I hope to present a couple of post on various Minhagim books. Some will focus on communal Minhagim books, and others on the minhagim of specific people.

The Tashbetz, also known as the Tashbetz Koton to distinguish between this the teshuvot haTashbetz, are the customs of R. Meir of Rothenburg as recorded by his disciple. The disciple’s name formed the title, however, it is unclear what exactly was his name. Obviously, it is linked to the title, Tashbetz. Some explain the title as Talmid Shimon ben Tzodok others say he was Talmid Shmuel ben Tzodok, or Tosefot Shimon ben Tzodok, Tosefot Shimon ben Yoitz, orTikkun instead. The book was supposedly written when R. Meir was imprisoned.

The book collects all the customs of R. Meir dealing with the holidays, prayers and everything in between. As R. Meir is one of the gedoli Ashkenaz many of his customs were followed by subsequent generations. Of course, his customs were generally highly influential also due to his students, R. Mordechi ben Hillel haKohen, author of the Mordechai code on the Talmud, R. Asher b. Yehiel (Rosh) as well as his son R. Jacob (Tur) as well as many others.

There are many fascinating customs, whose sources are from the Tashbetz. , standing during the recitation of the Torah, washing ones hands after the kiddush, eating head of a ram on Rosh haShana, saying Zikhron Terura when Rosh haShana is on Shabbat, reciting both Eloki ‘ad shelo netzarti and aloki netzor on Yom Kipppur and the list goes on. There are also some key passages, which explain other unclear customs. For instance, Naftali Wieder explains a rather cryptic passage in the Tashbetz as offering a totally new rational for why some people switch the word b’Fie (Bet-Peh-Yud) in Barukh She’amar to b’Feh (Bet-Peh-Hey). According to Wieder, Fie, is a curse in numerous languages, [think fie fi fo fum] and thus, the Tashbetz is saying for that reason one must alter the word.

There is actually a new edition of this book, however, it has some rather glaring flaws. The editor of this edition, [Sefer Tashbetz haKoton, Israel, 2005 Machon Torah S’beketav] states that he used a specific manuscript for this version, namely the one that he matched up with R. Yosef Karo. From the fact that this manuscript conformed with R. Karo’s readings, this was the manuscript of the Tashbatz. Why the manuscript R. Karo, who lived some 300 years after the time of the transcription of the book, is left wholly unanswered. Further, aside from matching up a couple of passages from the Tashbetz with that of R. Karo, nothing further is offered about this manuscript. The editor never dates the manuscript, talks about where it was written and by whom. In fact, the reader is left to guess whether this manuscript was written after the Shulhan Orakh and Bet Yosef and was done with the specific purpose of conforming with the readings of R. Karo. The editor never says which of the “hundreds” of manuscripts there are of the Tashbetz is actually the oldest. Only that if R. Karo may have used one then that one is dispositive of R. Meir of Rotenberg’s statements. Obviously, this is absurd.

This fundamental flaw aside, there are some positive points of this reprint. The first is that they have reproduced the first edition of the Tashbetz, Cremona 1556. This is reproduced fully, including a interesting title page which can be added to a previous post of mine. The editor has also added some notes, which at times are helpful. He generally uses abbreviation in referencing other books, he includes a key to explain these abbreviations. However, he cites to R. Daniel Goldsmit’s Machzor as well as Weider (cited above) but for those abbreviations, the reader is left on there on. I assume he did not want to “taint” anyone with citations to scholars that although he saw fit to use, did not wish to fully reveal to his readers.

For further reading on both R. Meir and the Tashbetz, see Arbach Ba’alei haTosefot, 552-564; Yode’a Sefer (in vol. 2 of the Roest Catalog) no. 2525; Encyclopedia Judaica 11:1247-53; N. Wieder, Hisgabsut Nusakh haTeffila b’Mizrak u’Ma’ariv (The Formation of Jewish Liturgy in the East and the West) Jerusalem 1998 469-491.

There is a new book out, Elefh Dor, by Yeruchum Horowitz (2 vol.). This book gathers from hazal and various secular history works to give a complete picture from the Second Temple until the closing of the Mishna. The author does an especially good job of collating and arranging the various sources in a coherent manner.

As it is tisha b’av I will focus on the parts of the book dealing with the destruction of the Temple. As anyone that has read Josephus is aware many of his histories are spread out in various volumes of his books. For example, the destruction of the Temple appears in both the Wars of the Jews as well as Josephus. Horowitz, however, is able to mesh all these sources together. What is also refreshing is that he notes where there are problems with Josephus’s recounting of the story. Further, the book contains separate articles that go into greater depth regarding the general veracity of Josephus as well as Josephus the person.

He also has an article on where the Temple vessels currently are. However, on this point he has some inaccuracies. For example, he accepts the well known story about the Hafetz Hayyim that appears in “All for the Boss.” This story claims that a farmer in Israel located the temple vessels while digging in his field. He then traveled to America and met with R. Shain who sent a letter to the Hafetz Hayyim. The Hafetz Hayyim “confirmed the man’s find by looking in various books.” This story is unfortunately, preposterous. Why would the man travel to America from Israel when he could have gone to Rabbis in Israel or Europe. America at the turn of the century was not exactly known for its wealthy of Rabbinic scholars. Second, which books did the Hafetz Hayyim look into to confirm the story. The only books that are really relevant are secular history books dealing with the rise and fall of Rome and where the spoils of Rome went to after that. He also doesn’t cite to the most relevant articles on this issue, namely, Hans Lewy, Olomot Nifgashim, 255-58; Abraham Berliner, Divrei yemi hayehudim b’roma, vol. 1 107-110.

Besides for the above issue, this book provides a basic understanding of the periods it covers, and in particular a rather good overview of the history surrounding the destruction of the second Temple.

The book is available at your local bookstore, I purchased it for $28.50 from Beigeleisen Books.

Pashekevilin, or broadsides, are commonplace all over Israel, but perhaps they are most associated with Meah She’arim area of Jerusalem. There is a permenant exhibit on some of these at JTS.

There is now a book devoted to these. The book, Pashkevilin: Modo’t Kir u’kruzot Pulmus b’rehovot haharedi (“Broadsides: Wall Announcements and Polemical Proclomations in the Ha’redi Street”) contains three articles and 150+ pages with pictures of these broadsides.

The first article is by Menachem Friedman (a recent topic on AJHistory) on the history of these broadsides. (This article is available online here.) The second article focuses on death notices and the third article focuses on the language of the broadsides. The rest of the book is devoted to pictures of these broadsides. This section is divided into seven sections by topic: the controversy about the Yishuv haYashan; HaHinuk haTohar (Jewish education); Zionism; Hillul Shabbat; divisions between various camps of Orthodoxy; Tzniut; and various fights.