 |
From the cover of Jewish Education and Society in the High Middle Ages, by Ephraim Kanarfogel. |
INTRODUCTION:
I recall vividly, as a youngster just out of school and
about to study in yeshiva, how it was made very clear by my rabbis that
as bochurim (yeshiva students) we had to get, not just away from
our families, not just out of town, but out of the country in order to immerse
ourselves in study. Many children were sent overseas even earlier, as thirteen
and fourteen-year-olds, just after barmitzvah. I know some who never saw
their parents, brothers and sisters again, for years.
One of the yeshivot
I attended in Israel was great fun but rather ascetic in that we were given a certain elitist designation, not
allowed mirrors in the washrooms, and hardly allowed out on Shabbat, not even
to go to other yeshivot, never mind visiting family. If one chose,
instead, to study in a yeshiva in one’s hometown, no matter how good it
was, one lost a perceived status that was difficult to regain.
Where did these unwritten laws and perceptions come from?
Certainly, they have become part of the cultural authority of various modern
groups and sects, but their roots may have had their origins in earlier times.
This article, based extensively on the research of Rabbi
Professor Ephraim Kanarfogel[1]
of Yeshiva University, deals with guidelines for early yeshiva schools
going back perhaps to the eleventh and twelfth centuries, and is based on the work Sefer
Chukei haTorah.
SEFER CHUKEI HATORAH:
There is only one extant version of Sefer Chukei haTorah and
it has three sections. The text is found in the Bodleian Library[2].
It reads like a manual or guideline for a strict pietist school system.
It’s an interesting work as it has many unknowns. For some
reason, it is not cited by later rabbinic literature although two later texts
are fairly similar to it.
Sefer Chukei haTorah was eventually only published in
1880, by Moritz Guedermann. Since then, over twenty-five scholars have argued
and debated over its date of origin and general provenance. The work makes
mention of Gaonim (rabbis from the Gaonic period 589-1038) and some believe it
may have been written during that time.
On the other hand, it shows resemblance
to the midrash hagadol or great academy which was prevalent in southern France in the twelfth century.
The historian Salo Baron (1895-1989) writes that Sefer
Chukei haTorah originated:
“...in one of the northern
communities under the impact of Provençal[3]
mysticism or of German-Jewish Pietism [i.e., the mystical movement known as
Chassidei Ashkenaz][4]
of the school of Yehudah the Pious and Eleazar of Worms.”
This indicates that Sefer Chukei haTorah had intense
mystical origins.
a) PROGRESSIVE TEACHINGS:
Rabbi Professor Isadore Twersky (1930-1997) sums up the
essence of Sefer Chukei haTorah as
being most progressive:
“It strives, by way of
stipulations and suggestions, to achieve maximum learning on the part of the
student and maximum dedication on the part of the teacher. It operates with
such progressive notions as determining the occupational aptitude of students,
arranging small groups in order to enable individual attention, grading the
classes in order not to stifle individual progress.
The teacher is urged to
encourage free debate and discussion among students, arrange periodic
review...utilize the vernacular in order to facilitate comprehension. Above
all, he is warned against insincerity and is exhorted to be wholly committed to
his noble profession.”[5]
Sefer Chukei haTorah also stresses that teachers be
completely committed to their teaching while in class and not allow anything to
distract them. Even the Dean may not interrupt the teacher while he is engaged
in his work with the students.
These are, as R. Twersky describes, very progressive
pedagogic measures particularly for a school system some eight centuries ago.
b) ASCETIC AND PIETISTIC TEACHINGS:
However, one can argue that Sefer Chukei haTorah also
encouraged strict ascetic practices as well. It tells how the sons of the Cohanim and Leviyim were ‘consecrated’ and expected to study in these schools full time, although this was not enforced. Designated scholars would also study full time – and, importantly, the communal responsibility to study Torah was considered to be vicariously discharged through these students. The students are not just called students, but perushim, or separatists who have been ‘consecrated’
to distance themselves from not just the outside world, but even from their own
families.
Kanarfogel writes:
“The most novel position of
this document calls for the establishment of quasi-monastic study halls for perushim
(lit., those who are separate), dedicated students who would remain totally
immersed in their Torah studies for a period of seven years. Elementary-level
students would be taught in separate structures for a period of up to seven
years, in preparation for their initiation into the ranks of the perushim.
The formal initiation took place when the student was thirteen, although it
could be postponed (or perhaps renounced) until age sixteen.”
This makes a total of fourteen years of study within these institutions.
The fact that Kanarfogal, who is most articulate in his use
of words, refers to ‘quasi-monastic study halls for perushim’ is
significant because he suggests a possible non-Jewish ascetic influence.
Elsewhere, Kanarfogel writes about the Tosafist’s (also active
during the same period - around the twelfth and thirteenth centuries) whose analytical
style of dialectics is referred to by the Sefer Chassidim as ‘dialectica
shel goyim’ or dialectics of the non-Jews. He shows how the
signature analytical style of the Tosafists may have been adopted by Jews influenced
by the culture of dialectics popular in Christian France.
Rabbi Professor Yaakov Elman shows many earlier examples of influences from the surrounding outside culture which were prevalent during the times of the
Babylonian Talmud. A significant example is that of Jewish women who opted for stricter
observances when it came to the laws of family purity, so as not to be spiritually upstaged
by their more ascetic Zoroastrian neighbours.
If Kanarfogel is correct, it is possible that both the
dialectic style of the Tosafists and the ascetic approach to education that we
see in Sefer Chukei haTorah, may both have been influenced by the
prevailing religious milieu as found within cathedral and monastic schools in
Europe at that time.
Sefer Chukei haTorah discourages the classes taking
place in the house of the academy head lest he is distracted by his wife. The
classes must take place in the school of the perushim (the students who
have separated). The academy head must remain with the students and not return
home for the entire week. He may only return home for Shabbat.
SEFER CHUKEI HATORAH RESEMBLES SEFER CHASSIDIM:
Sefer Chukei haTorah reflects many ideas that are
mentioned in Sefer Chassidim of the German Pietists (Chassidei
Ashkenaz).
Sefer Chassidim also expects the children of Cohanim
and Leviyim to be sent away from home for long periods of time, in order
to study Torah, or until they no longer have doubts. This is based on its unusual
interpretation of a verse in Devarim recording Moshe’s blessing before he died:
“Who said of his father and
mother, “I consider them not.” His brothers he disregarded, ignored his own
children. Your precepts alone they observed and kept your covenant.”[6]
Kanarfogel says that he knows of no other text that
interprets this verse the way Sefer Chassidim does, other than what
appears to be its sister work, Sefer Chukei haTorah.
He writes:
“...the sons of kohanim and
leviyyim are to be consecrated as youngsters to study Torah and to become
perushim [separatists][7].
They are to remain separated from everyone including their families for seven
years, while they study.”
Thus Sefer Chukei haTorah seems to follow a similar educational
approach to that of Sefer Chassidim.
MONASTIC INFLUENCES?
Based on this and other similarities[8]
between Sefer Chukei haTorah and Sefer Chassidim, it is possible that
the pietistic teachings of the former were influenced by the latter.
However, Kanarfogel suggests that some influences may also
have been absorbed from the surrounding religious culture of Christian piety
which was reflected in its educational system.
He writes:
“Another possible key to the
origin of [Sefer Chukei haTorah] that has not been probed sufficiently lies in
the practices and phrases that appear to be similar to Christian monastic
ideals. The perushim, who are chosen originally through some form of parental
consecration, ensconce themselves in their fortresses of study away from all
worldly temptations.
They devote all their time in
the holy work of God (melekhet shamayim), and serve as representatives of the
rest of the community in this endeavour. It is possible that the [Sefer Chukei
haTorah] represents an attempt to recast the discipline and devotion of
Christian monastic education, which was certainly known to, and perhaps admired
by, Jews, in a form compatible with Jewish practices and values.”
EXTRACTS FROM THE TEXT
OF SEFER CHUKEI HATORAH:
The following are some selected
extracts from Sefer Chukei haTorah:
1) NUMBERS OF STUDENTS IN A CLASS:
“Statute six. Melammedim
[teachers][9]
should not accept more than ten students in one class...”.
2) TO TEACH FROM A TEXT:
“Statute seven. It is
incumbent upon the melammedim not to teach the children by heart, but
from the written text....”
3) NOT TO LINGER IN THE SYNAGOGUE:
The heads of the academies
should not linger in the synagogue for morning prayer until the prayer
[service] ends, but only until...qedushah rabbah...”
4) THE RECULCITRANT STUDENT:
“Statute five.....And if the
supervisor sees amongst the youths a young man who is difficult and dense, he
should bring him to his father and say to him: ‘The Lord should privilege your
son to [do] good deeds, because he is too difficult for Torah study,’ lest the
brighter students fall behind because of him.”
5) FINANCIAL MATTERS:
"Statute four. To collect from all Israel twelve deniers a year for the service of the study hall....”
“And it was ordained regarding
the melammedim, that a head melamed can gather up to one hundred
young men to teach them Torah, and take in for this one hundred litrin.
He then hires for them ten melammedim for eighty litrin, and the
remaining litrin will be his share. He does not teach any child but is
the officer and supervisor over the [other] melammedim....”
“[The father of a five year
old][10]
informs the melammed...’I am telling you that you will teach my son
during this month the structure of the letters, during the second month their
vocalization, during the third month the combination of letters into
words....If not, you will be paid as a furloughed [temporary][11]worker.’”
6) CONSECRATION WHILE IN THE WOMB:
“The first statute. It is
incumbent on the priests and Levites to separate one of their sons and consecrate
him to Torah study, even while he is still in his mother’s womb. For they were
commanded this at Mount Sinai as it is written, “they shall teach your statutes
to Jacob. [Deut.33:10]....”
“[The father] accepts upon
himself and says: ‘If my wife gives birth to a male, he shall be consecrated
unto the Lord, and he will study His Torah day and night.’ On the eighth day,
after the child has entered the covenant of circumcision....[t]he academy head
shall place his hands on him and on the Pentateuch and say, ‘this one shall
learn what is written in this,’ three times....”
7) THE ‘TITHE OF SONS’:
“Similarly, all the children
of Israel shall separate [one] from among their sons, because Jacob made such a
separation, as it is written, “all that You shall give to me I will surely give
the tenth [double verb] to You” [Gen. 28:22]. The verse speaks of two tithings,
a tithe of money and a tithe of sons....”
8) THE FEW STUDY FOR THE MANY:
“Statute two. To establish a
study hall for the separated students [perushim]...near the synagogue.
This house would be called the great study hall.
For just as cantors are
appointed to discharge for the many their obligation in prayer, full-time
students are appointed to study Torah without end, to discharge for the many
their obligation in Torah study, and the work of heaven will thereby not fall
behind....”
9) THE STUDENTS MAY NOT LEAVE FOR SEVEN YEARS:
“Statute three. The perushim
may not leave the house for seven years. There they will eat and drink, and
there they will sleep, and they should not speak in the study hall.
Wisdom will not reside in the
student who comes and goes...
If the perushim leave
the study hall before seven years, they must pay a set fine...which teaches
that they imprison themselves in order to know the statutes of the Almighty....”
ANALYSIS:
The first five extracts
are indeed quite ‘progressive’ as per R. Twersky - but the last four appear extremely
ascetic and do seem to reflect a monastic approach as per R. Kanarfogel, making
his hypothesis rather convincing.
FURTHER READING:
Jewish Education and Society in the High Middle Ages, by Ephraim Kanarfogel. Detroit. Wayne State University Press.
Michal Bar-Asher Siegal. Shared Worlds: Rabbinic and Monastic
Literature. Ben Gurion University.
No comments:
Post a Comment