A Defense of the Torah Temimah,Marc B. Shapiro –

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

A Defense of the Torah Temimah,Marc B. Shapiro – A Response to Dr. Shapiro: A Defense of the Torah Temimah A Response to Dr. Shaprio: A Defense of the Torah Temimahby: Y. Lander (of the Ishim v’Shitot blog) I read with interest Dr. Shapiro’s recent post questioning the accuracy of R’ Baruch Epstein’s tale concerning his dialogue with the Netziv’s first wife, Rayna Batya. Dr. Shapiro points to several discrepancies in R. Epstein’s account and based on those discrepancies posits that R’ Baruch deliberately contrived the story in order to call attention to the plight of women in his time. I would like, however, to present a more prosaic but equally plausible interpretation of the discrepancies that Dr. Shapiro notes. Dr. Shapiro refers to the “the well-attested fact that Epstein was a plagiarizer” [1] and therefore one must be suspicious of anything he writes. That Epstein frequently fails to provide proper attribution when quoting other authors is certainly irrefutable but I am not at all certain that this was due to conscious plagiarism. I found that only two of Epstein’s works show significant signs of plagiarism –Torah Temimah and Tosefes Bracha[2] – whereas the chiddushei Torah cited in Mekor Baruch and Baruch She’Amar (Tefillah and Pirkei Avot) are original. If Epstein was indeed a plagiarizer then from where did he get the sudden burst of originality that appears in the latter two works? Why would he plagiarize in Torah Temimah, stop for Mekor Baruch and then continue in Tosefes Bracha? Further, Y. Bezek, in the article cited by Shapiro, points out that among the sources that R’ Epstein plagiarizes is Maimonides Sefer Hamitzvos. Is it really logical to assume that Epstein intentionally tried to pass of a Rambam as his own chiddush? Or that he could get away with plagiarizing a Gra in Mitnaggdic Vilna heavily influenced by the Gra and his teachings. [2a] It seems far more logical to simply take Epstein’s words in his Introduction to the Torah Temimah at face value. There he writes, (roughly translated) “this work has taken me 15 years to write and has gone through many drafts. During the course of this time much information has gathered in my mind and although I have made an earnest attempt to provide proper attribution the reader is requested to judge me favorably in this.” Given the large volume of information Epstein was dealing with and the limited time he had at his disposal [3] it is not surprising that he had not the ability to properly identify the sources for all the hundreds (if not thousands) of interpretations he provides in his commentary. I suspect that Tosefes Bracha is based on those notes that he did not incorporate into his Torah Temimah [4] and would therefore have the same defects as the former. Shapiro also uses Mondshine’s study on R’ Epstein. But, Mondshine brings very little proof to support his assertion that the story of the Aruch HaShulchan’s meetings with the Tzemach Tzedek was simply fabricated out of “whole cloth.” Rather, Mondshine points out that R’ S. Y. Zevin who received Semicha from the Aruch HaShulchan never mentioned any of these conversations. This omission, according to Mondshine is key, as R’ Zevin was an adherent of Chabad it is only natural that the AS should have mentioned these meetings to him. It is a pity that Mondshine didn’t read Zevin’s K’sav Horaah (printed in the new Kitvei Aruch Ha-Shulchan). If he had he would have seen that R’ Zevin never met the Aruch HaShulchan. It is written there that “I recognize that this is man is indeed a Talmud Chachamim based on the many letters I exchanged with him.” Those who have read the AS’s correspondence in the Kitvei will see that the AS rarely goes into any extra detail in his letters focusing solely on the question at hand. But all this is unnecessary, R’ Y. L. Maimon (Fishman), a Talmud of the AS, wrote a series of books with various “Gedolim” stories entitled Sarei HaMeah. In the last volume (vol. 6 pg. 101) he mentions the conversations that “the Aruch Hashulchan himself told me that at the request of some of the (Chassidic) townspeople he went to visit the Tzemach Tsedek.” Their first conversation involved a discussion of the disagreements between Chassidim and Misnagdim….” [5] Dr. Shapiro finds it impossible to believe that the Tzemach Tsedek should have said “Had it not been for the great dispute about Hasidism, and the Gaon’s strident opposition, the new movement might have led its followers out of the ranks of halakhic Judaism.” I beg to differ. The Tzemach Tsedek’s grandfather the Baal HaTanya held the Gra in great esteem [6] thus he might have tried to find a justification for the Gra’s opposition. Second, the Tzemach Tsedek waged an intense battle against the Maskilim in their attempts to “reform” traditional Jewish education [7]. To this end, the disagreements between the Chassidim and Mitnaggdim were ignored in order to more effectively battle this new greater menace [8]. It is not unlikely that in order to cement this new found alliance [8a] that the Tzeamach Tsedek would have made this kind of conciliatory remark to the Aruch Ha-Shulchan (brother-in-law of the Netsiv who was one of the most influential of the Mitnaggdim) in order to downplay the conflict between the Chassidim and Mitnaggdim Dr. Shapiro introduces his post admitting that – “When Mekor Barukh was published there were still plenty of people alive who had known her and it would have been impossible to entirely fabricate her personality.” This being the case the report that- “It was her habit to sit by the oven in the kitchen—even in the summertime—next to a table piled high with seforim. These included aTanach,(Mishnayos) Ein Yaacov, various midrashim, Menoras HaMaor, Kav HaYashar, Tzemach Dovid, Shevet Yehudah, and many other books of this nature.” [9]- must also have been true. This is an important point that is the cornerstone of the whole story. Dr. Shapiro wonders how “the rebbetzin, sitting in Volozhin, would just so happen to come across this volume on her husband’s bookshelf.” Here is one possibility. We know that there were several large libraries (for example the Strashun Library in Vilna [10]) in the area and it is certainly possible that a copy of Mayin Ganim might have made its way to the intellectual center in Volozhin. A similar example of a very rare Sephardi book circulating is mentioned in Mekor Baruch (pg. 1224). There he mentions a Maggid who recalled seeing an alchemical recipe in a rare book. The name of the book was Nifla’ot Elokim by Abraham Shalom Chai printed in Livorno. As Shapiro writes “There would have only been a few copies of this book in all of Lithuania.” But we see that it did circulate. I agree with Shapiro that the TT obviously copied the letter from HaTzefirah. But all this proves is that at the time of the writing of Mekor Baruch he no longer had access to a Mayin Ganim and therefore had to copy from “HaTzefirah”. We do not have any proof that years before, as a student in Volozhin, he had no access to this book. I also would like to point out that the TT refers to Mekor Baruch in manuscript [11] (Malki BaKodesh vol. 6 pg. 45) in his letter to Hirschenson. It is clear from the letter that the passage on Rayna Batya had already been written before he wrote this letter so he could not have “uses the language in his letter to Hirschensohn to create the following reply to Rayna Batya” as Shapiro writes. As to the addition of the term “Ulai”, acommenter has correctly noted that the TT must have conflated the term “Efsher L’ Chalek” that appears in the letter with the term “Ullai”. Erroneous readings such as these are fairly common in TT as Kasher has shown in the addendum to Torah Shelemah v. 26. We have then two possible ways of interpreting the various discrepancies that appear in R’ Epstein’s works. Either as Dr. Shapiro contends he engaged in fraudulent behavior, including intentional plagiarism, and fabricating historical accounts, or as I contend he simply failed to approach his work systematically, meaning he didn’t keep detailed notes, relied overly much on a faulty memory (See Psalms 19:13), and perhaps engaged in some artistic license in order to heighten the effect of his stories. I leave it to the reader to decide which of the two is more plausible. [1] On this see the sources cited in D. Rabinowitz – “Rayna Batya and other learned woman: A realuation Rabbi Barukh Halevi Epstein’s sources” Tradition – footnote 4. [2] Many of the Chiddushei Torah cited in Tosefes Beracha have been previously attributed to the Gr”a. Compare “HaMeor HaGadol” – A collection of the Gra”s Torah from rare source by Yissocher Kreuser to almost any Parsha in Tosefes Bracha. [2a] Note that in Tosefes Bracha (Gen. 31,1 Exodus 8,17) he writes that “after I thought of this chiddush a sefer of the Gra’s chiddushim (D’var Eliyahu) came out containing the same idea.” It seems that he genuinely thought that these were entirely his own ideas. [3] He had a full time employment as a bookkeeper. See also M. M. Kasher’s description in a note toTorah Shelemah 26 (300-301) [4] TB is for the most part a repetition of his Chiddushim in Mekor Baruch and an expansion of some of his writings in Torah Temimah.
Recommended publications
  • Tehillat Hashem and Other Verses Before Birkat Ha-Mazon
    301 Tehillat Hashem and Other Verses Before Birkat Ha-Mazon By: ZVI RON In this article we investigate the origin and development of saying vari- ous Psalms and selected verses from Psalms before Birkat Ha-Mazon. In particular, we will attempt to explain the practice of some Ashkenazic Jews to add Psalms 145:21, 115:18, 118:1 and 106:2 after Ps. 126 (Shir Ha-Ma‘alot) and before Birkat Ha-Mazon. Psalms 137 and 126 Before Birkat Ha-Mazon The earliest source for reciting Ps. 137 (Al Naharot Bavel) before Birkat Ha-Mazon is found in the list of practices of the Tzfat kabbalist R. Moshe Cordovero (1522–1570). There are different versions of this list, but all versions include the practice of saying Al Naharot Bavel.1 Some versions specifically note that this is to recall the destruction of the Temple,2 some versions state that the Psalm is supposed to be said at the meal, though not specifically right before Birkat Ha-Mazon,3 and some versions state that the Psalm is only said on weekdays, though no alternative Psalm is offered for Shabbat and holidays.4 Although the ex- act provenance of this list is not clear, the parts of it referring to the recitation of Ps. 137 were already popularized by 1577.5 The mystical work Seder Ha-Yom by the 16th century Tzfat kabbalist R. Moshe ben Machir was first published in 1599. He also mentions say- ing Al Naharot Bavel at a meal in order to recall the destruction of the 1 Moshe Hallamish, Kabbalah in Liturgy, Halakhah and Customs (Ramat Gan: Bar Ilan University Press, 2000), pp.
    [Show full text]
  • The Legal Status of Abuse
    HM 424.1995 FAMILY VIOLENCE Rabbi Elliot N. Dorff Part 1: The Legal Status of Abuse This paper was approved by the CJT,S on September 13, 1995, by a vote of' sixteen in favor and one oppossed (16-1-0). V,,ting infiwor: Rabbis Kassel Abelson, Ben :Lion BerBm<m, Stephanie Dickstein, £/liot JY. Dorff, S/wshana Gelfand, Myron S. Geller, Arnold i'H. Goodman, Susan Crossman, Judah f(ogen, ~bnon H. Kurtz, Aaron L. iHaclder, Hwl 11/othin, 1'H(~yer HabinoLviiz, Joel /t.,'. Rembaum, Gerald Slwlnih, and E/ie Kaplan Spitz. hJting against: H.abbi Ceraicl Ze/izer. 1he Committee 011 .lnuish L(Lw and Standards qf the Rabhinical As:wmbly provides f};ztidance in matters (!f halakhnh for the Conservative movement. The individual rabbi, hou;evet~ is the authority for the interpretation and application of all maltrrs of halaklwh. 1. Reating: According to Jewish law as interpreted by the Conservative movement, under what circumstance, if any, may: A) husbands beat their wives, or wives their husbands? B) parents beat their children? c) adult children of either gender beat their elderly parents? 2. Sexual abu.se: What constitutes prohibited sexual abuse of a family member? 3· verbal abuse: What constitutes prohibited verbal abuse of a family member? TI1e Importance of the Conservative Legal Method to These Issues 1 In some ways, it would seem absolutely obvious that Judaism would nut allow individu­ als to beat others, especially a family member. After all, right up front, in its opening l T \VOuld like to express my sincere thanks to the members or the Committee on Jew·isll Law and Standards for their hdpfu I snggc:-;tions for impruving an earlier draft of this rcsponsum.
    [Show full text]
  • Toronto Torah Beit Midrash Zichron Dov
    בס“ד Toronto Torah Beit Midrash Zichron Dov Parshat Vayyigash 5 Tevet 5772/December 31, 2011 Vol.3 Num. 14 To sponsor an edition of Toronto Torah, please email [email protected] or call 416-781-1777 Age: More Than Just a Number Hillel Horovitz נדמיין לעצמנו מפגש פסגה בין שני מנהיגים אברהם בא ללמד אותנו כיצד יש לגשת לחיי משמעותית ביותר ולכן הן גם מקבלות משקל מהגדולים בעולם. האפיפיור מגיע לוושינגטון המעשה בעולמנו . עלינו למלא כל יום בעשייה רב כל כך בחיבור התורה. לפגוש את נשיא ארצות הברית . הנשיא רואה ולהבין שאין כל חשיבות בימים שעוברים עלינו נוכל גם לענות באמצעות כך על השאלה למולו את האפיפיור ואת המשלחת הנכבדה בעולם הזה מצד הזמן שעובר כי אם מצד התמידית שמהדהדת בין עולם התורה לעולם שעומדת לפניו ושואל לפתע : התוכן שאנו יוצקים אל תוך החיים הללו. המדע . כיצד ייתכן שלפי המדע העולם קיים "בן כמה אתה אדוני האפיפיור? אתה נראה די נוכל אולי באמצעות הבנה זו גם לעמוד על מאות מיליוני ואפילו מיליארדי שנים ואילו מבוגר!" דרכה של התורה בתיאור המהלכים לפי התורה העולם קיים רק 0222 שנה לערך . התיתכן מציאות שכזו ? האם היינו מעלים על ההיסטוריים הקורים בתוכה . במהלך התורה לפי ההבנה בפרשתנו נוכל להגיד גם כן , כי דעתנו שאחד ממנהיגי העולם ידבר כך ? כולה על חמישים וארבע פרשיותיה עוברים אנו יכול להיות שהעולם התקיים שנים רבות לפני כנראה שלא , זו נראית כשאלה מאוד אישית מהלך של 0022 שנה , ניתן לצפות בחישוב בריאת האדם אולם התורה מחשיבה את ואפילו חצופה ופוגעת , אולם בפרשת השבוע פשוט כי כל פרשה תספר על כחמישים שנה . העולם כקיים ונברא רק כאשר יש בתוכו אדם אנו מגלים שאין הדבר פשוט כלל וכלל .
    [Show full text]
  • “Official Position” of the CJLS Nor of the Rabbinical Assembly
    N.B. This paper represents solely the opinion of the author and is not an “official position” of the CJLS nor of the Rabbinical Assembly. Emergency Ruling in Regard to Livestreaming Services Rabbi David J Fine, PhD President, New Jersey Rabbinical Assembly March 14, 2020 Psak Din: In the current state of emergency, where most of our congregations have closed their doors in the midst of the containment efforts of the COVID-19 crisis, live streamed services of even a single individual (the shaliah tzibbur) may be deemed a minyan when at least nine others eligible to count in a minyan are connected to the site at the time of the live streaming. In 2001, the Committee on Jewish Law and Standards of the Conservative movement (CJLS) approved a responsum by Rabbi Avram Israel Reisner by a vote of 18-2, that permitted one to perform one’s obligation to participate in prayer, hear the Torah, shofar, megillah and say kaddish when connected to a minyan through the internet. However, Rabbi Reisner required a minyan of ten eligible Jews to constitute a live minyan at the source of the “broadcast.” That decision was reasoned through a careful reading of the relevant precedents regarding when one can fulfill an obligation when in “ear-shot” but not in the same room as the minyan, and gave important consideration as well to the importance of live face-to-face gatherings. In the nineteen years that have passed since Rabbi Reisner’s paper was approved by the CJLS, we have seen an extraordinary increase in the development and use of technology towards virtual meeting space.
    [Show full text]
  • Fine Judaica, to Be Held May 2Nd, 2013
    F i n e J u d a i C a . printed booKs, manusCripts & autograph Letters including hoLy Land traveL the ColleCtion oF nathan Lewin, esq. K e s t e n b au m & C om pa n y thursday, m ay 2nd, 2013 K est e n bau m & C o m pa ny . Auctioneers of Rare Books, Manuscripts and Fine Art A Lot 318 Catalogue of F i n e J u d a i C a . PRINTED BOOK S, MANUSCRIPTS, & AUTOGRAPH LETTERS INCLUDING HOLY L AND TR AVEL THE COllECTION OF NATHAN LEWIN, ESQ. ——— To be Offered for Sale by Auction, Thursday, May 2nd, 2013 at 3:00 pm precisely ——— Viewing Beforehand: Sunday, April 28th - 12:00 pm - 6:00 pm Monday, April 29th - 12:00 pm - 6:00 pm Tuesday, April 30th - 10:00 am - 6:00 pm Wednesday, May 1st - 10:00 am - 6:00 pm No Viewing on the Day of Sale This Sale may be referred to as: “Pisgah” Sale Number Fifty-Eight Illustrated Catalogues: $38 (US) * $45 (Overseas) KestenbauM & CoMpAny Auctioneers of Rare Books, Manuscripts and Fine Art . 242 West 30th street, 12th Floor, new york, NY 10001 • tel: 212 366-1197 • Fax: 212 366-1368 e-mail: [email protected] • World Wide Web site: www.Kestenbaum.net K est e n bau m & C o m pa ny . Chairman: Daniel E. Kestenbaum Operations Manager: Jackie S. Insel Client Accounts: S. Rivka Morris Client Relations: Sandra E. Rapoport, Esq. (Consultant) Printed Books & Manuscripts: Rabbi Eliezer Katzman Ceremonial & Graphic Art: Abigail H.
    [Show full text]
  • Fine Judaica
    t K ESTENBAUM FINE JUDAICA . & C PRINTED BOOKS, MANUSCRIPTS, GRAPHIC & CEREMONIAL ART OMPANY F INE J UDAICA : P RINTED B OOKS , M ANUSCRIPTS , G RAPHIC & C & EREMONIAL A RT • T HURSDAY , N OVEMBER 12 TH , 2020 K ESTENBAUM & C OMPANY THURSDAY, NOV EMBER 12TH 2020 K ESTENBAUM & C OMPANY . Auctioneers of Rare Books, Manuscripts and Fine Art Lot 115 Catalogue of FINE JUDAICA . Printed Books, Manuscripts, Graphic & Ceremonial Art Featuring Distinguished Chassidic & Rabbinic Autograph Letters ❧ Significant Americana from the Collection of a Gentleman, including Colonial-era Manuscripts ❧ To be Offered for Sale by Auction, Thursday, 12th November, 2020 at 1:00 pm precisely This auction will be conducted only via online bidding through Bidspirit or Live Auctioneers, and by pre-arranged telephone or absentee bids. See our website to register (mandatory). Exhibition is by Appointment ONLY. This Sale may be referred to as: “Shinov” Sale Number Ninety-One . KESTENBAUM & COMPANY The Brooklyn Navy Yard Building 77, Suite 1108 141 Flushing Avenue Brooklyn, NY 11205 Tel: 212 366-1197 • Fax: 212 366-1368 www.Kestenbaum.net K ESTENBAUM & C OMPANY . Chairman: Daniel E. Kestenbaum Operations Manager: Zushye L.J. Kestenbaum Client Relations: Sandra E. Rapoport, Esq. Judaica & Hebraica: Rabbi Eliezer Katzman Shimon Steinmetz (consultant) Fine Musical Instruments (Specialist): David Bonsey Israel Office: Massye H. Kestenbaum ❧ Order of Sale Manuscripts: Lot 1-17 Autograph Letters: Lot 18 - 112 American-Judaica: Lot 113 - 143 Printed Books: Lot 144 - 194 Graphic Art: Lot 195-210 Ceremonial Objects: Lot 211 - End of Sale Front Cover Illustration: See Lot 96 Back Cover Illustration: See Lot 4 List of prices realized will be posted on our website following the sale www.kestenbaum.net — M ANUSCRIPTS — 1 (BIBLE).
    [Show full text]
  • Text: the Many Voices of Torah וכל מחלוקת התנאים והאמוראים והגאונים והפוסקים… דברי
    TEXT: THE MANY VOICES OF TORAH In this text Rabbi Yehiel Michael Weinberg argues that the Torah is a harmonious combination of distinct and different voices, all of which add to its beauty. All the disputations of [the rabbis throughout the ages] represent the words of the living God….Indeed, that’s the magnificence of our Torah. The entire Torah is one song, and it is the harmonic combination of different and distinctive voices that makes listening to a choir a transcendent experience. Indeed, that is the very essence of the pleasure we derive from it. וכל מחלוקת התנאים והאמוראים והגאונים והפוסקים… דברי אלוקים חיים המה… זוהי תפארת תורתינו… וכל התורה כולה נקראת שירה, ותפארת השיר היא כשהקולות משונים זה מזה, וזהו עיקר הנעימות - Rabbi Yechiel Michel Epstein: Aruch HaShulchan, 1880s www.jpeoplehood.org/toolkit TEXT: THE MANY VOICES OF TORAH EXPLANATION OF TEXT: Rabbi Yechiel Michael Epstein (1829-1908) was a 19th century Lithuanian Halachist who is often remembered as “Aruch HaShulchan” his important work summarising the sources and opinions of the 16th Halalchic code, the “Shulchan Aruch”. He stands in the centre of Eastern European orthodoxy in his time and the quote brought above is thus a particularly interesting statement concerning the breadth of the Jewish tradition and its ability to contain different points of view. The Rabbinic tradition in Judaism, as a tradition which has for thousands of years seen its major task as elucidating the will of God through a minute and often creative dissection of the Torah and the Tanach and the secondary literature that has accumulated within the Rabbinic tradition itself (such as the Talmud), has walked a very delicate tightrope between two different tendencies.
    [Show full text]
  • Cincinnati Torah הרות
    בס"ד • A PROJECT OF THE CINCINNATI COMMUNITY KOLLEL • CINCYKOLLEL.ORG תורה מסינסי Cincinnati Torah Vol. VII, No. XXXVIII Pinchas A LESSON FROM THE PARASHA THE RABBI WAS ASKED ALTER RAUBVOGEL ADAPTED BY RABBI DOVID TZVI MEISSNER FROM ME’AH SHE’ARIM BY RABBI YITZCHOK ZILBERSTEIN Doing Hashem’s Work GUEST CONTRIBUTOR The Talmud (Bava Metzia 30b) states that Pinchas... turned back My anger In a similar way, we can express our love the mitzvah of bikur cholim, visiting the from upon the Children of Israel, for Hashem by volunteering to do His work sick, applies to everyone, but an extra when he avenged My retribution for Him, as it were. exhortation is needed for one who is ben among them, [and as a result] I did Rav Moshe offers two practical examples. gilo, born under the same constellation as not destroy [them]… Therefore… I One relates to religious observances, and one the sick person, for he gets 1/60 of the give him my covenant of Peace. (25:11) to interpersonal relationships. sickness from his visit. Nevertheless, he The wicked Turnus Rufus once asked “When he avenged My retribu- must go and visit his friend. tion…” When he took My revenge, Rabbi Akiva... “If G-d wants man to be circum- Q How can it be that one would get when he displayed the anger which I cised, why isn’t an infant born circumcised?” harmfully affected from the performance should have displayed. (Rashi’s com- Rabbi Akiva retorted, “Why is a baby born of this special mitzvah? Also, is one mentary) with an umbilical cord, which his mother must cut?..
    [Show full text]
  • Parshat Mishpatim 5773
    Written by: Dina Michaels Editor: David Michaels Parshat Behar 5779 In the beginning of this week’s Parsha, the pasuk (Vayikra 25:1) states “Hashem spoke Secondly, why was Moshe calmed whenr he heard that the laws being taught, had to Moshe on the mountain of Sinai saying.” After this pasuk, the Torah explains the laws come from ‘Moshe at Sinai’? of Shemittah. Rashi asks, if all the mitzvos were given at Har Sinai, why does the Torah expressly state that the laws of Shemittah were given at Har Sinai? Rashi quotes a To answer the first question, the Shulchan Oruch of the Arizal and the Or Hachaim say Medrash and explains that this pasuk teaches that not only were the main aspects of that Moshe did receive the entire Written and Oral Torah and he knew what would be the mitzvos taught at Har Sinai but also all the details of the mitzvos as well. Rashi taught in the future. However, there is a difference in how Moshe and rest of Bnei expands that just as the halachot of Shemittah were given to Bnei Yisrael years after Yisrael received these laws. They explain that Moshe first received the Oral Torah the events at Har Sinai were taught to Moshe at Har Sinai; so too were all the other directly from Hashem and then learnt the Written Torah. He knew what everything in mitzvos and their details. the Oral Torah meant before he learnt the pasuk it was derived from. For example, Moshe was taught that ‘an eye for an eye’ meant recompensing someone with money, The Talmud Yerushalmi in Mesechet Chaggigah 10 explains that not only was Moshe before Moshe learnt the text.
    [Show full text]
  • Jewish Law Association 20Th International Conference July 23
    Buchmann Faculty of Law Tel Aviv University EURO-ASIAN JLA JEWISH CONGRESS עבר הווה ועתיד בחקר המשפט העברי כנס לציון מאה שנים ליסוד חברת המשפט העברי, מוסקבה 1917 Мишпат иври: прошлое, настоящее и будущее 100-летие создания Общества “Мишпат Иври” в Москве Mishpat Ivri: Past, Present and Future 100 Year Anniversary of the Establishment of the “Mishpat Ivri Society” in Moscow Jewish Law Association 20th International Conference Moscow State University Law School, Moscow July 23–26, 2018 The Organizing Committee: The Academic Committee: Prof. Alexander Golichenkov Dean, MSU Prof. Arye Edrei, TAU Prof. Arye Edrei, TAU Prof. Shaul Stampfer, (emeritus) HU Prof. Andrey Sherstobitov, MSU Prof. Gayane Davidyan, MSU Prof. Natalia Kozlova, MSU Prof. Olga Dyuzheva, MSU Ms. Evgenia Krukova, MSU Prof. Assaf Likhovski, TAU Dr. Haim Ben-Yakov, TAU Dr. Yifat Monnikendam, TAU Prof. Anton Kanevskiy, JU Prof. Anton Kanevskiy, JU Prof. Phillip Lieberman, JLA Dr. Amos Israel, SAC Dr. Amos Israel, SAC Prof. Suzanne Last-Stone, YU Prof. Phillip Lieberman, JLA Dr. Shay Wozner, TAU Conference Supported By: The Buchmann Faculty of Law, TAU | Euro-Asian Jewish Congress | The Jewish Law Association | The Zimin Foundation, TAU | The Friends Association of TAU | Eliyahu Foundation Program for Instruction and Research In Mishpat Ivri, supported by the Koschitzky Family | Embassy of the State of Israel in Moscow | The Center for the Study of Law and Religion, Emory University School of Law | David Berg Foundation Institute for Law and History, The Buchmann Faculty of Law, TAU | Taubenschlag Institute of Criminal Law, The Buchmann Faculty of Law, TAU | Media Partners: ConsultantPlus | Monday, July 23 14:00–15:00 Lunch 15:00–16:30 Preliminary Session: Jews and Judaism in the Russian Empire Moderator: Prof.
    [Show full text]
  • Weekly Brief
    WEEKLY BRIEF Tammuz 16 5781/June 25th & 26th, 2021 Parshat Balak Shabbat Schedule Plag Mincha/Maariv 6:40pm Candle Lighting 7:15/8:13pm A MESSAGE FROM RABBI ADLER Mincha/Maariv Outdoor Tent 7pm Chaveireinu HaYikarim, Main Sanctuary 7pm Beit Midrash I hope you and your family are well. If 8:15pm one were to read our parsha simply based Shabbat Morning Sof Zman Kriyat Shma 9:12am on Pshat, a simple reading of the text, and Shacharit- Main Shul 7am not be influenced by midrashic Beit Midrash 8am Social Hall 8:30am interpretation, we notice that Bilam Outdoor Tent 8:45am Main Shul 9am constantly tells Balak that he will only do Youth Groups 9am Shailot UTshuvot Shiur 10:30am that which HKBH directs him to do. But Beit Midrash קריאת שמע על המטה וברכת המפיל Tot Shabbat 10:30am three different expressions are used to convey the same idea . Outdoors, behind the Beit Midrash whatever HaShem puts in my, כל אשר ישים בפי אותו הדבר (1 Shabbat Afternoon אותו אשמור (I will do. 3 , אותו אעשה (Mincha- mouth, I will speak . 2 Main Sanctuary 2pm .I , I will guard it to eventually say itלדבר Backyard Lecture Series 6pm 328 Ogden Avenue, Allen home Pre-Mincha Shiur, Rabbi Dr. Yaakov Jaffe Ibn Ezra comments on the Aseret HaDibrot that there are three 6:55pm Main Sanctuary types of mitzvot actions, speech and thought. For mitzvot Mincha- Main Sanctuary 7:55pm between man and G-D, thought is most significant and hence, Followed by Rabbi Adler’s Gemara shiur in the Main Shul Outdoor Tent 8:15pm the first commandment is thought, to believe in G-D, followed Maariv- Main Sanctuary 9:05pm by the mitzvah of speech, such as not to swear falsely in the Shabbat Ends 9:14pm name of G-D, and then concludes with a mitzvah of action, to observe the Shabbat.
    [Show full text]
  • Unit 4 Marriage Tanach More on Who Should Listen to Whom with Regard to Domestic Decision-Making
    Unit 4 Marriage TaNaCh More on who should listen to whom with regard to domestic decision-making. Kohelet 4:9 קהלת פרק ד Two are better than one; because they have a good )ט( טֹובִִ֥ים הַשְּׁ נַַ֖֖יִם מִ דן־הָאֶחָָ֑ ראֲשֶֶׁ֧ יֵש־לָהֶֶ֛ םשָכִָ֥ר ט֖ ֹוב בַ עֲמָלָָֽ ם:1 reward for their labor.6 2 RaShI7 s.v. Tovim HaShenayim רש"י For everything, (two are better) than one. Therefore a )ט( טובים השנים - לכל דבר מן האחד לפיכך יקנה לו אדם חבר3 וישא אשה אשר יש להם יותר ריוח בעמלם, person should “acquire” a friend8 and marry a woman, הרבה מלאכה נעשית בשנים שאין היחיד מתחיל בה in order that there be greater benefit in all of their לבדו: efforts. Much work is accomplished by two, because (certain things) will not even be attempted by one by himself. 1 Taken in the context of the succeeding verses, particularly v. 12-- 10 For if they fall, the one will lift up his fellow; but woe to him that is alone when he falleth, and hath not another to lift him up. 11 Again, if two lie together, then they have warmth; but how can one be warm alone? 12 And if a man prevail against him that is alone, two shall withstand him; and a threefold cord is not quickly broken-- it is hardly compelling to interpret v. 9 as reflective of marriage in general and marital decision-making in particular. Nevertheless R. Lichtenstein (“Of Marriage: Relationship and Relations” http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/725299/Rabbi_Dr-_Aharon_Lichtenstein/Of_Marriage- _Relationship_and_Relations# ) does apply the sentiment expressed in v.
    [Show full text]