427) Keset haSofer: The story behind the guide to writing a Sefer Torah

 

A manuscript on Bava Batra in the handwriting of R. Shlomo Ganzfried (1804-1886)

I came across a fascinating piece of little-known Halachic history uncovered by Hadassah Wendl who is a PhD researcher on Halakhic history at the Free University of Berlin. It’s about how a now well-known guide to writing a Sefer Torah, entitled Keset haSofer (The Scribe's Inkwell), came to be. 

Before R. Shlomo Ganzfried (1804-1886) became the famous author of the Kitzur Shulchan Aruch (Abridged Code of Jewish Law) he was a businessman in Eastern Hungary, selling wines. One day, while looking at some books in a Jewish bookshop in Debrecen, in Hungary’s Northern Great Plain region, he chanced upon a book entitled Bnei Yona. 

426) Developing R. Hayim Soloveitchick's view on the "controlling role of the text"

 

Introduction 

This article, based extensively on the research by Professor Adiel Schremer,[1] explores the rather provocative notion that contemporary religious Judaism has adopted a new approach which was unknown to previous generations. Schremer builds on the thought and observations of Rabbi Professor Hayim Soloveitchick[2] (the only son of R. Joseph Ber Soloveitchick, known as the Rav, who served as Rosh Yeshiva at Yeshiva University) who maintained this was due to an unhealthy obsession with the text - and he shows historical parallels of similar elevation of 'text above tradition' which were always reactionary to the former tradition.

425) Challenging G-d in rabbinic writings

 

Tanchuma-Yelammedeinu named after the common phrase Yelamedeinu rabbeinu: "Let our master teach us." 

Introduction 

This article is based extensively on the research by Professor Dov Wiess[1] and discusses the changing rabbinic perspectives on the permissibility, or otherwise, of arguing with, or challenging G-d. The Torah is replete with references to Avraham, Moshe, Job, Jeremiah, Habakkuk and even some Psalms challenging and protesting various actions of G-d. Talmudic and Midrashic literature followed on a similar path by an expansion of this style of protest writing, where the rabbis placed additional confrontational words into the mouths of the biblical characters they commented upon. Thus, biblical and rabbinic literature is overwhelmingly in favour of humans directing challenges to G-d when they feel they have been unjustly treated. These bold and challenging rabbinic texts flourish and peak particularly at the end of the Talmudic period (around the seventh century). 

424) Avraham Ibn Chasdai's references to 'a certain Chacham'

 

The thirteenth-century Moznei Tzedek by R. Avraham bar Chasdai,

Introduction 

I have based parts of this article on the research presented in ‘Judaism Adventures,’ and have additionally included some of the original Hebrew texts as well as other observations. For contextualisation, I have drawn on Peter Cole’s The Dream and the Poem.[1] 

Sefer Moznei Tzedek is a fascinating thirteenth-century work by R. Avraham bar Chasdai, also known as Ibn Chasdai, which gives us a rare window into rabbinical writings from around the time of Maimonides. Like Maimonides, Ibn Chasdai quotes Aristo (Aristotle) and he also is well-acquainted with Islamic teachings. He even cites sections of the Quran. 

Ibn Chasdai, was a staunch follower of Maimonides, and fought against R. Yehuda ibn Alfakhar and R. Meir haLevi Abulafia to withdraw their opposition to the Moreh Nevuchim (Guide for the Perplexed). This is interesting because Ibn Chasdai went on adapt or translate a work by the Islamic mystic, al-Ghazali, which we shall soon explore. 

423) Maimonides calls the belief in Angels an “evil and blind foolishness”

 

Introduction 

By all accounts, Maimonides (1135/8-1204) had some interesting views on Angels. He certainly did not view angels the same way as most other rabbis did, especially the mystics. In this article, although the style is somewhat cumbersome, we turn to Maimonides’ text in Moreh Nevuchim (Guide for the Perplexed 2:6) to see his actual words describing his position. 

The first challenge often posed to Rambam’s view that angels do not exist as the spiritual beings most understand them to be, is that the Torah mentions angles in contexts that seem to support these popular conceptualisations. However, Rambam does not read angels that way. 

422) The opening and closing blessings of the Amidah have not changed for more than a thousand years?

 

The world's oldest siddur from about 1 200 years ago.

Introduction

This article, based extensively on the research by Rabbi Professor Daniel Sperber,[1] looks at the popular perception that the daily prayer known as the Shemoneh Esrei, or Amidah − particularly the opening and closing blessings − have not changed an iota for more than a thousand years.

421) Hirsch, Hildesheimer and Hoffmann: Examining the boundaries of Orthodox modernity

R. Shimshon Refael Hirsch

R. Esriel Hildeshimer

R. David Tzvi Hoffmann

Introduction

R. Shimshon Refael Hirsch (1808-1888), R. Esriel Hildesheimer (1820-1899) and R. David Hoffman (1843-1921) were early protagonists of what has become known as the Modern Orthodox movement. There were, however, some major disputes between them. This article, based extensively on the research by Professor David Ellenson and Dr Richard Jacobs,[1] looks at some of the differences between these early Modern Orthodox rabbis. 

420) Alleged recruiting methodologies of the early Chassidic movement

 

The Autobiography of Solomon Maimon

Introduction

This article, based extensively on the research by Professor Immanuel Etkes,[1] looks at the recruiting processes and other activities of the two early Chassidic courts of R. Dov Ber, known as the Magid of Mezrich, and R. Chaim Chaikel of Amdur. Etkes bases himself on two separate texts allegedly presenting an ‘inside view’ and a personal account of the internal world of early Chassidim. 

419) Priestly politics, Calendar wars and early Jewish mysticism

 

The Dead Sea Scrolls from around the 3rd century BCE to the 1st century CE

Introduction

The Hebrew Calendar that we use today has undergone some dramatic transformation over time. What is most interesting is it seems that control over the calendars was often directly related to control over mysticism. In this article, based extensively on the research by Professor Rachel Lior,[1] we examine some of the fascinating developments of the Hebrew Calendar. Much of this information has only come to light in relatively recent times. It must be emphasised that these are Elior's views and not everyone necessarily agrees with the position she takes. Nonetheless, her observations are of great interest.

418) Sefer Chassidim: A little-known, unpublished and anonymous anti-Chassidic manuscript from 1818

 

The anonymous anti-Chassidic polemic, Sefer Chassidim, 1818

Introduction

If you are interested in texts and manuscripts with their varying Hashkafot (worldviews), then you may find the anonymous 1818 work, entitled Sefer Chassidim[1] to be of interest. This little-known work, a polemic (theological argument) against Chassidism, is a challenge to some of the then-new principles of the Chassidic movement. The manuscript was never published. In this article, based extensively on a review^[2] by Professor Jonatan Meir, we look at some of the content of this manuscript, without necessarily taking any one particular side. 

417) The shift from experiential Chassidism to an expansion of Chassidic literature.

  

Toledot Yakov Yosef (1817 edition) by R. Yakov Yosef of Polonnoye.

Introduction

This article, based extensively on the research by Professor Zeev Gries, deals with the often-overlooked role of the editor in producing Chassidic texts and in communicating Chassidic doctrines.[1] Many are familiar with the impressive stories of the great Rebbes but very little is known about the: 

“scribes, copyists, editors, and printers who, for better or for worse, have determined the shape in which hasidic tradition has come down to us and dictated the course and pace of its transmission” (Gries 1996:141). 

We shall also examine how these editors helped shift Chassidism from what started out as an experiential movement with little concern for an authoritative literature, to one that is today defined by this very literature. 

416) What really happened on the last Friday night in Kotzk?

 

A letter written by the Kotzker Rebbe's son, R. David in 1855. It was penned during the period of his father's seclusion and R. David requests from one of the followers: “that he help...to collect the debts from our people, for the house of [our master, my father..] may he live long, good days…and Hashem should give him success.”

Introduction

This article, based extensively on the research by Dr Morris Faierstein examines the various accounts of the last night the Kotzker Rebbe spent with his followers in Kotzk.[1] 

The popular version

The popular version of the story goes like this: One Friday night in 1839, R. Menachem Mendel of Kotzk (1789-1859) sat with his followers and in front of them he either smoked a pipe or extinguished the Shabbat candles, proclaiming “Leit din veleit Dayan,” (there is no Law and there is no Judge). Thereafter he excused himself from the gathering and secluded himself (or was forced into seclusion by his family) for the next twenty years until his passing in 1859. 

Faierstein, however, presents a series of the written accounts that led to this popular version and deconstructs them in an attempt to better understand the evolutionary process behind this story. We will look at six different written sources to see how they depicted the alleged events of that ‘last night in Kotzk.’