interest
the
kabbalists
this
Modena
doctrines.
Kabbalah,
to
as
cross-fertilization
Levant,
the
Judaism
charge
intimately
between
Jews
Even
by
uneducated
This
divine
AdretobjectedtoAbulafia’s
Christianity
by
esoteric
Gentile
Although
the
this
the
scholars
formed
that
justification
was
of
Simultaneous
the
between to
in
in
some
the
as
Previously
posed
dangerously
Kabbalah.
always
with
understand
magic.
was
physician
school.
Christian
Hebrew.
in
Pavia.31
Kabbalah,
and
rejected
fact,
to
in Jewish
exchanges
clash
was
and
in
factor
not
P1cc.
of
understanding
In
it,
danger
advance
Italy
philosophy
advocates
influence
mystical-ecstatic understood.
easy
first
by
by publishing,
became
and
were
Kabbalah to
various
interest
to
to
magic
is
is
countered
industry.
sefirot,
and
interest in
of
It
Another
It
The best
exchange.
on
controversy
previously
for
vocal
theosophical
published
way
the
taught
possible
intellectual
be
University
Ficino
a
the this
the
as 76
the
Christianity. tations convert.
most kabbalist,
to
and and Apostates
worked can
works proof
as were
science, magic resulting printing
migrated marked
of of designed
influenced
who with Abulafia MODENA AS RABBI OF VENICE
The most salient fact of Modena’s life was his position as a chief rabbi of the Ashkenazim of Venice. This aspect of Modena’s life has not been sufficiently considered even by the most recent research. The contradictions and the mysteries surrounding him are no longer problematic when one views Modena primarily in his role as a responsible leader of a community during troubled times. A good source for such a view is found in his Responsa which have been compiled into Ziknei Yehuda. Many of these rulings illustrate Modena’s great concern for the maintenance of traditional Rabbinic Judaism in the face of threats both from within and without the Jewish Community. The Venetian Jewish Community was unusual in its composition. Jews from all over the world were establishing sub-communities in the ghetto. In an introductory statement to Zeknei Yehuda, Modena warned of the danger posed to the Venetian Jews by fragmen tation ofthe community. In the past, lamented Modena, Jews were able to reach consensus by majority opinion. This became increasingly impossible in Venice: “It happens consis tently here in Venice, where the community is divided into many sub-committees, that any agreement reached by majority reverts consistently to disagreement among various factions.”32 This fragmentation was especially worrisome to Modena because it had repercussions for the Jews in their relationship with the Gentile government. Referring to those Jews who chose to use the non-Jewish courts and thus further undermine the unity and self-government ofthe Jewish community, Modena stated: “Howgreat is the sin ofthose who embarrass their brothers in front ofthe Gentile governors by entering into judgement on money and criminal matters in non-Jewish courts.” Although the first ghetto was established in Venice in 1516,it was not until the start of the seventeenth century that this geographical constraint was a way of life for Italian Jews. This period also marks a general repression of Jews as the Catholic Church attempted to curtail the Reformation. The free flow of learning between Jews and Christians which marked the earlier period ofthe Renaissance closed as the Church began to suspect that Jewish studies influenced Protestants and Humanists. It is wrong, however, to view this withdrawal from shared learning from one side only. Jews also began to withdraw into themselves. Modena, who in many ways represents the quintessential Renaissance Jew, viewed the ghetto favorably. In a letter to a friend in Verona, Modena called the Venetian ghetto “a sign of the ingathering of the exiles.”35 Scholars have often equated rationalism with enlightenment and mysticism with obscurantism.36 In this view, Kabbalah would represent a Jewish withdrawal from the Gentile world and Modena’s opposition to it would tend to create a perception of him as an early enlightened Jew. This view has left Modena scholarship in a constant state of confusion with nineteenth-century reformists claiming him as one oftheir own, and recent
77
A of
to
the
the
the
the
the
Law
took early
who
were
result
meta
many
orders stand
Added
Torah forced Safed,
sought
used
impact
author
painful
average
Modena
of
early
a
from
and
ridiculed
Oral
for the
in
know
who
an
answered
the
first-hand.
baggage
Marranos.
the
“If
they cases
Renaissance
Renaissance
and
pagan,
had
the then
:
sort to
issued
who was
to
However,
a
Marrano
as had
the
a
as
threat
ofobscuranfism.
the a
refuge
of
woman
such
was
wealthy
a but
first
of
danger
of
rabbinical
Reformation. Modena
converts
times who
well
recognized understanding
them
Yoseph of
debate
involving through
another part
as
Marranos, the was Two him
Buxdorf
openly.
apparent, interpretation. were
case
worldly difficult
for
which
creating
opposite
who
Judaism. as to
another a as
sift
Belt forced
with
context
This
call
was
of
the Gentiles,
various
and
oral
Counter
Cohen.39 the
to
them
all
the Venice
at a to
the ghetto in
such
can
with those from
of
faith
the such
source
century.
disrespect
was
in
intellectuals
acute
experience we
early
carried of
the
was themselves
since
only
Rabbinic
Kabbalah
only
controversies one
were
which tended purpose
in increasingly
heard past.38
quoted Many
Kabbalah
were
and
and not
of
Modena
those,
not scholars
meant
the
origin
father
He
had
Gentiles
within Cohen,
of
see from became
interpretation. There
Jewish,
against
a
increasing important
Judaism
some
he came.
from
his for
to
seventeeith
became Church,
but is
and
scholars
Christian
to
not Judaism
century,
an
Christian that
number divine a
and
Judaism,
is
the
they that
influx illegal.
a other. struggled
danger
Kabbalah
to
of
Jews
Protestant moving
of
though the
own Reformation
be
in
sources
decision above,
return
the
argument
the
Catholic
Judaism
in
lands, each
a
brethren
town,
them practice
which
both
to
what
provide the
community,
mother
some
even
Judaism, well-placed
to sixteenth
their
of
the to
of
for
contradict
by his
and
people
would
to
new
writings
of
his
belief of
to
Kabbalah
was
could
of
chose from
involved
Rabbinate
lifetime
from
early
during
Rabbinic
its
Many
divided
Christian rulings
woman
one their
ancestral
mentioned
a
studied Neoplatonic of
societies
also request
who they
to
in
the
only
a
As
times.
as returned
mystical perhaps
Venice
marriage Jewish
that
Italian
mean
past.
evidence
but
directly
and
number
of
were both
of
not communities
to
the
to
Modena’s
the implications
Christianity, family’s
divorced that
they
the
understanding
defending
their
Rabbinic
a
during
because
the
was
because In
of to
testify
his open of
the
large
Marranos involved
Rabbi
that
fear
came
vulnerable for
his
ob
Kabbalah
attack, to
prominence
Talmud, Jewish, when
a
Christian
as facing
it Italy
opening
marry not
from pointing of syrteretism. well.
first
Jews
challenges of
people
conversion
the
was religion
in
In
should
Thej
to
Those
do
Modena of
culture
role
again
under incomplete
what
was
The
the
came
we aim
an
places his the
these
burn
these
understand
confused
scholars and of
Christian, trend
philosophy. Its danger
Jew
came
in to
to Jewish convert
ity, particularly
a Inquisition
to
of process up on
implications
Once
out. challenges
wanted emphatically who convert
and
law.”4°
78 The most famous case involving a Marrano in which Modena played a key role was the case of David Farrar of Amsterdam, who was accused by the Rabbinate of heresy. Farrar, a scholar and prominent merchant, had returned to Judaism and, after moving to Amsterdam from Salonika, began to engage in polemics with Christians.4’ Problems began when a controversy arose in Amsterdam concerning a ritual slaughterer whose adherence to Jewish Law was questioned. Farrar, in defiance of the rabbis, ruled that the meat in question was permitted and publicly advised his followers to use it. Further complications arose when Farrar preached in the synagogue that practical Kabbalah was no longer effective.42 We know of Modena’s involvement with the Farrar case from a letter sent to the rabbis of Salonika who had asked Modena’s advice in the matter. No mention of Farrar’s defense ofthe ritual slaughterer was made in this letter. Instead, Modena defended Farrar and pointed out that the former Marrano is a “goodman ofmany good acts who was the first to establish a synagogue in Amsterdam and who dons the tefihinand tzitzit and who is strict to fulfill the rulings of the sages.”43 Farrar’s attack on Kabbalah was also defended by Modena, and this marked the beginning of the latter’s open stance against Kabbalah.’ Modena’s disagreement with the Rabbinate in the case of Farrar did not indicate a generally lax attitude toward the power ofthe rabbis in communal affairs. We know from other recorded controversies that Modena was a zealous advocate of rabbinic prerogative. His defense ofFarrar represents both a concern for the integration offormer Marranos back into mainstream Judaism and a growing sense ofthe danger that Kabbalah posed to Jewish life.
CoNcLusIoN
Historians have generally shared the view of Modena as a complicated and often inconsistent figure. Life of Judah, Modena’s autobiography, is the source of much of this perception.46 Indeed, there is much in this self-revelatory work that is disturbing to one searching for consistency. For example, Modena revealed himself as an “obsessive” gambler. He listed among his accomplishments the distribution of protective amulets, in spite of his preaching against mysticism. Also disturbing to some historians, is Modena’s constant mention ofmoney. By viewing Modenain the context ofhis times, these problems disappear. For example, in the case ofgambling, it has been pointed out that in Modena’s day, that particular form ofrecreation was acceptable and that it was common for Jews and
79
it
is
of
of
of
to
as
he
co
not
For
era
fact was
own
and
he
even
after
with
with
could
work,
rather
an
deep.5’
case did
his
the Just
general
study
Yet
letter
who
polemics
taught
in
codifying disciples.
standard
tended
in
lived
a
He
goal
the
was
the
exemplified
Zohar
of
by his
Christianity
the
Protestants, adherents
matter,
in
development
communities
Jew
the
it
in
“Renaissance
turn
teaching,
of
who
or
he
intellectual
obsession
small.”49
reflects
the
by
and
superficial.
as
in
that
this
and
involvement or
from
squarely
pain
interest
desired
believed
Judaism.
Both
his rise
than
and
in
a
that
anti-Christian
held
fact
well
who
to
big
his
often
other
incarnation.
but
the
him
person
writing,
generation
as
significance.
help
the
Ashkenazic
are
intellectual
consistency for
feel
been
authorities
and
layman
his
generation,
consummate
each
for
Finally,
broader
Modena’s
Catholics
methodology
place
an
for
later
achieving
Modena’s
disciples
the own whether
of
argument
about
long
reverted
unusual
a
from
was
from
that
at
socialization
Birth,
new
in
almost
quoted
half-heartedly
breaking
his
a
philosophy,
camp.
the
Jewish
was
it
had
preaching,
by
and
does
Tzarfati
previous
Kabbalah
argument
to
time.
to
rhetoric,
can
looking
it
it
he between
more
away to
only
matter
living
the
and
of
the
nothing,
Virgin
and
of
the
a
since
Modena’s
ground
and
down
the
One
forging
Counter-Reformation. apparent
Christians
do
Christian
than
effort
since
orally
sense
of
like
maintained
aimed
peace
Christianity.48
a by
to
scholarship,
pulling
the
period historical
also
Modena
Yohai
and
interesting
are
appealed
new
poetry,
gifts
In
a
Trinity,
a
learning
against
wisdom
And
is
to
making much
rabbi.
been
the
anti-Kabbalah
an
distancing
written
with
of
a
Bar
that
grammar
either
in
the
create
and
the
precepts
proper
of
long
rabbi
has
way concerning
argument
the
works
on
place.
issue
was
Jewish
is
to
It
so
introversion.
his
had
terms it
an
devoted
The
finally advances
including
goal
and
into
feeling
Renaissance
1605
Shimon
of
he
Judaism
in intellectual
against
arguments
argumentation
foremost
giving
based
over
represents
and
learning,
in
question
failed
toward
the
generation.47
was
Modena
taught
time
core
Christians
toward to
His
move
published
and
much
it
Rabbi
casinos.46
also
other
his
Modena
also
Modena
gets
much
great
the
unconvincing
in
his
interests, by
he
it,
difficulty reconcile
which law.
learning
first
so like
is Modena’s
immediate
polemical
Yohai
Tzarfati
can
of
each
an
until
Christianity.
arguments
groups In
of
to
to
tendency
into
of
unusual of
before became
the
is
in to
approach
almost
the
was
Nohem,
Bar
Renaissance
Modena’s
an
One
about
written
wrote
Hermeticism
socialize
deep
of
at
style
well
both
danger
body
in
predates
habit
failed
the
Jews
This
new
One
extent variety
However,
to
that
various
learning,
in
less
a
it
mAn
who
students
role.
been
Ben-Tzion
convert
“the
Vehereu.52
This
lived
His Modena None
reflected
The
began
to
to
aimed
interested
when delving
says
poses
he
existing
Zohar
characteristic
amulets
time.5°
have
their
80.
and
arguments.
than
Kabbalah.
were
example,
about the Mogen
establish Modena’s
his to This
similarly wrote the not
though
symbolizes sour
Renaissance
operation.
tendency were
which
that Renaissance the
man.”
Christians
rabbinic
money Modena, the respectful towards Christianity in general and has some very charitable things to say about Christian society and culture.63 Once again, one is left with the impression that Modena was more concerned with steering Jews away from Christianity than he was with disproving Christian dogma. Just as many of his arguments against Kabbalali are superficial, much of his anti- Christian polemic seems aimed towards a limited goal. Modena lived in turbulent times for Jews, and his role as rabbi limited him in ways not sufficiently recognized by historians. Changing conditions in general society created changing relations between Jews and Christians. New aspirations and adaptations within Jewish society to meet these chal lenges created tensions. Modena embodied much of this turbulence and it is that which should give him continuing importance in modern studies. In our times, we are faced with similar confusion as cultures meet and ways are sought to understand the dynamics ofmulti-cultural societies. We have much to learn from seventeenth-century Venice as experienced by Modena. The various Jewish communities ofItaly during the Renaissance were engaged in a unique relationship with their Christian hosts. Never before were conditions for a shared cultural environment so ripe. It must be remembered that this era pre-dates the racial anti-Semitism of the nineteenth century,TM and as the religious anti-semitism abated for this brief time in Jewish-Christian relations, so did many of the barriers to cultural exchange. This situation changed by the time that the Counter-Reformation was at its height. There was no longer the free and easy exchange of ideas and culture of the previous generation. Modena’s life and times correspond to an era in which Jews and Christians withdrew from each other. While Modena in many ways continued to represent the Renaissance-style Italian rabbi, he also became the product of the ghettoization of Italian Jewry. Historians still interested in Modena should use his writings as a source for understanding the dynamics of the changes that occurred in Jewish-Christian relations from the end of the Renaissance to the beginning of the Counter-Reformation. These changes are a reflection of the general trends of those times.
81 Nois
1 Mark Cohen, “Leone de Modena’s Riti: A Seventeenth-Century Plea For Social Toleration of Jews,” Jewish Social Studies, vol. 35, 1972. 2Howard Adelman, Success and Failure in the Seventeenth-Century Ghetto ofVenke: TheLife and Thought ofLeon Maclena, 15714648, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation (Brandeis University, 1985), 19-21. Ibid., 28. 4 Ibid., 43. 5 Ibid., 59. 6lbid,91. 7 Ibid., 108. 8 Ibid., 174. 9 Ibid., 173. 10 Ibid. 11 Ibid., 177. 12 Ibid., 181. 13 Yehuda Aryeh Modena, Ziknei Yehuda, ed. Penina Naveh (Jerusalem: Bialik Institute), 176. 14Ezalel Safran, “Leoneda Modena’sHistorical Thinking,” in Jewish Thought in the Seventeenth- Century, ed. Isadore Twersky and Bernard Septimus (Harvard University Press, 1987). 15 Yehuda Aryeh Modena, Zeknei Yehuda, ed. Penina Naveh (Jerusalem: Bealik Institute, 1956) 177, 178. 16 Mark Cohen and Theodore Rabb, “TheSignificance ofLeonModena’sAutobiography For Early Modern Jewish Thought and General European History,” in The Autobiography of a Seventeenth- Century Venetian Rabbi, Leon Modena’sLife ofJudah, ed. Mark Cohen (Princeton University Press, 1988). 17Bracha Sack, “The Influence ofCordovero on Seventeenth-Century Jewish Thought,” in Jewish Thought in the Seventeenth-Century, ed. Isadore Twersky and Bernard Septimus (Harvard Univer sity Press, 1987). 18 Howard Adelman, “Rabbi Leon Modena and the Christian Kabbalists,” in Renaissance Rereadings: Intertext and Context, ed. Maryanne Cline, Anne J. Horowitz, Wendy A. Furman (Bloomington: University of Illinois Press, 1988). 19 Paul Kristeller, “Renaissance Platonism,” in Facets of the Renaissance, ed. William H. Werkmeister (New York: Harper and Row, 1959). 20 Paul Kristeller, Renaissance Philosophy and the Medieval Tradition (The Archabbey Press), 1966. 21 Paul Kristeller, “Renaissance Platonism,” in Facets of the Renaissance, ed. William H. Werkmeister (New York: Harper and Row 1959).
82 7
22 Ibid. 23 Moshe Idel, “The Magical and Neoplatonic Interpretatians of the Kabbalah in the Renais sance,” in Jewish Thought in the Sixteenth-Century, ed. Bernard Dov Cooperman (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1983). 24 Joseph L. Blau, The Christian Interpretation of the Cabata in the Renaissance (New York: Kennikat Press, 1965). 25 Moshe Idel, “Kabbalah: New Perspectives,” Orim: A Jewish Journal at Yale, 3:1 (Autumn 1987), 63. 26 Ibid., 64. 27 Ibid. 28 Moshe Mel, Kabbatah, 191. 29 Howard Adelman, “Modena: Autobiography and the Man,” The Autobiography of a Seven teenth-Century Rabbi, ed. Mark R. Cohen (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1988). 30 Ibid., 271. 31 j• Blau, Christian Interpretation, 65. 32 Modena, Zeknei Yehuda, 172 33 Ibid. 3 Shiomo Simonsohn, “Halacha and Society in the Writings of Leone da Modena,” in Jewish Thought in the Seventeenth-Century, 436. 35 Ibid., 437. 36 Ibid.
3½. Pullan, The Jews ofEurope and the Inquisition of Venice1550-1670 (New Jersey: Barnes & Noble, 1983). 38 Bernard Cooperman, “Eliahu Montalto’s Suitable and Incontrovertible Propositions: A Seventeenth-Century Anti-Christian Polemic,” in Jewish Thought in the Seventeenth-Centu,y (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1987), 470. 39There is a scriptural proscription for a Cohen to marry a divorced women. The issue here was whether or not marranos retain the genealogical knowledge of their ancestors. 40Modena, Zeknei Yehuda. 41Adelman, “Rabbi Leon Modena,” 275. 42 Ibid. 43 Modena, Zeknei Yehuda, 170. 44Adelman, “Rabbi Leon Modena,” 275 45 It is questionable to use Modena’s auto-biography for proof ofinconsistency. It is possible that Modena used his diary for self-expression and therapeutic purposes, not expectingit to be published. For a discussion of early modern autobiography see Natalie Zemon Davis’ “Fame and Secrecy: Leon Modena’s Life as an Early Modern Autobiography”. 46 David Ruderman, “Memoirs of a Jewish Gambler,” in Orim: A Jewish Journal at Yale, 3:1, (Autumn 1987).
83
The
Press,
period
Simonsohn
Through
Makor
modern
HannaArendt’s
246.
see
Shiomo
early
Society
ed.
the
1971),
(Jerusalem:
of
period,
Jewish
in
Books,
modern
Leibovitz
Hanatzrus,
late
anti-Semitism
Schocken
1951).
Negid
the
Shmuel
of
of
Environment,”
York:
form
Hebor
World,
the
Nehemia
(New
and
ed.
from
Veherev
Renaissance
anti-Semitism
Brace,
the
Ettinger
Press).
in
S.
based
Mogen
171.
Ari-Nohem,
Modena.”
transition
and
Harcourt,
Society
the
Leon
racially
of
Nirdomim
Yehuda,
Modena,
Modena,
York:
the
of
“Jewish
“Rabbi
Ben-Sasson
1988.
Aryeh
Zeknei
(New
Aryeh
that
Meketzie
H.
discussion
Roth,
to
a
H.
Yehuda
For
Adelman,
Delman,
ed.
53
54
52
50Yoheda 51
49Modena,
48i
47Cecil
Europe
$4
1977).
in
(Jerusalem:
Antisemiti8m Ages, ______
1
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Adelman, Howard, “Modena: Autobiography and the Man.” In The Autobiography of a Seventeenth-Century Venetian Rabbi. Edited by Mark Cohen. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1988.
“Rabbi Leon Modena and the Christian Kabbalists.” In Renaissance Rereadings: Intertext and Context. Edited by Maryanne Cline, et al. Normal, Ill.: University ofIllinois Press, 1988.
Success and Failure in the Seventeenth Century Ghetto of Venice: The Life and Thought of Leon Modena, 1571 - 1648. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Brandeis University, 1985.
Arendt, Hannah. Antisemitism. New York: Harcourt, Brace, & World, 1951.
Blau, J. The Christian Interpretation of the Cabala in the Renaissance. New York: Kennikat Press, Inc., 1965.
Cohen, Mark. “Leone da Modena’s Riti: A Seventeenth-Century Plea for Social Tolera tion of Jews.” Jewish Social Studies 35 (1972).
and Theodore Rabb. “The Significance of Leon Modena’s Autobiography for Early Modern Jewish Thought and General European History.” In The Autobiog raphy of a Seventeenth-Century Venetian Rabbi, Leon Modena’s Life of Judah. Edited by Mark Cohen. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1988.
Cooperman, Bernard. “Eliahu Montalto’s Suitable and Incontrovertible Propositions: A Seventeenth-Century Anti-Christian Polemic.” In Jewish Thought in the Seven teenth Century. Edited by Isadore Twersky and Bernard Septimus. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1987.
Idel, Moshe. “Kabbalah: New Perspectives.” Orim:A Jewish Journal at Yale 3, no. 1 (Autumn 1987): 63.
“The Magical and Neoplatonic Interpretations of the Kabbalah in the Renais sance.” In Jewish Thought in the Sixteenth-Century. Edited by Bernard Dov Cooperman. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1983.
Kristeller, P. Renaissance Philosophy and the Medieval Tradition. London: Archabbey Press, 1966.
“Renaissance Platonism.” In Facets of the Renaissance. Edited by William H. Werkmeister. New York: Harper and Row, 1959.
85 3,
1956. and
Cam
the
In
Yale
York: and
Press,
in
Jerusalem:
at
York:
Thought.”
New
Society
Twersky
Institute,
New
Simonsohn.
Modena.”
Twersky
Septimus.
Thought
Journal
Jewish
da
1670.
University
Liebovitz. -
1987.
Jewish
1987.
Bealilc Isadore
In
Isadore
by
Scfflomo
Jewish
Leone
1550
Ettinger.
Bernard
Jewish
Press,
Press,
In by
of by
S.
Shmuel
Princeton:
and
Edited
and
Venice,
Jerusalem:
Orim:A
Edited
Edited
of
Writings
Cohen.
Nehemia
University Environment.”
University
Thinking.”
Twersky
R.
1952.
Seventeenth-Century
the
by
Century.
Naveh.
on
in
Ben-Sasson
Gambler.” 1987.
Mark
Hanatzrus.
Press,
Isadore
Inquisition
Harvard
Harvard H.
Edited
by
Penina
Historical
by
H.
the
Society
Renaissance
Press,
by
Jewish
Negid
1983. by
Seventeenth
Cordovero
a
the
and
and
of
of
Seventeenth-Century.
Edited
the
in
Nirdomim
Modena’s
Edited
Cambridge:
Cambridge:
Hebor
in
the
Translated
Edited
Books,
Ari-Nohem.
1971. da
University
Europe in
1987).
1977.
“Halacha
Society
of
Influence
Ages.
“Memoirs
Noble
Meketzie
Veherev
Yehuda.
Aryeh.
Judah.
Thought
Books,
“Leone
the
Septimus.
Septimus.
Jews
of
and
“The
Press,
Harvard
Thought
“Jewish
(Autumn
Sifiomo.
David.
The
Mogen
1
Life
Zeknei •
• Jewish
Yehuda
B.
Bezalel.
1988.
Makor
Jerusalem:
Barnes Through
Schocken
no. In
Bernard
Seventeenth-Century. bridge: Bernard
Jewish
Cecil.
Bracha.
______• Modena,
Pullan,
Roth,
Ruderman, Sack,
Safran,
Simonsohn,
86