DOCSLIB.ORG

Talmud Bavli

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Talmud Bavli Biography of the Vilna Shas תלמוד בבלי Moshe Freedman ירושלים תמוז תשס״ז דרכיה דרכי נעם בס״ד Introduction Typeset by the Romm Printing House in the city of Vilna, Lithuania, the Vilna Shas is by far the most common edition of the Babylonian Talmud still in use today. This biographical analysis of a typical page of Talmud was designed to help both beginner and more advanced learners to familiarize themselves with the origin and function of the various commentators printed on the margins of the classic Vilna Shas. Besides the primary commentaries of Rashi and Tosafos, the Romm printers made use of a variety of other important, but less well known commentaries in the outer margins of the text. The publishing house employed scholars to search for these manuscripts in libraries and private collections across Europe, including that of the Vatican. After studying these lost manuscripts, the scholars were able to copy them and bring them to the Romm publishers who included them, even though they did not cover every tractate. In this biography the only one of these commentaries mentioned is Rabbeinu Chananel whose manuscripts were found for most of Shas. Furthermore, the Sefer HaAruch (written by Rabbi Nosson ben Yechiel) indicates that Rabbeinu Chananel’s commentary originally covered every tractate, although many have now been lost. Different tractates contain other commentaries in the margins of the Gemara. The additional commentaries not included in this work include the following: Rabbi Nissim Gaon 4750 – 4822 מאור הגולה ,CE), Perush Rabbeinu Gershom, refered to as the Meor HaGolah 1062 – 990) 4720 – 4788 (960 – 1028 CE), Hagahos HaRi Landau by Rabbi Yechezkel Landau 5473 – 5553 (1713 – 1793 CE) also known as the Noda B’Yehuda and Rabbi Yeshaya of Trani I .(CE 1260 – 1180) 5020 – 4940 תוספות רי״ד ,HaZaken, known as Tosafos Rid The ‘Tzuras HaDaf’ layout is designed to facilitate the visual learner and is based on the original printing of the Vilna Talmud. This edition was first printed between 5640 and 5646 (1880 and 1886 CE), although it has now been reproduced and reprinted with innovative features and changes that organize the commentaries on the outside columns differently. No mention has been made of new versions in this pamphlet. Acknowledgements I owe enormous thanks to the Roshei Yeshiva, Rabbi Yitzchak Hirshfeld and Rabbi Shaya Karlinsky along with all of the Rebbeim at Yeshivat Darche Noam/David Shapell College who gave advice and encouragement that facilitated the success of this project. Particular thanks must go to Rabbi Dovid Kamenetsky for checking the text and confirming that all the information contained in it is correct and to Rabbi Gidon Shoshan for his proof reading and proposals regarding the presentation. I also wish to thank Rabbi Elie Silverberg for his suggestions and corrections and to all of the other Gemara Rebbeim who gave their comments, and to Yisroel Choleva for analysing the text and pointing out various corrections. Future projects I will be continuing this project and beginning work on the other commentaries ,אם ירצה השם Please contact .ספרי קדש at the back of the Vilna Shas before starting new projects on other me at [email protected] for any comments you may have and to order more copies. © Moshe Freedman Kislev 5768 Third Edition מסורת Masechta Perek Number Name of the Perek ב עין משפט הש״ס נר מצוה means additions Rashi · Rabbi Shlomo Yitzchaki was born on (תוספות) Ein Mishpat Ner The · word Tosafos א א Mitzva: The Wellspring th nd and serves as an analysis to Rashi and an 29 Shevat 4800 (February 22 1040) of Justice – The Lamp of Commandment was analysis of apparent contradictions in the text of and died on 22nd Tamuz 4865 (July 13th 1105). He authored by the Spanish Rabbi Yehoshua Boaz the Mishna and Gemara based on Mishnayos and was born in Troyes in France and as well as writing תורה אור : .Mevorach Gemaras elsewhere in Shas a commentary on the Talmud, The Ein Mishpat Tosafos · is printed on the also wrote commentaries on ב ב Ner Mitzva is a : combination of two opposite side to the Tanach Rashi was the THE MISHNA cross-reference indices. Rashi farthest from the only child · to his parents, The Torah Ohr, found binding and is printed in Yitzchak and Leah. He ג ג between the text of the Rashi script. There were a traced his lineage through his Gemara and Rashi’s was compiled around the year number of Baalei Tosafos in father's side back to Rabbi commentary was also 3960 (200 CE) by Rabbi The Mesores HaShas written by Rabbi different yeshivas throughout Yochanan Hasandlar who in means tradition of the Yehoshua Boaz and cites Yehudah Ha-Nasi. The sages of six orders of the the sources for the the 12th and 13th centuries turn was a direct descendant Mishna. pesukim in Tanach and it probably began as the Mishna are known as the of King David : Rashi’s brought down in the text of the Mishna and notes made by the talmidim Tannaim. The word Mishna commentary · was originally Gemara. It is referenced written within the text of the ,שנה comes from the root )משנה) : by an open circle in the on discussions and shiurim The Mesoras HaShas The Mishna and Gemara. Later, was written by Rabbi גמ ׳ :text like this: Some · of the most prolific which means to teach Yehoshua Boaz Baalei Tosafos period of the Gemara began the printers of the Talmud Mevorach (see Ein Mishpat Ner Mitzvah). include Rabbi Yaakov ben after the redaction of the placed his commentary Mishna. Sages throughout around the side of the text, on (ר״ת ,Meir (Rabbenu Tam from Ramerupt in France Eretz Yisrael and Babylonia, the inner margin by the who lived from 4860 – 4931 called Amoraim, analyzed, binding. The type face used is CE). He was debated and discussed the called ‘Rashi script’ which 1171 – 1100) רבינו חננאל the grandson of Rashi. takes its name from its use in Rabbeinu Channanel mishnayos. These discussions ben Chushiel lived Rabbi Shmuel ben Meir Rashi’s commentaries; Rashi from 990 – 1055 CE form the basis of the Gemara .and were written did not write in Rashi script (גמרא) who (רשב״ם ,in Tunisia, North (Rashbam Africa. His lived from 4845 – 4934 It developed as a printed הגהות commentary on the primarily in Aramaic, the הב״ח Talmud is one of the (1085 – 1174 CE). Rabbi version of the semi-cursive earliest. Rabbeinu language spoken in Babylonia Yitzchak of Dampierre (Ri, way that Hebrew was Channanel mainly and in Eretz Yisrael after the (A) Compiled by Rabbi deals with the (written by Jews in Italy Yoel Sirkes (the Bach – 1120) 4960 – 4880 (ר״י explanation of return from the Babylonian 1200 CE), lived in France between the 14th and 15th who wrote notes on the principle s and issues exile. The Gemara provides a textual syntax and raised in the Gemara. during the 12th century. Century. Each entry begins sentence structure in the On occasion he is detailed analysis of the Mishna, Talmud, Rashi and also cited by Tosafos. The nephew of Rabbenu with a heading called the Tosafos. ד״ה = ) ’His commentary is Tam and the Rashbam he raising difficulties and questions: ‘dibbur hamaschil unique in that it often (B) The Bach lived in In new Poland from 5321 (1561 .( ד יּבוּר ה מ ת ח יל The text of the Mishna מתני ׳ brings equivalent was one of the most prolific sugyos from the is broken up into segments also CE) until 5400 (1640 Jerusalem Talmud. of the Baalei Tosafos. editions of the Talmud these CE). His most famous Rabbi Shmuel 4840 – 4918 known as individual mishnayos are printed in bold : The student was Rabbi (C) The Bach is cited by and commentary · has many a Rashi script letter in ( מ ׁשנ ה plural of מ ׁשנ יוֹת) Yitzchak ben Yaakov (1080 – 1158 CE) was the Alfasi, also known as brother of Rabbenu Tam. accordingly, each segment is functions. Rashi helps us parentheses (as shown .(Also above .רי״ף ,the Rif many of Rabbeinu Rabbi Shimshon ben called a Mishna. The Mishna understand the simple Chananel’s comments can be found in the Avraham of Shantz (Tosafos quoted in the text of the meaning of the Mishna and a ,ספר הערוך Shantz), lived in France during Gemara, focusing on specific dictionary compiled Talmud and introduced in the by Rabbi Noson ben the latter 12th and early 13th text of the Talmud by the word issues while resolving Yechiel of Rome. ,meaning ‘our difficulties in the text. Often מתני׳ = מ ת נ ית ין Please refer to the century and was the most introduction for other important disciple of the Ri. this is achieved by completing commentaries that Mishna’, can be one segment, a may appear here. In addition to his Tosafos he part of a segment or passages in the text that have composed a commentary to apparently been truncated by גליון הש״ס consecutive segments joined the two orders of the Mishna the Mishna or Gemara. He together. A number of The Gilyon HaShas for which no Babylonian occasionally brings different was written by Rabbi make up a Akiva Eiger who lived מ( ׁשניוֹת) mishnayos Talmud was written. Another versions of the text. Some in Posen, Prussia chapter), a number פ ר ק) perek Baal Tosafos was Rabbi Meir entries of Rashi are meant to between 5522 and of 5598 (1761-1837 CE). ben Baruch of Rothenberg be read independently from His notes reference relevant passages in while other entries are meant to Shas and other ד יּבוּר ה מ ת ח יל who was born in Worms, Germany, 4985 – the 5053 (1225 – 1293 CE).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 1 Jews, Gentiles, and the Modern Egalitarian Ethos
    Jews, Gentiles, and the Modern Egalitarian Ethos: Some Tentative Thoughts David Berger The deep and systemic tension between contemporary egalitarianism and many authoritative Jewish texts about gentiles takes varying forms. Most Orthodox Jews remain untroubled by some aspects of this tension, understanding that Judaism’s affirmation of chosenness and hierarchy can inspire and ennoble without denigrating others. In other instances, affirmations of metaphysical differences between Jews and gentiles can take a form that makes many of us uncomfortable, but we have the legitimate option of regarding them as non-authoritative. Finally and most disturbing, there are positions affirmed by standard halakhic sources from the Talmud to the Shulhan Arukh that apparently stand in stark contrast to values taken for granted in the modern West and taught in other sections of the Torah itself. Let me begin with a few brief observations about the first two categories and proceed to somewhat more extended ruminations about the third. Critics ranging from medieval Christians to Mordecai Kaplan have directed withering fire at the doctrine of the chosenness of Israel. Nonetheless, if we examine an overarching pattern in the earliest chapters of the Torah, we discover, I believe, that this choice emerges in a universalist context. The famous statement in the Mishnah (Sanhedrin 4:5) that Adam was created singly so that no one would be able to say, “My father is greater than yours” underscores the universality of the original divine intent. While we can never know the purpose of creation, one plausible objective in light of the narrative in Genesis is the opportunity to actualize the values of justice and lovingkindness through the behavior of creatures who subordinate themselves to the will 1 of God.
    [Show full text]
  • In the Following Verses from Devarim, Moshe Recounts the Events of Revelation at Sinai
    In the following verses from Devarim, Moshe recounts the events of revelation at Sinai. How does he describe his role? What inner contradiction comes from a comparison of verses 4- 5? Deuteronomy 5 (1) And Moses called unto all Israel, and said unto them: Hear, O Israel, the statutes and the ordinances which I speak in your ears this day, that ye may learn them, and observe to do them. (2) The Lord our God made a covenant with us in Horeb. (3) The Lord made not this covenant with our fathers, but with us, even us, who are all of us here alive this day. (4) The Lord spoke with you face to face in the mount out of the midst of the fire. (5) I stood between the Lord and you at that time, to declare unto you the word of the Lord; for ye were afraid because of the fire, and went not up into the mount, saying: To think about: What is a “face-to-face” encounter? What does it mean that Hashem spoke to the nation in such a manner at Sinai? Why might God have chosen to do so? According to verse 5, Moshe acted as an intermediary to “tell [the nation] the word of God.” How can this be reconciled with the direct encounter described in verse 4? What would be the point of Hashem speaking via a mediator? What does Moshe mean when he says “for you were afraid because of the fire”? Had the nation not been afraid, would the experience have been different? Why would God have chosen to frighten the people anyway? Did we hear the Ten Commandments directly from Hashem or did Moshe act as an intermediary? Right after the description of Hashem relaying the Ten Commandments, Moshe recounts how the people approached him, filled with fear: Deuteronomy 5 (20) and ye said: ‘Behold, the Lord our God hath shown us His glory and His greatness, and we have heard His voice out of the midst of the fire; we have seen this day that God doth speak with man, and he liveth.
    [Show full text]
  • Is There Life After Life? Superfetation in Medical, Historical and Rabbinic Literature1
    Is There Life After Life? Superfetation in Medical, Historical and Rabbinic Literature1 Rabbi Edward Reichman, MD Case Report On January 18, 2008 a unique medical case was reported in the British newspaper, the Daily Mail. Two babies were carried in the same womb, born only one minute apart, yet Thomas and Harriet Mullineux are not twins. They were conceived three weeks apart thanks to an extraordinary twist of nature. Their mother Charlotte had been pregnant with twins when at seven weeks she miscarried one of them. But two weeks later, she discovered, after undergoing a follow-up ultrasound, that she was carrying another fetus - con- ceived separately and still growing in her womb. The surviving twin and the new baby were born in May of 2007. This case, which may represent an extraordinarily rare, and not well documented, phenomenon, is the substance of this brief essay. We shall address the medical, historical and halakhic aspects of this case. Superfetation in Historical and Medical Literature The process whereby a woman becomes pregnant and then sub- sequently conceives again during another ovulatory cycle is called 1 A version of this article appeared in Shalom Rav (self-publication, 2008), a tribute volume to Rabbi Shalom Rosner formerly of Congregation Bais Ephraim Yitzchok (Woodmere, NY) upon his aliyah to Eretz Yisrael. Rabbi Edward Reichman, M.D. is Associate Professor of Emergency Medicine and Associate Professor of Clinical Epidemiology & Population Health at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine of Yeshiva University. 39 Wiesen.indb 39 4/28/09 4:09:21 PM 40 And You Shall Surely Heal superfetation.
    [Show full text]
  • CREATIVITY at the CUTTING EDGE of HALAKHAH WEEK TWO SUMMARY of SBM 2019 Sara Krishtul and Elyanna Saperstein, SBM Fellows
    Chukat, July 12, 2019 www.torahleadership.org CREATIVITY AT THE CUTTING EDGE OF HALAKHAH WEEK TWO SUMMARY OF SBM 2019 Sara Krishtul and Elyanna Saperstein, SBM Fellows How does Jewish law respond to changes in scientific knowledge nivul for financial gain, but why would that mean that one cannot ​ and technical capacity? One window into this issue is Shu”T Noda do nivul in order to save lives?! ​ ​ B’Yehudah 2:YD:210, written by the renowned eighteenth-century posek Rabbi Yechezkel Landau of Prague. Rabbi Landau’s ruling R. Fischels agrees with this disproof. However, he contends that one can even go further, and prove the matir’s permission from the demonstrates the power and necessity of halakhic creativity in ​ ​ oseir’s source. It’s true that Rabbi Akiva forbids the heirs from response to such changes, and also some of its risks and perhaps ​ inevitable pitfalls. autopsying the body – but the Talmud implies that the buyers of his property would be permitted to demand an autopsy! R. Landau’s son-in-law R. Leib Fischels reported a disagreement between two rabbis in London - henceforth the matir=permitter, R. Landau is quick to justify the oseir, however. He argues that ​ ​ and the oseir=forbidder - whether to allow doctors to autopsy a autopsies in London likely require the permission of the family, ​ ​ man who died after surgery to remove a bladder or kidney stone, and therefore, if one does not distinguish between autopsies for in the hope of developing safer, less invasive surgery for future gain and autopsies for medical knowledge, the oseir’s proof would patients.
    [Show full text]
  • Solomon Dubno, His Eastern European Scholarship, and the German Haskalah
    Zuzanna Krzemien Solomon Dubno, His Eastern European Scholarship, and the German Haskalah This article examines the life and works of Solomon Dubno (1738–1813), an Eastern European intellectual who lived and worked in Berlin over a period of ten years. While he is remembered as an initiator of the publication Sefer netivot ha-shalom [Paths of Peace], and for his work on the commentary (Bi’ur) of Moses Mendelssohn’s Pentateuch translation,1 Dubno’s influence on the early German Jewish Enlightenment, as a commentator of the book of Genesis, has been largely forgotten. Following a dispute with Mendelssohn, Dubno abandoned the Bi’ur project and headed for Vilna. There, he persuaded several members of the rabbinical elite of the need to create a new Bible commentary under his authorship, which could be published together with the Aramaic translation of Onkelos. He aimed to facilitate a correct understanding of the sacred text among Eastern European Jews, for whom Mendelssohn’s translation was not easily understandable, and which was regarded as a German textbook rather than a tool for enhanced study of the Torah. In this way, Dubno combined the maskilic program of Berlin Jewry with the Eastern European reverence for a traditional religious education. The Life and Works of Solomon Dubno Solomon ben Yoel Dubno was a renowned scholar from Eastern Europe and a preeminent representative of the early Jewish Enlightenment (Haskalah), who found recognition among his contemporaries through his poetry and expertise in Hebrew grammar. He was educated under the tutelage of Solomon Chelm (1717–1781),2 whose Sha’arei ne’imah [Gates of Melody], a work on accentuation in 1 Moses Mendelssohn (ed.), Sefer netivot ha-shalom [Paths of Peace] (Berlin: George Friederich Starcke, 1780–1783).
    [Show full text]
  • Reading Between the Lines: Mining Jewish History Through Extraction of Polish Archive Data
    READING BETWEEN THE LINES: MINING JEWISH HISTORY THROUGH EXTRACTION OF POLISH ARCHIVE DATA Judy Golan Kfar Vradim, Israel Keywords: • Polish Jewish genealogical research marriages 19th century • Opatów • Działoszyce • Polish archive record extraction • Council of Four Lands • Jewish merchant trade routes • Hasidic influence • Landau Rabbinical Clan Abstract What began as a study to explain the perceived proliferation of “other” towns outside the town of Opatów during the review of 19th century Jewish marriage record extracts from that town’s archive, evolved into an exploration of how these “other” towns became a “spouse pool” for marriage-seeking Jews from Opatów. The process of town identification became a pivotal exercise in the analytical process. Evaluating locations outside the archival town meant going beyond mere town name extraction; it meant pinpointing the precise location on a map. Accurate assessment of town location is a critical underpinning of genealogical research without which inroads are stymied. This paper highlights issues and prescribes methodology logic for resolving them. By benchmarking statistics from record extracts during the same time frame from two Polish archive towns, relevance is determined. Techniques used in business analyses are applied to genealogical research, enabling illumination of similarities and anomalies. Applying such methodology is a way of “reading between the lines” of archive extracts, and allows for isolating salient aspects of any archive data. After validating the evidence of “other town” statistics in town archive marriage records, the marriage registrations are divided into four segments in terms of each couple’s towns of residency. Comparison in this way enables isolating disparities that are evident in the segment comprised by non-Town brides who married non-Town grooms.
    [Show full text]
  • Assisted Reproduction in Jewish Law Daniel B
    Fordham Urban Law Journal Volume 30 | Number 1 Article 5 2002 Assisted Reproduction in Jewish Law Daniel B. Sinclair Tel Aviv College of Management Academic Studies, Law School Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/ulj Part of the Religion Law Commons Recommended Citation Daniel B. Sinclair, Assisted Reproduction in Jewish Law, 30 Fordham Urb. L.J. 71 (2002). Available at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/ulj/vol30/iss1/5 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by FLASH: The orF dham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. It has been accepted for inclusion in Fordham Urban Law Journal by an authorized editor of FLASH: The orF dham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Assisted Reproduction in Jewish Law Cover Page Footnote Professor of Jewish and Comparative Biomedical Law, Tel Aviv College of Management Academic Studies, Law School. LL.B. (Hons.); LL.M.; LL.D. Ordained Rabbi and formerly Rabbi of the Edinburgh Hebrew Congregation and Dean of Jews College (London). This article is available in Fordham Urban Law Journal: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/ulj/vol30/iss1/5 ASSISTED REPRODUCTION IN JEWISH LAW Daniel B. Sinclair* I. ARTIFICIAL INSEMINATION USING THE HUSBAND'S SPERM ("AIH"): JEWISH AND CATHOLIC POSITIONS This Section is devoted to a survey of Jewish law, or halakhah, in relation to AIH, and a comparative discussion of Jewish and Cath- olic approaches to reproductive technology in general. AIH ac- counts for a small proportion of artificial insemination cases, and is recommended in situations where the husband suffers from ana- tomical defects of his sexual organ or from severe psychological impotence.
    [Show full text]
  • 1. How Did Rav Yechezkel Landau Defuse the Controversy Surrounding Rav Yonasan Eibeschuetz?
    c"qa CAN YOU ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS? 1. How did Rav Yechezkel Landau defuse the controversy surrounding Rav Yonasan Eibeschuetz? 2. In which cities did R. Yechezkel Landau serve as a Rabbi? 3. Describe four examples of R. Landau's personal piety. 4. What were the issues surrounding the Cleever Get? 5. Describe the Rabbinic response to the work, "Divrei Shalom V'Emess". This and much more will be addressed in the sixteenth lecture of this series: "The New Torah Enlightenment: The Life and Times of the Torah Giants of the Late Eighteenth Century". To derive maximum benefit from this lecture, keep these questions in mind, as you listen to the tape and read through the outline. Go back to these questions once again at the end of the lecture and see how well you answer them. PLEASE NOTE: This outline and source book was designed as a powerful tool to help you appreciate and understand the basis of Jewish History. Although the lectures can be listened to without the use of the outline, we advise you to read the outline to enhance your comprehension. Use it, as well, as a handy reference guide and for quick review. THE EPIC OF THE ETERNAL PEOPLE Presented by Rabbi Shmuel Irons Series IX Lecture #16 THE NEW TORAH ENLIGHTENMENT: THE LIFE AND TIMES OF THE TORAH GIANTS OF THE LATE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY I. HaRav HaGaon R. Yechezkel Landau: The Early Years A. bltend axd f"`l cigie jx `ht` w"wa w"tl z"rc zpy oeyg i"g clep df wicv (1 drepv f"` ezxiab yi`ke .
    [Show full text]
  • Judaica Olomucensia
    Judaica Olomucensia 2015/1 Special Issue Jewish Printing Culture between Brno, Prague and Vienna in the Era of Modernization, 1750–1850 Editor-in-Chief Louise Hecht Editor Matej Grochal This issue was made possible by a grant from Palacký University, project no. IGA_FF_2014_078 Table of Content 4 Introduction Louise Hecht 11 The Lack of Sabbatian Literature: On the Censorship of Jewish Books and the True Nature of Sabbatianism in Moravia and Bohemia Miroslav Dyrčík 30 Christian Printers as Agents of Jewish Modernization? Hebrew Printing Houses in Prague, Brno and Vienna, 1780–1850 Louise Hecht 62 Eighteenth Century Yiddish Prints from Brünn/Brno as Documents of a Language Shift in Moravia Thomas Soxberger 90 Pressing Matters: Jewish vs. Christian Printing in Eighteenth Century Prague Dagmar Hudečková 110 Wolf Pascheles: The Family Treasure Box of Jewish Knowledge Kerstin Mayerhofer and Magdaléna Farnesi 136 Table of Images 2015/1 – 3 Introduction Louise Hecht Jewish Printing Culture between Brno, Prague and Vienna in the Era of Modernization, 1750–1850 The history of Jewish print and booklore has recently turned into a trendy research topic. Whereas the topic was practically non-existent two decades ago, at the last World Congress of Jewish Studies, the “Olympics” of Jewish scholarship, held in Jerusalem in August 2013, various panels were dedicated to this burgeoning field. Although the Jewish people are usually dubbed “the people of the book,” in traditional Jewish society authority is primarily based on oral transmission in the teacher-student dialog.1 Thus, the innovation and modernization process connected to print and subsequent changes in reading culture had for a long time been underrated.2 Just as in Christian society, the establishment of printing houses and the dissemination of books instigated far-reaching changes in all areas of Jewish intellectual life and finally led to the democratization of Jewish culture.3 In central Europe, the rise of publications in the Jewish vernacular, i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • Kabbala, Halakha and Kugel: the Case of the Two Handed Blessing
    Kabbala, Halakha and Kugel: The Case of the Two Handed Blessing Kabbala, Halakha and Kugel: The Case of the Two Handed Blessing* In parshat Vayehi, Yaakov simultaneously blesses his two grandchildren, Ephraim and Menashe by placing one hand upon each of their heads. Today, there is a widespread custom of blessing one own’s children on Friday night (although some only do it on the eve of Yom Kippur). This custom most likely originated with the Hasedi Ashkenaz in the 14th century but quickly spread to the rest of Europe, including France, Spain, and Italy.[1] The exact details of the blessing, however, are subject to some variation. The earliest sources mention only the priestly blessing and not Yaakov’s.[2] It was not until the 18th century, R. Yaakov Emden propose the specific usage of Yaakov’s blessing to his grandsons “God shall make you like Ephraim and Menashe.” Likewise, even within those sources they are inconsistent as to whether both hands are to be used or only one. Some provide that one hand should be used because it has 15 joints the same number of words as in the priestly blessing, while others urge two hands because they ”somekh“ ”סמך“ contain 60 bones which corresponds to the word samach” and“ ”סמ״ך“ to lay hands” to be read as the letter“ correspond to the numerical value of sixty rather than the literal translation equaling the number of letters in Birkat Kohanim. These sources disagree because of the symbolic nature of the hands vis-à-vis the blessing. The anonymous book, Hemdat Yamim, states that one should only use the right hand to bless.
    [Show full text]
  • Orthodox Judaism
    Orthodox Judaism General Information Orthodox Judaism teaches that the Torah, in both its written and oral form, was given to Moses directly by G-d and that strict adherence to the Torah is required of all Jews in all areas of life. This core set of beliefs unites various subgroups with significant social, cultural, and organizational differences. Within the United States, the largest of these subgroups are “Modern Orthodox” Judaism, which finds positive value in interactions with contemporary society, and “Haredi” and “Hasidic” Judaism, which advocate segregation from non-Jewish culture but not complete isolation from the secular world. More information about Orthodox Judaism can be found by going to http://www.ou.org, http://www.rabbis.org, and http://www.chabad.org. Number of Members in the U.S. and Canada: 600,000 Number of Members Worldwide: 1.8 million Official Statements on Animals Humans are the “pinnacle” of creation and have “dominion” over animals Because Orthodox Judaism is not a monolithic movement, there is no one organization with the authority to speak on behalf of the entire Orthodox community. However, the Orthodox Union, the Rabbinical Council of America, and Chabad Lubavitch do speak on behalf of a large segment of the Orthodox population. According to these organizations, G-d rules over a cosmic hierarchy and has made humans “the pinnacle of creation.” Our privileged status is accompanied by the right to exercise dominion over animals. “The Torah tell[s] us that in the beginning, when G-d created all living creatures…the
    [Show full text]
  • Introducción Al Estudio De La Torá
    FUENTES DEL PENSAMIENTO JUDAICO LAS OBRAS Y LOS PERSONAJES MÁS IMPORTANTES Por Roberto J. Ayala 1 LA TRADICIÓN INTERPRETATIVA “Rabí Meir refirió una vez: Cuando Israel se acercó a Di-s para recibir la Torá, Di-s les dijo: ‘Dadme garantías de que la observaréis.’ El Pueblo contestó: ‘Nuestros antepasados, cuya piedad es el ejemplo de nuestras vidas, aseguran que nosotros guardaremos la Torá.’ Pero Di-s contestó: ‘Vuestras garantías necesitan garantías a su vez, pues, yo he hallado falta en ellos.’ Entonces contestó el pueblo: ‘Permite que nuestro profetas se pongan de pie y respondan por nosotros.’ Pero Di-s contestó: ‘También en ellos he encontrado fallas.’ Entonces el pueblo de Israel dijo: ‘Nuestros hijos garantizarán la observancia de la Torá por toda la Eternidad.’ Y Di-s aceptó entonces esa garantía, y les dio la Torá.” (Cantar de los Cantares Rabá 1:4). Según la tradición Moisés recibió la Torá en el Monte Sinaí en el año 2.448 de la creación del mundo (1313 A.E.C.). La opinión de los rabinos al respecto es que la Torá que Di-s entregó al pueblo de Israel, estaba escrita de manera tal que además de poder estudiarse mediante un entendimiento literal del texto, también era posible llegar a niveles más profundos de comprensión mediante otros sistemas interpretativos de las escrituras que no contradecían la literalidad del texto, sino que complementaban el entendimiento del mismo. Por lo tanto los rabinos entendieron que la Biblia podía comprenderse de múltiples maneras al expresar: Shivím Paním LaTorá que quiere decir: ‘Setenta rostros tiene la Torá’ (Midrásh, Números Rabá 13:15), lo cual es una referencia a las diversas formas de interpretarla, considerándolas como verdaderas y entendiendo que provinieron de una misma fuente: El Creador del universo.
    [Show full text]