Some thoughts on R. Yosef Engel’s Scholarship By Dovid Markel

R. Yosef Engel (1858-1920) was a brilliant and unique scholar—the likes of which the world rarely sees. Born in Tarna, Galicia in the year 1858 and living to the young age of 62, he dazzled the world with the breadth and depth of his works which span the corpus of Talmudic thought. Though never having studied in traditional yeshivot—being primarily an autodidact he developed a unique Talmudic methodology and was one of the pioneers in what has become known as the Analytical School of Talmudic scholarship. While of the over alleged one hundred works that he authored only seventeen remain, those works are remarkable tour-de-force of depth, breadth and novel thought.

Engel was the un-bifurcated consummate gaon who weaved the various streams of Judaic thought into a cohesive picture. He would use agada to explain , halakha to explain agada and bring Talmudic proofs to Kabbalistic concepts1. For him was a singular unite and the divides between sections was artificial. While at first glance the relationship between sections may not be apparent a deeper look—according to Engel—reveals that inherent association.

In Zevin’s Sofarim V’Sefarim he writes the following concerning Engel’s Talmudic proficiency2:

There is a unique path that the author has in all his compilations; “independent proficiency” not found in those that are great in Torah and not common is (Torah) books. [He exhibits] proficiency of comparisons and surprises, revealing the point of comparison of the idea being analyzed in places that we would never have thought of. The reason is not due to the fact that “the words of Torah are impoverished in one place and wealthy in another,” for if the “one place” is revealed and articulated, the “wealth” is available to anyone who has “a hand in .” However, there are places that the “wealth” is covered and hidden; the “pearl” is concealed by “earthen shards.” Standard proficiency, even when it is great in the quantitative aspect, will not be sufficient to locate those hidden treasures. The unique sensitivity of the author recognizes the logical point that is hidden in a well-known idiom of Razal; he reveals it and displays it for all. His broad proficiency—in the normative delineation—assists him in adding to that point copious references from the Babylonian and Talmud and from all of the “rooms of Torah” of the Talmudic library.

While many have the ability to locate the central theme of a Talmudic section, Engel had the ability to see how the seemingly trivial aspects of a Talmudic section were central as well. This

1 In the preface to Engel’s Agadic work Shev D’Nechemta he writes “G-d should bestow his kindness upon me, and continue to support me to publish my many novella on halakha and agada.” This work is a prime example of Engel connecting the various facets of Torah. See for example Mamar 3 (New York 2013) pp. 315-322 where Engel brings 14 halakhic proofs whether on tosefet mikri akira (that adding is considered uprooting) to explain an agadic thought. 2 R. Shlomo Zevin, Sofrim V’Sefarim, (Tel-Aviv 1959) pp. 150-151 1

The Neirot Foundation of Jewish Thought was due to his study not only analyzing the section under-discussion but locate the conceptual paradigms that were conveyed in it as they pertain to a general Talmudic clause. Engel did not only know Talmud, he was a master of Talmud and employed the keen ability to manipulate the data and trick out new modes of thought.

R. Yosef Engel’s methodology was a highly original methodology of study. Having never studied in a standard —being primarily autodidactic—he developed an idiosyncratic style with distinctiv