Jacob’s Dream: Reproducing a Talismanic Illustrated Title Page
Jacob’s Dream: Reproducing a Talismanic Illustrated Title Page
(Illustrations are from the following sources: the Edut Be Yosef, Rabot, Shivim
Tekunei Zohar, and Yefeh Anaf are from the Gross Family Collection. The Minhat
Shai is from Dan Rabinowitz’s personal collection, and the rest are courtesy of
the internet.)
One of the earliest examples of Jewish art are the biblical paintings at the Dura Europos Synagogue, completed in 244-5 C.E. Among those images is that of Jacob’s dream. The importance of the Dura Europos iconography in the development of Jewish art is hard to overestimate. “The iconographic formulas, seen for the first time in the Dura synagogue would recur both in Jewish art and Christian art, in widely differing media – manuscripts, murals, mosaics, ivories and silver utensils – frequently without modification, or with only the modifications necessitated by different materials or techniques, or the need to emphasize a new theological perspective.”[1] By the time of its discovery in the 1920s, only a fragment of Jacob’s dream scene remained visible. Nonetheless it is possible to discern the subtly of the artist. In the fragment, Jacob is depicted as a figure wearing Greek costume – the then contemporary dress – leaning on his elbow, in the posture of Palmyrene funerary reliefs. Only the body is preserved, the head and upper body are lost. Near the figure is planted an inclined ladder, which one or perhaps two (it is unclear) personages in Persian dress are ascending. This custom, consisting of a short-belted tunic adorned with braid at the throat and hem, and wide trousers gathered into short supple boots, represents in the language of the Dura painter the garb of kings and princes, and court temple personnel.[2]
Scholars have voiced a number of opinions to explain the Persian court dress. According to one scholar the artist was referencing a midrash that appears in Pirkei de-Reb Eliezer. The angels, rather than merely serving as Jacob’s protection, also allude to “the four kingdoms that would conquer and subjugate the Jews, each as represented by its prince.”[3]One of the kingdoms is Persia. Thus, the artist’s choice of iconography was deliberate.
Jewish Title Pages
The first illustrated Jewish title pages appeared in the early seventeenth century. In 1693, the first depiction of Jacob’s dream graced a Jewish title page. That book, Sefer Rabbot, Midrash Rabba, with the commentary of R. Yisachar ben Naftali Katz, printed in Frankfurt on the Oder by Michael Gottschalk. He was a local bookbinder and bookdealer who took over the management of Johann Christoph Beckman’s printing press in Frankfort d.O. in 1693, and led the press for almost forty years.[4] Sefer Rabbot’s title page includes Moses and Aaron (who first appear in the 1610 edition of the She’a lot u-Teshuvot Mahril, printed in Hanau (see “Aaron the Jewish Bishop”), at the top, angels around the ark, and at the bottom, three biblical scenes, Jacob wrestling with the angel, David praying, and Jacob’s dream. It is obvious that these images are modeled after Matthaeus Merian’s engravings of biblical scenes that accompanied his Icones Biblicae printed between 1625-1630. All three of these images can be traced to Merian based upon a number of similarities and artist conventions.
The image of Jacob’s dream depicts, in both instances, Jacob laying next to a tree, boats and houses appear in the background, and angels’ hands are outstretched to greet Jacob. There is one significant puzzling difference. In Merian’s depiction, he substitutes the letters (reversed) of tetragram for God. In the Jewish book, God is depicted as an old man with a beard wearing a crown. This, despite Judaism’s strong prohibition on depicting God in a human form.
(This is not the only instance of a Jewish book containing a human image for God. The title-page of the first edition of R. Yedidia Shlomo of Norzi’s commentary on the biblical mesorah,Minhat Shai, Mantua, 1742-44, includes a depiction of God with a human face. The images on the title page are various biblical vignettes and in the one for the resurrection of the “dry bones” that appears in Yehkezkel, God is shown as an old man with a white beard.)
Here is that image in detail: Michael Gottschalk reused the Rabot title page at least five times; in 1695, for R. Shmuel Yaffe, Yafe Anaf, in 1696, Mattityahu ben Asher Lemle Liebermann, Mattat Yah, in 1698 in R. Benjamin Ze’ev Wolf ben Samuel Romaner’s Ir Binyamin, in 1699 in Ohel Yaakov, and in 1602 in Yisrael b. Aaron Yaffa, Or Yisrael.
These title pages are just a few of Gottchalk’s illustrated title pages. Gottshalk artistic sensibilities are on full display in his 1697-99 edition of the Talmud, a work for which the Frankfurt press is best known to this day. It contains arguably the most magnificent Talmudic title page ever printed. In 1695, the first illustrated copperplate Haggadah was published in Amsterdam. All the images are modeled based upon Merian. The title page too contains a number of biblical scenes in circular medallions. One of which is Jacob’s dream. The next title page that depicts Jacob’s dream appears in Tzvi Hirsch ben Rachmiel Chotsh’s, Shiv’im Tikunei ha-Zohar, Hemdat Tzvi, Amsterdam, Moshe ben Avraham Mendes Coutinho,1706.[5] Like the Gottchalk’s image that includes heretical iconography, those of
Shiv’im Tikunei ha-Zohar would prove equally problematic.6 Despite Hemdat Tzvi’s impressive approbations, R. Jacob Emden accused Chotsh, and specifically this book, of holding and expressing Sabbatian beliefs.[7] It has been conclusively demonstrated that indeed Chotsh’s book contains Sabbatian ideas.[8] Evidence of Chotsh’s embrace of Sabbateanism is identifiable amongst the title page images. Indeed, Chotsh calls attention to the larger meaning of the title page’s images. At the bottom of the title page Chotsh provides that “whosoever wishes to know the secret of the above frontispiece, should see the introduction to the Tikkunim at the beginning of the first article.” An inspection of that section yields likely Sabbatian passages. Thus, Chotsh is indicating that like the introduction, the title page also contains allusions to Sabbateanism. The title page depicts a variety of biblical figures and Jacob’s dream appears at the top center of the page. Above that are two deer holding a crown with the verse from Isaiah 28:5, “On that day will the Lord of the hosts be for a crown of glory, and for a diadem of beauty.” The “crown of glory” or in Hebrew “Ateret tzvi” has a double meaning here, “glory” and “deer” and, of course, is alluding to Sabbatia Tzvi, who, “on that day” will be presumably wearing the crown.[9]
The most long-lasting depiction of Jacob’s dream is that which appeared in Siddur Shaarei Shamyim from R. Isaiah ha-Levi Horowitz (Shelah), Amsterdam, 1717.[10]
This title page is notable in that the accompanying images that align with the book which was not always the case. This is a complete machzor and as such four holidays, Sukkot, Pesach, Shavout, and Rosh Hashana, are represented on the top encased in circles, and underneath the columns. On one side of the bottom of the pillars. On either side is a niche, on the right with Abraham with the legend and on the left, Isaac, underneath each is a verse corresponding to prayer. Displayed prominently at top center, depicting his dream, with the verse from which the book’s title is derived. Underneath the title is a depiction of the Levites pouring water over the priest’s hands with the legend above, Ze hasher la-leviim. This is a reference to R. Horowitz’s lineage. All of the biblical images correspond with Merian’s depictions.
This title page, with small modifications, was repeatedly copied and is found in books from across Europe. One explanation for the ubiquity of this title page is that the Siddur ha-Shelah was imbued with talismanic effect. R. Yoel Sirkes in his approbation assures that whoever prays from this book their prayers would be answered. As evidence of the talismanic effect of the book one only needs to look to recent auctions where the book is regularly sold for tens of thousands of dollars. Perhaps printers looking to capitalize on the aura surrounding the Siddur ha-Shelah incorporated the images in their books.
For example, the title page appears inEdut be-Yaakov, Sulzbach, 1741,[11] in 1765, Furth, Siddur Korban Minha, and in 1797, in the north west of France in Luneville, Sha’ar Selihot ve-Tahanunim. In the latter, the Levite is substituted for Jonah as that is more aligned with the High Holiday themes of the book, and the four depictions of the holidays are removed because they conflict with the singular nature of the book.
Illustrated Hebrew title pages are perhaps the most ubiquitous, and certainly the most accessible form of Jewish art. Yet, the study of the art of the Hebrew title page has not attracted commensurate scholarly interest. Our example, tracing the depiction of Jacob’s dream, is but one instance that illustrated Hebrew title pages fit within the larger history of Jewish art. Here, the Hebrew title pages seventeenth- and eighteenth-century Hebrew books harken back to the iconography identified at Dura Europos that continued to appear in Jewish artistic forms, in this instance books.
[1] Gabrielle Sed-Rajna, Jewish Art (New York: Harry N. Abrams, Inc., 1997), 127. [2] Gabrielle Sed-Rajna, Jewish Art (New York: Harry N. Abrams, Inc., 1997), 559. [3] E.L. Sukenik,Bet-haKeneset shel Dura-Europa ve-Tserayav (Jerusalem: Mossad Bialik 1947), 112-3. [4] B. Friedberg, History of Hebrew Typography in Central Europe (Antwerp, 1935), 35-49. [5] Like Gottschalk, Coutinho also produced a number of other illustrated title pages with biblical images.In 1696, the year before he published the siddur, he published at least two books with illustrated title pages, Sefer Hinukh and the Mishna. This title page was reused in Coutinho’s 1698 edition of R. Hayim Moshe Karinal, Yemin Moshe. [6] Bezalel Naor, Post-Sabbatian Sabbatianism, (Spring Valley, NY: Orot, 1999),79-82. [7] See Shnayer Leiman, “Sefarim ha-Hashudim be-Shabbta’ot: Rishimat shel ha-Gaon Yavet”z Tzal,” inSefer ha-Zikhron le-Rebi Moshe Lifschitz, (New York, 1996), 890 [8] See Naor, Post-Sabbatian, 80-81 and the sources cited therein. [9] Of course, Shabbatai Tzvi is not the only “Tzvi,” Chotsh’s first name is Tzvi. Perhaps the image is an allusion to his name – a somewhat common theme in Hebrew title page illustrations. Recently, however, one scholar noted that the deers are not the only Sabbatian reference. According to his theory, the layout of the biblical figures aligns with kabbalistic representations of the sefirot. See Naor, 81. [10] Horowitz’s other book, Sheni Luhot ha-Brit, Amsterdam, 1698, also contains a beautifully illustrated title page. [11] The title page was reused for decades in the Sulzbach presses. As late as 1794, there are examples of the title page. See, e.g. Tsenah u-Renah, Sulzbach, 1794.
Pandemic Bibliopenia: A Preliminary Report of Disease Eradication
אין חכמת אדם מגעת אלא עד מקום שספריו מגיעין[1]1
ר‘ יצחק קנפנטון
([ואין ספריו מגיעין בשעת המגיפה[2)
Pandemic Bibliopenia:[3] A Preliminary Report of Disease Eradication
Rabbi Edward Reichman, MD The number of seforim written during, about or related to the Covid 19 pandemic continues to grow at breakneck speed.[4] What has largely gone unnoticed among the other unprecedented aspects of this pandemic, is that since the development of the printing press, we have not seen so much quality rabbinic literature produced in the midst of a pandemic.[5] In fact, if anything, a diminution in the quantity and quality of literature was more the norm during previous pandemics. This literature proliferation during Covid 19 heralds in a new age and reflects the eradication of a common condition prevalent in the premodern era- Pandemic Bibliopenia (heretofore, PB).
Few alive today have previously experienced a pandemic of the magnitude of Covid 19. While those Torah scholars and bibliophiles who weathered pandemics of the past would surely have been familiar with PB, possibly even from personal experience, the scholars of today are simply unfamiliar with this condition and have likely never seen a case. Furthermore, we are unlikely to see many cases of PB in the future as well (see “treatment” section below).
Since cases of PB in the present and future are likely to be exceedingly rare, the possibility of misdiagnosis or missed diagnosis is therefore a significant concern. We therefore review this condition and some illustrative cases to record its history for posterity, lest we completely forget this previously incurable disease that afflicted the Jewish community for centuries.
Definition/ Diagnosis
Pandemic adjective
Associated with a widespread outbreak of a contagious disease.
Bibliopenia noun
Biblio- relating to a book or books Penia (suffix)- lack or deficiency
A lack or deficiency of books
Pandemic Bibliopenia (PB) is defined as the lack or deficiency of books available to scholars during times of widespread disease.[6] This often leads to quantitative or qualitative decline in literature produced during times of plague or pandemic.[7]
Etiology
While the Talmud explicitly recommends one to shelter in place during times of plague,[8] the practice evolved from at least the late Middle Ages and onwards to flee the urban areas for more rural, less densely populated locations.[9] Access to rabbinic works was often severely limited, if existent at all, in these remote areas. Production of literature was thus severely hindered or curtailed in areas of disease. Plagues often lasted for many months or longer.
Literary Manifestations
PB appears to be more explicitly manifest in halakhic, specifically responsa, literature, with less impact on other genres, such as poetry,[10] or other forms that do not require or rely heavily on texts. Halakhic writing often requires referencing a wide spectrum of legal writings. Furthermore, due to the often-urgent nature of halakhic queries, the response cannot await the passing of the pandemic. Elective works, however, can simply be delayed until calmer times, when access to libraries, be they private or public, can be restored.
Epidemiology
The impact and prevalence of PB throughout history is difficult to assess,[11] though it has likely been significantly underreported. Cases can only be definitively identified from manuscripts and printed works where PB is explicitly mentioned. One of the primary manifestations of Pandemic Bibliopenia is the unwritten book. How many works were conceived, and perhaps even gestated, though not birthed as a result of PB? As this is manifestly impossible to quantify, as no evidence of such remains, we will thus never know the extent of the bibliographic mortality of PB throughout history.
PB shows no innate predilection for age, gender or geographic location and is associated solely with the presence of pandemics.
Case Studies
There are a number of possible presentations of PB.
Severe Cases of Pandemic Bibliopenia
Below are two clear cases of severe PB.
1. Rabbi Yom Tov Tzahalon (c. 1559-1638)[12]
Rabbi Yom Tov Tzahalon (known as Maharitz) authored a number of halakhic works in the late sixteenth-early seventeenth centuries and lived in Tzfat for part of that time. There were a number of plagues in Tzfat during this period. In Tzahalon’s responsa we see clear evidence in a number of places of his affliction with Pandemic Bibliopenia.[13]
Siman 8
Due to plague in Tzfat, Tzahalon was forced to flee from mountain to mountain, village to village, and states explicitly that he lacks sufficient access to works of poskim to answer the question properly. He nonetheless offers a limited response to appease the questioner.
Siman 19
Tzahalon again notes his lack of access to rabbinic literature in the midst of plague, including the tractates of the Talmud, with the exception of tractates Bava Kama and Bava Metzia, and a portion of Rambam.
During the writing of the above responsum Tzahalon resided, albeit temporarily, in Kfar Par’am, located to the Northeast of the city. People generally fled to villages on the outskirts of their city of residence.
(the pin represents Par’am)
Siman 44
During the writing of this responsum Tzahalon appears to have returned to wandering between villages and once again laments his inability to provide an in depth and expansive response. Siman 81
In our final, albeit less explicit, example of PB in Tzahalon’s responsa, written in 1589, Tzahalon bemoans his prolonged exile and the toll it has taken, though does not allow this to prevent him from offering a halakhic analysis of the issue.
We not only have mention of Pandemic Bibliopenia in Tzahalon’s responsa, it also surfaces in his Talmudic commentary.[14] Tzahalon wrote his commentary on the fifth chapter of Bava Metzia, at least partially, while in exile. Parenthetically, this may explain why the only volumes of Talmud he possessed in exile were Bava Kama and Bava Metzia, as he likely packed these specific tractates for his travels anticipating work on his commentary. In the midst of his Talmudic commentary[15] we are introduced to Tzahalon’s personal tragedy while in exile in Kfar Par’am with the following line:
Tzahalon digresses from his commentary to share the details of the tragic death of his infant son.[16] The timing of the death, associated with a delayed burial, precipitated a halakhic question for the author:[17] Here again he reiterates his lack of access to required Talmudic tractates and poskim. He writes of his intent to review and expand his analysis upon his return to the city and to his library after the cessation of the plague. Of note, while this passage is physically situated in the midst of this Talmudic commentary, it is in essence a halakhic responsum.
2. Rabbi Hayyim Palachi (1788-1868)[18]
Rabbi Palachi was the Chief Rabbi of Izmir in Turkey. During his lifetime a cholera pandemic affected Turkey. In a number of his works he acknowledges suffering from Pandemic Bibliopenia. An explicit reference is below:
Hikikei Lev, vol 2, H. M., n. 51, p. 164a
Palachi was exiled to the village of Boron on the outskirts of Izmir. While lamenting that there is “no wise man withoutseforim ,” he endeavors to respond to a halakhic question with the resources he has available him in addition to relying on his memory. Below we see the repeated mention of PB throughout multiple works reflecting a most serious case of the condition.[19]
Hikikei Lev, vol 1, E. H., n. 57, p. 114b Hayyim Biyad n. 79, p. 98a
In a letter to Rabbi Hayyim Yehudah Avraham, published in the latter’s Ahi vaRosh[20] Palachi writes while still in exile in the village of Boron:
Varied Prevalence of PB
In the following case, we see the clear impact of PB on one Torah scholar, while another scholar during the very same pandemic appears to enjoy immunity from the condition.
In perhaps our most poetic example, Rabbi Yehudah Ibn Verga[21] corresponds with Rabbi Yosef Karo, author of the Shulhan Arukh, about a financial matter.[22] After lengthy praise for Rabbi Karo, he launches into a lament about the current state of plague in Tzfat.
Ibn Verga’s invokes the same phrase from Tehillim[23] (nikhsifah vigam kaltah nafshi) as does Tzahalon (Siman 81 above) to express the emotions evoked by the plague. His comment at the end of this passage about his elation upon meeting another person in the midst of the plague will sound familiar to those of us who have weathered complete lockdown during the current pandemic.
The next passage reflects the duration of Ibn Verga’s exile. Ibn Verga remarks that his exile had passed the entire summer, now into the winter, and the plague still lingered. “We have said, it is long due to the sins of the generation.” Ibn Verga and Karo both lived in Tzfat. Ibn Verga had hoped to speak to him directly about this case, face to face, but as the plague dragged on, he had no recourse but to commit his comments to paper.
Ibn Verga concludes that he had wanted to cite a responsum of Rosh in support of his position but was unable to include it due to his affliction with PB.[24]
In his response, Rav Yosef Karo likewise longs to speak face to face with Ibn Verga: He concurs that sin has caused them to be in a state of “mistar panim” until the plague passes. Rabbi Karo then proceeds to discuss the halakhic issue and makes no mention of lack of access to literature. He also lived in Tzfat and endured the same plague. In fact, we know Rabbi Karo fled Tzfat during the plague to live in the village of Birya.[25] It is in Birya in 1555 that he completed the first volume of his Shulhan Arukh. While the Shulhan Arukh was only first printed in 1565 in Venice, the colophon of each volume reflects the date and place of its completion.
Colophon at end of the 1565 edition of the first volume ofShul han Arukh:
By the time he had completed the second volume, Yoreh De’ah, less than one year later, he had already returned to Tzfat, presumably after the cessation of the plague.
Colophon at end of the 1565 edition of the second volume of Shulhan Arukh:
While Rabbi Ibn Verga was clearly a victim of PB, Rabbi Yosef Karo does not appear to have been affected whatsoever. We thus have evidence of the variable prevalence of the condition during the same pandemic. Mild or Implicit PB
Some cases of Pandemic Bibliopenia are not as explicit or easily diagnosed as those of Rabbis Tzahalon and Ibn Verga. At the same time as the aforementioned were experiencing plague in Northern Israel, Rabbi Moshe Isserles faced advancing disease in Cracow. Rabbi Isserles describes his dire situation in the introduction to his Mehir Yayin, a commentary on Megilat Esther that he wrote for his father-in-law, in lieu of mishloah manot, while in exile in the city of Shidlov.
While Rabbi Isserles does not explicitly refer to Pandemic Bibliopenia, he makes passing references possibly alluding to the condition. For example, he writes:
which means that his intellect still remained, despite his lack of access to an extensive library.
In describing the work, he writes:
Perhaps PB is reflected in his choice of composition, a work relying heavily on his textual analytic skills, and less so on obscure or hard to obtain texts, likely unavailable to him in Shidlov.[26] Furthermore, his qualifying statement,
might reflect a lack of bibliographical resources. Whether this case meets the diagnostic criteria for PB remains a question.
Differential Diagnosis
Pandemic Bibliopenia may possibly be confused with other forms of Bibliopenia. To be sure, many individuals have lost access to their libraries due to personal tragedies,[27] but here I refer specifically to systemic forms of Bibliopenia that impacted entire communities. In these cases authors were similarly deprived access to rabbinic literature, though for entirely different reasons. One such example will suffice.
The Physician Abraham Portaleone was a prominent figure in Renaissance Italy, treating royalty, authoring several medical works.[28] At the age of 62 he suffered a stroke which prompted a reevaluation of his life. He concluded that his affliction befell him as he had not devoted enough of his life to Torah learning. He undertook to write a work on prayer and the Beit HaMikdash which he dedicated to his children. At the end of chapter thirty-two, which discusses the shulhan in the Temple, we find the following comment.
Portaleone notes that, “Perhaps some place in the Talmud Hazal spoke of this, and I am not aware. As a result of the known deficiency [my emphasis] I have not been able to properly ascertain this.”[29] One might erroneously assume that he is referring to Pandemic Bibliopenia as the etiology for his lack of access to the Talmud. In fact, Portaleone is referring to a variant form of the condition, called Censorship Bibliopenia. A review of the entire work of Portaleone, including his introduction, will clarify any confusion.
In his introduction, Portaleone details the nature of his early education, and recalls how while a student studying Talmud with R’ Yaakov MiPano, the infamous decree led to the Talmud “being consumed by fire before our eyes.” This refers to the burning of the Talmud in Rome in 1553.[30] After the initial burning of the Talmud in Rome, other Italian cities followed suit with their own citywide burnings. Portaleone was witness to one such event. Decades later, as he penned his classic work, Shiltei haGibborim, the Talmud still remained largely unavailable in Italy. Portaleone was forced to use substitute works that alluded to or quoted the Talmud, if available, but sometimes the information was simply not accessible. One such example is his discussion of the Shulhan above.
In one remarkable instance Portaleone reveals his elation at being able to acquire a bona fide Talmudic reference. He writes that after he completed the chapter on the Lishkat haGazit (Chamber of Hewn Stone), God ordained (hikra) that he happen upon a wise man from the city of Tzfat (where the Talmud was available) who had come to Italy to seek financial support for his family. “From his mouth I heard the sugya in the second chapter of Yoma on the laws of theLishkat haGazit, and I write them here for you (my children) from his mouth…”[31]
In yet another place he excitedly relates of his accessing a small passage from Tractate
Chagigah from a tattered manuscript remnant in the library of a great Torah scholar (Gaon) of Verona.[32] All of these instances are examples of Censorship Bibliopenia.
Treatment
During previous pandemics, in the pre-modern era, PB was considered untreatable. Fortunately, however, it was temporary and ultimately resolved with the cessation of the pandemic. Today, however, the treatment for PB is readily available and inexpensive, though its safety has been called into question. Despite the fact that the understanding of disease transmission has evolved, people still, if feasible, flee their homes in urban areas for less populated locations. As such, they could still be susceptible to PB. However, PB is now completely remediable through internet access to Rabbinic literature.[33] Not only is virtually the totality or rabbinic literature widely and freely available for scholars (rabbis, poskim and laymen) via the internet, facilitating the production of quality work; the publication and dissemination of these works can be accomplished with ease on the internet as well. It is only today, in the midst of the current Covid 19 pandemic, that we are witnessing the eradication of PB. As a result, there have likely been more pages written of rabbinic discourse (both halakhic and aggadic, related to the pandemic or not) during the present pandemic than during all previous pandemics combined.[34]
Conclusion
Pandemic Bibliopenia is an underrecognized phenomenon in Jewish history. In addition to the medical impact of pandemics in the past, our ancestors experienced spiritual and intellectual suffering by being deprived access to the Torah library, our life blood. Today, however, even in the midst of a worldwide pandemic, while libraries have shuttered, and some have fled their homes, there has been little diminution in the access to rabbinic literature. As the world may never again experience Pandemic Bibliopenia and the unique literary impact of plagues and pandemics, it behooves us to recall it in appreciation that despite the many adversities associated with this pandemic, loss of access to our beloved Torah literature is not counted among them. Not only have we eradicated Pandemic Bibliopenia, it appears to have been replaced with a new diagnostic category, Pandemic Polybiblia,[35] though in this case, fortunately, a healthy and desired condition. May we bezokheh to the continuation of Polybiblia without any associated pandemics in the future.
[1] Isaac Canpanton (15th century), Darkei HaGemara. This oft quoted phrase refers specifically to the purchase of one’s own seforim. I take literary license with its use here. [2] My addendum. [3] This condition has been variously called epidemic or plague bibliopenia. We use the term pandemic in light of the present Covid 19 pandemic. [4] See Eliezer Brodt, “Towards a Bibliography of Coronavirus-related Articles and Seforim written in the past month (updated), Black Weddings and others Segulot,” Seforimblog.com (May 4, 2020). [5] The proliferation of literature specifically related to the pandemic is also noteworthy and unprecedented but is not the focus of this article. On the history of literature written during times of plague, see Abraham Yaari, biOhalei Sefer (Reuven Mass, 5699), 82-90. The other essays in this volume chronicle the impact of various natural occurrences, such as fires, and personal experiences, such as imprisonment, miraculous salvation, or infertility, on the writing of Hebrew books. [6] The etiology may be related to either closure of public libraries, which is a more widespread form PB, or due to required or elective relocation away from one’s personal library to remote areas devoid or deficient of seforim. [7] Plague and the migration to the rural areas affected not just the writing, but the printing of Hebrew books as well. See Yaari,op . cit.; Avraham Haberman, Perakim biToldot haMadpisim haIvrim (Reuven Mass: Jerusalem, 5738), 314. [8] Mishnah Ta’anit 3:4. [9] See Yaari, Moshe Dovid Chechik and Tamara Morsel Eisenberg, “Plague, Practice and Prescriptive Text: Jewish Traditions on Fleeing Afflicted Cities in Early Modern Ashkenaz,” Journal of Law, Religion and State (2017), 1-27. I thank professor Susan Einbinder for bringing this article to my attention. [10] For poetry in times of plague, see Susan Einbinder, After the Black Death: Plague and Commemoration Among Iberian Jews (University of Pennsylvania Press: Philadelphia, 2018). idem, “Poetry, Prose and Pestilence: Joseph Concio and Jewish Responses to the 1630 Italian Plague,” in Haviva Yishai, ed., Shirat Dvora: Essays in Honor of Professor Dvora Bregman (Ben-Gurion University: Beer Sheva, 2019), 73-101; idem, “Prayer and Plague: Jewish Plague Liturgy from Medieval and Early Modern Italy,” in Lori Jones and Nükhet Varlik, eds., Death and Disease in the Medieval and Early Modern World: Perspectives from Across the Mediterranean and Beyond (York Medieval Press, 2021), forthcoming. [11] We do not address here the impact of disease and illness on literary output. [12] On Tzahalon, see, Shimon Vanunu, Arzei Halevanon (Jerusalem, 5766), 862-865; Shalom Hillel “Sefer Magen Avot– Rabbeinu Yom Tov Tzahalon” Mekabtziel 33 (Kislev, 5768), 10. Vanunu lists all the references discussed below. [13] Here we do not address the substance of the responsa, rather focus on the impact of PB on the author. I mention the responsa in number order, assuming this is chronological. [14] Tzahalon’s Talmudic commentary was first published by his grandson in Venice, 1693, where it appears after the former’s responsa. A corrected and annotated version of the Talmudic commentary was published by S. Mertzbach in Benei Brak in 5752. [15] This was written in the manuscript in the middle of his commentary on the fifth chapter of Bava Metzia, but is printed separately as n. 14 as part of his responsa. [16] His son’s death does not appear to have been plague related, as he recounts that his son was perfectly healthy just prior to his death. [17] The delayed burial generated a question for Rabbi Tzahalon as to which day was considered his first day of mourning and thus whether he should put on tefillin. [18] On Palachi, see Shimon Aryeh Leib Eckstein, Toldot haHabif (Halevi’im Press: Jerusalem, 5759). All of the citations mentioned he are referenced on p. 183, n. 17. [19] See also his Nishmat Kol Hay, vol 2, E. H., siman 3, page 6. [20] (Izmir, 1840), H. M., n. 14, p. 88b. [21] This Yehuda Ibn Verga is not to be confused with the Spanish historian and kabbalist of the fifteenth century. [22] Rabbi Yosef Karo, Avkat Rokhel, 99 and 100. [23] 84:3. [24] If I am reading this correctly, it seems that Ibn Verga was still in Tzfat when he wrote this but had sent his library ahead to his location of exile. [25] See R. Ephraim Greenblatt, “B’Inyan Kiddush Levanah,” Noam 12 (5729), 113. Birya can be seen on the map above, between Tzfat and Par’am. [26] This work does reference texts from the Talmud and Tanakh as well as the Rambam’s Moreh Nevukhim. These may have been his available texts. [27] See, for example, Yehuda Rosenthal, “ The History of the Jews in Poland in Light of the Responsa of the Maharam of Lublin,” (Hebrew) Sinai 31:7-12 (Nisan– Elul, 5712), 320 regarding Maharam miLublin and his limited access to his library due to a fire in Cracow. [28] On Portaleone, see H.A. Savitz, “Abraham Portaleone: Italian Physician, Erudite Scholar and Author, 1542-1612,” Panminerva Medica 8:12 (December, 1966), 493-5; S. Kottek, “Abraham Portaleone: Italian Jewish Physician of the Renaissance Period- His Life and His Will, Reflections on Early Burial,” Koroth 8:7-8 (August 1983), 269-77; idem, “Jews Between Profane and Sacred Science: The Case of Abraham Portaleone,” in J. Helm and A. Winkelmann (eds.),Religious Confessions and the Sciences in the Sixteenth Century (Brill, 2001); A. Berns, The Bible and Natural Philosophy in Renaissance Italy (Cambridge University Press, 2014). [29] End of Chapter 32. [30] See Menachem Butler, The Burning of the Talmud in Rome on Rosh Hashanah, 1553 theTalmud.blog (September 28, 2011). [31] Chapter 23, p. 109. [32] For discussion of these cases, see Y. Katan and D. Gerber, eds., Shiltei haGibborim (Machon Yerushalayim, 5770), 28-29. [33] See Jacob J. Schacter, “The Challenges and Blessings of the Internet: Technology from An Historical Perspective,”Jewish Law Association Studies, vol. 29 [The Impact of Technology, Science, and Knowledge] (2020), 5-20. Rabbi Dr. Schacter highlights some striking parallels regarding challenges created by the development of printing and the development of the internet. [34] I admit being guilty of contributing to this phenomenon. [35] The diagnostic criteria for this new entity have not yet been adequately formulated and will require a fuller evaluation with the passage of time. A preliminary definition has been proposed: The proliferation of rabbinic works relating to pandemics written in the midst of the pandemic itself.
Book Sale 2020
Book Sale 2020
By Eliezer Brodt
This Book list of over four hundred titles, and consists of a few sections. The first batch are some of the works that were printed in the past year.
1. Almost all the books are either brand new or in good shape. 2. Email your order to [email protected]. I will than send you a bill based on what is available. Payment is with Pay Pal, but other arrangements can be made. 3. Shipping is not included in the price; that depends on the order and size of the book. 4. All books will be air mailed out after I receive payment 5. There are other shipping possibilities available depending on the quantity of books ordered. 6. For every 5 titles purchased there is a 10 percent discount [not including the shipping – a set counts as one title]. 7. Feel free to ask for details about any specific book on the list, or for books not found on the list. 8. All questions should be sent to me at [email protected] thank you and enjoy. 9. Part of the proceeds of this sale will be going to help support the efforts of the Seforim blog. 10. Enjoy! ספרים חדשים שהופיעו בשנה האחרונה
פרופ‘ יעקב שמואל שפיגל, עמודים בתולדות ספר העברי, “תלמיד .1 ערוך” $21 ד“ר מנחם קרן–קרץ, הקנאי, הרבי מסאטמר, $30 .2 רד“ מיכל טיקוצ‘ ,נינסקי משפטיך ,למדני ניצני הלמדנות .3 המשפטית בספר מנחת חינוך ואצל מחברו ר‘ יוסף באב“ד, $47 שפת אמת בשפת האם, דרשות חדשות של רבי יהודה אריה לייב .4 אלתר מגור [מכתב יד], בעריכת דניאל רייזר ואריאל אבן–מעשה, $26 מחקרים בשפות שמיות, מקרא ומדעי היהדות מוגשים לראובן שמחה .5 שטיינר, $36 יוסף דן, תולדות תורת הסוד העברית: ימי הביניים – כרך יג, .6 $32 שרה הלר–וילנסקי, ר‘ יצחק עראמה ומשנתו, דפוס שניה, $22 .7 הרב יהודה הנקין, מהלכים במקרא / סוגיות במקרא מבריאת .8 העולם ועד מתן תורה, $24 אור השם מספרד – חייו, פועלו והגותו של ר‘ חסדאי קרשקש, .9 (אוסף מאמרים), $30 ר‘ יצחק שילת, בין החסידות לראי“ה, $23 .10 עם עולם, שי לישראל ברטל, $30 .11 משה ארנד, שבעים פנים לתורה, בעריכת בנו אהרן ארנד, $21 .12 יצחק טברסקי, כמעיין המתגבר, הלכה ורוח ביצירת חכמי ימי .13 הביניים, בעריכת כרמי הורוביץ, $34 ביאור הרלב“ג לתורה, פרקי מבוא, מאת ברוך ברנר, כרמיאל .14 כהן, הוצאת מעליות, $24 פרופ‘ שרגא אברמסון, מחקרים בספרות הגאונים, $27 .15 ר‘ שמואל הילמן, אור הישר, דרשות, ע“י ר‘ פינחס דונר .16 ואחרים, כולל תולדותיו ב127- עמודים נכתב על ידי ר‘ יחיאל גולדהבר, $21 מפני תיקון עולם, פרק ד מסכת גיטין, מנחם כהנא, $27 .17 אילן אלדר תחייתה והתחדשותה של העברית: מחקרים ועיונים, .18 $21 מארמית לעברית: שיטת התרגום בהלכות ראו, יוחנן ברויאר, $33 .19 שרה צפתמן, שבחי רבי שמואל ורבי יהודה חסיד, ראשיתה של .20 ספרות השבחים ביהדות אשכנז, $32 גרשון ברין, פרשנים ביזנטיים יהודים באלף השני לספריה, $28 .21 יוסף הכהן, ספר דברי הימים למלכי צרפת ומלכי בית אוטומאן, .22 ג‘ חלקים, מהדיר: ראובן בונפיל, $48 יוסף הכהן, עמק הבכא, מהדיר ראובן בונפיל, $24 .23 גנזי קדם, כרך טז, $35 .24 ר‘ אליהו בן אמזוג, מסורת והיא תורה שבעל פה, $28 .25 ר‘ אליהו רחמים זייני, עץ ארז חלק ו, $23 .26 יעקב ברנאי, חדש באדרא: שבתאות – היבטים היסטוריוגרפיים, .27 $37 ישעיהו תשבי, תורת הרע והקליפה בקבלת האר“י (מהדורה חדשה), .28 $23 עיונים בלשניים פילולוגיים בחקר העברית והארמית, $27 .29 העברית והארמית בימי הביניים: עיונים בלשון ובחוכמת הלשון, .30 $31 עֵת הֵאָסֵף, א: מילים ומילונאות, $33 .31 סופה להתקיים; הקיום המשותף בצל המחלוקת, $31 .32 יעקב ליכט, מעולמה הרוחני של יהדות הבית השני פרקי עיון .33 במגילות מדבר יהודה ובספרים החיצונים, $24 דפנא לוין, הילכו שניים יחדיו בלתי אם נועדו, בין מורה .34 לתלמיד האר“י ור‘ חיים ויטאל, $35 גלוסר המילים השאולות מן היוונית ומן הרומית במקורות .35 היהודיים הבתר־מקראיים, $21 רמי ריינר ופנחס רוט, תשובות ר‘ יצחק בן שמואל מדמפייר .36 (ר“י הזקן), $25 לשון ומסורה אסופת מאמרים, יוסף פרץ, $22 .37 פירוש רש”י למשלי, $24 .38 אם לבינה, מכתב יד, מהריעב”ץ, $25 .39 סוגיות בנוסח המקרא ובפרשנותו, ישעיהו מאורי, $24 .40 פירוש האגדות לרבי עזריאל (מהדורה חדשה), $26 .41 ספר המספיק לעובדי השם, ניסים דנה (מהדורה חדשה), $34 .42 יונתן מאיר, דמותו המיתולוגי של הבעש”ט, $18 .43 הלל צייטילין, בחביון הנשמה, $20 .44 הלל צייטילין, געגונים ליופי, $20 .45 דוד שוורץ, מטכניקה לתודעה – התגבשות הכתיבה הרב ממדית מר’ .46 שלמה אבן גבירול ועד לרמב”ם , $24 ר’ אליהו גרינצייג, פקודי העדה, חידושים על רמב”ם הלכות .47 סנהדרין, חלק ה, $14 48. Yiddish Letters From the Seventeenth-Century World of Glikl Hamel, $20
:ספרים של (או בעריכתו) ר‘ שמואל אשכנזי
אלפא ביתא קדמיתא דשמואל זעירא –ר‘ שמואל אשכנזי חלק א 852 .1 ,עמודים
עותקים אחרונים, $68
אלפא ביתא תניתא דשמואל זעירא – ר‘ שמואל אשכנזי שני .1 חלקים, מבצע, 32$ אסופה, ארבעה מאמרים מאוצרות ר‘ שמואל אשכנזי, $13 .2 אברהם אליהו הרכבי, חדשים גם ישנים $35 .3 געגראמטע שפריכווערטער $3 500 .4 מפענח ,נעלמים 4000 פענוחי נוטריקונים שלא נכנסו לאוצר .5 ראשי תבות, $4 אוסף תדפיסים: מבוא שלו לשבט מוסר \ תדפיס פרדס הגדה \ על .6 שני ספרי חסידים הראשונים $7 ר‘ שלמה אלקבץ, שרשי ישי $18 .7 ר‘ שלמה אלקבץ, מנות הלוי, $18 .8
:ספרים מר‘ יעקב ישראל סטל
ספר גימטריאות – לר’ יהודה החסיד, שני .1 חלקים $32 סודי חומש ושאר ,$15 .2 סגולה – חלק א, $19 .3 דרשות לימי התשובה, $11 .4 תשובות הרוקח – $13 .5 נהגו ישראל – סוכות – $19 .6 גנזי חג הסוכות $20- .7 אחר שלישים במועצות (פיוט לחתן עם פירוש .8 לראשונים – נדפס ב50- עותקים) $13
שאר ספרים– חדשים וגם ישינים
אגרות מלכי רבנן, .1 תשובות מפוסקים וחכמי הדור, מלך שפירא, $21 מכילתא א, $15 .2 ר‘ יחיאל גולדהבר, קונדיטון [לשאלת החרם .3 על ספרד, אסון הטיטאניק מנקודת מבטו של העולם היהודי] 15$ ליקוטי אליעזר, אליעזר בראדט, 9$ .4 בין כסה לעשור, אליעזר בראדט, 14$ .5 סדר אליהו, לאדר“ת מוסד רב קוק, (נדיר) .6 $60 שבחי הרמב“ם, יצחק אבישור, $23 .7 גרים וגירות, הרב יוסף ליפלאנד, (מוסד .8 רב קוק) $16 חרבא דמשהמהדורה חדשה , מהדיר: יובל .9 הררי, $23 שקיעין מדרשי תימן, שאול ליברמן, $17 .10 ספר היובל לדניאל קארפי, $17 .11 שערי \צדק חכמת ,אדם הלכות התלויות .12 בארץ, [בעל החיי אדם] $22 ר‘ יצחק אייזיק חבר, הגדה של פסח יד .13 מצרים השלם, $17 יסופר לדור, יונה עמנואל, $17 .14 משיבת ,נפש קירוב רחוקים באספקלריית .15 חז”ל $15 הסנהדרין, אברהם ביכלר, $18 .16 שו”ת מתנות באדם, $26 .17 פרשיות מהווי יהודי איטליה במאה הט”ז, .18 על פי כ”י, $40 שו”ת ר’ עזריאל דאיינה, ב’ חלקים, $50 .19 אגרות מלמדים, $36 .20 אגרות בית ריאיטי, $36 .21 מחקרים בספרות התלמודית, יום עיון לרגל .22 מלאת שמונים שנה לשאול ליברמן, $24 פקסימיליה, ג‘ חלקים של תלמוד בבלי, כתב .23 יד מינכן, $72 סידור ר‘ הירץ ש“צ, א-ב, $21 .24 רוח חדשה בארמון התורה, ספר יובל לכבוד .25 פרופ’ תמר רוס עם הגיעה לגבורות, $22 מחקרים במקרא בתרגומיו ובמפרשיו, עזרא .26 ציון מלמד,$30 פירוש הראש“ למסכת שקלים, (מהדיר ר‘ .27 זק“ש) $18 הרב קוק והציונות גלגולה של תקווה, מיכל .28 לניר, $13 אריה מורגנשטרן, הרבנות הראשית לארץ .29 ישראל ייסודה וארגונה, $17 לחקר התלמוד, א. וויס, $27 .30 ספר המצרף / ביאורים והגהות לעבדות .31 חז“ל, $10 ישראל בעמים, כריכה קשה, יצחק בער, $12 .32 בעלות השחר, מרדכי זלקין, $18 .33 חסד לאומים ,חטאת הרב אליהו רחמים .34 זייני, $18 מועדים לשמחה ניסן – ב, ה, $16 .35 הגדות התלמוד, $28 .36 מוולוז‘ין עד ירושלים, כתבי הרב מאיר בר .37 אילן (ברלין), ב’ חלקים, $40 מחקרים בתקופת המשנה ,והתלמוד אברהם .38 ביכלר, $15 המשנה הראשונה ופלוגתא דתנאי, הרב ד“ר .39 דור צבי האפפמאנן, $10 ספרות יידיש בפולין, חנא שמרוק, $17 .40 מחקרי תלמוד א, $21 .41 מחקרי תלמוד ב, $32 .42 ספר הפרדס עם תרומת הפרדס, $12 .43 מוסדות ותארים בספרות התלמוד, ד”ר אברהם .44 אמיר, $18 הספר כסוכן תרבות, זאב גריס, $21 .45 פנקס ועד ארבע ארצות, ישראל היילפרין, .46 מהדורה שניה, $18 ר‘ שלמה זלמן הבלין, תורתן של גאונים .47 חלק א‘ [מבוא על תקופת הגאונים] , $20 משה מונטיפיורי האיש והאגדה, משה סמט, .48 $20 שירת המאור, בעל המאור, $26 .49 מבואות לספרות התנאים, יעקב נחום הלוי .50 אפשטיין, $35 מבואות לספרות האמוראים, יעקב נחום הלוי .51 אפשטיין, $35 תוספתא עתיקתא, שמא יהודה פרידמן, $25 .52 דברים בעתם, הרב מרגליות, $15 .53 מלאכת מחשבת, רבי משה חפץ, $18 .54 בנימין בכר, ר‘ אברהם אבן עזרא המדקדק, .55 $17 אם למסורת, שמואל ש. ביאלובלוצקי, $18 .56 תורת אבן העזר, אריה קרלין, מוסד רב .57 קוק, $15 ארשת ספר שנה לחקר הספר העברי, חלק ה .58 $16 חשק שלמה שרשים לרבי שלמה פפנהים, $22 .59 ספר הדמעות, שמעון ברנפלד, ג’ חלקים, .60 $65 שרשי מנהג אשכנז, חלק ב $28 .61 פנקס פתוח, מרדכי נדב, $22 .62 זכרונות השרידי אש, $16 .63 לפרקים, (בעל השרידי אש), ב’ חלקים, $18 .64 ר‘ יוסף איש רוסהיים, ספר המקנה, $23 .65 ‘ר יוסף רב“ נתן ,אופיציאל יוסף .66 המקנא,$27 והגעגועים סגורים ,בי נילי רחל שרף .67 גולד, $14 סדור עבודת הלבבות, ספר מקור הברכות, .68 $19 ר‘ יוסף קאפח המקרא ברמב“ם, $18 .69 על דרך האמת הרמבן“ ויצירתה של מסורת, .70 משה הלברטל, $25 מפרשי המקרא דרכיהם ,ושיטותיהם עזרא .71 ציון מלמד, ב’ חלקים, $38 מפי בעלי לשונות, שרגא אברמסון, $20 .72 היא שיחתי, דן אלינור, $10 .73 טעמי מסורת המקרא לר‘ יהודה החסיד, $12 .74 פתחי שערים, נפתלי בן מנחם, $19 .75 פירושי מסכת פסחים וסוכה, א. קופפר, $11 .76 מעין החיים, דברי חיים – חתם סופר, $5 .77 ספר זיכרון דגל מחנה ראובן, $25 .78 ספר שמות תורה, הלכות הנהגות חידושים .79 ביאורים, $20 יסוד מורא וסוד תורה ,ר’ אברהם אבן .80 עזרא, $32 סידור אור השנים, $18 מכון אהבת שלום .81 מרבדי משנה פרקי ברכות, אברהם וולפיש, .82 $18 פנקס הכשרים של קהילת פוזנא .83 (שפ“א–תקצ“ה), דב אברון, $16 שירים גנוזים, נחמיה אלוני ויוסף טובי, .84 $14 הפירוש השלם על תהילים, רד”ק, $21 מוסד .85 הרב קוק ביאור הגר“א לנ“ך, נביאים, $20מוסד הרב .86 קוק בשליחות ירושלים, אריה מורגנשטרן, $16 .87 לקסיקון העיתונות העברית, מנוחה גלבוע, .88 $24 תקנות ניקלשבורג, א.נ.צ. רות, $23 .89 שבע החכמות, דוב רפל, $18 .90 בית אבות, ספר מוסר, על מסכת אבות, $25 .91 לוחות עדות להגאון רבי יהונתן אייבשיץ .92 זצ“ל, $30 רד“ב מייזלש, תולדות, מוסד הרב קוק, $16 .93 חקר ועיון, קלמן כהנא, חלק א, $18 .94 פרקי עיון במשנת רבי אברהם אבן עזרא, .95 ד”ר אברהם ליפשיץ, $19 אוצר המשלים והפתגמים, דוידזון, (בעריכת .96 שמואל אשכנזי) $18 משלי ישראל ואומות ,העולם אלעזר .97 בלאנקשטיין, בעריכת שמואל אשכנזי, $30 חנוך אלבק, מבוא לתלמודים $25 .98 יעקב שמואל שפיגל, עמודים בתולדות ספר .99 העברי, (עותק אחרון) הגהות ומגיהים $50 יעקב שמואל שפיגל, עמודים בתולדות ספר .100 העברי, הדר המחבר, $21 יעקב שמואל שפיגל (מהדיר), וישמע קולי, .101 $22 פירוש רש“י למסכת ראש השנה [על פי כ“י], .102 מהדיר: אהרן ארנד, $22 ר‘ ואלדבערג, דרכי השינויים, מחקר דרכי .103 מדרש הכתובים בספר חז“ל, [הוצאת מקור] 28$ מרדכי סבתו, תלמוד בבלי, מסכת סנהדרין, .104 פרק שלישי, ב‘ חלקים, $30 רש“,י עיונים ,ביצירתו בעריכת צבי .105 שטיינפלד, בר אילן, 34$ רבי זרחיה הלוי – בעל המאור ובני חוגו .106 ישראל מ‘ תא–שמע $32 מאיר בניהו, הדפוס העברי בקרימונה, $36 .107 מאיר ,בניהו הסכמה ורשות בדפוסי .108 ויניציאה, $36 מאיר בניהו, כתבי הקבלה של הרמח”ל, $66 .109 קבץ על יד, כרך שנים עשר, $20 .110 קבץ על יד, כרך עשירי, $18 .111 קבץ על יד, כרך שביעי, $16 .112 קבץעל יד, כרך עשרים ואחד, $21 .113 ספרי היובל לרבי חנוך אלבק, מוסד הרב .114 קוק, $21 אור החיים, חיים ב”ר יוסף מיכל, $25 .115 במעגלי הנגלה והנסתר, וינשטוק, $23 .116 בין שני כהנים גדולים, מנחם קמפינסקי, .117 $13 משנת ארץ ישראל, עם פירוש ספראי, פסחים, .118 $25 אוזן עבדיך, שאלות ותשובות פוסקי הדור, .119 $9 עץ חיים, רבי יעקב חזן, ג’ חלקים $66 .120 ארעא דרבנן, $7 .121 רבי דב בר מייזלש, גדול בתורה מדינאי .122 ולוחם, מוסד הרב קוק ספר מרגליות ,מאמרים ומחקרים לזכרו של .123 הרב ראובן מרגליות ז”ל, $23 ישראל והאנושות, אליהו בן אמוזג, $20 .124 רבינו אפרים, ישראל שציפנסקי .125 יום טוב שני של גלויות, מאיר בניהו, $28 .126 מולדת וארץ יעודה, אליעזר שביד, $13 .127 קורות בתי התפילה בישראל, שמואל קרויס, .128 $34 יחיד בדורו הגאון מוילנא – דמות ודימוי, .129 עמנואל אטקס, $24 שמואל בדורו, י. רימון – י.ז. וסרמן, .130 $21 דעת לשון ,ב סיגלית רוזמרין וישראל .131 רוזנסון, $8 אלה דברי ,הברית קובץ החרמות ופסקי .132 ההלכות נגד ראשונים הרפורמים בהמבורג, דפוס צילום, $17 שערי תורת בבל, ר’ זאב וולף רבינוביץ .133 ז”ל, $40 ספר ארץ ישראל, הגאון רבי יחיאל מיכל .134 טוקצינסקי זצ”ל, $12 חטאו של אלישע, יהודה ליבס, $13 .135 מה נשתנה, דוד הנשקה, $33 .136 רשי“ תורתו ואישיותו, הרב ד”ר שמעון .137 פדרבוש, $26 החסידות, אהרן מרכוס, $25 .138 דוד הנשקה, שמחת הרגל בתלמודם של תנאים, .139 $28 אוצר הביאורים ,והפירושים פנחס יעקב .140 הכהן, $32 הביוגרפיה הרוחנית של רבי שמעון בר .141 יוחאי, רונית מרוז, $25 אילן אלדר, תורת טעמי המקרא, ספר הוריית .142 הקורא, קריאת ארץ ישראל במאה הי”א, $16 בפריסהחסידות והקבלה, הלל צייטלין, $20 .143 דרשת הפסח ‘לר חסדאי קרשקש ומחקרים .144 במשנתו הפילוסופית, אביעזר רביצקי, $18 ספר סופר וסיפור, שמואל יוסף עגנון, $20 .145 ר‘ ישראל סלנטר וראשיתה של תנועת המוסר, .146 עמנואל אטקס, $23 ,הצנזור העורך ,והטקסט אמנון רז .147 קרקוצקין, $18 מטפחת ספרים, להגאון יעב”ץ, $34 .148 הויכוח על הפלפול, דב רפל $22 .149 יאיר בן שבתי מקוריו, חרב פיפיות, $21 .150 מלחמת השם, יעקב בן ראובן, $21 .151 נתיבי אמונה ומינות, ישעיה תשבי, $21 .152 מאסף לתולדות יהדות פולין, גלעד $10 .153 רבי יצחק בר ששת שהריב“ דרך חייו .154 ותקופתו, אברהם הרשמן, $20 ספר דברים, הרב דוד צבי הופמן, שני .155 חלקים $45 יוסף פאור, עיונים במשנה תורה להרמב”ם, .156 $23 נח שטיינשנדר, עיר ווילנא, דפוס צילום, .157 $24 לפלגות ישראל בהונגריא, $13 .158 קורות יהודים בהונגריה, $14 .159 עיר הצדק, צונץ, $22 .160 פסקי עוזיאל בשאלות הזמן, $25 .161 מפתחות שו“ת משפטי עוזיאל, לחלקים א-ט, .162 $9 רבינואליהו ,מווילנא ישראל יעקב .163 דינסטאג, כריכה רכה ,$9 מלות ההגיון, רבינו משה בן מימון, $19 .164 הצדקה בישראל, יהודה ברגמן, $13 .165 בית הועד לעריכת כתבי רבותינו $18 .166 העקיבות התרגומית בתרגום אונקלוס, רפאל .167 בנימין פוזן, $24 מ‘בעל שד‘ ל‘בעל שם‘, מיכל אורון, $18 .168 בני עליה, ש. ברנפלד, $8 .169 מבואות למקורות ומסורות, דוד הלבני, $15 .170 לשון התרגום לנביאים ראשונים, אברהם טל, .171 $12 עולם כמנהגו נוהג, יצחק (אריק) זימר, .172 $29 מפרד“ס התנ“ך, ז. שזר, $25 .173 עיוני תפילה, יוסף היינימן, $21 .174 מילי דמרדכי, ה‘ ספרים מר‘ מרדכי זק“ש, .175 $23 שבחי הבעש“ט כתב יד, י. מונדשיין, $40 .176 פיוטי רבי פינחס הכהן, שולמית אליצור, .177 $42 תשובות רבינו אברהם בן הרמב“ם, פריימן .178 גויטיין, $42 פיוטי רבי יהודה בירבי בנימין, שולמית .179 אליצור, $32 רבי אלעזר בירבי קליר, שולמית אליצור, .180 $32 החדש אסור מן התורה, משה סמט, $55 .181 כתבים נבחרים, ב‘ חלקים אברהם ברלינר, .182 $36 כתבים נבחרים, אברהם ברלינר, חלק א, .183 הערות על סידור, $18 קובץ ראשונים מועד קטן, $24 .184 על פי דרכו, יהודה ברנדס, $18 .185 ספר ראבי“ה, חלק ו, מכון הרי פישל, $17 .186 ספרי רבינו ישעיה פיק: קשות מיושב, אומר .187 השכחה, חידושי הש”ס, מיני תרגומא, $16 גאוני פדוואה, קונטרס המקוה בריווג’ו, .188 שאלות ותשובות מהר”י מינץ, סדר הגט למהר”י מינץ ומהר”ם פדאווה, שני חלקים, (זכרון אהרן) $55 אגרות שד“ל, ב’ חלקים $46 .189 מנחת שי על התורה, צבי בצר, $40 .190 המדפיס דניאל בומבירגי ורשימת ספרי בית .191 דפוסו, א. מ. הברמן, $36 ספר צמח דוד, מהדורות מרדכי ברויאר $50 .192 על התפילה, אברהם הברמן, $23 .193 נאחז בסבך, דוד אסף, כריכה קשה, $36 .194 יעקב זוסמן, תורה שבעל פה, פשוטה .195 כמשמעה, $23 הלכות ארץ ישראל ,מןהגניזה מרדכי .196 מרגליות, $26 מבוא על חכמי צרפת מפרשי המקרא, שמואל .197 אברהם פאזנאנסקי, $25 לקורות הגזרות על ישראל, אוסף ספרים על .198 ת“ח ות“ט, $28 ר‘ אברהם בקראט, ספר זכרון על פירוש .199 רש“י (מהדיר: משה פיליפ) $23 ספרים קדושים מתלמידי בעש“ט ‘הק : שם .200 אפרים, יד ושם, אות ישע, אורח מישור, תולדות אדם, חשבה לטובה, ספר היחש, ברכה שלמה, $16 קובץ ספרי טעמי המקרא, (מאת יודא ארי‘ .201 גוטמאן) $40 התפילה בתקופת התנאים והאמוראים, יוסף .202 הימן, $24 עם הארץ הגלילי, ביכלר , $18 .203 ספר לב טוב, לרבי יצחק ב”ר אליקים מק”ק .204 פוזנא, תרגום מיידיש, $19 מנוחה נכונה, ביברפלד, $14 .205 שמחה עמנואל, מגנזי אירופה, ב, $28 .206 שמחה עמנואל, מגנזי אירופה, א, $28 .207 הגדול” ממינסק, הרב מאיר היילפרין, $21“ .208 [[מצוין מבחר כתבים, ר‘ מתתיהו שטראשון, $23 .209 מבוקר לערב, יצחק לוין, $19 .210 רש“י על התורה, מהדורת ברלינגר, $27 .211 התלמוד הבבלי בהתהוותו ההיסטורית, מ”א .212 טננבלאט, $20 מחקרים בספרות התשובות, י. ז. כהנא, $28 .213 טמירין, ב’, $17 .214 קובץ ספרי סת“ם, כתרי אותיות תפילין, .215 ברוך שאמר, אלפא ביתא, $17 שמחה עמנואל, שברי לוחות, ספרים האבודים .216 של בעלי התוספות, $25 מעולמם של חכמים, אפרים א. אורבך, $42 .217 בשערי ספר, נפתלי בן מנחם, $20 .218 מקראה בחקר הרמב“ם, ליקוטי “תרביץ”, $20 .219 ילקוט המכירי, ישעיה משלי, $20 .220 ברכות לאברהם, לכבוד פר‘ אברהם גרוסמן, .221 בעריכת יוסף קפלן, $23 יין הטוב על התרגומים ,על התורה שני .222 חלקים, $34 כתבי הרב ד“ר יוסף זליגר, $28 .223 ספר הזיכרון, הריטב”א (מהדורת ר’ כהנא) .224 $19 מחקרים בגיאוגרפיה היסטורית יישובית של .225 ארץ ישראל, $14 חז“ל אמונות ודעות, א.א. אורבך, (כריכה .226 קשה), $27 אשכול חלק ד עם פירוש נחל האשכול, $12 .227 תרגום אונקלוס, מהדורת ברלינר $30 .228 רבינו מיוחס, פירוש על ספר במדבר, $17 .229 מגילת איבה לבעל התוס’ יום טוב $18 .230 יעקב מארק, גדולים פון אונזער צייט, $36 .231 [[מצוין ר’ מרדכי גימפל יפה, מבחר כתבים $15 .232 רשימת תשובות רב שרירא גאון, $18 .233 ספר רש”י מוסד רב קוק $36 .234 בצלאל לנדוי, הרב ר’ אלימלך מליז’נסק, .235 $26 ר’ משה אבן עזרא, שירת ישראל, $20 .236 ר’ יהושע מונדשיין, הצופה לדורו, תולדות .237 חייו ופעלו של הרב יקותיאל קמלהאר, $22 שני ספרים נפתחים: ר’ ראובן מרגליות, .238 תולדות אדם חיי המהרש”א, תולדות רבינו חיים בן עטר בעל אור החיים, $24 ר’ אברהם גבישון, עומר השכחה, משלי $23 .239 חתן דמים, דפוס צילום, $11 .240 ר’ יצחק דמן עכו, מאירת עינים על רמב”ן .241 על התורה, $24 ר’ יוסף קאפח כתבים, חלק ב $23 .242 שו”ת הרי”ף מהדורת רוטשטיין, $24 .243 ר’ בצלאל לנדוי, הגאון החסיד מוילנא, .244 $16 אדרת אליהו, הגאון מוילנה, דמותו .245 והשפעתו, בית התפוצה, $22 רבי שמואל ב”ר נסים מסנות, בראשית זוטא, .246 מוסד הרב קוק $28 תשובות הגאונים, שערי צדק, $21 .247 חמדת גנוזה, $15 .248 תשובות הגאונים מוסאפיה (ליק), $16 .249 יד הקטנה, ביאור על תרי”ג מצוות, $25 .250 שני כרובים, על התוספות יום טוב וקצות .251 החושן $22 ישראל מ’ תא-שמע, הנגלה שבנסתר $20 .252 צבי ברסקי, חנות ותווית, מוכרי ספרים .253 בארץ ישראל, 1870-1948, $30 ר’ יוסף אבן עקנין, התגלות הסודות .254 והופעת המאורות, פירוש שיר השירים, $35 פירוש רבינו מיוחס ב”ר אליהו על ספר .255 איוב, $17 עמנואל אטקס, יחיד בדורו, הגאון מווילנה .256 דמות ודימוי, $23 תשלום אבודרהם פירוש על סדר העבודה, $21 .257 מנחם כהנא, המכילתות לפרשת עמלק, $36 .258 פירוש רש “יעל התורה [על פי כ”י משנת .259 ר’], מאת מנשה ליהמן, $28 שלמה דב גויטיין, סדרי חינוך, מתקופת .260 הגאונים עד בית הרמב”ם, $21 ספר זכרון לר’ יוסף בן יצחק קמחי, $23 .261 ש’ שרגאי, מעייני חסידות איזביצא- .262 ראדזין, $22 יצחק רפאל, ספר החסידות, $27 .263 ספר ציוני, $20 .264 מדרשי הגניזה, בתי מדרשות, ב’ חלקים, .265 רבי שלמה ורטהימר, $55 ר’ יעקב עמדין, לחם שמים ד’ חלקים $65 .266 ספר הבתים, ג’ חלקים $66 .267 ספר השרשים לרד”ק $24 .268 ר’ אהרן מרקוס, החסידות, $26 .269 א’ אשכול, סיפור דוד הראובני, $28 .270 תרגום יונתן בן עוזיאל, מהד’ גינצבורג, .271 $25 תרגום ירושלמי, מהד’ גינצבורג $21 .272 אפרים אלימלך אורבך, מחקרים במדעי .273 היהדות, ב’ חלקים, $42 שרגא אברמסון, בעלי התוספות על התורה .274 $23 ספר הניצחון, $23 .275 ספר יוחסין השלם, $27 .276 משלי עם פי’ ר’ יצחק בן עראמה, $27 .277 רד”ק על התורה, מוסד הרב קוק, $21 .278 ר’ יעקב עמדין, תורת הקנאות, $42 .279 ר’ אברהם גלאנצר, מעייני אגם, אסופת .280 מאמרים נבחרים, עיונים בפירוש רש”י $21 פירוש הרמב”ן על התורה, דפוס צילום דפוס .281 ראשון, $60 ספר רושיינא, במדבר-דברים, $20 .282 ספר רושיינא, ויקרא, $20 .283 ספר רושיינא, בראשית, $21 .284 ספר רושיינא, שמות $20 .285 ספר הברמן, $25 .286 יד להימן, $25 .287 פנקס ועד ארבע ארצות, מהדורת תש”ה, $40 .288 שבת אחים, אדר”ת, $21 .289 תשובות רבי שר שלום גאון, $22 .290 מאמר על יהודי ונציה, $21 .291 מבוא לש”ס, אשכול, $65 .292 שבט יהודה, $24 .293 אברהם יערי, מסע משולם מוולטרה בארץ .294 ישראל $24 שלשלת הקבלה, $27 .295 ילקוט המכירי, תרי עשר, ב’ חלקים $26 .296 ר’ שלמה שיק, תקנות ותפילות, סדור .297 רשב”ן, $21 דובנא רבתי, עיר דובנא וגדוליה, $20 .298 בן גרני, קובץ ספרים מובחרים, $20 .299 אגרות רמח”ל, מהד’ גינצבורג, ב’ חלקים .300 $36 ר’ יוסף קרא, איוב, $24 .301 ר’ יוסף קרא, נביאים ראשונים, $25 .302 דרשה לפסח לרוקח, $23 .303 חשמונאי ובניו, $23 .304 פירושים לספר משלי לבית קמחי, $27 .305 שד”ל, בית האוצר, $30 .306 א’ קופפר, מהדיר, תשובות ופסקים, $25 .307 משה צינוביץ, עץ חיים על וולוז’ין $32 .308 שד”ל, מבוא למחזור רומא, $35 .309 הגאון מטשעבין, $18 .310 ספר רפאל וייזר, עיונים בכתבי יד, .311 בארכיונים וביצרת ש”י עגנון, ערך גיל וייסבלאי, $34 שאול ליברמן, יוונים ויוונות בארץ .312 ישראל, $32 לוית חן, אור עינים, $23 .313 ד’ חלקים, אריה ליב פרומקין, תולדות .314 חכמי ירושלים $60 עזרא פליישר, היוצרות בהתהוותם .315 והתפתחותם $36 אוצר נחמד, ד’ חלקים, $45 .316 כתבי יד הגניזה, גנזי ירושלים ב’ חלקים, .317 $50 ביאור הגר”א כתב יד, מכון הגר”א, $23 .318 רבי אשתורי הפרחי, חלוץ חוקרי ארץ .319 ישראל, (קובץ מחקרים), $25 מחזור גולדשמידט, סוכות $25 .320 מאיר בניהו ועוד, סדר אליהו זוטא, ג’ .321 חלקים, $66 אוסף הגדות [שבע: מלבי”ם, זכר יהוסף, .322 אמרי שפר, מעשה נסים, מעשה בר’ אלעזר, מגדל עדר, צורף אמרים], $20 פירוש חמאת החמדה על התורה, $27 .323 וידוי של משכיל, יומן, מרדכי גינצבורג, .324 $12 יצחק קובנר, יומן, ספר המצרף, $12 .325 שמואל פין, קריה נאמנה $36 .326 ספרי זוטא, ליברמן $24 .327 מחזור גולדשמידט, פסח $26 .328 מחזור גולדשמידט, שבועות $26 .329 מחזות של הרמח”ל ג’ חלקים: מעשה שמשון \ .330 לישרים תהילה \ מגדל עוז $35 שמא פרידמן, לתורתם של תנאים, $21 .331 יחוסי תנאים ואמוראים, מוסד הרב קוק $60 .332 דב רפל, הרמב”ם כמחנך $19 .333 מאיר בניהו, היחסים שבין יהודי יוון .334 ליהודי איטליה, $34 יוסף היינימן, התפילה בתקופת התנאים .335 והאמוראים [כריכה קשה] $25 שלחן שלמה \ פסקי תשובה א-ג $10 .336 מעלות היוחסין מאת ר’ אפרים זלמן .337 מרגליות עם הערות 10$ א”א אורבך, בעלי התוספות (ב’ חלקים), .338 $27 וילנסקי, חסידים ומתנגדים, (ב’ חלקים) .339 $27 משנת ארץ ישראל, ספראי, כתובות, ב’ .340 חלקים $40 כנסת מחקרים ישראל תא שמע,חלקים א-ד, כל .341 חלק $27
The Significance of Avraham Avinu’s Performance of the Mitzvot
The Significance of Avraham Avinu’s Performance of the Mitzvot By Michael Landy
Perfection for a Jew can only be realized through the performance of the mitzvot [commandments] of the Torah, which were given from G-d to Moshe on Sinai [Matan Torah]. Since man is finite, his thinking and understanding is limited and constrained to factors of time and space. Man is not capable, and it is beyond his intellectual reach, to calculate a finite system that can relate to the infiniteruchaniyut world—existence beyond time and space. Man needed a revelation from G-d that would give him such a system whereby in the physical world man could affect and achieve perfection in the ruchaniyut existence. Torah is this system given by G-d to the Klal Yisroel, and its function is realized through the performance of the mitzvot.[1] The mitzvot are an “interface” from finite physical existence to the ruchaniyut existence. It is our emunah [belief], and a rational deduction, that only through the performance of the mitzvot, given from G-d to Moshe on Sinai, that a Jew can reach completeness and perfection in this world and in his ruchaniyut existence.
אמר רב קיים אברהם אבינו כל :The Talmud in Yoma 28b[2] states AvrahamAvinu – ’התורה כולה שנאמר עקב אשר שמע אברהם בקולי וגו (performed and) fulfilled all the commandments of the Torah.[3] In a responsum, the Rema (Rabbi Moshe Isserles) writes that this statement of the Talmud refers only to Avraham, to the exclusion of Yitzchak and Yaakov.[4] What is the overall intent of the Talmud stating and proving that Avraham kept the mitzvot? Since Avraham lived before Matan Torah, what would be the implication if Avraham did not observe all the mitzvot? Additionally, why is the emphasis on Avraham to the exclusion of Yitzchak and Yaakov
Early church theology dealt with a dilemma as to the status of Divine Law—Torah: the function of the mitzvot [commandments] as written in the Torah.[5] Historically, in order to counter judaization of the Galatian Church, then comprised of pagan converts to Christianity, and, as a general attack on Jewish converts who still kept to traditional Jewish observance of ישוע הנוצרי [the mitzvot, Paul declared that belief in[6 [Jesus of Nazareth, the historical central figure in Christianity] alone was sufficient for man’s perfection.[7] As a consequence of this supposition, the observance and performance of Divine Law—the mitzvot of the Torah—would no longer be necessary for a person’s completeness or perfection.
The fundamental proof for this assertion was the Torah’s description of Avraham who lived prior toMatan Torah.[8] Avraham referred to as righteous Bereshit( 15:6) and his attainment to the level of navi [prophet] (Bereshit 20:7), all occurring before Matan Torah, were used as proofs that performance of the mitzvot was not essential and not necessary for man’s perfection. In their view, Matan Torah with the requirement of the performance of mitzvot, was a temporary necessity only for the generation exiting Egypt into a wilderness and for a number of subsequent generations, culminating with the destruction of the Second Temple in Jerusalem and with the introduction of Jesus of Nazareth They postulated: with the appearance of Jesus of .[יש”ו] Nazareth, Torah Law and mitzvot became obsolete and were no longer necessary for a Jew’s performance. The basic requirement for a man’s completeness and perfection was only a type of identification with Jesus of Nazareth.
The Torah is completely opposed to this outlook. As stated above, perfection for a Jew can only be realized through the performance of the mitzvot [commandments], which were given from G-d to Moshe on Sinai [Matan Torah], and defined in the Torah she-ba’al peh. This is one of the main ramifications of Matan Torah for the world, that only through the performance (or non-performance) of mitzvot can a Jew’s ruchaniyut existence be affected. Any pronouncement of such a system existing outside the realm of the Torah and the function of Therefore, the) .(עבודה זרה) its mitzvot isavodah zarah Chassidic legend that by whistling during Yom Kippur prayers the “gates of heaven” opened, and the prayers were elevated and accepted,[9] is in concept avodah zarah. The Torah gave man a mitzvah of Tefilla, and Chazal defined its structure and system.) Before Matan Torah one’s perfection was realized through observance of the seven Noahide commandments. According to the Talmud, the seven Noahide commandments were G-d given,[10] and before Matan Torah were communicated to mankind through a type of prophecy to specific individuals. What the Greeks and others refer to asNatural Law (or sometimes referred to in our literature asnemusi’im -is in reality the seven Noahide commandments. Non ([נימוסים] Torah philosophers throughout history have erred by denying the necessity that the seven Noahide laws also had to be G-d given.[11]
This supposition that man can achieve perfection through belief in Jesus of Nazareth, as well as the belief that Jesus of Nazareth became a prophet[12] lacking the necessary Halachic requirements, is an intentional distortion and outright rejection of the fundamentals of the Torah, as explained above. Their main proof from the Torah: the statement that Avraham was righteous, and the statement “All the families of the earth shall bless themselves by you” Bereshit 12:3), were used as examples of one who lived before Matan Torah, and yet had the ability to achieve spiritual completeness without the performance of the mitzvot. In a direct refutation of these distortions, the Talmud states emphatically: Avraham performed and fulfilled all the mitzvot in the Torah, which include the Written Torah and the Oral Torah. The Talmud brings a proof for this assertion from the עקב אשר שמע אברהם בקלי וישמור משמרתי מצותי חקותי ו :verse [Because Avraham obeyed My voice and observed My mishmarti, My commandments, My decrees, and My Torah] (Bereshit 26:5). The achievement of completeness and perfection of Avraham Avinu would not have been possible without the performance of the same mitzvot given at Matan Torah. Since before Matan Torah the only obligation for man was the fulfillment of the seven Noahide commandments, Avraham’s knowledge of the complete Torah and the mitzvot could only have been realized through prophecy, as explained and defined by the Rishonim.[13] The Talmud specifically references Avraham because the proof offered for this antinomic argument only mentions Avraham, and does not mention Yitzchak or Yaakov. It is probable that this issue was a prevalent theological debate of that era.14 Therefore, besides being a testimony of Avraham’s religious devotion and adherence to the mitzvot, the Talmud’s statement as to Avraham’s fulfillment of the entire Torah was a theological declaration as to the necessity of Matan Torah and the function of the mitzvot. And, consequently to categorically dismiss and deny what contemporary and current detractors of the Torah were and are teaching.
[1] [HaRav] Dr. Chaim Zimmerman, Torah and Reason: Insiders and Outsiders of Torah (Jerusalem: Tvuno, 1979), 20. [2] This statement of the Talmud is also found at the end of a Mishnah in Kiddushin 82a, with a text variant. Yoma: Avraham .the whole Torah עשה the whole Torah. Kiddushin: Avraham קיים inYoma unites the two [מהרש”א] Rabbi Shmuel Eliezer Eidlisz refers to fulfillment of the negative קיים :texts refers to performance of the positive עשה ,commandments, and commandments. Therefore, Avraham performed and fulfilled all 613 commandments of the Torah—positive and negative תורה שבעל פה).) commandments—including the Torah she ba’al peh רב אבא בר The author of the Yoma 28b statement is Rav, or [[3 There is no mention inYoma of this statement having a .איבו Mishnaic source, even though it is referenced and included in גליון הש”ס) the Mishnah in Kiddushin 82a. Rabbi Akiva Eiger references Perush Kuntarus at the end of Tractate (קדושין שם will be [ברייתא] Kinim stating that sometimes abaraita inserted at the end of a Mishnah. Rav is referred to in some רב תנא הוא places in the Talmud with the status of Tanna:a תולדות] Rabbi Aaron Hyman in Toldoth Tannaim Ve’Amoraim .ופליג I:17) quotes Rabbenu Hai Gaon that there) [תנאיים ואמוראיים .that should be attributed to Rav [ברייתות] are three baraitot שאלות ותשבות הרמ”א סימן י’ [4] 5]] Antinomianism (Epistles: Gal 3; Rom 4). [6] This Hebrew spelling is in accordance with the Rambam There .(משנה תורה הלכות עבודה זרה פרק י’ והלכות מלכים פרק י”א) are examples in rabbinic literature where the spelling has These authors probably follow the Talmud .יש”ו been changed to one should teach in] לעולם ישנה אדם לתלמידו דרך קצרה dictum the most concise language] (Pesachim 3b) and Megillah 25b. [7] Samuel Sandmel, A Jewish Understanding of the New Testament (Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College Press, 1956), 69, 91. [8] Sandmel, A Jewish Understanding of the New Testament, 89. [9] See Shmuel Agnon, Ya’mim Nora’im (Jerusalem; Tel Aviv: Schocken Publishing, 1968), 369. [10] Sanhedrin 56b [11] See Rambam, Mishneh Torah: Hilchot M’lachim 8:11. According to what is written here, the text does not necessarily have to be amended. The correct text can be: “and ולא מחכמיהם).) ”NOT from their scholars 12]] See also Alexander Altmann, “Maimonides and Thomas Aquinas: Natural or Divine Prophecy?” AJS Review 3 (1978): 1-19, https://www.jstor.org/stable/1486419. [13] Concerning the specific level of prophecy of Avraham, the Ramban in his commentary on Bereishit 26:5 uses the term ruach The Rambam inMoreh Nevuchim 2:39 uses .(רוח הקדש) ha-kodesh The Abarbanel in his commentary to .(חזון) the term chazon נבואה).) Shmot 20 uses the term nevuah 14]] As seen by its explicit inclusion in Gal 3; Rom 4.
Some Memories of Reb Dovid Feinstein zt”l: Instead of a Hesped
Some Memories of Reb Dovid Feinstein zt”l: Instead of a Hesped
By Jonathan Boyarin
Jonathan Boyarin is the Diann G. and Thomas A. Mann Professor of Modern Jewish Studies at Cornell University. His latest book is *Yeshiva Days: Learning on the Lower East Side*, available here.
My Rosh Yeshiva, Reb Dovid Feinstein zt”l, was no longer with us on Friday just before Shabbes. This morning, Sunday, we watched online as an East Side Hatzoloh ambulance bearing his coffin waited for a crowd to clear so it could head up East Broadway following his outdoor eulogies. The ambulance lights flashed, almost surreal in the bright November sunshine, seeming at once reluctant to leave the neighborhood, warning of an emergency, and telling us it was already too late.
None of us will see him again, yet in the days and years to come the memories will circulate. I am so grateful that he permitted me to publish my impressions of him and of the Mesivtha Tifereth Jerusalem that he led for decades as successor to his father, Reb Moshe Feinstein. The book is new, and I am no longer a Lower East Side resident. Along with those who did eulogize him and askedmechila , forgiveness, from him on East Broadway this morning, I ask his forgiveness that I did not manage to bring it to him personally.
Those close to him, those who studied with him, referred to him as “Rebbi” or “the Rosh Yeshiva.” To help those who knew him to remember, and to offer some slight glimpse of his special personality to those who did not know him, I share here a few strokes of my sketch of him in that book, Yeshiva Days: Learning on the Lower East Side (Princeton University Press). And I speak of him in the present, as I do in the book, written and published in the sincere hope that I might continue to study with him for years to come. It was not to be.
Unlike the paradigmatic Hasidic leader, similarly addressed and referred to as “the Rebbe,” our Rebbi’s authority is if anything anti-charismatic and reserved. He has not striven to build a community of devoted followers, but rather serves the community as it happens to manifest itself and as it turns to him. One day I overheard my study partner Asher reply to someone: “That’s so not like Rebbi. Rebbi, if he sees someone doing something he disagrees with, he won’t say anything. But if you come to him and try to justify it, he’ll throw the book at you.” During the week that the Lower East Side was without power after Hurricane Sandy, Elissa and I took refuge with cousins in Washington Heights, and were kindly invited to Shabbes meals at the homes of local residents there. Another guest at dinner that Friday night was a young man who clearly had a “yeshivish” background, and was working on a master’s degree in art history at Bard while working at the Cloisters. He told us had spent some time at MTJ during his high school years. In response to my comment about how remarkable it is to be in a small room with just about ten other guys listening to a shiur by one of the top halachic authorities of our generation, he told me he believed the Rosh Yeshiva had stayed on the Lower East Side precisely because he doesn’t want to be the object of mass veneration.
At least once I heard the Rebbi wonder aloud about the source of his own authority. One day we worked through a very long Tosafos (at Sotah 24) that took up the full hour of his Talmud shiur. The Rebbi introduced this text by saying, “Today we have a Tosafos that has nothing to do” with the ostensible topic of the passage in the Gemara to which it is attached as commentary. Rather, this discussion turned on the fundamental principle of Rabbinic Biblical interpretation that nothing is superfluous in the Torah—and that therefore, every seeming superfluity is available to teach us something not explicitly stated in the text. On the other hand, the Gemara will also sometimes claim that at certain points, rather than redundancies being available for interpretation, the Torah is merely “speaking in human language,” as people would in conversation.
As we studied the Tosafos, the Rosh Yeshiva several times worried the question of the seeming arbitrariness of the principle’s being applied sometimes and not others: “How do we know this one is dibra toyre, and that one is something we interpret? Because his Rebbi told him! But who told his Rebbi? So is it all ultimately halachos lemoshe misinai [laws orally dictated to Moses and not actually derivable from Scripture]? And if so, then are all of these cited verses just asmachtos [prooftexts for citation, but not the actual sources of the law]?”
He did not answer his own question, on this occasion—but he did on another. The Rebbi commented on a series of very general prooftexts presented (at Sotah 23b) for why certain rules pertain to male Kohanim and not to daughters of Kohanim, and certain rules pertain to men generally and not to women: “Don’t try to interpret the verses too closely—they’re very general. It’s all really halacha lemoshe misinai and the rabbis were just trying to convince the masses. You could spend five days trying to read it precisely, and you’d really be wasting your time. You should keep studying the text further instead.” Yet Asher had earlier that same morning quoted the Rebbi to almost the opposite effect: the Rebbi had once quoted the scholar known as Malbim, to the effect that if we really knew Hebrew grammar properly, we would understand why all of the prooftexts the Rabbis cite are compelling.
The Rosh Yeshiva is able to raise these issues, it appears to me, at least in part due to his conviction that we do know in fact what the halacha, the proper Jewish procedure, is, whether or not we are absolutely certain of its particular source in the text. Related to this conviction is his penchant for attempting to make sense of the Talmudic text, in the standard “Vilna edition,” as it is printed, before considering the various emendations that have been suggested over recent centuries and that are duly marked in that same edition. Thus, in a Tosafos as printed at Sotah 25b, the word “ve’ayno,” “and he does not” is left out in a quote from the Gemara elsewhere, so that the entire meaning of the quoted Gemara is obscured. While we were sitting in the library waiting for the Rebbi, several of us noted this. Someone said, “Should we tell the Rosh Yeshiva about it?”
Asher: “No, because maybe he’ll come up with a pshat (a way to make sense of the text as printed), and we would have missed it if we told him.”
In fact, the Rosh Yeshiva puzzled over it for a few seconds, then said, “maybe it’s a mistake.”
Perhaps the Rosh Yeshiva is willing to accept a certain degree of necessary misapprehension of the Rabbinic texts because of his conviction that the halacha for us is what we do.A different time, while ultimately acceding to an emendation, he insisted it was not necessary although it produced an assertion directly contrary to the text as it stands: “Okay, you can do like the Bach and take out the word lo‘ ’ [not] here, and that makes it easier to interpret. But we could also interpret it the other way. It wouldn’t change the halacha, because we know what the halacha is, because the halacha is what we do.”
Such an assertion seems to reflect a striking confidence in the integrity of a tradition of halachic practice as handed down to us. The term here is minhag, as the authorized version of practice for a given community. Asher told me of someone who had studied at the famous Yeshiva Torah VoDaas in Brooklyn, who tried to dispute the Rebbi on a particular point of halacha. The disputant “brought asefer [a printed authority] to show how the halacha should be, and the Rebbi shouted, ‘You’re going to start paskening [deciding the law] from seforim now? That’s not our minhag!’”
The Rebbi has time for moral dilemmas presented by the Talmud as well. The Gemara at Bava Kama 38a discusses whether Gentiles, who are not obligated to observe the vast majority of the commandments in the Torah, are nevertheless rewarded if they do observe those commandments. It concludes that they are indeed rewarded, but less than Jews—because “one who is commanded and does is superior to one who is not commanded and does.” The Rebbi explained that this is because of the anxiety attendant upon the obligation in anticipation: “Why does the one who is commanded get a greater reward? Because the thought, ‘I must do it,’ is weighing on my mind long before the obligation actually comes into force.” He reinforced this argument with the maxim lepum tsaarah scharah, “according to the suffering is the reward.”
Yisroel Ruven protested that this is unfair: if the suffering involved is the measure of the reward, then a Gentile who suffers for the sake of observing a commandment should be rewarded, even if he is not obligated.
The Rebbi responded by pointing to the analogous case of a Jewish woman who is not obligated to do a certain mitsvah, but does it anyway. He stated that “according to the suffering is the reward” applies to her, and concluded that perhaps indeed it should apply to a Gentile as well. This led to a brief mention of women who insist on putting on tefillin, against the usual Orthodox practice and sometimes in the face of mockery and protest. The Rebbi remarked: “Those people [women] who [put on tefillin] must be getting lots of reward, because look at all the grief they’re getting!”
Yet he was still troubled by Yisroel Ruven’s question: It’s hard to understand why a Gentile is not rewarded according to his suffering. He suggested that perhaps God makes sure that righteous gentiles who want to observe commandments don’t suffer for it, and thus they miss out on the corresponding rewards. And he conceded that perhaps those truly “compulsive” Gentiles who not only observe the commandments, but worry about them beforehand, are in fact rewarded commensurately.
“Yeah,” Yisroel Ruven commented when I reviewed this discussion with him after the shiur, “but he also said God wants it that way [with greater rewards for those who are commanded than for those who are not], so we’ll have to work it out ourselves.”
Several of the eulogies this morning addressed both the Rosh Yeshiva’s extraordinary focus on study and his commitment to the welfare of the community, a perennial tension in rabbinic culture. The end of the first chapter of Bava Kama (17a) deals with the question of the relative priorities of Torah study versus the active performance of commandments. The Rosh Yeshiva explained the meaning of the dictum that study is great because it leads to the performance of mitzvos. It’s not because when I study, I know how to do mitzvos; on the contrary, “The more I learn, the more I’m fartift [engrossed], the more I know I don’t know.” This, he suggested, will make me stand in greater awe of Heaven, and thus encourage me to follow the commandments more diligently.
But how much indeed can be conveyed in a brief sketch like this, or even in a whole book of memories? One day Asher, Hillel, and I understood the Gemara (at Bava Kama 21b on the bottom) the same way the Rebbi understood it in shiur, and our agreement that Tosafos’ explanation of the scenario the Gemara was discussing seemed to make the most sense was evidently in accord with the Rosh Yeshiva’s reading as well. I pointed this out to Asher, who replied, “Yeah, wasn’t that satisfying? Every now and then I see that I’m reading the Gemara the way the Rosh Yeshiva learns it. Somebody asked me once years ago why I go to the shiur, and I said it’s because I hope that if I stay long enough, sometimes I’ll learn the way he does. I’ll never really get there, but every year I get a little closer to how the Rebbi learns.”
May his memory bring us blessing. Rabbi Steinman and the Messiah, part 1
Rabbi Steinman and the Messiah, part 1
Marc B. Shapiro
Since in a recent post I discussed Maimonides and the Principle of the Messiah, let me add one more thing. Yet before doing so, I need to make a few preliminary comments. Many readers know about the Peleg, which has caused all sorts of problems in Jerusalem. After the passing of R. Yosef Shalom Elyashiv, the simmering dispute in the Lithuanian world broke out into the open, and a minority of the Lithuanian community refused to accept the leadership of R. Aharon Yehudah Leib Steinman, who was backed by R. Hayyim Kanievsky. The opponents, known as the Peleg, were led by the late R. Shmuel Auerbach.
While people are aware of the wild behavior of the Peleg youth as they are the ones who block streets in Jerusalem, there is very little awareness of what was another element of the battle in the Lithuanian community, and that was the attempt to delegitimize R. Steinman. An entire literature was created that focused on two things. The first was citing all sorts of things that R. Steinman said which were believed to be in opposition to haredi ideology. The point was to show that because of his supposedly liberal views he was not suited to lead the haredi world, and that he had departed from the approach of R. Shakh.[1]
The other focus, also found in Peleg publications, was to show that R. Steinman did not have the requisite Torah scholarship to lead the community. For obvious reasons, they never made this claim about R. Hayyim Kanievsky, and never explained why they felt able to disagree with R. Kanievsky who was the most outstanding backer of R. Steinman.
While this dispute was playing out, R. Steinman said something that was like manna from heaven for the Peleg, for now they had a chance to use some heavy “ammunition” on him, as they could claim that he rejected the Rambam’s Twelfth Principle which affirms the coming of the Messiah. In response to the attacks on R. Steinman, his defenders claimed that his words were taken out of context. During the dispute, a couple of people in correspondence with me wondered if R. Steinman should be added to the list of people who disagree with one of the Principles.
Here is a poster put up against R. Steinman by some unnamed extremist (found here). So what did R. Steinman say that created such a mini-explosion in the haredi world. You can find the transcript of R. Steinman’s words here. You can hear the actual conversation here.
R. Meir Zvi Bergman, in discussion with R. Steinman, said that according to the Rambam one must wait for the Messiah’s arrival and not merely believe in his coming.[2] In other words, there are two separate things that are required: 1. Belief that he will come, and 2. Actively awaiting his arrival. R. Bergman referred to the Rambam’s words in the Mishneh Torah, Hilkhot Melakhim 11:1, which seem to say exactly this:
וכל מי שאינו מאמין בו או מי שאינו מחכה לביאתו לא בשאר נביאים בלבד הוא כופר אלא בתורה ובמשה רבנו
R. Bergman later notes that this is also included as part of the Twelfth Principle. What he must mean is the following: In the Principle the Rambam says that we must believe that the Messiah will come, and he cites the verse from Habakkuk 2:3: “Though he tarry, wait for him.” By citing this verse, the Rambam is adding a second aspect to the principle, just like he later does in Hilkhot Melakhim.
I would add to this that presumably the Rambam also had in mind Shabbat 31a, which says that in the next world everyone How this sentence should be .צפית לישועהwill be asked if translated is itself a problem. Soncino translates it as “Did you hope for salvation?”, while Koren translates as “Did you await salvation?” Hoping for salvation and waiting for it are two separate things.[3] Artscroll’s translation combines the approaches of both Soncino and Koren: “Did you wait in hope for the [Messianic] salvation?”
In response to R. Bergman’s point, about the need to actively wait for the Messiah, R. Steinman replies that no one fulfills this, namely, no one is really waiting for the Messiah. My understanding of what he said is that no one is consciously focusing on, and anxiously awaiting, the Messiah’s arrival. They believe that the Messiah will come, but in the meantime they are learning Torah and doing mitzvot and when he comes, he comes, but until then Jews have plenty to do to keep themselves busy. R. Bergman is surprised by R. Steinman’s comment and states that the Rambam says that if one does not wait for the Messiah he is a heretic, to which R. Steinman repeats his earlier point that no one does this. Upon being questioned again, R. Steinman replies that this is a “decree that the community cannot follow.” He adds that people say that the Chafetz Chaim “waited” for the Messiah. “Maybe yes, I don’t know. This is what they say, maybe yes.” R. Steinman then adds that the Chafetz Chaim was unique, but the Torah was not given just for such special people.[4]
R. Steinman’s statements are quite provocative, first, because he expresses uncertainty if the Chafetz Chaim can really be said to have actively waited for the Messiah, and second, because he makes it clear that the other great rabbis did not really wait for the Messiah. It would have been controversial enough if all he said was that he himself, or the people of this generation, do not really wait for the Messiah, but he applied this statement also to great ones of previous generations.
As the conversation continues, R. Bergman insists that waiting for the Messiah is one of the Thirteen Principles, and that in earlier times people indeed did wait for the Messiah. R. Steinman replies that in earlier days the Jews suffered greatly and that is why they had a focus on the Messiah.
R. Moshe Schneider, who was R. Steinman’s havruta and present at the conversation, adds: “The Rambam in the Thirteen Principles says, ‘Even though he may delay, nevertheless, I wait daily for him to come.’ Doesn’t he mean that there is an obligation in the Thirteen Principles to wait [for the Messiah]?” R. Steinman could have pointed out that the version of the Principle found in the siddur which R. Schneider quoted was not written by the Rambam, and its words do not appear in the actual text of the Principle found in the Rambam’s commentary to Mishnah, Sanhedrin. However, I don’t know how much this would help, for as we have seen, in theMishneh Torah, Hilkhot Melakhim 11:1, the Rambam is explicit about the need to wait for the Messiah.
וכל מי שאינו מאמין בו או מי שאינו מחכה לביאתו לא בשאר נביאים בלבד הוא כופר אלא בתורה ובמשה רבנו
R. Bergman adds that if people do not fulfill this aspect of the Principle, then all the Thirteen Principles are weakened.
So far we see that R. Steinman held that the Principle is to believe in the coming of the Messiah, but this does not mean that one has to “wait” for him, which I think means to have a focus on the Messiah and actively wait in hope for his return.[5] We also see that R. Steinman himself was not “actively waiting” for the Messiah. Although Chabad claims that a focus on the Messiah is basic to Judaism,[6] it appears that R. Steinman thought otherwise. The Hatam Sofer already mentioned—in opposition to Maimonides—that the Messianic idea, while of course true (and denial of it is heresy), is not an essential element of Judaism, namely, basic to the very structure of the religion.[7]
אא“ לי בשום אופן להאמין שיהי‘ גאולתנו אחד מעיקרי הדת, ושאם יפול היסוד תפול החומה חלילה . . . ועכפ“ הגאולה וביאת המשיח איננה עיקר
Many have wondered about these words of the Hatam Sofer. Yet they are simply a repetition of what appears in Nahmanides, and as is well known, the Hatam Sofer greatly valued the writings of Ramban. Here is what Nahmanides states (and as with the Hatam Sofer, despite these words he continues by noting that denial of the messianic idea is indeed heresy):[8]
ודע, יעזרך הא–להים,כי אם נסכים בלבנו שפשעינו וחטאת אבותינו אבדו ממנו כל הנחמות, ושיארך ויתמיד עלינו הגלות מאין קץ וסוף, וכן אם נאמר שרצה הא–להים לענותנו בעולם הזה בשעבוד המלכיות לרצון או לתועלת, כל זה לא יזיק בעיקר התורה, כי אנחנו אין תכלית גמולנו ימות המשיח, ואכול פירות הארץ ההיא, והתרחץ בחמי טבריה וכיוצא בהן מן התענוגים, גם לא הקרבנות ועבודת בית המקדש תכלית רצוננו רק גמולנו ומבטנו העולם הבא, והתענג הנפש בתענוג הנקרא גן עדן והנצל מעונש גיהנם
Returning to R. Steinman’s conversation, in response to R. Bergman he cites R. Hillel’s view (Sanhedrin 99a) that there will be no Messiah for Israel, “because they have already enjoyed him in the days of Hezekiah.” It is not clear why he cited this. Was R. Steinman stating that one does not need to believe in an individual Messiah at all, in accord with the commentary to attributed to Rashi’s understanding that R. Hillel’s point is that in the future there will only be a messianic era, not a Messiah? R. Bergman asks R. Steinman point blank if he holds like R. Hillel in opposition to the Rambam, and R. Steinman does not answer the question, instead replying, “It is enough for us to observe the mitzvot that we can.”[9]
R. Steinman’s point in mentioning R. Hillel could also be that R. Hillel certainly did not “wait” for the Messiah, as he thought that the Messiah had already arrived. Nevertheless, he is not regarded as a heretic, thus showing that this point is not essential. In any event, it is obvious that R. Steinman was not happy with R. Bergman’s focus on the details of the Twelfth Principle, and instead wanted the focus to be on the performance of mitzvot.
Not surprisingly, when the tape of R. Steinman speaking to R. Bergman was released it created a great controversy, which was For attacks on R. Steinman by Satmar .סערת המשיח called rabbis, which degrade him in the most harsh way, including one that says that R. Steinman is “worse than Kook,” see here.
A Chabad rabbi, R. Yechezkel Sofer, also responded to R. Steinman’s words (see here), and he makes a very interesting point which could explain what R. Steinman was getting at. R. Sofer states that one is not a heretic if he is lacking an emotional connection to the coming of the Messiah. The problem is only if one develops an intellectual position that there is no reason to wait for the Messiah. R. Sofer adds, however, that from a hasidic perspective a higher level of “waiting” is required, which he acknowledges not everyone is capable of. Here is how he concludes, and the second part of the sentence must be seen as a put-down of all those who do not put a stress on constantly waiting for the Messiah.
רק במישור החסידות ופנימיות–התורה נדרש רף גבוה של ‘ציפייה‘ שלאו כל מוחא סביל דא: ובהעדר–הציפייה מורה, שבתוככי–נפשו, חלשה אמונתו במשיח, אחרת ודאי היה כולו משתוקק “אמתי קא אתי מר“
I think R. Steinman can be explained very simply, that despite what the Rambam says, it is difficult for virtually anyone to be emotionally invested in the coming of the Messiah, and thus have a sense of waiting for him, especially waiting constantly (every day) which is how the Principle is formulated in the siddur. R. Steinman was saying, what is the point of speaking about something which hardly anyone can fulfill? At the end of the day, it is enough to believe in the coming of the Messiah without adding anything else to this basic belief.
R. Avraham Yehoshua Soloveitchik defended R. Steinman, and this is some of what he said before he moved into a general attack on the Peleg:[10]
גאון אחד נכנס לביקור בביתו של ר‘ יחזקאל אברמסקי זצ“ל וראה על השולחן בסמוך אליו ספר שעוסק ב“ציפייה למשיח” שחיבר אדם בן זמנינו. מיד הוא פנה אל ר‘ חצקל‘ ושאל: “מה הספר הזה עושה אצלך על השולחן“? השיב לו ר‘ חצקל‘: לפניך נכנס כאן יהודי שאיני מכיר והביא לי את הספר הזה שהוא חיבר. והוסיף ר‘ חצקל‘: פעם נכנס לרוגוטשובער יהודי שהיה מאוד מוטרד ושאל מה עושים ואיך מחזקים בציבור את העניין של אמונה בביאת ?המשיח השיב לו :הרוגוטשובער פרנסה כבר יש ?לך אוכל לאשתך ולילדים אתה נותן? קודם כל תדאג לעניינים הללו אחר כך תדאג למשיח.
סיים ר‘ חצקל‘: גם אני רציתי לשאול את היהודי שחיבר את הספר הזה האם פרנסה כבר יש לך? אוכל לאשתך ולילדים אתה נותן? אלא שנמנעתי רק מפני שחסתי על כבודו The upshot of R. Soloveitchik’s point is that thinking about the Messiah is not something that needs to be at the top of our concerns. Using Scholem’s terminology, we can say that R. Soloveitchik’s approach is that of neutralization of the messianic impulse. Should we be surprised that after R. Soloveitchik’s words were made public he too was attacked.[11] Here is a poster against him that was plastered on walls in Jerusalem. Whatever you may think of R. Soloveitchik’s words, I don’t know how to square them with what his grandfather, R. Isaac Zev Soloveitchik (the Brisker Rav), is quoted as saying, that not only must we await the Messiah every day, but we must do so the entire day and every instant.[12] R. Moshe Mordechai Shulzinger notes, based on the Brisker Rav’s understanding, that all those who give dates when the Messiah will arrive are undermining Maimonides’ Principle (which he explains in line with Maimonides’ words in Hilkhot Melakhim), because the result of their predictions is that they (and those who follow them) will not believe that the Messiah can come at any minute, as they will only be expecting him at a future time.[13]
R. Shulzinger also explains the meaning of the Brisker Rav in a different way than his words are usually understood. He says that what the Brisker Rav meant is that one must believe that the Messiah can come at any instant, and that is the meaning of “waiting” for the Messiah. Understood this way, the Brisker Rav’s point is exactly in line with what R. Steinman said, for R. Steinman never denied that the Messiah could come at any time. He simply said that the idea of consciously waiting for the Messiah is not something that a typical person can do. Here are R. Shulzinger’s words:[14]
זה חיוב של אמונה, שמאמין שיכול לבוא בכל רגע, וה“אינו מחכה” – הוא מי שהחליט בלבו ח“ו על זמן מסוים שעדיין לא יבוא, ומפני זה – הזמן ההוא מופקע אצלו מלחכות ולצפות, וזה הוא חסרון אמונה, וזה מיקרי “שאינו מחכה לביאתו“, רח“ל . . . כשמאמין שיכול לבוא בכל רגע – הרי זה “מחכה לביאתו“.
R. Shulzinger also prints a letter he sent to an unnamed rabbi who had argued that when the Rambam speaks of “waiting” for the Messiah, it does not mean that you must really believe that he can come at any minute. This rabbi compares it to someone who has a son in prison. He waits for the son to return home, even though he knows that this will not happen in the near future. According to the unnamed rabbi, this too falls under the Rambam’s understanding of “waiting,” a point that R. Shulzinger strongly rejects.[15]
In line with his understanding of the meaning of “waiting”, R. Shulzinger also makes the following very interesting point, which I don’t know if everyone would agree with: A person says that he would prefer that the Messiah not come in the near future, but only in a few years as he will by then have completed study of the entire Talmud, and will be more prepared to greet the Messiah. Nevertheless, this person knows that God does not take into account his wishes, and he believes that the Messiah can come at any instant. R. Shulzinger says that this person has not violated Maimonides’ Principle. In other words, the Principle requires the belief that the Messiah will come, and can come at any instant. Yet it does not require you to actually desire the Messiah’s arrival. Thus, to give a different example than that offered by R. Shulzinger, if someone has a very good business in the Diaspora, it could be that while he believes in the coming of the Messiah, he does not actually want this to happen, because he thinks that after the Messiah’s arrival all Jews will have move to Israel, and he does not want to give up his thriving business. According to R. Shulzinger, these sentiments would not be in contradiction to Maimonides’ principle:[16]
שהצפי‘ המחכה הוא שיעור בהצהרת גודל האמונה שלי בזה [לא הצהרה של רצון או לא רצון], כמדו‘ שזה נקרא מאמין ומחכה ומצפה לביאתו בכל רגע
To be continued
Excursus
Is there anywhere in tannaitic or amoraic writings where it says that all Jews will live in Israel is messianic days? I ask because this certainly does appear to be a widely held view throughout Jewish history. Maimonides states that “all Israel” will be gathered around the Messiah(Hilkhot Melakhim 12:3), but I don’t think this can be taken literally. I say this since according to Maimonides the messianic era will not be an era of open miracles, and people will still have free will, including free will to sin, so one can assume that some Jews will choose to remain in places outside of Israel. For those who see the messianic era as a time of miracles, when life will not continue as it does now, then it makes sense to imagine a time when all Jews will come to Israel. Thus, R. Isaac Abarbanel states that in messianic days not even one Jew will remain outside of Israel. See his commentary to Ezekiel 39:28 (p. 583), Mashmia Yeshuah, ed. Golan (Bnei Brak, 2014), pp. 72, 208. This is also stated on many occasions by the Lubavitcher Rebbe. See e.g.,Likutei Sihot, vol. 11, pp. 1ff.
On the other hand, R. Shmuel Tuvyah Stern understands the issue in a purely naturalistic way. He states that the Jewish people are themselves obligated to go to Israel, as God will not be bringing them there. Those who refuse to go, or delay in going, are preventing the Jewish people in the Land of Israel from the performance of certain mitzvot that come into effect when the majority of the Jewish population lives there. (Regarding these mitzvot, see R. Yehudah Amihaihere .) In other words, R. Stern acknowledges that even in messianic times not everyone will follow the Torah path. See She’elot u- Teshuvot ha-Shavit, vol. 9, p. 62:
ובאמת כשם השהקב“ הבטיח לגאול אותנו כך חייב אותנו להגאל ולקרב את הגאולה, ואלו בני עמנו שהם מאחרים לצאת מן הגולה ומעכבים את הגאולה מבטלים אחת מהמצות הכי עיקריות של התורה, כי הגאולה היא כמפתח להרבה מצות התלויות בארץ ובגולה . . . ואלו שמעברין זאת מבטלין מצות הרבים מישראל, והנה זכות הגאולה היא מצד הקב“ה שהוא מזכה אותנו בגאולה, וחוב הגאולה היא מטעם ישראל
This topic has relevance to the issue of Yom Tov Sheni. Will it still be celebrated in messianic days for those Jews living outside of Israel? Since we will return to the old way of declaring Rosh Hodesh, rather than by a calendar, the assumption in pre-modern times would presumably have been yes, as far flung places would still not know what day was declared the New Moon. However, with modern communications, it would seem that there will be no Yom Tov Sheni in messianic days, even for people who live in the Diaspora. Writing before the invention of modern communications, R. Moses Sofer states that there will indeed be Yom Tov Sheni in messianic days. See Derashot Hatam Sofer, vol. 2, p. 274b, He sees this as in remembrance of our time in .למען .s.v where he says , כל.exile. See, however, ibid., p. 208a, s.v that Yom Tov Sheni will be abolished in messianic days, and that this is the meaning of the rabbinic teaching in Yalkut Shimoni, Mishlei no. 944: “All the festivals [i.e., Yom Tov Sheni] are to be abolished in the future [messianic era], but Purim will never be abolished.”
Elsewhere, in speaking of Yom Tov Sheni in the messianic era, He makes .ב‘ ימים טובים של גאולתינוR. Sofer refers to it as this comment while discussing R. Judah’s position in Gittin 8a: “R. Judah holds that all islands fronting the coast of Eretz Israel are reckoned as Eretz Israel” (see his commentary to Beitzah 4b. See also his commentary to Beitzah 24b and She’elot u-Teshuvot Hatam Sofer, Orah Hayyim no. 145 [end]). R. Sofer notes that this means that all islands in the Mediterranean on the same latitude as the biblical Land of Israel (which extends into Lebanon), are regarded as belonging to Israel. If you look on a map (and you can actually see a good one in the Koren Talmud, Gittin 8a) you will see that this means that Cyprus, Crete, and Sicily are part of the territory of Israel. R. Sofer states that Jews who live in these places in messianic days will have to observe a second day of Yom Tov.
It is not clear to me why R. Sofer assumes that R. Judah’s position is accepted. See Tosafot, Gittin 8a, s.v. Rabbi Yehudah, where Rabbenu Tam states that we do not accept his position. Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, Hilkhot Terumot 1:7, also rejects R. Judah’s opinion.
In describing how far the territory of Israel extends, the R. Sofer writes (Teshuvot, Orah Hayyim, no. 145 [end]):
דכל הנסין שבים הגדול עד אוקיינוס שייכים לארץ ישראל והוא עד מצר רמון ספרד which he uses, is found inGittin 8a and it ,נסין The word .ניסא and נס .means “islands”. See Jastrow, s.v
(Regarding R. Judah’s position about the islands being included as part of Israel, R. Hayyim Kanievsky points to Psalms 97:1: “The Lord reigneth; let the earth rejoice; let .R ”.ישמחו איים – רביםthe multitude of isles be glad in plural. He answers that איים Kanievsky asks why does it say this makes sense according to R. Judah’s view that the islands opposite Israel are included in the territory of Eretz Yisrael. See R. Kanievsky, Ta’ama de-Kra to Ps. 97:1.)
In .רמון toספרד In the quotation above, R. Sofer refers medieval Hebrew, this is how the kingdom of Granada is called. The word “Granada” means pomegranate, which are abundant in that part of Spain, and a pomegranate was on the kingdom’s coat of arms (and is also found on the contemporary Spanish coat of arms). The reason the kingdom was generally called Rimon Sefarad and not just Rimon, which would be the literal translation of “Granada”, is because the רמוןis a play on the biblical place רמון ספרד expression that is mentioned in Num. 33:20. See R. Meir Mazuz,Bayit פרץ בעברי על פני Ne’eman, vol. 1, p. 32. In Yehudah Halevi’s poem Some .בעברי על פני רמון מפחד the first line reads רמון See .ספרד it should read מפחד scholars believe that instead of Halevi, Diwan, ed. Brody (n.p., 1971), vol. 1, p. 78 (note to .רמון poem no. 34). Yet Halevi elsewhere does refer simply to See Diwan, vol. 1, p. 153, line 59, and vol. 2, p. 280, line 46
Since the Hatam Sofer is absolutely clear in what he writes, that the boundary of Israel extends until the end of Granada, which means the Atlantic Ocean, I don’t understand how R. Mordechai Winkler can cite without objection a report that R. Sofer said that England also falls within the borders of Israel. See Levushei Mordechai, Yoreh Deah vol. 3, no. 49. R. Hayyim Hirschensohn interprets R. Judah’s position differently than the Hatam Sofer. He assumes that R. Judah is speaking not of the Mediterranean but of the Atlantic Ocean, and thus the territory of Israel extends all the way to the United States. He also interprets R. Judah to be including not merely the islands but also the land territory that is on the same latitude as Israel. What this means is that a good deal of the southern United States is included in the territory of Eretz Yisrael! Furthermore, R. Hirschensohn claims that according to R. Judah you can pray in the direction of these southern states, and those in the U.S. who want to fulfill all opinions should do this!. (Interestingly, he also does not see any significance for people in the U.S., who are so far from Israel, to face the Holy Land in their prayers.) See his article in Avraham Moshe Luntz, ed., Yerushalayim 8 (1909), p. 196:
והרוצה לצאת ידי כל הדעות יתפלל באמירקא [!] נגד הדרום כי לדעת ר‘ יהודה (בגיטין ד“ח ע“א) שכל שכנגד ארץ ישראל הרי הוא כארץ ישראל . . . זה כולל חלק גדול מצפון אלגריא, ובאמירקא: דרום סויט ,קארליינא צפון ,דזארזי צפון ,אלאבאמא צפון ,מסיסיפי צפון לוזיאני, דרום אריקאנסיס, צפון טעקסיס, דרום ניו מעקסיקו, דרום אריזאנא, דרום קאליפארנע, כל אלה המקומות לדעת ר‘ יהודה הם ארץ ישראל, והעומד בתפלה נגדם כעומד נגד ארץ ישראל
See also R. Yeshayahu Steinberg in Ha-Ma’yan, Tishrei 5775, pp. 43-44, who has a different approach according to which even Northern France is perhaps regarded as having the holiness of Eretz Yisrael. He even says that if someone is forced to live in the Diaspora, it is better to live in northern France since it is in some sense part of Eretz Yisrael!
ויש נפ“מ מסוימת בדיון זה לעניין בדיעבד: אם אדם נאלץ לדור בחו“ל ויש לו אפשרות בחירה – יעדיף לגור בצפון צרפת במקום שאותו הזכירו בעלי התוס‘ הנ“ל,כי יש במקום זה צד של קדושת א“י ומניעה של עזיבת א“י לגמרי If one has to live in the United States (or west of it), then R. Steinberger says that it is best to live in places on the latitude of Israel (that is, the places mentioned by R. Hirschensohn).
I don’t mean the following to be disrespectful, but I can’t help commenting that what R. Steinberger says might make sense on paper, but I am certain that no one in history has ever made living plans based on the assumption that there is some spiritual advantage due to the holiness of Eretz Yisrael to living in northern France or South Carolina over anywhere else in the Diaspora.
**********
It has been a while since I have done a quiz, so let me offer one now. Email me with answers at shapirom2 at scranton.edu
1. If you look at older machzorim, in theTekiat ha- Shofar between the first two sets of blasts you find the ?What is this about .שב letters 2. Where in Rashi’s commentary on the Talmud does he say that a certain individual knew all of Shas? ***************
[1] In addition to citing “liberal” passages in R. Steinman’s works in order to discredit him, they also cited a number of strange things that he supposedly said, also in order to discredit him. As always with these types of attacks, it is hard to know if R. Steinman really said what they claim he did. There is a long history of famous rabbis being misquoted, both by opponents and even more so by supporters. Thus, I find it incredibly difficult to believe that R. Steinman ever said the following which is quoted in his name by an unnamed student.
פעם אמר רבנו הגראי”ל, שאודות השואה כולם חושבים על האסון שנהרגו הרבה מכלל ישראל, אבל יש כאלו שבאמת היה עדיף שיהרגו, כי הם היו מחללי שבת וע”י זה שנהרגו עשו פחות עבירות. היטלר הרג את כל המשומדים שהתבוללו בזדון, וזה דבר אחד טוב שיצא מהאסון הזה, שנהרגו כל המשומדים
Me-Ahorei ha-Pargod (Bnei Brak, 2012), p. 454. [2] R. Bergman discusses this matter in his Sha’arei Orah, vol. 1, pp. 264ff. [3] Generally, we understand “salvation” to mean the Messianic era. However, see R. Zvi Shapira in his commentary on the Sefer Mitzvot Katan, vol. 1, p. 5, who explains that for the Semak, it refers to individual salvation of various kinds. דרבינו ז“ל אית לי‘ פירושא אחרינא בהך דצפית לישועה, וס“ל דלא קאי אישועה הכללית, אלא קאי אישועה פרטית לפי הזמן, והיינו דכל אחד לפי מצבו בעת שנצרך לאיזה דבר וקשה לו להשיגו, מקרי שהוא נזקק לישועה ונצטוה לצפות לה
[4] See also the Chafetz Chaim, Mahaneh Yisrael (Jerusalem, 1973), p. 172:
וכמו שאנו אומרים בתפלה כי לישועתך קוינו כל היום וכתבו בספרים שלא דוקא על הגאולה בלבד צריך לצפות אלא על כל מין צרה שלא תבא צריך לצפות לישועת ה‘ וכבר כתבו בשם האר“י ז“ל שבכל יום כשאומר כי לישועתך קוינו כל היום יכוין שמצפה לישועה על כל צרה שנמצא בו
Regarding the Chafetz Chaim, in his Mahaneh Yisrael there is an entire chapter (ch. 25 in the 1973 edition [in the first section]) on the issue of the future redemption. The chapter’s title is
גאולת ישראל: בו יבואר שצריך האדם לצפות תמיד לגאולת ישראל
At the beginning of the chapter he writes:
שלא דיי [!] באמור בפה שהוא מצפה לישועה אלא צריך להיות מצפה לישועה בלב שלם ואמונה שלמה
R. Shmuel Greineman writes as follows about the Chafetz Chaim (Chafetz Chaim al ha-Torah, p. 229):
והי‘ מרגלא בפומי‘ תמיד, כי משיח צדקנו יבוא פתאום, אם רק נחכה עליו, רגילים אנו לומר “כי מחכים אנחנו לך“, “ואחכה לו בכל יום שיבוא“, אבל אנו אומרים זה רק בפינו, ולבנו בל אתנו
R. Yehezkel Levenstein, Or Yehezkel, vol. 3, p, 298, writes:
התעוררתי לדבר בעניני הגאולה מפני שהתעוררתי בעצמי לזה לכן הנני מרגיש שמחובתי לדבר בענינים אלו. וזכורני שהחפץ חיים ז“ל היה ממשיל את צורת הצפיה למלך המשיח לחולה אנוש היודע כי רופא גדול בא לבקרו ולהמציא תרופה למחלתו. ועומד וממתין לביאתו וכל נקישה בדלת גורמת לו להתרגשות שהנה בא הרופא אליו,וכל שעת איחור אינה ממעטת מצפיתו אלא להיפך עומד ומצפה הנה בודאי עתה יבוא וירפאהו. כן חייב להיות הציפיה לביאת הגואל, וכל שאינו ממתין כן חייב לחזק את עצמו באיזה אופן שהוא כדי שיוכל להיות מהמחכים לביאתו
The same analogy that R. Levenstein cites in the name of the Chafetz Chaim is cited by R. Elijah Dessler in the name of his father-in-law, R. Nahum Zev Ziv. See Beit Kelm, vol. 2, p. 131. [5] Regarding Maimonides’ Principle of the Messiah, R. Moses Salmon, Netiv Moshe (Vienna, 1897), p. 44, makes the interesting comment that in the days of the Sages, belief in the Messiah was not a dogma, denial of which would have been regarded as heresy:
שבדורות חכמי המשנה והתלמוד לא היתה אמונת המשיח עוד אמונה עיקרית בישראל כ“כ עד שיהי‘ הכופר בה ככופר בעיקר הדת אשר הוא אמונת האחדות . . . ואף שהר“מ ז“ל מנה אותה בעקרים, הנה הוא זל“ דבר מהדורות האחרונים ואילך ולא מהדורות התנאים, כי מצאנו בתנאים את ר‘ הלל שאמר אין משיח לישראל (סנהדרין צט ע“ב) עור “גם הוא טעה בבר כוזיבא ודרש עליו הפסוק דרך כוכב מיעקב שהוא משיח (איכה רבתי פסוק בלע ה‘) ובכל זאת לא מצאנו שהרחיקום מכל [!] ישראל בעבור זאת.
I don’t understand his point about R. Akiva, as unlike R. Hillel, he did not deny the concept of a Messiah. He just falsely identified Bar Kokhba as the Messiah. Also, it is not clear whether R. Hillel was a tanna or an amora. See my Limits of Orthodox Theology, p. 141 n. 10. [6] Regarding Chabad and the Messiah, it is worth noting that Elliot Wolfson has argued that the Rebbe’s secret teaching is that there will be no physical redeemer. Rather, the messianic redemption is able to occur within each person. SeeOpen Secret: Postmessianic Messianism and the Mystical Revision of Menahem Mendel Schneerson (New York, 2009). [7] She’elot u-Teshuvot Hatam Sofer, Yoreh Deah, no. 356. The Hatam Sofer’s descendant, R. Akiva Glasner, was shocked by what his forefather wrote. See R. Glasner,Ikvei ha- Tzon (London, 1958), p. 104:
אני עומד ומתמיה על ק“ז החת“ס לזצוק “אשר בניגוד אל מה שהעתקתי מדבריו הקדושים להנ “פלטה קולמוסו הטהורה דבר המפליא ומבהיל כאחד בתשובותיו
[8] Kitvei Ramban, ed. Chavel, pp. 279-280. See also ibid., p. 324, where Nahmanides has strong words about those who only focus on their personal lives rather than praying for God to bring the messianic era.
כולנו כצאן תעינו איש לדרכו פנינו: יאשים את ישראל בעבור כי הם בגלותם ישימו כל כוונתם בעסקי העולם, ומשים כל אחד כוונה לעצמו ביתו ועסקיו, וראוי להם להיות בוכים ולהתפלל לפני ה‘ לילה ויום שיכפר על עוון ישראל ויחיש קץ הגאולה.
[9] R. Meir Mazuz offers the fanciful suggestion that the reason the Ashkenazic version of Kaddish—and I guess he would is ויקרב משיחיהinclude R. Amram Gaon as well—did not include so as not to decide against R. Hillel. See Or Torah, Tevet 5778, p. 337. Yet as R. Mazuz himself notes, even Ashkenazim .ומביא גואל לבני בניהם :say in the Amidah
In Kevatzim mi-Ketav Yad Kodsho, vol. 1, p. 37, R. Kook explains R. Hillel’s position as follows:
הלל הי‘ חושב שמציאות מלך באומה בא מצד חסרון המוסר, אמנם ברוממות המוסר צריך רק תוקף לאומי גדול ונעלה,על כן אמר אין משיח לישראל, כי אם בא יבא לנו תוקף לאומי נהדר מאד, וכח שלטון של ישראל הוא המשיחות
Yeshayahu Leibowitz claims that R. Hillel’s statement was directed against the Christians. He was telling them not to believe that Jesus is the Messiah, as the Jews already enjoyed the messianic era in the days of Hezekiah. See Sihot al Torat ha-Nevuah shel ha-Rambam(Jerusalem, 1997), pp. 400-401. Graetz already offered this suggestion. See Encylopaedia Judaica, s.v. Hillel. [10] See here where the poster against him that I include is also found. [11] Unlike R. Avraham Yehoshua, R. Meir Soloveitchik spoke out against what R. Steinman said. See here. As long as we are speaking about the Jerusalem Soloveitchiks, let me also mention that R. Meshulam Dovid Soloveitchik writes that one who truly waits for the Messiah understands what the Zionists are all about. He also adds that those who have any happiness about the State of Israel are lacking in their belief in the coming of the Messiah. See Shiurei Ha-Gaon Rabbi Meshulam ha- Levi: Derush ve-Aggadah (Jerusalem, 2014), p. 601:
והנה מי שברור אצלו לגמרי ענין האמונה והציפיה לביאת המשיח הוא יודע להסתכל כראוי על הציונים, ומי שיש לו משהו של שמחה על המדינה ועל השלטון והחוקים שלהם הדבר מוכיח שחסר אצלו באמונה בביאת המשיח.
R. Meshulam Dovid Soloveitchik has many pages in which he blasts Zionism and the State of Israel in the harshest way imaginable. Yet after all this, he adds that nothing he says should lead to the degrading of any Torah scholar who is mistaken in this matter—a lesson Satmar authors would do well to learn— and this was the path of both his father, the Brisker Rav, and his grandfather, R. Chaim. See ibid., pp. 601-602:
אמנם צריך לדעת שכל מה שאנו מדברים . . . זהו על השיטה ולא לזלזל באנשים חרדים אפילו אם טועים בהשקפתם לילך אחריהם, ובודאי שאסור לבזות ת“ח וצריך להיזהר בכבוד התורה ולהתנהג עמם בדרך ארץ, ובנפש החיים כתב דהמבזה ת“ח שאין לו חלק לעוה“ב זהו אפילו ת“ח שלומד שלא לשמה. צריך לרחם עליהם על שטועים טעות מרה שכזו, אבל אסור לבזותם. בכל השנים שהייתי אצל מרן ז“ל לא ראיתי מעולם שביזה מישהו, וגם הגר“ח ז“ל לא ביזה שום אדם. הרבה מעשים שמעתי בבית ומעולם לא שמעתי שביזה מישהו.
[12] Haggadah shel Pesah mi-Beit Levi, p. 120. R. Moshe Feinstein had the same basic approach. See Iggerot Moshe, Orah Hayyim 5, no. 8:
משום דהחיוב בכל יום ויום לצפות כעין וודאי שיבא היום
As the Messiah can come at any time, including during the Covid pandemic, R. Gamliel Rabinowitz wonders if kohanim would be permitted to wear masks while performing their service in the Temple. See Or Torah, Elul 5780, p. 1327. [13] Peninei Rabbenu Ha-Griz, p. 376. R. Yekutiel Yehudah Halberstamm, Shefa Hayyim: Derashot Humash-Rashi 5742, p. 431, goes so far as to say (emphasis added):
שהרמב“ם הק‘ פוסק הלכה ברורה שאסור לאדם אפילו לחשוב שמא יתאחר זמן ביאתו של מלך המשיח, אלא להאמין באמת שמשיח צדקנו יכול לבוא בכל רגע
R. Jacob Sasportas, Tzitzat Novel Tzvi, ed. Tishby (Jerusalem, 1954), p. 41, writes:
כי אמונת הדת היא שבכל יום ויום ובכל שעה ורגע בוא יבוא האדון אשר אנו מבקשים
[14] Peninei Rabbenu ha-Griz al ha-Torah, p. 383. [15] Peninei Rabbenu ha-Griz al ha-Torah, pp. 382ff. [16] Peninei Rabbenu ha-Avi Ezri, p. 417. There are myriads of other possible reasons why one might not wish the Messiah to come soon or even at all. Consider this hypothetical case: A man who intermarried and had children later became a ba’al teshuvah and divorced his wife. He is now hoping that his former wife and children will convert. However, it will take some time for him to convince them that this is the best path. This man, who now goes to Daf Yomi, learned from Yevamot 24b that in the days of the Messiah no converts will be accepted. So while the man believes in the coming of the Messiah, and wants him to come, he does not want him to come too quickly, since he figures he needs a couple of years before his family will be ready to convert. While some will regard this man as a heretic for not waiting in hope for the Messiah every single day, according to R. Shulzinger’s understanding of the Brisker Rav, there is nothing lacking in this man’s belief in Maimonides’ Twelfth Principle.