571) Did Maimonides believe the universe was created or eternal?

 

"Three Philosophical Approaches" by Professor Avi Harel

Introduction

This article—based extensively on the research by my friend and mentor, Professor Avi Harel—discusses one of the most perplexing questions of Maimonidean scholarship: Did Maimonides believe the universe was created or eternal? Was the universe created by God at a point in history, or did it always exist? The question itself is astonishing for any religious thinker because belief in the creation of the universe seems to be a natural theological consequence of believing in God’s existence. Importantly, even the Torah opens with (two accounts) of the creation narrative. Yet Maimonides engages very seriously with this question of creation or eternity in his Moreh Nevuchim (Guide of the Perplexed). 

The Maimonidean conundrum

According to Harel (my translation from the Hebrew): 

“The controversy over whether the world was created or always existed is one of the most serious and difficult philosophical and theological problems to resolve” (Harel 2026). 

What follows is an attempt at positioning Maimonides—based on his writings in the Guide—within this great debate. No other theological inquiry has so much at stake because, firstly, the eternity of the universe negates the sensus literatus of the Torah text; and secondly, it challenges the common notion that God (as sovereign and all- powerful) is the creator of the universe. 

570) Rabbi Shmuel Alexandrov: An early model of Religious Zionism

R. Shmuel Alexandrov (1865-1941)

Introduction

This article—based extensively on the research by Dr Isaac Slater—identifies and analyses a forgotten early model of Religious Zionism as presented in the writings of Rabbi Shmuel Alexandrov. Religious Zionism today is readily recognisable in its various popular iterations, but there were many early models and visions of how such a movement should be constructed. We shall explore just one of these diverse theological projections on how to integrate classical traditional Judaism, as understood during the late nineteenth century, with emergent Zionism. 

569) Is Maimonides the solution or the problem?

 

Professor Shalom Sadik

Introduction

A recent book by Professor Shalom Sadik—‘A Call For The Revival of Religious Philosophy’ (in Hebrew)[1]—has sparked a ferocious but fascinating debate over the resurgence of interest in the philosophical views of Maimonides. Sadik is calling for a measured return to Maimonidean philosophy. He acknowledges that this path is not for most religious Jews and specifically aims his teachings at a minority of Jews, which he sees as being less than ten per cent of the population (Sadik 2024). Yet R. Ysoscher Katz, Professor Menachem Kellner, Professor Avinoam Rosenak, Professor Ari Ackerman (and others) take issue with Sadik and his interpretation of Maimonides. 

567) What happened to the Chabad Megillah of Yud-Tet Kislev?

Tomchei Temimim Yeshiva in Otwock during the 1930s

Introduction

This article—based extensively on the research by Professor Wojciech Tworek—examines a unique Megillah (Scroll) compiled in 1936 by the sixth Chabad Rebbe, Yosef Yitzchak Schneersohn (1880-1950). It was to be read out aloud and publicly on Yud-Tet Kislev (19^th of Kislev), which is celebrated by Chabad as the Chassidic ‘Festival of Redemption.’ Yud-Tet Kislev commemorates the release and liberation of their founding Rebbe, Schneur Zalman of Liadi (1745-1812), also known as the Alter Rebbe, from prison in the Petropavlovsk fortress in 1798. 

566) From Manuscript to Print: Redefining the Borders of Rabbinic Authority

 

2024 marks the five hundredth anniversary of the Second Rabbinic Bible printed by Daniel Bomberg and edited by Yaakov ben Chaim Adoniyah.

Abstract

The shift from manuscript to print around 1450 was not simply a technological innovation, but a transformative theological encounter that reshaped the borders of rabbinic reach and authority. This paper examines how the introduction of print during the Renaissance period impacted and changed traditional rabbinic authority. Print indeed stabilised textual transmission through standardisation, yet it also created new tensions. Print inadvertently exposed the hidden disputes among the multiple and variant manuscript traditions, since only one version could be published. More importantly, printers with their editorial interventions and often-arbitrary selection of manuscripts began to displace rabbis as the prime mediators of tradition. Some rabbis, therefore, rejected the new technology, while others embraced the innovation as the printed book signalled the promise of authority and legitimacy. Historically, the material form of the printed book indeed became the decisive factor in shaping the future trajectory of the Mesora (rabbinic line of tradition) since it immediately identified who held authority in the rabbinic world. This paper argues, however, that the printing press also introduced a new and arbitrary rule—unknown before to the ancient line of transmission—He who prints first wins. 

New tensions as printing becomes the locus of rabbinic authority

565) Jewish mysticism: Debates of influence between East and West

A fragment from the Cairo Geniza in the hand of  Maimonides' only son, Avraham ben haRambam

Introduction

This article—based extensively on the research by Professor Ronald Kiener—examines the contested origins of Jewish mysticism, including the neglected question of the role Islamic mysticism may have played. This Islamic influence seems to have been previously missed by the doyenne of Jewish mysticism, Gershom Scholem, who “based largely on manuscripts from Italy and Germany…hardly professes to say much of Judaism in Islamdom” (Hodgson 1974: 2:202, n.1). Scholem’s use of texts predominantly from Europe accounts for his Eurocentric approach to the history of Jewish mysticism. Scholem was not alone because sixty years ago most scholars indeed “looked to Europe in order to provide narrative explanations for the history and development of Jewish mysticism” (Kiener 2011:147). However, scholarship has changed since then, and Moshe Idel, one of the foremost contemporary scholars on Jewish mysticism, starkly declares: 

“Muslim culture is the primary source of influence upon Jewish mysticism” (Idel 1991:33). 

564) Oleksa Dovbush: A Ukrainian Baal Shem Tov?

Oleksa Dovbush 1700-1745

Introduction

This article—based extensively on the research by Professor Boris Czerny[1]—examines some unusual similarities between the Baal Shem Tov (the founder of the Chassidic movement, c.1700-1760) and Oleksa Dovbush (the Ukrainian Robin Hood and rebel leader, 1700-1745). Czerny researched the archives of Kyiv and Lviv, as well as Israel, and analysed texts written in Ukrainian, Russian, Hebrew and Yiddish. He also consulted police and court records concerning Oleksa Dovbush to construct his revolutionary biography (Czerny 2018:34). I thank Professor Czerny for gifting me a copy of his book (in French!). 

563) The suicide of Sarah?

  

Milk urns used to bury documentation form the Warsaw Ghetto as part of the Ringelblum Archives

Note: This article deals with an unusual and peripheral view that the biblical Sarah committed suicide after she heard that her son Isaac was bound on the altar. Suicide is a serious problem in many communities, and ours is no different. Reference to Sarah’s alleged suicide as a ‘virtue’ must be understood within the historical and literary context in which this idea was fermented, and not in any way as a religious sanction of such an act. I deal with it here knowing full well that ideas are dangerous, but equally aware that withholding them is more so. 

Introduction

This article—based extensively on the research by Rabbi Professor Daniel Reiser—examines an unusual Chassidic interpretation of the biblical Sarah’s death as a suicide. This idea is to be found in the writings of the Piaseczno^[1] Rebbe, Kalonymus Kalman Shapira (1889-1943), produced while he was confined to the Warsaw Ghetto. According to Reiser (2021:7): 

“Sarah died in order to demonstrate to God that her excessive  suffering in the wake of Isaac’s near sacrifice was absolutely unbearable.” 

In Shapira’s lived experience, he seemed to identify with Sarah, whom he interpreted as demonstrating that with the episode of the Akeidah—the sacrifice of Isaac—God had pushed humanity too far. 

562) Was Maharal of Prague a philosopher or a veiled mystic?

Tiferet Yisrael by Maharal of Prague. First edition, Venice 1599

Introduction

This article—based extensively on the research by Dr Leore Sachs-Shmueli and Eynel Kapach—examines the question of whether the Maharal of Prague  (1512-1609) was a philosopher or a Kabbalist. The Maharal has long been the subject of much scholarly debate over his relationship to Kabbalah. This new research situates Maharal as a discreet Kabbalist who hid his deep mystical views behind a veil of philosophy. 

561) Maimonidean philosophy as a form of rationalist mysticism?

The Kabbalistic Eitz Chaim as depicted in an early 18th century diagram from the Klau Scrolls Collection showing the complicated mystical path to unio mystica.

Introduction

This article—based extensively on the research by Professor Gideon Freudenthal—explores the possibility of a unio mystica (mystical union) attainable through Maimonidean philosophic and rationalist endeavours. This rationalist unio mystica parallels (and might even surpass) the unio mystica described by the mystics and Kabbalists. If this claim holds, then it is not only the mystics who can, allegedly, experience unio mystica, but also the rationalists. Yet, both states of unio mystica are defined very differently, as one is mystically ecstatic while the other remains purely intellectual. 

560) What Can We Learn From the Writing Style of Kabbalistic Source Books?

This is another guest post by Rabbi Boruch Clinton, and originally appeared on his B'chol D'rachecha site.

(I asked Rabbi Clinton to share his fascinating and original thoughts on the stylistic underpinnings of our mystical texts, not only because so much of his writing resonates with me, but also because I have never before seen a theory of mysticism expressed in such a forthright manner - Gavin Michal)

Many years ago, a Torah scholar speaking at a public gathering I attended said some strange things. Everything sounded fine until you spent a moment thinking about it. As an example, he insisted that “Rabbi S.R. Hirsch and the Baal Hatanya translated the word הלל identically.”

Now that’s simply untrue. R’ Hirsch’s translation of הלל is on the record and it bears no resemblance to the translation reported in the speech.1 It’s not as though there are any political points to be made here one way or the other, it’s just incorrect. I said nothing at the time, but I quietly wondered why that rabbi would have said such nonsense.

559) The murder of Rabbi Avraham Kohn: A contested history

R. Avraham Kohn 1807-1848

Introduction

This article examines the contested history surrounding the murder of R. Avraham Kohn on September 6, 1848. He was a student of the Chief Rabbi of Prague, Shmuel Landau, who ordained him in 1831. He was also a graduate of Charles University of Prague. R. Kohn, himself,  later became the Chief Rabbi of Lemberg (Lviv). 

The story

Jewish Encyclopedia

According to the Jewish Encyclopedia, we are left with more questions than answers concerning the murder of R. Kohn: 

“[W]hile the better element [of Jewish society] rallied about him, the enemies of culture and progress [i.e. the radical Orthodox] were actively engaged in embittering his life and in undermining his growing popularity. Impelled by unbounded fanaticism, and encouraged by the lawless conditions [during the civil unrest] prevailing in 1848, they finally concocted a plan to take Kohn's life. On Sept. 6, 1848, a man, hired by the fanatical clique, entered Kohn's kitchen and poisoned the dinner. While the other members of his family recovered, Kohn and his youngest child died the following day. A wearisome trial ensued; but for some unknown reasons it was suppressed” (Jewish Encyclopedia 1906:534).