בס"ד Kandel Medieval Jewish History Prof. Chaviva Levin Intro ..................................................................................................................................... 3 Unit I: Jews Under Islam ................................................................................................... 3 Rise of Islam ................................................................................................................... 3 Jews of Arabia............................................................................................................. 3 Mohammed ................................................................................................................. 4 Tenets of New Religion .............................................................................................. 4 Reception .................................................................................................................... 5 Status of Jews.............................................................................................................. 5 Jews of Islam: Geonim and their Institutions ................................................................ 6 Transition to Muslim Rule .......................................................................................... 6 Leadership Structure of Jews under Islam .................................................................. 7 Exilarch ....................................................................................................................... 7 גאונים............................................................................................................................ 7 Exilarchate .................................................................................................................. 8 Competition with the Palestinian Center .................................................................... 8 Saadia Gaon .................................................................................................................... 9 R. Saadia Gaon............................................................................................................ 9 Involvement in Communal Affairs ............................................................................. 9 Writings..................................................................................................................... 10 Karaites and Karaism .................................................................................................... 12 Early (pre-Ananite Dissent) ...................................................................................... 12 Ananites .................................................................................................................... 12 Ninth Century Karaism ............................................................................................. 13 Issues of Disagreement between Rabbanites and Karaites ....................................... 13 Decline of the Geonate and Rise of New Jewish Centers ............................................. 15 “Story of the Four Captives”..................................................................................... 15 Backdrop and Overview: Spanish Political Context ..................................................... 17 Courtier Culture ............................................................................................................ 17 שמואל הנגיד................................................................................................................. 17 משה אבן עזרא............................................................................................................... 18 Critiques of “Courtier Culture” ................................................................................. 21 Neoplatonism and Jewish Neoplatonic Philosophers ............................................... 22 ר' יהודה הלוי................................................................................................................. 24 רמב"ם............................................................................................................................. 24 End of Jewish Life in Spain ...................................................................................... 24 Biography.................................................................................................................. 25 Major works .............................................................................................................. 26 The “Real” רמב"ם...................................................................................................... 26 Unit II: Jews in Christendom ............................................................................................ 27 Jews in Early Christianity ............................................................................................. 27 Jesus .......................................................................................................................... 27 Paul and Pauline Christianity .................................................................................... 27 Moments in the Break Between Judaism and Christianity ....................................... 28 Patristic Attitudes toward Jews ................................................................................. 28 -1- בס"ד Kandel Legal Status of Jews.................................................................................................. 29 Jews in Early Medieval Europe .................................................................................... 29 Jews in the Carolingian Empire ................................................................................ 29 The Rise of Jewish Communities in Northern Europe ................................................. 31 Origins: Immigration ................................................................................................ 31 Communal Structure and Governance ...................................................................... 32 רבנו גרשום מאור הגולה.................................................................................................. 33 Relations Between Jews and Christians .................................................................... 34 רש"י............................................................................................................................ 35 Midterm............................................................................................................................. 36 Crusades ........................................................................................................................ 37 Reasons ..................................................................................................................... 37 Smaller Crusading Groups ........................................................................................ 37 Jewish Narratives ...................................................................................................... 37 יהרג ואל יעבר לעומת יהרוג ואל יעבור............................................................................... 38 Historicity of First Crusade Narratives ..................................................................... 39 Portrayals of Women ................................................................................................ 40 1096 as a Turning Point ................................................................................................ 40 ' בעלי התוס....................................................................................................................... 41 Methodology and Characteristics ............................................................................. 41 פיתוח ההלכה................................................................................................................. 42 חסידי אשכנז..................................................................................................................... 43 פרשנות המקרא היהודית באשכנז במאה הי"ב........................................................................... 45 Jewish-Christian Polemic.............................................................................................. 47 Philip Augustus and the Jews ....................................................................................... 48 Ritual Murder Accusations ....................................................................................... 49 Church Attitudes Towards Jews ................................................................................... 50 Nicolas Donin and the Trial of the Talmud .............................................................. 51 Popular Attitudes Towards Jews............................................................................... 53 Provence ........................................................................................................................ 54 Maimonidean Controversy........................................................................................ 55 Christian Spain .............................................................................................................. 56 קבלה........................................................................................................................... 57 Social Aspects ........................................................................................................... 58 Breakdown of Convivencia....................................................................................... 59 Responses are supposed to be done by 9:00 the day of the class. Primary sources and secondary sources. The papers are about: 1) Karaism or the ( גניזה קהיריתwhich has anything written in Hebrew script, so is particularly valuable to us) (Feb. 12). 2) How historians read primary sources (March 21). Don’t cheat. Give papers in on time. There will be midterm and final exams: Feb. 28 and May 14, 1:00-3:15. Grading: Responses-15% -2- בס"ד Kandel Papers-35% Exams-45% Class Participation-5% Next paper is due on Monday, April 16; worksheet is due Monday, March 26. Intro We will briefly examine the title of the course: Medieval Jewish History. Let’s start with “History”: It could include only events that happen, or could be broadened to include cultural waves and ideas. Old historians weren’t interested in much besides kings and princes, but fuzzy-headed liberals like studying stuff like women, children, the oppressed, and Jews. This could be because universities also start studying stuff that’s important in general culture, like gender studies and stuff like that, so they also start studying the history of those things (since historians themselves are products of their society and mindset). (For example, William C. Jordan (a black) wrote a lot about manumission. This could or could not be coincidental.) So, we’ll say that history is the “study of the past.” Now, let’s examine “Jewish”: It could be narrow—what Jews did—or could be broadened, and study how Jews thought, different currents’ effects on Jews, etc. We could also discuss what we include in the group “Jews”—what about Karaites and stuff like that? What about people who left Judaism—what about, say, ( משומדיםconversos, or people who just converted on their own)? Let’s make it pretty broad. “Medieval”: Comes from “medium aevum,” which means “middle age.” A more derogatory term is “Dark Ages.” It normally includes about the years 500-1500. An important question to ask is whether this set of dates makes any sense in terms of the Jewish experience or whether we should set our own guidelines. The Jewish experience could be different because they lived in non-European societies, but according to the criteria of intellectual Jewish history, they do make sense, since they correspond to the eras of the גאוניםand ראשונים. In terms of Jewish migration, these dates also probably make sense. Some1 try to define Jewish history based on “corporate Jewish history,” which describes autonomous Jewish communities. These communities were very powerful and responsible for collecting taxes, social benefits, societal order, economic norms, etc. (In Israel, some look down on medieval Jewish history as too גלותי, and claim that they didn’t have any political history outside of ;ארץ ישראלthe reality was otherwise, however—there was an active and vibrant Jewish political life throughout much of Medieval Jewish history. Also, the Holocaust overshadows all medieval Jewish history, and often Holocaust studies find their way into historical studies of the Middle Ages.) Unit I: Jews Under Islam Rise of Islam Jews of Arabia The Jews live in the Arabian peninsula (Hijaz) in tribes; they live centered around a city called Medina. We don’t have many original sources from this time period, so we don’t 1 Haim Helleben Sasson? (I have no idea how to spell his name.) -3- בס"ד Kandel know, for example, the origin of the name Medina. Jews were farmers, craftsmen, etc., spoke Arabic, and have Arabian names; however, as opposed to the Arabian pagans, they were monotheistic and had separate tribes (for example, Banu ’l Nadir, Banu Qurayza, etc.). Different tribes had different alliances; there was no pan-Jewish alliance. (We’ll speak a lot about the interaction between the Jewish communities and their neighbors; the Jewish communities also resemble their host culture to some degree. This has impact on all sorts of things.) Mohammed Mohammed was a member of Hashemite family of the tribe of Quraysh (that is the tribe that controls Mecca; the Hashemite tribe is supposed to be prominent); he lived in Mecca, which was the home of the main temple of the god Qaba. Some historians say that Mecca was really important; others (Peters) say that Mecca is more of a place with a few mud huts. The Quraysh seem to have put some Bedouin idols around Qaba so that the Bedouins will come in. Muhammed’s wife was Khadija; he traveled in a caravan, so he probably met Jews and Christians. We know about Muhammed since in 610, at the age of 40, he thought that he had a revelation from Gabriel. Initially, Mohammed was sort of ignored; he was seen as kind of a poet-seer, whereas he sees himself as a prophet. However, when he starts talking about believers going to heaven and non-believers not, the Meccans come up with a plan to assassinate Mohammed. In Yathrib (Medina), the tribal alliances are falling apart and so try to invite Mohammed to be the leader of their political structure. In 622, Mohammed flees to Medina. This run-away is known as the hijra ()הגירה. Everyone agreed to the Constitution of Medina. The constitution says basically that Mohammed will be the ruler of Medina, and they’ll all help each other. This document is a political document with strong religious undertones. It says that the Jews have a protected status, as long as they don’t hurt “the Believers.” However, the document also threatened the Jews’ status, since it suggested that the new Muslims form a broader pan-Muslim alliance, which could threaten the existing Jewish alliance and overpower it. Tenets of New Religion Iman=beliefs (there are 4): 1) Monotheism (strict monotheism, meaning that there are no saints or anything like that; 2) Divine Scripture; 3) Prophecy (concluding with Mohammed); 4) Angels (Mohammed received his revelation from an angel, so it’s pretty important that they exist). Din=Pillars (there are 5): 1) Charity; 2) Prayer (five times a day towards Jerusalem); 3) Shahada (declaration of faith); 4) Fasting; 5) Hajj (pilgrimage). Mohammed was supposedly told by Gabriel that the law he received was part of the Great Law (Nomos). This puts Muhammed’s revelation in the context of the Great Law, so Muhammed always saw himself as the next level of Christianity and Judaism, so he used Biblical ideas. Different scholars suggest that different religions had more influence on him; it could be more important to investigate what his allusions assume that his audience (7th cent. Mecca) would have known. Therefore, it seems that people in the area that Mohammed was speaking knew oral traditions of the Bible. -4- בס"ד Kandel Reception Mohammed apparently thought that the Jews would like him, since he was a monotheistic alternative to paganism and some even think that Mohammed thought that the Jews would convert. Reuven Firestone thinks that that assumes that Mohammed would be too naïve, and it’s ridiculous to think that he would actually think that he would be received. He adds that the Jews of Medina were in a messianic state. He quotes documents that state that the Jews were awaiting the emergence of a prophet from the south (in Mecca), and claims that Mohammed thought that he would be welcomed by the Jews as that prophet. The Jews, however, did not accept Mohammed. Mohammed claimed that he was illiterate (that shows that his revelation was real, since there’s no other way for him to get his revelation). This, of course, does not endear himself with the Jews. Also, the גמרא says that only קטנים ושוטיםget any נבואה. Also, he has some really bad mistakes—he claims that יום כיפורis celebrated to commemorate יציאת מצרים. It’s possible that this garbled transmission is due to his illiteracy. Shlomo Dov Goitein claims that these transmissions are from Mohammed’s connection only to sectarian Jews, and so the mainstream Jews rejected him as a representative of these sectarian Jews. For example, in Sura 9:30-31 (page 5 of the handout), it says: The Jews say, “Ezra is the son of Allah,” and the Christians say, “The Messiah is the son of Allah.” …Allah attack them! What?! In apocryphal בית שניliterature, Ezra is elevated to almost a divine figure, so it’s possible that this attack is really an attack on these rejected beliefs that come from different sects. Peters-Initially, the Jews enter into the alliance of the Constitution of Medina, but they then realize that Mohammed is very threatening: The Jews assume that they can ally with whomever they want, but Mohammed suggests the creation of a pan-Muslim tribe, which could threaten the Jewish position; it’s also possible that the Jews didn’t want a competing monotheistic religion. Stillman suggests that Mohammed then realized that the Jews weren’t accepting him, and waited until he could fight them; others suggest that he turned against the Jews when they tried to fight him. In 624, Jews were expelled from Medina and one tribe was slaughtered when they didn’t listen. Mohammed attacked a caravan of the Quraysh, beats off two Meccan attempts at retaliation, and began to conquer land. He then changes the direction of prayer from Jerusalem to Mecca and started conquering North Africa. Status of Jews Wretchedness and baseness were stamped upon [the Jews]… That was because they disbelieved in Allah’s revelations and slew the prophets wrongfully… Sura 2:61 Have you not seen those who received a portion of the Scripture? They purchase error, and they want you to go astray from the path. Sura 4:44 These don’t bode well for the Jews. However, when he conquered the Khaybar (North Africa), Mohammed said that the Jews could stay Jews (this was because of their economic power). Therefore, other statements -5- בס"ד Kandel in the Qur’an have a more positive view of Jews; later Muslims mostly followed the Kahybar model. Within 10 years of Mohammed’s being kicked out of Mecca, he conquered the entire Arabian peninsula and made everyone convert to Islam (no separation of church and state); shortly afterward, he also conquered (by 732) all the way up to Spain from Africa (until being stopped at the Battle of Tours) in the west, Armenia (south of Caucasus Mountains) in the north, and Persia in the east. Part of his success is due to the internal weakness of the empires that he took over. Now, Islam is the religion of a huge region, and Mohammed’s actions serve as guides to the legalists. There are two areas of the world: Dar al Islam (ruled by Islam), and Dar al Harb (the rest of the world, which is at war with Islam). Theoretically, the Jews and Christians were supposed to be killed; in reality, the Ahl al-kitab (people of the book, or Christians and Jews) were made Dhimmis, or protected citizens. The pact of Umar, which was made between Christians of Spain and the Muslims, has several problematic parts—Jews and Christians were second-class status, couldn’t build new synagogues, couldn’t learn Koran, couldn’t celebrate religion loudly, etc. However, the dhimmis were at least protected, so by medieval status, they had a relatively secure place. (Jews in Europe claim that they had it worse, but Jews in Muslim lands claim that they had it worse; Arabs claim that Islamic countries treated Jews great.) Cohen claims that the protected minority status let Jewish life flourish when social conditions were right for it. At different times, the reality of life didn’t actually conform to the theoretical model—either Jews had more or fewer privileges than they were supposed to have. The Jews and Christians had to pay the Jizya, or poll tax, and the Kharaj, or tribute. Jews of Islam: Geonim and their Institutions Transition to Muslim Rule By the end of the Muslim conquest, the bulk of the Jewish community lived under Muslim rule (Dar al-Islam), especially in בבל. We will discuss the changes in the Jewish community that reflect this change. תקנות There are two major תקנותthat influenced this time: The גמראsays that you can only collect debts from sold land, but you can’t collect debts from sold chattel;2 there was a Geonic תקנהthat let debts be collected also from chattel. This reflects the change to urban living under the Caliphate (this doesn’t have anything specifically to do with Islam).3 Also, the גמראsays that a woman who claims מאיס עליhas to wait a year before forcing a divorce;4 there was a תקנהthat she doesn’t have to wait, since they were afraid that the , אמר רבי אלעזר אפי' מיתמי? לא: אמר ליה ר"נ לעולא. גובין מן העבדים: הלכתא, ואמר עולא א"ר אלעזר:ב"ק יא דאמר, כדרבא. אפי' מגלימא דעל כתפיה! הכא במאי עסקינן? שעשאו אפותיקי, מיניה.]מיניה [מבעל החוב עצמו מ"ט? הא אית. אין ב"ח גובה הימנו- שורו אפותיקי ומכרו, בעל חוב גובה הימנו- עשה עבדו אפותיקי ומכרו:רבא . והא לית ליה קלא,ליה קלא 3 There was no legal prohibition for Jews to own land. 4 לא- אבל אמרה מאיס עלי, דאמרה בעינא ליה ומצערנא ליה: היכי דמיא מורדת? אמר אמימר.סד-:כתובות סג לא, לא מפקינן מינה- תפסה, השתא דלא אתמר לא הכי ולא הכי. מיבעיא בעי לה רבא ולא פשיט...כייפינן לה 2 -6- בס"ד Kandel Jewesses would go to ( )בין לזנות בין לשמד( תרבות רעהaccording to רב שרירא ;)רב נטרונאי גאון says that the תקנהwas done to prevent the interference of Muslim courts in גיטין, so that there wouldn’t be גט מעושה. This is called ""תקנה מורדת. This reflects the new reality that at as opposed to Zoroastrianism, Islam is interested in converts, so the Jews were concerned to keep the בנות ישראלJewish.5 If the Muslim courts had the power to interfere with the courts, they may have impressed the woman with their empathy with her cause and thereby convince her to become Muslim. Leadership Structure of Jews under Islam By the tenth century, Sura and Pumbedita moved to Baghdad (but kept their own names). However, ארץ ישראלhas its own geonate that tried to assert its own influence over world Jewry. Exilarch In בבל, there were two sources of rule: The exilarch ()ריש גלותא, or Jewish “head of state”, claimed to be descended from ;מלכות בית דודhe has to be recognized both by the Jews (Geonim) and the caliph. Bustanai is the first ריש גלותאunder Islam and the last under Persian rule. The Persian ruler felt threatened by מלכות בית דודand decided to try to kill them all. The Persian ruler had a dream that when he was in his garden, he cut down all the trees except for one, and someone with red hair told him not to cut down the last tree; they find an old Jew who said that the trees were בני דוד. That guy was דוד, and told him not to kill the last Davidic scion. They old Jew goes home and finds a woman pregnant with Bustanai, who is protected by the Persian ruler. Bustanai also shows the king that he isn’t interested in taking over (he doesn’t raise his hand in the presence of the king to kill a fly). This story basically claims that the exilarchate—and Bustanai in particular—was chosen by God and has special powers to behave in front of kings. After the Muslim conquest, the Muslim ruler gave Bustanai one of the daughters of the deposed Persian king, and Bustanai married her. This symbolized the royalty of Bustanai and his authority in the Muslim world. Later, when there is conflict between the exilarch and the Geonim, the Geonim claim that the exilarchs have no legitimacy, since they’re שקציםin any case since their ancestor married a שקצה. (Of course, she may have converted; also, she presumably wasn’t Bustanai’s only wife.) גאונים The Geonim are theoretically in charge of the spiritual, internal stuff in the Jewish world. However, the idea of a “”רשות, or the area where one Geon or exilarch had authority, defined where who could collect taxes, appoint judges, etc. In each רשות, each Geon could do most of the stuff that the Exilarch could do in his רשות. Therefore, the difference between the spiritual and temporal is more stuff that’s related to the broader Jewish community. There is often some gray area; some Geonim tried to influence government policy and stuff like that and some Exilarchs tried to start ישיבות. For example, רבנו סעדיה גאוןwent to talk to the Caliph went he wanted to. (ועיין. ובהנך תריסר ירחי שתא לית לה מזוני מבעל, ומשהינן לה תריסר ירחי שתא אגיטא, לא יהבינן לה- תפסה . ונקבעה ההלכה כמותם, אבל ר"ת (שם תוד"ה אבל) ושו"ע פסקו שלא,ברמב"ם שם שפסק שכופין גט במקרה כזה ). וכך נוצרה הבעיה של עגונות, זה מאד מצמצם כוחן של נשים בעניני גירושין,כמובן 5 The Jews were more used to resisting Christian conversion efforts. -7- בס"ד Kandel It’s not so clear how the Geonim are appointed and if the exilarch had to appoint them. The Geonim received questions and support from the Jews that were in the rest of the world that weren’t in the רשותof the Geonim. ארץ ישראלhad its own Geonate; it was weaker than the Babylonian ישיבות. Both ארץ ישראלand בבלtried to encourage the North Africans to send their questions and money to them. Especially in ירחי כלה, the Geonim would lecture on whatever מסכתthey were studying. The גאוןsat at the head; the דיני דבבאsat around him. The seventy sages sat around them; the אלופיםsat towards the front. The ראשי כלהsat in the דרא קמא, or first row. יקום פרקן mentions all of these people—' וכו, ראשי כלותא,דיני דבבא. There were also תנאיםand אמוראים, or people who recited texts, to clarify questionable texts. The students (there were theoretically 400 there) were tested on their mastery of the מסכת. The Geon leads the discussion; the דרא קמאis involved, also. It’s not clear how many people were there during the rest of the year. The גאוןoften answered questions in the name of himself and the ישיבה. The גאון, during the rest of the time, wrote responsa, administered the judicial system, administered his רשות, and sometimes wrote different texts (e.g., standardizing liturgy, which was variable before the Geonim—the חזןwould write a פיוטfor each בבל ;שבתwas not a fan of פיוטים, but א"יdid like them). The introduction to the סדורof רב אמרם גאוןshows that the Jews in Spain sent the Jews in בבלmoney in return for blessings and a standardized סדור. Another thing the גאוניםhave to do is clarify Jewish law; גמראoften isn’t so helpful in these circumstances. It wasn’t so available, convenient, relevant, etc. The גאוניםdecided that the בבליwould be authoritative, so they had to start interpreting it in order to make it relevant. Several legal works were made: שאילתות, which discusses laws in relation to the ;פרשה ;בה"גetc. Exilarchate ’רבי נתן הבבליs account is biased by an attempt to buttress the support of the Exilarchate, but it shows the ראש גלותאas a kind of king who was definitely above the ;גאוניםalso, the caliph would supposedly invite the ראש גלותאand would send escorts to bring him to him, etc. This doesn’t seem to keep with the spirit of the pact of Umar, since the Exilarch is being treated like a king (albeit still under the caliph). In general, to get authenticity, you would attribute whatever you want to do to an earlier figure; for example, the Exilarchs claimed that they had permission from Mohammed to do this. The pact of Umar seems to be a theoretical document much more than the actual way that the place was governed. Competition with the Palestinian Center There was competition over control of the outlying areas. The ישיבהof א"יhad a broader curriculum, including בעלי מסורה, פיוט, מדרשי הלכה ואגדה, etc.; the בבליacademies studied almost exclusively תלמוד בבלי. However, in א"י, there is a much stronger Karaite -8- בס"ד Kandel community. Also, in א"י, a woman couldn’t be forced to accept a co-wife; in בבל, she could be. People in the גלותoften thought about the traditional ascendancy of ;א"יthe subject matter of their question; and geographical proximity. Pirqoy ben Baboy finally realized that the בבלייםwouldn’t change the minds of בני ארץ ישראלabout פיוט, so he sent a letter to the גלותthat argued that since the Byzantines oppressed א"י, their הלכהwas less pure; also, he argued against ;פיוטיםalso, he said that they shouldn’t say שמעin שמנה עשרהof שבת. Some parts of the א"יtradition became prominent, especially in ;מסורהwe have a report that there were two בתי כנסתin Egypt and the difference between the בבליand ארצישראלי places was that the בבליread the תורהevery year, but the ארצישראליplace read it once every three years. However, they came together on שמחת תורהand one other time to celebrate. Saadia Gaon Last time, we talked about the exilarchate in general; now, we’ll talk about R’ Saadia Gaon. R. Saadia Gaon R. Saadia Gaon was not an ivory tower intellectual; he was a communal figure and leader. He was born in Fayyum, Egypt in 882. As opposed to the other gaons that were from a few major families in Babylonia, he was from Egypt. He left Egypt for about ten years (it’s not so clear why; some suggest he was in a controversy, others say that he was an itinerant student). While he was still in Egypt, he wrote the rhyming dictionary, the Sefer HaEgron, and wrote anti-Karaite works. He was one of the first Geonim to say that Karaism was a problem (this could have been since he was from Egypt, where Karaism was much more influential). Involvement in Communal Affairs Ben-Meir Calendar Controversy R. Saadia was very active in the Ben-Meir Calendar Controversy. In 921, the Gaon of א"י, מאיר-אהרון בן, decided to make a calendar that was different from that of בבל. It’s unclear exactly what the dispute was about (the difference is whether כסלוwould be מלא or )חסר, but the point was that the holidays would fall out on different days. It’s clear that the calendar issue was schismatic (cf. ר' גמליאלand ר' יהושעand the fight about )יו"כ.6 One 6 דמות צורות לבנות היו לו לרבן גמליאל בטבלא ובכותל בעלייתו שבהן מראה את ההדיוטות ואומר:ח:ר"ה ב הכזה ראית או כזה מעשה שבאו שנים ואמרו ראינוהו שחרית במזרח וערבית במערב אמר רבי יוחנן בן נורי עדי שקר הם כשבאו ליבנה קיבלן רבן גמליאל ועוד באו שנים ואמרו ראינוהו בזמנו ובליל עבורו לא נראה וקבלן רבן 'עדי שקר הן! היאך מעידים על האשה שילדה ולמחר כריסה בין שיניה?!' אמר, אמר רבי דוסא בן הרכינס.גמליאל '.לו ר' יהושע 'רואה אני את דבריך ' הלך. ' גוזרני עליך שתבא אצלי במקלך ובמעותיך ביום הכפורים שחל להיות בחשבונך, שלח לו רבן גמליאל:ט:ב 'יש לי ללמוד שכל מה שעשה רבן גמליאל עשוי שנאמר "אלה מועדי ה' מקראי, אמר לו.ומצאו רבי עקיבא מיצר אמר,' בא לו אצל רבי דוסא בן הרכינס.קודש אשר תקראו אתם"—בין בזמנן בין שלא בזמנן אין לי מועדות אלא אלו ' אם באין אנו לדון אחר בית דינו של רבן גמליאל צריכין אנו לדון אחר כל בית דין ובית דין שעמד מימות משה ועד,לו " ולמה לא נתפרשו שמותן של זקנים? אלא,עכשיו! שנאמר "ויעל משה ואהרן נדב ואביהוא ושבעים מזקני ישראל -9- בס"ד Kandel of the two authorities would have to agree to the other, or else there would be a huge split in the community. R. Saadia was then in Aleppo, and he wrote to everyone trying to convince them that the Babylonian position should be followed. In 855, the Babylonians ceded control of the calendar to א"י, but in the aftermath of the calendar dispute, א"יlost and בבלwon (even Egypt sided with )בבל. By פסחof 922, the balance of power seems to have gone towards ;בבלby ר"ה, everyone followed בבל. This was sort of the death-knell of ’א"יs dominance, and R. Saadia Gaon was the cause. Ben Zakkai Controversy R. Saadia was then made into an אלוף/ ריש כלהin Pumbedita. After that, he impressed the ריש גלותא. The Gaon of Sura, Joseph ben Jacob, died. The exilarch, Ben Zakkai, approached Nissim al-Marhawani, and was told to pick Zemah since R. Saadia was very qualified, but had a contentious personality; Ben Zakkai picked R. Saadia instead. R. Saadia then was made the Gaon of Sura. The appointment of a foreigner like R. Saadia shows that the yeshiva of Sura was falling on hard times. R. Saadia refused to sign a legal document that the ריש גלותאtold him to sign, so there were six or seven years of fighting. David ben Zakkai, the Exilarch, and Rav Saadia Gaon each deposed each other, leading to a major fight. It’s not clear exactly what was wrong with the document. The story of Rav Saadia is that the document was invalid for some reason, which is why he wouldn’t sign it. The document said that the administrators would take some split of the inheritance that some kids would inherit from their father. However, it’s not so clear that the document was actually bad; it’s possible that Rav Saadia didn’t want to rubber-stamp the documents of the Exilarch. The Gaon of Pumbedita did sign the document, so it’s hard to say that he was completely corrupt and only Rav Saadia Gaon was willing to stand up for justice. Therefore, it’s possible that Rav Saadia was making a political (and not moral) stand. Others emphasize that the institutions in Babylonia were in decline, so they were ripe for conflict; this court case was the thing that sparked the conflict between the Geonate and the Exilarchate. After six years, they realized that they couldn’t live in such a split, and the Natira bankers forced the two sides to come to terms with each other. If the document were really unjust, it’s difficult to see how Rav Saadia could make peace without changing it; it seems that the document was not an unforgivable miscarriage of justice. Rav Saadia stayed the Gaon until 942, when he died. Writings אמונות ודעות Background/Kalam ' נטל מקלו ומעותיו בידו והלך.ללמד שכל שלשה ושלשה שעמדו בית דין על ישראל הרי הוא כבית דינו של משה 'בוא, אמר לו, עמד רבן גמליאל ונשקו על ראשו.ליבנה אצל רבן גמליאל ביום שחל יום הכפורים להיות בחשבונו '.בשלום רבי ותלמידי רבי בחכמה ותלמידי שקבלת דברי - 10 - בס"ד Kandel This book was a philosophical work that used reason to strengthen the Jewish community’s faith. It had some anti-Karaite stuff in it, as well. R. Saadia was responding to the religious confusion; there were many different religions, and were encountering the Kalam. Kalam was a branch of Islamic theology (believed by the mutakallimun) that had three main ideas: 1) Reason: Kalam states that there are two parallel paths to wisdom, revelation/scripture and reason. Both paths will lead you to the same place. This assumes that we can interpret Scripture and the world competently. The need for both paths of knowledge is that לא דומה ראיה לשמיעה. 2) Unity of God: Another assumption of the Kalam is the Unity of God, which states that God is immutable. This means that God is always the same. This seems to contradict many passages in Scripture which imply that God changes His mind or behaves in different ways in different times (e.g. ל רחום וחנון ארך אפים-א ורב חסד ואמת, etc.). 3) Also, the Kalam says that God is just, which is measured the same way that we would say that people are just. The outcome of that is the belief in free will, since if there’s no free will, there’s no way for people to be punished. Hellenism was also becoming more widespread, since Arabs were translating Greek works into Arabic. There were several reasons that a work like אמונות ודעותwasn’t written in Christendom: The scholarly language of the Islamic world was Arabic, which is what the Jews spoke; in Christendom, the scholarly language was Latin; also, yeshivot in Christendom studied only תלמוד בבלי. ספר אמונות ודעות There are several types of knowledge: 1) Sense perception, 2) Intellectual perception, 3) Logical perception, 4) Reliable Tradition. The main point for R. Saadia is that tradition includes both the Written and Oral תורה. The first class of laws is logical laws ()מצוות שכליות. The second class of laws is מצוות שמעיות, or laws that are not dictated by reason. (He also claims that there is some small moral benefit from the second class of laws, also.) The need for revelation for the מצוות שכליותis so that people will know how exactly to do what we’re supposed to do and the specifics of what we’re supposed to do. For example, even if reason tells us that we have to thank God, we need the prophets to tell us when and how to pray. The need for this work is the desire to help the שלומי אמוני ישראלfight against the other currents going about the Jewish people. תורה שבכתב Sefer HaEgron (dictionary) was R. Saadia’s work that tried to convince the Jews to speak Hebrew, so he wrote an introduction in Hebrew and gave a brief history of Hebrew; he says that everyone spoke Hebrew until ;מגדל בבלfrom then until the Exile, the Jews spoke Hebrew. Some of this was influenced by the idea of Arabiyya, which tried to convince Muslims that Arabic was the most beautiful and expressive language; R. Saadia changed it to say that Hebrew is the most beautiful and holy language. R. Saadia wasn’t so successful; he had to rewrite the introduction in Arabic. - 11 - בס"ד Kandel In addition, R. Saadia wanted the Jews to study the תורה, so he translated the תורהinto Arabic in a work called Tafsir. R. Saadia says that some verses can’t be translated literally, such as כי הוא היתה אם כל חי. Also, the verse that השםis an " "אש אכלהis a metaphor, which wasn’t so obvious at that point. He also interprets פסוקיםin accordance with the מסורה, such as לא תבשל גדי בחלב אמו, which he translated as “don’t have mixtures of milk and meat.” This is part of his fight against Karaism, but it fits in with his reason, since he said that tradition is a source of reason. In conclusion, Rav Saadia is not an ivory tower and was involved in many communal issues. We’ll discuss how effective he was in helping Rabbinic tradition be more accepted. Karaites and Karaism Early (pre-Ananite Dissent) We spoke last time how R. Saadia Gaon was anti-Karaite; now, we’ll explore what exactly Karaism is a little more. In general, Karaites rejected the oral ( תורהthey’re בני מקרא, or )קראים. To examine what happened that caused Karaism, we could examine what precursors to Karaism existed (diachronic position); we could examine what cultural effects caused it (synchronic position), for example, looking at Muslim sects that emphasize scriptural literalism; we could also look to what extent Karaism is a reaction to contemporary Rabbinic culture. Some who adopt this last approach emphasize that the Geonim are trying to emphasize the hegemony of the בבליand their authority in interpreting it; the Geonim also impose judges and taxes on the people and ask the people to turn to them for authority. For people in Baghdad, this could make sense; if you’re living out in the middle of nowhere in Persia, you could feel resentment towards the Babylonian center. The growth of Karaism could be a backlash against the growth of the influence of the Geonate. Also, there’s a huge degree of instability when the Muslims took over; due to this lack of stability, messianic stuff starts coming up (including messianic figures such as Abu Isa and Yudghan). By the rule of the Abbasid caliphate, when everything has sort of settled down, a different kind of protest starts coming up against the central religious authority that manifests itself as a protest against the Oral Law. Ananites Anan ben David is known as the founder of Karaism. He was a candidate for the exilarchate, so of Davidic descent; he was also a scholar. We have his ספר המצוות. We also have Abraham ibn Daud’s account of the story of Anan ben David. Abraham ibn Daud7 says that Anan ben David was rejected for the exilarchate because of his heretical views. There is good reason to suspect the account of Abraham ibn Daud, since he was an anti-Karaite crusader. However, it does seem that Anan ben David was from Davidic descent, since there’s no reason for Abraham ibn Daud to make that up. 7 More on that later in the “Story of the Four Captives”. - 12 - בס"ד Kandel Another story claims that Anan ben David was imprisoned for trying to pose as the exilarch; he told the Muslim caliph that he wasn’t Jewish and was a different religion, since he had a different calendar (solar, not lunar). Whereas Abu Isa and Yudghan were challenging the Babylonian hegemony from Persia, Anan mounted his challenge from Baghdad and was using the Babylonian tools against them (like scholarship and stuff like that). Anan isn’t really a Biblical literalist; he uses דרשותand stuff to come to different conclusions. Muslim sources talk about Ananites being distinct from Karaites, which makes sense, since although Anan doesn’t accept the בבלי, he still does accept the idea of דרשותand stuff. Anan’s ספר המצוותlooks so much like the ( בבליeven though it fights it) that some people were put off by the over-intellectualization. So by the ninth century, Karaism wasn’t flying; it was pretty clear that it wasn’t going to get anywhere in בבל. In the ninth century, Karaism shifts focus from בבלto ארץ ישראל. Ninth Century Karaism The first major Karaite is Benjamin al-Nahawendi (early C9). al-Nahawendi tried to fix all the Rabbinic baggage that Anan brought with him to proto-Karaism. al-Nahawendi emphasizes the use of Hebrew and starts focusing on literal interpretation of the Bible. Anan supposedly said ;חפישו באורייתא ואל תשענו על דעתיprobably, he never said the אל תשענו על דעתיpart (it’s Hebrew8, and Anan never really countenanced differences of opinion in the same way later Karaism did). al-Nahawendi comes from Persia to Jerusalem. Daniel al-Kumisi (late C9) continues what al-Nahawendi started. He dissents from Anan and pushes literal adherence to the Bible; he pushes the Karaites to come to Jerusalem and mourn Jerusalem ()אבלי ציון. Each town was supposed to send some people to mourn for the ;ביה"מif you didn’t come yourself, you were supposed to support the people who were mourning in your stead. Gil claims that the main characteristics of Karaism were: 1) Dissociation from Rabbinic Judaism; 2) Center in ;א"י3) Mourning for ציון. Karaites became very significant in א"יand Egypt; they may have been more creative than Rabbinic elements. Most Rabbinic figures didn’t pay too much attention to Karaites until R. Saadia Gaon. This could have because of two reasons: 1) R. Saadia, coming from Egypt, recognized the threat; 2) The Karaites could focus around R. Saadia as a person. Therefore, it’s unclear if R. Saadia protected the Rabbinic community from the Karaites, or created the Karaite “lobby.” Issues of Disagreement between Rabbanites and Karaites Salmon ben Yeroham was responsible for writing down many things that characterize Karaite philosophy. Some issues of contention: 1) —כשרותrestrictive: No fish blood, limited fowl (only pigeons and turtledoves). 8 Aramaic probably would’ve been something like אל תסתמכון אדעתי. - 13 - בס"ד Kandel Calendar—Rabbinic calendar is based on lunar system with מעוברותbased on astronomical calculations, whereas the Karaites had the lunar system based on when אביבis. 3) —שבועותdifferent date. 4) Oral Law—problems in transmission; not necessary ( אין להם שיעורfor some things); how can there be ;מחלוקתRabbis never claim Divine inspiration; how can you write an ‘Oral’ law?!; 5) —תורת ה' תמימהGod is perfect; therefore, His law is perfect and needs no amendments. It’s problematic to say ;ואל תשענו על דעתיyou can’t have a community based on everyone doing whatever they want! It really doesn’t work to do that, so later Karaite stages do have a set הלכה. One of the Karaite theories is ריקוב, or consanguinity; if two people marry, they both become אסורto their spouse’s family. This is a problem, since almost no one can marry anyone. 2) Sahl ben Masliah He wrote an “Epistle to Jacob ben Samuel.” From it, it appears that there are several differences between Karaism and Rabbanism. He claims that: 1) The Karaites practice based on what each individual person thinks is right. 2) They were ascetic: “They have abandoned their merchandise and forgotten their families; they have forsaken their native land and left palaces in order to live in reed huts.” 3) The entire Geonic system is corrupt. The Geonim had their taxes collected by the gentile system (the רמב"םhas a similar critique of the institution of salaried public learners of )תורהand care more about their power than the people they were supposedly serving. 4) The Rabbanites are much too מקלon mixing with Gentiles and that the Rabbanites don’t care about ( טומאה וטהרהthese are related claims, since the lack of הקפדהon טומאה וטהרהcauses the Rabbanites to get to close to the )גויים. 5) The Rabbanites are out to get the Karaites (R. Saadia Gaon is the arch-enemy of Karaites, and put lights in the בית כנסתon שבתso that the Karaites couldn’t come in—that’s why we have cholent on שבת, and some say that that’s why we say במה מדליקיןon Friday night; also, that could be why we say פרקי אבות—משה קיבל תורה מסיני, etc.) 6) The Karaites accuse the Rabbanites of carrying on שבת, since the women walked out with jewelry (which is מותרaccording to the משנהin )שבת. 7) The Rabbanites pray to the dead and ask the dead people to give them ברכות. It seems that both the Rabbanite and Karaite community are both at their others’ throats about how to worship God. We have a ( כתובהpage 9) of a Rabbanite man and Karaite woman; the man agrees not to do all sorts of things that would affect her religious sensibilities. (It seems from here that the Karaite woman has the upper hand in the relationship.) It’s unclear what kind of religious education the kids have; maybe, the kids would follow the father’s practice, but it’s unclear. - 14 - בס"ד Kandel In reality, we know from the Genizah that there were intermarriage, business partnerships, and cooperation between Rabbanites and Karaites. The existence of this kind of relationship apparently helps us understand what exactly R. Saadia Gaon was fighting against when he embarked on his crusade against Karaism. Some claim that the conflict between the Geonim and ארץ ישראלand Karaites should be seen as part of a broader conflict between the בבלייםand everyone else. As the Abbasid caliphate began to splinter, it’s not so surprising that the communities turn away from the Babylonian center of influence. Summary: So far, we’ve seen that the Geonic system had: 1) A centralized authority in ;בבל 2) Promotion of תלמוד בבליagainst תלמוד ירושלמיand sectarian groups; 3) A strong relation to ;ישיבות התלמוד 4) Relations with Muslim authorities; 5) R. Saadia Gaon had interaction with Kalam; 6) Bilateral ties with Jewish communities far away; 7) Hierarchical structure. Decline of the Geonate and Rise of New Jewish Centers The political environment in which this system happened was unified over a large space and that was tolerant of the Geonim. When the different caliphates split up, they encouraged the Jews not to turn to בבלall the time for their needs so that the Jews wouldn’t rely on בבלor send their money to בבל. Therefore, in the tenth century, רב שרירא גאוןcomplains that the Jews in the outskirts don’t pay attention to the “head” of the Jewish people in בבל. “Story of the Four Captives” Abraham ibn Daud wrote the Sefer HaQabbalah in 1161. Here is a brief summary of the story of the four captives: A ship carrying four rabbis was on its way from Bari (in Southern Italy) to Sefastin (in Persia). Along the way, it was captured by ‘Abd ar-Rahman an-Nasir. The four rabbis were taken captive and then sold. R. Shemaria went to Egypt, where he became ראש ישיבהin Fostat; R. Hushiel was sold on the coast of Ifriqiya and then went to Qairawan, where he had his son רבנו חננאל. (We don’t know the name of the third one.) R. Moses was captured with his son, R. Hanok (his wife committed suicide on the ship). R. Moses went to Cordova, where he was redeemed by the people of the city. He impressed everyone in the city with his vast erudition (he knew something that the original judge, R. Natan, didn’t know) and became the judge of the city. Bari was in Southern Italy and was a center of תורהstudy; Sefastin was a city in Persia. This story is an account of the creation of the break with בבל. The ישיבותwere in decline, which could be the reason that R. Saadia Gaon was brought in. - 15 - בס"ד Kandel ;9 also,אגדות החרבן The story about the people who jumped out into the sea has echoes in ;10 also, theהלל andבני בתירא the story of R. Moses sounds a lot like the story of the stories of the rabbis in the three boats have an antecedent. We know, for example, that R. Moses ben Hanokh was in Spain and all the other rabbis actually were in their supposed places. , during whose time the story happened, was a gaon from 968שרירא גאון We know that R. to 1006; Abd Al Rahman III ruled from 912-961; also, the date was supposedly 4750 (=990 C.E., more or less). We also know from the Cairo Genizah that R. Kushiel wrote that he was in Egypt of his own volition and stayed there because of his son, not that he was taken captive in a pirate ship. Rather, it seems that the story is a foundation myth that R. Abraham ibn Daud explained .היתה סיבה מאת ה' ; he claims thatבבל how they could leave the authority of Gershon Cohen points out that the only date that Abraham ibn Daud gives as approximate is this date of 4750; it turns out that 4751—4260 (500 C.E.) was the redaction date of the Talmud; Hillel came to power in 3769 (9 C.E.). If you subtract a year, 4749, Hillel’s date was 3769, which was 980 years before, or two sets of 70 weeks of years, which has eschatological significance. Therefore, he claims that R. Moshe ben Hanokh is a continuation of Hillel. ;Sara Zfatman didn’t buy it. She claims that Gershon Cohen asked the wrong questions really, this was a folk story. The four rabbis could signify the four corners of the world, , the idea that in each period, there are four rabbisגאולה ofלשונות , the fourגלויות the four ר' ; in Persiaחגי זכריה מלאכי ונחמיה ; in Babylonחננאל מישאל עזריה ודניאל( to save the world etc. in his generation, and these four rabbis in this generation). Therefore, sheעקיבא suggests that the four captives were a motif, and he tells this story to talk about Spain. Therefore, perhaps, the fourth captive could be a potential rival of Spain, and he didn’t want to talk about him. 9 גיטין נז :אמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל ,ואיתימא רבי אמי ,ואמרי לה במתניתא תנא :מעשה בד' מאות ילדים וילדות שנשבו לקלון ,הרגישו בעצמן למה הן מתבקשים ,אמרו :אם אנו טובעין בים אנו באין לחיי העולם הבא? דרש להן הגדול שבהן :אמר ה' מבשן אשיב אשיב ממצולות ים ,מבשן אשיב -מבין שיני אריה אשיב ,ממצולות ים -אלו שטובעין בים; כיון ששמעו ילדות כך ,קפצו כולן ונפלו לתוך הים .נשאו ילדים ק"ו בעצמן ואמרו :מה הללו שדרכן לכך כך ,אנו שאין דרכנו לכך -על אחת כמה וכמה! אף הם קפצו לתוך הים .ועליהם הכתוב אומר :כי עליך הורגנו כלהיום נחשבנו כצאן טבחה. פסחים סו .מתני' :שחיטה שאי אפשר לעשותה מערב שבת -דוחה את השבת .גמ' :תנו רבנן :הלכה זו נתעלמה מבני בתירא .פעם אחת חל ארבעה עשר להיות בשבת ,שכחו ולא ידעו אם פסח דוחה את השבת אם לאו. אמרו :כלום יש אדם שיודע אם פסח דוחה את השבת אם לאו? אמרו להם :אדם אחד יש שעלה מבבל ,והלל הבבלי שמו ,ששימש שני גדולי הדור שמעיה ואבטליון ויודע אם פסח דוחה את השבת אם לאו .שלחו וקראו לו .אמרו לו: כלום אתה יודע אם הפסח דוחה את השבת אם לאו? אמר להם :וכי פסח אחד יש לנו בשנה שדוחה את השבת? והלא הרבה יותר ממאתים פסחים יש לנו בשנה שדוחין את השבת .אמרו לו :מנין לך? אמר להם :נאמר 'מועדו' בפסח ונאמר 'מועדו' בתמיד .מה מועדו האמור בתמיד דוחה את השבת ,אף מועדו האמור בפסח דוחה את השבת. ועוד ,קל וחומר הוא :ומה תמיד שאין ענוש כרת דוחה את השבת ,פסח שענוש כרת ,אינו דין שדוחה את השבת? מיד הושיבוהו בראש ומינוהו נשיא עליהם ,והיה דורש כל היום כולו בהלכות הפסח .התחיל מקנטרן בדברים ,אמר להן :מי גרם לכם שאעלה מבבל ואהיה נשיא עליכם -עצלות שהיתה בכם ,שלא שמשתם שני גדולי הדור שמעיה ואבטליון .אמרו לו :רבי ,שכח ולא הביא סכין מערב שבת מהו? אמר להן :הלכה זו שמעתי ושכחתי .אלא ,הנח להן לישראל אם אין נביאים הן -בני נביאים הן [רש"י :ותראו מה יעשו] .למחר ,מי שפסחו טלה -תוחבו בצמרו ,מי שפסחו גדי -תוחבו בין קרניו .ראה מעשה ונזכר הלכה ,ואמר :כך מקובלני מפי שמעיה ואבטליון. 10 - 16 - בס"ד Kandel Backdrop and Overview: Spanish Political Context Spain was inhabited by Visigoths, who were pagans and then became Catholic. In 711, Spain was conquered by the Muslims. The Umayyad Caliphate started around 930; then, in 1013, turned into petty kingdoms. This is important because Jews serve as courtiers to the many kings; the monarchies were unstable and ephemeral, so the kings were interested in preventing people from trying to take over the kingdom (Jews wouldn’t try to take over the kingdom). These Taifa kingdoms were juicy targets, so the Christians tried to conquer. In 1090, the Almoravid invasions tried to take it back from the Christians; the Christians won. Almohades tried again in 1147, and said that no Jews could stay. The “Golden Age” of Spain was 950-1150, before the Jews were banned. Courtier Culture In general (and for Abraham ibn Daud in particular), the Jews knew all about physics, math, languages (Arabic), גמראand תנ"ך, poetry (secular and religious), מדרש, etc. Hasdai ibn Shaprut was one of the courtiers. He rose to a good position since he found an antidote to a poison. One of his diplomatic endeavors was that he wanted to form a treaty between the Byzantines and the Umayyad caliphate. One of the Byzantine gifts was a medical treatise that was in Greek, translated to Latin, then Hasdai translated it to Arabic. This broke Spanish dependence on the Baghdad libraries; Hasdai also brought Moshe b. Hanokh and Sura’s library to Spain. He also got knowledge about the Khazars and their Jewish conversion and therefore king. He was probably very excited since the presence of a Jewish kingdom disproved the “historical argument” that if the Jews were the chosen people, they wouldn’t be subjugated everywhere—the Jews weren’t subjugated everywhere! Hasdai used his influence to help the Jews in Byzantium and other places; he also supported Dunash ibn Labrat and Menachem ben Saruq (both, of course, quoted by )רש"י. Dunash favored using Arabic to understand Hebrew; Menachem didn’t like this so much. Dunash was the first to use Arabic meter into Jewish poetry. These people are called “golden men”; from 950-1150 (Hasdai ibn Shaprut was in the 11th century, until the invasion) is known by medieval Jewish historians as the “Golden Age of Spain.” The age was characterized by: 1) Peace; 2) Artistic development (cultural advancements); 3) Religious freedom; 4) Jews were powerful, influential, and wealthy; and 5) Integration of Jews into majority culture. “Convivencia” refers to Jews, Muslims, and Christians living together and having cultural integration. Abraham ibn Daud’s ספר הקבלהwas looked upon as reflecting upon his personal perspective; those who called this the “Golden Age of Spain” also reflect their bias that they wanted to integrate into the majority German culture and looked at their intellectual forefathers in the “Golden Age” of Spain. The appellation “Golden Age” makes a value judgment, since not everyone identifies with everything that was going on. שמואל הנגיד Shmuel HaNagid was: 1) A general; 2) Courtier (vizier); 3) Poet.11 He also captured popular imagination as both a לויand a descendant of ( בית דודpretty cool to do both!). He 11 Probably not the author of the הקדמה לתלמוד. - 17 - בס"ד Kandel also saw himself as a larger-than-life figure. He is alleged to have theological disputes with Muslims, also. Scheindlin argues that ’שמואל הנגידs war poetry is different from other poetry, since it feels much more real and authentic than the other stereotyped poetry. Ross Brand, on the other hand, says that שמואל הנגידwas someone upon whom was projected the aspirations of the Jews and the uneasiness of the Muslims than a historical reality; he was supposedly more a symbol than anything else. Example: Poem 26: הרסוה ימי קדם קצינים הלינותי גדוד כבד בבירה .ותחתינו בבעליה ישנים וישנו עלי גבה וצדה ?ועמים שכנו בזאת לפנים אי קהלים:ודברתי ללבי ודלים ועבדים ואדונים ואי בונים ומחריבים ושרים ?ובנים ואבלים וחתנים ומולידים ושכולים ואבות בימים אחרי ימים ושנים ועם רב נולדו אחר אחרים ,והם היום בלב ארץ שכונים והיו על פני ארץ שכנים ,ועפר—מחצרים נעמנים וקבר חלפו מארמנותם .שללונו נפשים ועדנים ואלו העלו ראשם ויצאו !אהי אני ואלה ההמונים נפשי אמת כהם למחר,אמת The poem seems to reflect personal feelings, not stereotyped ideas. (Others claim that these are actually stereotyped.) 1055, when he died, he tried to pass on his rule to ;יהוסף יהוסףis killed and there are riots against the Jews of Grenada after some trouble. Jehoseph’s being killed isn’t so surprising, but the riots against the Jews show how much the Jews were identified with their courtiers. It could also be that there was resentment that שמואל הנגידwanted to pass on his rule to his son through heredity. שמאול הנגידsupposedly rose to prominence since he was writing letters to the king, who began to employ him as an advisor. This shows that literacy and effective written expression were valued very highly by the courtier culture. This could be similar to alArabiyya, where the Muslims valued Arabic very much, and the courtier culture reflected that interest in mastering Hebrew (and Arabic). Dunash ibn Labrat gave us the idea of ;בניניםthe Spanish masters used Arabic to teach us that each שרשhas three letters. The Jews became interested in reviving Hebrew to write secular poetry that mirrored the Arabic style. Two things we sometimes miss are the meter and the forms that the poet is basing himself off of. משה אבן עזרא דדי יפת תאר Example: Poem 11, Moses ibn Ezra (the uncle of )ראב"ע: דדי יפת תאר ליל חבק !ושפת יפת מראה יומם נשק וגער בכל מריב יועץ לפי : וקח ישר נמצא בפי,דרכו ,אין החיות רק עם ילדי יפי - 18 - בס"ד Kandel כי נגבו מעדן לעשק חיים ואין איש חי לא יחשק! נסך לבבך בשמחות ושיש ושתיה עלי יבל נבל עסיס יין ,לקול נבל עם תור וסיס ורקוד וגיל ,גם כף על כף ספק, ושכר ודלת יעלת חן דפק. זה הוא נעים תבל—קח חלקך מנו כאיל מלואים חקך שימה מנת ראשי עם צדקך: אל תחשה למצץ שפה ורק, עד תאחז חקך—חזה ושוק! This poet is making a mockery of the whole idea of sacrifices; he uses many different ideas to make fun of all the ideas he expresses. For example, the poem is filled with ), but the poem was a wineחזה ושוק ,למצץ שפה ורק ,כאיל מלואים ,נסך לבבך( imageryקדשים !party poem! That’s not supposed to happen ר' משה הסלח קינות , since he’s one of the most prolific composer ofר' משה הסלח R. Moshe ibn Ezra is among Sefardic literature. Example: והרשענו ורבו משובותינו ידענו אלקים עונותינו בחטאינו ובעונות אבתינו: וטבענו ביון גלותנו ונמכרנו לצמיתות ולא נושענו מכרנו דת הצור ופשענו ושבענו מפרי מפעלותינו: וקצרנו את כל אשר זרענו וערכנו נגדו תחנונינו שפכנו לפני אל שיחנו לכפר בנו על כל פשעינו: ונסכנו דמעות בעד רוחנו ותרופה שיתה לציר עונינו הא-לקים אדוננו רפאנו ולקלס לכל סביבותינו: כי חרפה אנחנו לכל שכנינו It’s unclear whether he saw these two poems as one integrated whole or whether he lived two lives. When he had to leave Spain, he felt really bad that no one wrote poetry. It’s at the end of his life; at the end of his life, we know that he saidתשובה possible that he did that all of this was nonsense, but it’s possible that that’s just stereotyped, also. שירים הומוארוטיים—הייתכן?! Poem 12, Moshe ibn Ezra: תאות לבבי ומחמד עיני— עפר לצדי וכוס בימיני! רבו מריבי—ולא אשמעם, בוא הצבי ,ואני אכניעם, וזמן יכלם ומות ירעם. בוא ,הצבי ,קום והבריאני מצוף שפתך והשביעני! - 19 - בס"ד Kandel ? למה,למה יניאון לבבי אם בעבור חטא ובגלל אשמה !דני שמה-אשגה ביפיך—א ,אל יט לבבך בניב מענני . ובוא נסני,אש מעקשים , וקמנו אלי בית אמו,נפתה ,ויט לעל סבלי את שכמו .לילה ויומם אני רק עמו ,אפשט בגדיו—ויפשיטני .אינק שפתיו—וייניקני ,כאשר לבבי בעיניו נפקד —גם על פשעי בידו נשקד ,דרש תנואות ואפו פקד , עזבני,צעק באף "רב לך "!אל תהדפני ואל תתעני , עד כלה, צבי,אל נאנף בי , הפלא,הפלא רצונך ידיד !ונשק ידידך וחפצו מלא ,אם יש בנפשך חיות—חיני !או חפצך להרג—הרגני Here, we have the צבי, which is the love-object of the speaker. The poem seems to be some sort of homo-erotic poem; some could suggest that it’s actually an allegory. To say that it’s an allegory would solve the whole ‘homo-erotica being in obvious contrast to Jewish law and morals’ problem, but it’s unclear how true to the author such a suggestion that is.12 In our society today, poetry plays almost no role as compared to the role it played in the life of the courtier society. Some could claim that the fact that he was accepted as a סלחwould seem to militate against his actually having these actual life experiences. In general, the characters in these poems aren’t individualized; they’re stock figures that are taken as the protagonists of his poems. This could show that the poem didn’t actually reflect lived experience. (Of course, some use the poetry to prove that homosexuality was sanctioned in this society.) Also, since most of the poets were neo-Platonists, they could have been writing about the idea of beauty. Allegorical Poems Poem 2, Moshe ibn Ezra: ?עלי ולבי לו ינוד כמו קנה ?תאב ואיך אקרא היום ולא יענה !פניו ואל טובו אביט וגם אפנה ?כי איך נעים כתם יועם ואיך ישנא 12 מה לאהובי כי יקצף ויתגאה שכח זמן לכתי אחריו בעי מדבר ואם יסתיר,הן יקטלני לו אוחיל לא ישנו חסדי אדון אלי עבד It’s unlikely that the author is writing as a woman. - 20 - בס"ד Kandel This seems to be more allegorical; it has symbols taken from פסוקיםtalking about the Jews’ relationship to God. Poem 3, Moshe ibn Ezra: .פזרם הזמן ונותרו חרבים .לכפירים מעון וגם לזאבים .מכלואי אדום ומאסר ערבים :גם תענה במאמרים ערבים !רפדוני במגדני האהבים מהרו נא אלי מעוני אהובים והנם--לעפרים אזי מעונים אשמעה נאקת צביה תיליל ,על אהובה תבך ואלוף נעורים סמכוני כבאשישות ידידות האהבים...מהרו נא This seems definitely to be allegorical. Therefore, it seems that all of these poems reflect different aspects of the poems that were supposed to be written; we’ll try to understand a little bit about how these people lived. Critiques of “Courtier Culture” דונש אבן לברט Poem 2, Dunash ben Labrat: .יבואנו נשלים...ואומר איל תישן So far, it sounds like a regular pleasure poem. !וגעולים...גערתיהו דם דם Now, the poet rebukes the people in the poem for not learning תורהand for reveling in their hedonistic stuff when they should be worried about how the ביה"מisn’t around. Some could claim that the last voice won, since he was given the last word. Others could claim that the two voices are in tension. דונש בן לברטwas the first one who used Arabic meter to write Hebrew poetry. Some could claim that the Epicurean content of the poetry is essential to the meter and form of it, so Ross Brand suggests that maybe, in order to involve themselves in this whole courtier culture, the poets had to undergo a level of discomfort; this poem reflects that discomfort. So it appears that although דונשdid involve himself in this culture, he wasn’t completely happy and comfortable with it. (It should be pointed out, however, that משה אבן עזראdidn’t have the same problems with this poetry.) Bahya ibn Paquda\רבנו בחיי Bahya ibn Paquda also says similar things, in חובות הלבבות, in שער ייחוד המעשה: ישתדל לעצל אותנו במעשי העבודה ויטרידנו בעניני,וכאשר יתיאש היצר מספק אותנו בכל מה שקדם זכרו וכאשר נשמע אליו במזון אשר לא, וליהנות במיני הנאות הגופיות,עולמנו ממאכל ומשתה ומלבוש ומרכב ייפה לנו המותרות שהם טפלה למזונות ויחבב לנו השמחה והתענוג ולקנא בשרים ובאנשי,יתכן לעמוד בלתו , וכאשר יראה חפצנו ורצוננו בזה, להדות אליהם ולנהוג מנהגם וללכת בחקיהם בבקשת התענוגים,עבודתם ועבוד העולם ועבוד אנשיו אולי,יאמר שנס מתניך חשוף זרועך האיש הנפתה והשתדל בכחך הגבר המוסת ותהיה, ואל תתעסק במעשה ממעשה העולם אלא מה שיהיה לך בו עזר על העולם הזה,תגיע לקצת מחפצך בו ואל תטריד לבך בדבר מן החכמות אלא מה שתתכבד בו,מרוצה בו לאנשיו ומנהיגיו מן המלכים אל שאר העם כחכמת הלשון ותוכן המשקל, ותתרצה בו אל גדולי בני זמנך משר ושוטר וקצין ובעל מעלה,אצל אנשי דורך והתמיד לשבת עם אנשי,ושרשי הדקדוק והשיר והחידות החמודות והמשלים המופלאים והמליצות הנכריות - 21 - בס"ד Kandel והנח שאר החכמות כי, ואל תשתוק שלא תחשב אויל וכסיל,הצחות ולמד לדבר עם כל כת מכתות בני אדם .יגיעתם רבה ותועלתם מעוטה The יצרtries to convince people that they should only care about climbing the social ladder and to do things that the courtier culture did that he didn’t like. ואם יראה ממך הריצות, ישתדל לך מצד חכמתך,ואם תעמוד כנגדו בכל זה ולא יוכל לפתותך במה שזכרנו הלא ידעת כי, יאסר לך הלא יספיק לך מה שמספיק לגדולי דורך וזקניך לדעת תורתך הנאמנה,ללמוד החכמה ואחר כך למוד מה שתזדיין בו, שים מגמתך אל עיקר האמונה ושרש התורה,החכמה אין לה קץ ולא תכלית והנח לך דברי הדינים,אצל בני אדם מענין השיר והמקצב וצפוני הדקדוק והחידות הנכריות והמשלים הנוהגים , ואל תכניס עמצך בחכמת שרשי המופת ואיכות הדבור ומיני ההקשות ואופני הראיות,ומחלוקת החכמים בהם ,ואיכות הילוך העילה עם המעולל והתחברות החכמה הנראית עם החכמה הנסתרת מפני עמקם ודקות ענינים .וסמוך על אנשי הקבלה במה שתוכל לעמוד על בירורו כאשר תסמוך עליהם במה שהוא נמנע ממך Here, בחיה אבן פקודהsays that you should learn things that ואחר כך למוד מה שתזדיין בו אצל בני אדם מענין השיר והמקצב. Here, ר' בחיהrejects the stuff that would only help you in your personal, negative ambition; but he values studying other stuff that could help you in this world (although as a Neoplatonist, he probably would say that this stuff will help you achieve your ultimate religious goals). The truths obtained by these philosophers were as real to the medieval Jews as the truth that the world is round, so they tried to reconcile these philosophies with their beliefs. Neoplatonism and Jewish Neoplatonic Philosophers Neoplatonism World of Ideas Has a “world of ideas”, that no material object on this world could aspire to compete with the ideal form that the object on this world represents. This creates a dichotomy between “form” and “matter”, the “form” being the ideal, and the “matter” being the stuff that gives mass to the form. Emanation This brings us to the Neoplatonist conception of G-d. They know that G-d is infinite, immutable, eternal, etc. The world, on the other hand, is finite, mutable, decaying, etc. If so, then what’s the relationship between G-d and the world? They posit that there are many emanations that intervene between G-d and the world. The last emanation is called the “active intellect”, which is the soul that’s implanted into the body that gives each person a little bit of Godliness that they have; every person’s soul wants to reconnect with the source of his soul, which is God. To achieve reunification with its source, the soul must live a good life, in which case the “active intellect” will reunify with G-d. For a soul to achieve reunification with G-d in this world, the soul must engage in philosophical speculation about G-d; once you achieve a certain stage in that speculation, you achieve a connection to G-d that’s called “prophecy.” Solomon ibn Gabirol He’s the author of ( כתר מלכותa פיוטfor יו"כthat uses Neoplatonic imagery). He lived from 1020-1057. He wrote a lost philosophical work called “”מקור חיים. They had a - 22 - בס"ד Kandel work in Latin called “Fons Vitae” (Fountain of Life, a Neoplatonic philosophical work) that was anonymous, but then they found a copy of מקור חיים, and it was the same! This would seem to imply that this Jewish philosopher wrote a philosophical work that had nothing particularly Jewish about it. This doesn’t seem to jive so much with the ’גמראs presentation of Judaism, which is mostly performing מצוות. On the other hand, this philosophy claims that the מצוותonly have secondary value as leading to the perfection of the soul. Joseph ibn Zaddik רשותto ""נשמת: ומעין נעלמה,יפתה עלמת חן " דעו "אין איך ולמהץ,בעלי חכמת לב בהתאסף גו וצורה,ירדה אל בית טיט ותהי נחבאת שם באין כסף רק עצורה לא ביד נשבית גם בלי כסף היא מכורה לעבוד אדמת גוף ולשום לו הוא ואימה .חק ובמזמת לב להבדילו מבהמה ! צור להבן,סוד פליאתך מה מאד יגבר עז בריתאך באנוש—חובר פז לאבן ?לתבן-ראש פעלתך הוא ואת הבר מה ,חברה עצמת ידך גלמי אל נשמה .כוננה רקמת מחזה צלמי מאדמה יחידה,שאלה חפש מאשר עבד בה יום להנפש בו ואל תכבד העבודה . בלי יאבד יום פרידה,כי יסוד נפש חי ,באשר קדמת גוף יהי נמצא היא קדומה .אך לפי תומת מעשים נרצה או זעומה , תהלתך צוף ומלתך מן ונפת,יה . על גדולתך אות ומופת:עז פעולתך !חון קהלתך בית תפלתך נאספת תעטף נשמת כל בני חלד לך כאמה !"קול בלי נצמת "הללו יוצר כל נשמה This reflects several Neoplatonic ideas: The soul returns whence it came, the body and soul are separate, etc. However, it also does reflect the particularistic idea of having mercy on “Your children” that are in the ביה"כ. The idea of having this conception of G-d was pretty widely accepted by the Jews of the time. - 23 - בס"ד Kandel ר' יהודה הלוי What a surprise, then, when —ר' יהודה הלויwho was a major member of the courtier culture, including his remarkable poetic tongue—rejected this philosophy, mode of existence, and land of Spain! Example: Poem 1: His opponents’ dissuasions resound about him…creatures? He doesn’t like all of this stuff; he rejects the “service of kings, /Which to him is like the worship of idols.” Even more extreme is his position in the Kuzari. Kuzari ר' יהודה הלויsays that the king of the Khazars said that the philosopher wanted to make him a philosopher, but God said to him in a dream that his intentions are good, but his actions aren’t. The king then called to a Christian and a Muslim, but they weren’t good; he then called to the חבר, who talks about the God of history, of אברהם יצחק ויעקב. The good life is the life of מצוות, and the מצוותthemselves constitute the good life; the מצוות don’t lead to a philosophical perception of God, as the Neoplatonists said. ר' יהודה הלויsaid that there is a “Jewish soul” that is qualitatively different from a nonJewish soul. Also, prophecy is not a philosophical speculation; it’s a gift from God to the Jewish soul. However, the prophecy can only work when it’s in the soil of ארץ ישראל. He rejected the courtier culture so much that he left Spain to go to א"י. The Jews of Spain saw themselves as ;גלות ירושלים אשר בספרדthe tradition recorded the Expulsion as ט' באב (it was actually a little bit off), which equates the Expulsion with the destruction of the ביה"מ. The Spaniards think that ר' יהודה הלויhad lost his mind when he decided that he was going to א"י. ר' יהודה הלויwent to Alexandria, where he wrote poems and stuff and became the honored guest of everyone in Alexandria (he could have needed patrons, but it does seem that he didn’t completely rid himself of his cultural model). It’s not absolutely clear that he ever made it to א"י, but the Cairo Genizah has a record that he actually did make it to א"י. רמב"ם End of Jewish Life in Spain We’ve been focusing on the study of the Jews in Spain; after that, we’ll be moving on. Spain is the high point of Jewish civilization under Muslim rule; after the reconquista, the fanatic Muslim Almohades prohibited the practice of Judaism in Spain. The Almohades invaded in 1148 and conquered Spain from the other Muslim rulers; after that, there wasn’t so much more Jewish life. The Jews went to all sorts of places. Some went to Christian Spain; others went to North Africa, א"י, Egypt, etc. At the beginning of the experience of the Jews in Islam, the Jews were second-class citizens, but they were protected, as evidenced by the Pact of Umar. In Spain, however, it seems that the Jews actually were not subjected to such strict second-class citizen status. Instead, the Pact was more of a theoretical document than a historical record of what actually happened. Partly as a backlash to the rising status of Jews in Spain, the Almohades went to the opposite extreme and didn’t even give the Jews the protected status of second-class citizens. - 24 - בס"ד Kandel Biography He was born in 1135 or 1138 in Cordova to the family of Maimon the דיין, who was a student of the ר"י מיגאש. The family moved around until they got to Fez, Morocco, the home of the Almohades (it seems that the fanatic ruler mellowed in his old age). In Morocco, there were many Jews who had outwardly converted to Islam, but still believed in Judaism. Converting to Islam basically consists of saying that there’s no G-d but Allah, which isn’t such a problem, and saying that Mohammed was a prophet, which makes sense since he was a שוטה. Maimon (the father of )רמב"םwrote אגרת הנחמהin order to convince these Jews that they stayed Jews. רמב"םbegan his פירוש המשניותwhen he was 20. מלות ההגיוןis his work of pure philosophy, which he wrote before he was 20; מאמר העיבורis his work on the calendar and the intercalation of the months. These works were both commissioned, which implies that he was already gaining fame from such a young age. During his stay in Morocco, he wrote אגרת השמדand continued his פירוש המשנה. The אגרת השמדwas a polemical work written against someone who said that anyone who converted to Islam wasn’t Jewish. The רמב"םsays that the people are indeed Jewish, but they have to get out of this situation as soon as possible and they have to get out and practice as a Jew.13 רמב"םmoved to Egypt and settled in Fustat. His brother, David, supported him, but he was killed in the Indian Ocean; the רמב"םtook this loss hard. רמב"םwasn’t a big fan of the Geonic institution of taxing the community to support people to learn. It seems that the Geonic institutions were still around, even though Abraham ibn Daud claimed that they weren’t. Abraham ibn Daud claimed that the Geonim ended when ר' משה בן חנוך went to Spain; it’s not really true, and the Geonim were still active and claimed the allegiance of the people through the ’רמב"םs time. After his brother died, the רמב"םwas really busy; he went to Cairo to see the royal family, then came back to see patients in Fustat for a long time. Ibn Tibbon The ’רמב"םs daily schedule was absurd; he wrote to Ibn Tibbon to translate his works. This was done for the benefit of the Jews in Europe, including southern France. The Jews from Spain, who studied philosophy, wanted their co-religionists to learn philosophy, so they translated stuff to Hebrew. This caused a pan-European discussion about the works of the רמב"םin particular and the study of philosophy in general. אגרת תימן The רמב"םwas a major communal leader, so, for example, when the Jews of Yemen had a false Messiah, they wrote to the רמב"ם. The רמב"םwrote back that history is cyclical; even though you are being persecuted now, you shouldn’t worry about it; it’ll get better. The Jews of תימןthen accepted the רמב"םas their פוסק, and he has continued to be the influence in Yemenite culture until today. Some Muslim historiographers also claim that the Maimon family converted to Islam, but it’s not so clear whether that’s true or not. It’s not so clear that there’s much evidence for the claim; some present as evidence the fact that both Maimon and the רמב"םdefended people who converted. 13 - 25 - בס"ד Kandel מאמר תחית המתים The other public letter he wrote is מאמר תחית המתים. In the 1180’s, there was some question about what the רמב"םbelieved about תחית המתים. The pro- רמב"םcamp said that the רמב"םdoesn’t believe in bodily resurrection, which isn’t a problem; the anti-רמב"ם camp said the same, except that it’s a huge problem. The רמב"םclarified that there will be a brief period of bodily resurrection, which will be followed by the disembodied soul’s being reunited with the active intellect. Karaism The רמב"ם, as head of the community in Fustat, had to deal with Karaism. He said that they are Jews, so you can visit them, and can drink wine that they touch, etc.; but they can’t be counted in a מנין, and you shouldn’t associate with them when they actively flout הלכה. Major works These are the משנה תורהand the מורה נבוכים. משנה תורה This is unique for several reasons: 1) Included everything, whether it’s practical or not; 2) Includes some philosophy with its ;הלכה 3) Distills all opinions and gives one final opinion; However, this was controversial for several reasons: 1) Doesn’t bring sources; 2) Says that you don’t need to learn גמראafter learning this work; 3) Doesn’t acknowledge dissenting opinions (this is the work of the ;)נושאי כלים 4) It’s claimed that he inserted his philosophical stuff into his הלכה. The “Real” רמב"ם It’s unclear who the “real” רמב"םis, that of the משנה תורהor the מורה נבוכים: 1) Leo Strauss: Claims that the רמב"םis a philosopher, and the משנה תורהis the “cover story.” Therefore, even though the רמב"םsays that the world is created, he also says that he could reinterpret the תורהas saying that the world was not created. The Strauss-ian reading of this passage is that the רמב"םactually accepts the eternality of the world, and just couldn’t say that since he didn’t want to be persecuted. He claims that the Guide should be read “esoterically”, and you should figure out those esoteric meanings. 2) The “real” רמב"םwas the רמב"םof the ;משנה תורהhe just had to write the מורהin order to deal with the issues of the day. 3) The “real” רמב"םis both the משנה תורהand the Guide. Throughout משנה תורה, and especially ספר מדע, we see glimpses of the ’רמב"םs philosophy. For example, the רמב"םsays that there are reasons for the מצות, and people can discover the reason for the מצות, if they were interpreted allegorically. However, this means that the reasons for the מצוותfall into three major categories: 1) Intellectual perfection, which is important since the goal is to achieve the most perfect knowledge of G-d; - 26 - בס"ד Kandel 2) Moral development, like loving and goodness and stuff; 3) Practical, that people simply have to have in order to produce a worthwhile society. In the מורה, he adds another reason, which is historical reason; this is the reason for some ritual מצוותthat were needed in order to uproot the עבודה זרהfrom the Jews, especially as practiced by the Sabaeans. In addition, the רמב"םsays that you should study the reasons for the מצוות, even though this could lead to philosophical antinomianism. He justifies this by saying that since the goal is knowledge of G-d, you have to know the reasons of the מצוותin order to use them to become close to G-d. This presents a philosophical interpretation of מצוות. For philosophers, נבואהis when a person has achieved intellectual perfection, he achieves communion with G-d. The רמב"ם, on the other hand, says that נבואהis achieved only by someone who has achieved intellectual perfection, but then, G-d has to respond and grant נבואה. Unit II: Jews in Christendom First, we have to look at what the “ground rules” are for Jews in Christendom. Jews in Early Christianity Jesus We’ll start with what we know about the historical Jesus. This is problematic, since most of what we know about him is from the Christian Scriptures, which were written 50-100 years after his death. Therefore, we don’t really know so much about the historical Jesus. It’s clear that he was some sort of preacher, and the Gospels claim that he was critical of traditional Judaism; he claimed that the Jews didn’t emphasize enough the social message of Judaism. Attitude towards the Jewish Law—on the one hand, Jesus claims that he comes to “fulfill” the law, but he also says that you can pluck corn on שבת, since “the son of man is sovereign over the son of God.” It seems that there’s conflicting evidence, in short. Paul and Pauline Christianity Jesus claimed to be the Messiah, but most Jews didn’t buy it. Therefore, most Jews are not portrayed in a favorable light in the Gospels. The Jews are therefore seen as responsible for the killing of the Messiah. Once the Council of Nicaea decided that Jesus was God, the charge turned into the charge of deicide. Paul, who was a Jew and had tormented Christians, converted to Christianity. He decided to shift the mission of Jesus to the Gentiles, not the Jews. This is problematic— do you demand observance of the law (' וכו, שבת, מילה, ?)כשרותPaul decided, therefore, on the Abrogation of the Law. He claimed that the Law didn’t apply anymore; this wasn’t such a simple decision to make. He came up with “supersessionism”, that the Law was only in effect until Jesus, and after that, people didn’t have to listen to the Law. He then re-read the Law, and came up with the term Old Testament and New Testament. A “testament” is a covenant. To say that there’s an Old Testament implies that there’s a new covenant that God made that superseded the old covenant; God was supposed to no longer want the service of the Jews. - 27 - בס"ד Kandel More recently, historians claim that there was much more interaction between the Jews and Christians until the 4th century. Islam perceives Judaism as a previous revelation of God that was followed by the revelation of God in the Christian system, and then the last, final revelation (Mohammed’s); but you can read the Koran without knowing תנ"ך. On the other hand, it’s impossible to read the Christian Scriptures without the Hebrew Scriptures. There are several reasons for it: 1) Jesus was a Jew; 2) Jesus claimed to be a messiah of Davidic descent; 3) Many aspects of Jesus life were supposedly prophesied by הנה העלמה הרה ( תנ"ך לא יסור שבט מיהודה ומחוקק מבין רגליו,) ישעיה נג (העבד הסובל,ויולדת בן, etc.). Christians read their history into —תנ"ךe.g., carrying the wood for the עקידהand switching ’יעקבs hands symbolize the cross, breaking the לוחותis supersessionism in disguise, etc. Christians claim that there’s an Israel of the Flesh and Israel of the Spirit; originally, the Jews were chosen, but then they switched and the Israel of the Spirit, the Christians and descendants of Sarah and Abraham, took over the Israel of the Flesh, the “old” Israel. The Christians claim that they are “Verus Israel,” or the “true” Israel. So Paul took every negative description of the Jews in the תורהand says that that’s “Israel of the Flesh,” or the Jews; on the other hand, the prophets were part of “Israel of the Spirit,” or Christianity. This basically takes everything positive from תנ"ךand applies it to Christians; all Jews everywhere are bad. Rosemary Radford-Ruther argues that the idea that God has rejected the covenant with the Jews and only attributing to them the bad stuff is inherently anti-Semitic. Yosef Haim Yerushalmi argues that it’s true that that’s how Christian theology treats Jews, but that’s not the only influence on the way Christians treat Jews; not every Church figure behaved in an anti-Semitic way. Moments in the Break Between Judaism and Christianity The Christians blamed the Destruction of the Temple on the Jews’ rejection of Jesus; that makes it uncomfortable to be both Jewish and Christian. After the בר כוכבאrevolt (135 C.E.), where בר כוכבאclaimed that he was משיח, it doesn’t make sense to also accept Jesus as a ;משיחyou can’t accept two משיחים. The Christians understand the exile of the Jews from Jerusalem as further proof of G-d’s abandonment. Until the 4th Century, the Christians rely on Jews to some extent. For example, it took until 325 C.E. for the Council of Nicaea (in addition to deciding that Jesus was God) to decide that they shouldn’t base the date of Easter off of the date of Passover. Patristic Attitudes toward Jews John Chrysostom (Antioch, 347-407) lived among Jews and Christians. He wrote a series of sermons called Adversus Judaeos. In these, he claims that God has abandoned the Jews and the Jews were really terrible people and the synagogue was a pernicious edifice and institution. It’s possible to read this contextually and claim that Chrysostom’s flock was leaning “dangerously” close to Judaism, and he had to try to distance his flock from the Jews. However, these sermons become available much after Chrysostom died; his messages were not read by medieval Christians contextually. Augustine of Hippo (345-430) was another Patristic author. He doesn’t write very much about Jews, since he was living in North Africa, and doesn’t really meet Jews so much. Therefore, he wrote much more about the theoretical, theological Jew than the real one. He claims that: - 28 - בס"ד Kandel Not by bodily death shall the ungodly race of carnal Jews perish…To the end of the seven days of time, the continued preservation of the Jews will be a proof to believing Christians of the subjection merited by those who, in the pride of their kingdom, put the Lord to death. The Jews were supposed to be a witness (by their subjugation) that God had abandoned them. This is called the “Doctrine of the Witness.” In his Commentary on Psalms (5859), he also claims that the Jews themselves predicted Jesus, and since they believe in the Hebrew Scriptures, they must also believe in Christian Scriptures. This creates a place for Jews in Christendom, since they have a role to play in the Christian theological, and therefore real, world. This leads to the Christians being amenable to the existence of Jews, so the Jews weren’t subjected to major persecution and supposed to be executed. Legal Status of Jews Roman Empire In the Pagan Roman Empire, the Jews were permitted to practice their religion (not pay tribute to the state gods, keep שבת, etc.). It could be that Christians claimed that they were the real Jews in order to get these rights. With the conversion of Constantine and the creation of the Christian Roman Empire, the toleration of Jews begins to be diluted—Jews can’t own Christian slaves, proselytize, etc. On the other hand, the Jews were permitted to maintain their synagogues and stuff, and the Jews maintained their own internal authority. This was eventually codified into law. The Jews wrote a letter to Pope Gregory complaining of religious coercion, and the Pope sent a letter to the bishop of Naples not to force the Jews to convert. Pope Gregory I wrote the sicut judeis, which says that the Jews should not have any problem with doing their religion, as long as they don’t overstep their bounds. Jews in Early Medieval Europe Jews in the Carolingian Empire As Traders Within Christendom, there were Jewish communities in Italy, Provence, and Spain. Jews were international traders called “Radhanites” (it’s unclear what this term means) by a Muslim historian. We have a description of the routes of the Radhanites; they go from France to the East (Egypt to China; Antioch to Baghdad to the East, etc.). The Jews had two advantages that helped them become effective traders: 1) They could always find other Jews to spend the night and talk about תורהand stuff14; 2) It wasn’t so likely that Muslims would let Christians travel freely in their territory (and vice-versa)—when there was still huge competition between the Muslims and the Christians, they wouldn’t let each other in. Long-distance trade was really dangerous; there was no Pax Romana, so there were many bandits who were happy to kill people. That left an opening for Jews to step up to the plate.15 14 15 יהושע. ב. אwrote a book called מסע עד תום האלףabout traders about the year 1000; it’s pretty cute. At this stage, Jews were permitted to own land. - 29 - בס"ד Kandel The Jews mostly traded in luxury goods, so they probably sold to royalty, nobility, and high-ranking clergy. Jews are so identified as traders that a biographer of Charlemagne told an anecdote about Charlemagne sitting on the Gaul coast, and they said that if it’s a trading ship, it’s probably Jewish. Under Louis the Pious The Carolingians wanted to stimulate the economy, so they brought in Jews. Especially Louis the Pious (814-840) brought in the Jews so that they would help stimulate the economy. In the Order on the Jews, Louis emphasizes that the Hebrews were under their control and protection and no one should touch them. The Jews were trusted as witnesses, could hire Christians to work for them, etc. The Augustinian Doctrine wasn’t such a big fan of Jews’ employing Christians, but Louis is much more open to it. The slaves of Jews who decided that they would be Christians became free; it seems that Louis says that the Jews would be compensated for his slaves. Some claim that these laws are better for Jews than the charters that came into practice later on. The Order also says that Jews can’t be convicted only based on the testimony of Christians; this implies that the Jews were not viewed as a normal part of the community, and the Jews were scared that the Christians would gang up on them and falsely accuse them. Louis the Pious clearly wanted to have Jews in his empire to develop the economy; he even had a Magister Judaeorum (Master of the Jews) who was made to deal with Jewish issues. Agobard, Bishop of Lyon He lived in 820’s; he was not nearly as fond of Jews as Louis. He had many complaints against Jews: 1) They blaspheme Jesus and Christian beliefs; 2) They were insolent and threatening; 3) The royalty was pro-Jews; 4) The Jews were engaged in “Judaizing;” 5) The Jews sold their טרפותand non-Kosher wine to the Christians; 6) They build synagogues; 7) They moved the market day from Saturday; 8) They employ Christians, who then start following the Jewish religion’s stuff (eating meat during Lent and stuff; this really bothered the Christians who claimed that the Jews made the Christians violate their host); 9) The Jews and Christians ate together; 10) They steal Christian children and sell them as slaves to Muslims; Agobard is generally compared to John Chrysostom. It seems that most of the things he says are pretty realistic. For example, it’s pretty reasonable that Agobard isn’t such a fan of Jews eating with Christians—most rabbis weren’t such big fans of Jews’ eating with Christians, either! It seems, indeed, that these complaints were more general and less specifically anti-Jewish. However, the last one is that Jews steal Christian kids and sell them to Muslims. That’s a pretty sketchy claim, and it’s based on a specious accusation: It’s based on the testimony of a guy who was supposedly kidnapped at 6, and placed at the end of his letter. Most historians say that Jewish life in this period is happy, and only became worse after the Carolingian Empire. Kenneth Stow claims that many Jews in this period were indeed persecuted, but it’s unclear what’s normative and what’s exceptional—the other 75% of the time that the Jews did fine isn’t written down. - 30 - בס"ד Kandel The Rise of Jewish Communities in Northern Europe Origins: Immigration אגדת רבינו משולם We don’t have hard evidence for Jewish communities in Germany until the 10th century. , which is a story originating in the early 11th century:אגדת ר' משלם We’ll start with מעשה ברבינו קלונימוס ,אביו של רבינו משולם הגדול ,שחלם שידחה בנו ממנו .ופעת אחת באו סוחרים בעירו ביום השוק .ורבינו משולם היה בן י"ד שנה .ופגעו בו הסוחרים כשהלך בשוק ,ושמו עיניהם עליו ,ולקחוהו והוליכוהו עמהם במלכותם .ותפשוהו והוליכוהו לבבל. והסוחרים באו אצל הנשיא מבבל ואמרו" :רוצה אתה לקנות יהודה אחד לשמש לך?" השיב להם" :כן ".וקנהו מידם .והנשיא היה ראש ישיבה .ורבינו משולם ביקש ממנו שיאמר לשאר בני ביתו שיעשו עמו טובה .והבית המדרש ) (sicשל הנשיא עמד על החדר שתקנו לו מאכלו ,והוא היה ממונה על החדר. ושמע רבינו משולם שהנשיא היה מסופק בדבר הלכה ,שכל כך הקשו לו התלמידים .וכשפירש הנשיא מבית מדרשו ,הלך רבינו משולם והגיה הטעם בגליון ושתק—כמו שקיבל מאביו .וכשחזר הנשיא ראה הטעם מוגה בגליון ושתק הנשיא .וכן עשה רבינו משולם בכל פעם שנעלם הבירור מן הנשיא .והיה סבור הנשיא שמאת השי' היה שמצא הטעמים בגליון ספרו כתובים .פעם אחת אמר לתלמידיו" :אני רוצה לגםגם בהלכה; אם יש בכם אחד או שנים שיזכו לראות כשאצא מכאן—שיראה מי מגיה הספרים ".וכשיצא הנשיא ,עמדו שנים מתלמידיו אחורי הכותל וראו מן החור שבא רבינו משולם והיג ספיקותו בגליון ויצא והלך בחדרו .וכשבאו התלמידים לשמוע ההלכה מפי הנשיא ,אמרו אותם ב' בחורים שראו שהגיה הספר לרבם" :מורינו ,יש לך שמש אחד שגדול ממך בתורה ".השיב להם" :מי הוא?" אמרו לו" :השמש שהביאו לך הסוחרים מארץ רחוקה מגיה ספרך ".ומיד קרא לאותו שמש והביאו אל בית מדרשו וביקש ממנו מחילה לפני התלמידים ,שהיה משתמש בו דרך חול כמו שאר עבדים שמשים. והושיבו אצלו. וכשהגיד ההלכה פעם אחת שאל לו" :מה שם אביך ומה שם זקינך?" השיב לו" :שם אבי רבנא קלנימוס בן הר'ר משה מלכא שיסד 'אימת נוראותיך '.וביקש הנשיא לזווגו לבתו—ולא רצה רבינו משולם לעשות בלא רשות אביו. אמר לו הנשיא" :אם תמחול לי בלב שלם ששמשת לי—אתן לך שמש וצידה לדרך ,עד שתגיע לאביך או לשאר עיירות שיש לך מכירים ".השיב לו" :כן ".ונתן לו הנשיא אחד מעבדיו שהלך עמו וצידה לדרך. ובא על מגנצא ושם נשא אשה ,אחות קרובתו ,והוליד ממנה בן שמו רבי טודרוס .ורבינו משולם חזר לאביו ומת שם. ורבי תודרוס בנו נעשה ראש ישיבה במגנצא16 . was offered theר' משולם ).הלל knows all the answers to the hard questions (likeר' משולם goes to ask his father’s permission, and marries his relative,ר' משולם ’s daughter, andנשיא of Magence. This story shows several things—it says thatישיבה and his son started the , since the young kid knew theבבל inתורה in Germany is even better than theתורה the didn’t know. It also shows that the community cared a lot aboutבבליים answers that the ’s family. Also, it seems that the communityר' משולם asked aboutנשיא ancestry, since the .בבליה would prefer a local girl over thisר' משולם— so muchבבל didn’t like This is very similar to the story of the four captives—both have someone captured, , etc.; on the other hand, it is different—here,תורה , legitimize localתורה besting the local was from Italy andר' משה בן חנוך the boy is only 14 when he’s captured. Also, is a native to Germany, so he’s not a foreigner inר' משולם , butבבל ofתורה represented the the place he ended up. In Spain, there was an inferiority complex, and they had to prove that they were at least . Also, in the Fourבבל ; in Germany, they thought they were better thanבבל as good as ;Captives, R. Moshe’s son married a local woman from the culture he was transported to didn’t take a woman from the place he went to and went backר' משולם in this story, home. .מתוך שרה צפתמן ,בין אשכנז לספרד עמ' 83-86 - 31 - 16 בס"ד Kandel There are several possibilities for the hero of the story: The obvious one is ר' משולם, but it’s also possible that the real hero is the son, ר' טודרוס, who made the yeshiva in Magence. Alternatively, it could be רבינו קלונימוס, who had a dream that came true. The story also emphasizes familial lineage and ancestral heritage ( קבלת אבותand ייחוס )משפחה, which is why the נשיאasks for ’ר' משולםs house. The אגדהcontains several artifacts from its European origin. For example, the yeshiva seems to be described as a branch of the house of the ( נשיאor vice-versa), which describes the ישיבותin אשכנז, which were basically the dining room table of the ראש ישיבה (with maybe 10 kids boarding locally). The ישיבות בבליותwere much bigger—they had enough room for everyone on ירחי כלהand they had a בית דיןand stuff. Qalominides from Northern Italy We also have a story from ר' אלעזר רוקח. That tells us that ר' משהbar Qalonimos told תורת ( הסודfrom ר' אברהםof Baghdad) to the Qalonimos family, who moved to Mainz. The people were supposedly taken by King Charles who settled them in Mainz (probably since they were traders). Since this was written in the Middle Ages, this King Charles was probably Charlemagne, since that’s how they created legitimacy in the Middle Ages. This representation of Carolingian actions was accurate; Carolingian policy was generally pro-Jewish. These traders were invited by Carolingians; it seems that these traders who were invited knew a lot of תורה. Therefore, it seems reasonable to suggest that the traders who started these communities knew a lot of תורה. Communal Structure and Governance These communities grew by starting from one head of a family, who normally was really rich and knew a lot of תורה. These people liked having people around so that they would have a מניןand stuff, and they then invited other members of their family around.17 When newcomers came in, they caused friction, since the new members would often compete with the original monopoly. The old founders would often make a חרם הישוב, which stops other people from coming in and getting citizens’ rights. The Jews dealt with their own communal issues, and they didn’t want any Christians to get involved, so they were loathe to resort to the communal Gentile authorities. Even when the original founders let other people come in, they were often disadvantaged. However, the new people who came in could call an עיכוב תפילה, meaning that they could stand up in the middle of the תפילהand plead their case. רבינו גרשום מאור הגולהsaid that you can’t make an עיכוב תפילהbefore you go to the town council three times. Another question to be dealt with is how to deal with a מערופיא, or traditional monopoly. This brings us to שו"ת רבינו גרשום סימן ע: There was a story of someone who bought his father’s מערופיא, and רבנו גרשוםsaid that the buyer’s brother couldn’t make use of the guy’s מערופיא, since he bought it on his own. This is based off of the justification that the buyer only had the מערופיאsince he bought it and it wasn’t hereditary. This assumes that the questions of מערופיאwere dealt with on a place-by-place basis, and there was no set rule to go by. This is as opposed to the situation in בבל, where one גאון decided what was happening everywhere. 17 Hence the problem of עיר שכולה כהנים. - 32 - בס"ד Kandel רבנו גרשום מאור הגולה We assume he was born around 960-970. He died either in 1028 or 1040. רש"יwas born in 1040, so 1040 would be a convenient date to make up; 1028 was probably more accurate. However, the fact that someone decided that he died in 1040 shows that רבנו גרשוםwas thought to be the leader of his generation. This brings us to 'שו"ת רבינו גרשום סי לב. The opening of the אגרתshows that רבנו גרשוםbrought in many other authorities; that shows that the גדוליםof אשכנזturned to each other and past decisions much more than בבל, where there was a straight hierarchy that didn’t encourage the גאוניםto discuss their decisions with each other. The question was whether they should do the בריתon ראש ;השנהthey decided that they should do the ברית מילהdirectly before תקיעת השופר. However, some בני ישיבהdidn’t like this decision, and wanted to do the תקיעהfirst. רבנו גרשום, in the end, decided that they should listen to the ראשי ישיבה. It’s pretty surprising that the בני ישיבהdidn’t listen to the ;ראשי ישיבהwe wouldn’t expect the בחוריםin ישיבות גאוניות בבליותto do similar things. It’s possible that the בני ישיבהwere basing their response on the מנהגof the places they came from. It’s also important to note that ר' משה מאור הגולהdidn’t quote בבליin these sources; instead, he relied on אגדותand local מנהג. It seems that the בבליwasn’t yet considered completely decisive. תקנות These include only having one wife, not divorcing a wife without her consent, and not reading someone else’s mail. In Christian Europe, most normal Gentiles didn’t marry more than one wife, in any case. Therefore, some claim that this תקנהis just a reflection of the Christian environment that surrounded him. This is supported by the fact that the תקנהwas only in effect in places under Christian rule. Also, the ירושלמיsaid that women can insist on having only one wife; the בבליsays that the man can have two wives. Grossman says that the תקנהreflects particularly on the situation of the Jewish traders—the traders would have a house and a wife on the two ends of your trade route, say one in Poland and one in France. It is specifically this situation that רגמ"הwas fighting. The גמראsays that you can’t be married to two wives in two places without the other one knowing about it, so it seems odd that there would have to be a תקנהfor it, also. Apparently, the תקנהwas meant only to enhance the power of that original תקנה. The תקנהalso reflects the relatively high position of women in the society; it’s possible that the problem was the men sending their wives a גטfrom the other end of the world. The תקנהabout reading mail is also important. The reason is that merchants would often deliver their competitors’ mail, so it was important to protect the privacy of all of the letter-senders.18 משומדים The last תקנהis not reminding someone that his ancestors converted to Christianity, then back to Judaism. This also reflects on the societal structure of the Jewish community— we know that there were sporadic persecutions in the early 11th century. During one of There’s a story of a Christian convert who caught a letter that implied that he wasn’t such a sincere convert, underscoring the gravity of the problem. 18 - 33 - בס"ד Kandel the persecutions, it seems that there was an expulsion from Mainz, including the forcible conversion of the son of רגמ"ה. The report of the אור זרועis that רבנו גרשוםsat שבעהfor 14 days; it was said that ר"תsaid that it was better that ’רבנו גרשוםs son die than that he grow up as a Christian. ’רבי שמעון הגדולs son, אלחנן, was supposedly kidnapped, raised to become a priest, and given the best education. Needless to say, the kid, being Jewish, rose to become the Pope Elchanan. He would ask his advisors what his origins were, and in the end, they told him that his father was רבי שמעון הגדול. The Pope expressed his will to מקדש שם שמים. He brought all of his flock to the top of a tower, told them that Christianity was false, and then jumped off. This is a happy ending, since he reverted back to his Jewish roots and was able to מקדש שם שמים. It could be talking about Pope Anaclete, whose great-great-grandfather was Jewish. That’s probably not true, however. On the other hand, the story does give inspiration to all of the Jews who had their kids converted to Christianity, and helps them deal with the possibility that their kids would become believing Christians. In the early modern period, the ending was changed to ’אלחנןs returning home; martyrdom wasn’t looked on so well. Relations Between Jews and Christians Interaction? Jacob Katz presents the situation of the relations between the Jews and the Christians as Jews going off on economic forays into Christendom, but besides that, they didn’t interact at all. This is the opposite of the ספרדיmodel of integration presented above. However, modern historiography presents a slightly more complicated picture. We will bring two folk stories, a piece of a halakhic work, and a historical fact to show this point. For example, the story of רבי אמנוןof Mainz is that he appeared to רבי שמעון בן קלונימוסand told him ונתנה תוקף.19 The story is of dubious historical value—we don’t know any אמנון from northern Europe. However, the idea that there was a rabbi who had relationships with a bishop is important. אמנוןmeans “faithful”; the idea that he asked for three days was not very faithful. However, in the end, he did confirm his connection to Judaism. (This story appears in different forms during different periods of history.) The story of 20 רבי אמנוןaddresses the tensions felt by the generation that told it. Perhaps, the story reflects that there were Jews in Ashkenaz who actually did hesitate for a 19 20 It was actually written in Byzantium, in the 7th century. Appears in the אור זרוע: שר' אמנון ממגנצא יסד 'ונתנה. מצאתי מכתב ידו של ה"ר אפרים מבונא בר יעקב:)רעו (הלכות ר"ה:אור זרוע ב מעשה בר' אמנון ממגנצא שהיה גדול הדור ועשיר ומיוחס ויפה תואר ויפה:תוקף' על מקרה הרע שאירע לו וז"ל ויהי כדברם אליו יום יום ולא שמע. וימאן לשמוע להם, והחלו השרים וההגמון לבקש ממנו שיהפך לדתם,מראה ' וכדי. 'חפץ אני להועץ ולחשוב על הדבר עד שלשה ימים, ויהי כהיום בהחזיקם עליו ויאמר. ויפצר בו ההגמון,להם ויהי אך יצוא י צא מאת פני ההגמון שם הדבר ללבו על אשר ככה יצא מפיו לשון ספק שהיה.לדחותם מעליו אמר כן ויבוא אל ביתו ולא אבה לאכול ולשתות ונחלה ויבואו כל קרוביו,צריך שום עצה ומחשבה לכפור באלקים חיים ויהי ביום השלישי בהיותו. 'ארד אל ניבי אבל שאולה' ויבך ויתעצב אל לבו, כי אמר,ואוהביו לנחמו וימאן להתנחם וימאן ללכת, 'לא אלך!' ויוסף עוד הצר שלוח שרים רבים ונכבדים מאלה,כואב ודואג וישלח ההגמון אחריו ויאמר 'מה זאת אמנון? למה לא,' וימהרו ויביאו אותו ויאמר לו. 'מהרו את אמנון להביאו בעל כרחו, ויאמר ההגמון.אליו - 34 - בס"ד Kandel millisecond before deciding not to convert to Christianity. The story says that even if you hesitated, it’s all right; you can still be beatified. (R.ראש ישיבה Here’s another story: R. Yom Tov of London (12th cent.) was the son of the . The communityערב שבועות Moshe ben Yom Tov); R. Yom Tov hanged himself on thought that he had committed suicide like any other lunatic, and buried him in , he appeared in a dream andשבועות accordance with their assumption. On the night of explained that he saw a demon that was forcing him to worship the cross, so that’s why he killed himself. The community decided that he was not a normal suicide, and reburied תיקוני of London, says that it would have been better to doר' מאיר , byהלכות שמחות him. and have children, and worship God with his life than to kill himself as a martyr.תשובה We don’t know of R. Yom Tov, but it’s certainly possible that the story actually happened. talks about a Jewish woman and a Christian neighbor who asks about what toספר חסידים do to her little baby. The Christian woman gives her a rock relic from the Church of the Holy Sepulcher to heal the baby. That doesn’t contribute to the spiritual health of the baby. Even in places where the Jews lived, they weren’t completely separated from their !Christian neighbors; often, they would even share walls Contemporary historians look at stories like these and claim that Jews were not so sealed ! had a bishop as a friendר' אמנון from their neighbors—see that רש"י He studied in Mainz and Worms, then returned to northern France. His commentaries represent a consolidation of the traditions of Mainz and Worms. One of the things he had גמרא to deal with in the aftermath of the First Crusades is the problem of apostates. The said that aboutרש"י ;)סנהדרין מד about the Jewish people (.ישראל אע"פ שחטא ישראל הוא says every individual person, also.21 This makes it harder for Jews, since it could be dangerous for the Jewish community to harbor Christian apostates. Also, this requires באת אלי למועד אשר יעדת לי להועץ ולהשיב לי דבר ולעשות את בקשתי?' ויען ויאמר אמנון' ,אני את משפטי אחרוץ כי הלשון אשר דבר ותכזב לך דינה לחתכה '.כי חפץ היה ר' אמנון לקדש את ה' על אשר דבר ככה .ויען ההגמון ויאמר 'לא! כי הלשון לא אחתוך ,כי היטב דברה! אלא הרגלים אשר לא באו למועד אשר דברת אלי אקצץ ואת יתר הגוף איסר '.ויצו הצורר ויקצצו את פרקי אצבעות ידיו ורגליו ,ועל כל פרק ופרק היו שואלין לו' ,התחפוץ עוד אמנון להפך לאמונתנו?' ויאמר' ,לא '.ויהי ככלותם לקצץ ,צוה הרשע להשכיב את ר' אמנון במגן אחד וכל פרקי אצבעותיו בצידו וישלחהו לביתו .הכי נקרא שמו ר' אמנון כי האמין באל חי וסבל על אמונתו יסורין קשין מאהבה רק על הדבר שיצא מפיו .אחר הדברים האלו ,קרב מועד והגיע ר"ה .בקש מקרוביו לשאת אותו לבית הכנסת עם כל פרקי אצבעותיו המלוחים ולהשכיבו אצל ש"צ .ויעשו כן ויהי כאשר הגיע ש"צ לומר הקדושה וחיות אשר הנה ,א"ל ר' אמנון' ,אמתן מעט ואקדש את השם הגדול .ויען בקול רם ובכן לך תעלה קדושה'—כלומר ,שקדשתי את שמך על מלכותך ויחודך—ואח"כ אמר' ,ונתנה תוקף קדושת היום ',ואמר 'אמת כי אתה דיין ומוכיח ',כדי להצדיק עליו את הדין שיעלו לפניו אותן פרקי ידיו ורגליו וכן כל הענין ,והזכיר 'וחותם יד כל אדם בו ותפקוד נפש כל חי ',שכך נגזר עליו בר"ה .וכשגמר כל הסילוק נסתלק ונעלם מן העולם לעין כל ואיננו כי לקח אותו אלקים ,ועליו נאמר 'מה רב טובך אשר צפנת ליראיך' וגו' .אחר הדברים והאמת אשר הועלה ר' אמנון ונתבקש בישיבה של מעלה ,ביום השלישי לטהרתו ,נראה במראות הלילה לרבנא קלונימוס בן רבנא משולם בן רבנא קלונימוס בן רבנא משה בן רבנא קלונימוס ולימד לו את הפיוט ההוא 'ונתנה תוקף קדושת היום' ויצו עליו לשלוח אותו בכל התפוצות הגולה להיות לו עד וזכרון ויעש הגאון כן: 21 שו"ת רש"י קעג :השיב רש"י :על היבמה שנפלה לפני יבם משומד צריכה חליצה .ואין חילוק בין שקדשה הבעל ואח"כ נשתמד בין שנשתמד לאחר [קודם] קידושין ,שהמשומד הרי הוא כישראל חשוד לכל דבר ,שנאמר 'חטא ישראל' --אעפ"י שחטא ישראל הוא .ואין לחלקו מידת ישראל ,אלא שאין נאמן באיסורין ,הואיל וחשוד הוא עליהן ,ויינו יין נסך הואיל וחש וד הוא לע"ז ,וקידושיו קידושין וחליצתו חליצה .כללא של דבר הרי הוא כישראל חשוד. - 35 - בס"ד Kandel , which it’s unclear that the apostate wanted to do; it also forces him toחליצה people to do also reinforces communal authority; for example, he says that theרש"י .גט have to give a מצוה have the power of aתקנות .22 Also, the town’sבית דין חשוב of every town is aב"ד .דאורייתא :שמות כח:מא sometimes discusses some realia in his commentary. Example:רש"י והלבשת אתם את אהרן אחיך ואת בניו אתו ,ומשחת אתם ולאת את ידם וקדשת אתם וכהנו לי. רש"י שם :כל מלוי ידים לשון חינוך ,כשהוא נכנס לדבר להיות מוחזק בו מאותו יום והלאה ,ובלשון לע"ז כשממנין אדם על פקודת דבר ,נותן השליט בידו בית יד של עור שקורין גנט בלעז ,ועל ידו הוא מחזיקו בדבר ,וקורין לאותו מסירה רווישטיר בלעז ,והוא מילוי ידים. explains the phrase based on what they would do in his time; he explains that youרש"י רמב"ן would take, say, a glove, and put it on the hand of the guy (investiture; and see there). Charter to Jews of Speyer This is a charter to the Jewish community of Speyer, which he wants to do to make the village into a town. The Jews were willing to move to Speyer since Mainz had a fire. The first Crusade was 1094; just a dozen years earlier (1084), the Bishop of Speyer was inviting the Jews in. Therefore, it seems that the Jews were happy to be invited into Speyer. Midterm 22 יש סתירה בענין הזה בגמרא .בסנהדרין לא :כתוב ש"התוקף את חבירו בדין ,אחד אומר נדון כאן ואחד אומר נלך למקום הוועד ,כופין אותו וילך למקום הוועד...והא אמר רבי אלעזר כופין אותו ודן בעירו? הני מילי היכא דקאמר ליה לוה למלוה .אבל מלוה ,עבד לוה לאיש מלוה ".לעומת זאת ,הגמרא בב"ק קיב :אומרת ש" ...לא פתחו ליה בדינא מצי א"ל אנא לב"ד הגדול אזילנא " .ועיין ברא"ש בסנהדרין ג:מא איך שהוא יישב את הגמרות ,ועיין עוד בר"ן על אתר (בסנהדרין) .ועיין באו"ז ב"ק סי' תלו שכתב שתלמיד החכם הכי גדול בעיר נחשב בית דין גדול. - 36 - בס"ד Kandel Crusades Reasons When the Crusade was called in 1095, it wasn’t originally about Jews; Pope Urban II wanted the Crusades to recapture the Holy Land from the Muslims. The Pope decided to call a Crusade at that point for several reasons: 1) There was a newly invigorated Christendom (even under Charlemagne, Europe was under siege; by the late 12th century, Europe was much safer from attack); 2) The Crusade was an attempt to control the violent parts of society (as evidenced also by the Peace of God, which was made to prevent too many people from bearing arms); 3) Europe practiced primogeniture, which is problematic, since it leaves the younger sons to do…what? If the younger sons become knights, for example, they would basically go around terrorizing the countryside, which doesn’t contribute to a conductive lifestyle. Smaller Crusading Groups The Pope wanted a multinational army under papal/ecclesiastical control. In reality, the Pope had no idea how much his idea of a “Crusade” would take on. Everybody wanted a piece in the action, and many people came. The baronial armies were the closest to the Pope’s idea; they conquered Jerusalem from the Muslims by the summer of 1099. Another, less professional group, gathered around the preacher Peter the Hermit; they went off to the east in April 1096, but by the time they got to Muslim territory, they were basically wiped out. On the way, they did some anti-Jewish activities. During Peter’s preaching in Cologne, some of his followers stayed in the Rhineland, and created serious problems for the Jews (they only made it to Hungary!). The Crusaders under Emicho of Leiningen (the least organized and professional group) created the most problems for the Jews. Previously, the anti-Jewish violence was basically from a small group that got bored and found Jews. Emicho’s violence wasn’t incidental; he decided that instead of going to Muslim territory to kill Jews, he could attack Jews in Christendom. Kenneth Stowe argues that Church officials didn’t like Emicho’s actions. For example, Emicho told the Jews that they had to either die or convert. The Church normally says that only if a person is dragged into a conversion is it a forced conversion; otherwise (even if he were forced into agreeing), it’s not a forced conversion. However, it’s not good for the religion to have such a huge group of people who really don’t want to be Christian. This leaves us with Emicho’s attacks on Jews not in conformity to Christian papal will. Jewish Narratives We have three Hebrew narratives of the Jewish responses: Mainz anonymous, the ’ראב"ןs chronicle, and ’שלמה בר שמשוןs chronicle. Recently, people have decided to call them “narratives”, since “chronicle” implies historical accuracy. It’s unclear exactly to what extent these sources tell us about 1096. They were all edited within 50 years of the events described therein and claim to be eyewitness accounts; they all have certain - 37 - בס"ד Kandel common stories, like רחלwith her four kids.23 In general, the accounts concur on the general pattern of Jewish response to the Crusades and Christians in general. To decide whether or not we can rely on these sources, we first would look at corroborating evidence. Albert of Aachen reports that Jewish mothers killed their children rather than allow them to convert; he doesn’t say that many Jews converted. Also, a lot of the stories were similar and reflected well on the Jews, which implies some selective editing, at the very least. In addition, it’s unclear how the eyewitnesses knew what happened in all of the stories. Also, it’s possible that the writers used Talmudic images to tell their stories. When the Jews heard the bad news, they tried to negotiate with their burgher neighbors, tried to find safety with the bishops, etc. This all shows that the Jews thought they could be saved. In Speyer, Bishop John was able to save the Jews. When the Jews realized that they couldn’t be saved, they reacted in different ways. ר' שמחה הכהןapparently took up armed resistance against Christians; some killed themselves; some killed their children; a few converted; at least one Jew claims he’ll convert and then kills people in and is killed; etc. It’s interesting to point out that the women and children took an active role in the activities. “Excerpts from Hebrew First Crusade Narratives,” There was…them. This is a re-enactment of ;עקדת יצחקthere’s an astonishing number of boys named יצחקin this story. It’s clear that עקדת יצחקinforms the telling of the story. (However, the father of the kid wasn’t אברהם, it was ;משולםalso, the mother wasn’t שרה, she was ציפורה.) “Then the pious and…forever.” These people are treating themselves as if they were in the ביה"מand sacrificing themselves. Prior to the first ;ואשי ישראל מהרה באהבה תקבל ברצון after, אשי ישראלwas understood as the people were being the offerings; it was changed to ואשי ישראל באהבה תקבל ברצון, without the מהרה. These people think that they’re going straight to heaven. The Crusades take place during the spring, when everything begins to thaw. Most of the time, we don’t say אב הרחמיםon שבת מברכים, but before איירand סיון, we do, since that’s when the Crusades were. The Christians were not reflected very well; the Jews would prefer to kill their children than to let them become Christians. They don’t want to give Christians the satisfaction of killing their kids, and they also don’t want the filthy Christian hands on their kids. The Jews said that they could choose to die purely as a קרבןrather as a victim of Christian resistance. The Jews also claim that they are doing their things ליחד שם שמים, or to deny the Trinity. The excerpt says that the Jews were suffering because of their sins, but during the rest of the paragraph: “The precious…might.” יהרג ואל יעבר לעומת יהרוג ואל יעבור This is not construed as a punishment; they say that they are martyrs, and G-d is testing them to give them עולם הבא. They were tested because they were a קהילה קדושה, אשר יאהב יוכיח. 23 Some suggest that the accusation of the well poisoning smacks more of 14 th-century events and is a sign of later date. - 38 - בס"ד Kandel Is there any halakhic justification for these actions? The גמראsays יהרג ואל יעבר, that you are to be killed before serving ;ע"זit doesn’t say that you can kill others ()יהרוג ואל יעבר. (Even שאולonly killed himself, not others.) David Malkiel claims that there really wasn’t any choice between baptism and death; there was no option of baptism.24 The בעלי תוספות never talk about killing others. Chaim Soloveitchik argues that there is no justification for killing children at all. Rather, this is a visceral, creative religious instinct that came to the fore. These texts seem to justify the martyrs; they couldn’t ignore such a powerful act, and they couldn’t repudiate the actions of their ancestors. Chazan claims that the Jewish response of killing babies before falling into foreign hands is also a pan-European response to threatening religions; Christians committed similar acts when Muslims came to conquer Christian lands. (Yisrael Yuval argues that the idea of ritual murder came around since Jews would kill their own kids.) Avraham Grossman and Yisrael Ta-Shma claims that Chaim Soloveitchik is applying a 20th-century perspective on the Jews on Ashkenaz. They point out that the Jews of Ashkenaz read יוסיפון, which mentions that people killed each other at ;מצדהalso, אגדה may have been legally authoritative. There was also a letter in the גניזה קהיריתthat describes three Italian rabbis who killed themselves before being converted. Therefore, they claim that Chaim Soloveitchik is erring in assuming that the Jews of Ashkenaz only accepted the בבליas authoritative; the ארצישראליtradition, from which the Ashkenazi Jews sprang, has a much more favorable opinion of martyrdom. Kanarfogel brings manuscript evidence of ר"תwho he claims does sanction killing children. מהר"ם מרוטנבורג has a תשובהwhere he was asked by a father what to do since he killed his children in anticipation of an attack, but there was no attack in the end. מהר"ם מרוטנברגsays that there’s no need to do תשובה, since he didn’t do anything wrong; their ancestors did the same thing. Historicity of First Crusade Narratives To what extent can we use these First Crusade narratives? The narratives were mostly written for didactic purposes: They lionize the martyrs; they reflect negatively on the Christians; etc. They almost never mention conversion. Therefore, we can’t really use these documents to tell us whether more Ashkenazi Jews converted or became martyrs. Chazan claims that since there were different responses reported in the texts, we can use them to answer questions of larger patterns of behaviour. That is, their agenda didn’t cause them to change their stories, so we can learn about what happened in 1096. Marcus, on the other hand, claims the opposite; he says that we can learn much more about the concerns of 12th-century Jewry than what actually happened in 1096. One of the questions we discussed is the attraction of Christianity to Jews. There are brief mentions that people actually did convert. Jeremy Cohen argues that these texts tell us about the anxieties and concerns of the authors of the text. He further argues that the authors of the texts could have possibly converted, and they experienced survivors’ guilt; the texts serve a therapeutic service in showing that the martyrs had some doubt, also. He argues on the basis of one of the Qalonymus stories, where people were hidden without water in an attempt to convince them to convert. Cohen says that אין מים אלא תורה, and 24 לשתף שם שמיםmeans to swear by השםand a saint, not the Trinity. - 39 - בס"ד Kandel really, this story is a hidden mention of the fact that there were some Jews did actually have doubts. Needless to say, this is a ridiculously farfetched reading of the text. In the second Crusade, everyone was better prepared, so the Jews could protect themselves and Christians could protect them. Therefore, the narratives describing the second Crusade describe the events completely differently. Marcus claims that the First Crusade narratives don’t really portray any doubts on the part of the Jews. Portrayals of Women A distinguished pious woman there [in Speyer]…was the first among all the communities of those who were slaughtered. The women girded their loins with strength and slew their own sons and daughters, and then themselves…betrothed. Women were portrayed well in the narratives, and they talked about Jesus and Mary with very uncomplimentary epithets (wanton, menstruating, etc.). After these [four Jews] were killed, the enemy saw those remaining in the palace…them. These women take a strong stand against Christians. On the other hand, the women aren’t described as being raped. Some suggest that Jews here are engaged in a cultural polemic against Christian. For Christians, the model family is the “Holy Family” (Mary and Jesus). These texts claim that the women here are the actual “Holy Family”, and are being contrasted to Christians. In general, Jews don’t like Christians at all. The institution of monasticism, however, was somewhat challenging. ספר חוקי התורה advocates Jews studying תורהin a ישיבהin a quasi-monastic model. The Jews deal with this challenge in two ways: 1) The monasteries are actually licentious; 2) The Jewish family is very holy and strong. This is why the Jews were so eager to lionize their families. Also, there is a tradition of Christian women martyrdom; Jews could be claiming that they are just as strong as their Christian counterparts. Ta-Shma says that it’s part of the tradition of Ashkenaz; Chazan claims that it’s a Northern European model of martyrdom that the Jews adopted. In their act of rejection of everything Christianity stands for, the Jews reflect just how acculturated they are to Northern European culture—the same impulse that created the Crusades created Jewish martyrdom. 1096 as a Turning Point It’s unclear whether or not 1096 represents a real turning point for Jewish people. It did stamp the ideal of martyrdom on the Jewish people of Ashkenaz. It also changed the attitude towards memorializing people—“Memorbucher”, or memory books. These record the names of martyrs, when and how they died, and during what persecution they died. This adopted the idea of Christian monastic necrology, but also put it as a polemic against the Christians. Originally, the Jews were welcomed by the Carolingians, but at some point, this tide shifted. It’s unclear when. Some could claim that the attacks of 1007 were really a major turning point, and the situation was really not so good even before 1096. It’s unclear how much change there was in the status and situation of Jews after 1096. It could be evaluated based on economics, literary productions of Jews, demographics - 40 - בס"ד Kandel (birthrate-death rate and patterns of migration), what happened in the Second Crusade, non-Jewish political or legal documents that deal with Jews, what subjects שו"תיםdealt with, etc. 1) Demographics—the communities of northern France continued to grow; even Mainz and Worms regenerated pretty quickly. Jews in other places also started growing and migrating; they apparently didn’t think that 1096 was such an important turning point. 2) Urbanization—we begin to see a move from agrarian to urban economy; this requires capital. Therefore, Jews moved into money lending, which was (at least at first) a good idea—it supplied for Jewish economic security, and supplied a service that non-Jews couldn’t supply for themselves. In an agrarian economy, lending money means that someone’s had a failure; when things go well, there’s no need to lend money. However, for an urban economy, people always need money to go on new business ventures, start new shops, etc. Lending money was, of course, not only positive; there were some negative consequences for Jews, also. Henry IV, the Holy Roman Emperor, was in Italy, so he couldn’t counteract the mobs. When he came back, he let the forcibly converted Jews go back to Judaism, which was unprecedented. He also introduced the Land-Peace Law, which says that the Jews belong to the royal treasury (c. 1104). This means that the Jews couldn’t be harmed, but they also couldn’t carry weapons. This also means that the Jews were seen as exceptional; it later led to kings squeezing Jews very tightly. 3) The Second Crusade was much less of a disaster for Jews; Bernard of Clairveaux personally makes sure that the Jews wouldn’t be attacked. According to Ephraim of Bonne, mostly Jews were left their fortresses or were traveling were killed; most Jews were all right. He also minimizes the importance of martyrdom, and doesn’t idolize it as much. Jewish survival is the key, so he also likes it when the person manages to survive. 4) תוספותand חסידות אשכנזwere both in the 12th century, and they were both important developments. The Jews encountered philosophy in the 12th century (cf. ;)רמב"םQabbalah; etc. However, Avraham Grossman emphasizes that the yeshivot of Mainz and Worms were destroyed; the center of תורהstudy shifted from Ashkenaz to Northern France. Haim Soloveitchik points out that in any case, the yeshivot of Mainz and Worms were already in decline; 1096 was just the last nail in the coffin. 'בעלי התוס Methodology and Characteristics These include ( ר"תgrandson of ( ר"י ;)רש"יnephew of ( רשב"ם ;)ר"תgrandson of ר"ש ;)רש"י משנץ. They seem to approach the גמראthe same way the גמראapproached the —משנהthey use a dialectic approach (logic, contradiction); look at contemporary מנהגים, etc. Some say that they got the dialectic approach from the way the גמראapproaches the משנה, but that doesn’t really explain why they use dialectics now. אורבךclaims that this tendency was taken from the Christian approach to Roman law, but that assumes that the ' תוסwere borrowing from Christian legal scholars; we have no evidence of this. אורבך - 41 - בס"ד Kandel claims that the methodology drew from the “zeitgeist”. However, he also tries to show were (geographically) to their Christian counterparts, so it’s likeבעלי התוס' how close the he tries to imply influence. רש"י , Christian students went to study at institutions (like howרש"י During the time of went to study in Mainz and Worms); later, they focused on single teachers (like, say, Peter of Abelard); so too, Jewish scholars changed their focus from yeshivot (Mainz, , etc.).ר"י ,ר"ת( Worms) to single people , so that there wouldישיבות assume that there were ~60 people in theseאחרונים Some later . However, the reality is that mostמסכת be someone who would be responsible for each ; were very small. Kanarfogel claims that there could be maybe 25 students at maxישיבות Breuer claims that there were probably not more than 10. פיתוח ההלכה also resolved contradictions between communal practice and law.בעלי התוס' The משנה ע"ז ב .לפני אידיהן של עובדי כוכבים שלשה ימים -אסור לשאת ולתת עמהם ,להשאילן ולשאול מהן ,להלוותן וללוות מהן ,לפורען ולפרוע מהן. This is a problem, since it implies that it’s forbidden to do business on Thursday, Friday, and Saturday. This would create major problems. Six answers: )1 ,עכו"ם שבחו"ל )2 ,איבה )3 ,עכו"ם שבינינו לא פלחו )4 ,אינו מכירו vs.מכירו )5 ר"ת היה מפרש אסור לשאת ולתת עמהם דוקא במידי דתקרובת )6 , it’s for their priestly clothes, and not really anגלחים Even for their .ע"ז offering for אסור לשאת ולתת עמהם -פ"ה משום דאזיל ביום אידו ומודה לעבודת כוכבים .מתוך לשונו משמע שר"ל אף ממקח וממכר. וקשה! על מה סמכו העולם לשאת ולתת ביום איד העבודת כוכבים עמהם? נהי דרוב אידיהם מן הקדישים הם ,מ"מ בכל שבוע יום אחד יש להם דלרבי ישמעאל (לקמן ו ).לעולם אסור! נסיונות לפתור את הבעייה: א) ואין לומר דהיינו טעמא משום (חולין יג ):דעובדי כוכבים שבח"ל לאו עובדי עבודת כוכבים אלא מנהג אבותיהם בידם ,דהא אמר שמואל בגמ' (לקמן ז ):בגולה אינו אסור אלא יום אידם בלבד משמע הא יום אידם מיהא אסור. ב) לכך נראה דשרי משום איבה ,כדאמר בגמ' (שם דף ו ):גבי ר' יהודה נשיאה דשדר ליה ההוא מינא דינרא קסריינא ביום אידו .אמר [ר' יהודה] היכי איעביד? לא אישקליה ,הויא ליה איבה! מיהו אין משם ראיה גמורה דשמא לאו משום איבה לישתרי אלא היה נוטל עצה כיצד יעשה שלא יהיה לו איבה .ועוד אי טעמא משום איבה תינח להלוותם ולהשאילם ולפרעם כשהעובד כוכבים תובע חובו ,אבל לשאת ולתת עמהם דהיינו מקח וממכר מאי איבה איכא? וכי לא יוכל ישראל לומר איני צריך עתה למכור ולקנות וכן לשאול ללוות ולפרוע מה ידע העובד כוכבים שמניח משום אידו?! ג) לכך נראה דטעם ההיתר משום דעכו"ם שבינינו קים לן בגוייהו דלא פלחו לעבודת כוכבים, ומהאי טעמא שרי לקמן בפ"ב (דף סה ).רב יהודה דשדר ליה קורבנא לאבידרנא ביום אידו אמר קים לי בגויה דלא פלח לעבודת כוכבים .וכן רבא (שם) דשדר ליה קורבנא לבר שישך ביום אידו אמר קים לי בגויה דלא פלח לעבודת כוכבים. ד) א"נ יש לסמוך אההיא דתנא בירושלמי על מתני' דאסור לשאת ולתת תני ,בד"א? בעובד כוכבים שאינו מכירו .אבל בעובד כוכבים שמכירו מותר ,מפני שהוא כמחניף .ותניא הנכנס לעיר ומצאן שמחים שמח עמהם שאינו אלא כמחניף להם. ה) ור"ת היה מפרש אסור לשאת ולתת עמהם דוקא במידי דתקרובת ,ולא איירי כלל בלקנות ,דודאי שרי בין ללישנא דאזיל ומודה בין ללישנא דלפני עור לא תתן .דלא אסרו אלא למכור דוקא מידי דתקרובת ולשאת ולתת .הכי פי' :לשאת מהן המעות ולתת להם מידי דתקרובת חליפי המעות. - 42 - בס"ד Kandel ,) בגמרא טעמא דלשאת ולתת עמהם אי משום הרווחה.ומביא ראיה מדאיבעיא (לקמן דף ו או דלמא משום ולפני עור לא תתן,פירוש משום שמרויח ומשתכר ואזיל ומודה לעבודת כוכבים אמאי לא, ואי מידי דלאו תקרובת אסור.מכשול וקאמר נפקא מינה דאית ליה בהמה לדידיה קאמר נפקא מינה למידי דלאו תקרובת? דמשום הרווחה איכא! אלא וודאי מידי דלאו תקרובת כיון שנותן המעות תחת החפץ והוא לוקח וגם אינו,שרי דלא שייכא אזיל ומודה במקח וממכר טעמא דאסור לשאת ולתת עמהם במידי: ובעיא דגמרא הכי מפרש.בטוח כ"כ שירויח בסחורה דתקרובת משום הרווחה שיהיה לו בהמות רבות בריוח אפי' אית ליה לדידיה נמי אסור שמתוך שיהיה לו הרבה בהמות יקריב מן המובחר או משום לפני עור ונפקא מינה דכי אית ליה בהמה .לדידיה שרי ולפי פר"ת אין לתמוה על מנהג העולם שאפילו אם היו מחזיקין אותם כעובדי עבודת כוכבים שהרי אינם עושים שום תקרובת אלא במעות ובזה לא שייך הרווחה והרבה מעות מצויים להם ומיהו נכון הוא להחמיר כשבא העובד כוכבים ואומר הלויני מעות לשקרי שקורין.לאותו דבר אופרי"ר אבל ר' אלחנן אמר כי גם באותם אופרי"ר אין שום איסור כי מה שהם נותנים אותם .לגלחים ולכומרים אינו ממש לשם עבודת כוכבים אלא לצורך הנאתם )ו חסידי אשכנז Founded by ( ר' יהודה החסיד1150-1217), which is based in Germany, not France (where the majority of the בעלי התוספותwere). Most of what we know about חסידות אשכנזis based on ספר חסידים.25 Some suggest that ספר חסידיםwasn’t a work that ר' יהודה החסידwrote as a single work; rather, there were different pamphlets were circulated, and were then collected later and put into ""ספר חסידים. ספר חסידיםhas a very expansive notion of what’s included in the purview of God’s directives. It also has “exempla”, or examples of how you should implement Jewish values. This gives valuable historical information on what the realia of Jewish medieval life was like. ר' אלעזר מגרמייזא=רוקחtook over the leadership of חסידות אשכנזafter the death of ר' יהודה החסיד. The רוקחgave us the foundation myth of the Qalonimus family, and tells us that he brought תורת הסודfrom ר' אברהםof Baghdad. One of the basic premises of ספר חסידיםis that the 613 commandments in the תורהare just the beginning; really, G-d has much broader demands from people. Opening Tract: “For those who fear G-d and are mindful of His name I write this book…ignorance.” This claims that we can be punished for things that we don’t know, since we should look for extra stuff to do. “If you see…תורה.” This doctrine implies that you can have a תלמיד חכםwho is punished since he didn’t observe the things that חסידי אשכנזthought were important. To find out what you’re supposed to do, you find out the רצון הבוראby asking the חכם. ( חסידיםclaim that you can always explain bad stuff happening to good people by saying that their grandparents converted to Christianity for a little bit of time or something like that.) ספר חסידיםis really anti-conversion; for example, there’s an exempla of a rabbi who told his congregation to convert to save their lives, and then they converted back; their descendants were still punished. Part of this is that Judaizing was strictly forbidden, so ספר חסידיםwasn’t so anxious to let Jews become Christians, for fear that they wouldn’t be able to come back. ספר חסידיםalso says that if a son has apostatized, you should leave him away, since he would just contaminate the family if he came back. ספר חסידיםalso We have two versions: כתב ידParma (much longer and more extensive, edited by Wistinetski), and כתב יד Bologna (has some stuff Parma doesn’t have, edited by Margaliot). 25 - 43 - בס"ד Kandel assumes that dead people stick around, visit family members, rattle rafters, etc. On the other hand, there were other instances when they were very common-sense—for example, it says that if someone was born with a tooth, you just take it out. Some suggest that רצון הבוראsounds suspiciously like “deus vult” (God wills it), which was the slogan of the Crusaders. If you read ספר חסידים, you get the sense that there is a war going on, and there’s the good fighting the bad. For example, if you’re looking to marry, and there’s a poor girl from a good family and a rich girl from a bad family, you should marry the poor girl from a good family (good=)חסידי. They also have an exempla of a “bad” ( ש"ץin medieval אשכנז, the ש"ץis pictured as the conduit of prayers to God; for example, one ש"ץ, the רביof רש"י, grew a very long beard and swept the floor of the ארון קודש, but he would still be considered a רשע, since he wasn’t a )חסיד. ר' יהודה החסידcame from the Qalonymus family, and expounded his תורה. The ’חסידיםs תורת הסודfocuses on כסא הכבוד. “There were once two synagogues…sum.” In this exemple, the big synagogue prays too quickly; the חסידwanted to count the ’אלףs in each Psalm and find a reason for it. It’s unclear how much of this whole system was actually put into practice, as it doesn’t seem to be a system fitting for המון עם. It also seems that there aren’t enough חסידי אשכנזto actually have a מניןof their own. ר' יהודה החסידwas run out of town in the Rhineland, and had to relocate to Regensburg. The one mention of חסידי אשכנזwe have in ' ספרות התוסis that מהר"ם רוטנבורגmentioned that there was one חסידwho wore his טליתall day. “If a person has…water.” This extreme requirement for penance is strikingly Christian in nature. תשובת =המשקלcommensurate penance is different from תשובה הבאה, which is putting yourself in the same situation and not committing the same sin. For example, if you had adulterous relations, you should put yourself in the same situation, and hopefully resist it. For obvious reasons, חסידות אשכנזrejected this idea. Yitshaq Ber argues that חסידות אשכנז adapted the religious practices of the self-flagellating Christians (who also practiced penance). Also, the monasteries posed a religious challenge that חסידות אשכנזresponded to by creating an ascetic ethic (this is the synchronic position). Peter Schaeffer argues instead that this is a genuinely Jewish practice that drew on the היכלותliterature and developed its doctrines. Talia Fishman points out that the practices of חסידות אשכנזdo have their roots in Irish penitential literature, but those Christian practices preserved very old ideas (Irish in particular were great at preserving stuff). Therefore, the Irish monks preserved 2nd-century Syriac practices that were in turn influenced by the היכלותliterature. The Irish ideas then infiltrated into the Rhineland, where the Jews picked them up and made them into ספר חסידים. This possible Christian influence is particularly interesting given the seriousness of the חסידיallergy to Christianity (compared to the relatively mild reaction that the 'בעלי התוס had against lending money to a Christian to give money to the Pope; also, most 'בעלי התוס permit taking a Christian religious idol as a collateral, while ספר החסידיםdoesn’t). “It is written…books.” This position shows that ספר החסידיםheld that even palimpsests that had Christian writing on it are forbidden. Similarly, it’s not appropriate to hum a Christian tune as a lullaby. Also, pigs were everywhere in the Middle Ages, and ate just about everything. ספר חסידים says that you should not face a window when a pig walks by. The רוקחtalks about a - 44 - בס"ד Kandel ritual of initiating children into תורהstudy—when the child is three, they’d take the child down to the river ()אין מים אלא תורה, but on the way, you should wrap the child with a טלית to prevent them from seeing any Christian symbols. However, you should not bake cookies in the shape of letters since it’s not good to eat the holy letters (Christians have the same concern about the wafer). There were also questions of whether Jewish women could use the same river for טבילהas Christians use for baptism. Chaim Soloveitchik points out that before the 'בעלי התוס, the point of your study was to master a received body of wisdom. To be a 'בעל התוס, you have to know much less, and you develop the knowledge on your own. It shifts the focus from modesty and rote learning to creativity and, to some extent, self-aggrandizement. It also doesn’t place emphasis on Qalonymus blood. The education philosophy of חסידות אשכנזcould represent a reaction against the Tosafist revolution. “A person should not…teach them.” ספר חסידיםimplies that Tosafist dialectic was Christian and intended to let yourself show off. Haim Soloveitchik says that חסידי אשכנזwere not influential; Kanarfogel points out that the Tosafists from Evreux were interested in ;הלכה למעשהeven the ר"יhad pietistic practices. Soloveitchik retorts that not every practice of piety is necessarily German pietism; only eating meat on שבתis a pious practice, but doesn’t necessarily betray any German influence. פרשנות המקרא היהודית באשכנז במאה הי"ב So far, we’ve been looking at the different forms of creativity in greater Ashkenaz. Now, we’ll be looking at the פשטrevolution of the 12th century. Before the 12th, there was very little interest in ;פשטby the 13th, there was also very little interest. The 12th century was the center of the פשטrevolution. The dictionaries used would’ve been the מחברתof מנחםand ’דונשs dictionary; cognate languages; ספר השרשיםif ibn Janach (if they knew about it); and realia (cf. רמב"ןon בית לחםand the definition of ( שקלsee Intro)); human nature and psychology; etc. רש"יis sort of a transitional figure in learning ;פשטhe talks about פשט, but the majority of his commentary is מדרשים. ר' יוסף קרא One of the first פשטניםis ( ר' יוסף קרא1050-1125). His area of expertise is ( תנ"ךhence the name )קרא, not necessarily תושבע"פ. He developed the idea of context in order to understand פסוקים. He is unapologetic in his rejection of מדרשin his search for פשט. Some claim that מדרשhas much more spiritual fulfillment and meaning, and פשטis too dry and remote. יז:ר' יוסף קרא ש"א א ומדרש.אין צריך להביא ראיה ממקום אחר ולא מדרש כי תורה תמימה ניתנה תמימה נכתבה ולא תחסר כל בה אבל מי שאינו יודע פשוטו של מקרא ונוטה לו אחר מדרשו של דבר דומה לזה.חכמינו כדי להגדיל תורה ו יאדיר ואלו שם לב לדבר ה' היה חוקר אחר פשר דבר ופשוטו.ואוחז כל אשר יעלה בידו להינצל...ששטפהו שבולת הנהר .ומוצא If you only know מדרשand don’t know פשט, it’s like being swept up by the current of the river and not knowing how to save yourself. If you actually care about the word of G-d, you’d study פשט. - 45 - בס"ד Kandel רשב"ם רשב"ם, ’רש"יs grandson (1080-1160), tried to continue ’רש"יs tradition when he thought that רש"יdidn’t follow פשטcompletely. The most famous one is the one on ויהי ערב ויהי בקר. Of course, the רשב"םwas a very pious individual, and did not intend to challenge ( הלכהhe was, after all, a ')בעל התוס, so he was always respected. (On the other hand, ראב"עdidn’t feel sure enough of his credentials to interpret תנ"ךin contradiction to הלכה.) רשב"םoften used דרך ארץto interpret פסוקים. He also offers anti-Christological arguments. We’ll look at one place where his purpose is תשובה למינים, י:מט: לא יסור שבט מיהודה ומחקק מבין רגליו עד כי יבוא שילה ולא יקהת עמים. This פסוקisn’t clear; if you say that שילהis משיח, and the subject of יבואis שילה, then when =שילהMessiah=Jesus comes, there will be no more Jewish sovereignty. המלכות הניתן לו להשתחות לו כל אחיו שנים עשר לא תפסוק ממנו כל אותה הגדולה ולא- לא יסור שבט מיהודה כלומר עד כי יבא מלך יהודה הוא רחבעם בן שלמה שבא לחדש,מחוקק ושררה מזרעו עד כי יבא יהודה שילה אבל אז יסורו עשרת השבטים ממנו וימליכו את ירבעם ולא נשאר לרחבעם בן. שזהו קרוב לשכם,המלוכה בשילה :שלמה רק יהודה ובנימין ולבסוף מפרש כל אילו,וש כם אצל שילה כדכת' ביהושוע ויאסוף יהושוע [את] כל [שבטי] ישראל שכמה וכל הפרשה וגם.'הדברים היו לפני י"י בשילה וגם בשופטים הנה חג י"י בשילה [וגו'] למסילה העולה [מ]בית אל שכמה וגו וקרקע חלקה היה בשכם סביב האלה אשר עם שכם הראויה.בירמיה ויבאו האנשים משכם [משלו] ומשמרון שאין כתוב כי אם שילה שם. ופשט זה תשובה למינין.להתקבץ שם בני אדם ולכבוד משכן אשר בשילה הסמוך שם .העיר רשב"םsays that this פסוקis talking about רחבעם, who comes to שילה. It’s a little bit forced, as the reader can decide for himself—in the context of ’יעקבs blessings, it probably has an eschatological meaning. This interpretation is the crux of the argument between the Jews and the Christians—the Christians claim that G-d’s promises to the Jews have been fulfilled and abandoned, whereas the Jews say that they haven’t. ר' יוסף בכור שור ( ר' יוסף בכור שורd. at the beginning of 13th century) draws heavily on context (e.g. עשרת הדברותand the בריתafter ;)עגל הזהבlike most פשטנים, he tends towards the rational (e.g., רשב"םsays that ותהי נציב מלחrefers to the city ר' יוסף בכור שור ;סדםexplains that נציב מלח means that she was frozen in shock and then was covered in salt). He says that פוטיפרand פוטיפרעwere the same person; if פרעהbecame deposed, יוסףwas afraid that פוטיפרwould claim his as a slave again, so he married ’פוטיפרs daughter so that he would be a son-inlaw. He also says that אהרןmade the עגל הזהבsince he thought that it was preferable that he make it than that the Jews would make another leader that would clash with משה רבנו when he came down from הר סיני. Like the רשב"ם, he looks at legal texts in non-halakhic ways; for example, ר' יוסף בכור שורsays that a slave goes free on ( שמיטהnot after his seventh year of servitude) since no one needs a slave on שמיטהanyway. He’s also aggressively anti-Christological and attacks Christian programmatic statements. ומהפכין...ובכא נשברו זרועם של אומות העולם שאומרים על מה שאמר משה רבינו אלגורי"א הם כלומ חידה ומשל לא עשה כן לכל... מגיד דבריו ליעקב:הנבואה לדבר אחר ומוציאין הדבר ממשמעותו לגמרי ועליהם אמר דוד לא נתן להם הקב"ה לב לדעת לעיניים לראות ואוזניים,שאף על פי שהעתיקו את התורה מלשון הקודם ללשונם...גוי .)ח:לשמוע אלא מהפכין הדברים למה שאינם (במ' יב Non-Jews are fundamentally unable to understand ;תורהthey mess everything up and make it all allegories. והם, אלהים שאוכלים ושותין אותו אין בו ממש,לתשובת המינין שמלעיגים על אותה שתייה אמור להם בכאן רמז .)כ:הנוצרים אוכלים בשר תרפותם והם שותי דמו בכל [ה]שנה (שמ' לב - 46 - בס"ד Kandel It’s ridiculous for Christians to argue against Moshe feeding the Jews the dust from the עגל, since they eat their own =עגלgod=wafer. This is a strikingly aggressive attack; there are reports from Christian sources that Jews actively and intentionally provoked Christians (there’s a story that a Jew traveling with a Christian told him that it would be better to relieve himself on a cross than on a bush, since G-d spoke to Moshe through a bush). In the 12th century, some have argued that all groups became somewhat less forward in their attacks on others. Broader Trends Avraham Grossman says that there are three causes of the rise of פשטin the 12th century: 1) Contact with Spanish Jews (as opposed to German Jews, French Jews knew about ( ראב"עwho traveled all over the place, getting as far as England), דונש בן לברט, and )מנחם אבן סרוק. 2) 12th-Century Renaissance: There were many doubts about long-held religious belief; Christians began to question relics and miracles. In parallel, Jews start turning towards פשט. Especially by Andrew in the school of St. Victor, Christians start understanding “ מקראad litteram”, or literally. This could be because of a few reasons: A) To understand the allegory, you have to understand the literal meaning of the text; B) The literal meaning is important on its own. Christian scholars often contacted Jewish scholars (including )רשב"םwho can help them overcome the problems caused by the text of the Vulgate. It’s possible that these discussions between Jews and Christians helped lead the Jews to try to understand the תנ"ךliterally. 3) Jewish-Christian Polemic: If the bulk of Christological readings are allegorical, Jews have to offer something completely different; מדרשיreadings were too close to allegory to counter the Christian readings. Andrew of St. Victor even accepted that the ) עבד הסובל (ישעיה נגwas not Jesus, for which he was suitably criticized. By the end of the 12th century, life in France got worse for Jews; by that time, the Jews were wondering about why they were chosen, and פשטjust didn’t do it for them. Jewish-Christian Polemic One of the things the Jews had to respond to is Christian claims about the תורה. The real purpose of the literature is to preach to the flock of whoever wrote the polemics (it’s not so likely that a Jew would read a Christian work or vice-versa). :28 ניצחון ישן A certain apostate argued that the Hebrew verse, “Until Shilo comes and to him…” constitutes an acrostic for Jesus…astray. David Berger talks about two forms of polemic: Genuine polemic and exegetical polemic. Genuine polemic reflects the core issues that divide the disputants; exegetical polemic is just how to read פסוקים, but doesn’t have a real effect on the faith of the disputants. “The scepter…name?” These deal with real issues that divide the Jews and Christians; he claims that שילהisn’t Jesus at all. “Moreover, …safely.” - 47 - בס"ד Kandel According to the Christian interpretation, the prophecy refers to the end of G-d’s promises, but it’s clear that God’s promises refer even to after the cessation of Davidic monarchy. “If he will tell you…David?” This points out that if Jesus were the son of G-d, he can’t be of Davidic descent; if he were the son of Joseph, he can’t be the son of G-d. “Moreover, it is written…together.” This shows that the prophecies about the Jewish people have not been fulfilled through Jesus; the Jews still can and must wait for the fulfillment of the prophecies. “The final section…all.” Even if שילהis משיח, the מחוקקis communal ruler, which hasn’t happened. “Moreover...quiet.” שילהmeans “peace and quiet”, which clearly hasn’t happened yet. After the first paragraph, the tone shifts to serious; this was genuine polemic that was crucial for the Jews. This is characteristic of the 12th century, when Jews felt comfortable to debate Christians openly and unabashedly. Philip Augustus and the Jews Jews were welcomed by the Carolingian monarchs, but by the 15th century, they were expelled from many places; we’ll explore this trajectory. We’ve examined Henry IV’s legislation to protect Jews, but that it also made the Jews stand out as a separate group. This does have implications for Jewish political status. Philip Augustus reigned over Ile-de-France, a pretty small area; when he expelled Jews in 1182, it was only temporary. However, the expulsion does tell us about how the Christians perceived Jews. First, we’ll examine the reason that Philip Augustus expelled the Jews: 1) Ritual Murder: The first claim against the Jews is that the Jews killed a Christian and crucified him. (We’ll examine where this belief came from and why it took hold.) 2) Almost as soon as King Philip ascended the throne, he took a lot of money from the Jews. Some suggest that this is in reaction to his father’s pro-Jewish policies toward the Jews. William Jordan points out that the French monarchies used their Jewish policies to expand their power throughout France—the kings claimed they were personally responsible for the Jews’ protection. 3) Before 1182, it seemed that there was a substantial Jewish presence in Paris; it seems that it was certainly livable. 4) The Jews were moneylenders. Although technically, the Jews could lend money at interest since Christians were considered לנכרי תשיך ולאחיך לא תשיך (דב' ( נכרי )כא:)כג, it was disturbing to Christians to be considered נכריים. They could also hold Christians in prison. The economy at this time was shifting from an agrarian economy to a capitalist economy. This changes the purpose of lending: In an agrarian economy, you only borrow money if you have a major disaster; in a capitalist economy, everyone borrowed money. However, people’s attitudes were still old-fashioned—they didn’t appreciate the value that lending money had, and - 48 - בס"ד Kandel still associated it with taking advantage of people who fell on hard times. Another reason for popular disgust with usury was that interest was viewed as paying for time, which was bad, since time really belongs to G-d (even clocks aroused suspicion). Also, subsistence loans made the lower strata of the economy really unhappy with the Jews. (Jordan further suggests that the kids of the poor people were imbued early with a hatred of Jews and usury.) 5) They caused their Christian servants to Judaize. This is an old complaint, but almost every charter to the Jews emphasized that the Jews can have Christian servants. 6) They own half the city. 7) They took Christian sancta as collateral and supposedly abused them (used the holy cups to drink with, etc.). This was like adding insult to injury. Then, Philip cancelled all debts to the Jews, and took a fifth of the money for themselves. This has doubly good effects—everyone’s happy with the king, and the king gets lots of money! Also, the king’s tallage from the Jews came from money taken from moneylending. This was a great move by Philip: When the Jews were allowed to lend money, Philip taxed the Christians indirectly through the tallage; then, when he took away all of the money, he got a cut of the debts anyway. Although the גמראdoesn’t recommend lending money at interest, ' תוסsay that it’s permissible: אלא בכדי, וכן בגר תושב! אמר רב חייא בריה דרב הונא לא נצרכא, לוין מהן ומלוין אותם ברבית: איתיביה:ב"מ ע .חייו ומה שנהגו עתה להלוות לנכרים אור"ת משום דבשל סופרים הלך אחר המיקל וקי"ל כאידך:תוס' שם ד"ה תשיך ולא אסרו מעולם רב נחמן ורב הונא רבית דנכרי! ואפי' ללישנא,לישנא דמתני הא דרב הונא אברייתא דרב יוסף . לפי שיש עלינו מס מלך ושרים והכל הוי כדי חיינו,קמא יש להתיר ועוד שאנו שרויין בין האומות ואי אפשר לנו להשתכר בשום דבר אם לא נישא וניתן עמהם הלכך אין לאסור רבית .שמא ילמוד ממעשיו יותר משאר משא ומתן Since we don’t know when we’ll have a crazy pogrom, any amount of money is considered necessary. The Jews were then allowed to sell their moveable property at a loss, but the king got all of the real estate. Ritual Murder Accusations What about the idea that Jews crucified Christian children? In 1096, the Christians claimed that the Jews were guilty of deicide; by 1182, the Jews were supposed to pose a danger to Christians in the present! What happened?! The first ritual murder accusation was made in 1144 in Norwich by Thomas of Monmaith. A child named William was found dead; this wasn’t so surprising, since there were many opportunities for children to meet their untimely death (accidents, no swimming lessons, no antibiotics). Thomas claimed that a Jew told him that every year, there is an international council of Jews where they chose from where to kill a child by Easter. Cohen points out that William the Conqueror took over England in 1066; in Norwich in particular, the Normans really started oppressing the local Saxons. Thomas of Monmaith heals that fissure by making a scapegoat of the Jews, so the Saxons and Normans could join together over their common Christianity and hatred of Jews. (This theory is also supported by the language of Thomas’ claim, which talked in the language of Christian unity.) - 49 - בס"ד Kandel However, this theory doesn’t explain the spread of the accusation, like the accusation in Blois in 1171. In Blois, the accusation was accepted by the government, which executed 21 Jews—even though there was no body produced! (The Christians claimed that a Jewish tanner threw the body into the river.) Yisrael Yuval suggests that the Christians believed these stories since the Christians heard that Jews killed their own children in the First Crusade in order to arouse G-d’s vengeance and cursed Christians, and so believed that Jews also killed Christians. This is problematic, since we actually don’t have evidence that Jews killed their children in order to arouse G-d’s vengeance. However, it is possible that the Jews’ killing their children in order to save them from conversion could have convinced the Christians that the Jews also killed Christians. 2nd Crusade Bernard of Clairvaux says that he should not kill Jews because God will take care of “mine enemies.” Ephraim of Bonn is still thankful to Bernard for not killing Jews. Peter the Venerable is even more extreme—he says that Jews are worse than Muslims, since they don’t think that Jesus was holy, and so we should kill Jews. However, Scripture forbids us to kill Jews, so the Jews should pay their interest for the Crusades. Chazan says that there are three developments: 1) Jews are enemies; 2) Moneylending is an expression of that enmity; 3) Jews kill Christian kids. These developments help us understand why Philip was happy to kick the Jews out of his rule. Church Attitudes Towards Jews In 1205, Pope Innocent III wrote a letter to Philip Augustus (King of France) with complaints about his treatment of the Jews. 1) Augustinian Doctrine: Innocent III opens his letter with his desire that the Jews should serve under the Christians, in accordance with the Augustinian Doctrine. However, he’s not happy that the Jews are being so obstinate as to not convert, and the Jews must be downtrodden. 2) Usury: At that time, the Jews were charging usury and taking pledges. 3) Christian servants: The Jews use their servants to do difficult and hard tasks that aren’t very nice. 4) Christian witnesses aren’t believed against Jews; the Jewish-issued, royallybacked loan documents are believed over Christian witnesses. This law was made by Louis, but the King can revoke that. 5) The Jews made new synagogues that were taller than churches; it was nominally allowed to make synagogues, but not bigger than the churches. 6) The Jews make fun of Jesus, especially on Good Friday and Easter. (Easter was traditionally a time of heightened tensions between Jews and Christians due to its connection with the Passion. There was a traditionally one Jew that was slapped once a year on Easter; Nuremberg, in Communities of Violence, says that that helped the communities stay cool the rest of the year. Cecil Roth and Horowitz both claim that Purim was a violent holiday; Jews often hanged effigies of המן, - 50 - בס"ד Kandel which could be easily confused with the תלוי, or Jesus. If Easter was early and Purim late, that could intensify the juxtaposition.) Phillip, in return, decided to reduce usury from 70% to 42%; that puts him ahead on both fronts—he can still let the Jews lend money, and he gets the Pope off his back. At the 4th Lateran Council in 1215, there were a number of promulgations: 1) Canon 67 says that the Jews must continue to pay tithes on land taken from Christians. 2) Jews can’t take ‘immoderate’ usury. 3) Canon 68 imposes a dress code on the Jews so that they’ll be distinct from nonJews. The putative purpose of this was to stop interfaith relations. David Niremberg pointed out that the Christians were careful to make a distinction between Jews and Christians—although Jews and Christians could have contact with each other, prostitutes were strictly limited to members of their own faith. It appears that Christians saw prostitutes as representatives of the Christian body politic; if she were to become contaminated, every Christian man could become contaminated. To stop the Jews from becoming mixed up with the Christian men and taking advantage of Christian prostitutes, they had to dress differently. (Muslims and Jews, for their part, upheld their end of the bargain; their members weren’t supposed to use Christian prostitutes.) 4) Jews were prohibited from going outside from three days before Easter. (This is a response to the charge that the Jews blaspheme Jesus.) Nicolas Donin and the Trial of the Talmud In 1236, Nicolas Donin approached Pope Gregory IX with a series of complaints about the Talmud. The Jews say that Nicolas was excommunicated of the Jews before he was an apostate. It’s unclear why; some suggest that he was influenced by the Karaites, or that he was a big fan of the רמב"םand was a victim of the Maimonidian conflict. The Church was receptive of the claims that said that the Talmud was bad, since the Church in general was interested in blotting out heresy. The claims against the Talmud were: 1) Blasphemous against Jesus and Mary; 2) Jews were Talmudic Jews, not Biblical; 3) Superstitious; 4) Discriminates against Christians. In 1242, there was a trial of the Talmud in Paris with ר' יחיאל מפריזrepresenting the Jews. ר' יחיאל, in his attempt to cancel the trial, pointed out that Jerome knew the Talmud and its sages, so there’s no reason to make up charges now. Needless to say, this technique fell flat. We have two records of the debate, one in Hebrew and one in Latin. The Hebrew account, of course, puts a much more positive spin on the Jewish side; the Latin side says that ר' יחיאלwasn’t so impressive. ר' יחיאלsays that עכו"םin the תלמודdoesn’t refer to Christians; also, ישו הנצריisn’t the same Jesus as Christians worship (this is obviously specious). It’s unclear exactly what’s at stake—is it that the Talmud is blasphemous against Christianity, or that the Jews aren’t Biblical Jews? If the problem is that the Jews are Talmudic and not Biblical Jews, then - 51 - בס"ד Kandel Jeremy Cohen claims that the Jews are no longer witnesses to the truth of the Bible, and so they have no more right to live in Christendom. Cohen claims further that the reason that Christians devoted so many resources to converting Jews in the following 100 years is that the Jews didn’t deserve any more protection under the Augustinian doctrine. Robert Chazan, on the other hand, says that the problem is with the contents of the Talmud; the missionary efforts were a natural outgrowth of the Christian church. Jordan claims that the major problem with the Talmud was its blasphemous comments towards Mary. The Talmud was declared to have lost the debate, and 24 cartloads of manuscripts were burned. At some time after that, the Jews went to the Pope and said that Jewish life is dependent on the Talmud, and the Jews were always allowed to have copies of the Talmud (after censoring certain passages); why shouldn’t they be allowed to have Talmud now? (This implies that the problem with the Talmud was just the blasphemous passages, not the broader ‘Talmudic Jews’ claim.) This turn of events also points to a broader trend in Jewish history—the Jews went to the Pope for protection, not their local lords or kings. מהר"ם רוטנבורגwas a student in Paris26 at the time the Talmud was burned, and wrote a )'שאלי שרופה באש'( קינהabout the burning. .גויליך...שאלי שרופה באש לשלום אבליך מהר"ם רוטנברגaddresses the Talmud in the second-person feminine; he also seems to be comparing the burning of the Talmud to the חרבן. .בגחליך..הולכים חשכים .משליך...עד אן It’s interesting that he assumes that the Talmud was given on סיני. .שמליך...משל למלך אשר בכה The מלךis השם, and the Talmud is His son who died. (This also has polemical significance; the son of God who died is the Talmud, not Jesus.) .אציליך...,אוריד דמעות עדי יהיו כנחל The אציליםwere משהand אהרן. ואשאל היש תורה חדשה: This is an obvious swipe at the Christian “New Testament.” These two hints show that מהר"ם רוטנבורגis actively fighting Christian claims. Susan Einbeinder has argued that the reason that he addressed the Talmud as a secondperson feminine is due to the influence of apostrophic love poems. However, the קינהis grouped with the קינות ציון. This is strange— ר' יהודה הלויisn’t influenced by French Romantic poetry, obviously; however, Northern French Jewry was open to Spanish culture, and it’s possible that the Northern French Jews wrote in the style of קינות ציון more than the style of romantic poetry. The extent of the catastrophe isn’t so clear—did it really lead to the end of the Tosafist movement? The center of learning was, after all, in France. Haim Soloveitchik argues that the Tosafist movement was past its prime anyway by the 13th century, and was undergoing a period of consolidation and editing. He also says that the burning of the Talmud didn’t actually stop the creativity of the בעלי התוספות. 26 Contrast that to רש"י, who went to Germany from France to study. - 52 - בס"ד Kandel Popular Attitudes Towards Jews In York, in 1190, Richard the Lion-Hearted went on Crusade. When Christians go on crusades, Jews get attacked and taxed. If this had happened in 1096, the Jews would’ve committed suicide; in 1190, the Jews agreed to baptism, but they were killed anyway, and their loan documents were burned (to prevent the king from collecting their debt). This shows that the hatred towards the Jews was exacerbated by the Jewish practice of moneylending. The first blood libel accusation was in Fulda, Germany (1232). Ritual murder accusations said that Jews habitually kill Christians, and is associated with Easter; blood libels take this a step further and say that Jewish law requires killing kids, and were associated with ( פסחbaking )מצות. Frederic II called a conference of apostate Jews to investigate the claim. The apostates told him that the claim was nonsense. The pope also came out against the claim. However, the claim stuck so much that some German Jews don’t even use red wine at the סדר, and some הגדותcensor ואמר לך בדמיך חיי ואמר לך בדמיך חיי. The claim of blood libels obviously assumes that Jews were dangerous to Christians. The first ‘host desecration’ accusation was in Paris in 1290.27 It claimed that Jews took one of the wafers of Mass and tried to destroy it by stabbing it, boiling it, circumcising it, etc. The reason this accusation caught on is that it was an outgrowth of the acceptance of the doctrine of transubstantiation. In the story, the woman debtor claimed that the Jew would forgive her loan if she brought the wafer to the Jew. In many other stories, the connection between the wafer and the Jew was Christian female domestic help, which underscores the uneasiness Christians have with Jewish employing Christians. A reason the claim caught on is that once scholastics had made all Christian doctrine logical, the Jews should’ve caught on and converted. (They didn’t because they were unintelligent or in league with the Devil.) The Christians were harboring secret doubts about the truth of transubstantiation. The host desecration charge ‘proves’ that the Jews were witnesses to the truth of transubstantiation, so the Christians should believe that, too. Langmore argues further that these claims represent the first example of antiSemitism (defined as anti-rational, as opposed to the previous anti-Judaism, which was non-rational (like claiming that Jews were lazy because they rest on ))שבת. However, this argument seems a little weak—it seems pretty possible that Jews could have desecrated the wafer, so it’s a little odd to say that the host desecration accusation was the most anti-rational claim of the Christians. In 1298, the host desecration claim led to massacres; in the 14th century, the Black Death led to mass expulsions of Jews. These differences emphasize the changes that had come across popular perceptions of Jews from the time of Louis to the 14th century. 27 Ariel Toaff wrote a book that claimed that Jews actually admitted to ritual murders during the Inquisition. Many other historians wrote in response that you can’t use forced confessions to tell us about what people actually did. Toaff’s claim was also very provocative and made people uneasy; this, of course, raises questions about where historians’ loyalties lie. For example, David Niremberg argues that ritualized anti-Jewish violence helped to make a cohesive community; it’s unclear if he could get away with that if he weren’t Jewish. (Toaff’s thesis may also reflect a maturation of the field of Jewish history and overcoming the inhibitions that they had about portraying Jews in unfavorable light.) - 53 - בס"ד Kandel How did the Jews react? In some instances, Jews accepted the negative stereotypes—in ספר ניצחון ישן, the author says that Jews are ugly and dark since their parents conceived them modestly, in the dark; Christians are the opposite. Also, there are medieval pictures of עשוhunting a rabbit, not a goat. Also, there are several הגדותwith pictures of a hare-hunt. This seems to be a representation of the Christian practice to hunt hares, but it seems odd to have it on the first page of the הגדה. In German, a hare-hunt is Jagen-has (=)יקנה"ז. That’s pretty cute. In addition, the Jews would identify with the hare, but some pictures show that the rabbits escape the snare, symbolizing the Jews’ escape from persecution. Also, rabbits (a negative image) symbolize fecundity, which shows another difference between Jews and Christians— Christians are celibate, whereas Jews aren’t. Therefore, it seems that the Jews did indeed appropriate the symbol of the rabbit. Also, the picture of עשוhunting rabbits symbolize the Christian hunting Jews, and show express the Jewish hope that השםwould save the Jews ( שפך חמתך על הגוים אשר לא ידעוך )ואשר בשמך לא קראו. The הגדהwas widely circulated, and many Jews identified with it. By 1306, Philip the Fair expelled the Jews for several centuries. The Holy Roman Empire couldn’t expel Jews, but the Jews were expelled from many German towns; Jewish life centered on Eastern Europe. England expelled Jews in 1290. All these ominous developments show that the Jews suffered a serious decline in reputation. Provence The Provencal community was old and well-established, as opposed to the community in Northern France. Also, their relations with their Christian neighbors were better than the relations between the northern French community and their Christian neighbors. Chazan claims that the anti-Jewish feeling in northern France is due in part to the fact that the Jews were immigrants. Provencal Jews were physicians and moneylenders, but in southern France, Jewish moneylending was not looked upon with such hostility and were often appreciated. We know, for example, that the rates of interest charged by Jewish moneylenders in southern France were 20-30%, whereas in northern France, it was more like 70%. It’s possible that moneylending in northern France was riskier (due to random tallages and capricious taxes), but in southern France, it was more stable, so they could charge lower rates, which led to more stability. Provence is between southern France and northern Spain. In terms of Jewish History, Provence normally includes all of Southern France/Languedoc south of the Loire. Pre12th century Provencal culture was mostly centered on the Talmud, and they didn’t have access to philosophical texts. When they had questions, they sent them to Germany and Northern France (they also sometimes immigrated to Northern France from Southern France). Therefore, the Provencal culture was much closer to Northern Europe than Spain. However, in 1148, the Almohades invaded Spain, which kicked out the Jews and brought their ‘golden age’ culture and philosophy to Provence. The ibn Tibbon and Kimchi family both began translating Arabic works at this time. They translated אמונות ודעות, רבנו בחיה, שלמה אבן גבירול, etc. Then, Samuel ibn Tibbon finally got to the Aristotelian works, including the מורה, in an effort to bring the world of philosophic rationalism to the Provencal community. - 54 - בס"ד Kandel The main Halakhist from Provence is the ראב"ד. He is often called the בעל ההשגות, which he wrote on the רי"ףand the רמב"ם. When he writes on the רמב"ם, he normally defends Provencal traditions from the Spaniard רמב"ם. The מאיר"יcalls the ’גדול המחברים‘ רמב"ם and the ’גדול המפרשים‘ ראב"ד. Unfortunately for the ראב"ד, the Provencal community wasn’t inherited by anyone the same way that the German community became the Polish community and the Mediterranean community inherited the Spanish community, so much of its traditions were lost. In Provence, the Provencal Talmudic traditions were under attack, and the Qabbalistic community and the philosophic community also caused much tension with each other. Maimonidean Controversy The controversy over the רמב"םhad three major parts: 1) תחית המתים: 1180’s: This focused on the ’רמב"םs view on resurrection. This was started by the ( רמ"הR. Meir Abulafia). ר' יונתן הכהן מלונילand ששת בן אייזק בן מנוצא )?( both defended the רמב"םincorrectly; ששתsaid that the רמב"םdidn’t believe in resurrection, and ר' יונתןsaid that the רמב"םsaid that there would be a stage in which the soul would be resurrected with the body. The רמב"םwrote מאמר תחית המתים, where he said that there would be a period in which souls would be resurrected with their bodies, and after that, the souls would go on to עולם הבא. When ר' יונתן הכהןgot the letters from רמ"ה, it was an interesting situation—the ר"י, a Provencal figure, asked how the רמ"הcould ask on the רמב"ם, and the רמ"ה said that he never intended to disrespect the רמב"ם. This is important because it shows the importance of the belief in Resurrection to that time. 2) 1230-1232: This is the major question of anti-rationalism vs. rationalism. Both groups are found and based in Provence. ( ר' שלמה בן אברהם מן ההרsometimes referred to as the רשב"א, but not the ר' שלמא בן אדרתwe know and love) said that too much philosophy leads to a lack of observance (‘philosophic antinomianism’). He and ר' יונה מגרונהwere the leading figures to get a ban on philosophic rationalism. The rationalists, including the רד"ק, claimed that this isn’t true. The anti-rationalists claimed that the philosophers took non-authentic, Greek ideas and imposed them on Judaism. The rationalists countered that the rationalist-hunters took the Christian, simple-minded idea of heresy and applied it to Judaism. The anti-rationalists sent ( ר' יונהfrom Spain, studied in Provence and Ashkenaz) to explain to the ' בעלי התוסthat the rationalists wanted to get rid of learning גמראand held the ' בעלי התוסin disdain. The ' בעלי התוסbanned the rationalists, and the rationalists banned the anti-rationalists. The rationalists sent the ( רד"קwho was elderly at this time) to Spain to try to get them to support the rationalist position in Provence. However, Spain had changed, and there were many anti-rationalists even in Spain. This is partly due to the movement for social reform in Spain (a leader of the community gave himself a remittance for taxes). Many social reformers were mystics and moralizers. The רמב"ןwas involved in this controversy. Even though he was a mystic, however, he couldn’t imagine doing what the ' בעלי התוסdid and ban the מורהand ספר המדע. The רמב"ןsaid that there should be no ban on the anti-rationalists, but it would be schismatic to ban the רמב"ם, also. At this time, the news arrived that the מורהand ספר המדעhad been burned by the Papal Inquisition in Provence. At this point, everyone took a step - 55 - בס"ד Kandel back. The rationalists accused the anti-rationalists of giving over the ’רמב"םs works to the Church. (Some claimed that the burning of the Talmud in 1242 was punishment מדה כנגד מדהfor burning the ’רמב"םs books.) 3) 1303-1306: By the dawn of the 14th century, philosophic rationalism became part of Provencal Jewry—they read even Averroes and Aristotle. The anti-rationalist forces were led by ר' אבא מרי בן משה, and the rationalist forces were led by the מאיר"י. Some, like Shmuel ibn Tibbon, said that the רמב"םreally held that philosophic rationalism was the main hold on the רמב"ם, and so when there was a conflict, he held like rationalism. אבא מריand מאיר"יboth didn’t like that reading, however. The problem was that there was growing philosophical-allegorical reading of תורה. אבא מריfelt that this was very dangerous, and went to the רשב"א in Barcelona to get involved. However, the רשב"אdid make a ban on his own area (it did not expand to Provence) that had two major aspects: A ban on the philosophical allegorical interpretation of Scripture, and not learning non-Jewish philosophy under the age of 25. The מאיר"יcountered that the רשב"אwas a Qabbalist who didn’t believe in philosophical rationalism in any case. In addition, there’s no reason to have the ban—it won’t be effective, and furthermore, the רמב"םwrote philosophy! Why is the philosophy of Aristotle טרף, but the ’רמב"םs is OK? (In any case, most people didn’t encourage young kids to learn philosophy.) In 1306, there was an expulsion from southern France, so the controversy was never resolved. For Medieval Jews, philosophy was the same as science; the dispute never really went away. Christian Spain There’s a lot to talk about before the Expulsion. The Christian Reconquista—1248, Saragossa Fell; by 1212, the Christians already controlled a lot of it, and by 1492, they conquered Grenada, the last Muslim outpost. This fuelled an expansionist and militaristic Christendom, which was interested in dominating the Spanish peninsula. The Christians were interested in making Europe completely Christian and kicking out the Muslims. We would expect that the Christianity that resulted would be militant, conversionary, and pretty strict, but it wasn’t at first. Spain was the only place in Europe where there was a non-Jewish minority (Muslims). This tradition of multiculturalism, or convivencia, helped temper the extreme elements in Christianity. When the Muslims conquered Spain in 711, they helped the Jews, since they were helpful to the Muslims, and the Jews became high-level officers. In the 13th century, the major fight was between Christendom and Muslim-dom. After the Christians won, they were afraid that the Muslims would rebound. The Christians, after they conquered Spain, had to govern the indigenous Jewish populations, and they invited them into Saragossa and Toledo, which made the Christians (at least temporarily) not interested in oppressing the Jews too much. The Jews were now known as Aljamas. They offered the Jews fueros, or special charters, to encourage the Jews to come. The Jews were claimed as the property of the king, so when the Pope said to one of the Spanish monarchs that the Jews should wear an identifying badge to avoid unintentional sexual contact between Jews and Christians, the monarch replied that he didn’t want his Jewish subjects to run away to Grenada. In some municipalities, the Jews produced 30- - 56 - בס"ד Kandel 65% of the revenue. However, as the municipalities become more powerful, the Jews get caught in the middle as violence erupted when both the king and the municipalities both wanted to claim the Jews as their own. In the 12th century, the Archbishop of Toledo got a bunch of scholars to translate all sorts of philosophical works from Arabic into Latin, and they used Jews to help do that. This is representative of the philosophical and literary cultural exchange between the Christians and Jews (especially in Toledo, where Abraham ibn Daud was). קבלה The Jews living in Spain were influenced by the models of Christian Europe, as evidenced by the spread of mysticism into the Spanish Jewish culture. קבלהmeans ‘reception’. It’s also known as תורת הסוד, and was studied by cabals (which is a nice דרשה, but has nothing to do with )קבלה. There are many different types of mysticism. The Tannaitic mysticism was ( היכלותlike ר' ישמעל כהן גדול, who heard stuff ר' עקיבא ;)מאחורי הפרגודand ספר יצירהwere other early mystical figures. Spain was the birthplace of ( ר' יצחק סגי נהור ;ספירותson of the )ראב"דalso was a major mystic. The רמב"ן was a conservative mystic, and his סודcomments are unintelligible unless you know what he’s talking about. ר' עזראof Gerona also had a private קבלהschool; ספר הבהירis another difficult work. However, by the time of the 13th century, Kabbalistic ideas were disseminated much more publicly than they had been in the past. Arthur Green claims that the spread of Jewish mysticism was intended to fight against the Christian mystical doctrines of the same time. This would mean that the mysticism is polemical, and is intended to work against the attractiveness of Christian mysticism. Taken to an extreme, Green would suggest that ר' שמעון בר יוחאיand his disciples are meant to take the place of Jesus and his apostles. Green also claims that קבלהwas meant to counter the influence of philosophical rationalism, so its leaders started to spread it so that the masses wouldn’t fall to philosophy ר"ל. This brings us to the זהר, which Moshe de Leon claimed was an old Tannaitic manuscript. However, almost everything about the text implies a 13th century background, whether or not he wrote all of it. It is possible that it contains old mystical ideas, but the form it takes is from the 13th century. Prof. Isadore Twersky argues that there are three curricular roads. The most widely traveled road is that of הלכהand גמרא, which is a prerequisite for getting attention. To get behind the הלכה, philosophers and mystics both ask what the purpose of it is, but they get different answers. Neoplatonists ask how the infinite G-d can relate to a finite and mutable world, and posit a series of emanations, the lowest of which relate to the world. The Qabbalists who like ( ספירותSefirotic Qabbalists) posit a system of ספירות. At the top of the diagram, there is כתר. Below them are חכמה and בינה, which are the masculine and feminine parts of it. חכמהemanated בינה, and בינה gestated and gave birth to all of the other ספירות. They then created תפארתand מלכות, which are the masculine and feminine parts of G-d. - 57 - בס"ד Kandel כתר בינה חכמה גבורה חסד תפארת For rationalist philosophers, the purpose of ( תפלהand most other )מצוותis the effect it has on the one who prays. However, it doesn’t really seem like that’s what תפלהdoes in תנ"ך. For the Qabbalists, תפלהis made לשם ייחוד קודשא בריך הוא, to unite G-d. That is, the purpose of prayers is to have an effect on G-d. This has the benefit of making people always do מצוות, since the purpose of the מצוותalways has to be done; you can’t get out of it by claiming that you already have a refined perception of G-d. For example, רס"גsays that we have שבתsince it makes sense to rest, and the תורהspecified which day (better than working for seven and resting for one), but the details aren’t really so important. However, for the Qabbalists, the details are hugely important. This brings us to כגוונא. שכינהis the last (seventh) emanation of בינה, and unites with its masculine counterpart תפארת. Each one has angels to help it reunite. She separates from the Other Side, which is the ספירותthat emanated that are completely judgment, and they threaten to destroy both the world and שכינה. )שבת=( שכינהis crowned to face the king ()תפארת, which is based on the אגדהthat ר' חנינאand ר' ינאיwould prepare to greet the שבת. Since there’s no סטרא אחראon שבת, sinners are given respite on שבת. When we do our preparations for שבת, we help שכינהget ready for its reunifications with תפארת. Philosophers claim that a נשמה יתירהmeans that we get something to help us think or something, but the מקובליםtake it literally. This gives us a completely different meaning for —מצוותfor the Qabbalists, the details are important, since they help us help the Divine business up above. Social Aspects The conflict between Qabbalah and philosophic rationalism had social aspects, not just theological aspects. We have seen the development of factions in Spain, with רמב"ןand ר' יונהon one side, and the philosophers on the other. One aspect of the debate was the fight for control of the Spanish Jewish community. At the beginning of the 13th century, the philosophic rationalists were the heads of the Jewish community. However, the mystical faction decided that the philosophers weren’t leading the Jewish community appropriately, specifically in the area of morals: They had non-Jewish concubines, they shaved their beards, they didn’t have מזוזותor תפלין, and they weren’t worried about nonJews. (In אשכנז, the claimed reason that people didn’t have מזוזהis that they didn’t know - 58 - בס"ד Kandel which way to put it, so out of piety, they didn’t put it up at all.) In the year 1240, the סמ"ג went around preaching (this was also year 5000, so there were messianic expectations); one of the things he preached was that there should be מזוזותput up. Another thing that the reformers worried about was that the Jews were going to nonJewish court systems. This is a social and halakhic problem—the Jews had communal autonomy, and to invite non-Jews to get involved in that puts the entire system of autonomy in jeopardy. (It seems that the Spanish Jewish community was so independent that it had the power to put people to death.) The other critique that the reform faction made was that the rationalists used their position for their own advancement—they would ask for remittances and other things. ’ר' יונהs comments in שערי תשובהare meant against the social ills of his community. 'ר יונה, רמב"ן, and the רשב"אall seem to have been wealthy, and ר' יונהappreciated the ability of wealth to make communal figures not be susceptible to bribes. רמב"ן, for example, wrote poetry. James I of Aragon deposed the aristocratic, rationalist faction of the Jews and put the mystics in power. In 1280-81 in Toledo, many of the Jewish courtiers were killed by the king, and Todros b. Joseph Abulafia tried to implement a program of practical reform. He kicked out the Gentile women out of the Jewish quarter, railed against usury, tried to make people not swear, and tried to get rid of astrology. Astrology was thought of as scientific, and the fight against it implied that the exile was imposed by G-d, not the natural world. He wanted a בירורי עבירות, or ‘vice squad’, in an attempt to enforce moral uprightness among the community. He also instituted the בירורי תביעות, which was meant to go around and make sure that everyone used fair weights and measures. He also tried to fight against the employment of Muslim slave-girls in Jewish households, due to the danger of sexual impropriety that wouldn’t be prosecuted by the king. He said that if one had these maidservants, they must be dressed modestly, and if there were any sexual problems, they had to be freed. Breakdown of Convivencia The Church, led by the Franciscans and Dominicans, decided to try to proselytize the Jews and Muslims.28 Jeremy Cohen had argued that the Christian discovery of the Talmud abrogated the Augustinian Doctrine (the Jews weren’t Biblical Jews anymore), which let the Church start converting Jews. However, Chazan points out that there actually is nothing in the Augustinian Doctrine that outlaws conversions, so there’s no reason that they would need the abrogation of the Augustinian Doctrine. In 1242, the forced sermons started. The Jews would be gathered into the synagogue and listen to the preachers tell them how Christianity was the best and true religion, ח"ו. However, the Jews would often rebut the arguments of the preacher, and the preacher couldn’t do anything about it. 28 There was a movement that said that Christians, instead of being monastics, should live imitatio Christi, in imitation of Christ. The monasteries often devoted much of their time and energies to the management of their estates, so they sort of lost their attraction. Therefore, the Dominicans and Franciscans started becoming mendicant friars so that they would be more moral. - 59 - בס"ד Kandel The Disputation of the רמב"ן To correct this defect, the forced disputation was created. In 1263 in Barcelona, the רמב"ן was forced to dispute the apostate Pablo Christiani.29 Christiani played the same role that Nicolas Donin played in the 12th century debates: He used his knowledge of תלמודand תנ"ךto try to prove that the משיחalready came. We have two different accounts of the debate, one Christian and one Jewish (by the )רמב"ן. It’s unclear which one we should or can rely on; neither scribe was overly interested in presenting a dispassionate record of events. However, both accounts record roughly the same topics of discussion. It’s virtually impossible to determine which record is more accurate, but some claim that that’s missing the point of the debate—the point of the records was to have polemical texts, not to record the contents of the debate for posterity. The Christians now changed from trying to destroy the Talmud to trying to use the Talmud for their own advantage. This would be more effective than arguing Scripture since the Jews knew, studied, and followed Talmud. In addition, since the Christians didn’t believe that the Talmud was a sacred text, there was no worry that Christians would convert to Judaism after hearing the Jewish claims; on the other hand, when the Christians argued Scripture, there was always the worry that the Jewish side would be more convincing and would persuade Christians to convert. Part of the reason for the disputation of the רמב"ןcould have been that the Christians wanted to fine-tune their arguments to use against Jews in the future. Therefore, it seems that the goal of the disputation was didactic. In the ’רמב"ןs report of the disputation, he was very assertive and aggressive. It’s unclear whether or not he actually said all of these things in the presence of the king or if these statements were not actually said during the debate. David Berger argues that רמב"ןhad a good relationship with James I, and it’s very possible that the רמב"ןreally did have freedom to say whatever he wanted (this position does not necessarily mean that the account was a transcription). Chazan argues that it’s highly likely that the רמב"ןwould have been able to attack fundamental doctrines of Christianity, and it’s possible that he used literary license. However, if the goal of the רמב"ןis to tell the Jews how to respond to the accusations (for both actual and theoretical debates), then it doesn’t really matter what happened at the debate. Professor Berger suggests that things written down have a different sense than things said in person, so it’s possible that the רמב"ןcould have done things to cool down the tone of his report. Pablo Christiani set out to prove that the Messiah had already come. He tried to do this by using different אגדות. In some instances, the רמב"ןused these אגדותagainst him—for example, the רמב"ןclaims that the אגדהthat the משיחwas born on the day of the Destruction itself proves that the משיחcouldn’t be Jesus! Pablo used several different אגדות: There’s one that says that the משיחwas born on the day the ביה"מwas destroyed; there’s one that an ox lowed six times so that he said that the משיחwas born, etc. (The רמב"ןsaid the same thing.) On a more fundamental level, the רמב"ןclaims that we are all bound by the Bible and the Talmud. However, we are not bound by ;אגדותmoreover, there are many contradictory Although it’s possible that in the 12th century, the debate was initiated by Jews, by the 13 th century, they were initiated by Christians. 29 - 60 - בס"ד Kandel —אגדותthere’s also an אגדהthat says that the משיחwill be born close to the time of the redemption! It’s unclear to what extent the רמב"ןactually thought that אגדותaren’t binding. We could search the ’רמב"ןs writings to see what exactly he says, but the work hasn’t been done. The best work that’s been done is אהבה מגולה ותוכחה מסותרתby Bernard Septimus, in the volume edited by Isadore Twersky. After the debate, the רמב"ןrealized that he had to deal with the משיח, so he wrote ספר הגאולה. The רמב"ןargues that the messianic age will be very different from what it is now—no death, no suffering, etc. He argues that it can’t be that this world is a postMessianic world, and the Messianic age will be fundamentally different from what it is now (and so Jesus hadn’t fulfilled the prophecies of )ישעיה. The רמב"ןsays that the Jews suffer because we’re living in the era of the sixth millennium, corresponding to the sixth day, when the beasts were created. However, ultimately, G-d will come and redeem the Jewish people. Missionizing Activities The disputation of the רמב"ןwas a trial run for a broader missionizing program. Raymond Martini wrote Pugio Fidei (Daggers of Faith), which was a conversion manual for Christian preachers. In a response to the ’רמב"ןs claim, he stopped using so much אגדתיmaterial. Therefore, 1263 marked the beginning of Christian conversion activities. This was strengthened by the anti-Jewish attitudes and activities that started in the rest of Europe. Ferrant Martinez of Seville espoused particularly odious vitriol. He was a highranking cleric who tried to put the Jews in ghettos, raze synagogues, etc. The pope, bishops, and king were all interested in protecting the Jews. In 1391, when the archbishop of Seville and the king also died, massive anti-Jewish riots started in Seville that spread throughout all of Spain. Conversos Some of the Jews tried to barricade themselves into castles, but more Jews converted than martyred (possibly as much as 1/3 of Spanish Jewry). These converted Jews are called conversos, New Christians, Marranos, or confesos. This has a major impact on everyone in Spain. The Christian response was ambivalent—there were now a huge number of new competitors; there was now much more jockeying for power among the new and old Christians; and a sense that they had to separate the Jews from the Christians. Now that there was a huge influx of Jew-Christians, it became much harder for Christians to have a steadfast identity as non-Jews (Christian couldn’t really be the opposite of Jew anymore, since there were a bunch of people who were in the middle). The Fourth Lateran Council of 1215 said that Jews had to dress differently from Christians to preserve sexual purity. However, in the wake of the conversos phenomenon, there arose a greater desire to make clearer and broader distinctions between Jews and Christians. The Jews tried to provide their former co-religionists with religious services; most of the conversos still lived in the same houses they had lived in before, so it was easy to stay in contact with the conversos. (In general, young men in late adolescence were the ones - 61 - בס"ד Kandel who were most like to convert—they’d get more opportunities, they could get some independence, they could be having faith-related issues, etc.) The picture of the conversos’ religious experience is murky. Some tried to stay as Jewish as they could (buy kosher meat, pay for the נר תמיד, etc.), and some tried to become as Christian as they could, and some did everything in the middle.30 As a test case, we’ll examine Shlomo ha-Levi. He was a Jewish rabbi who converted either in 1391 or 1390; he exchanged letters with his student, Joshua ha-Lorki. Ha-Lorki suggests several possibilities for the conversion: 1) Physical desires drove him to convert (more economic and base opportunities), but this probably doesn’t explain Shlomo ha-Levi; 2) Philosophic rationalist drove him away from religion, so he figured that he might as well be Christian as Jewish (this how Yitzhak Baer explains the conversions of Spanish Jewry—they didn’t have the pure faith that led the Jews of Germany and Northern Europe to martyr themselves), but this isn’t it either; 3) G-d has forsaken the Jews, as evidenced by the Jewish status in Spain, but this isn’t it, either, since there are lots of Jews who don’t live under Christendom; 4) Ha-Levi really believed in Christian doctrine and became convinced of the truth of Christianity (this must be the real reason). Ha-Levi confirmed the fourth reason; he was about to become a Christian priest, which he claimed was better than being a Jewish Levite ח"ו. The rest of the Jews were probably stuck somewhere in the middle—they probably went to church, but may have retained some Jewish practices (for example, they may still sweep to the middle of the room as opposed to past the ;מזוזהget ready for שבתin some sense; they still wouldn’t eat pork, etc.). Peter Berger has compared the phenomenon of conversion to immigration (the same way, the first generation is still pretty close to its roots, but the next generations become more and more acculturated), so the kids of the conversos probably did eat pork and became regular Christians. He called it the process of “Christianization”, as opposed to conversion. However, since there was such anxiety in the Church about Judaizing, the Christians weren’t very understanding of Jewish apostates preserving their old habits. This led to limpieza de sangre (blood purity laws), which state that new Christians can’t rule over old Christians and other things (this is all completely against Christian theology, and the Pope made his stern opposition to these restrictions known). Some historians suggest that this is the beginning of racial, as opposed to religious, anti-Semitism. Historiographic Debates Ben-Zion Netanyahu claims that there was no crypto-Jewish practices on the part of the conversos; rather, the Inquisition, by showing the conversos that there really was no possibility for the Jews to assimilate, caused the Jews to go back to Judaism. He bases this off of the North African rabbinic writings that claim that the convsersos weren’t good. This is the opposite of other historians (Renee Meline-Levonitt ?) who try to recreate crypto-Jewish practices based on the Inquisition’s evidence. It’s unclear to what Although the גמראtalks about -ישראל מומר ל, it doesn’t really talk about a full convert, and certainly not about a whole community that converts. 30 - 62 - בס"ד Kandel extent we can rely on Inquisitional evidence; it usually didn’t use torture (it didn’t kill anyone on its own). Netanyahu argues that most of the accusations are based on ‘Judaizing’, but the Inquisition is what tells people what it is. Therefore, they don’t necessarily reflect relics of Jewish practice; they could just be the Inquisition’s idea of Judaizing. Also, if you continue denying your Judaizing once brought into the Inquisition, you were looked upon badly. Therefore, he argues that the only thing the Inquisition records tell us is that someone confessed to the charge, not that anything actually happened. For example, many traditional Christians who didn’t like the limpieza de sangre claimed that the conversos were good Christians! However, this is also problematic; those authors are also biased. Meline-Levonitt counters that the entire apparatus with trials and lawyers and secret documents only makes sense if the Inquisition was real; if all of the Christian participants actually were fabricating everything and knew it, there would be no point to have the Inquisition! Furthermore, the Inquisition often had some real legal proceedings—in some instances, charges were even thrown out! Netanyahu has been criticized for assuming that the converso experience is monolithic; it’s very possible that it varied based on age, gender, religious tendencies, socioeconomic status, etc. The experiences aren’t static, either. Profiat Duran was forcibly converted in 1391; he and David Bonjorn decided that they would flee as soon as they could so that they could return to Judaism. However, later, Bonjorn decided that he would actually become a faithful Christian, and decided not to flee Spain. In response, Duran wrote a letter called אל תהי כאבותיך, which was a witheringly sarcastic letter that ostensibly encouraged Bonjorn to stay Christian (‘don’t be like your fathers who stayed steadfast in their allegiance to their faith’), but managed to fool the authorities enough to let the letter get through to Bonjorn; he also wrote כלימת הגויים, which was a work of criticism of the different Gospel stories. After 1391, the Jewish community was badly hurt, as described above. In 1413-1414, the Church continued its missionizing activities at the Disputation of Tortosa. This time, it was Geronimo de Santa Fe (Joshua ha-Lorki), who was the student of the teacher who had converted before (see above). However, in Barcelona, the defendant was the רמב"ן, who had a relationship with the king and knew what he was talking about; however, at Tortosa, the Jews didn’t really have one delegate; they sent a group of people (including )ר' יוסף אלבוwho didn’t agree with each other, and some of them even converted. The delegates were kept Tortosa for 17-18 months. Ha-Lorki wouldn’t even let the Jews see the sources of the quotes he gave, and sometimes even made up quotes. The Hebrew account of the disputation explains the tremendous pressure the delegates were under; it was clearly a fiasco. It was so bad that many Jews converted. Solomon Alami, in אגרת מוסר, says that the Jews should: The right way is to listen to the teachings of the prophets and of the sages of old; to advance humility, loving-kindness, and virtue; to love Israel and its תורה, and to be forbearing with the faults of our brethren. May they learn to act out of true fear of God and not out of worldly vanity. If people could be taught to restrain their desires, to be content, and to trust in divine providence, the much of what saddens my heart would be overcome and our good would increase with the good of man. May what happened to our philosophers in Catalonia not happen to us: their strength of faith was surpassed by simple people, by women and children. The promise of our Scriptures upholds me; so greatis the power of this promise, so deep the fountain of our hope, that - 63 - בס"ד Kandel I do not despair of the future of Israel, which one day will recognize its failings and receive forgiveness. Yitzchak Baer (and Solomon Alami) claims that the reason that the Jews of Spain didn’t stay close to their G-d is that they learned philosophy; they should ignore philosophy, and stuff will be better. (The idea is that if you become convinced of philosophy, you’ll lose your connection to Judaism, and decide that it doesn’t really matter whether you call yourself a Jew or a Christian.) However, Elazar Gutworth claims that it’s not so clear that the century before the Expulsion was one big degringolade. He claims that we have to look at the Taqqanot of Valladolid of 1436, which were a bunch of really important תקנותput together by the Jewish community at large. However, Baer argues that the reason that the Jewish communities had to band together is that the individual cities weren’t powerful enough on their own. Often, sumptuary legislation (as the תקנותwere) appears when there’s friction between the Jews and Christians and highlights the Jewish attempt not to stick out. In 1486, the Inquisition was founded, which was intended to root out Judaizing tendencies; in 1482, the Jews were kicked out of southern Spain. In January 1492, Granada was conquered; in March 1492, the Jews were to be kicked out. The rationale offered is that the Jews aid and abet the Judaizing conversos, so they decided to kick out all of the Jews. Some suggest that the reason was economic; Baer says that the community was impoverished, so economics couldn’t be a reason. However, others claim that Jews were still in pretty good shape, and the Inquisition was really intended to fight the Judaizing conversos, not the Jews themselves. Jewish lending was protected; Jews as late as 1489 possibly didn’t know that an expulsion was around the corner. In 1490, there was a blood-libel accusation against Jews and conversos, which paved the way for the ultimate expulsion. The Jews were given until July 31, 1492. Some Jews ended up in Italy, the Ottoman Empire, Portugal, Navarre, North Africa (the Jews were already kicked out of France). Elijah Capsali, סדר אליהו זוטאsays that the Expulsion was meant to prepare for the ;משיח the fact that so many Jews were fleeing to the Ottoman Empire shows that it was the beginning of the ingathering of the exiles. ( שבט יהודהSolomin ibn Verga) says that the Jews sinned; observing Jewish law will make other people hate you; we killed Jesus; the Christians coveted us, our money, and our women; etc. These were all naturalistic reasons, without depending on direct supernatural intervention. - 64 -