The Jewish History Channel

Karaites, Samaritans and praying with a ‘minyan’. An Attempt at a Samaritan-Karaite Alliance in the 19th Century

2012-01-26T12:12:00.003-05:00

at my new blog

Anan ben David and his Descendants, Part I

2012-01-21T21:31:00.002-05:00

NOTE: This post is unfinished. There is much more material to be added, but this should suffice for now.

Anan ben David is generally regarded as one of the most important (if not the most important) figure in the Karaite movement. Although he is often mistakenly referred to as the founder of it, he was in fact not. Nonetheless, he was, and continues to be, highly venerated by most Karaite communities- especially those of the Near East. This veneration stemmed from the fact that he was the first of the non-Rabbanites to supply a Halakhic manual for the movement (called ספר המצוות The Book of Precepts) and secondly (and perhaps more importantly) he was from the line of the exilarchs-direct descendants of the Royal house of Judah and of the seed of King David.

At the close of the 19th century, Most near eastern Karaites found themselves in 2 locations: Cairo and Istanbul. Apparently through a dual process of intimidation and wanting to be close to a Karaite community, the ancient Karaite communities of Persia, Syria, and most of Iraq (except for a tiny community that remained on the shores of the Euphrates, in Al-Hit) beacame empty of its inhabitants. The Karaites of Crimea and Eastern Europe (referred to in Hebrew as קראי קדר) were facing their own challenges, as their leaders sought it best to completely disassociate themselves from their Jewish co-religionists to avoid anti-semitic persecution. Undoubetedly at the close of the 19th century, the center of Karaite Jewish life was in Egypt. There too one can find the descendants of Anan ben David. In the genealogical scroll preserved by members of his family, it appears that most of them migrated to Egypt from Babylonia. Anan himself is said to have immigrated (fled?)to the Land of Israel and founded a Synagogue in Jerusalem that bears his name to this day, although there is no proof of that. The original Karaite Synagogue was also not originally founded in its current location.

Of Anan's descendants, a scant few made their mark on the movement. His son Saul, appears to have been very active in spreading Karaitism. A grandson Boaz wrote a small treatise on consanguineous marriages (known in Hebrew as 'shitat harikuv') which is quoted by other Karaite scholars. His son David b. Boaz wrote some commentaries on the scriptures ,of which fragments are extant. It is worth mentioning that Rabbanite families of high standing had no compunctions marrying the children of the Karaite exilarchs. Some even intermarried into Geonic (Heads of Babylonian Yeshibhot) families. The lines between Karaites and Rabbanites were very much not delineated until much later.

The pedigree chart pictured (bottom) is housed in the Karaite Museum in the Old City of Jerusalen and was copied from an earlier scroll (top), that was originally (apparently) composed in the year 1616 and transcribed (as is written in the colophon on the bottom), by one Moshe Yehuda Mizrahi of Jerusalem in the year 1763 in honor of Abraham Firkovich, perhaps during his visit there in the early 9th century(?).

The newer copy was commissioned for the occasion of the circumcision ceremony in a Cairo Synagogue, of Shlomo the son of Eliyahu Hanassi, known as 'liato' in 1948- the same year the State of Israel was born.

The family is still known to this day by their surname Al-Nassi, some of whom, upon their immigration from Egypt, settled in the Karaite Moshav Mazliah near the city of Ramla in Central Israel.

Picante anecdote: a close friend of mine from Mazliah related to me that one of his pupils in his early years as a teacher in the Moshav was a member of this family. Upon me asking him, what kind of student he was, he smiled as he recalled the young lad's smug sense of self, "listen", the kid would say "I am a direct descendant of King David, I will remember you as not too bad of a teacher and nothing more"....

A possible order of Karaite Rashei Galuta that I found on the net (I haven't checked if it corresponds to the scroll):

Anan ben David.................................760-c. 800
Anan was the acknowledged heir of Isaac Iskoy I but was passed over (possibly because of his unorthodox beliefs) in favor of his brother Hananiah. He declared himself Exilarch and eventually had his sect recognized by the Caliphate as a separate religious community (though neither the Karaites nor the Ananites claimed that they were not Jews).
Saul ben Anan...............................c. 800-early 800's
Josiah ben Saul
Jehoshaphat ben Josiah
Boaz ben Jehoshaphat...........................mid-late 900's
Abu Sa'id David ben Boaz.......................993-early 1000's
Solomon ben David
Hezekiah ben Solomon
Hasdai ben Hezekiah
Solomon ben Hasdai.............................fl. c. 1200 ?
In the 1000's the Karaites reached the peak of their influence, and to some it seemed that Karaism was about to supplant Rabbinic Judaism as the dominant sect within world Jewry. The sect began to decline, however, particularly after the Crusades when many communities were destroyed. Scattered remnants of the kehilla (community) continued to exist, primarily in Egypt, the Holy Land, western Anatolia, the Crimea, and parts of Lithuania. Today there are only a few thousand Karaites in the entire world, most of them living in Israel.

To Pray at Graves or Not to Pray at Graves?

2011-12-20T22:09:00.002-05:00

here

Check out my new post on the possible origins of tefillin

2011-11-06T12:23:00.002-05:00

at my new blog.

This blog is moving!

2011-11-01T03:05:00.002-04:00

Due to the problems with blogger, I have decided to relocate to http://toldotyisrael.wordpress.com/
Hope to see you there:)

Joel

This Blog is Moving!

2011-11-01T02:55:00.003-04:00

Due to the many problems I have been experiencing lately with blogger, I have decided to relocate to wordpress. Please visit and comment on my new blog at http://toldotyisrael.wordpress.com/
Hope to see you there!

Joel

The True Origin of the Karaite Movement, Part I

2011-10-26T13:51:00.002-04:00

In the recent Summer, 2011 issue of the magazine REFORM JUDAISM (the official publication of the Union of Reform Judaism), columnist Chaya Burstein seeks to condense the most important events in Jewish history and gets some things right but some important details dreadfully wrong.

It's annoying enough when obviously biased writers (such as Berel Wein and Lawrence Keleman) give a completely warped view of the history of the development of Karaite Judaism (see here and here), but it's doubly annoying when representatives of liberal streams of Judaism-and the supposed ethos of scholarly objectivity that they so often champion, do the same.

Burstein in her column The Ever-Evolving Faith (p.43), writes:

A challenge to the Talmud's authority arose when the Babylonian Jewish leader Anan ben David rejected the extra biblical laws and opinions that Rabbinic Judaism had developed. Insisting that only the original Torah was God's word, he accused the Rabbis teaching Talmud of being impostors and hypocrites. Ben david believed that Judaism's purpose was to prepare for the final redemption. So long as Jews remained in exile, they needed to mourn the loss of their land and temple. Storming into holiday parties wearing his dark cloak of mourning (source?!) he scolded the celebrants, "How can you laugh and drink wine? Our Temple is destroyed. Our land lies desolate. Blow out the candles! Douse the oil lamps! We must sit in the dark on Shabbat as the Torah commands. We must pray for God's forgiveness and obey every letter of every law in the Torah. Only then will we bring the redemption".
A large group of followers called Karaites gathered around Anan ben David. Some found the Torah easier to follow than the commentaries and interpretations of the contentious Rabbis of the Talmud.
Again Jews faced a choice. Should they try to live within the limits imposed by the Torah? Should they sit in the dark on shabbat or enjoy the holiday by the light of a previously lit Shabbat lamp, as the Rabbis suggested? Should they dedicate their lives, studies, and prayers to bringing redemption or should they enjoy God's gifts of life, family, community and prayer?
The continued practice of Karaism with its focus on a destroyed Temple and hopes for redemption might have led the Jews into a dead end. Rabbinic Judaism, in contrast, gave Jews guidance in adapting to new environments as well as philosophical tools to compete with Christianity and Islam. A majority of Jews chose to go forward. Karaism was eventually reduced to small sects of purists

There are several problems with Burstein's thesis. Her linear simplistic view of the development of Judaism as we know it, is just that: simplistic- almost child-like. The notion that Anan ben David and his supposed movement, "the karaites" grew out of a vacuum (ex-nihilo)-and challenged what was hitherto the norm, is wrong and goes against scholarly consensus. All competent historians agree that Anan ben David was not the founder of what we now refer to as Karaite Judaism, neither was he accepted as an authentic scripturalist by many early Karaites (like Benjamin Nahawendi). The truth is far more nuanced than that described by Burstein. The following are excerpts of a much larger article I am working on, which will attempt to trace the beginnings of Karaism and more importantly to burst the many silly myths about their origin and practice.

Leon Nemoy, a foremost expert on Karaism and author of the highly acclaimed Karaite Anthology (Yale University Press, 1987) XV-XVI:

The Arab conquest of the 7th century rapidly consolidated into a far-flung empire, brought nearly all Jewish centers of that period under the control and influence of islam. The most important of these centers of medieval jewery; the mainspring of Jewish learning, culture and authority, had long since been anchored in Iraq, the ancient Babylonia.

...the conquest and pacification of the sparsely populated provinces in the east and north (Xurasan, Gibal, Adarbaygan, Armenia, etc.), and their incorporation into the Arab state opened a vast territory for immigration and made possible an exodus for discontented elements among the Iraqi Jews for new homes on the frontier. Like all such movements this emigration was undoubtedly composed of mainly of self-reliant and venturesome individuals, and the mountainous character of their new homelands caused them to acquire quickly the mountaineers desire to be left alone to live in his fashion. The remoteness of these frontier settlements from the metropolitan centers of Iraq made them practically independent, in both religious and secular matters from exilarchic and geonic authority.

For their own religious platform the Jewish frontiersmen had a ready made example-the ancient and never entirely suppressed opposition (represented in earlier times by the Saduccee faction) to the validity of the post-biblical law based on oral tradition and codified in the Talmud and to the authority of its official administrators and interpreters in Iraq.

All these influences by their combined action, produced at a very early date the principles common to a large number of schismatic movements, which eventually through a long process of elimination and consolidation, formed the Karaite sect: first the rejection of the validity of the Talmud, whose adherents were now called rabbanites, i.e., partisans of the Talmudic rabbis; second, the disinclination inspired no doubt by their grievances against the Iraqi religious and secular officials, to recognize a permanent authority of a religious leader, or of a succession of leaders, and the insistence on the freedom of each individual to interpret the bible –the sole repository of law- in the light of his own understanding and judgement; third, a fervid messianic nationalism, impatient of the seeming endless delay in the redemption and restoration of Israel; fourth, a strong flavor of unworldly asceticism; and fifth, an acute sense of social justice and opposition to economic inequality and oppression.

Nemoy goes on to list various sectarian leaders and describes Anan as the individual to whom fell "The honor of supplying a (first) pioneer manual of non-rabbanite theology" (p. XVIII) to those groups who were unwilling to accept the hegemony of the main Talmudical Academies of Sura and Pumbeditha (both moved to Baghdad after the Arab conquest in the 7th century).

Nemoy describes Anan as "a learned and cultured Iraqi of aristocratic Rabbanite descent who flourished in the seventh decade of the 8th century" (Ibid). Similarly he does away with the silly (but widely accepted notion) that he founded a splinter movement because of a personal slight; Nemoy: "How he came to break with the faith of his fathers we do not know but it seems certain that it was not the result of angry disappointment over the failure of his candidacy for the office of Exilarch, as the traditional Rabbanite account would have it (Ibid).

As mentioned earlier, there seemed to have always existed groups of Jews who did not accept the legitimacy of the rabbis to enact new legislation or abrogate old ones (from approx the year 70-200 CE we find only approximately 120 tannaitic sages/Pharissees that are mentioned in the Mishna. It is highly possible that they did not represent the majority of the Jewish population of their own time) Anan ben David was hardly a pioneer in this respect. Moreover, it is important to point out that ben David never fully broke with his Rabbanite roots and still held on to some purely Rabbinic traditions (such as the 13 hermeneutical principles which are traditionally attributed to the Tannaitic sage R' Ishmael --see beginning of the Rabbinic compendium "Sifra"). For that and some of his other beliefs he was often harshly critizied by Karaites (both his contemporaries and those who succeeded him). It also important to point out that Anan ben David did not found a new movement because of some alleged slight on the part of the Geonic Rabbis, as the common myth alleges (see later) and although initially not accepted by all Karaites as a legitimate arbiter of Torah law, he was undoubtedly a charismatic leader and the fact that he came from the princely house of David only enhanced his stature among his followers who were originally referred to as 'ananites'-not 'karaites'.

Bernard Revel, rector of the Orthodox Yeshiva University in his The Karaite Halakah and its Relation to Sadducean, Samaritan and Philonian Halakah, (Philadelphia, 1913): "The question of the origin of Karaism, its causes and early development is still awaiting solution. That Karaism is not the result of Anan's desire to revenge himself on Babylonian official Jewry, need not be said."

Similarly:
Ankori, Zvi. Karaites in Byzantium, p.15:

The historicity of Anan’s Davidic genealogy and his eligibility for the exilarchic office seems to have been unduly impugned by recent scholars. Of course, the familiar Rabbanite story, which would explain Karaite rebellion merely in terms of a private vengeance by Anan for alleged Geonic interference with his right to exilarchic succession, should rightly be rejected.

Yoram Erder in his recently published אבלי ציון, הקראים ומגילות קומראן
(הקיבוץ המאוחד, Tel Aviv : ha-Ḳibuts ha-meʼuḥad, 2004.)
p.14:

"Anan ben David’s movement was preceded by many sects that set the stage for its creation".

and again on p. 38:
"It is wrong to attribute the creation of the Karaite sect to Anan ben David".

On p. 39:
"The earliest sources make a clear distinction between the Karaites and the Ananites who were followers of Anan and were formed 100 years after the latter’s death."

On p. 41:
"Anan sprung out of the Rabbanites and was not related to the schismatic sects that were active in his time."

On the alleged connection between the Dead Sea Sect (Qumran) and the Karaites, see also Naphtali Wieder's The Judean Scrolls and Karaism (Published by the Yad ben Zvi Institute), where he posits that there were important parallels between the Dead Sea Scrolls and early Karaite literature (mainly of the 9th-11th centuries). These parallels manifested themselves in terminology, general concepts, and imagery. In his opinion, even if a direct historical link between both these sectarian-ideological movements was difficult to prove, it was possible that the Karaites borrowed from the Dead Sea literature during the early Middle Ages, when portions of the Qumran library came into their possession, such as the medieval copy of the Damascus Covenant (pictured above) found by Schechter in the Cairo Geniza. see here

Michael Korinaldi in his book מעמד האישי של הקראים pp. 15-16:
"There seems to be a consensus both among the early Rabbanite (esp. Raabad) as well as Karaite source that the Karaites did not spring out of nowhere in the days of Anan."

He continues in a similar vein on p. 17:

We don’t know for sure the extent of the influence of the Dead Sea Scroll sect on the Karaites, however it’s reasonable to say that during the times of the Talmud and afterwards, there existed sects who opposed the authority of the Rabbis to legislate new laws and rejected their interpretation of the Torah.

Did liberal minded German Jews look to Karaism for Inspiration? Are (some of) the Roots of Reform Judaism to be found in Karaism?

Ironically, Reform Judaism may owe its early beginnings to Karaitism. At the end of the 19th century when forces of liberalism were steadily making their way into the Synagogue, the presence of Karaites on the European continent did not go completely unnoticed. See for instance the accompanying scan (courtesy of www.onthemainline.blogspot.com ) which appeared as a notice in a publication called The Peculiar People published by a Christian Missionary organization based in Jerusalem during that period.

Close and often warm relations existed between Eastern European Karaites and Maskilim- liberal minded Jews. This was especially true in places like Austrian-occupied Galicia, where jews availed themselves of the civic freedoms afforded to them by the Kaiser Franz Josef I. One of the foremost maskilim of that era and area, Nachman Korchmal forged a close friendship with the Karaite cantor of the local town of Kuzikow, David ben Mordechai, author of Semmah David and also with the important Karaite leader Abraham Leonowicz of Halicz. Krochmal was harshly castigated for these ties by local ultra-traditionalist Jews, when the correspondence between them came to light.

On the preceding episode, The Karaites of Galicia: an ethnoreligious minority among the Ashkenazim By Mikhail Kizilov, p. 224-5:

According to Reuven Fahn , (another well known maskil and writer), Kuzikow was the first Karaite savant to establish close links with the Galician maskilim (David may have inherited his friendly attitude to the Rabbanites from his father, Mordechai ben Nisan who mentioned that it was Rabanite Jews who had taught him the Hebrew Bible and literature. David’s sons continued the family tradition of maintaining close contacts with the Rabbanites. This is why it was the Rabbanite scholar David Maggid who edited a collection of David Kuzikow’s writings; Semah David (St. Petersburg, 1897) and achieve a proper understanding of Rabbinic literature, the Talmud and Haskalah. In many of his writings, Kuzikow referred with deep respect to the Talmudic scholars and their works.

The history of his friendly correspondence with Krochmal was soon marred by an unpleasant episode with clearly shows the complexity of relations not only between the Karaites and Rabbanites but also between the maskilim and other Rabbanite Jews. Approximately from 1814 to 1816 Kuzikow accidentally gave some of his letters to the local hassidic jews. The latter when they discovered that Krochmal’s epistles were full of praise for the Karaite hazzan, copied and publicized these letters. They apparently tried to compromise Krochmal and suggest his deviation from the norms of Judaism and Jewish religious law. The matter was especially sensitive because at the same time the Rabbanite authorities of Lwow imposed a herem (ban) on some maskilim.

While being understandably vexed by these complications, Krochmal did not change his positive views of the Karaites. He mentioned that they believed in the same written law as the Rabbanites, the coming of the Messiah, the resurrection of the dead, and other articles of Jewish creed. Moreover, in spite of the fact that their forefathers rejected the Talmud, in his time many Karaites approached the study of the Oral Law (Torah she-be-al pe, i.e. the Talmud). Krochmal suggested in his letter that the Karaites should be given hope that some day they would join their Rabbanite brethren and there would be no division between these two branches of Israel.

As has been mentioned, Krochmal also maintained contacts with another important Karaite leader, Abraham Leonowicz. During half a century of his tenure in the office of leader of the Halicz community, Leonowicz kept up relations with many Rabbanite thinkers, who later mentioned him in their writings: Isaac Samuel Reggio of Gorizia, Samson Halevi, Luzzatto, Bloch, Geiger and Daniel Hartenstein, to name a few. Abraham Geiger (1810-1874) one of the most famous German maskilim received from Leonowicz a manuscript copy of Mikhtav Ahuz by the Rabbanite scholar Joseph-Solomon of Crete (Yashar Delmedigo- who himself entertained pro-Karaite sympathies), which he published in 1840.
This again shows that the Karaites eagerly read and copied Rabbanite manuscripts-and, moreover, they were the only possessors of some unique manuscripts penned by European Rabbanite scholars. As was mentioned above, Leonwitz’s tenure in the Hazzan’s office was marred by a few conflicts with the Rabbanites. This is why, perhaps, Reuven Fahn came to the conclusion that Leonowicz “did not reach the spiritual state of David Kuzikow” in his relations with the maskilim.

See ibid footnote 135: On the general attitude of the maskilim to the Karaites, see Reuven Fahn, “Maskilei Yisrael ve-hakhmei Miqra,: in KRF, 65-1411, on Galicia especially, pp. 118-122; Israel Bartal, “Ha-Haskalah be-Eirpoah ve-ha-Qaraim: dimmui u-mesi’utm”, in the Proceedings of 11th World Congress of Jewish Studies 2:2 (Jerusalem, 1994), 15-22: idem, “The Karaites in Eastern Europe and Jewish Enlightenment,” in Karaites in Eastern Europe in the Last Generations. Proceedings of the First International Karaite colloquium, ed. Dan Shapira et al. (Jerusalem, 2008) (in the press); Balaban, “Karaici,” 22; Iris Parush, “Another look at ‘The life of ‘Dead’ Hebrew’. Intentional Ignorance of Hebrew in Nineteenth-Century Eastern European Jewish Society,” Book History 7 (2004): 197, 199-200.

The whole Krochmal Karaite controversy is narrated in detail in Krochmal’s letter to Zeev-Wolf Shiff of 1816 (Krochmal Kitvei, 413-416). This period was the time of ideological struggle among maskilim, Orthodox Jews and Hassidim.

More on these tries from Avraham Firkowicz in Istanbul: 1830-1832 : paving the way for Turkic nationalism By Dan Shapira
pp. 13-14:

During the late 1820s Jewish maskilim from Central Europe and prominent figures in the wissenshcfat des judentum began to show a keen interest in things Karaite, in this they were following the earlier Christian, especially missionary model. The trend expressed itself for example in the correspondence between Mordechai Jost, a distinguished Jewish-German historian, and Simcha Babowitz, or in M. Steinschneider’s edition of the works of Caleb Afendopolo, one of the most important Karaite religious authorities from the early Ottoman period; and in the contacts between Besalel Stern, a leading Russian Maskil, with connections to the authorities, and the Crimean Karaites, including particularly (Abraham) Firkowitz. Especially noteworthy is Stern who was asked by leading European-Jewish scholars to collect information on the Karaites in Southern Russia. Born in Brody, in Austrian Galicia, the city of the afotre-mentioned distinguished Jewish thinker, Nahman Krochmal, whose pupil he was, Stern was appointed in the late 1820s to supervise the famous Odessa Jewish seminary established in 1826. This seminary served as a flagship of the radical Russian maskilim; stern also served as the relgiou head of the Brody emigrants in Odessa leaning toward Reform Judaism and prior to the establishment of the famous Brody Synagogue in Odessa religious services were held in his house.

By the same token, from the 1840's into the early 20th century, many reform communities and thinkers of the English- speaking world would be better described as Neo-Karaites, as they were as horrified by what they called "Liberal Judaism".

See for instance David Woolf Marks' 1843 Siddur that he arranged for the West London Synagogue for British Jews, which was based on the same principles of the Karaite siddur (but without directly mentioning or even being fully aware of it). See here especially the introduction where he poses an eloquent defense of using the Scriptures as the only infallible source of doctrine and liturgy.

Here's a link to Vol 5 of the Siddur (which contains services for the annual fast days, besides services for: circumcision, Pidyon HaBen, Naming a Girl, Burial, Mourning, and Funerals):

It is interesting to note that WLS was the first Reform Synagogue in England, and had several famous members who promoted Tanakh-based Reformed Judaism ('mosaism' as they called it back then), among whom were Moses Mocatta, the Sephardic Jew who translated perhaps the most well-known Karaite work in the world, into the English language: Sefer Hizzuq Emunah.

See also Jakob Petuchowski's article, "Karaite Tendencies in an Early Reform Haggadah." in the Hebrew Union College Annual 31 (1960): 223-49.

How Reform Viewed Karaitism in the 20th Century

This pro-Karaite trend among liberal Jews continued even much later; in 1979, following the Israel-Egypt peace accords, a group of Rabbis, comprising the Reform, Conservative and Orthodox denominations, along with some wealthy and influential Jews paid a visit to Cairo. What followed was comical but also quite telling.

S. from onthemainline blog writes:

..... One of the laymen, businessman and bibliophile Manfred R. Lehmann felt that he witnessed some boorish and appalling behavior on the tour..... and he sent a letter to Conservative Judaism, which they declined to publish. So he sent it to the (Orthodox publication) Jewish Observer, which delightedly published it.

Here is a part of it:

". . . Your readers may be interested in the reaction of an Orthodox person traveling for the first time at close range with Conservative and Reform rabbis. Here are some examples of my experiences, and impressions . . .

"1. When I had located the Karaite community in Cairo and reported this to the group, there ensued enough interest among its members to sacrifice a half hour of the time allocated for the Sphinx and the Pyramids, for a quick breezer through the Karaite main synagogue and community buildings. But by contrast, when I had located the Beth Hamidrash of Maimonides in the Old City -- and this was a most difficult task in itself -- and then, full of excitement, told the group about my discovery, not one member (to my utter amazement, bordering on disbelief) was interested in paying a visit to this hollowed (sic) shrine of Jewish scholarship. Could it be that Conservative and Reform rabbis feel more kinship with the Karaites, than with one of the greatest personalities normative Judaism has produced since the close of the Talmud?"

There is no doubt that liberal German-Jewish leaders looked beyond their narrow confines to redefine Judaism. In addition to their looking toward the "Jewish-Spanish Golden Age", for a working model (see my post on that here) , they also looked to Karaite Judaism for inspiration. Their view of Karaism, was very much unlike that of Mrs. Burstein's, that is Karaism as a rigorous movement of unflinching conservatives, but rather as a movement that had fiercely guarded its independence and was unwilling to bend under the yoke of Rabbis [maskilim often suggested that the rest of European Jewry should take the non-Talmudic Karaites as an example worthy of being imitated] (see Kizilov p. 231).

In addition to their independent nature, Karaites had always nurtured a strong sense of social justice ('tikkun olam', literally, 'repairing the world' would later become the catchphrase of all liberal Jewish movements). It is fair to say that Karaism was way ahead of its time on many issues that would later became lightning rod issues for movements such as Reform, especially the rights of women, non-Jews (there is no concepts of a 'shabbos goy' for instance), the poor and under-privileged (see Nemoy, xvi) and can also (arguably) be described as the forerunners of the Zionist movement (see for instance Hakham Daniel al-Kumisi's "Appeal to the Karaites of the Dispersion to Come and Settle in Jerusalem" in Nemoy, p. 34).

Karaism had also often been quite practical, much to the surprise of their detractor, tying to reconcile advances in technology with the tenets of their faith. Although not without controversy, the very colorful Hakham Tobias Levi Babovich (see the 2 volume biography on him by Yusef El-Gamil here), the last of the Egyptian Karaite Hakhamim permitted the driving of an automobile on holidays. In addition, Karaite innovative Halakha made it possible for courts to adjudicate issues of divorce in the case of a recalcitrant husband, thus eliminating the problem of agunah.

During the Middle Ages, there was also plenty of cross-pollination (not to mention intermarriage) between the 2 communities. The notion that the 2 communities developed completely independent of each other is a mistaken one. One common Rabbanite custom that possibly has its roots in Karaitism (according to some opinions), is holding (and kissing) ones sissith during keriath shema (see Beth Yosef on Tur, Orah Hayyimm simman 24, where he quotes the geonic sages Natronai and Moshe on this).

Much like Karaites, the Reform movement consciously or unconsciously, in its early stages returned to a more scripture-based Judaism, rejecting for instance the Rabbinic interpretation of Tefillin (metaphorical rather than tangible) [though the issue of tefillin among Reformers has become an issue of controversy over the last several years, see here , here and here]

The same goes for the issue of patrilineal descent, where liberal streams of Judaism adopted a modified non-Rabbinic approach.

When researching the history of Karaites, both ancient and modern, (but especially the latter) a picture emerges very much unlike the one described by Mrs. Burstein. Although Karaite Jews have been reduced to a tiny, almost inconsequential sect, they are not your grandmothers Karaites anymore. Instead of a group of morbid ascetics sitting on cold hard stone floors in the dark on the sabbath and eating cold food, we see a contemporary community here that seeks to modernize and become more practical. One may even observe that it is currently flourishing to some extent, with more than a dozen Synagogues (several of them built in the just the past several years) youth groups, adult study groups and a ready willingness to incorporate modern technology to meet their religious needs. On the subject of light on the Sabbath, for instance, A US-based Karaite Hakham put it to me best: "That is why I have (use) batteries and fluorescent lights. God did not command us “Thou shalt sit in the dark”, but, rather, “You shall not cause fire to burn”. It would seem an imperative to always increase our knowledge and use that knowledge to help us keep Torah."

Perhaps what attracted enlightened Jewish thinkers most to the Karaites was their free-thinking nature. A cardinal principle of early Karaism (and a popular saying among Karaites still) is the following, which is attributed to Anan ben David:

חפישו באורייתא שפיר ואל תשענו על דעתי
"Search diligently in the Torah and don't rely on my opinion."

Perhaps this saying would serve Burstein well; to search diligently not only in the Torah but also in the writings of our history, as well as examine current reality more closely.

What is חנוכה Doing in a Karaite Siddur?

2011-10-10T13:24:00.005-04:00

In the Karaite version of a יזכור/מי שברך prayer for important personages in Karaite history (it is found in the section of the Sabbath Torah reading) we find:

אלהינו ואלהי אבותינו ירחם את מתינו ואת מתיכם ואת מתי כלל כל עמו בית ישראל: בראש ובתחלה לרבנו ענן הנשיא איש האלהים ראש הגולה אשר פתח את דרך התורה והאיר עיני בני מקרא ורבים השיב מעוון ומעבירה...ילנהו במלון טוב...ועם שבע כתות הצדיקים הנוחלים בגן עדן ויקים עליו מקרא שכתוב והיה ביום ההוא שורש ישי אשר עמד כו' והיתה מנוחתו כבוד...ויתן עז למלכו וירם קרן משיחו...ועוד יקים עליו מקרא שכתוב...ותעמוד לרגלך לקץ הימין

זכר צדיקים לברכה וזכר ישרים ונבונים וטהורים וקדושים לברכה: וכן זכר כלל משכילנו משכילי הגלות זכרונם לברכה ולתחיה: וכן זכר שלשת הצדיקים הנוחלים בגן עדן: כבוד הרב ר אפרים וכבוד הרב ר אלישע וכבוד הרב רבי חנכה זכרונם לברכה ולתחיה...ועם שבע כתות הנוחלים....

Later there are references to Saul, Nahawendi, Salmon b. Yeroham, Al- kirkisani, Yefet b, Eli and his son Levi, David Hanassi (a descendant of Anan), Yoseph Ha-roeh, Nissi ben Noah, Sahl b. Mazliah, Yeshua b. Yehuda, Yehuda Hadassi, and others.

It continues:

…זכרון טוב חן וחסד ורחמים..על כל מתי קהילנו..ישראלים כהנים לויים וגרי הצדק והאמת שעברו מן העולם הזה יזכרם ברצון עמו ויפקדם בישועתו ....

ימהר קיצתם ויפתח קברם במהרה וינערם מעפרם וישמחם בבנין בית מקדשו....

2).

I was told by a member of the Egyptian Karaite community in Israel that Rabbis Elisha, Efraim and Hannukah, who merited a separate berkaha in this prayer, were converts to Karaite Judaism. Whether these were gentile converts or former Rabbanites is unclear. Perhaps a search for other instances where the unusual name of the latter appears, may provide some valuable clues.

The Khazars and the Karaites

An alleged Karaite-Khazar connection is a subject that still arouses passionate debate among scholars and laymen

The standard Karaite position has been that the Khazars initially converted to Karaite Judaism under the tutelage of a Karaite Hakham Isaac Sangari. Firkovitch claimed to have found the grave of Sangari and his wife in Chufut Qale. Other scholars dispute that and claim Sangari is a fictitious character.

The latter claim is ludicrous since he is mentioned by quite a few Rabbanite medieval sage (such as Raabad). Whether Sangari was a Karaite, converted the Khazars to Karaite Judaism, and was buried in Chufut Qale is open to debate.

I don't reject out of hand the possibility the Khazars were originally converted to Karaism, but I am fairly certain that they Rabbanized pretty rapidly. My proof is in the very names the Royal family chose for themselves, namely the personal name 'hanukkah', a holiday that is completely foreign to Karaites (although I have come across a claim that I have been unable to verify thus far, that the Karaites of Istanbul did celebrate it). 3)

I would add that it is possible that the Khazar Khagan, Obadia who is referred to in the "Khazar Correspondence" as a major reformer may have introduced Rabbanism to his people. It is also possible (I am not sure if anyone ever put forth this theory before) that there were some Khazars who rejected these reforms and chose to stay Karaite. As a result the latter split off and relocated to Crimea (where they either founded the first Karaite community there or joined an already existing one).

Hannukah, this unusual given Jewish name (still common among Bukharian and Kavkazi Jews-- see here ,here , here, and here) may indicate that the Khazars followed Rabbinic rather than Karaite Judaism 4). Perhaps the name was a a loud endorsement of the 'reforms' undertaken by his father Obadiah; the latter is described in the correspondence of King Joseph to Hasdai Ibn Shaprut (circa 967) as "a reformer who built study houses for Torah, invited scholars and taught the people tanach, Mishna and Talmud".

The version of the correspondence reproduced in the Ben Yehuda Project, however gives the king's name as 'hanina' and not hannukah and mentions nothing about mishna and Talmud:

אַחַר הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵלֶּה עָמַד מֶלֶךְ מִבְּנֵי בָנָיו וּשְׁמוֹ עוֹבַדְיָה. צַדִּיק וְיָשָׁר, הוּא חִדֵּשׁ אֶת הַמַּמְלָכָה וְהֶעֱמִיד אֶת הַדִּין כַּדִּין וְכַהֲלָכָה, וְהוּא בָּנָה בָתֵּי כְנֵסִיּוֹת וּבָתֵּי מִדְרָשׁוֹת וְקִבֵּץ לָרֹב מֵחַכְמֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל. וַיִּתֵּן לָהֶם כֶּסֶף וְזָהָב לָרֹב וַיְפָרְשׁוּ לוֹ אַרְבָּעָה וְעֶשְׂרִים סְפָרִים וּמִשְׁנָה וְתַלְמוּד וּמַחֲזוֹרוֹת שֶׁל חַזָּנִים וְהָיָה יְרֵא אֱלֹהִים וְאוֹהֵב הַתּוֹרָה וְהַמִּצְווֹת, עֶבֶד מֵעַבְדֵי ה', רוּחַ ה' תְּנִיחֶנּוּ. וְאַחֲרָיו עָמַד חִזְקִיָּה בְּנוֹ וְאַחֲרָיו מְנַשֶׁה בְּנוֹ וְאַחֲרָיו עָמַד חֲנִינָא אֲחִי עוֹבַדְיָה וְיִצְחָק בְּנוֹ

Looks to me like an error but it is possible that it is based on a variant text of the MS. Most printed versions have 'hanukkah' (and -I think- the 'mishna and talmud' reference), like the following one

Notes:

1). עמוד שג -חלק א' ,סדר תפלות הקראים Published in Vienna, 1854

*Interesting to note that in the latest reprinting of the Karaite Siddur edited by Nehemia Gordon in Jerusalem 2001 (based on the Abraham Firkowitz Edition which was originally published in Vilna 1870--pictured), none of these blessings were reproduced.

2.) Fred Macdowell would have been delighted to find a bona fide Rabbinite name not in subscription lists but in the Karaite siddur, and in a very prominent section at that.

3). Someone by the name Kazimer Huberz posted the following: "A unique tradition among those descended from the Istanbul tradition of Qaraim is that we represent the remnant of HaLakhah Beth Shammai which opposed the Rabbinical Halakhah Beth Hillel. Observation of Hanukah is one such evidence for this tradition being true, as is standing during the shema..."

The above is a strange proposition, to be sure, but the theory that Karaites were sympathetic to the "shammaists"or even the remnants of that school, is reflected in several Karaite works.

4). See The Jews of Khazaria By Kevin Alan Brook p. 230
see also this book in Russian.

Unprecedented Opposition to "kaaparot" Ceremony This year From Virtually all Circles

2011-10-07T09:17:00.004-04:00

This year, like every other year, the Animal Rights Group PETA and other organization organized demonstration against the custom of 'shlugging kapparot': an old controversial custom among religious Jews to swing a chicken over ones head and then have it slaughtered as some sort of transference of sin (as is evident from the text recited during the ceremony זֶה חֲלִיפָתִי, זֶה תְּמוּרָתִי, זֶה כַּפָּרָתִי. זֶה הַתַּרְנְגוֹל יֵלֵךְ לְמִיתָה , וַאֲנִי אֵלֵךְ לְחַיִּים טוֹבִים אֲרֻכִּים וּלְשָׁלוֹם

Some have sought to preserve the spirit of this custom and recommended that money be used, instead of chickens and that money should then be donated to the poor.

As mentioned, this ceremony has never been without controversy; no less an authority as Rabbi Joseph Caro who composed the Halachic Compendium followed by most Orthodox Jews, the Shulkhan Arukh, called it "a custom of the Emorites" i.e. a pagan custom that has no place in Judaism. However others disagreed ad it became particularly popular among Eastern European Ashkenazim and those who follow Lurianic Kaballah (Hassidim and some Sephardic communities--although there was some opposition even among certain Kabbalists).

This year, opposition to the custom has emerged from unexpected places see here and here .

Already in the 19th century, there was unease about the custom among certain circles of Eastern European Jews. The traditional Maskil, Moshe Leib Lilienblum, chose not to mock and assail it but rather to leave it as a matter of personal choice "Let (the customs of) tashlich and kapparot with chickens be a matter of choice, much like wearing teffilin d'rabenu tam", he urged. Here is the relevant quote from here

הן כלנו מודים, כחפץ כל היראים, כי התשליך והכפרות וכאלה, מנהגים יפים ונאוים הם וגדול הוא התשליך יותר ממצות תקיעת שופר, ושקולה הבאת כפרות כנגד התענית ביום הכפורים; כלנו מודים, שיש למנהגים אלה רמזים וטעמים יקרים בנגלה ונסתר, והם חכמתנו ובינתנו, ובהם נתפאר; אך מדוע יהי' מקום למנהגים אלה בשו"ע, הכולל חובות כל איש ישראל, כדברי הגר"א המפורסמים? מדוע לא נבור כל המנהגים היפים והטובים, כתשליך וכפרות, לשים להם מקום במשנת חסידים לבד, והיו לנו כשתי זוגות תפילין לרש"י ולר"ת, אשר אין זאת חובת כל איש פרטי, רק חפץ המהדרים; ואם יאבה איש חסיד ללכת לקיים תשליך, להכות כפרות ולהכות גם את המן שלש פעמים בכל יום, מר"ה ועד יוה"כ ומיום כפורים עד ר"ה, לא ימחה איש בידו, – אך מדוע נעמיס דברים כאלה על כל העם, להיות חובת כל איש? הטרם נדע, כי בעיני ההמון יחשב לאפיקורוס האיש הממאן להתנהג בכמו אלה? הטרם נדע, כי הקדושה הנתונה למנהגי הבל כאלה גורמת מחלוקת ופירוד לבבות על בלי דבר? הטרם נדע, כי רבי הדקדוקים במנהגים טפלים ובחסידות יתירה מגבירים יותר מדאי את הדמיון, ומחלישים בזה את ההרגשה, בבוא האדם לחובות הלב

Addendum:

Kapparot, a theory as to its origins here

Samuel Morse, the Inventor of Morse Code, an American Jew?

2011-10-05T19:41:00.003-04:00

I was reading the introduction to the first book of responsa by Rabbi Yosef Zechariah Stern (1831-1904), entitled זכר יהוסף of Šiauliai, Lithuania and came across this very curious passage:

אמנם מה שכתבו באיזה חבורים על מציאות ״ הטעלעגראף" [שנתחדש בדורנו ע״פ המצאת איש יהודי מאמעריקא שמואל בן ידידיה מארס אשר בשנת 1836למספרם כוננו ידיו את מכונתו הראשונה

Rough translation:...."the invention of the Telegraph which was renewed in our generation by the ingenuity of a Jew from America, Shmuel the son of Yedidiah Morse, who in 1836, his hands readied the first machine".

The book is available in its entirety on the hebrewbooks website here

I was naturally a bit surprised by this statement and did a little digging, this is what I found:

1) The telegraph itself was NOT invented by Samuel Morse (1791-1872),1) in fact the first primitive Electric Telegraph was invented by a German scientist by the name of Samuel Thomas von Sömmering in 1809. Later, other German scientist further perfected his method and used it for scientific, rather than commercial purposes.

The first commercial Electric Telegraph was invented by William Cooke and Charles Wheatstone and came into use in Britian in 1839.

In America itself, in 1836 an American scientist, Dr. David Alter, invented the first known American electric telegraph, in Elderton, Pennsylvania, one year before the Cooke and Wheatstone and the Morse telegraphs.

Morse developed the concept of a single wire telegraph in 1837 (not 1836 ,as Rabbi Stern writes), making long distance communication more efficient and effective.

2). He was not a Jew. In fact, according to his bio on wiki:

Samuel F.B. Morse was born in Charlestown, Massachusetts, the first child of the pastor Jedidiah Morse (1761–1826), who was also a geographer, and Elizabeth Ann Finley Breese (1766–1828). His father was a great preacher of the Calvinist faith and supporter of the American Federalist party. He thought it helped preserve Puritan traditions (strict observance of Sabbath, among other things), and believed in the Federalist support of an alliance with Britain and a strong central government. Morse strongly believed in education within a Federalist framework, alongside the instillation of Calvinist virtues, morals and prayers for his first son.

Perhaps it is that small detail I highlighted that made the Rav of a small Litvish Shtetl (who was uncharacteristically learned and eclectic for a traditional Lithuanian Rabbi of his age) come to the conclusion that Samuel Morse "the son of Yedidya the Jew" was in fact a Jew? (I am aware that that neither mainstream Calvinists nor Puritans adhered to the Jewish Sabbath....). Or perhaps his and his father's Biblical names convinced the elderly sage that he was Jewish, the Lithuanian Rabbi, of course, being unaware that Protestants were very fond of such names.

Not only was Morse not a Jew, but he was a fervent campaigner for the Nativist Part in NYC. The movement fiercely opposed immigration. It just so happened to be that the 2 largest immigrant groups at that time were composed of Irish and Jews. While there is no evidence that Morse was anti-Semitic or anti-Jewish in any way, he was rabidly anti-Irish and anti-Catholic.

For more biographical details on Rabbi Stern see here and here

NOTES:

1).Although In a letter to a friend, Morse describes how vigorously he fought for being called the sole inventor of the electromagnetic telegraph despite the previous inventions.

I have been so constantly under the necessity of watching the movements of the most unprincipled set of pirates I have ever known, that all my time has been occupied in defense, in putting evidence into something like legal shape that I am the inventor of the Electro-Magnetic Telegraph!! Would you have believed it ten years ago that a question could be raised on that subject?

see here

and here

A Doomed Proposal For a Joint Jewish-Christian Crusade; 3 Divergent Views on Solomon Molkho

2011-10-03T15:13:00.007-04:00

The Mixture of Fear, Concern and Reverence in Josel of Rosheim’s Memoirs.

The Overwhelming Sense of Reverence in Josepf Karo’s maggid meisharim.

The Mocking Attitude of Yashar of Candia in his Mikhtav Akhuz

Solomon Molkho (his signature and flag pictured above) was one of the more interesting characters of 16^th century Europe. Born Diogo Pires in Lisbon to converso parents in 1500, he eventually rose through the ranks to become secretary to the king’s council and recorder at the court of appeals. The year 1525 would forever change young Solomon’s life when he encountered one of the most bizarre and still-unexplained characters in Jewish history, namely the enigmatic David Ha-reuveni. Ha-reuveni, whose true name and identity remains unknown, claimed to be the son of a Jewish King named Solomon and a brother of a King Joseph who ruled over the lost tribes of Reuben, Gad and Manasseh in the desert of Habor: hence his name “Reuveni”. At other times, he claimed descent from the tribe of Judah and even compiled a pedigree tracing his descent back to King David.

He first made his grandiose appearance in Venice in 1523, claiming to be the commander in chief of his brother’s army and requested aid from the local Jewish community. Although most regarded him with suspicion and even derision, he did gain a measure of support among notable members of the community who helped him gain an audience with the Pope Clement VII at Rome. His proposition, was nothing short of astonishing; an alliance between the forces under his command and those of Western Christendom, in other words, a joint Jewish-Christian Crusade to liberate the Holy Land from Islamic rule.

As mentioned, in 1525 Reueveni was in Portugal where King John III received him as an official ambassador. Reuveni’s appearance in the city spread like wildfire and fired the imagination of Jews and Christians alike. Particularly smitten by him, were the “marranos”, those Jews who had been forced to live outwardly as Christians but secretly held on to their Jewish heritage. One of them, Diogo Pires met Reuveni and asked to be circumcised . Reuveni, probably fearing for the success of his mission, dissuaded the young man. But Molkho circumcised himself and took on a Hebrew name. Reuveni, aghast at the young man’s audacity, urged him to flee the country, which he did. Most scholars agree that he studied Kaballah for a time in Salonika under the tutelage of Rabbi Joseph Taitaczak. There he probably met Rabbi Joseph Caro (see later).

Meanwhile, Reuveni was ordered to leave Portugal, by order of the Imperial authorities. He continued to wander around Spain, France and Italy before finally dying in a Spanish prison, accused of having seduced conversos to recant.

In Salonika Molkho gathered a group of devotees and it was there that he published his first book of sermons entitled Derashot (later known as Sefer Ha-mefoar). To his peril, he returned to Catholic Europe in 1529 and began to preach in Ancona. It wasn’t long until he had to flee from the arms of the “Holy Office” yet again. For some inexplicable reasons (probably convinced that he was the Messiah to whom no harm shall befall), he traveled to Rome, the lion’s den. In fulfillment of the Talmudic legend (see Sanhedrin 98A), he sat for 30 days at the gates of Rome, among the paupers and the sick.

Molcho continued to preach and successfully predicted some major natural disasters, which further heightened his stature among both Jews and Christians. He even escaped the auto-da-fe in Rome by the personal intervention of Pope Clement III himself, whom he had met.

In 1532, he traveled to northern Italy where he again met with David Reuveni and together they went on a mission to Emperor Charles v who was then at Regensburg (Ratisbonne). Some scholars believe that the pair (especially Reuveni) were interested in creating a certain geopolitical situation which would have Messianic meaning for the Jews (a Christian-Muslim war that would herald the long awaited war of “Gog and Magog”).

Charles’ court Jew, R’ Joselman of Rosehim (1478-1554) recalls in his memoirs that “Molcho came in order to rouse the Emperor to call upon the Jews to fight the Turks”. Rosheim utterly condemned the activities of the Messianic pair and feared that they would bring calamity upon the whole of European Jewry. He relates: “hearing what was in his mind, I wrote a letter to him and warned him not to rouse the Emperor lest the Great Fire consume him. And I removed from the city…in order that the Emperor should not say I was helping him in his ideas and activities”. Yet after Molkho was martyred, he wrote of him that ‘He died sanctifying the name and faith of Israel and he turned many away from sin. His soul rests in the garden of Eden’ 1).

However Charles brought Molcho to Mantua, Italy where he was finally burned at the stake as a recalcitrant heretic in 1532. Remarkably, many Jews and conversos, refused to believe that he had in fact been killed, and continued to await his return……Not surprisingly, his influence on Sabbateanism,, a century later, was not insignificant.

In the second decade of the 16^th century, Molkho was to prove an inspiration to, arguably, the most well known Halakhic decisor of all time, Rabbi Joseph ben Ephraim Caro. As mentioned before, Molkho spent some time in Salonika studying Kabbalah under Taitaczak. We do not know if Caro ever met Molkho in person, but he undoubtedly made an indelible impression on him.

R.J. Zwi Werblowsky in his Joseph Karo, Lawyer and Mystic wrote:

In Caro’s mind Molkho’s death at the stake assumed the significance of a coveted privilege and supreme realization, and throughout his Maggid Meysharim, the maggid repeats the promise ‘and thou shalt be privileged to rise as a burnt offering before me and to be burned for the sanctification of my name’.

The profound psychological roots of this desire of martyrdom (probably utilizing the Talmudic martyrdom of Rabbi Akiba, the ‘ultimate martyr’ as well, see Berkahot 61B) became even more evident when we realize its practical improbability. Ambitions of this kind could entertained with a reasonable chance of fulfillment only under the dominion of the cross. The prospect of being martyred and burned in an auto-da-fe for the ‘Sanctification of the Name’ was practically nil under the rule of the crescent

The dependence of Karo’s fantasies on Molkho’s fate is borne out by the one passage in the M.M. where the Maggid, summing up all Karo’s ambitions, explicitly refers to Molkho:

Behold what thou hast attained and what degree thou hast reached, that (words) are spoken through thy mouth the way I speak in thee. I shall make thee worthy to be publicly burned in Palestine, to sanctify my name in public, and thou shalt rise as a burnt offering to my pleasure on my altar and thy sweet savior shall rise as Frankinscense…and thine ashes shall be heaped on my altar to my pleasure. I shall privilege thee also to finish thy book to illuminate thereby the eyes of Israel, for all wise men and scholars and sages shall draw from thy work which is to be called the House of Joseph (Bet Yosef); they shall be filled with the fatness of thine house , your springs will flow to all directions…and your name will be mentioned in Synagogues and houses of study. Wherever thou shalt be mentioned in the house of study, the sweet savour of your ashes shall rise like frankinscense. Behold what thou hast attained so far and what thou shall still attain by publicly sanctifying my name. Even so Solomon my chosen one, who is called Molkho, was anointed with a great and supernal anointing and rose on my altar to my pleasure. You likewise shall go up…Lo, I am the Mishnah speaking in your mouth, kissing you with kisses of love and embracing you, for it is in the shadow of my wings, that thou restest they head. ‘my glory is on thee and they glory is on me, my splendour is on thee and thy splendour is on me, I shall not forget thee and thou wilt not forget me, neither in this world nor in the world to come’.

The possible dates of this revealing entry are 1533, 34 or 37. The temptation is great to prefer the former date-the year after Molkho’s death. (2)

Very different from the aforementioned two is the estimation of the Rabbi and scholar Yosef Shelomo Delemedigo of Crete. In his epistle to the Karaite Zerach ben Natan Ha-troki, entitled Mikhtav Ahuz, he utterly mocks Molkho and his supposed Kabbalistic powers “which did not help him on the day of his death” (3).

First, Delmedigo fawningly praises the Karaites for their rationalism and contrasts their attitude to Kabballah to that of the Rabbanites:

כן ארחות כל קלי הדעת פתי יאמין לכל דבר, לא אליכם בני
מקרא הביטה וראה אתה בחירי, ותן חודה לאלהים שבראך ועשאך
עברי, ואל תתאוה להיות פלשתי או מצרי, ותהיה מכת המאמינים
וכרות עמהם ברית מלח כאשר מעט קט ממנו במאכל נ ותנ ים,
וכאשר הצדיקים ....ואינם מרבים תפנוקים
ומעדנים

After excoriating the Kabbalists and their beliefs and superstitions, he directly references Molkho and his estimation of the man is not kind, to say the least:

ובדברי השוטה ר׳ של מ ה מ ל כ ו ראיתי שערוריה, ואיך נשרף

בגזירת קרולו ק ו י נ ט ו הקיסר גדול העצה ורב העליליה, וכל מעשי

שגעונותיו כתובים בספר יוסף ה כ ה ן וחקוקים בעט ברזל ו ה ו א

נשיה, וברפאים בארץ מאפליה, בחטאו מת לא יראה י ה , בארץ

ל א הועילה ביום צרתו ידיעתו הצירוף והחמורה והגימטריאה,

ואם הוא את נפשו לא חיה, שלמה אהיה כעוטיה, התשים באפך

אגמון, פעמון זהב ורמון, או תתענג באור צח ומצוחצח וקדמון,

כרו לי זדים שיחות, בעשר צחצחות, ולא מצאתי לבתך בחולים,

בענין עצמות וכלים, אחזו לנו שועלים

Did a Jesus-like Cult Spring Up Around the Figure of Molkho?

As mentioned before, even after he was burned at the stake, many of his followers believed that he was still alive (or more precisely, that the flames did not burn him). The writer Micha Berdicewski describes it in his writings:

והיה בהגיעה השמועה לתלמידיו ומעריציו, ויבכו עליו ויספדו לו; ואחרים ששו ושמחו ואמרו, כי לא שלט ביה נורא כלל. לרבים גם נגלה שלמה שבוע ימים אחרי שרפתו והוד לו. זר סביב לראשו, אחר-כך לא נראה עוד אליהם, אבל דבריו וכל אשר עשה וכתב בסתרי התורה קיימים עד היום הזה

Notes:

1).Cited in Sasson, H.H. A History of the Jewish People, p. 688

2).Weblowsky, p. 98-99 :

3)Ironically, the eminent Lurianist, Hayyim Vital warned against the dangers of ‘practical Kaballah’ and cited Molkho’s fate as a warning to those, not in a sufficient state of purity and saintliness, who are wont to dabble in it. see Werblowsky p. 72. This criticism was also leveled against him by the prominent Moshe Cordovero. See Moshe Idel, Italy in Safed, Safed in Italy, p. 246

(4. Mikhtav Ahuz, p. 14 (in pdf).

Strange Encounters; Hassidim and Karaites, Eastern Europe and Jerusalem's Old City

2011-09-06T11:34:00.016-04:00

The casual visitor to Jewish Quarter of the Old City of Jerusalem, has probably come across the historic Synagogue of the Karaites on Karaim Street (photo bottom). Directly opposite, lies the ruins of a once magnificent edifice called the "Tiferet Yisrael Synagogue" built by the Hassidim of the Ruzhin sect who settled in the city (see before and after photos).

Completed in 1872, it merited a visit from the Kaiser Franz Josef I of Austria in 1871, en route to attend the inauguration of the Suez Canal. The visit was described in the hebrew Havatzelet Journal (one wonders if the Kaiser visited the Karaite Synagogue as well, if he did, I have been unable to locate a record of it). The Tiferet Yisrael Synagogue would serve as the general center of Hassidic Jews in the Old City until its fall in the War of Independence in 1948.

The Karaite Synagogue "Anan ben David" is according to scholars the most ancient continuously functioning (except for the period of the Jordanian occupation from 1948-67) Synagogue in Jerusalem, and perhaps in the entire Land of Israel. While the Karaite Synagogue was restored after the Six Day War, the Hassidic Synagogue, on the other hand, still lies in ruins (though there has been talk recently of restoring it as well).

One can only wonder what kind of (if any) neighborly relations existed between the Ruzhiner Hassidim and their Karaite neighbors, mere meters away...

KARAITES AND HASSIDIM IN EASTERN EUROPE

This curious rendezvous between Hasidim and Karaites in Jerusalem, may not have been such a strange one after all; Karaites have lived in parts of Eastern Europe since at least the 13th c. and according to some scholars may have laid the foundations of certain eastern European Jewish communities (1). There certainly were relations between the two communities (Hassidim and Karaites) back in Poland, Galicia, and Volhynia, although not always good ones.

The most famous Karaite of the 19th c. was undoubtedly Avraham Firkovich (known by his penname אבן רש"ף). He was a prodigious scholar as well as traveler and bibliophile. Firkovich was born in Luck, Poland and spent the waning years of his life in the Karaite stronghold of Chufut Qale in the Crimea. He corresponded throughout his life with a wide variety of people, including prominent Hassidim, such as the third Rebbe of Chabad-Lubavitch (2). In 1834 during his stay in the town of Berdichev, he quarreled with the local Hassidic Rabbi who called him 'an ignoramus'. According to one account the ideological debate developed into a fist-fight. Berditchev was a center of Hassidism (a famous Hassidic dynasty was founded there by Rabbi Levi Isaac) as well as a stronghold of Maskilim. It is no surprise that the arrival of Firkovich (and his decidedly pro-maskilic and anti-hassidic bent) added to the already boiling cauldron.
(It should be pointed out that the Karaite approach to Kaballah -and presumably the movements it inspired, such as Hassidism, was allot more nuanced than commonly perceived, see for instance the biography and works of Simcha Yiztchak Lutzki, termed in this paper a "Karaite Kabbalist").

Another famous Karaite scholar, Mordechai Sultansky actually met Rabbi Yisrael, founder of the aforementioned Ruzhin Hassidic dynasty. David Assaf gives an account of Sultansky's less than charitable impression of the man:

Writing in 1841, Mordechai Sultansky of Chufut-Qale (Crimea), a prominent Karaite sage and historian recalled his encounter in Ruzhin with the young Israel, which probably took place around 1815

When I was young I had heard of the fame of the baal shem Israel, who was adored by his believers. I had a desire to see him and to assess his quality. I went there to the town of Ruzhin; however I could not see his face because of the crowd who flocked from all over the country to ask his assistance. Finally I had an idea. I wrote a letter of poems and phrases dedicated to his honor and delivered it to his attendant, and then he ordered that I be invited. That is how I came to see him, and he was then 18 years old. He said to me: my dear, you wrote your letter in vain, since I will not understand ay of it. That is because I haven’t any knowledge in wisdom or in books. I am devoted only to theoretical Kabbala. When I tested him, I realized that he had neither faith nor knowledge or sense, but he is one of Jezebel’s prophets, who merely consumes the remnants of the brainless Jews and strips them of their skin with his crazy tricks. However in their eyes he is as lofty as an angel. (3)

THE KARAITE-LIKE TENDENCIES OF THE RUZHINER REBBE'S SON

If Rabbi Israel of Ruzhin was a controversial figure, so much more so for his colorful son, Rabbi Dovber (bernyu) Friedman (pictured) who was given the post of Rebbe of Leova (1815-1877). The latter is one of the only 'admorim' in Hassidic history to have willingly resigned his post.

Dovber was on intimate terms with the Maskilim of his locale. He regularly spouted 'maskilic ideas', rejecting what he termed "the superstitious baggage that Judaism has accrued since the Babylonian exile". One can only speculate what his views on Karaite Judaism were.....

By 1869, he had relocated to Czernowicz , where he stayed at the residence of the noted maskil, Dr. Yehuda Leib Reitman and refused to see any of his former followers. During his stay there, he would often engage the local Christian mailman in philosophical discussion, which he is said to have enjoyed immensely. He also publicized a scandalous letter which I reproduce here:

ידעתי קוראים נכבדים כי בני עמנו הנפוצים בארצות רחוקות כחכמים היושבים על גפי מרומי השכלה ככסילים היושבים אחורי התנור והכירים אשר שמעו את שמי ישיחו בי וישאלו: מה היה לי כי נהפכתי לאיש אחר? לכן גמרתי בלבי לבוא במגלת ספר להודיע בקהל עדת ישורון שורש דבר נמצא בי כי בלבי צפנתי אמונת אל אחד ובו אדבק כל הימים ונאמן אנכי לתורתו ולחכמי ישראל ההולכים לפנים ולא לאחור ולא אסרתי מעלי את יראת השם רק הרחקתי מעלי את המון הפתאים השומרים הבלי שווא אשר סביב שתו עלי. אולם לא אל אנשי חנף השמים חושך לאור ואור לחושך המתכסים באדרת החניפה למען כחש אשים דברתי כי המה מורדי אור החכמה ואמונה טהורה רק אל החכמים והנבונים בעם אשר החכמה נר לרגלם והאמונה אור לנתיבתם אביעה רוחי ואודיע דברי איתם כי האמת אזור מתני והאמונה אזור חלצי

ואם אמנם אין לאל ידי לבער את הקוצים מכרם בית ישראל לטהר את אמנותנו מהבלי המנהגים אשר אין להם עיקר בתורת אלהים רק עלו עם בני עמנו מבבל ושאר הגוים אשר התערבו בהם כאשר דרשו חז"ל: כתוב אחד אומר כמשפטי הגויים עשיתם וכתוב אחר אומר לא עשיתם הא כיצד? כמתוקנים שבהם לא עשיתם כמקולקלים שבהם עשיתם". הלא טוב לי כי אעבוד את אלהי אמת על כן לא אירא מרבבות פתאים אשר כהמות ימים פתיון ולא אערוץ מהמון רבה אשר בחשיכה יתהלכון אם רק מחשבתי רצויה בעיני אלהים וישרי לב.

ובזה אשים קנצי למילן ולכל אוהבי חכמה שוחרי מוסר שלום!

טשערנאוויץ יום א' לחודש אדר תרכ"ט לפ"ק

דוב בער במוהר"ר ישראל

Finally, under tremendous pressure from his family (who were at the receiving end of vicious attacks by rival Hassidim as a result of his activities), he publicized a second letter wherein he "recanted" his former heretical views. An impossible maskil and a tortured soul, he would spend the remaining years of his life at the house of his nephew the Rebbe of Sadigura.

According to the Yivo Encyclopedia:

Disillusioned with Hasidism and with his role as tsadik, he began to keep company with maskilim. In 1868, following the death of a brother, he experienced a profound personal crisis and decided to abandon his standing as a Hasidic rebbe. Attempts to persuade him to recant failed, and rumors abounded regarding alleged contacts with missionaries and his desire to convert to Christianity. Fearful of the damage to the reputation of the dynasty, his wife and brothers brought him forcibly to Sadagora in 1869, but maskilim from nearby Czernowitz secured his release with the help of the police. He stayed at the home of a communal elder, a lawyer named Yehudah Leib Reitman; was openly lax in his religious observance; and published a declaration in the Jewish press rejecting Hasidism and espousing Haskalah values. A storm ensued: maskilim lauded him as a hero, while his former Hasidim believed he had gone mad. After one and a half months, Bernyu repented his actions and returned to his brother’s court at Sadagora. He did not resume his rabbinical duties, however, and lived in solitude until his death.
Bernyu’s actions and his followers’ reluctance to denounce them (some of his Hasidim claimed that he had not sinned at all, attributing his behavior to some inscrutable religious mystery) inspired Ḥayim Halberstam of Sandz, an extremely conservative rebbe and important halakhic authority, to attack Sadagora Hasidism, condemning their regal style of life and pronouncing a ban upon its members as long as the four “brothers” remained unrepentant and refused to acknowledge their misdeeds in public. The controversy was marked by violence and split the Hasidic communities of Galicia and Hungary bans and counterbans flew back and forth. Sadagora Hasidim in the Land of Israel excommunicated Reb Ḥayim at the Western Wall in Jerusalem, and dozens of vitriolic polemical pamphlets were published. Only after the deaths of Bernyu and Halberstam (both in 1876) did the dispute die down, but the warring camps remained hostile to one another for many years thereafter.

NACHMAN KROCHMAL- A RABBANITE-TURNED KARAITE, ACC. TO HASSIDIM

While have no record of Dovber/Bernyu having correspondence with Karaites, we do have extensive evidence of other maskilim and their overtures to Karaites. One example, is the famous thinkers and writer Nachman Krochmal author of Moreh Nevuchei Hazman (Guide to the Perplexed of this Age). Krochmal carried on a correspondence with the Karaite cantor of the town of Kuzikow, David ben Mordechai, author of Semmah David and also with the important Karaite leader Abraham Leonowicz of Halicz. When this correspondence was discovered by local Hassidim, they termed him a Karaite and a heretic. Krochmal wrote a defense of his actions, wherein he denied becoming a Karaite but at the same time, he fiercely defended the Karaites as fellow Jews who believed in the most important aspects of the Jewish faith.

According to Reuven Fahn, Kuzikow was the first Karaite savant to establish close links with the Galician maskilim (David may have inherited his friendly attitude to the Rabbanites from his father, Mordechai ben Nisan who mentioned that it was Rabanite Jews who had taught him the Hebrew Bible and literature. David’s sons continued the family tradition of maintaining close contacts with the Rabbanites. This is why it was the Rabbanite scholar David Maggid who edited a collection of David Kuzikow’s writings; Semah David (St. Petersburg, 1897) and achieve a proper understanding of Rabbinic literature, the Talmud and Haskalah. In many of his writings, Kuzikow referred with deep respect to the Talmudic scholars and their works.

The history of his friendly correspondence with Krochmal was soon marred by an unpleasant episode with clearly shows the complexity of relations not only between the Karaites and Rabbanites but also between the maskilim and other Rabbanite Jews. Approximately from 1814 to 1816 Kuzikow accidentally gave some of his letters to the local hassidic jews. The latter when they discovered that Krochmal’s epistles were full of praise for the Karaite hazzan, copied and publicized these letters. They apparently tried to compromise Krochmal and suggest his deviation from the norms of Judaism and Jewish religious law. The matter was especially sensitive because at the same time the Rabbanite authorities of Lwow imposed a herem (ban) on some maskilim.

While being understandably vexed by these complications, Krochmal did not change his positive views of the Karaites. He mentioned that they believed in the same written law as the Rabbanites, the coming of the Messiah, the resurrection of the dead, and other articles of Jewish creed. Moreover, in spite of the fact that their forefathers rejected the Talmud, in his time many Karaites approached the study of the Oral Law (Torah she-be-al pe, i.e. the Talmud). Krochmal suggested in his letter that the Karaites should be given hope that some day they would join their Rabbanite brethren and there would be no division between these two branches of Israel.

As has been mentioned, Krochmal also maintained contacts with another important Karaite leader, Abraham Leonowicz. During half a century of his tenure in the office of leader of the Halicz community, Leonowicz kept up relations with many Rabbanite thinkers, who later mentioned him in their writings: Isaac Samuel Reggio of Gorizia, Samson Halevi, Luzzatto, Bloch, Geiger and Daniel Hartenstein, to name a few. Abraham Geiger (1810-1874) one of the most famous German maskilim received from Leonowicz a manuscript copy of Mikhtav Ahuz by the Rabbanite scholar Joseph-Solomon of Crete (Yashar Delmedigo- who himself entertained pro-Karaite sympathies), which he published in 1840.

This again shows that the Karaites eagerly read and copied Rabbanite manuscripts-and, moreover, they were the only possessors of some unique manuscripts penned by European Rabbanite scholars. As was mentioned above, Leonwitz’s tenure in the Hazzan’s office was marred by a few conflicts with the Rabbanites. This is why, perhaps, Reuven Fahn came to the conclusion that Leonowicz “did not reach the spiritual state of David Kuzikow” in his relations with the maskilim. (4)

NOTES

1). see for instance Eliach, Yaffa. There once was a world: A 900-Year Chronicle of the Shtetl of Eishyshok 1998

2).Mentioned in Shapira, Dan. AVRAHAM FIRKOWITZ IN ISTANBUL p. 77 n. 151

It's interesting to note that the famed 'Chabad library' (one of several) contains plenty of maskilic and Karaite works such as this one by the Karaite Scholar Elijah Bashyaczi.

3). Assaf, David. The regal way: the life and times of Rabbi Israel of Ruzhin P. 73I

4). The Karaites of Galicia: an ethnoreligious minority among the Ashkenazim by Mikhail Kizilov, p. 224-5

The whole Krochmal Karaite controversy is narrated in detail in Krochmal’s letter to Zeev-Wolf Shiff of 1816 (Krochmal Kitvei, 413-416).

Was the Gaon of Pumeditha, Rab Sherira Crucified (?) by the Caliph Alkadir of Baghdad?

2011-09-05T07:12:00.004-04:00

I came across this odd reference a long time ago, while reading SEDER HADOROT by Rabbi Yehiel Halperin (1660 - 1746). I came across it again, recently in this book published in honor of the 1999 wedding that united the vizhitz and spinka Hassidic sects. As is their custom on occasions such as this, a book was published with sayings of their Hassidic forbears. Appended to it, an exaggerated royal pedigree, to demonstrate that they are of noble (Davidic) lineage. The text on this particular page quotes the SEDER HAKABALLAH ("Chain of Tradition") of the Spanish scholar Abraham ibn Daud (1110-1180, approx.):

רב שרירא גאון זצ״ל, הי״ד, בן רב חנינא גאון בן רבי יהודאי גאון בן רב שמואל ר י ש
בלה, מצאצאי רבה בר אבוה המיוחסים לזרע דוד, מצאצאי זרובבל בן שאלתיאל, ,
גאון בפומפדיחא משנה ד' ,תשב״ח עד שנת ד' תשנ״ח, שאז לגודל חולשתו מסר
הגאונות לבנו רב האי, והאריך ימים עד שנח חשס״ז, וגם אז נקפד פחיל חייו ביד צר,
במו שבחב רבינו הראב״ד בסדר הקבלה שלו"דהלשינו פריצי ישראל ברב שרירא ורב
האי, וחפסם מלך ישמעאל ובזזו בל אשר להם, לא השאיר שריד שום מחיה בעולם,
ותלה רב שרירא בידו אחה והוא בבן מאה שנה״. ורבינו האר״י ז״ל אמר, שהוא רמוז
בפסוק "שרים בידם נתלו, פני זקנים לא נהדרו". "שרים״ רמז לרב שרירא, "בידם
נחלו" שנתלה בידו, "פני זקנים לא נהדרו" שהיה זקן בן מאה שנה, שהכל רמוז בתורה.

Brief synopsis:

Rav Sherira Gaon, of blessed memory, may God avenge his blood, (906-1006)was a descendant of Rabba bar Abahu who in turn descended from the house of David. He (Sherira) was the Gaon of the Academy at Pumbeditha from the year 4710 to 4758, when due to his weakened state he handed over the reigns to his son Hai Gaon (939-1038) who reigned until 4767. And then his life was turned upside down, when insolent men of Israel spread libel on them to the authorities, whereby they were seized by the 'King of Ishmael' who confiscated all their possesions, and Rav Sherira was hanged by one of his hands. And Arizal (Isaac Luria) said that this was foretold in the verse in Lamentations 5:12: שרים בידם נתלו, פני זקנים לא נהדרו, literally: Our princes are being hanged by their thumbs, and our elders are treated with contempt. 'sarim' alludes to sherira, 'beyadam nitlu' that he was hung by his hand, 'pney zekenim lo nehadaru' alludes to his being 100 years old at the time of his death, etc.

Was Rab Sherira really crucified at age 100 by the Arab ruler of Baghdad?

If so, why the strange and macabre method of hanging him by one arm?

Is this some sort of twisted crucifixion? (parenthetically, crucifixion was not foreign to the Arabs and the Berbers of that period. A century after the incident in question, a Berber mob would crucify Rabbi Josef Ha-naggid (1035-1066) on the gates of Granada)

Heinrich Graetz tells the story quite differently:

Malicious persons had Sherira arraigned before the Caliph Alkadir on some unknown charge, probably growing out of the rigor of his administration (the editor of hebrew wiki, opines that the charge was espionage and probably related to the far reaching correspondence of the father-son pair, often sending letters (and accepting disciples from) to countries that were considered at war with their own, such as Persia, Spain, Andalucia and Byzantium--J.D.). In consequence of this, father and son were deprived of their liberty, all their property was confiscated and there was not enough to them for a bare livelihood. They were however, liberated at the intercession of an influential man and restored to their dignity. Sherira soon after on account of old age abdicated in favor of his son (998) and died a few years later. (1)

Moshe Gil and David Strassler in Jews in Islamic Countries, put forth a (possible) different explanation for the word נתלה by Ibn Daud:

“and the king of the Ishmaelites grabbed them..”and Rav Sherira Gaon depended on one hand”; (nitla נתלה which may be “he was hanged”, but also ‘depended’, i.e., was in distress...

…the information in Ibn Daud, that Sherira Gaon “was hanged (nitla) on one hand” was somewhat of a mystery for scholars. Some assumed that it should be taken literally, and found parallels in Christian martyrology. As against this it was claimed that- according to what Ibn Daud further states-Sherira was not removed from his post of Gaon, which contradicts this story, that should be considered an invention; or it was considered an erroneous translation of some Arab idiom. However Fleischer has shown, based on piyut that the meaning is: he was impoverished, lived in poverty; this is also in accordance with the additional information which I quote on the sufferings of Sherira and Hai (see ibid) (2)

Lag Baomer, a Holiday?

2011-09-03T18:34:00.003-04:00

This is a synopsis of a lecture by Rabbi David Bar-Hayyim ofJerusalem.

Courtesy of Adam Abraham Kessler.

----------------------------------------------

The Talmud does not mention it.

The Zohar does not mention it.

Not even the writings of Luria (or rather his students) reallymention it.

In Shaar HaKavanos (by Luria’s student Chaim Vital) LagB’Omer is referenced as Yom SheMeis RaShBY. The original manuscripts (asobtained from the Vital family) actually refer to it as Yom Simchas RaShBY, acopyist left out the ‘chet’ in later editions so Simchas accidentally becameSheMeis. The book records that Luria met a sage who would every day recite aparticular Tefilla which was added on to Birchas Bonei Yerushalayim for TishaB’Av. This sage in addition to reciting it every day would also say it on LagB’Omer in Meron. Luria had a dream in which the RaShBY told him to tell thesage not to say it on the RaShBY’s Yom Simchato, and that if he persisted a calamitywould fall upon him. Soon afterwards one of this sage’s children passed away. Vitalalso mentions that Luria observed the custom to go to Meron on Lag B’Omer a fewtimes – and he also tenuously tries to make a connection between RaShBY and theaccount of R. Akiva’s students.

The Ben Ish Chai (who as a ‘Kabbalist’ was very familiarwith Luria’s writings) writes in Daas U'Tvunah [Pp. 4] – that there is nosource to suggest that LaG B’Omer is the date of RaShBY’s death, which wouldfurther seem to confirm that the possible reference in Shaar HaKavanot toRaShBY’s death is erroneous.

In the Shulchan Aruch; Orach Chaim: 493 it speaks about theMinhag of not getting married and cutting ones hair/beard, in 493:2 it saysthat the Minhag is not to cut one’s hair until LaG B’Omer because there is asaying that the Talmidim of R. Akiva ceased dying on that day, and thereforemourning is not appropriate and that one must wait until AFTER LaG to cut.

The Rama disagrees with this, saying that cutting ON LaGB’Omer is permitted, that we rejoice a bit and that there is no Tachanun. TheRama based his statement on the Maharil who says that even though it says inYevamos 62b that they died from Pesach until Shavuous, that really they onlydied on days on which Tachanun is said - so you have to subtract all the non-Tachanundays from the 49 day Sefira period (7 days for Pesach, 3 days for Rosh Chodesh [2for Iyar, 1 for Sivan], and 7 days for Shabbosim, which adds up to 17) so when 32days are up there is some joy as a remembrance that there was a cessation oftheir deaths.

During the period of the later Geonim and possibly theearlier Rishonim there was a practice of making Aliya LaRegel [pilgrimage] togo to Jerusalem for Shavuos, people would come from many different directions (Syria,Bavel, Egypt etc.) and so there were particular places that groups of peoplewould meet up from all over before continuing the trek to Jerusalem so that inlarger numbers they could be assured greater safety. The primary meeting placebefore collectively moving en masse as a caravan to Jerusalem was in Meron on the 18th of Iyar. Becausethere was a tradition that RaShBY and his son R. Elazar were buried in Meron, somehowthe connection was made in people’s mind between him and that day.

In 363 CE there was an earthquake in Jerusalem which was recorded in ancient Syriacby a bishop named Cyril who said it took place on 19th of Iyar, about 9 hoursafter sunset. This took place during the reign of the Roman Emperor Julianus [‘theApostate’]. He was very against the rise of Christianity in the Empire andwanted it to revert to the paganism that preceded Constantine. As an attack on Christianity hedesired that the Beis HaMikdash be rebuilt. Preparations began, but on the daythat the actual work was to begin this earthquake occurred, destroying whateverpreparatory work had already commenced. Additionally short afterwards Julianusdied mysteriously (possibly assassinated).

From that date in 363 CE forward, the Jews observed the 18thof Iyar as a day of mourning. Perhaps the bishop’s calculation of the 19th wasnot in accord with the Jewish calendrical calculations but was very close –just apart by one day at the time. Either way this became a date of mourning asany hope of rebuilding the Beis HaMikdash at this late date was utterly dasheddue to the devastation of the earthquake. Documents that were discovered at theCairo Geniza which recorded the customs of communities in Eretz Yisroel mentionthe 18th of Iyar is to be observed as a fast-day.

So we see that LaG B’Omer is really not such a happy day, andthat really something very strange has occurred over the last few centuries andit somehow underwent a transformation to being a day of joy.

What is clear – is that concerning this day – nothing isreally clear at all. It’s a day clouded in mystery, and certainly not a day forgreat celebrations.

Additionally we have the Chasam Sofer who was very opposedthe celebrations of LaG B’Omer. In a Teshuva he wrote (on Yoreh Deah: 233) hestates that he heard about celebrations in Tzfas for the Yom Hilula of theRaShBY and that even though the revelers intentions are L’Shem Shamayim hecannot agree to the whole business – that he stays away from it… and also citesthis as a reason for not moving to Tzfat because if they wanted him to beinvolved he would be forced to be Poreish Min HaTzibur. He says that to makethis day, a day of celebration and lighting fires, and to do this in thatparticular place [namely Meron] is not right. Especially to innovate a holidayon which no miracle is recorded and that none of the Poskim refer explicitly to.He says he knows of no real reason for any of the rites associated with this so-calledholiday.

LaG B’Omer seems to have become over-rated and gotten out ofhand. One should be suspicious of any such holiday that arose over the last fewcenturies. All the popular Drashos about the connection of fire and kabala tolag b’omer is just a big mish-mash. It appears ok to have some Simcha on thisday to have a relief from the Aveilus. However we should not think that it’s aprofound deep day of great significance, mystical or otherwise.

Yevamos 62b – the regular girsa is as follows “It was saidthat R. Akiva had twelve thousand pairs of disciples, from Givat to Antipatris;and all of them died at the same time because they did not treat each otherwith respect. The world remained desolate until R. Akiva came to our Masters inthe South and taught the Torah to them. These were R. Meir, R. Yehudah, R. Yosi,R. Shimon and R. Eleazar b. Shammua; and it was they who revived the Torah atthat time. A Tanna taught: All of them died between Pesach and Shavuos. R. Chamab. Abba or, it might be said, R. Chiya b. Abin said: All of them died a crueldeath. What was it? — R. Nachman replied: Azkara.”

Academic scholars and Torah scholars all agree that R. Akivawas a great supporter of Bar-Kochba. ChaZaL mention it in the Talmud Yerushalmiin Taanios Ch. 4 which says he was a great supporter of the revolt of BenKoziba (which took place about 132-135 CE approximately 60 years after theChurban). The RaMBaM writes in Hilchos Melachim 11:3 “One should not entertainthe notion that the Melech HaMoshiach must work miracles and wonders, bringabout new phenomena within the world, resurrect the dead, or perform othersimilar deeds that the fools claim. This is definitely not true. A proof can bebrought from the fact that that R. Akiva, one of the greatest Sages of theMishnah, was arms bearer of King Ben-Koziba…etc” Indicating he was a greatsupporter of Kochba’s effort against the Romans, who at that time was the def-actoruler of Eretz Yisrael. ChaZaL refer to him as Ben-Koziba HaMelech, and R. Akiva’ssupport with many students was pivotal. R. Akiva’s allegiance was more than inword, but also in deed. These students died in battle, and perhaps there was aparticularly deathly period of slaughter that occurred between Pesach andShavuos. The war was the most bloody war the Jews had experienced till thattime. Hadrian who was in charge of putting down the revolt didn’t write back toRome duringthis period {as he usually would} that he and his legions were at peace. Entirelegions of Hadrian’s army were destroyed, they lost large amounts of people, thathas been estimated to be between tens and hundreds of thousands dead. Needlessto say the estimate on the Jewish side is considerably more. There was loss onboth sides, even though the Romans ultimately won it was still not perceived assuch a success because of all the loss. TheJews tragically became a minority in EY because of both the number of Jews whowere killed, or were enslaved, in tangent with the importation of gentiles intoEY. From that time, the Jews of EY never really recovered. Most Jews wereforced northward into Galil and Golan… Lod became considered the ‘south of thecountry’ as it says in Sanhedrin 62b that R. Akiva. Went ‘Etzel RabboteinuShebadarom’. We know that this was Lod. Concerningthe Gemara referring to a plague – ‘azkara.’ It seems it was either internalvoluntary censorship on the part of the Chachamim– to discourage and preventrevolt, because to do so would mean the end of Jews and Judaism, or it wascensorship born of external factors such as fear that the Romans would preventthem from speaking openly about the historical truth so they couched it inother terms, for example many Aggados if looked at with a discerning eyeclearly refer to revolt and this could be such an instance.

R. Akiva was ultimately killed because he was a politicalsupporter of Bar Kochba, and to get a sense of the conditions we can take alook at Maseches Shabbos 33b which records that R. Yehuda, R. Elazar, and R. Yosi[who were all students of R. Akiva in the period right after the revolt] were sitting, and Yehudah the son ofproselytes, was sitting near them. R. Yehudah commenced [the discussion] byobserving, 'How fine are the works of this people (referring to the Romans)! Theyhave made streets, they have built bridges, they have erected baths.' R. Yosiwas silent. R. Shimon b. Yochai answered and said, 'All that they made theymade for themselves; they built market-places, to set harlots in them; baths, torejuvenate themselves; bridges, to levy tolls for them.' Now, Yehudah the sonof proselytes went and related their talk, which eventually reached thegovernment. They decreed: Yehudah, who exalted [us], shall be exalted, Yosi, whowas silent, shall be exiled to Sepphoris; and Shimon, who censured, let him beexecuted.

R. Shimon b. Yochai and his son R. Elazar had to flee as aresult, and were fugitives for many years from the Romans, and hid in a cave, andthe Gemara proceeds to record the miraculous nature of a carob-tree and a waterwell springing forth within the cave in order to preserve them. Indeed we seethat R. Shimon was a radical, and that he had inherited ideas from his teacherR. Akiva. So we see that there is a connection between Sefiras HaOmer and thedeaths of R. Akiva’s students, but it is not the usual connection that is made,it is really a result of the revolt.

Indeed we see that there was another girsa [version] of theGemara that was previously extant which seems to confirm this. In the Iggeretof R. Sharira Gaon [in the nusach sfaradi text] sent to Jews in Spain he writesa short history of Torah Shebaal Peh, which says R. Akiva had many students, and there was a Shmada [Roman decree (i.e.war)] on them, and that he had 12,000 students [not pairs] which died betweenPesach and Shavuos. Further proof of the meaning of Shmad can be seen fromcontext of the discussions continuation. Which notes that in time of Rabi therewas period of grace, decrees [shmad] were relaxed. Because of the goodrelations between Antinonius and Rabi.

The whole Minhag of Aveilus during this period of SefirasHaOmer has its roots in the national mourning of the Jews as a result of thedestructiveness of the Kochba revolt. One would think that ChaZaL would haveinstituted an official mourning as a result. Speculatively perhaps they didn’tfor 2 reasons. One being that the Romans would not have allowed it, that it wasjust politically untenable, and the other is that maybe the Chachamim mighthave felt that it was not appropriate to turn such a long period into one ofmourning. that it is more appropriate to concentrate it into the 9th of Av. Soit appears this is something the nation took on of their own accord, and wascommemorated by the cessation of shaving and hair cutting. However it appearsthat such is a bit out of hand, we see even by the mourning of one’s parents –one goes past the initial period of shloshim, until people begin to tell youthat you appear scruffy. Seven weeks is clearly way beyond that, also formarriage the same would apply. It seems the Minhag got out of hand. The RaDBaZspeaks approvingly in a Teshuva of communities that shave Lichvod Shabbosduring this period, and that he permits marriage without waiting for such along period of time. This is in ShU’T RaDBaZ 2:687 “I personally conduct myselfin this manner - I [allow myself to] cut my hair throughout the month of Nissanand on Rosh Chodesh Iyar, and this is the widespread custom… the custom [toallow haircutting on Rosh Chodesh, i.e. not to observe practices of mourningthereon] comes and overrides the lower-level custom. And besides, I have seenmany communities who never observed this custom, and they cut their hair everyweek in honor of Shabbat…”. He also says that it is very uncomfortable for onewho is used to shaving/cutting his hair to refrain, and if one is exempted dueto irritation in a case by a Mitzvah Asseh such as sleeping in the Sukkah, thencertainly by a Minhag, an alleviation from the botherance is permissible. ChaZaLcertainly would not have instituted such a long burdensome period of mourning.

However there is certainly something to be said ofcommemorating the events, whether you hold the whole omer, or any of thevariations.

In the QA session after the Shiur: Q is addressed as towhether on should say Tachanun on Lag B’Omer, the Rabbi responds by citing theRaMBaM in Hilchos Tefilla end of Ch. 5 which states that “it is an acceptedcustom among the entire Jewish people not to utter Neffilas Apayim on Shabbosesor Moadim, nor does one utter it on Rosh Chodesh, Rosh HaShana, Chanuka orPurim or in Mincha of erev Shabbos or Yomim Tovim or in the Maariv of any day”Beyond that there are no other days that one should not say it (though inMaseches Sofrim which is not mentioned by the RaMBaM perhaps there is reasonnot to recite it during Nissan). Outside of a reasonable cause andjustification to not do so, one should say Nefillas Apayim on Lag B’Omer. Obviouslyif one is in a place where such is not the custom, he should do so separatelyin private so as not to increase controversy and division.

עמק יהושפט; The Karaite Necropolis of Crimea

2011-08-29T11:03:00.007-04:00

Emek Yehoshaphat, The valley of Yehoshaphat, is the name given to the ancient Karaite necropolis at Chufut Qale ("Jews' Fortress") in the Crimea where the local Karaites buried their dead for centuries.

The size of the area is about 80 dunams and is now known by its 'new' Tatar-Karaite name “Balta-Teymez”, which means ‘the place where an ax is never lifted’.

The area was first explored by the Karaite Hakham and Scholar Abraham Firkovitz in the second half of the 19th century. The study was conducted as part of a more comprehensive research into the history of the Crimean Karaites on behest of the Czarist authorities. Some scholars believed that the results of that study was not 100 percent accurate and some forgeries were suspected.

A new full comprehensive epigraphical study was conducted in 1997 by the Ben Zvi Institute and published in Hebrew in 2008 under the title מצבות בית העלמין של היהודים הקראים בצ׳ופוט־קלעה

Why Emek Yehoshafat?

Already in Tanach and even more so in the New Testament,
the Valley of Yehoshafat has eschatological significance (1).
The moniker appears to have been first coined by the German zoologist Peter Simon Pallas when he visited the site during his travels throughout Russia and its territories at the end of the 18^th century (2).

The reason for this, is the very similar topography between Chufut Qale and the biblical Emek Yehoshafat in Jerusalem.

The Russian traveler Y. Markoff, also noted this stark resemblance during his travels there in the sixth decade of the 19^th century. At the beginning of the 20^th century, The Russian writer S. Vajsenberg writes, the local Karaites would often compare the surroundings of chufut qale to the outskirts of Jerusalem and named the mound in front of the ancient castle “the mount of olives”. Kizilov opines (in "matzevot", p. 72) that the name emek yehoshafat was first given by Karaite pilgrims to Jerusalem in the 17^th and 18^th centuries who noticed the stark similarites between the 2 localities.

Karaites, like other Jews (and perhaps even more) always maintained a close connection to Jerusalem and put a special emphasis on making a pilgrimage to Jerusalem at least once during their lives (not dissimilar to the Muslim hajj to Mecca). Many recordings of such travelogues have been preserved. In addition, many of the tombstones at the necropolis likewise contain references to Jerusalem. Aside from the obvious religious connection to Jerusalem, Karaites were also able to do so relatively easily during the many centuries when both Crimea and Jerusalem were under Ottoman rule.

Why the Change to Balta Teymez?

The first one who called the burial grounds by this new name appears to have been Hakhan (emphasis on the 'n) Seraya Shapshal. Shapshal undertook the radical turkicization of the Karaite community of Crimea and Eastern Europe and stripped them of all vestiges of Judaism (even going as far as to ban the Hebrew language). The name arose because of the heavily wooded area in the center of the cemetery, particularly the "great oak" that had attained almost sacred status among the local Karaites. Shapshal spoke of religious ceremonies having been conducted there to pray for rain or to put a stop to plague. This kind of shamanistic pagan worship is not foreign to the region and was cited as “proof” of the non Jewish Turkic origin of the local Karaites (some local Karaites still practice this holdover from dark times when any connection to Judaism was tantamount to a death sentence. See here beginning at the 3:12 mark) . Interestingly enough, the Tatar rulers took full advantage of this adoration and often extorted money from the community by threatening to uproot the trees. Kizilov ( in "matzevot" p. 141, note 7) puts forth a different theory as to why the Karaites guarded the trees so zealously. He claims that it is tied in with the Karaite tendency to generally neglect their burial grounds because “from dust hast thou arisen and to dust thou shalt return” (Genesis 3:19). This is also the reason why Karaites generally frown at the (increasingly common) Jewish custom of praying at a gravesite. (see for instance the Karaite sage Sahl b. Mazliah's sharp rebuke of this custom in Pinsker, Likuttei Kadmoniot II, Ch. 32. Mentioned in El-Gamil, Toledot Part I, p. 73).

NOTES:

(1) One notes that the eschatological midrashic work Sefer Zerubavel mentions עמק יהושפט as a place that would take center stage in the Messianic age:

כי שם יהיה משפט לרשעים ושמחה לצדיקים

see Wertheimer, בתי מדרשות תק'

(2) Bemerkungen auf einer Reise in die südlichen Statthalterschaften des Rußischen Reichs in den Jahren 1793 und 1794 (Leipzig, 1799—1801), p. 35

היזהרו בבני עניים שמהן תצא שופין או מוצארט...; Daoud Hosni and the Egyptian Karaites

2011-08-17T05:31:00.006-04:00

Daoud Hosni (1870-1973) was one of the greatest composers of the modern age and arguably the founder of modern Egyptian music. He was the first in the Middle East to compose music for an entire Opera in Arabic ('Samson and Delilah'). Hosni was born to a Karaite-Jewish family in Cairo with deep roots in the country.

He is credited for giving rise to a new generation of famous singers, most important and famous among them, 'Oum Kulsum'.

Daoud Hosni grew up in Egypt during that period of progress when its youth awakened and struggled to assert itself and the country became a part of Europe. Also, at that time, Mohamed Abdo, “Hero of Egyptian Nationalism”, spread the spirit of freedom in the heart of the Egyptian masses, and Verdi the Italian composer, composed the music of “Aida” for the Egyptian Opera. On the other hand, Abdo El-Hamouli and, Mohamed Osman infused a new style in Arabic music, and Sheikh Salama Hegazi founded the Egyptian Singing Theater.

Daoud Hosni passed away on the 9th of December 1937 after a brief illness, and was buried the 10th, in the Karaite Jewish Cemetery of Bassateen near Cairo and was eulogized by the community's Chief Hakham Tovia Levi-Babovich (pictured) among others.

In 1940 Hakham Babovich (officiated 1934-56) mentioned him in a speech to the community. In his speech he mentioned the Talmudic dictum 1הזהרו בבני עניים כי מהם תצא תורה
and lamented the fact that the community did not have a scholarship fund for the gifted youngsters in their midst (in the same speech he also listed the lack of a proper hebrew school for the youth, home for the aged, home for post-partum women, and a Museum and archive).

Re: Hosni:

הוא היה בעל כשרון גדול ולא היה להוריו הון לשלחו לבית ספר מיוחד.... דמו בנפשכם! לו היה לחוסני מזל טוב והיה לומד חוכמת הניגון באופן מסודר מי יודע לאיזה מדרגה גבוה היה מגיע. אולי היה יוצא לנו
chopin או mozart
או גלינקא, רובינשטיין, או מאייקפר 2

NOTES:

1. נדרים פא ע"א

2. see El-Gamil, Yosef TOLEDOT HAYAHDUT HAKERAIT VOL. II, p. 253

Karaite Hakhamim Who Encouraged the Study of Mishna and Talmud

2011-07-12T04:53:00.018-04:00

(Note: I did not bother translating the Hebrew text. However should there be popular demand by readers, I'd be happy to do so).

Following the theme of the previous post, we also see a converse phenomenon; that of Karaite Hakhamim pointing out the importance of studying the Mishna and Talmud. The reason usually given for this is twofold: 1. to better understand the Karaite position, one must also understand the other side, 2. because there are many things found in tannaitic and amoraic literature that are in harmony with karaite exegesis and understanding of the Torah.

Hakham Nissi ben Noah (active in Basra, Iraq circa 8th century) , was the first of the Karaite hakhamim to advocate the study of the Mishna and Talmud. He writes:

וממה שצריך לדעת ולהודיע שאנחנו הקראים אין אנחנו מכחישים כל דברי המשנה והתלמוד מכל וכל כמחשבת הרבניים, חלילה לנו מרשע ומעוול כזה, כי כבר הקדמנו כי במשנה ובתלמוד יש דברים טובים ורעים, בקבלה אמיתית ממשה ר"עה ומן הנביאים האמיתיים והם ההלכות שאינם עומדים כנגד פשוטי התורה. אבל אדרבה מסכימים עמהם...ולכן חייבו חכמינו הקדמונים ע"ה ללמוד המשנה והתלמוד ואמרו כי רוב דבריהם דברי אבותינו הם 1

Hakham Shelomo ben Afida Ha-kohen (1836-1893), born in Greece and officiated as Hakham in Egypt, authored the Karaite Halakhic compendium Yeriot Shlomo, ( 2nd edition. Ramla, Israel 1986):

ומהראוי לדעת, כי לא כל התורה שבע"פ דחוה חכמינו הקדושים עליהם השלום רק אותם
העמודים כנגד הכתוב, כי יש ויש בתוכה דברים מתקרבים את האמת ומסכים השכל האנושי
בהם אשר על זה חייב הרב רבנו נסי בן נח ז"ל לבני עמנו ללמוד המשנה והתלמוד, להוציא סולת
מן הפסולת ובר מן התבן, אשר על זה היה ממליץ מורי ורבי כה"ר יצחק יפת החכם ז"ל "את
הטוב נקבל ואת הרע לא נקבל".

וההסכמה מאיתנו לקצת ההלכות אינה להיותן פירושים מקובלים איש מפי איש עד מה רבנו עליו
השלום, אלא מצד היותם ביאורים מפי חכמים ונבוני לב אוהבי האמת, אשר לא חדלו בכל דור
ודור. וזה על דרך מאמר קיבל האמת ממי שאמרה. ועל כמו אלה הענינים אמרו חכמינו קדושי
עליון "רוב דבריהם דברי אבותינו הם", כוונתם על אותם שתיארם דניאל הנביא ע"ה בשם
משכילי עם (י"א, ל"ג), שהיו קודם החלוקה שנים רבות. וזאת החלוקה היא אחת מהצרות
שעברו על ישראל בהיותם בארץ אויביהם בסיבת הריגת החכמים מכירי אמת בימי ינאי
והורקנוס כמיועד "וְיָמִים רַבִּים, לְיִשְׂרָאֵל: לְלֹא אֱלֹהֵי אֱמֶת, וּלְלֹא כֹּהֵן מוֹרֶה וּלְלֹא תוֹרָה" (דברי
הימים ב', ט"ו, ג'). ועל זה יעד הנביא ע"ה "וְלֹא יהיה- (יִהְיוּ-) עוֹד לִשְׁנֵי גוֹיִם, וְלֹא יֵחָצוּ עוֹד לִשְׁתֵּי
מַמְלָכוֹת" (יחזקאל ל"ז, כ"ב). 2

The Polish Karaite Hakham, Mordechai ben Nissan (1824-1864) in his work Dod Mordechai which he authored in response to a query by a Dutch Hebraist (Jacob Trigland) regarding the division between Karaites and Rabbanites, writes:

...נסי בן נח חייב לבני עמנו ללמוד המשנה והתלמוד, ואין זה תפארת לבעלי הקבלה, כי רוב אמריהם דברי אבותנו הם
( the preceding is a quote from Hakham Aharon ben Yosef, author of Sefer Hamivchar)

גם אמרו החכמים ע"ה כל קבלה שלא תעמוד נגד לא תוסיף עליו ולא תגרע ממנו , וכל ישראל מודים בה, ויש לה סיוע מן הכתוב נקראת העתקה ונקבלה עלינו ונפאר בזה שרובם תיקוני אבותינו הקדושים הם. אם כן איך לא נעשה אותם? כי וודאי צריך לנו שנאמין בהם ולעשותם בלב טוב ובנפש חפיצה

(here he gets very controversial, but it's a discussion for a different time) ....

ובפרט בהיותם דעות של רב שמאי ובית דינו והקודמים לו...לפי שאנו הקראים יחד סמוכין ונשענין ברב שמאי ובית דינו כאשר קיבלנו הוראת התורה והעתקה בה ממנו3

The last of the Egyptian-born Hakhamim in Israel, Hayyim ben Isaac Ha-levi (1930-2009) in the introduction to his Halakhic compendium Maayan Hayyim writes:

זוהי דעה מוטעית הרווחית בקרב אנשים, לאמור שאנו הקראים מכחישים את כל דברי המשנה והתלמוד מכל וכל, חלילה לנו מעוול כזה כי התלמוד והמשנה דברי רבותנו הם: יש בהם דברים אמיתיים ונכונים, וכן דברים לא אמיתיים ולא נכונים.

הדברים האמיתיים והנכונים הם הדברים שיש להם סיוע מן הכתב ושאינם סותרים אותו ואינם עומדים כנגדו. אלה הם הדברים שנמסרו בקבלה אמיתית ממשה רוע"ה דרך הנביאים ועד ימנו אנו.

אולם הדברים הלא נכונים והלא-אמיתיים הם הם הדברים אשר עומדים כנגד הכתוב וסותרים אותו: דברים אלה בדו אותם חלק מהחכמים, במיוחד בסוף ימי הבית שני. לכן אין אנו מקבלים 4דברים אלה.

Most Karaite Hakhamim freely quoted passages from Rabbinic literature. Hakham Ben Afuda, refers to 'hazal' numerous times throughout his halakhic compendium (for instance, in his instructions on the institution of post-temple prayer : "וכן אמרו החז"ל שהתפילות במקום הקרבנות תקנום") 5

Even Reshef, though a harsh critic of Rabbinites, in his early career, freely quotes adages from the mishna and talmud. (although sometimes he is in the habit of quoting non-existent 'hazals' (see here for instance and Fred Macdowell's comment: "Incidentally, naturally I was curious about the following remark: " אמרו חז"ל כבוד האיש לעשות רצונו." My encyclopedic familiarity with rabbinic literature didn't help me, but some text searching did. Naturally the phrase does not appear in rabbinic works, so I believe we are speaking of an alternate חז"ל. Interestingly enough, the only other instance of this remark I could find was by Firkowitsch himself, on pg. 74 of his אבני זכרון. Here he does not mention חז"ל, thus I am unclear if he is truly quoting Karaite sages or himself (in which case he is probably trying to be clever here)."

Interestingly enough, Ben Afuda likewise cites a hazal, that I could not locate; אל תדור בעיר שאין בה בית כנסת ורופא
(see Yeriot p. 14)

I found something similar but not quite, here:

אל תדור בעיר שראשיה תלמידי-חכמים (פסחים קיג.

כי הם שקועים בתורתם וחכמתם ואין להם פנאי לעניני הצבור. וזה מן הדברים שצוה ר' עקיבא את בנו, ונמצא גם במשלי בן-סירא (אך אפשר מאד שהוא מאמר עממי). ושם (קיג.) אמר רב לרב אסי: אל תדור בעיר דריש – מתא אמיא (שראש העיר הוא רופא. ג"כ מטעם הנ"ל)

NOTES:

1.Quoted in El-gamil, Yosef. Toledot Ha-yahadut Ha-kerait, vol II, p.378

2. p.91 in PDF

3. Dod Mordechai (Ramla, 1966), p. 53

4. Mayyan Chaim (Ramla 1988) p. 16

5. Yeriot Shlomo, p. 14

*Not all Karaites agreed with the liberal approach to the study of Rabbinic writings. In a recent conversation with a Karaite man in the synagogue in Jerusalem, he expressed himself in no uncertain terms that those who advocate the study of rabbinic writings are gravely mistaken.

Three Rabbis who Encouraged the Study of Karaite Literature.

2011-07-10T11:32:00.007-04:00

Naphtali Tzvi Yehuda Berlin (known as 'the Netziv'), Yashar of Candia (Yosef Shlomo Rofeh Delmedigo) and Rabbi Abraham Isaac Kook all encouraged the study of Karaite works.

Netziv in his commentary עמק הנצי"ב on Shoftim, vol. iii, pg 189:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_N61RVdo9I44/SGTnaKkkjsI/AAAAAAAAAQU/ELqfj8mRods/s1600-h/emek.jpg

Quoting the enigmatic S. from onthemainline: "As you can see, he directs the reader to the introduction of the grammatical work אשכול הכופר by the Karaite scholar Yehuda Ha-dassi, which obviously was on his reading list. The commentary contains references to other works...."

The only problem with that is, that Eshkol Hakopher is not a grammatical book. It is a work on history and Halakhah

Hakham Rahamim Qanai (a Karaite Hakham and scholar) cleared up this confusion for me by pointing out that in the introduction to אשכול הכופר Kalev Afendopolo shows where Hadasi discusses grammar as being indispensible for understanding the text of the TaNaKh. The highlighted section of the text of הנצי"ב translates as “in the introduction to Eshkol HaKofer, on [the subject of] grammar”

Yashar of Candia:

from here
Delmedigo was attracted to the Karaites by their love for secular learning and it is also possible that the hostility of Orthodox Jews caused him to turn occasionally to the Karaite sectaries for company. He was delighted to find in Egypt several works on Maimonides' Guide, as well as certain writings of Abraham ibn Ezra, whom he greatly admired. From Cairo, Delmedigo went to Constantinople, then a prominent center of learning. Here, again, he befriended several Karaite leaders, including Moses Mezordi, from whom he acquired many Karaite works.

Delmedigo (about whose descendants I blogged about before here), in his epistle to the Karaite Hakham Zerah ben Natan of Trakai, entitled מכתב אחוז writes:

בין כך בני, אל תטוש תורת אמך ללמוד בספרי הקראים כלם ובס' המצוות והאדרת [הכוונה לאדרת אליהו של החכם אליהו בשייצי] והיית לכל רואיך לשם ולתפארת. בני, אם תקח אמרי, אלו הספרים מספיקים לך לדעת כל למוד יקיר מן הארץ אשר בלבנון עד האזוב אשר יוצא בקיר
--

מ ש פ ט ה נ ע ר ומעשהו הוא אחר שיתחיל להבין בלשון
ה ק דש בתורה ובנביאים וזה על פי פירושי הקראים
כפי פשטם האמתי
--

וירגיל עצמו בפיוטים שחברו חכמי הקראים כי כל תפלותיהכם מדברי
הנביאים

See more on Delmedigo and the Karaites here

Rabbi Abraham Kook in one of his letters, outlines the proper way to study:

בכלל דרך העבודה צריך להיות: להשוות על כל ענין את הבבלי לעומת הירושלמי וחיפוש בכל המקורים השייכים לו, מהקדמונים: התרגומים, המסורות, תשובות הגאונים וכו', עד דברי האחרונים: בעלי ההלכה, הפוסקים, המבקרים וכו', לחקור גם על העבודה החיצונה, כשל הנכרים, הקראים ולברר את המקום שהלכו בו לפי תומם בדרך ישרה ומקום המעדת רגליהם. ובכלל להרבות בחיפוש, בחקירה של ישוב הדעת, ולמעט בהשערות ודמיונות. וכשירחיב ד' גבולנו נוכל לשוטט גם על פני כל היסוד המשפטי בכללות האנושיות, להראות עד כמה גדלה השפעת הקודש על החול, להעלותו, ונתחבר בזה עם חכמי לב יודעי ד' המבינים בספרויות עמים שונים,

Free translation:

In general, the way of learning should be: compare on every matter the Babylonian Talmud versus the Jerusalem Talmud and search through all the relevant sources, the targumum, traditions, geonic responsa, etc., until the writings of the 'aharonim': the halakahic deicisors. Also investigate the work done by the those 'on the outside', such as gentiles, Karaites and see where they went straight and where they deviated. In general one should use reason and common sense when learning and minimize speculations and assumptions

אגרות הראי"ה ב (לעיל הערה 6), עמ' קפב

A KARAITE CONVERSION STORY

2011-07-07T20:34:00.004-04:00

By Hartwig Hirschfeld Ph.D.

The records of the Jews in Egypt under Mohammedan rule are not very rich in facts of historical importance. Being almost entirely excluded from taking part in the affairs of state, their fate varied according to the religious inclinations of the rulers. Official intolerance reached its apogee under the sceptre of the Khalifa Al Hakim (who died about 1020), and it was not till 150 years later that a change was wrought by the fall of the Fatimide dynasty and the simultaneous termination of ecclesiastical government in Egypt. With the arrival of secular rulers, the first of whom was the famous Saladin, an era of comparative tolerance was inaugurated which, with short interruptions, lasted during the periods of the Seljuk and Mamluk Sultans. The political insignificance of the Egyptian Jews during this period is accurately reflected in the historical sources at our disposal. Arab authors did not pay much attention to their affairs. Even Jewish travellers and chroniclers, such as Benjamin of Tudela and Sambari, have not much to tell about them. As regards the communal, social, domestic, and literary life, however, these Jews themselves have provided a vast material of documents of every imaginable kind, pre served in what is known as the Cairo Genizah. When this material has been sifted and studied, our knowledge of this chapter of Jewish history will be immensely enriched, ii. 81 6 82 The lot of the Egyptian Jews under the rule of Sultan Al Malik Al Zahir Khoshkadem (1461-1467) was, on the whole, a tolerable one. With the exception of one instance when he, to please the clergy of his faith, renewed the old law forbidding Jews and Christians to hold public offices, and to wear turbans or other than special colours, 1 they were allowed to practise their religion undisturbedly. Even these restrictions seem to have been as gradually forgotten as had been done on former occasions. As an indirect sign of the absence of official annoyance we can regard the case of a serious quarrel which at that time arose between the two sections of the community of Fostat (Old Cairo).

The Jewish inhabitants of this city were divided into a larger Rabbanite and a much smaller Karaite community, the former possessing eight synagogues 2 and the latter only two. The names and topographical description of these synagogues have been handed down to us by the Arab historian, Al Makrizi, who finished his bulky Description of Egypt* about fifteen years prior to the incident which forms the subject of this study. Several of these synagogues are mentioned again by Joseph Sambari, who compiled his " Chronicles " 4 in the latter half of the seventeenth century. It is only necessary to compare the number of these synagogues with that given by Benjamin of Tudela to see how considerably the Jewish com munity of Fostat had increased during the intervening three centuries. From Benjamin s silence concerning the Karaite and Samaritan communities we may infer that, at his time, they either did not exist in Cairo or were of little account. An interesting point in connection with the incident in 1 See Weil, Geschichte der Abbassidenchalifen in Egypten, ii. p. 302. a See Zunz in Benjamin of Tiidela, ed. Asher, ii. p. 198 sqq. Cf. Lane, Modern Egyptians, ii. p. 343. 3 Billdk, 1853, ii. pp. 464 sqq. 4 See Neubauer, Medieval Jewish Chronicles , i. pp. 136 sq. 83 question is that it contributes to our knowledge of the holders of the dignity of Nagid among the Egyptian Jews. 1 The Nagid of the Rabbanite Jews at the period with which we are concerned was Joseph b. Khalifa, whilst the chief of the Karaites was called Al Shams b. Abdul Karim b. Feiruz, who was also the Sultan s banker. The report upon which the following story is based is taken from a MS. of the British Museum (Or. 2538, fol. 7383), and is headed "Story of the Europeans who adopted the laws of the Karaites." It is written in vulgar Arabic, but in Hebrew characters, and is occasionally intermixed with Hebrew words, phrases and quotations from the Bible.

As can be gathered from the title, the anonymous author was a Karaite, and, to judge from the fact that he now and again speaks in the first person, he was an eye-witness of the affair. The account must, however, have been penned some years after the incident had taken place, as several persons who were connected with it are alluded to as deceased. The most remarkable part of the story is undoubtedly the interference of the Moslim judicial authorities in a matter which concerned the internal affairs of the Jewish community ex clusively. This interference was not, however, foisted upon them but solicited by the Karaites. The decisions of the judges are nevertheless distinguished by great impartiality. This is even the case in the Fatwa of the Shafii High Kadhi, whose seeming intolerance was nothing but the expression of the law of his country. For it is laid down that in Moslim lands no one may change his religion unless he adopt Islam. 2 The episode of the judicial inquiry brings us to the question of the authenticity of the report, or, at least, of the accuracy 1 Magazin fur die Wisscnsch. des Judenthums, vol. xvii. pp. 50-58 ; Graetz, Gesch., vi. p. 306. See also Bacher inJ.Q.tf., xv. pp. 88 sqq. 2 See Sachau, Mohammedan. Recht nach schafeitischer Lehre, p. 844. of many details.

As can easily be seen, the author does not take the slightest trouble to hide his bias, and the triumphant way in which he, somewhat in the style of the concluding chapters of the Book of Esther, describes the discomfiture of the Rabbanites, cannot fail to arouse the suspicion that his account is highly coloured. Many statements he makes must, therefore, be received with caution. On the other hand, the report mentions the names of about twenty persons, some of whom can be proved to be historical from other sources. This is the case with four of the five Kadhis who signed the Fatwas. One of these, the Shafii Kadhi Yahya Al Munawi, 1 was a man of high position, and the Arab historian, Al Suyuti (to whom we owe lists of the Kadhis of the four different schools), states that he composed a dirge on the occasion of his death. The absence of the name of the Maliki Kadhi from Al Suyuti s lists is accounted for by the fact that it ends with the year 1442, whilst the Karaite appeal to the courts of justice did not take place till three- and-twenty years later. The list is therefore supplemented by our report. The introduction of the Kadhis into the story forms a strong element of historical veracity. Finally, even the bribes extracted by several high officials of state, and the Sultan s son in particular, are in keeping with what historians relate about the usages in vogue under Khoshkadem s govern ment as well as his own character. 2 In the background of the story we see the spectacle of the persecutions of the Jews in Christian Spain. The people on whose account the feud arose had come from Toledo, and were probably Marranos. This may be gathered from one remark in the tale in which it is intimated that they might 1 See p. 89, rem. 3. 2 Weil, I.e., p. 314; S. L. Poole, The Story of Cairo, p. 236 ("Justice was bought and sold"). 85 be Christians. Incidentally we also learn that the Egyptian Jews were not possessed of great wealth ; further, that the prohibition of holding land, except by special permission of the Sultan, was strictly enforced, and finally, that the main centres of Karaism at that period were Egypt, Palestine, and Turkey.

In Spain Karaism had already dwindled down to vanishing point. The following translation of the report is somewhat abridged, especially in the latter portions, a certain amount of trivial matter being omitted. The style is occasionally so confused and rambling that, if all this were reproduced, it would be difficult to keep the thread of the story. STORY OF THE EUROPEANS WHO EMBRACED , THE LAW OF THE KARAITES. In the blessed month of Ellul 1776 of the era of Docu ments, which is the year 5225 of the creation of the world (1465), there arrived at Al Kahira a Jewish sage of great learning named Aaron the Pious (of blessed memory). He came from the country of Ifranj l and the city of Toledo. With him were two brothers, of whom one was called Joseph, the other David. They were accompanied by twenty-one compatriots. This man went to dwell in the Karaite quarter. A prominent member of the Karaite community (which may the Almighty preserve) called upon him, and they conversed together on matters of the law, and on their axioms of belief as well as ours. He (the visitor) informed them that they did not believe in the Mishnah or in the Talmud, that all his life he had not eaten of the tail [of a sheep], because he knew that it belonged to the forbidden fat, 2 and that he endeavoured to find those who followed the Torah of the Lord, and did not 1 Europeans. 2 Lev. iii. 9 ; ix. 20. Cf. Ibn Ezra and Nahmanides. 86 hold with those who contradicted the teaching of Moses. He [the stranger] asked us to observe silence concerning his affairs, and added that he intended travelling to Jerusalem and back again. We acceded to his request. He then, as an act of penitence, left for Jerusalem, whilst his companions remained in Al Kahira. He had given them instructions concerning their mode of life, and all this remained secret till the month of Tishri. Then arose a difference between us and the Rabbanites [in the following manner]. If the Rabbanites celebrated New Moon on the Sabbath, the Karaites fixed the same according to their usual method, and zealously kept the practice of the true observation of the moon. The brother of the [above-mentioned] man came to us and said : " We will fast the Day of Atonement only with you on Wednesday." l We replied : " Do as you please." Some thing concerning this came to the ears of the Rabbanites. On the eve of the Day of Atonement the Rabbanites sent their Nagid, whose name was Joseph b. Khalifa, to [the above- named] David, with whom he held a secret conversation. " I have been informed," he said, " that 2 . . . you do not eat of our food, and that you live in a fashion different from ours." He replied : " Yes, we do not eat the tail, because it is for bidden in the Torah." 3 The Nagid said : " The Sages de clared it lawful, and said that it did not belong to the forbidden fat." " I do not listen to the Sages," said he, "at all in these matters, and will not eat of the tail." " You contradict, then," the Nagid replied, " the Sages, but whoever does so in any point is liable to be put to death according to Deut. xvii. 11 12." These sentences, the other answered, do not refer to the Sages, 1 Rabbanite New Year in 1465 fell on a Saturday and the Day of Atonement on a Monday. 2 Fol. 74vo. In the original : mniwa nW vhn KO DDK DKonM> IPKO 3 Talmud, Hullin, fol. uyvo (Lev. ix. 19). 8; but to the " Priests, Levites, and the Judges who shall live in those days." This will be confirmed by any one who reads this chapter through. Bring a copy of the Torah and read Deut. xvii. 5 sqq. The Nagid then said : " This is apostasy ; you are Karaites." Thereupon David went before the [Karaite] community and told them what had passed between him and the Nagid. " I am afraid of the Rabbanites/ said he, " because our condition has come to their knowledge. As long as we stay here we shall keep our ways, and you should know that we do not live like non-Jews. 1 Should we adopt Karaite ways and deny those of the Rabbanites, they would find us out." The Karaites answered : " Fear nothing ; should the Moslims be come aware of this we will give them the necessary explana tion 2 as to what prevented you, when you first came to Al Kahira, from stating that you follow Karaite ways, and that you are not familiar with our customs in this city." He answered : " We have been living six years in this country, 3 but we did not find one who followed the way of the Torah ex clusively. Every one to whom we speak bows to the decisions of the Mishnah and Talmud, and forsaking the written Torah, says one thing and does another. They tell us that we belong to the Karaite Jews who live in Egypt, Palestine, Turkey, and Persia, and arrange their religious affairs according to the literal meaning of the Torah, declare it unlawful to eat of the 1 Orig. fol. 75ro, 1. 7, anhon wanhon K TS D^iyn mow jo -ION to^y NO JN laiyn Drua | KJianya pKan? anno aonmi anpo is a verbal form derived from 2 Orig. ibid., n:y r^a -IDK^K xhn JKI ejib DD^J; 6i wby KD xnpo ^n nnno p^so jm Orig. ibid., ngtata nin^ bn^M n^i^N pn pJDnnD N3^ jna. 88 pig, but permit the sow to be eaten, asserting that the Torah only speaks of the male pig. 1 We wonder at such words, and whenever we hear Karaites speak we tell them what our ways are and what theirs. If we knew the Karaite way to be the right one we would come to you with all our heart." We (the Karaites) said to them : " Fear not, the Almighty will help you if it pleases Him, because whoever trusts in Him finds gratification." Then they went before our chief, the famous Al Shams b. Abdul Karim, on Sabbath, the I3th of Tishri, 2 and acquainted him with all that had happened to them. They advised the Karaite community to put questions to the four Kadhis before the Rabbanites had time to speak. They set to work together and wrote four letters of enquiry as follows : WHAT THE HONOURED AND LEARNED MEN PUT DOWN : O ye Imams of religion and ye learned in the laws of the two sects of Karaite and Rabbanite Jews ! Suppose a Rab- banite wishes to live in Karaite fashion, or a Karaite desires to become a Rabbanite ; how is such a person to be dealt with, and may any objection be raised against such practice or not ? Give us your decision, ye to whom heavenly reward shall be granted. 3 I. REPLY OF THE MALIKI [KADHI] : Neither of the two sects can raise any objection against the other, but every individual [must be treated] according to his belief. Whoever encroaches upon the other fs status], should be checked. And when a party becomes converted to the belief of the other, no opposition can be raised against him, 1 Lev. xi. 7. 2 According to the calendar of the Karaites, who celebrated New Year on the Monday following the Rabbanite New Year. 3 Concerning this formula, see Goldziher in Z.D.M.G., liii. p. 667. Cf.Journ. As., 1871, p. 167. 8 9 because the whole of Judaism is but one religion. God knows what is right. MOHAMMED B. ABI BAKR B. AL SHEKH AL HusAiNi. 1 II. REPLY OF THE SHAFII KADHI. There can be no objection raised either way, because the Jews form one community as regards the principles of faith. ZAKARIYYA B. [MOHAMMED] AL SHAFII. 2 III. REPLY OF THE SHAFII [HIGH KADHI]. If one of the two sects does not differ from the other in matter of belief, then there can be no objection in case one of them desires to be converted to the other. But if they do differ as regards the maxims of faith to such an extent that each party considers the other as heretic, then any one who desires to change his belief can only become a Moslim. YAHYA B. MOHAMMED AL MUNAWI AL SHAFII, HIGH KADHI. S IV. REPLY OF THE HANAFI [KADHI]. If such a thing is considered lawful by Jewish belief, then neither sect can be prevented [from following the course de sired], since Judaism is but one religion. YAHYA B. MOHAMMED AL AKSARAI AL HANAFi. 4 1 His name is not mentioned either by Al Suyuti or Ibn lyas. From the words added in the MS. to his name : "He was prominent among worthy men," we may conclude that he was not the Kadhi himself, but one of his officials. Ibn lyas, Tarikh Misr, ii. p. 83, mentions the Maliki Kadhi Hisam al dm Harlz. 2 Al Suyuti, ibid., ii. p. 138. His full name was Zakariyya Mohammed Al Ansari Al Suneiki, appointed A. 786 (H.) (1384) ; see also Ibn lyas, ii. p. 120. 3 Ibid., i. p. 253 ; Ibn lyas, ii. 174. As to the functions and prerogatives of the High Kadhi, see Wiistenfeld, Calcaschandi s Geographie und Verwaltung von Aegypten, Abhandll. d. KonigL Gesellsch. d. Wissenschaften Gottingen, vol. xxv., p. 184. 4 Al Suyuti, ibid., i. p. 273 ; Ibn lyas, i. p. 303 ; ii. pp. 74, 84. 9 o V. REPLY OF THE HANBALI [KADHI]. If a person lives according to the tenets of his religion, there exists neither restriction nor objection in the eye of the law. AHMAD B. IBRAHIM. These are the Fatwas [which we have] reproduced literally without adding to, or subtracting from, them. When they arrived, and the community had perused them and seen the disturbing character of the [second] Shafiite Fatwa, they chose the Maliki Kadhi as arbitrator. On the Monday they petitioned him to summon the Rabbanite chiefs, and to exhort them not to demand us to join any other but the noble [Karaite] re ligion. 2 He acceded to their request. We only presented this petition for protection in case they should complain of us, and that we might prevent them complaining and not be troubled by the Maliki Kadhi. 3 On the Sunday Al Shams Abdul Karim sent for the elders of the Rabbanites, whose names were Sadaka b. Abda and Abdul Daim b. Al Tajir. He met each of them separately and said : " We want you not to raise any objection to what these people desire to do, neither to lodge a complaint against them, otherwise the matter will go out of your and our hands, and Gentiles will interfere with us. You will, then, commit a sin of which nothing good will come. We cannot expel them after they have taken us into their confidence, and we know 1 Ibid., i. p. 276. Ibn lyas, ii. p. 130, gives his full genealogy. He held his office from 857 (1453) to 876 (1471). See also Ms. Br. Mus. Add. 23,360, fol. i6vo. 2 Orig. fol. 76vo. Ppt^N JTW&t JIDK^K KmiW ^ DTOK. 3 Orig., ibid. This passage is somewhat obscure. It appears that instead of *D/KE?X we should read JJBM50X, and refer the passage to the hidden threat in the reply of the Shafii High Kadhi. 91 that they have abandoned their former belief, that they follow the way of the Torah, and seek, as we do, the way of the Lord. We must not forsake them." " Thou knowest," they replied, " that this affair causes us great distress. There are people among us who have no sense, and, if they hear this, circum stances will arise over which we have no control, and the result will be unpleasantness between us." [Abdul Karim then suggested arranging a meeting of ten elders of each party in order to settle the question. The meeting took place in the house of the Nagid 1 ].

After this the Nagid came to us and said: "Have nothing to do with these people, for they are neither Karaites nor Rabbanites. If they wish, they may create a special religion for themselves. I had an interview with one of them called R. Moses, and he mentioned to me that he intended buying an estate and settling on it with his people. I told him that in this country no one was permitted to buy anything except from the Sultan, who would not let him have one. I urged him to go to Palestine or Galilee and carry out his intention there." To us it appeared that he only travelled there for this purpose, but that he [the Nagid] said this in order that we should leave them alone. Now the Rabbanites were greatly perplexed, and every one gave his opinion. On Friday night the Nagid came to us accompanied by a number of Rabbanites, among whom was Samuel Khashshd. We had a long conversation, lasting half the night. David and Joseph of the Europeans were also there. They discussed the subject of the [sheep s] tail and similar matters at great length. They all rejected the views of the Rabbanites, and declared them to be unbelievers in many respects. Then arose Samuel Al Khashshd 2 and said : 1 Fol. 76vo-77vo. Abridged in the translation. 2 The author adds 9 2 " To-morrow I will lodge a complaint against these people ; let them become Mohammedans. They are originally Chris tians, and it is better that they should belong neither to us nor to you than form an independent sect." The Karaites and Rabbanites dispersed in bad temper. In the same night the mother of R. Moses, who was living with him and his brother, became dangerously ill. They brought her into the street of the Gate Strr, 1 and a member of the community received her in his house. The Karaites and Rabbanites spent the whole Friday in anger and pertur bation. The latter went about trying to do mischief behind the backs of the Karaites without our noticing it. Then Ibn Al Khashsha went to a person named Ala al Dm Al Khabuni, who occupied a high position in the Karaite community. He said concerning them among other things : " These people have a new religion, and have not been under Islam[ic sway] something like 500 years. 2 Through their wealth and action they are men of influence. If you will bring this matter to the knowledge of the Sultan, he will not only give you power over their lives and property, but hold you in high favour. You know what the Koran 3 says concerning the Rabbanites, but it does not speak about Karaites." This man 4 took great trouble in the affair. He went with Samuel Al Khashsha to the Sultan s son, 5 who was the wickedest and greediest man imaginable, and told him all 1 See Makrizi, I.e. ii. p. 471. 2 Orig. fol. 77vo, H3D iTNB 3 Sura, iii. 72 sq. The passage contains the charge that Jews had altered the Torah, and that the Rabbis claimed obedience to their regulations. It is on this occasion that the term Rabbanites (rabbaniyyun) is used for the first time, but it need not be pointed out that it does not stand in contrast to Karaites. If any such existed at that time, they were unknown in North Arabia, and could not have been alluded to in the Koran. 4 Ala al dm Al khabuni. 5 Ibn lyas, ii. p. 83, says that Khoshkadem left two young sons, and that the name of the eldest was Sldi Mansur. The name of the other is not disclosed 93 this with exaggerations. The prince sent in the following night twenty men to the Karaite quarter and ordered them to make a raid on the synagogue on the Sabbath, and to throw the community into confusion. In the night of this Sabbath the mother of R. Moses died. Two Rabbanites went in the middle of the night to the prefect of the non-Moslim population and said to him : " My Lord, there came to the Karaites a foreign woman of great wealth. She brought with her a large amount of money, precious stones, gold, silver, and jewels. The people seized her, administered a narcotic to her, murdered her, and took all her property. Make a raid upon them, and inform the Sultan, that he may seize her property and hold us in favour." l In the forenoon of the Sabbath he despatched twenty men, who seized the house where the corpse lay, and [another] twenty attacked the synagogue, arrested the elders of the community, and brought them to the house of the Sultan s son. They had just been reading the morning prayer. 2 The congregation was seized with great panic on account of this. The detained men remained in the house of the Sultan s son, and he sent all that the deceased woman had left into her house. The Vice-Kadhi, 3 supported by several witnesses, made a list of all that was in the house linen, furniture, and books without omitting anything. They valued it and found that it amounted to 200 Ashrafis. 4 All the Europeans gathered in the house of the deceased. They were all apprehended on the Sabbath and brought into the house of the governor, where they were put in chains. They presented the list to the governor, but he found nothing 1 Orig. fol. 78ro, fo W bm 2 Orig. 1XV i>SB D. 3 Orig. * 4 Ducats. 94 of which the Rabbanites had spoken. Then he said : " What is to be done ? I have told the Sultan distinctly that these people are possessed of considerable wealth." " The Rab banites, my Lord," answered they, " have taken the money and hidden it. Let four of their people be arrested." [When these were brought before him] he frightened them with the words : " I will bring you up to the Sultan, and he will flog you." Being in great fear, they came back to him with a letter and many messages, and offered him 400 dinar to take to the Sultan in order to appease him. He signed a receipt for the money, and ordered them to bury the corpse. They took her out on the Sabbath night after midnight, and she had a funeral such as had never been seen. They buried her in the Karaite cemetery. Now, the people who had gone to the house of the Sultan s son were received by his men, and remained there until he came down in the afternoon from the citadel. When he arrived he heard what Samuel, the accursed, had said. He had with him an intimate friend called Abul Fadhl, secretary to the Mamluks. When he perceived in what condition Abdul Karim was on the Sabbath day, he said to the Sultan s son : " My Lord, this Abdul Karim has to look after the people, he is also the Sultan s banker and cannot possibly do anything wrong either in regard to the house or any one of his people. Let him go to finish his Sabbath. I will guarantee for him, if it please you that I may do so." Among the attendants of the Sultan s son was a certain Sha ban Badruddar, a person than whom a wickeder could not be seen, or a more sinister one. He tried to interfere in the matter. 1 We, however, did not want him, because he took money and could never be satisfied. The Sultan s son said 1 Orig. fol. 78vo, UNU^K HnS l m^K J?DV ; literally : he widened the wound and opened the gates. 95 to Abdul Karim : " Go home with thy people, but come here on Monday ; we will then hold a meeting with the Kadhis and settle your affair, viz., whether, or not, you follow a new creed. We will also consider what they and you have to say." They adjourned to the synagogue, whither they summoned the people, and said to them : " Trouble not about this matter, though the Rabbanites endeavour to kill us. Let us take counsel what to do." They advised them to pray to God, " for He forsaketh not His people for the sake of His great name." Every one who was in the service of an Emir went to him and informed him of what had happened. They also resolved not to stir in the matter till after the feast, and further, that Abdul Fadhl should wait upon the Sultan s son. The Rabbanites, meanwhile, went about slander ing the Karaites, whilst some people were in their favour, others against them. The Karaites went to the high officials, as the Keeper of the Seal, the Commander-in-Chief, and another person, called Sharaf al dm al Nasiri. They informed them that they would appeal to the Maliki High Kadhi. The Rabbanites sent a denunciation to the Shafii [High Kadhi], declaring the Europeans to be unbelievers, and demanding their conversion to Islam ; but God was merciful, and the matter dragged on until the eve of Simhath Torah. On that day a large Rabbanite gathering and about 200 Karaites met in the house of the Sultan s son, bringing the Shafii Kadhi with them. The prince presided, letting the Rabbanites take their stand on one side and the Karaites on the other. The Rabbanites shouted for the Shafii Kadhi, whilst the Karaites did the same for the Maliki. Sha ban Badruddar endeavoured to make a compromise, and said to the Karaites : " Why are you so obstinate ? His Highness the prince has declared himself satisfied with 5000 dinar." He said the same to the Rabbanites, who declared that they did not care about this. 9 6 He then agreed with the Karaites to take 500 Ashrafis, and by his advice they all turned to the Maliki Kadhi. Before the prince left many of his attendants, such as the Chief of the Emirs, the Commander-in-Chief, and the Keeper of the Seal, had gone out and said to the Karaites : " Fear not, we have agreed with His Highness about 500 Ashrafis from both sides, as also to refer you all to the Maliki High Kadhi." This afforded them some relief. When the Sultan s son came out they stood before him, and Sha ban said to him: "Hold thy hand out." 1 After he had done so he said : " Go to the Shafii Kadhi," but all the Rabbanites, God bless you, 2 were obdurate. The Nagid and [Samuel] b. Al Khashsha remained and brought with them the Hakim Samuel before the Shafii Kadhi, who cross-examined him severely until Abul Fadhl relieved him. The Karaites were greatly discomfited, but the Rabbanites shouted with joy, and held themselves ready to kill the Karaites on the spot. God, how ever, had compassion on them. The Shekh Musa Al Iskandari and Abdul Karim b. Feiruz went to the Sultan s son and said to him : " Cast us not into the power of these dogs. Consider, if they behave thus in thy presence, what will they do for us when we have departed from thee." Sha ban replied : " If it is your intention to go to the Maliki Kadhi, pay the Sultan s son 1000 dinar and go." They said: "Yes, we will pay 1000 Ashrafis." Immediately the prince ordered all his attendants to make a raid on the Rabbanites, who were beaten and dragged away, whilst their chief was bound with the sleeves of his coat. Ibn al Khashsha was also bound, and they were led like captives from the Lion Bridge 3 to the house of the Maliki [Kadhi] at the top of the street Zuweila. 1 Orig. fol. 79vo. 1^ "pBK 6OK1 "I T N "|DD. As to TK for T, see Dozy. 2 Orig. ibid. "pW fWK ; literally, " May God help thee." 3 See Makrizi, ii. p. 146 ; Lane-Poole, ibid. pp. 42, 217. 97

Whilst they were kept in this distressed and humiliated condition, the Karaites passed their time in joy, jubilation, and thanksgivings to Him who has shown us great mercy. Wherever they caught a Rabbanite they dragged him to the house of the Maliki [Kadhi]. Afterwards many Rabbanites and leading Karaites held a meeting. The Karaites charged the Rabbanites with having infringed the law of the Torah. One of the points urged was that, whereas we hold that the fast [of the Day of Atonement] should be held on the tenth of Tishri, they had fasted on the eighth. 1 The Kadhi ques tioned the Rabbi on this point, but the latter would give no answer. The Karaites further urged that the Rabbanites declared the eating of a pig lawful when they found it inside a sheep. 2 The Rabbi answered as he was obliged, but only in consideration of the Shafii Kadhi. 3 The Rabbanites were therefore in great trouble, and the Moslims shouted at them, and called them unbelievers. Thus they were made to suffer much unpleasantness. After this a certain Rabbanite, called Abdul Daim the Elder, 4 who was an official of the High Kadhi, came forward. When he heard that they (the Rabbanites) had been driven to the Maliki [Kadhi], he went to the [Shafii] High Kadhi and said : " I conjure thee, accept no appeal against us, 5 and, when the two parties appear before thee, endeavour to make peace between them, but hear not their appeal." He promised to do so, and whenever the Karaites appealed to him he en deavoured to make peace without being harsh. This was in favour of the Rabbanite cause. Many judges and law 1 See above, p. 88. 2 Misinterpretation of the passage Mishnah Hullin, iv. p. 5 (Talmud^ fol. 75vo sq.\ Karaite practice forbids the eating of the embryo altogether. Cf. Aaron b. Elijah, Gan den, fol. 84vo, and Judah Hadassi, Eshkol, par. 233. 3 See the Shafii High Kadhi s reply. 4 See above, p. 90. 5 Orig. foi. 8ovo, mjn & II. 93 students who were present at the sitting tried to contradict them, and called them infidels. The Moslims repeated these charges all over the country. They stopped every Jew and asked him whether he was a Rabbanite or a Karaite. If he said " Karaite " they left him alone, but if he confessed himself a " Rabbanite/ they cursed him and said : " Thou belongst to the people who declare abominable things lawful, who con tradict the law of the Torah, and permit the eating of pork." No Rabbanite was left without fear or injury. To return to what happened during the meeting, the Karaites asserted in the presence of the Nagid and his community that they practised Karaism on the basis of the Torah alone. They would not interfere with any one who wished to live as a Rabbanite, neither would they hinder any one who desired to adopt Karaite law. This was agreed to, and a fine of 1000 Ashrafis was imposed on any individual who should contravene this rule. The Karaites also urged against the Nagid and Samuel b. Al Khashsha : " That all they had said against the Karaites was irrelevant, being dictated by a spirit of opposi tion and jealousy ; that their religion was no innovation, whilst that of the Rabbanites was absurd heresy, and that they would never return to Rabbanite practice." They then passed a resolution that the Karaite faith was the oldest form [of Jewish belief]. The court had given a clear and unmistakable decision from which the Karaites emerged victorious, whilst the Rabbanites had to beat a retreat, humiliated and weakened, and dared not raise their heads.. Thereupon they sent for the Europeans, and ordered them forthwith to become Karaites without any one being able to prevent them. After this l Sha ban, in the name of the Sultan s son,, arrested both the Nagid and Samuel, and ill-treated them. 1 The following is abridged, as the original contains much irrelevant matter. 99 On the third day the prince gave them, as he had done to the Karaites, a written order to pay a thousand Ashrafis. The Rabbanites consulted the Emir Muhammed al Kamili, who went to the Sultan to plead on their behalf. He told them how poor the Jews were, and that the Sultan s son had mulcted them of a thousand Ashrafis for quarrelling among themselves. The Karaites, on their side, sent their physician Sadaka to the Emir Kanem, 1 who was very influential at court. There he met the same Muhammed al Kamili, and both Emirs presented to the Sultan a full account of the proceedings, from which it appeared that the Sultan s son had extorted a thousand Ashrafis from each side. The Sultan replied : " No one has any business to cause the Jews trouble, nor must he force them to pay even half the money." He said this although he was grasping, and whenever he heard of money, in whatever form, he used to take it rightly or wrongly. The Sultan immediately sent an Emir to his son with a written order not to take one half of the money from the Jews, but to let them go without molesting them in any way. When both parties heard this their joy was great. They paid the costs of the proceedings, and the money was restored to them. Two days afterwards the prince went to the palace, and the Sultan said to him : " Trouble not the Jews, and force them not to pay even half the money." During this interview the Sultan learned that Sha ban had been the cause of all the trouble and brought this curse on his son. The Sultan sent for him in order to have him flogged. When Sha ban heard of it he fled with all the members of his house. Thereupon Samuel went to the Karaite Dayyan Ala al din b. al Khabuni, and bade him send for the Elders of the Karaites. He entreated them to leave him and all the Rabbanites in 1 Ibn lyas, ii. p. 83, mentions an Atabak Kanem, who may have been the same person. IOO peace. Ala al din sent for the Shekh Aaron al Saghir and said to him : " I urgently desire that thou do not trouble Samuel, and that thou also request thy people to do likewise. Leave him entirely alone as long as he conducts himself in this fashion." Aaron agreed, and spoke to his people accord ingly. Some of them intended to lodge a claim against him (Samuel) with the Maliki Kadhi, in order to punish him for what he had done, but Abdul Karim and Abdul Rahim b. Iskandari went to the house of the Maliki High Kadhi, summoned the Rabbi and the Rabbanite Elders, every one by his name, and at this meeting a resolution was passed as follows : " No one shall strive to oppress or to injure a Karaite in any way. If a Rabbanite desires to be converted to Karaism he shall not be prevented from, or indicted for, so doing. Whoever infringes this decision must pay a fine of 1000 dinar to the Moslim treasury."

President Yitzchak ben Tzvi and the Karaite Jews

2011-06-28T08:33:00.009-04:00

During the Sukkot holiday of 1960, Israel’s 2nd President Yitzchak ben Zvi (see photo top) took the opportunity of an official visit to the Sukkah of then Sephardic Rishon Lezion, Yitzchak Nissim (third from top), to raise the issue of Karaite-Jewish rights in the Jewish State.

Ever since the “Karaite question” arose in Israel, the Israeli Rabbinate, that is given official jurisdiction over issues of marriage and divorce, has officially declared the community persona-non-grata claiming fears of illegitimacy (because their divorce practices differ from the Talmudic one).

At best, Ovadia Yosef (who once served in the Rishon Lezion capacity) once offered that they may be accepted only if they take upon themselves the Rabbinic lifestyle and reject the Karaite one.

In the early years of the Jewish state, many Rabbis, including those from the official Rabbinate expressed unrestrained hostility towards the Karaites. Foremost among them was Rabbi Eliezer Yehuda Waldenberg (second from top), who served as the head of the Rabbinic court for many years and was also recognized as a prodigious scholar (his 22 volume of responsa ציץ אליעזר remains quite popular). Waldenberg penned a scathing attack against the community, in one of his responsa, calling them 'heretics' and maintaining that they should not be permitted to marry Jews. He even went as far as to call for a ban on their immigration to Israel (during a time of increasing anti-Jewish unrest in Egypt). Fortunately, cooler heads prevailed. Waldenberg, ever the purist, also rejected the legitimacy of the Bene Israel Jewish community of India.

Yitzchak Ben Zvi, who had a deep love for history- especially those of exotic Jewish communities, argued that the reason for their barring was negligible and that they should be brought closer not pushed away. Rising to shake the President's hand, Rabbi Nissim thanked Ben Zvi for his visit and "apologetically" intoned that it was beyond his power to change the status of Karaite Jews.

The minutes of the meeting were reported in the Herut newspaper the next day (see comment 1 and photo bottom) and garnered a furious response from the office of Rabbi Nissim claiming that the conversation never took place. This in turn garnered an anonymous letter to the editor from someone who claimed to be present at the meeting and insisted that the original report was authentic. The anonymous writer also added this sardonic remark: “we are glad to see that the denial came from the offices of the chief rabbi and not from the chief rabbi himself”.

Ben Zvi continued his tireless work on behalf of the Karaites. He was especially bothered by the official Halakhic hesitancy for their acceptance (as mentioned), He once wrote:

We are to bring the Karaites close to us as much as possible. Karaites ,who are all our brothers, count among their number: Cohanim, Levites and Israelites. Like us they nurture a strong love of land, Torah and the Hebrew language. They are a commuity recognized by the state who encourages them to ascend and build within it. Their Jewishness is beyond question!

Wise men, be careful with your words! (a quote from Mishna, ABOT 11). Heaven forbid that we cast aspersions on an entire community solely on the basis of suspicion that maybe one of their ancestors divorced not according to Rabbinic Halakha. Because of such shaky doubts, shall we defame an entire community?

Be careful not to rear the young generation with hostility and suspicion towards a community that lives among us by right and privilege. It is incumbent upon you (speaking to the overseers of Jewish education) to educate the youth to treat them without discrimination, but rather with respect, love and brotherhood. (2)

The Karaites of Israel deeply appreciated (and still do) these gestures and named several of their synagogues after him (see photo, fourth from top).

Notes:

(1)נשיא המדינה בזכות הקראים

מאת: נ. בראלי סופר חרות

פורסם: חרות | חרות - עמוד אחורי - 12/10/1960

(2) Quoted in Elgamil, Yosef. תולדות היהדות הקראית, Vol. I, p. 17

'Nimrod' and 'Nimrodi' were common Jewish-Iraqi Personal Names and Surnames

2011-03-24T15:30:00.005-04:00

I've blogged before on the usage of the name 'Nimrod' among Jews here. Nimrod is depicted in the Bible as a particularly evil idolatrous Mesopotamian King, making it a peculiar (if not surprising) choice for religious and deeply traditional Mizrahi Jews (as well as modern-day Assyrian Christians, where I'm told, the name is popular as well).

My friend S. also blogged about this here

S. opines:

One of the irksome slanders some highly frummer-than-thou anti-Zionist Jews proclaim about Israelis is that their language and names are Jewishly illegitimate. Oft-mentioned is a legendary Israeli named Nimrod

A recent article on popular Israeli given names in the MAARIV Newspaper in Israel also pointed out this curiosity here:

המסורת היהודית הטילה הגבלות רבות על שמות שמותר לתת לילדים. כריבוי ההגבלות, ריבוי ההיתרים והחריגים. הקבוצה האסורה איסור מוחלט, כפי שסיפר החוקר חיים ריבלין, היא קבוצת הרשעים, אויבי העם היהודי, ועל כך נאמר במדרש: "וכי יקרא אדם שם בנו פרעה, או סיסרא, או סנחריב?". ברשימת משרד הפנים של שמות שאסור לאשרם נמצאים אדולף היטלר, אוסמה בן לאדן, ודמות אקטואלית השבוע: המן. עם זאת, רשעים שונים זוכים להקלות. למשל, ישמעאל, שעשה תשובה. יש הסכמה שנמרוד, עשיו, עמלק ודואג היו רשעים, אבל נמרוד הוא כידוע שם שניתן לילדים ישראלים לא מעטים, כהתרסה למסורת היהודית.

Partial translation: Jewish tradition sets limits on the types of names permissible for Jewish children. A group of names that sit "beyond the pale" and are in fact ILLEGAL ACCORDING TO ISRAELI LAW are: Adolf Hitler, Osama bin Laden and Haman (!). Despite this, a more liberal approach is applied to names like Ishamel (who tradition has it, repented toward the end of his life). Although the historical figures of Nimrod, Esau, Amalek and Doeg were wicked men (at least as depicted in the Bible), Nimrod remains a very popular name among contemporary Israelis in opposition to Jewish tradition.

Looks like the editor over at MAARIV could have delved a little bit more into the history of this name among Jews, before jumping to his conclusion...

Yesterday I came across another instance of the name; in the year 1969, 14 Iraqis, nine of them Jews, were falsely accused of spying for Israel by the Baath regime under Saddam Hussein. All of them were hanged in the public square. One of the unfortunate victims was a Jew by the name of Yaaqov (George) Nimrodi (transliterated into Arabic as Yacoub Gourji Namerdi). The names of the 9 Jews are now inscribed on a stone monument (see photo) in the Israeli city of Or Yehuda, where many Iraqi Jews settled upon their arrival in the holy land

Mr. Dangoor (himself an Iraqi-Jewish expat living in London) has more details on the hangings here

Sephardim in Eastern Europe; The Secunda Family

2011-02-23T10:33:00.002-05:00

Ukrainian-born Sholom Secunda (b. 1894), star of the Yiddish entertainment world and renowned for such hits as Bei Mir Bist du Shein was-like celebrated Yiddish writer Y.L. Peretz- a Yiddish-speaking Ashkenazic Jew of Sephardic descent. Victoria Secunda in her biography of the man; Bei Mir Bist Du Schon; The life of Sholom Secunda, writes:

The Secundas believe that they are descended of Italian Jews who were expelled from Italy in the 16th century and settled in Russia. [1]

The Secundas apparently considered themselves Sephardic Jews (rather than “Italian”). Another member of this family, Arthur Secunda, is described “as the son of a Sephardic Jew who immigrated to the United States from Russia”. [2]

In the book White Lies: Race and the Myths of Whiteness Maurice Berger makes mention of his mother whose maiden name was Secunda. He describes her as follows:

More than anything, my mother's life was shaped by her otherness: the darkness of her skin, eyes and hair; her Sephardic heritage; her Hispanic sounding maiden name. More than once she had been called a spic. More than once she had been called a kike, a hebe, a Jew bastard. More than once she had lost a job because a producer or casting director thought she was 'too dark' or 'too Jewish'.. She was born in Germany in 1920. Her father Norbert Secunda, a research assistant in the mathematics department of the University of Hamburg. [3]

[1] Secunda, Victoria. Bei Mir Bist Du Schon; The life of Sholom Secunda. p.1

Massacres, Expulsions, Blood Libels (and yet they Kept on coming back). Why?

2011-01-12T09:50:00.002-05:00

We often wonder, how and why is it that our Medieval Ashkenazic ancestors kept on coming back to their destroyed communities to rebuild (much like the residents of Galveston constantly rebuild, after hurricanes and such..).

Why the heck didn't they run away to the Ottoman Empire where the Turks treated Jews relatively nicely? (face it, they needed the Jews, more than the Jews needed them).

Well I don't have the answer to that question, but I can tell you that some Ashkenazim themselves were puzzled by the illogical habitation of Jews in hateful Christian territory. Take a read.

**********

Not all Franco-German Jews suffered from what I once described as a disorder akin to “battered woman’s syndrome”.

As Graetz put it:

When contrasted with the miserable conditions of the Jews in Germany, the lot of those who had taken up their abode in the newly-risen Turkish empire must have seemed unalloyed happiness. Jewish immigrants who had escaped the ceaseless persecutions to which they had been subjected in Germany expressed themselves in terms of rapture over the happy conditions of the Turkish Jews. Unlike their co-coreligionists under Christian rule, they were not compelled to yield up the third part of their fortunes in royal taxes; nor were they in any way hindered in the conduct of business. They were permitted absolute freedom of movement throughout the breadth and length of the empire. They were subject to no sumptuary laws, and were thus able to clothe themselves in silk and gold, if they chose.

Turkey was in short, correctly described by an enthusiastic Jew as a land “in which nothing, absolutely nothing is wanting.” Two young immigrants, Kalman and David, thought that if German Jews realized but a tenth part of the happiness to be found in Turkey, they would brave any hardships to get there. These 2 young men persuaded Isaac Sarfati who had journeyed in Turkey in earlier times, and whose name was by no means unknown in Germany, to write a circular letter to the Jews of the Rhineland, Styria, Moravia, and Hungary, to acquaint them with the happy lot of the Jews under the crescent as compared with the hard fate under the shadow of the cross, and to call upon them to escape from the German house of bondage and emigrate to Turkey. The lights and shadows of his subject could not have been more sharply defined than they are in Zarfati’s letter (written in 1456), whose graphic, often somewhat too artificial language, does not readily lend itself to translation:

“I have heard of the afflictions, more bitter than death, that have befallen our brethren in Germany-of the tyrannical laws, the compulsory baptisms and the banishments. And when they flee from one place, a yet harder fate befalls them in another. I hear an insolent people raising its voice in fury against the faithful; I see its hand uplifted to smite them. On all sides I learn of anguish of soul and torment of body; of daily exactions levied by merciless extortioners. The clergy and the monks, false priests, rise up against the unhappy people of God and say: ‘let us pursue them even unto destruction, let the name of Israel be known no more among men.’ They imagine that their faith is in danger because the Jews in Jerusalem might per-adventure, buy the Church of the Holy Sepulcher (eventually this happened, j.d.). For this reason they have made a law, that every Jew found upon a Christian ship bound for the east shall be flung into the sea. Alas! How evilly are the people of God in Germany entreated; how sadly is their strength departed! They are driven hither and thither, and pursued even unto death. The sword of the oppressor ever hangs over their heads. Brothers and teachers! Friends and acquaintances! I, Isaac Zarfati, from a French stock, born in Germany, where I sat at the feet of my teachers, I proclaim to you that Turkey is a land wherein nothing is lacking. If ye will, all shall yet be well with you. The way to the holy land lied open to you through Turkey. Is it not better for you to live under Moslems than under Christians? Here every man dwells in peace under his vine and fig tree. In Christendom, on the contrary, ye dare not clothe your children in red or in blue, according to your taste, without exposing them to insult and yourselves to extortion; and therefore are ye condemned to go about meanly clad in sad colored raiment (haredim…, j.d.). All your days are full of sorrow, even your Sabbaths and holidays. Strangers enjoy your goods; and therefore of what profit is the wealth of your rich men ( j.d.-הכותב כבר הקדים אתכם, מר גפרסון ומר גון לוק) They hoard it but to their own sorrow, and in one day it is lost to them forever. Ye call you riches your own? Alas! They belong to your oppressors. They bring false accusations against you. They respect neither age nor wisdom; and though they gave you a pledge you sealed sixty fold, yet would they break it. They continually lay double punishments upon you, a death of torment, and confiscation of goods. They prohibit teaching in your schools; they break in upon you during your hours of prayer; and they forbid you to work or conduct your business on Christian feast-days. And now seeing all these things, O Israel, wherefore sleepest thou? Arise, and leave this accursed land forever!”

Isaac Sarfati’s appeal induced many Jews to emigrate forthwith to Turkey and Palestine. Their grave demeanor, extreme piety and peculiar apparel at once distinguished them from the Jews of Greece and the Orient, and ere long, the new-comers exercised considerable influence upon the other inhabitants of the countries in which the settled.

But lest one think that conditions for Jews in Judea were utopia:

There were peculiar circumstances connected with the prohibition of the emigration of the Jews to Palestine. The Jewish inhabitants of Jerusalem had obtained permission from a pacha to build a synagogue on one of the slopes of Mount Zion. The site of this synagogue adjoined a piece of land owned by Franciscan monks. The monks raised a clamor, again raising the fear that the Jews would occupy the holy sepulcher..(hmmm..this sounds familiar....-j.d.)

The Pope issued a bull prohibiting any Catholic shipowners (most of whom were conveniently Venetians) to transport Jews to the east.

---

I am also trying to comprehend an opposite phenomenon, namely that of Sephardim expelled from Spain and Portugal seeking refuge in places like Germany (especially Hamburg), Austria (Vienna mostly) France and even in Eastern Europe (the latter is the subject of my upcoming book). Most of the descendants of these unfortunate souls would eventually meet a violent death on the eastern part of this blood-soaked continent.

Rabbanite-Karaite coexistence in Eastern Europe, Part I

2010-10-14T20:59:00.006-04:00

One of the remarkable untold stories of Eastern European Jewish history is the saga of the Karaite communities of Lithuania, Russia, and Poland; specifically their relationship vis- a- vis the rest of the Jewish population that formed the majority of the Jews in the region.

The origins of the eastern European Jewish Karaites are shrouded in obscurity, although it seems that the first Karaite Jewish settlement in the region was in the Crimean Peninsula.

Who were these Karaites? What sort of Judaism did they practice? And most importantly what was their relationship and attitude toward their local Rabbanite brethren. The simple answer is: neither hostile nor always benevolent. The reader of history will find that the Karaites are scarcely mentioned in the conventional history of Eastern European Jews which may indicate that the group was not considered to be much of a threat (although they do play a role in the controversies surrounding the controversial Rabi Nachman Krochmal and his work—see later).

YIDDISH FOR RABBANITES AND KARAJ TILI FOR THE KARAIM

The two main barriers separating Rabbanite from Karaite in Eastern Europe was their differing attitudes toward Judaism and two very different spoken tongues. The Karaites of course utterly rejected the extra-biblical literature of the Rabbis, clinging fast to the 24 books (in itself a Rabbanite canon) of the Hebrew Bible (although, ironically developing over the centuries a sort of "oral law" of their own). They also did not speak the Yiddish of the their neighbors (although many understood it and/or used it as needed) but rather their own Turkic-Jewish hybrid language known in Trakai (the center of the Karaites in Eastern Europe) as "Karaj Tili" or simply referred to as "Karaim Language" .

HACHAM FIRKOVICH; FATEFUL CHOICE: KARAITES OR JEWS?

One of the best known Eastern European Karaite figures is Crimean-born Hacham Avraham Firkovich (1786-1874). The latter was a prodigious writer and traveler (he spent some time in the Ukrainian town of Berditchev where he first encountered followers of the Hassidic movement) and also the undisputed leader of the eastern European Karaites.

His persona was complicated, as was his relationship to Rabbanite Judaism and its leaders. One of his published tracts מסה ומריבה (published in Eupatoria, 1838) was a sharply worded polemic against Rabbanites but he later retracted it, not wanting to upset the usually amicable relations between the two sects.

Remarkably, Firkovich had many Rabbanite admirers and even received approbations from Rabbanite leaders for some of his works! (1). As mentioned, Firkovich was an enigmatic figure. He is credited by some with beginning the process of stripping the Karaites of their Judaic identity, a process which began as a means of protection against the harsh anti-Jewish laws enacted by the Czarist authorities. This trend later continued and even intensified during the Nazi occupation of the region. Today most Karaites in the region do not consider themselves ethnically Jewish at all but use the term “Karaim” to denote their ethnicity (2). Firkovich was accused by some of forging many of his “findings” in order to support his conjecture that the Karaites were in the region long before the Jews (supposedly) crucified Jesus in Jerusalem (an obvious attempt to spare his followers the persecutions that followed the deicide charge). (3)

In 1853 the Karaites from the city of Trakai, Lithuania sent a letter to the Russian authorities asking that they stop being designated as 'Jews' but rather as a separate entity. In 1857 Firkovich sent a similar letter along with evidence of his "findings". These efforts were crowned with success when the Imperial Czarist authority in 1863 exempted the Karaites from the laws and restrictions affecting the Jews.

KARAITES IN THE HOLOCAUST

Firkovich’s disciple and successor, Hakhan (emphasis on the 'n) Seraya Shapshal likewise remains a very controversial figure. He is especially maligned by many Rabbbanites as a traitor for giving the Nazis (under severe coercion) a list of Karaites, thereby condemning many Rabbanite Jews who falsely co-opted a Karaite identity, to the gas chambers (a charge which is now vehemently denied by many Karaites—see footnote). (4)

Nazi persecutions skipped the Karaites for the most part (A Nazi commission was set up to ascertain the Jewishness of the Karaites, Rabbis were consulted, all of whom denied the Jewishness of the group, a move that was motivated out of genuine concern for their welfare).

Accusations against Shapshal notwithstanding, many Karaites assisted their Rabbanite brethren although some did indeed cooperate with the Nazi authorities (as did some Rabbanite Jews, unfortunately, such as some of those working for the Judenrat and Kapos in the Concentration Camps).

The Zionist activist Israel Cohen, who was active in the interwar years in Europe, in his book "Travels in Jewry" recounts a visit to the Lithuanian city of Trakai which had a significant Jewish population- both Karaite and Rabbanite- and described the cordial relations that reigned between the two communities. Some of the same Rabbis who fought the "Haskalah movement" tooth and nail didn’t seem to have a problem with Karaites. Again, this could have been perhaps because the Karaites were not considered to be a religious threat, whereas the latter were (5).

ROOTS; THE KARAITES OF TRAKAI (TROKI), LITHUNIA

The Karaites of Troki received a writ of privileges in 1441 and 1507 which stipulated among other things the barring of Rabbanite Jews from the city. In 1646 the writ was ratified again by Wladyslaw the 4th. Nevertheless Rabbanite Jews did settle in the city. The Karaites were opposed to it mostly for economic reason (they feared competition). Beginning in 1643 the Karaites of Troki along with all other Jews in the area belonged to the Central Community in Vilna. In that same year 2 Karaites from Troki litigated one of their own judges at the Central Rabbinical court in Vilna which also served as the supreme court of “our brethren” the Karaites.

Relations between Rabbanites and Karaites were generally good. The Vilna community borrowed the writ of privileges from the years 1632 ad 1653 and had it in its possessions for several years. (6).

Troki Karaites were dealt a heavy blow with Russian invasion of the region. The Vilna community urged the vaad to help them but this time the vaad let them down and did not respond with aid. The Troki Karaite Kehilla, once the jewel of eastern European Karaism never again restored its former glory (7).

In 1688 the Polish Monarch Jan Sobieski offered to settle them in Halicz and many went there. The aforementioned vaad defended the interests of the Karaites, sometimes even against the Rabbanites. In an agreement between the Karaites and the vaad, the Karaites agreed to pay 400 gold pieces annually to the vaad.

Although, relations were usually good, there was soon “trouble in paradise” when Karaite notables asked the authorities to expel the Rabbanites from Trakai (8).

To be continued..

Notes:

(1). See here

(2.) Much like the Rabbanite “Mihu Yehudi” (literally, “Who is a Jew?”) controversies which consumed Israel in the 70s and 80s and is still far from resolved, the Karaites are now undergoing a similar process, see here

See also this Documentary from the History Channel (sorry I only found one with a Hebrew narration/voice over)

for Part 1 and

for part 2

(3). See The YIVO encyclopedia of Jews in Eastern Europe, Volume 1 p. 516. Later, his succesor Shapshal would enthusiastically embrace the "Khazar" theory (namely that the Karaites of the Crimea and eastern Europe are descended of the half-Turkic, half-Mongol Khazar people who converted to Judaism). The Khazar episode is deliciously ironic considering the fact that the Rabbanite Jews had tried to disassociate themselves from it ever since it became popular in anti-Zionist and anti-Semitic circles. Recent DNA evidence has shown negligble Turkic or Mongol influence on the Rabbanite gene pool. Similar studies on Eastern European Karaites show a genetic affinity with Jews, though with considerable turkic mtDNA.

(4). See here

(5). Although Rabbi Moses Sofer (better known as the Chatam Sofer), German-born leader of Orthodoxy would later compare the Reform Movement with Karaism (and Sadduceanism). He drew a comparison between them and "the disciples of Zadok and Boethus, Anan (ben David) and Shaul his son"

( ויהי' עדתם כעדת צדוק ובייתוס ענן ושאול (שו"ת חתם סופר ח"ו סי' פ"ט

(6. See Yahadut Lita p. 38. On particularly severe confrontations see p. 55

(7). Ibid, p. 43

(8). Ibid, p. 86

Muwaḥidūn: A Study of the Almohads and the Moroccan Jews Under Their Domain

2010-04-29T05:00:00.031-04:00

[The Jewish History Channel is pleased to present to you an inaugural post by הצעיר שלמה בן רפאל, the newest memeber of the JHC team. We hope this will be the first of many fascinating, insightful and educational materials presented by שלמה. Welcome!!!!!!!!]

In studying the history of the Jews in Morocco, we quickly come upon a curious phenomenon: while it can certainly be said that "Torah never ceased from Morocco", we do find a great void in Judaic literature from a few decades after the era in which rabbis such as Isaac Al-Fasi flourished until the arrival of the 1391 Spanish exiles. Or, more accurately, until the Spanish expulsion a century later (basically during the entire era which is known as the period of the "Rishonim"). What was the cause of this centuries-long pause in Jewish learning?

1. Early History

Morocco had been conquered and occupied by the Arabs since the year 670, and had been independent from the Califate in Baghdad since 789, but as was the case in America or any other land occupied by foreigners, the natives (in this case Berbers) resented the foreign rule of their land and struggled constantly to regain control. In the 1050's their wish was granted. A native, Berber-Muslim government regained control of the country from the Arabs, almost four hundred years since the Arabs arrived. To put that in perspective, it's comparable to the native Americans regaining control from the European Americans today, four centuries after the arrival of the Mayflower. But, in due time, fault was found in this native government as well. Abd Allah Muhammad (or, in Berber, "Amghār") Ibn Tumart, a devout Muslim of the Masmuda tribe, found the religious observance of the Berber ruling class wanting, and went on to found a new dynasty, based on a puritanical Islam heretofore unknown to the Berbers.

2. Ibn Tumart and Al-Mu'min

To me, Ibn Tumart (or, as he was called by the Jews, Ben T'murat, "son of exchange") was a character reminiscent of the Islamic experience of Malcolm X, one of the leaders of America's Nation of Islam movement. "X" found religious inspiration though the "Islamified" teachings of the preacher Elijah Muhammad, but when he started to question (Elijah) Muhammad, he was ousted. He later made the the pilgrimage to Mecca and studied under traditional Islam under Sunni clerics. When he returned to the states he brought with him a more intense, but more purified version of Islam. Ibn Tumart was also dissatisfied by the Islam of his fellow Berbers and traveled east to draw from the traditional schools of Islamic theology. He too returned with a much more purified and theologically "orthodox" version of Islam to the Maghreb, and found himself disappointed by the religious laxity of the Berbers and of the Berber ruling class. They used their conversion to find legitimacy with the Arabs and gain Independence from them, but their Islam was only a very thin veil over their tribal ways. They still consumed wine, the women still walked about the marketplaces unveiled and the Christian and Jewish infidels were free to practice their corruptions in the heartland of Berber Islam. In Spain they even exchanged knowledge with unbelievers and wasted time on speculative philosophy and meaningless poetry. Upon viewing these unsettling images, Ibn Tumrat went about stirring rebellion among his countrymen, which only accomplished his being labeled a heretic and made him a fugitive. He would have accomplished little politically if not for his student and general, Abd Al-Mu'min.

Abd Al-Mu'min Bin Ali (called by the Jews Ben Mumin, "son of flaws") was a Berber from Algeria. He married the daughter of a prominent Masmuda in order to be accepted into the highly insular tribe of Ibn Tumrat. By 1117 he became a follower of Ibn Tumart and the two became a potent political pair. In my eyes he played Hitler to Ibn Tumart's Nietzsche. Or Haman to Ibn Tumrat's Ahasuerus, for if not for Ibn Tumart's influence, Al-Mu'min would have had no legitimacy, but if not for Al-Mu'min, Ibn Tumart would have been only a man of ideas, not of action.

3. Al-Muwaḥidūn

My previous allusion is again applicable, for just as the clouds of doom hovered over the Jews of Europe in the 40's of the twentieth century, so did they loom over the Jews of Iberia and North Africa in the 40's of the twelfth century. The Jews of Moravid Spain especially were about to experience the suffering their brethren in Europe had been enduring for centuries, and their golden age was about to end. After the death of Ibn Tumart in 1130, Al-Mu'min swept down from the mountains and began a wildly successful military campaign that gave him all of North Africa and most of Iberia.

The Berbers, as newly requited "fringe Muslims", were naturally overly pious, and took Islam to extremes even the Arabs would not venture to (similar to the piety of the Afghan Taliban group). One of their policies when conquering a new city was to force strict Sharia' law upon it's Muslim inhabitants and to give it's infidel inhabitants the chance to save themselves spiritually or to be freed of their toilsome existences (though some were also able to escape). When their forces entered the city of Cordoba, one of the families that were given this choice was the family of Ibn-AbdAllah, or, in Hebrew, "Ben Ovadia". Better known today for being the family of Maimonides.

4. The Jews and Maimonides

Until that time Morocco, and to a larger extent, Spain, had more-or-less positive relationships with Jews. Centuries earlier in Morocco entire Berber tribes converted to Judaism. And during the golden age of Spain, Jews enjoyed an equality that they still aspire to. But with the conquering of the Jewish centers of Tlemcan, Fez and Marrakesh in Morocco, and Cordoba, Lucena and Granada in Spain, came an inquisition the likes of which was to come three centuries later by the hands of the Christians. Judaism in all forms, public or private, was outlawed in Spain and in North Africa through to Fatamid Egypt. As can be imagined, this phenomenon practically served to end Jewish life in the Maghreb.

As mentioned before, the Ben Ovadias of Cordoba were faced with the choice of conversion or death, and, as is well known, escaped to Fez in Morocco (which itself was no peaceful oasis at the time). Moses, the families' eldest, soon found respite at the intellectual bastion of Fez's at the Al-Karaouine University, and studied Torah under Judah Ha-Kohen Ibn Susan, renowned Talmudist and Judge of Fez who continued teaching his students as if nothing were amiss.

Maimon, the family's patriarch, (a student of Rabbi Josef Ibn Migash, who in turn was a student of Rabbi Isaac Al-Fasi, who himself had came to Spain from Fez) had written an epistle to the Moroccan Jews called the Epistle of Comfort (Igeret HaNeḥama), in which he supplied words of encouragement to the Jews of Morocco who were weary of clandestine observance and wished to live as total Muslims. Ibn Susan was fiercely opposed to the implications Rabbi Maimon had made and vehemently preached that a Jew who accepted Islam in word had no share in this world or the next, and that one must prefer martyrdom over even outward conversion. Upon these revelations Rabbi Moses rose up against his Teacher and penned the Epistle of Apostasy (Igeret HaShmad). In it he proved that Islam is not a form of Paganism and if one's life is in danger it is certainly permitted to be outwardly Muslim; but that does not mean one is free from their halachic obligations.

Many historions question how Maimonides himself seemed to have been more or less imune to persecution in Morocco, seeing as he had the respite to author many important Jewish works during his formative years in Fez. The prospect that he converted to Islam has been discredited long ago, rather it must be said that the Muslims held him in high regard.A rabbinic contemporary wrote of that period "I have heard one of the Palace Elders of Morocco bragging about having once exchanged words with the Jew Abū ʿImrān Mūsā...".

After the death of Al-Mu'min Jewish life seemed to return to normal, and the schools were reopened. Soon after that though his son Yusuf I ascended the throne and instituted a new Inquisition. This time they ensured the conversions were sincere. Maimonides's family fled to the east, and, surely enough, Ibn Susan chose death over conversion.

Again, after the death of Yusuf I there was a short period of calm in which we are told the Jews were living in luxury and dressing in the finest clothing. The next king, Ya'qub I then introduced the requirement that Jews dress in black (the Muslim fashion of mourning) with long cloak-like garments. The subsequent ruler, An-Nâsir , ordered that Jews wear a very noticeable yellow cloth as a head-covering, which in turn affected European Jewry by having influenced the decision of the Fourth Lateran Council that Jews wear distinctive clothing. Only from this time on did the clothing of the Jews formed an important subject in the legal regulations concerning them.

The reign of the Almohads on the whole exercised a disastrous and enduring influence on the position of the Moroccan Jews. Already branded by their clothing as unbelievers they furthermore became the objects of scorn and of innumerable violent uprisings in every city; and out of this condition they have not succeeded in raising themselves. There were a few great Jewish thinkers in the two centuries that followed, but the Moroccan rabbis always directed their queries to the great centers of Judaism in Spain, and Morocco was not a center of Jewish life up until the arrival of the Spanish Jews in 1492. Upon the arrival of the exiles the downtrodden nature of the Moroccan Jews was still evident, as the Spanish Jews testified that the Moroccans had strange practices and irrational superstitions which smacked of Muslim influences, and that their religious observance had an air of secrecy and fear to it. So long-lasting was the influence of the Almohads upon them.

As for the Almohads themselves, their conquests served to shift the balance of power in Iberia, making the northern Christian states perceive the Muslim presence as an active threat. They fought the Muslims offensively, ultimately serving to reduce Almohad holdings in Iberia to only the Emirate of Granada.

Orthodoxy and Communism, Part I

2010-02-17T13:22:00.014-05:00

Orthodox Responses to Communism; Rabbis and Laymen

By: Joel W. Davidi

The noted author Marc Shapiro wrote a short sketch on Rabbis and Communism on the Seforim blog[1]. In that excellent article, Shapiro brings up some excellent points and observations regarding the initial reaction of the Orthodox clergy toward the Communist movement. He discusses the varying Jewish reactions to this important movement, which greatly affected the Orthodox and non-Orthodox alike during the better part of the 20^th century. Shapiro informs us of an important assembly that took place in the aftermath of the Bolshevik Revolution where leading Rabbis of Eastern Europe formulated a plan on how to respond to the new realities. What I found fascinating though were the individuals mentioned as supporting Communism. When most of us think of Communism, we think of the infamous Yesvektzia (more on them in a future issue) a unit of the dreaded KGB composed entirely of Jews dedicated to eradicating any remnant of Jewish religious life in the Soviet Union. It comes as a shock to most of us when we are introduced to Rabbis; ostensibly religious figures who

expressed their enthusiastic support for the ideals of Communism[2].

Now, to be fair the campaign against Judaism (and against religion in general) in the Soviet Union did not begin in earnest until quite a bit after the Revolution. Organized Jewish religious life continued as it did before, with Rabbis in place leading their respective Congregations. Perhaps the aforementioned Rabbis were not aware of the Communists’ true plans and what they had in store for them which brings to mind some Jewish reactions to the ascent of Hitler’s Nazi Party in Germany. Marc Shapiro in his excellent biography of the very interesting Rabbi Yechiel Yaakov Weinberg mentions that not a few Orthodox Rabbis in Germany expressed their support and commitment to the Nazi Party and to Germany’s new Fuhrer. Weinberg and others went as far as insisting that the ideals of the Nazi party were consistent with that of Orthodoxy! [3]Surely Weinberg was not aware at the time of the Nazis true plans so one is obliged to give him the benefit of the doubt.

It is no secret that many of the movements active in pre-war Europe- vying for the minds and hearts of the youth- succeeded in entering and making its mark even among the most conservative and seemingly sheltered segment of the population, namely the Yeshiva world. Historians still disagree as to what role the imposition of secular studies in the great Yeshiva of Volozhin played in the closing down of that institution. What we do know for certain is that not an insignificant number of Yeshiva students enthusiastically embraced many of the new secularist movements then sweeping Europe, including Communism and Socialism[4]. Some individuals who would later reestablish Orthodox Judaism in America too got swept up in this fervor and actively campaigned on behalf of leftist causes. One such individual was Rabbi Isaac Revel (pictured) who was founder and dean for many years of the Rabbi Isaac Elchanan Theological Seminary in New York[5]. One cannot blame the Jewish youth of prewar Europe for sympathizing with many of the ideals and goals of the Revolutionaries. The Czars have long been considered the oppressors of the Jews and the revolutionaries promised change, reform and an end to discrimination. It is not difficult to see what temptation these promises held for the average Jewish member of the lower class whether Orthodox or not.

Did the Ancient Essenes Practice a Form of Communism?

Many of the ideas expressed by Marx and Engels as formulated in the former’s Communist Manifesto were ideas that were put into practice long before the word “communism” entered the vernacular. The idea of eliminating the distinction between rich and poor is a theme echoed throughout the ancient literature, both secular and profane[6]

The Essenes[7] were one of the three streams of Judaism in existence during the period of the Second Commonwealth circa 30 CE (the other two were the Pharisees and the Saduccees). They were known for their medicinal knowledge, their resentment against the Jewish nobility in Jerusalem (especially the Priestly Caste) and their strict code of living (which included strict rules about eating and sex).

Pliny the Elder and Josephus, who were contemporaries of the ancient Jewish sect of the Essenes describe the latter as “living in communes and sharing everything they have with each other, so there are neither rich nor poor among them”.

Communal Living Among Chassidim in Eastern Europe

In some communities across Eastern Europe men voluntarily gave up all their worldly possessions and renounced all ownership of private property for the betterment of the collective. No, I am not talking about Communists or Socialists but rather Chassidim in 19^th century Ukraine.

In David Assaf’s fascinating recent book on renegades from within the Hassidic community, Neechaz Basevach[8]. Sender was a charismatic leader of a Breslov Chassidic group in the town of Torgovitsa, Ukraine in the 1860s. He was a very wealthy cloth merchant who decided to join the Breslov Chassidic sect and distribute all his money to charity. With his talent and charisma, he succeeded in gathering about him a group of likeminded individuals who became his most devoted followers. Unlike him, however, most members of the group were impoverished Chasidim who probably found it much easier to live the kind of lifestyle he demanded from them. In a Breslov work we are told that “they would deposit all their money into a communal account” and “they shared a closet full of clothes and if anyone (in the group) was missing an article of clothing they would just go over to the closet and take whatever he needed”[9]. we are introduced to a Rabbi Sender

Jewish Communists Benign Attitude towards Judaism

Mosa Pijade

I have written about the interesting Jewish communist figure Mosa Pijade and his attitude towards religion here.

Dovid Sfard

A Communist Yiddish author from the Soviet era, Dovid Sfard (1905-?) was born in Trisk, Volhynia (Western Ukraine) and lived in Warsaw before fleeing to Soviet-occupied Biyalistok in 1939. After the war, he returned to Poland, where he became active in the banned Communist Party and retained a prominent position in the Jewish cultural life there, before emigrating to Israel in 1969.

Sfard's Judaism

It bears mentioning that Sfard was one of a group of communist Jewish intellectuals who refused to slavicize their names as many other high ranking communists were wont to do. Sfard severely criticized the people who did do so.

In postwar Communist Poland “Jewish Communists were for instance routinely ordered to Polonize their names. Some Jewish communists frowned upon this practice. Hersh Smolar called the practice a “shmad protzedur” (literally, "apostasy procedure"). Old time Jewish Communists frowned upon this practice. An eminent Yiddish language poet, David Sfard spoke on the issue forcefully during a conference organized in August 1945 in Moscow by the Organization Committee of Polish Jews at the ZPP, the Association of Polish Patriots. He described the dropping of Jewish names by party activists as affront to “national dignity” and to the “dignity of being a Communist” as well. It reflected an attitude, he said, that verged on adopting “a racist point of view”. Also, the party should not condone such behavior “because it opens the door to careerists who have the same attitude toward the Party as they do towards their nationality”[10].

In the introduction to Dovid Sfard’s autobiography Mit Zich un Mit Andere, Eli Shekhtman gives what seems to be an apologetic portrayal of Sfard’s radical socialism. He writes:

Sfard the writer was attuned to needs of the nation. To a Jewish writer, the Jewish people are of paramount importance. This is not the place to focus on the 2 major movements that swept the Jewish people, namely Zionism and socialism, (Zionism also arose as a socialist movement) . Sfard became a radical socialist solely because he believed with his entire being (like his father the Rabbi of Wohlin) in the coming of the Messiah (!) … he believed that this was the only to redeem the world of evil and cruelty ….our nation would be free and able to reconstruct a Jewish national life… he believed but he was hoodwinked….and here we must state unequivocally: Sfard never threw his away his past but rather cherished it…. he didn’t wear his religion on his sleeve but rather cherished it in his heart… when he received the sad news of his father’s passing in Warsaw…. he attended the funeral and Sfard-the communist- recited the Kaddish prayer on the grave of his father the rabbi[11]

Sfard himself attributed his quest for social justice to the lessons he learned at home from his father the Rabbi, "all the towspeople would gather at the Rabbi's house to listen to Chassidic stories. Although he wasn't a hassid himself, he was enamored of these types of stories, eppecially those with the theme of rich vs. poor, weak vs. strong...years later when I would come home from university to visit, we would have long conversations about the injustices in the world...about the toiling simple folk who barely had enough to survive and those who barely worked, yet had plenty and were the toast of the town (דער סולת פון שטעטל)
p.47

Sfard is open about his fathers capitalist proclivities (he ran a bank), although he tempers this seemingly damning information by pointing out that he also ran a "gemach bank", basically a bank that gave out interest free loans to those who were destitute. Sfard audaciously attributes this altruistic endeavor as an attempt to "ease his conscience". p. 48

Joel Davidi is An independent research historian and genealogist and is currently working on his first book that explores the Sephardic origin of many Eastern European Jews, entitled Eastern European Jews and Iberian Roots

[1] See http://seforim.blogspot.com/2008/03/rabbis-and-communism-by-marc-b.html

[2] The focus of this article is not on those who left Judaism for Communism but rather on those who attempted to reconcile the two.

For the sake of interest, David Assaf in his Neechaz Basevach (p.331) gives a lengthy list of descendants of Hassidic Rebbes across Eastern Europe who left traditional Judaism and joined the Communist Party:

A descendant of Rabbi Nahum of Makorov one of the sons of Rabbi Mordechai of Chernobyl who joined the communist party and was killed in an anti-Jewish pogrom in the town of Novygrod-Wilensk (Zvihl). Assaf believes he was the inspiration for the story “The Rebbe and the Son of the Rebbe” by Isaac Babel; Hannah Twersky was the youngest daughter of Rabbi Yosef Meir of Machnovka and in 1912 was married to Rabbi Joshua Rokeach of Jaroslaw, son of Rabbi Isaachar Dov of Belz. In the early 1900s, Hanna traveled to the Soviet Union, became enamored with Communism and decided to stay there and cut off all ties with her former world.

See also Assaf (p. 312) on Aaron Matisyahu Friedman son of Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel of Adzod of the line of Rabbi Israel Friedman founder of the Ruzhin Hassidic sect who was an active socialist in his native Romania. See also Assaf (313, footnote 117) on Dovrisch, daughter of Rabbi Shmuel Bornstein Rebbe of Sochotchov and descendant of Rabbi Menachem Mendel of Kotzk who was an ardent Socialist and member of Poalei Zion. Also the brother of the previous Lubavitcher Rebbe mentioned in Deutch, Shaul Shimon Larger Than Life

Aaron Escoli in his Hachasidut Bepolin (p. 128) sums up the situation among the Jewish youth in Eastern Europe in the early part of the 20^th century:

“There wasn’t a house that didn’t get swept along with the spirit of the times…. And not only that but this phenomenon did not skip over the houses of the righteous. With the rise of poverty and unemployment the zaddikim could not withstand the spirit of the times. The sons and daughters of the zadikkim were the first to come to the realization that there was no future to the way of their parents and they went grazing upon all the fields- from the religious Zionist Mizrahi party to the Communist party- all of which represented a radical diversion from the hassidic way of life.” (cited in Assaf, p. 332)

[3] ..Weinberg went on to say that it was the Jews, in particular the Orthodox, who understood and sympathized with the new national movement that had swept Germany. It was the religious Jews who understood how thankful they had to be to Hitler for his fight against communism and atheism, which had brought such spiritual destruction to the Jews of Russia.

Shapiro, Marc Between the Yeshiva World and Modern Orthodoxy, p.111

Another Orthodox Rabbi, Elie Munk of Ansbach voiced a similar opinion, see Shapiro, p.113, footnote 15

[4] However, the attitude of even the most stridently secular former yeshiva student toward the Orthodoxy they had left ranged between ambivalence and a thinly veiled longing for the world they left. See for instance Bialik’s poem “Hamatmid”

[5] His awareness of political concerns led him to join the Jewish Bund a socialist revolutionary group, retaining his traditionalism all the while. Participation in the bund, however, led to his arrest and imprisonment in 1906. After his arrest he emigrated to the United States.

See Rakeffet-Rothkopf, Aaron Bernard Revel: Builder of American Jewish Orthodoxy

[6] See for instance midrash on the “end of days” when distinctions between people will be eliminated along with poverty and want.

Also see claims that Marx’s weltsanschaung grew out of traditional Judaism

[7] See recent research by Miriam Naor that expresses doubt whether the Essenes really existed at all.

[8] See Assaf, David. Neechaz Basevach p. 198, footnote 58

[9] See Siach Sarfei Kodesh 4, pp.79-81

[10] Gross, Jan. Fear; Anti-Semitism in Poland After Auschwitz p. 214

[11] Sfard, David. Mit Zich un Mit Andere Yershalaimer Almanac, 1984. p. 13

Ashkenazim and the Sephardic Pronunciation of Hebrew

2010-01-08T11:42:00.046-05:00

This post will continue on the theme of a previous post where I discussed how Chassidim switched from the Ashkenazic rite to a modified Sephardic one. Here I will focus more in depth on how and why some Ashkenazic Jews –both religious and (later) secular- adopted the Sephardic pronunciation of Hebrew because they deemed it superior to the Ashkenazi one.

Sepharad in Ashkenaz

In the last 2 decades of the 18^th century, concurrent with the rise of the Chassidic movement [1]Germany. It was led by Rabbi Nathan Adler of Frankfurt. Rabbi Nathan’s followers regarded him as a man of God and a miracle worker. Under his influence they studied kabbalah, demanded extreme standards of abstinence and self purification and conducted separate prayer service according to a special rite based on the prayer book of Rabbi Yitzchak Luria. in Eastern Europe, a pietist group was emerging in of

R' Adler was a very controversial figure in the Frankfurt Jewish community and was eventually excommunicated in 1779 and again in 1789. A booklet entitled Maaseh Tatuim was published anonymously in 1790 (a copy of which I have in my collection) which attacked the actions of Adler and his followers. Some of the chief accusations against Adler included the complaint that they introduced substantial changes in both the text and the conduct of prayers; praying in the Sephardic rite known as siddur haari and (unlike the Chassidim) also of using the Sephardic pronunciation in prayer [2] [3].

The Jewish Enlightenment looks to Sepharad as a Positive Model

The literature abounds on the subject of the Reform movement in Germany using Sephardic Jewry as a positive model of what progressive Jewry ought to look like. Interest in all things Sephardic was all the rage among the wissenschaft crowd in Western and Central Europe.

Todd Endelman writes:

From the late 18th century, Sephardim throughout Western Europe, as well as Ashkenazim, deployed the myth to promote their own cultural, political and social agendas...the pioneers of Wissenschaft des Judentums and the leaders of the Reform movement constructed an image of Sephardi Judaism that stressed its cultural openness, philosophical rationalism, and aesthetic sensibilities in order to criticize what they disliked in their own traditions, i.e. its backwardness, insularity, aversion to secular studies. In France, Austria, Germany, Hungary and the United States, communal and congregational boards erected imposing synagogues of so called Moorish design, assertive symbols of their break with the “unenlightened” Ashkenazi past.

Before the end of the century, the myth of sephardi superiority was widely disseminated and available for appropriation by Jews and their enemies alike…in their battle against racial myths about Jewish deformities, Jewish anthropologists drew on the Sephardi mystique to create a counter myth of their own- that of the well-bred, aesthetically attractive, physically graceful Sephardi, a model of racial nobility and virtue. In their work John Efron notes, “the Sephardi served as the equivalent of the Jewish ‘Aryan’…the physical counterpart to the ignoble Jew of Central and Eastern Europe [4].

This Ashkenazic sense of inferiority was obviously something new. As Ismar Schorch put it: "there is little doubt that beyond the worldwide influence of Lurianic Kabbalah(of which Adler's group and the Chassidim of eastern Europe are one example--J.D.), the religious culture of Spanish Jewry held but slight allurement for a self-sufficient and self-confident Ashkenazi Judaism in its age of spiritual ascendancy" [5].

In fact until the 16^th century Ashkenazi culture enjoyed higher status than the Sephardi one, (perhaps since Ashkenazi Jews had not converted to any other religion i.e. had not become Marranos). Around 1500 when the first scholarly Hebrew grammar books were published in Europe, the authors naturally took the language of Jews living in France and Germany, that is Ashkenazi Hebrew , as the basis of their work, and sephardi was regarded as a curiosity. In the epoch making grammar book (De rudimentis Hebraicis, 1506) of Johannes Reuchlin (1455-1522), Ashkenazi Hebrew was the living language. It was only in the 17^th century that European Hebraic scholars- the so called “Christian Hebraists”, decided in favor of Sephardi reading. It was accepted by the great grammar (1817) of William Gesenius (1786-1842) as well, which formed the basis of modern Hebrew linguistics. Since the 17^th century everyone considered the Sephardi usage to be the scholarly standard and used it exclusively. Jewish scholarship (wissenschaft) was now committed to Sephardi, and it became the ideal for the initiatives of the Reform movements[6].

Schorsch writes:

With the advent of emancipation in central Europe, German speaking Jews gradually unhinged itself from the house of Ashkenazic Judaism. Inclusion in the body politic sundered a religious union born of common patrimony. Historians have tended to focus on the institutional expression of this rupture-the repudiation of the educational system, the mode of worship, and the Rabbinic leadership intrinsic to Ashkenazic Judaism- with special emphasis on the western tastes and values with propelled the transformation of all areas of Jewish life…with surprising speed German Jews came to cultivate a lively bias for the religious legacy of Sephardic Jewry forged centuries before on the Iberian Peninsula without which they would have cut loose from Judaism itself…..enabled them to redefine their identity in a Jewish mode [7].

The Sephardic Pronunciation of Hebrew vs. the Ashkenazic

The Maskil Nafatali Herz Wessely, whose admiration for the Sephardim of Amsterdam was born of personal experience, had contended in the fourth and final letter of his Words of Peace and Truth that the Sephardic pronunciation of Hebrew was grammatically preferable to the manner in which the Ashkenazim rendered it. A generation later, the teachers and preachers who pioneered the development of a German rite adopted the Sephardic pronunciation for their “German synagogue”. Not a point of Halachic contention, the switch could be defended by Eliezer Liebermann in terms of grammatical propriety or by Moses Kunitz of Ofen (Modern day Budapest) in terms of demography- more than seven eighths of the Jewish world offers its prayers in the Hebrew of the Sephardim but the ultimate motivation of this unnatural and self conscious appropriation of Sephardic Hebrew was the desire to extinguish the sound of the sacred tongue from that of Yiddish, which these alienated Ashkenazic intellectuals regarded as a non-language that epitomized the abysmal state of Jewish culture [8].

Another proponent of "Sephardicism" was Mayer Kayserling (1829-1905) PICTURED TOP who was born in Hanover in 1829, an eventually became the liberal rabbi of Budapest and his generation’s leading scholar on of Sephardic Jewry. In his work entitled Sephardim: Romanische Poesien der Juden in Spanien, he betrays an unmistakable pro-Sephardi bias, contrasting the “lowly” language and manner of the Ashkenazic Jew with the “nobility of character” and “purity of the language” of the Sephardic Jew. He extols the virtue of the Sephardim and maintained that: "persecution had not destroyed the aristocratic bearing, the cultural loyalty, the linguistic purity, and the alliance of religion with secular learning that had distinguished Sephardic Jewry". He also naturally felt that the Sephardic pronunciation of Hebrew was the correct one. [9].

It should be noted that the close resemblance in pronunciation between the biblical Hebrew taught at German universities of the time and the Hebrew of the Sephardim no doubt bestowed a verisimilitude of correctness of the latter.

Schorch also quotes an interesting letter dated 4^th October 1827 by J.J. Bellerman, a well known theologian, scholar and director of the prestigious Berlin Gymnasium. He advised Zunz to teach the youngsters in the Jewish communal school over which Zunz presided the Sephardic pronunciation of Hebrew from the very beginning. Bellerman had been invited to observe a public examination of the children. While expressing his pleasure at the event, he did see fit to challenge the retention of the “Polish pronunciation of Hebrew,” because it managed to offend both the vowels and accents of the language. And in conjunction with the vowels, he pointed out the historical superiority of Sephardic Hebrew.

Bellerman writes in the letter:

As you well know the writings of learned Alexandrian Jews—in the Septuagint, Josephus, Philo and Aquila- show that the Polish pronunciation is incorrect…the learned Portuguese, Spanish, French and Italian Jews have the correct one. Why shouldn’t the Jews of Berlin and in fact of Germany choose the better (of the two)? Especially Berlin Jewry which has already adopted so much that is correct? It would indisputably accrue to their honor, if they would offer other communities in this matter an example [10].

Stripping the Sephardic Pronunciation of Legitimacy

Obviously not all Ashkenazim were thrilled with the radical changes now gaining popularity. They were particular disturbed by the change in pronunciation.

As early as 1502 the Jewish false Messiah Asher Lämmlein, a German Jew who appeared in Italy and succeeded in attracting a large following of both Sephardic and Ashkenazic Jews mocked the Sephardic émigrés in his city . In his writings Lammlein barely hides his contempt for the peculiar Sephardic accent. He publicly excoriated the Spanish Jews (who had recently fled to Italy after being expelled from their home country) for their “corrupt ways” and demanded that they “correct” their prayer liturgy. In his writings he also heaped scorn upon the writings of Maimonides, particularly the latter’s injunction that it is important to distinguish between an ayin and an aleph and between a heh and a chet. He called themעילג לשון literally “Stutterers. Lemlein wrote: “they (the Sephardim) do not distinguish between a samech and a tzadi…and the kamatz and patach is the same to them as is the tzere and the segol…” [11].

Some Ashkenazi Rabbis were of the opinion that an Ashkenazi praying in the Sephardic rite and or using the Sephardic pronunciation rendered the prayer null and void. Some Rabbis took issue with the way Sephardim pronounce Gods name and maintained that one should be careful to say adoinoi [as in oy] rather than the Sephardic adonay [as in aye] (which could be mistaken as a declaration of polytheism) see here.

To be sure, this attitude of contempt is not restricted to the Ashkenazi side, see this piece of recent news.

Controversy in Hungary

Hungary never had a strong tradition of pronouncing the prayers in the Sephardi pronunciation. The aforementioned Hartwig (Naphtali Hirtz) Wessely (1725-1805). PICTURED SECOND FROM TOP who initiated the reform of Hebrew pronunciation, referred precisely to the fact that the Sephardi people read out every phonetic symbol, even semitones of traditional texts, clearly, and claimed that their language sounded nicer than the Ashkenazi reading. In Hungary, Joszef Rajnis (1741-1812), a Jesuit teacher and poet, made a similar statement with an offensive anti-Semitic overtone. In his opinion the accent ("barking" as he called it) of rabbis differed significantly from the original sounds of the ancient Jewish language.

In Hungary there was an attempt to introduce Sephardi pronunciation already in the 19^th(Ben Yohai, 1815), and even a drama in Hebrew verse (Beit Rabbi, 1805), who in 1818 published a Rabbinic decision (pesak) which announced that the Sephardi pronunciation should be used in the synagogue instead of the Ashkenazi one. His main argument (as mentioned before) was that seven eighths of the world’s Jews prayed using the Sephardi pronunciation (this figure was obviously exaggerated). Kunitzer was in favor of reforms in general; he even supported the efforts of the radical reformer Aron Chorin. He studied in Prague and was held in high esteem. century. Following German examples, it was Moses ben Menachem Kunitz (1774-1837) of Obuda, the Rabbi of the Buda community from 1828 until his death, author of some valuable Talmudic works, a Zohar analysis,

The activity of Kunitzer had no real result, but in spite of its failure, it indicates that representatives of the haskalah were unanimously convinced that the Sephardi pronunciation preserved by certain isolated Jewish groups throughout centuries, was closer to the original sound of the Hebrew language than the Ashkenazi one, the common language of European Jews altered under German influence [12].

In the 1950s, the leadership of the Hungarian Jewish community strictly forbade the Sephardi pronunciation which sounded similar to Modern Hebrew. It was even forbidden at the Rabbinical Seminary, lest they be accused of Zionism and thus invite political or police intervention (Hungary was a Communist dictatorship at the time). Those who study Hebrew these days may learn both pronunciations, yet the attraction and impact of the Israeli intonation is powerful. In Synagogues, the Ashkenazi pronunciation is still in use, but younger people, including students of the Rabbinical Seminary, switch to the Sephardi-Israeli reading they became accustomed to during their stay in Israel [13].

Zionism and the Rebirth of Hebrew

Eliezer ben Yehuda PICTURED BOTTOM is considered the father of “Modern Hebrew”.

Ben Yehuda left his native Lithuania and sailed to Palestine in 1881 where he settled in the Jewish quarter of old Jerusalem. In 1890 he helped create the Hebrew Language Council (Va'ad Ha Leshon Ha Ivrit) whose stated purpose was to disseminate works in Hebrew and establish Hebrew as the official language of the Yishuv.

Although Ben-Yehuda was not a religious Jew, he dressed as a traditional Sephardic Jew, sported a long untrimmed beard and regularly attended the local synagogue [14]. It wasn’t long however until he managed to arouse the ire of the Jerusalem Sephardic Rabbinate who responded with 3 separate bans against his and his newspaper “Hatzvi”.

Ben-Yehuda particularly disliked the Sephardic Chief Rabbi Yaakov Shaul Elyashar and considered him be from the old generation of Jews who were hopelessly stuck in the “galut [exile] mentality”. He did however form close ties with Elyashar’s successor, Rabbi Yaakov Meir who was highly sympathetic to Ben-Yehuda’s ambitions and the former was instrumental in introducing the modern Hebrew language into the schools of the Sephardic community in Jerusalem[15].

Ben-Yehuda Chooses the Sephardic Pronunciation

Ben-Yehuda, although displaying an attitude of contempt for the older generation of traditional Sephardic Rabbis, harbored a strong admiration for the traditions of Sephardic Jewry; the “golden age in Spain”, was especially cherished by Ben-Yehuda who called it “this most fruitful period” [16].

As Jack Fellman put it:

..the Sephardim as a whole were less inclined to religious fanaticism and more receptive to new ideas from the outside world. This fact can be attributed to various sources. First, unlike the Ashkenazim, the Sephardim had never been directly exposed to the new climate of thought as expressed in the ideas of the enlightenment which were sweeping across Europe during the 19^th century and therefore did not recognize as deeply the possible anti-traditional, anti-religious consequences of these beliefs [17].
It is known from historical records and had also been clear to Ben Yehuda before his arrival in Palestine that the various Jewish groups in the city, while speaking their own languages among themselves, used Hebrew as a lingua franca when it became necessary to meet together, for example in the market place, or to work together, as in the collection of taxes for the government authorities. This situation was particularly applicable to the 2 major sections of the community- Ashkenazim and Sephardim- when they met together, but was also the case when groups consisting only of Sephardic Jews gathered, as these people had no other common means of communication but Hebrew, since Ladino was restricted in use and Arabic was splintered into several dialects. As Ben-Yehuda observed: “When for example a Sephardi from Aleppo would meet a Sephardi from Salonika or a Sephardi from Morocco would come into the company of a Jew from Bukhara, they were obliged to speak in the holy tongue… of all the centers of Jewish population in the world only Jerusalem could boast a spoken Hebrew tradition which had been preserved until Ben Yehuda’s time. As Ben-Yehuda noted: “for me the matter was a little easier, because the Sephardim who knew I was not a Sephardi were already used to the fact that with an Ashkenazi they must speak in Hebrew. As for the Ashkenazim, some of them did not know who I was, and the question whether I might not be a Sephardi made it acceptable to them to speak with me in Hebrew.

This Hebrew was not, of course, the Ashkenazic (European) Hebrew that Ben Yehuda had learned in his youth. In the first place, it was a Hebrew spoken with the Sephardic accent, inasmuch as the Sephardim were numerically and culturally superior to the other groups in Jerusalem and had enjoyed this status for over 300 years and therefore their accent too had become dominant….It should also be borne in mind as a factor initially aiding Ben Yehuda and his ideal that certain groups of Jews in Palestine already spoke only Hebrew, in particular Kabbalists and Hassidim especially in Safed, at least on Sabbaths, but also, it would seem, on weekdays [18].

Adopting Hebrew as the Official Language

After much discussion and debate, a meeting of the Hebrew Teachers Association in 1895 adopted Hebrew as the language of instruction, with Sephardic pronunciation to be used (but Ashkenazic pronunciation was allowed in the first year in Ashkenazic schools, and for prayer and ritual). The next meeting of the association was not until 1903, at the close of a major convention of Jews of the Yishuv called in Zikhron Yaakov by Ussishkin, the Russian Zionist leader. The 59 members present accepted Hebrew as the medium of instruction…and there was general agreement also on the use of Ashkenazi script and Sephardic pronunciation [19].

It should be pointed out that although modern Hebrew is similar to the Sephardic pronunciation, it isn’t exactly alike. For instance, Sephardic Hebrew, as mentioned before, differentiates between an ayin and an alef, as well as between a chet and a khaf while modern Hebrew does not do so in both cases.

While most Zionists were enthusiastic about reviving Hebrew as a spoken language, not all of them were as enthused by the adoption of the Sephardic pronunciation and insisted on using their “native” dialect in conversation.

The Lithuanian Yiddish poet and writer Yehoash mentioned how strange Sephardic Hebrew sounded to him when he emigrated from the US to the new colony of Rechovot shortly before World War I

In stark contrast to the story cited in Schorsch (see above) with Mr. Bellerman and the students of the Berlin Gymnasium, Yehoash (and others) took issue (though ambivalently)with the young Hebrew students at the Herzliyah High School reciting Hebrew poems in the Sephardic pronunciation:

An excellent poem by Frischmann was read, but in the Sephardic Hebrew pronunciation the lines lost their original rhythm. The problem of retaining in the Sephardic accent the rhythm of the Hebrew songs composed originally in the Ashkenazic pronunciation will be very hard for the devotees of the ha-Havarah haSefardit to solve. Yet practically all residents of Eretz Yisroel use exclusively this latter. The most sonorous strophes of Bialik and Shneor must naturally lose the greater part of their melody when uttered in the Sephardic pronunciation. No wonder then that many Hebrew authors in foreign countries look askance at the Havarah Hasefaradit, One of them- a well-known mystic and philosopher, who never in his life cracked a joke-perpetrated his first and only pun at the expense of the selfsame dialect calling it ha-havarah ha-sefardde’it, the language of the frogs.

Yet Yehoash concedes:

And yet after residing in Eretz Yisroel for an appreciable length of time, one begins to feel that the Sephardic accent is the proper one, despite all the historico-philological considerations [20].

On the question of why Ben-Yehuda and the Language Council decided to adopt the Sephardic pronunciation, Jack Follman quotes the noted linguist Dr. Haim Blanc: “for various reasons, they decided to adopt the pronunciation in vogue among Mediterranean and Middle Eastern (Sephardic) communities, but which one of the several Sephardic varieties was actually used as a model is obscure…”

Blanc offered the following reasons among others for this change:

1. The Sephardic variety was already in use as the pronunciation of the Market Hebrew lingua franca of Palestine, and was used even by the Ashkenazim in their face to face dealings with the Sephardim for almost 4 centuries prior to Ben-Yehuda.

2. The Sephardic variety was considered the more ancient of the two, as testified in particular by various transliterations and translations of Hebrew into Latin and Greek, and therefore was considered closer to the original ancient biblical Hebrew of the homeland. A further point was the fact that the Sephardi variant was considered closer to the historical dialect of Judah, the home of Judaism, whereas the Ashkenazic form was thought to be similar to that of secessionist Samaria.

3. The Ashkenazic variety of Hebrew reminded the council too much of Yiddish, the despised language of the exile in the opinion of most of the council’s members, which, in particular contained the same set of vowel phonemes. Conversely, the Sephardic form resembled the sound pattern of Arabic more closely and Arabic was the sister language in the Semitic family which already existed in the locale.

4. The Sephardic variant reproduced the consonantal text of Hebrew more accurate that did the Ashkenazic, as it included at least four more graphemic-phonemic renditions, as mentioned above. Therefore it was considered the more correct of the two by the council, who still conceived of Hebrew more in its written image than in its spoken form.

5. It was the council’s opinion that children who knew the Sephardic system would be equipped to read and write Hebrew texts with greater facility since the Sephardic system resembled the consonantal text more closely. Since children were to be the chief carriers of the language revival, this was an important factor. (However as Hebrew is generally written only in its consonantal shape, the fact the Ashkenazic and not the Sephardic system was closer in vocalization to the vocalized Hebrew text was never given serious attention, although Yellin did mention it at least once in his work, at his lecture on the subject to the Secondary and Grammar School Teachers Union Conference in Gedera in 1904. This step was later to lead to serious problems in the teaching of Hebrew vocalization.)

6. The Sephardic system is closer to the internal grammatical structure (morpho phonemics) of Hebrew than the Ashkenazic system, and had been the system already in use among the European Hebraists as well as in Hebrew grammars. In this sense, it may be said that the Sephardic variety had more codification and thus more prestige than the Ashkenazi variety [21].

Notes:

[1]. the historian Simon Dubnow doubted the existence of a direct link between the formation of Adler’s circle and the emergence of Hasidism, and most other scholars who have considered the question agree. Some reconsideration of this position is now required, as the scholarly world has recently revised its view of the spiritual nature of early Hassidism and embarked on a new assessment of its religious and social features. The new approach studies the beginning of Hassidism in the context of the religious awakening then taking place in the world of kabbalistically oriented pietistic groups active in 18^th century Europe. We are therefore justified in attempting a reassessment of the link between the different manifestations of religious pietism appearing at the same time in eastern and central Europe. The Frankfurt pietist circle and the Hasidic groups in eastern Europe were established at approximately the same time-the early 1770s; both trends looked to the same sources for inspiration and sought to create a new ritual expression for new spiritual currents; both used the Hebrew term Hasidim; they recognized the power of charismatic leaders and their authority to innovate new practices and there was a striking similarity between the two in prayer rites and other customs as well as in the nature of their deviations from accepted norms in their respective communities.
Elior, Rachel "Rabbi Nathan Adler and the Frankfurt Pietists: Pietist Groups in Eastern and Central Europe during the Eighteenth Century," in Karl Erich Grozinger, ed., Judische Kultur in Frankfurt am Main, von den Anfangen bis zur Gegenwart (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag, 1997), 135-177, available here.

[2]. Ibid, p.9 (in PDF)

[3]. the historian H.Z. Zimmels hypothesized that the Chassidim did not switch to the Sephardic pronunciation because it would have been too difficult for them to do so. Adler reportedly had a Sephardic scholar living in his house for over a year in order to teach him the "proper" pronunciations of Hebrew see here. Cf., Chatam Sofer, Responsa, Orah hayyim, para. 15: “therefore my master, the wise, pious, and priestly Nathan Adler, of blessed memory, he would himself lead the services and pray in Sephardic pronunciation from R’ Yitzchak Luria’s prayer book.” Cf. Abraham Lowenstein of Emden, Responsa Zeror Ha-hayim, Amsterdam 1820, sec,. “U-neginotay yenaggen”: “As to what has been testified of the unique sage…R’ Nathan Adler in Frankfurt, that he too used to pray in the Sephardic pronunciation , I too know this….And heard him pray in the Sephardic pronunciation and apart from that…R’ Nathan was at that time quite alone in his usage, counter to all the great authorities of that time in Frankfurt a.M., and no one ruled like the aforementioned R’ Nathan but prayed in the Ashkenazic accent as we do.” According to Adler’s biographers, he had learned the Sephardic accent in his youth from a Jerusalemite visitor to his home. Derekh Hanesher p. 22

Quoted in Elior p. 31 (in PDF)

[4]. See "Benjamin Disraeli and the myth of Sephardi superiority" Todd M. Endelman, Jewish History Volume 10, Number 2 / September, 1996) pp. 31-32

[5]. See "The Myth of Sephardi Supremacy," Ismar Schorsch, reproduced in his From Text to Context: The Turn to History in Modern Judaism (Hanover, N.H., 1994), p. 72

[6]. Jewish Budapest: monuments, rites, history by Kinga Frojimovics, Géza Komoróczy pp. 459-460

[7]. Schorsch, 71

[8]. Schorsch, 77

[9]. Ibid, 85. Cf. “Scientific Racism and the Mystique of Sephardic Racial Superiority”, John Efron pp. 86-87

[10]. Schorsch, pp. 89-90

[11]. Hamburger, Benyamin. Meshichei Hasheker Umitnagdayam pp. 242-243

[12]. Jewish Budapest pp. 457-458

[13]. Jewish Budapest, 461

[14]. Ben-Yehuda, Eliezer. Hahalom Veshivro, p. 107

[15]. Ben-Yehuda, Devorah. Hayav Umifalo pp. 47-48

[16]. Fellman, Jack. The revival of a classical tongue: Eliezer Ben Yehuda and the Modern Hebrew language p. 77

[17]. Fellman, 29

[18]. Fellman, 30-31

[19]. Wright, Sue. Language and the state: revitalization and revival in Israel and Eire p. 14

[20]. Yehoash, The Feet of the Messenger pp. 34-35

[21]. Fellman, 84-85

Please Help Preserve Jewish Family Trees!

2009-12-28T19:12:00.003-05:00

I am pleased to post here about a new genealogy collaboration that will help preserve Jewish genealogy for future generations.

MyHeritage.com and Beit Hatfutsot - the Museum of the Jewish People (Tel Aviv, Israel) are now collaborating in a major new project to preserve Jewish family trees.

Under this partnership, online family trees built on MyHeritage.com - with the consent of the tree creators (see below) - will be transferred to Beit Hatfutsot for digital safekeeping.

For three decades, Beth Hatfutsoth has been collecting digital information on many topics, all aimed at preserving the history of the Jewish people, including family trees with millions of records. Its multimedia database includes Jewish genealogy, surnames, communities, photographs, film/video and music.

Read more...