Life After Death: The Afterlife of Tombstone Inscriptions in the Old Jewish Cemetery of Vilna

Life After Death: The Afterlife of Tombstone Inscriptions in the Old Jewish Cemetery of Vilna

By Shnayer Leiman

The ultimate purpose of any Jewish cemetery is to provide a resting place, with dignity, for the Jewish dead. Jewish law and custom have played a major role in regulating almost every aspect of burial from the moment of death through the funeral itself, the period of mourning that follows the funeral, and – ultimately – the erection of a tombstone over the grave.[1] Once the tombstone is in place, the living return to the cemetery for occasional visits, usually on the anniversary of the death (yahrzeit) of a dear one, or to pray at the grave of a righteous rabbi or ancestor in a moment of need.

And, of course, the living return to the cemetery in order to attend the funerals of others. But the last mentioned occurs only in “living” cemeteries, i.e. cemeteries that still bury the dead. But, at some point, cemeteries run out of space, and/or are forced to close by municipal ordinance. In 1830, after serving Vilna’s Jewish community for well over 250 years, the Jewish cemetery ran out of space and the municipal authorities forced it to close.[2] It was no longer a “living”cemetery and it transitioned into a pilgrimage site, where Jews came to pray at their ancestors’ graves, and at the graves of the great Jewish heroes of the past.

Any such transition comes at a cost. It became necessary to provide for the security of the cemetery, despite the lack of income from regular funerals. Guards had to be hired, fences had to be built and repaired, caretakers had to maintain the cemetery grounds, and guides had to be provided for those searching for specific graves in the cemetery. In this brief essay we will focus on only one interesting phenomenon: the need to identify “celebrity” graves, and to create markers, often on the tombstones themselves, that identified the person buried at the foot of the tombstone as a celebrity, or as a close relative of a celebrity (e.g., אם הגאון רבינו אליהו “The Mother of the Gaon R. Eliyahu [of Vilna],” and אבי הרב הגאונים ר‘ חיים ורש זלמן מוואלאזין The Father of the Rabbis and Gaonim R. Hayyim and R. S[hlomo] Zalman of Volozhin ).[3] Clearly, this need was made necessary – in large part – by the wear and tear on the tombstone inscriptions that made many of them almost impossible to read by the end of the19th century. But it was also made necessary by the passage of time, when a younger generation no longer recognized the names of the deceased, who often were the parents or spouses of celebrities of the past and present.

Our evidence will come mostly from photographs of tombstones in the Old Jewish Cemetery taken during the first decades of the 20th century.[4] These will be supplemented by the hand copies of the same tombstones published mostly in the second half of the 19th century.[5] First, a word of caution.

While photographs don’t lie, they often mislead. Thus, a recent work – and a superb one at that – on the leading 20th century rabbinic figure in Vilna’s long history of rabbinic scholars, i.e., Rabbi Hayyim Ozer Grodzenski (d. 1940), inadvertently suggests that R. Mordechai Meltzer (1797-1883), a distinguished 19th century Vilna Talmudist, was buried in the Old Jewish cemetery of Vilna.[6] The suggestion is based upon a poor photograph of a group of graves in the Old Jewish cemetery. The Hebrew legend under the photograph reads “The tombstone of the Gaon Rabbi Mordechai Meltzer in Vilna.” Here is the photograph, as it appears in the volume, p. 180:

With a magnifying glass, one can barely make out above the second tombstone from the right, the title and name: הרב הגאון ר‘ מרדכי מעלצער The Rabbi and Gaon R. Mordechai Meltzer.” Since the third tombstone from the right is clearly identifiable as marking the grave of R. Abraham Danzig (d. 1820), a distinguished Vilna rabbinic scholar who was certainly buried in the Old Jewish cemetery, there is perhaps some reason to think that R. Mordechai Meltzer was, in fact, buried next to him, in the same cemetery.[7]

Interestingly, the author himself states openly the Rabbi Meltzer left Vilna and ultimately served as Rabbi of Lida (today in Belarus), “where he died in 1883.” Apparently, the author assumes that Rabbi Meltzer died in Lida, but was somehow brought to burial in the Old Jewish cemetery of Vilna.

Alas, it cannot be, for many reasons. Among them:

a) R. Mordechai Meltzer died in 1883. The Old Jewish cemetery was officially closed in 1830. No Jew was buried in the Old Jewish cemetery after 1830. From 1831 until 1941, all Jews who died in Vilna, including its most famous rabbis in that period, were buried in the Zaretcha Jewish cemetery (Vilna’s second Jewish cemetery).

b) R. Mordechai Meltzer, after serving 19 years as Chief Rabbi of Lida, was buried in Lida. A mausoleum was built over his grave, one of the few in the Lida Jewish cemetery, and it became a major pilgrimage site until it was destroyed during the Holocaust and its aftermath.[8]

c) More importantly, here is a clear photograph of the tombstone misidentified in the Grodzenski biography. The photograph will also introduce the first of 6 samples of celebrity markers on tombstones.

Sample1. R. Asher Klatzko (d. 1820).[9]

The second tombstone from the right is that of Rabbi Asher Klatzko (d. 1820), father of Rabbi Mordechai Meltzer. One can still read (in the photo) the original epitaph that mentions Asher and his father’s name, Isaac.[10] [Asher was a great talmudic scholar in his own right, and no one would have marked his grave in 1820 with an epitaph that mentions his 23 year-old son, Mordechai, who held no official position at the time. But in 1860 or so, long after the cemetery was no longer a living cemetery, few remembered who “R. Asher son of R. Isaac” was, but everyone knew who R. Mordechai Meltzer was: the head of Vilna’s Ramajles (ראמיילעס) Yeshiva during the first half of the 19th century, an official rabbi of Vilna with the title מורה צדק, teacher of Vilna’s most distinguished rabbis, and among the Vilna leaders who officially greeted Moses Montefiore when he visited Vilna in 1846.[11] And so the top of the tombstone frame was marked:

הוא אבי הרב הגאון ר‘ מרדכי מעלצער “He [Asher, the person buried here] is the father of the Rabbi and Gaon, R. Mordechai Meltzer.” The message seems to be clear: This is a celebrity related grave, not to be overlooked. This is our first sample of a phenomenon that characterizes the Old Jewish cemetery in its second phase, i.e. after it was no longer a living cemetery. Aside from repairing broken tombstones and re-inking the faded epitaphs, the cemetery authorities saw a need to introduce markers that provided new information that identified celebrity graves of one kind or another. Nor did the cemetery authorities hesitate to post those markers on the original tombstones themselves, when there was sufficient space to do so.

Sample 2. R. Yehuda Leib Gordon (d. circa 1825).

The third tombstone from the right, whose epitaph (in the center of the tombstone) is no longer legible, and is not recorded elsewhere, was accorded a celebrity inscription which reads: פנ חותן הרב הגאון ר‘ מרדכי מעלצער Here lies buried the father-in-law of the Rabbi and Gaon, R. Mordechai Meltzer.” The father-in-law, R. Yehudah Leib Gordon, was a member of a distinguished Vilna family that produced a long line of communal leaders and rabbis.[12]

Sample 3. R. Yosef b. R. Shmuel Zaskewitz (d. 1829).

In the same photo as at Sample 2 above, the first tombstone at the right has a celebrity marker at its top. The outer rim of its rooftop reads:

י[פנ ה]רבני המופלג מוה יוסף [בן ה]אבד דקק זאסקעווץ “Here lies buried the outstanding rabbinic authority, our teacher and rabbi Yosef, son of the Chief Rabbi of Zaskewitz.” Inside the rooftop, a celebrity marker has been added. It reads: אבי הרב הגאון ר‘ שמואל שטראשון “The Father of the Rabbi and Gaon, R. Shmuel Strashun.” By 1860 or so, few knew who R. Yosef b. R. Shmuel Zaskewitz was. But every learned Jew in Vilna knew precisely who R. Shmuel Strashun was,[13] and so R. Yosef was now properly identified as the father of R. Shmuel Strashun.[14]

Sample 4. R. Baruch b. R. Shmuel Zaskewitz (d. 1829).

In the same photo as at Sample 2 above, adjacent to R. Yosef b. Shmuel, rests his brother R. Barukh, who also died in 1829. Not surprisingly, he too was accorded a celebrity marker. It reads: דד הרב הגאון ר‘ שמואל שטראשון “The uncle of the Rabbi and Gaon, R. Shmuel Strashun.” In case you don’t know who R. Baruch was, now you know.[14a]

Sample 5. R. Zvi Hirsch b. R. David ha-Levi (d. 1830).

In the same photo as at Sample 2 above, at the extreme left, is the tombstone of R. Zvi Hirsch of Libau, who served with distinction as the lead cantor of the Great Synagogue of Vilna from 1822 until his death in 1830. The original epitaph is legible in the photograph, and has been recorded.[15] It makes no mention of his son. At a later date, perhaps in the 1860’s or later (see below), few remembered who R. Zvi Hirsch was, but everyone knew who his son was. Indeed his son not only eclipsed his father as a cantor, he eclipsed every cantor who would ever serve as lead cantor of Vilna. The son, the legendary “Vilner Balabesel” (Yiddish for: young and married householder in Vilna), R. Yoel David Strashunsky, succeeded his father upon his death in 1830, only 14 years old at the time. At that young age, there was much communal strife as to whether it was appropriate for him to serve as the lead cantor. It was decided that he would share the post with an older cantor until 1836, when in fact, he became the sole lead cantor. There was more trouble ahead, when in 1842 he left Vilna for Warsaw, where he performed in public concerts of operatic music. Ultimately he suffered from severe depression, and – on and off – either lost his voice, or lost his interest in serving as a cantor. He died in a hospital for the mentally ill in Warsaw in 1850, and was buried in Warsaw. He was 34 years old at the time of his death.[16] And so R. Zvi Hirsch too was accorded posthumous celebrity status. The inscription added to the rooftop portion of his tombstone reads:

פנ השץ מקק ליפי ופה קק ווילנא אבי ר‘ יואל דוד שץ דפה “Here lies buried the Cantor from the holy community of Libau and [who also served] here in the holy community of Vilna, the father of R. Yoel David, the Cantor [who served] here.”

Some, but hardly all, of the celebrity markers include the date when they were installed by the cemetery authorities. It is of particular interest to establish the date when R. Yoel David’s name was entered on his father’s tombstone, given the controversy that surrounded his name. It just happens to be that in the case of R. Zvi Hirsch of Libau, the celebrity marker included the date of its instillation, at least initially, but it no longer is entirely legible. The text at the bottom of the rooftop inscription reads:

 _ _נתחדש עי גבאי דצג בשנת תר “It [the grave site][17] was refurbished by the adjutants of the Zedakah Gedolah Society[18] in the year [5]6_ _.” The last two digits are illegible, leaving us with a range of years between 1840 and 1939. We can quickly close the gap a bit, since the photograph at Sample 2 was taken circa 1913.[19] Interestingly, the neighboring grave site just to the right of that of R.Zvi Hirsch Libau in the photograph at Sample 2, was also refurbished by the Zedakah Gedolah Society, and the date of instillation of its new inscription is included. It is the grave site of a pious woman named Roza, about whom we know almost nothing, other than the fact that she died in 1830 or earlier and was buried in the Old Jewish cemetery of Vilna. The text in the rooftop inscription reads: פנ ה[אשההצנועה המפורסמת מ[רתרוזאנתחדש עי גבאי דצג בשנת תרעג

“Here lies buried Mrs. Roza, the woman renowned for her modesty. It [the grave site] was refurbished by the adjutants of the Zedakah Gedolah Society in the year 673.”[20] The Hebrew year [5]673 was mostly in 1913. Almost certainly, both these grave sites were refurbished at the same time, in 1913. By that year, Yoel David Strashunsky was a legendary figure not only in Vilna, but indeed throughout the world of Yiddish speaking Jews. We will examine one more interesting celebrity marker that, as an aside, provides linguistic support for our dating of the R. Zvi Hirsch of Libau celebrity marker to circa 1913.

Sample 6. R. Shmuel b. R. Hayyim Shebsils (d. 1818).[21

Little is known about him, other than that he was a distinguished talmudic scholar, pedigreed, wealthy, charitable, and modest. He adopted the surname Landau, and one of his sons, R. Yitzchak Eliyahu Landau (1801-1876), was appointed rabbi and official preacher (מורה צדק ומגיד מישרים) of Vilna in 1868. Landau was a remarkable preacher and a prolific author who left an indelible impression on all who knew him. In 1870, among many other charitable deeds, he personally raised the funds necessary to rebuild the fence that surrounded the entire Old Jewish cemetery, where his father was buried.[22]

When his father died in 1818, there was no reason for the epitaph on his father’s tombstone to make mention of his 17 year old son. But this would change in 1912, if not earlier. As can be seen on the photo, the outer rim of the tombstone’s rooftop reads: פה מצבת הרב ר‘ שמואל בהרב ר‘ חיים שבתילס “Here is the tombstone of the rabbi R. Shmuel, son of the rabbi R. Hayyim Shebsils [sic].” Inside the rooftop, a celebrity marker has been added. It reads:

אבי הרב ר‘ יצחק אליהו לנדא ממ דפה “ Father of the rabbi R. Yitzchak Eliyahu Landau, [who served as] official preacher here.” Just under, and to the right, of the inscription on the outer rim, one reads: נתחדש עי גבאי דצג בשנת תרעב “Refurbished by the adjutants of the Zedakah Gedolah Society in the year 672.” The Hebrew year [5]672 was mostly in 1912. Here too, few, if anyone, really remembered who R. Shmuel b. R. Hayyim Shebsils was, but every learned Jew knew who R. Yitzchak Eliyahu Landau was. Gems from his sermons were repeated orally, and his books were published and republished in Vilna, Warsaw, and elsewhere. A celebrity marker was necessary in order to identify R. Shmuel b. R. Hayyim Shebsils.

It is interesting to note that the celebrity markers that highlight the names of Cantor Yoel David Strashunsky and Official Preacher R. Yitzchak Eliyahu Landau, share a specific – and ambiguous – Hebrew turn of phrase. Cantor Yoel David is called שץ דפה and R. Yitzchak Eliyahu is called ממ דפה. The term דפה can be rendered as present tense: “who presently serves as…” or past tense: “who served as…” I have preferred the latter sense in the English translations above, largely because in the case of R. Yitzchak Eliyahu Landau, the date of the refurbishing is clearly given as 1912. R. Yitzchak Eliyahu Landau was surely no longer alive in1912; as indicated above, he died in 1876. But it is possible that the celebrity markers come from an even earlier period, and were entered on the tombstones during the lifetime of Strashunsky (in the 1840’s) and Landau (in the 1870’s). When the ink faded, they were redone in 1912.

What argues against this possibility, however, is the written record. None of the 19th century publications of the tombstone inscriptions discussed in this essay record (or even seem to be aware of) any of the celebrity markers.

In sum, our purpose has been to introduce a topic – the afterlife of tombstone inscriptions – that needs to be developed and applied to many Jewish cemeteries, sooner rather than later.[23] Our purpose has not been to present an exhaustive treatment of celebrity markers – one category of the afterlife of tombstone inscriptions — in the Old Jewish cemetery of Vilna. That would require much research, and would result in a hefty monograph, both of which are well beyond our means. The few samples we examined, however, surely serve to underscore the fact that the study of the afterlife of tombstone inscriptions remains a scholarly desideratum.

Notes

[1] For a comprehensive bibliography on the Jewish cemetery, see Falk Wiesemann, Sepulcra Judaica: Jewish Cemeteries, Death, Burial and Mourning from the Period of Hellenism to the Present, A Bibliography (Essen: Druckerei Runge, 2005). For an eminently readable summary of contemporary Jewish halakhic practice and custom relating to erecting tombstones and visiting graves, see Chaim Binyamin Goldberg, Mourning and Halachah: The Laws and Customs of the Year of Mourning (New York: Mesorah Publications, 14th edition, 2012), pp. 382-399.
[2] [] See Israel Klausner, קורות ביתהעלמין הישן בוילנה (Wilno: An-ski Jewish Historical and Ethnographical Society of Vilna, 1935), pp. 30-32.
[3] For these markers, see the photographs below:

a) 

b) 

a) Tombstone of R. Yitzhak b. R. Hayyim of Volozhin, and just behind it, the tombstone of Traina, mother of the Gaon of Vilna.
b) Frontal view of Traina’s tombstone (in the center of the photograph, and to the right of R. Yitzhak b. R. Hayyim of Volozhin’s tombstone).

R. Yitzhak b. R. Hayyim died in 1780. At the time, his son R. Hayyim of Volozhin was 31 years old, and had just recently been appointed Rabbi of Volozhin, hardly a large and significant Jewish community in Lithuania at the time. The Yeshiva of Volozhin was not founded until 1802. R. Yitzhak’s son R. Shlomo Zalman was 24 years old when his father died, and relatively unknown. Indeed, R. Yitzhak’ eldest son, R. Simhah, 39 years old at the time, and a practicing rabbi, is not even mentioned by the marker. Clearly, the markers come from a much later period when R. Hayyim and R. Shlomo Zalman were the only names (of R. Yitzhak’s 5 sons) that were known widely by learned Jews, and by visitors to the Old Jewish cemetery of Vilna. For R. Hayyim of Volozhin, see, e.g., Dov Eliach, אבי הישיבות (Jerusalem: Moreshet ha-Yeshivot, revised and expanded edition, 2012); and Shaul Stampfer, Lithuanian Yeshivas of the Nineteenth Century (Oxford: Littman Library of Jewish Civilization, 2015), pp. 15-47. For his younger brother R. Shlomo Zalman, see, e.g., R. Yehezkel Feivel, תולדות אדם השלם (Jerusalem: Makhon Moreshet ha-Gra, 2012).

For the little that is known about Traina, who died in 1742, see Bezalel Landau, הגאון החסיד מוילנא (Jerusalem: Torah mi-Ziyyon, third edition, 1978), p. 15, note 14; and Dov Eliach, הגאון (Jerusalem: Moreshet ha-Yeshivot, 2002), vol. 1, pp. 66-70. For the epitaph on her tombstone, see Klausner, op. cit., p. 56. The marker was surely added after the lifetime of Gaon of Vilna (d.1797), who would not have tolerated seeing the title “Gaon” next to his name, permanently etched in stone as it were, in the Old Jewish cemetery. In photo b, one can actually see how an earlier marker on the upper portion of the tombstone, “פנ אם הגאון רבינו אליהו“, after fading away, was replaced by new marker “פנ אם הגרא” .
[4] Photographs of Vilna’s Old Jewish cemetery abound in a wide variety of publications and periodicals in different languages. These include: Hebrew (e.g., Y. Kremerman, מוילנא ירושלים דליטא‘ עד חיפה [n.p: privately published, 1995]); Yiddish (e.g., Leyzer Ran, אש פון ירושלים דליטא [New York: Wilner Ferlag, 1959]); Russian (e.g., G. Agranovskii and I. Guzenberg, Litovskii Ierusalim [Vilnius: Lituanus, 1992]); Lithuanian (e.g., K. Binkis and P. Tarulis, Vilnius 1323-1923 [Kaunas-Vilnius: Švyturio Bendroves Leidinys, 1923]); German (e.g., Paul Monty, Wanderstunden in Wilna [Wilna: Verlag der Wilnaer Zeitung, 1916]); and English (e.g., Gerard Silvain and Henri Minczeles, Yiddishland [Corte Madera, CA: Ginko Press, 1999]), and total many more publications than can possibly be listed here. Postcard reproductions of photos were produced and sold before, during, and after World War I, serving as a major source for some of the publications mentioned above. Some of these photos are posted on line in various collections of ephemera. Numerous photos, not yet published, are available in private collections. All the photos in this essay (with the exception of the misidentified photo in the recently published Grodzenski volume) are from original photographs and postcards in my possession. Artists have also depicted a variety of scenes from the Old Jewish cemetery (e.g., Walter Buhe, “Wilnaer Judenfriedhof,” 1916; a copy can be viewed online at the Wikipedia entry for Walter Buhe, sub: Images for Walter Buhe).
[5] The hand copies were published mostly by Samuel Joseph Fuenn, קריה נאמנה, second edition (Vilna: Notes and Schweilik, 1915), henceforth: Fuenn; Hillel Noah Steinschneider, עיר ווילנא (Vilna: Romm Publishing Company, 1900), henceforth: Steinschneider; and Israel Klausner (see above, note 2), henceforth: Klausner.
[6] R. Dovid Kamenetsky, רבנו חיים עוזררבן של כל בני הגולה (Jerusalem: n.p., 2021), volume 1.
[7] Our author may have been misled by Leyzer Ran, ירושלים דליטא (New York: Wilner Verlag, 1974), vol. 1, p. 101, who mistakenly identified the same photograph as containing the graves of both R. Mordechai Meltzer and R. Abraham Danzig in the Old Jewish cemetery of Vilna. The same error appears in Y. Kremerman (see above, note 4), p. 267.
[8] See R. Mordechai Meltzer’s posthumous publication, תכלת מרדכי (Vilna: Matz, 1889). On the reverse side of the second title page, the full text of the lengthy epitaph on his tombstone in Lida appears in print. A short biography appears on pp. 20-24, which makes mention of the mausoleum constructed over his grave, and that it has become a pilgrimage site. Cf. A. Manor et al, eds., ספר לידא (Tel-Aviv: Or-Li Publishers, 1970), pp. 91-92.
[9] See Steinschneider, p. 122, note 1.
[10] Klausner, p. 75, notes that the inner epitaph was no longer extant in 1935.
[11] See Isaac Meyer Dik, האורח (Vilna, 1846), pp. 30-31. The place and date of publication are uncertain; and the volume may have been co-authored. For bibliographical discussions, see the sources cited in the entry האורח in מפעל הביבליוגרפיה העברית accessed at:  https://uli.nli.org.il/permalink/972NNL_ULI_C/4upfj/alma99682727008422).
[12] Steinschneider, pp. 123 and 194.
[13] For R.Shmuel Strashun, see Zvi Harkavy’s “,תולדות רשש וכתביו” appended to his edition of מקורי הרמבם לרשש (Jerusalem: ha-Eretz Yisraelit, 1957), pp. 53-58. Cf. David Abraham, פנקסו של שמואל (Jerusalem: Makhon Yerushalayim, 2011).
[14] For the text of the inner epitaph, see Fuenn, pp. 254-255.
[14a] See note 14.
[15] Klausner, p. 74.
[16] A vast literature has developed regarding the history and legends surrounding the life of R. Yoel David Strashunsky. These include novels, plays, and film productions. For one of the many failed attempts to distinguish fact from fiction, but fascinating nonetheless, see Samuel Vigoda, Legendary Voices (New York: M.P. Press, 1981), pp. 390-427.

Some of the more important scholarly studies are: Hillel Noah Steinschneider “תולדות השץ הנפלא מווילנא ר‘ יואל דוד לעוווענשטיין” in תלפיות (Berditchev, 1895), part 12, pp. 8-13; Abraham Z. Idelsohn, “תולדות השץ יואל דוד בעל הביתל” in Hebrew Union College Monthly 20 (May-June 1933), pp. 27-29; Isaac Schiper, “אונבעקאנטע ארכיון– מאטעריאלען וועגען דעם אויפהאלט פון ווילנער בעלהביתל אין ווארשא אין יהאר 1842 Haynt, September 23, 1934, p. 9; Silja Haller et al, eds., Joachim Stutchewsky Der Wilnaer Balebessel (Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, 2013; and James Loeffler, “Promising Harmonies: The Aural Politics of Polish-Jewish Relations in the Russian Empire,” Jewish Social Studies 20:3 (2014), pp. 1-36 (especially pp. 19-25). קבר
[17] I translate “grave site” [for Hebrew קבר] rather than “tombstone” [for Hebrew מצבה], for –strictly speaking – the form נתחדש can only be the passive verbal form for a masculine noun. But I have some doubts about whether the sign painters in 19th and 20th century Vilna cared very much about Hebrew grammar. See below, in the center of the photograph at Sample 6, where the celebrity marker at the top refers to מצבת, yet under it, the marker specifically states נתחדש. In any event, the masculine noun קבר, ordinarily rendered “grave,” bears secondary meanings including “grave site” and “tombstone.” See Klausner, passim, who uses the term regularly for “grave site” and “tombstone; and cf. A. Even-Shoshan, מלון אבן-שושן (Tel-Aviv: Am Oved, 2003), vol. 5, p. 1623.
[18] The Zedakah Gedolah Society was Jewish Vilna’s official communal institution in charge of public welfare. Given the rampant poverty that prevailed throughout much of Vilna’s Jewish history, this was one of the most important institutions in Vilna. It assumed even greater significance when the Czarist regime abolished Jewish Vilna’s “Kahal” structure in 1844. One of the Zedakah Gedolah’s many tasks was to provide the lion’s share of the funding necessary for the upkeep of Vilna’s Jewish cemeteries. See Israel Cohen, Vilna (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1943), pp. 121-122; cf. Israel Klausner, וילנה ירושלים דליטאדורות הראשונים 1495-1881 (Tel-Aviv: Kibbutz Ha-Me’uhad, 1988), pp. 393-394. For a vivid description of how the Zedakah Gedolah provided Passover aid for the poor in late 19th century Vilna, see David Livni, ירושלים דליטא (Tel-Aviv, 1930), vol. 1, pp. 9-43. With the advent of World War I, it fell into a period of steady decline and would ultimately be liquidated under Polish rule in 1931. See Israel Cohen, op. cit., pp. 394-397; and cf. Andrew N. Koss, “Two Rabbis and a Rebbetzin: The Vilna Rabbinate during the First World War,” European Judaism 48:1 (2015), pp. 120-122.
[19] It is clearly a Jan Bulhak photograph, taken between 1912-1915 at the Old Jewish cemetery.
[20] The date תרעג = [5]673 = 1913, and not תרסג = [5]663 = 1903, is confirmed by several different photographs, taken from different angles, of Roza’s grave site (in my personal collection of Vilna materials).
[21] Fuenn, p. 230 and cf. his Introduction, p. xxxi. R. Hayyim’s father’s name was Shabsai. For the form “Shebsil” derived from “Shabsai,” see Alexander Beider, A Dictionary of Ashkenazic Given Names (Avotaynu: Bergenfield, 2001), pp. 409-411.
[22] Steinschneider, p. 97. For the date, see the essay “דער אלטער בית עולם” authored by “במב” in the weekly ווילנער וואכענבלאט, August 12, 1910, pp. 2-3.
[23] Anyone who has frequented, for example, the old Jewish cemeteries in Frankfurt, Mainz, Worms, Prague, and Cracow, will know that celebrity markers are commonplace and mostly late, and that many faded tombstones have been re-inked, often wrongly. Sadly, even the Gaon of Vilna’s epitaph, while yet in the Old Jewish cemetery, was – in part – re-inked wrongly. See the discussion of the Gaon’s epitaph in my “The Paper Brigade’s Recording of Epitaphs in Vilna’s Old Jewish Cemetery: A Literary Analysis,” The Seforim Blog, February 26, 2024 (SeforimBlog.com). It should also be noted that there are different categories of celebrity markers, such as large maps or lists of famous names (often encased in glass) at the cemetery entrance, arrows posted along the route to a celebrity grave, new inscriptions on old tombstones or mausoleums, and entirely redone tombstones (enlarged and enhanced to underscore their celebrity status). I am indebted to Marcin Wodzinski (Professor of Jewish Studies at the University of Wroclaw in Poland), who in a personal communication kindly informed me about yet another factor that plays a role in celebrity markers: the material out of which a tombstone is made, and its malleability. If you cannot easily engrave an inscription on a tombstone, others ways will be found to mark a celebrity grave. Thus, local geophysical factors may well influence the kind of celebrity markers used in a particular cemetery.




The Head Movements of Shema’

THE HEAD MOVEMENTS OF SHEMA’

by Bezalel Naor

Rabbi Bezalel Naor is a multifaceted scholar, recognized as the leading interpreter of R. Kook in the English language. His newest book is The Limit of Intellectual Freedom: The Letters of Rav Kook. It can be purchased from his website, www.orot.com.

The most important utterance in Judaism is the Shema’: Shema’ yisrael adonai eloheinu adonai ehad. (Hear O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one.) This declaration of the absolute unity of God is the cornerstone of our faith. By Biblical mandate, a Jew recites the Shema’ twice daily, be-shokhbekha u-ve-kumekha (“when you lie down and when you rise up”). See Deuteronomy 6:7.

All of the above is quite famous. What remains today a little known fact is that once upon a time this recitation was accompanied by head movements to the four directions, and up and down. This practice is recorded both in the Ge’onim (post-Talmudic Babylonian sages) and the Rishonim (medieval European sages).[1] The basis for this observance is the following statement in the Talmud:

Symmachus says: “Whoever prolongs the word ehad (“one”), his days and years are prolonged.

Said Rav Aha bar Ya’akov: “And [specifically] the letter dalet [of ehad].”

Said Rav Ashi: “Provided he does not speed up the letter het [of ehad].”

R. Yirmiyah was sitting before R. [Hiyya bar Abba]. He saw that he was prolonging overly much. He said to him: “Once you have proclaimed Him King above and below, and to the four winds of heaven, you need not any further.”[2]

Rashi, the eleventh-century exegete of Troyes, France, comments: “Proclaimed Him King above, etc. – You have prolonged the amount [of time] necessary to think in your heart that the Lord is one in heaven and on earth and its four directions.”

This is a disembodied approach; no mention in Rashi of actual body movements. The visualization of heaven and earth and the four cardinal points is purely mental.

However, if one consults the commentary of Rabbi Menahem Ha-Me’iri of Perpignan, Provence (1249-1306) one finds an added dimension: “The amount of lengthening the letter dalet is that required to picture in the heart that He, blessed be He, rules over heaven and earth and the four winds of the world. And for this reason, it is customary to tilt the head and move it to these sides. Nevertheless, if one prefers not to tilt the head, one need not, because the thing depends not on the tilting of the head and its movements, but rather upon the feeling of the heart.”[3]

Me’iri revisits this theme in his commentary to Tractate Sukkah when discussing the na’anu’im or waving of the lulav (palm frond) during the Sukkot festival. There, he opines that both in regard to the movement of the lulav during the recitation of Hallel and the movement of the head during Shema’, only a to-and-fro and up-and-down movement is called for (as opposed to the four directions, and up and down). “Even that which they said. . .to prolong the word ehad (“one”) sufficiently to proclaim Him King above and below and in the four winds of the world, even this necessitates only a movement to the two directions, and below and above. Furthermore, some say that in ehad no movement is necessary, only picturing in the heart.”[4]

Neither is Me’iri the only Provencal commentator to bear witness to the practice of head movements. His contemporary Rabbi David ben Levi of Narbonne writes: “How long? Long enough to proclaim Him King, etc. – Some interpret that one proclaims Him King by moving one’s head. And so interpreted Rabbenu Hai, of blessed memory.”[5]

In Provence, where we find most evidence of the head movements, there were some who found the practice ludicrous (huka ve-itlula).[6] Perhaps, these authorities took exception not so much to the movements themselves, as to the fact that as often happens in the case of rituals, the simple folk focus on the externals rather than on the inner awareness which is the essence.[7]

The German codifier Rabbi Jacob ben Asher (d. Toledo, Spain before 1340) defended the practice of the head movements accompanying Shema’:

One must prolong the dalet of ehad the amount [of time] necessary to think in one’s heart that the Holy One, blessed be He, is unique in His world, above and below, and in the four winds of the world. There are some accustomed to tilt the head according to the thought, above and below, and to the four directions. Some object to the practice because of the statement of the Rabbis, “He who recites Shema’ should not gesticulate with his eyes or lips.”[8] My father, of blessed memory, used to say that one need not heed [their words], for there, the gesticulations are for an extraneous purpose, and interrupt the concentration, but here, the gesture is a requisite of the concentration and brings it about (tsorekh ha-kavvanah ve-goremet otah).”[9]

Rabbi Joshua Boaz Baruch (Italy, d. 1557) offers a very graphic description of the head movements of Shema’:

This is the amount [of time] to prolong the word ehad: one third in the letter het and two thirds in the letter dalet. How does one proclaim the Kingship? Up and down during the het, and in the four directions during the dalet.[10] And one concentrates while moving the head up and down, to the east and to the west, to the north and to the south . . .[11]

One can only speculate what happened to these head movements. Whereas the movements of the lulav or palm frond continue in full force to this day, wherever Jews are found, we are not aware of any community that has retained the custom of moving the head during Shema’, though as we have seen, it was once widespread in communities as diverse as Babel (today Iraq), Provence, Spain and Italy.

One of the most provocative statements found in Rav Kook’s Orot is this:

We dealt much in soulfulness; we forgot the holiness of the body.[12]

Perhaps these head movements of Shema’ are a “mitsvah yetomah” (orphan mitsvah) due for revival.[13]

Notes

[1] These head movements of the Shema’ are not to be confused with those employed in the so-called school of “Prophetic Kabbalah” founded by Abraham Abulafia (b. 1240), although it is possible that Abulafia was inspired in this respect by the earlier tradition surrounding the Shema’. Prof. Gershom Scholem was struck by the similarity between the Abulafian technique (especially the technique of breathing) and Indian Yogic practices. Perhaps Scholem was unaware of the Judaic practice surrounding Shema’. It is possible though, that Scholem would have regarded even this practice, stretching back at least as far as Rav Hai Gaon, as influenced by Yogic or Sufic tradition. See Gershom G. Scholem, Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism (New York, 1971), pp. 139, 144; Aryeh Kaplan, Meditation and Kabbalah (York Beach, ME, 1985), pp. 55-114.

[2] Talmud Bavli, Berakhot 13b. The words “Hiyya bar Abba” are bracketed in the standard Vilna edition. In the parallel discussion in Talmud Yerushalmi, Berakhot 2:1, rather than R. Hiyya bar Abba, it is Ze’ira who apprises R. Yirmiyah that he needn’t overly prolong the recitation. R. Aryeh Leib Yellin (Yefeh ‘Einayim) suggests that the text of the Bavli be emended to “R. Zeira” to conform to the Yerushalmi.

[3] R. Menahem ben Shelomo ha-Me’iri, Beit ha-Behirah, Berakhot, Dikman ed. (Jerusalem, 1965), p. 42.

[4] R. Menahem ben Shelomo ha-Me’ri, Beit ha-Behirah, Sukkah, Liss ed. (Jerusalem, 1966), p. 133.

[5] R. David ben Levi of Narbonne, Sefer ha-Mikhtam in: Hershler ed., Ginzei Rishonim / Berakhot (Jerusalem, 1967), p. 28. This comment of Rabbenu Hai ben Sherira Gaon (939-1038) to Berakhot 13b first crops up in the Sefer ha-Eshkol of Rabbi Abraham ben Isaac, Av-Beit-Din of Narbonne (d. 1158). See Albeck ed., Sefer ha-Eshkol, p. 14; included in B.M. Lewin ed., Otsar ha-Ge’onim, Vol. I – Berakhot (Haifa, 1928), Perushim, p. 13. Cf. Rabbi Nathan ben Yehiel of Rome, Arukh, s.v. bar pahatei.

[6] Sefer ha-Mikhtam ibid.; R. Asher of Lunel, Orhot Hayyim, chap. 18.

[7] For example, Rabbi Hayyim El’azar Shapira of Munkatch (Munkacevo) explained the custom of reciting the verse Atah har’eita la-da’at [“Unto you it was shown, that you might know, that the Lord is the God; there is none else besides Him”] (Deuteronomy 4:35) on Simhat Torah at the opening of the Ark before commencing the hakafot or circumambulations with the Torah scroll in hand, as an antidote to any perverse notions that might creep into the common mind. By declaring the absolute unity of God, we stave off any misguided tendency to deify the Torah. See Rabbi Hayyim El’azar Shapira, Sha’ar Yissachar, Simhat Torah. Cf. Rabbi Meir Simha Cohen of Dvinsk, Meshekh Hokhmah (Riga, 1927), Exodus 32:19 who explains that Moses smashed the Tablets of the Law to prevent their deification by the worshipers of the Golden Calf.

[8] Yoma 19b. There, included in the prohibition is gesticulating with the finger(s).

[9] Rabbi Jacob ben Asher, Tur, Orah Hayyim.

[10] The Hebrew letters also signify numbers. Thus, het has the numerical value of 8; dalet, the numerical value of 4. The head movements up and down allude to the seven heavens and earth, a total of eight. It is appropriate that they occur during recitation of the letter het. The movements in the four directions of the compass occur during the recitation of the letter dalet.

On the practical level, one may question how it is possible to prolong the sound of the letter dalet (twice as long as the letter het!) when the consonant dalet is a stop or plosive. The question is based on ignorance of the correct pronunciation of the Hebrew letters. In the Ashkenazic community, the differentiation between dalet degushah (hard dalet, indicated by the dot or dagesh mark) and dalet rafah (soft dalet, lacking the dagesh or dot) was lost. In the Oriental communities, this tradition was maintained. In truth, only the hard dalet has the “d” sound; the soft dalet is pronounced “th” as in the English word “the.” In phonetics, such a sound is referred to as a “continuant,” as opposed to a “stop” or “plosive.” As the dalet of ehad is soft, the word is properly pronounced “ehath.” Adhering to these basic rules of the Hebrew language, the dalet of ehad may certainly be drawn out. See Rabbi Nahum L. Rabinovitch, Yad Peshutah (Jerusalem, 1984), Hil. Keri’at Shema 2:9 (p. 64). For the record, there were several Ashkenazic gedolim who were sensitive to the refinements of Hebrew pronunciation, as practiced by the Oriental communities. In the previous generation, Rabbis Joseph Elijah Henkin and Jacob Kamenecki expressed such concerns, to name but two.

[11] R. Joshua Boaz Baruch, Shiltei ha-Gibborim to Mordekhai, Berakhot (Vilna ed., 46a).

[12] See Rabbi Abraham Isaac Hakohen Kook, Orot (Jerusalem, 1950), Orot ha-Tehiyah, chap. 33 (p. 80); Naor trans., Orot: The Original 1920 Version (Spring Valley, NY, 2004), p. 189.

[13] Rabbi Jacob Moses Harlap, the eminent disciple of Rav Kook, wrote that the revival of mitsvot that have fallen into desuetude is a cure for the malady of our generation of neshamot she-be-‘olam ha-tohu (souls of the World of Chaos), whose vessel is too narrow to contain the great light due to penetrate it. This thought is expressed in a letter Rabbi Harlap wrote in 1946 upon the occasion of the renewed “Hakhel” ceremony. Published as an appendix to Rabbi J.M. Harlap, Mei Marom, Vol. V (Nimmukei ha-Mikra’ot) (Jerusalem, 1981). Cf. the essay entitled “Ha-Neshamot shel ‘Olam ha-Tohu” (The Souls of the World of Chaos) in: Rabbi Abraham Isaac Hakohen Kook, Orot (Jerusalem, 1950), pp. 121-123.

Postscript: In an email to Marc Shapiro, Rabbi Naor adds that R. Kalonymos Kalmish Shapira of Piaseczna advocated these head movements. Unfortunately, he can’t locate the precise source. Perhaps one of the readers can help out.

Postscript 2: Eliezer Brodt adds: See Eric Zimmer, Assufot 8 (1994), Tenuchos Vetenuot Haguf Beshaat Keriat Shema, pp. 343-368. For some reason it is not included in the collection of his articles called Olam Keminhago Noheg.




Guide and Review of Online Resources – 2022 – Part II

Guide and Review of Online Resources – 2022 – Part II

By Ezra Brand

Ezra Brand is an independent researcher based in Tel Aviv. He has an MA from Revel Graduate School at Yeshiva University in Medieval Jewish History, where he focused his research on 13th and 14th century sefirotic Kabbalah. He is interested in using digital and computational tools in historical research. He has contributed a number of times previously to the Seforim Blog (tag), and a selection of his research can be found at his Academia.edu profile. He can be reached at ezrabrand-at-gmail.com; any and all feedback is greatly appreciated. This post is a continuation. The first part of this post is here.

11.Tools and Indexes

There are some very powerful tools for researching primary and secondary sources.

Gone are the days when one is completely at the mercy of memory, concordance, index, or colleagues. Many of the websites in the previous section (“Primary texts”) have good hyperlinked navigation pages. In addition, they have very good search capabilities. In addition to this, there are websites which are dedicated to search and indexes, that provide powerful capabilities that the previously mentioned websites don’t have.

Open-access

  1. Dicta.
    1. Search is highly recommended.
    2. From the About Us page: “Dicta applies cutting edge machine learning and natural language processing tools to the analysis of Hebrew texts.”
    3. Created by Prof. Moshe Koppel of Bar-Ilan University, who has written for Seforim Blog (see here). List of their search and other tools, all very cool and quite user-friendly and hyper-modern UX/UI, in the best way:
      1. Tanach search: “Search the Bible intuitively, with no need to worry about alternate spellings, prefixes and suffixes or sorting out multiple meanings of a word. Dicta’s search engine understands what you’re looking for.”
      2. Talmud Search: “Search the Talmud and Mishnah for words and phrases intuitively, with no need to worry about alternate spellings and multiple meanings. Dicta’s search engine understands what you’re looking for.”
      3. Quick Nakdan: “Automatically add nikud (vocalization) to text as you type.”
      4. Citation finder: “Identify exact or approximate quotations of biblical and talmudic sources in a given text.”
      5. Rabbinic Abbreviation Expander: “Expand abbreviations in Rabbinic texts. An entered text will be displayed including expanded abbreviations. The automated expansions are editable by the user.”
      6. Synopsis Builder: “Align two or more versions of the same (arbitrarily long) text, highlighting differences between versions and matching parallel words, including variant spellings and synonyms.”
      7. Stylistic Segmentation: “Partition any selected text into distinct stylistic components. For example, a multi-authored text can be automatically decomposed and displayed so that distinct authorial threads are shown in different colors.”
      8. Charuzit: “Find rhymes, assonance, and alliteration for any given Hebrew word. Search results can be filtered by entering semantic words and configuring various grammatical settings.”
  2. Parallels in Yerushalmi (מקבילות לירושלמי).
    1. Project of Prof. Leib Moscovitz of Bar-Ilan University.
    2. From the About page:
      1. “This site contains lists of sources and parallels to the Jerusalem Talmud, from the Bible, the literature of the Tannaim (Mishnah, Tosefta, and the Halachic Midrashim), the Jerusalem Talmud itself, and the classic Aggadic Midrashim of the Land of Israel. For some of the Tractates, parallels from the Babylonian Talmud are also recorded.”
  3. Escriptorium
    1. From the homepage: “A project providing digital recognition of handwritten documents using machine learning techniques.”[13]

12.Bibliographic info

Open-access

  1. Merhav – The National Library (מרחב – הספרייה הלאומית של ישראל).
    1. Recommended. Tremendous bibliographic resource, besides for being a powerful search tool (mentioned also above, under “Search”).
    2. Overview at their website here (Hebrew): “The National Library’s collection includes about five million items, including books, manuscripts, journals, maps, music and audio-visual and electronic material, in a variety of languages.
  2. The Bibliography of The Hebrew Book (also here) (מפעל הביבליוגרפיה העברית).
    1. My understanding is that “The Bibliography of The Hebrew Book” has been incorporated into “Merhav”. See also National Library’s guides here: https://www.nli.org.il/en/research-and-teach/catalogs/bibliographic-databases
    2. Wikipedia – Hebrew: “A body designated for the editing of a bibliography of Jewish printing. The project lists and describes all the books printed in Hebrew characters in the Hebrew language and in the languages ​​of the Jews (Yiddish, Ladino, Judaeo-Arabic, etc.) from the first Hebrew incunabula in the year 1475, until about 1960. The bibliographic database was built on the basis of the collections of the National Library and other collections in Israel and around the world. The bibliography numbers over 141,000 bibliographic and 15,000 biographical entries, and includes: books, journals and individual pages (ephemera). Each publication is reviewed by the project staff, and the description of the books is very broad and comprehensive than their description in the National Library catalog, and includes, for example: book approvals (הסכמות לספרים), introductions written by other authors, and the like. As of 2011, the project recorded and described close to 90% of the world’s Jewish books and is online on the National Library website.”
  3. Thesaurus of Talmudic Manuscripts
    1. Hosted at the Hachi Garsinan website, mentioned earlier. Requires registration (free).
    2. Based on Y. Sussman, Thesaurus of Talmudic Manuscripts, Jerusalem 2012. With Friedberg updates, edited by M. Katz, September 2017.

Requires subscription or purchase

  1. Talmud Yerushalmi Citation Database (מאגרי מידע לתלמוד בבלי). Requires subscription.
    1. Project of Dr. Moshe Pinchuk of Netanya Academic College.[14] 

13.Indexes

Open access

  1. Halacha Brura Institute – Virtual Library (מכון הלכה ברורה – ספריה וירטואלית).
    1. This is an incredible project.
    2. From the webpage: “The Halacha Brura Institute centralizes here links to seforim that are on the Internet at various websites, in full text, some as text and some as images, to save the visit to libraries.”
    3. Has an extensive methodology of symbols to mark the website where the work is found, and the file type.
    4. Ironically, Halacha Brura’s own meta-index of its own indexes is unfortunately not very good, there’s no full sitemap available on the website, and the organization of the webpages doesn’t isn’t always the best (for example, Rambam and commentators and Responsa are on the same page). Presumably, this is because webpages were split as they got larger. In any case, to help with this issue, I created my own meta-index of Halacha Brura’s indexes, see appendix.
    5. This project appears to be affiliated with the Rambam Library (ספריית הרמב”ם – בית אריאלה) in Tel-Aviv, though it’s not clearly stated on their website. See the appendix.
  2. Bibliography of works in Judeo-Arabic (אתר פרידברג לביבלוגרפיה בערבית יהודית).
    1. From the webpage:
      1. “The aim of this website is to present to all scholars, researchers and, in general, users interested in Judeo-Arabic texts, a comprehensive bibliography of all works in Judeo-Arabic ever printed, in a variety of formats, with some filtering capabilities.
      2. The list, with some 1,500 entries, is intended to cover all regions of publications and all periods of the works’ writings, up until and including the very early works of the 21st century.”
  3. Seforimonline.org .
    1. Well-organized, publications can be sorted by place of publication, year, etc. There also seem to be works there not found in other websites. (Halacha Brura’s index above sometimes links to Seforimonline.org.)
  4. Heichal Menahem (היכל מנחם).
    1. E-commerce website selling seforim. Can be used as a kind of index of recently published seforim, with lots of bibliographical info and pictures.

14.Secondary literature

15.Books

There are a nice amount of academic books available online, especially more recent ones.

Open-access

  1. Society for the Interpretation of the Talmud (האיגוד לפרשנות התלמוד). Scholarly interpretation of Talmud Bavli, written in Modern Hebrew.
    1. Recommended. The first seven of their publications are available there (published between 2006 – 2016). Does not include the most recent publications published 2019 – 2021. The level of scholarship is very high.
    2. Wikipedia – Hebrew: “A series of commentaries on the Babylonian Talmud based on scientific research as well as a traditional-religious interpretation. Most of the project’s books are available for public use as PDF files on the Society’s website, along with additional unpublished reference materials. The chairman of the association is its founder, Professor Shama Friedman, and its management consists of Prof. Yeshayahu Gafni, Prof. Gideon Libson and Prof. Shmuel Shilo.”
  2. AsifSifriyat Asif (אסיף ספריית אסיף). Dissertations in Hebrew, written by scholars associated with hesder and Religious-Zionist institutions. Also whole seforim and Torah journals divided neatly and searchable, many of them of potential scholarly interest, well-annotated and sourced (such as R’ David Bruckner’s series Mishnat Tana’im).
  3. P’sik (פסיק) . Scholarly books in Hebrew, for a more popular audience, mostly on Bible and contemporary religious thought.
    1. From Bar-Ilan University’s library guide: “The digital book platform is designed for reading and academic research.”
  4. De Gruyter. Academic publisher. Has around 100 open-access books in English categorized as on Jewish topics available for download.[15]
  5. JSTOR.
    1. Many open-access books, see the books marked “open-access”.
    2. Especially JSTOR, Brown Judaic Studies. Currently around 65 open-access books. From the “Publisher Description”:
      1. “Brown Judaic Studies has been publishing scholarly books in all areas of Judaic studies for forty years. Our books, many of which contain groundbreaking scholarship, were typically printed in small runs and are not easily accessible outside of major research libraries. We are delighted that with the support of a grant from the National Endowment for the Humanities/Andrew W. Mellon Foundation Humanities Open Book Program, we are now able to make available, in digital, open-access, format, fifty titles from our backlist. Once digitized the volumes will be freely available through ProjectMUSE, JSTOR, ACLS Open Humanities and the Hathi Trust.”

Requires subscription or purchase

  1. Kotar . (כותר) – Requires subscription.
    1. For Hebrew academic books. Fairly user friendly for reading, though not as user-friendly as Kindle (see later). According to results, around 800 titles in Jewish studies. Leans towards newer publications. Subscription for remote access is sometimes available through libraries, such as my library (Tel Aviv library). Should be pointed out that Kotar links are often linked in National Library’s Merhav search results (see earlier under “Search”).[16]
    2. Wikipedia – Hebrew: “A website that is an online library for subscribers of scholarly books in Hebrew, in collaboration with Israeli publishers. The title library offers hundreds of digital books and online reference on a wide range of topics from the humanities and social sciences, law, natural sciences and exact sciences and more. The publishers involved in the project include about 100 academic, public and private book publishers. The library began operating in January 2006. Kotar offers online access to a large variety of information sources. Kotar offers online browsing of a selection of over 3,000 titles (as of March 2018) of reference and information books and is constantly expanding.”
    3. There are a large amount of works put out by the following publishers:
      1. Yad Ben-Tzvi
      2. Bialik
      3. Sifriyat Heileil Ben-Chaim
    4. A few of the hundreds of books that are available there (all in Hebrew, as mentioned):
      1. M. Kahana et. al (ed.), Sifrut Hazal HaEretz Yisra’elit (2 vol.)
      2. A. Grosman, Rashi VeHaPolemos HaYehudi HaNotzri
      3. A. Reiner, Rabbeinu Tam
      4. S. Reif, HaGeniza MiKahir
      5. Anat Reizel, Mavo LeMidrashim.[17]
  2. Kindle e-books.
    1. Great for scholarly books in English. Recommend, in my opinion underrated as a resource for scholarly English books. Great advantages of Kindle e-books:
      1. Can highlight and annotate, with a special section with your highlights and annotations, which is great for later skimming and refreshing memory.
      2. Can hover for dictionary definitions and Wikipedia entry header paragraphs.
      3. As well as many of the other advantages mentioned above for electronic resources: instant availability; takes up minimal space, searchable, easily screenshotted, etc.
      4. For most books, can download free sample of beginning of book, usually containing front matter, Table of Contents, intro, and first chapter or two.
    2. However, it should be pointed out that Kindle editions are not necessarily “cheap”, though they’re generally cheaper than the physical copies. For example, Halivni’s book mentioned below is currently being sold on Amazon for $104, and the Kindle version is $67.[18]
    3. Some of the many scholarly books available on Kindle:
        1. Secunda, The Iranian Talmud
        2. Halivni, The Formation of the Babylonian Talmud
        3. Cohen, From the Maccabees to the Mishnah
        4. Feiner, The Jewish Enlightenment
  3. Magnes Press. Hebrew University’s academic press. Around 350 books available as ebooks for purchase, to read on their app. Came across this while researching this guide, have no idea if it’s any good, but looks promising.

16.Journals

There are a lot of academic articles readily available online.

Open-access

Journals whose full archives are currently open-access.

  1. Kiryat Sefer (קרית ספר) (years available: 1924 – 1998). Scholarly articles written in Modern Hebrew.
    1. Recommended. Contains a huge number of articles by the greats of Hebrew bibliography.
    2. Wikipedia – Hebrew: “The journal was published from the founding of the database in 1925 until 2003. It also contains many bibliographic articles.”
  2. Cathedra (קתדרה) (years available: 1976 – 2017). Scholarly articles written in Modern Hebrew.
    1. See description in Wikipedia Hebrew: קתדרה (כתב עת) – ויקיפדיה
  3. Pe’amim (פעמים) (years available: 1979 – 2009). Scholarly articles written in Modern Hebrew. After 2009, some articles open-access, but most not.
    1. See description in Wikipedia Hebrew: פעמיםויקיפדיה .
  4. Jewish Studies, an Internet Journal (years available: 2002 -). Scholarly articles written in English and Modern Hebrew
    1. Started in 2002, have issued 21 issues so far. Editor-in-Chief – Prof. James L. Kugel. Managing Editor – Prof. Leib Moscovitz.
    2. From the home page: “JSIJ is a peer-reviewed electronic journal dealing with all fields of Jewish studies, which is distributed free of charge via the Internet. By publishing articles electronically via the Internet, JSIJ seeks to disseminate articles much faster than is possible with paper publication, and to make these articles readily and conveniently accessible to a wide variety of readers at all times. We hope that the use of this new technology will eventually allow JSIJ to develop in ways not available with conventional print journals, including the possibility of computerized full-text searches and the use of hyperlinks to other texts.”
  5. Ginzei Qedem (גנזי קדם). (years available: 2005 – ). Scholarly articles written in Modern Hebrew. Journal is published by the Friedberg Genizah Project and the Ben-Zvi Institute.
    1. From the About page: “Ginzei Qedem is a peer reviewed annual publication devoted to Genizah texts and studies published by the Friedberg Genizah Project and the Ben-Zvi Institute. Ginzei Qedem uses the term, “Genizah texts and studies” in the widest sense of the term – fragments of literary works and documents from genizot in Cairo and elsewhere – including all the relevant disciplines – history, literature (including piyyut), language, Biblical studies and exegesis, Talmud and Rabbinics, magic etc. The articles are in Hebrew and English. Seven issues have appeared to date.”
    2. See further description in Wikipedia Hebrew: גנזי קדם (שנתון) – ויקיפדיה
  6. HaTzofeh LaHochmat Yisra’el (הצופה לחכמת ישראל). Available on HebrewBooks. (years available: 1921 – 1931). Scholarly articles written in Hebrew. See description in Wikipedia Hebrew: הצופה מארץ הגרויקיפדיה.
  7. Kovetz al Yad (קובץ על יד) . Available on HebrewBooks. (years available: 1885 – 1946). Publications of works from manuscripts. See description in Wikipedia Hebrew: מקיצי נרדמים.
  8. Hama’ayan (המעין) (years available: 1953 – 2009). Scholarly articles written in Modern Hebrew. Journal is currently affiliated with Yeshivat Sha’alvim.
    1. Wikipedia – Hebrew: “HaMa’ayan is a quarterly publication, published since 1953, ‘which combines a Torah dimension with a scientific-Torah dimension’ and contains various articles on Halacha, hashkafa, Jewish history and scholarly research.”
    2. Available here:
      1. המעין מכון שלמה אומן: years available: 2007 –
      2. Earlier issues, years available: 1953 – 2006, at Daat and HebrewBooks
  9. Netu’im (נטועים) (years available: 1994 -). Scholarly articles written in Modern Hebrew. Focuses on Torah Sheba’al Peh. Journal is affiliated with Yeshivat Alon Shevut and Herzog College.
  10. Dinei Yisra’el (דיני ישראל). (years available: 2009 – ). Scholarly articles written in Modern Hebrew. Focuses on Jewish law. Journal is affiliated with Tel-Aviv University.[19]
  11. Masechet (years available: 2004 – ). Scholarly articles written in Modern Hebrew. Focuses on topics related to women. Journal is affiliated with Bar-Ilan University.
  12. Tallelei Orot (טללי אורות) (years available: 1989 – ). Scholarly articles written in Modern Hebrew. Journal is affiliated with Orot Yisra’el College. Also selected articles at Daat, in text format.
  13. Oreshet (אורשת) (years available: 2010 – ). Scholarly articles written in Modern Hebrew. Journal is affiliated with Orot Yisra’el College.
  14. Moreshet Israel (מורשת ישראל) (years available: 2018 – ). Scholarly articles written in Modern Hebrew. Journal is affiliated with Ariel University.
  15. Oqimta (אוקימתא). (years available: 2013 – ). Scholarly articles written in Modern Hebrew and English. Journal started by Prof. Shamma Friedman of Bar-Ilan University.
    1. See description in Wikipedia Hebrew: אוקימתא (כתב עת)
  16. Tradition (years available: 1958 -).
  17. Hakira (years available: 2004 – ). Scholarly articles written in English.
    1. Wikipedia: “Ḥakirah, The Flatbush Journal of Jewish Law and Thought is a peer-reviewed academic journal in the field of halakha and Jewish thought. Hakirah is a Jewish journal which publishes articles that reflect a wide range of Orthodox beliefs and ideas. Those who submit articles run the gamut from laypeople, to rabbis, doctors and professors. The first volume of Hakirah was published in the fall of 2004. Each volume generally contains about ten English and two Hebrew articles comprising a total of about 250 pages. A new volume appears about every six to seven months.”
  18. Many Torani journals are available on HebrewBooks, by searching the title. Many are also linked to by Halach Brura in their index of journals, and in their respective Wikipedia entries. These are Torani journals, meaning that they are published by Orthodox institutions. They are all written in Modern Hebrew. The articles in these journals are mostly not relevant for this guide, however, they often contain scholarly articles, especially related to publications of manuscripts of rabinnic works of Geonim, Rishonim, or Aharonim. For ideological reasons, the scholarly articles relevant for this guide generally don’t cover topics earlier than the Geonic period, and they are more likely to publish on recent topics than earlier ones.[20]
    1. Tzefunot (צפונות). (years available: 1989 – 1993). Focuses on bibliographic topics. See description in Wikipedia: צפונות .
    2. Kovetz Beis Aharon VeYisra’el (קובץ בית אהרן וישראל) (years available: 1986 – 2002) . Also available on Otzar Hachochma’s forum.
    3. Or Yisra’el (אור ישראל). (Years available: 1996 – 2015). See description in Wikipedia: חסידות_קרלין#קובץ_בית_אהרן_וישראל .
    4. Pe’alim LeTorah (פעלים לתורה).
    5. Yeshurun (ישורון). (Years available: 1996 – 2015). See description in Wikipedia: ישורון (מאסף תורני) .
    6. Yerushateinu (ירושתנו). See description in Wikipedia: ירושתנו .
    7. Asifas Chachomim (אסיפת חכמים).
    8. Hitzei Giborim (חצי גבורים).
    9. Min HaGenazim (מן הגנזים).

Requires subscription or purchase

  1. JSTOR
    1. 58 journals that focus on the subject of Jewish Studies.
  2. Nevo.
    1. Israeli law journals, in Modern Hebrew. Journals there with many articles relevant to history of halacha:
      1. Dinei Yisra’el available at Nevo (נבו) with subscription, years available: 1970 -.
      2. Sh’naton Hamishpat Ha’ivri (שנתון המשפט העברי). (years available: 1974 – 2006). Journal is affiliated with Hebrew University.
      3. Mehkerei Mishpat (מחקרי משפט). (years available: 1980 – ). Journal is affiliated with Bar-Ilan University.
  3. Otzar HaHochma (אוצר החכמה):
    1. See on this resource above.
    2. Areshet (ארשת). (years available: 1958 – 1980). Journal published by Mossad HaRav Kook, focused on Hebrew bibliography. Links at the Wikipedia entry for the journal.
  4. Project MUSE.
    1. Some journals on Project MUSE that focus on Jewish Studies: JQR
  5. EBSCO

17.Articles

Websites with scholarly articles.

Open-access

  1. Academy of Hebrew Language (האקדמיה ללשון העברית).
    1. Scholarly articles in Modern Hebrew.
    2. From the page on “Articles”: “The Hebrew Language Academy publishes selected articles here from time to time for the benefit and enjoyment of the visitors to the site. The articles are written by linguists – including members of the Academy and its researchers – and are usually taken from the journals of the Academy:Leshonenu (לשוננו), Ha’Ivrit (Leshonenu L’am) (העברית = לשוננו לעם) and Akadem (אקדם). Some of the articles were written specifically for the academy’s website.”
    3. Appear in both PDF format, as well as text.
  2. Daat (דעת).
    1. See above. Besides for complete texts of primary works, has many scholarly articles from journals, in text format, such as Sinai (סיני), Shma’atin (שמעתין), Mahanayim (מחניים).
  3. Academia.edu .
    1. I follow around 200 academics. Some of them are for deceased scholars whose students have set up a profile for them, and uploaded their work. I get updates of articles in my “feed” about once a day, and the articles are generally a good fit for my interests. (E.g. Elliot Wolfson has many of his articles there.)
    2. Wikipedia – English: “Academia.edu is an American for-profit social networking website for academics. It began as a free and open repository of academic journal articles and registered a .edu domain name when this was not limited to educational institutions.”
  4. Metah (מטח).
    1. Lots of transcribed scholarly articles in Hebrew. See also the section of the website called “Peshita” (פשיטא).
    2. From the About page: “The virtual library project of Metah began in 2000. Metah is a non-profit institution and the library project is non-commercial; The library is open and accessible to anyone for free.”
    3. Some examples of articles available:
      1. 55 Tarbitz (תרביץ) articles, see list.
  5. Ad Henah (עד הנה).
    1. Lots of PDFs of scholarly articles in Hebrew.
    2. From the About page: “A study and research institute that studies the Torah work of Galician and Bukovina Jewry, from the sixteenth century to the present time.”
  6. Ptil Tekhelet (פתיל תכלת).
    1. Lots of PDFs of scholarly articles in Hebrew (shows 530 items). Focuses on the topic of tekhelet.
  7. Author academic websites (e.g., Meir Bar-Ilan ; Yehuda Liebes)
  8. Ask the author – generally amenable to sending their own articles and dissertation.

18.Bibliographic info and indexes

Open-access

  1. RAMBI (רמב”י).
    1. My understanding is that “The Bibliography of The Hebrew Book” has been incorporated into “Merhav” (see above).
    2. Wikipedia – Hebrew: “An indexed and cataloged article index (or bibliography) of thousands of academic and other articles in a wide range of fields in the Jewish Studies, the study of the Land of Israel and the State of Israel, and is the largest and most comprehensive database of its kind in the world. The information contained in Rambi was collected from thousands of scientific journals, literary or documentary journals, collections and files of one-time articles on a specific topic, in Hebrew, English, French, German and other languages ​​and in the Judaic languages: Yiddish, Arabic, Ladino and others; most of them found in the National Library. The criteria for inclusion in Rambi are that the publication be in an academic publication or another recognized and respected stage, or that it be useful for academic research purposes.”
  2. RAMBISH (רמבי”ש). Same concept as RAMBI, but for articles appearing in Orthodox journals.
  3. Indexes of dissertations / theses:
    1. Hebrew University – search
    2. Bar-Ilan University, Jewish Studies Department – list
    3. Jewish Theological Seminary– search and list
  4. Google Scholar

Requires subscription or purchase

  1. Index of References Dealing with Talmudic Literature (Lieberman Index) . Requires subscription.
    1. From the home page:
      1. “The Index of References Dealing with Talmudic Literature, offering pinpointed citations from hundreds of classic and modern scholarly works directly related to the specific selected passage within Talmudic literature.”
  2. Oxford Bibliographies in Jewish Studies. Requires subscription.
    1. From Bar-Ilan University’s library guide: “Oxford Bibliographies in Jewish Studies is an interdisciplinary database encompassing history, religion, philosophy, literature, sociology and political science. Its chronological and geographical range stretches from the Bible to the present, including communities from the Americas to Western and Eastern Europe, North Africa and the Middle East, South and East Asia, and Africa. Oxford Bibliographies Jewish Studies offers selected articles that break down subject areas into their component parts and pithy annotations that summarize the main contribution of each citation. The database is one of the components of the Oxford Bibliography, a database that offers an authoritative guide to the current scholarship, containing original commentary and annotations.”

19.Dictionaries

Open-access

  1. Wiktionary – Hebrew (H). Generally very good entries, with ample primary and secondary sources.
  2. Jastrow’s A Dictionary of the Targumim, the Talmud Babli and Yerushalmi, and the Midrashic Literature, in English:
    1. Sefaria: here. Transcribed and searchable, with hyperlinked Table of Contents.
    2. Wiktionary: here. Transcribed, with hyperlinked Table of Contents.
    3. Tyndale House: here. Scanned, with hyperlinked Table of Contents.
  3. R’ Natan of Rome, Sefer HeArukh, ed. Lublin 1883, on Sefaria. Includes R’ Benjamin Mousafia’s Musaf Aruch. Also at Sefaria: R’ Isaiah Berlin’s Hafla’ah ShebaArakhin on Sefer HeArukh.
  4. Academy of Hebrew language’s online dictionary . In Modern Hebrew. Based on Milon HaHoveh (מילון ההווה). Does not include etymologies or sources.

20.Encyclopedias

Open-access

  1. Jewish Encyclopedia . In English.
    1. Large parts of it have been incorporated into the corresponding English Wikipedia entries.
  2. Wikipedia – Hebrew.
    1. Great source for Jewish topics. I personally have found Wikipedia to be great sources for, among other topics:
      1. Biographies of Jews
      2. Jewish communities
      3. Jewish Law (halacha)
  3. Encyclopedia Talmudit – Micropedia (האנציקלופדיה התלמודית). In rabbinic/modern Hebrew, on Talmudic topics.
    1. From the webpage: “From Micropedia to Encyclopedia: Wikishiva (ויקישיבה) continues its collaboration with the Talmudic Encyclopedia project and now becomes the home of the new Talmudic Encyclopedia entries. Now, beyond the Talmudic Micropedia project, the entries of the Encyclopedia itself will be published here. It is important to note that entries published here are not currently published as books. To date, 251 entries have been written in the Talmudic Encyclopedia project. The Talmudic Encyclopedia: The new Talmudic Encyclopedia entries are already on Wikishiva! You can browse all the entries on the site or search using the search box, select the first letter, or select from the new entries on the site. The Talmudic Micropedia: The Talmudic Micropedia is a concise and up-to-date treasure trove of the entries of the Talmudic Encyclopedia, in a flowing and clear style.”

Requires subscription or purchase

  1. Encyclopedia Judaica, 2nd edition. In English.
    1. Second edition published by Gale and available on their website. Requires subscription, many libraries give access through OpenAthens, see for example Bar-Ilan University’s page.
    2. The entries (all? some?) of Encyclopedia Judaica, 2nd edition, appear to have been incorporated into encyclopedia.com, and fully hyperlinked to other EJ entries. The entries seem to be able to be found only via search, there’s no way to browse list of entries. See google search “Encyclopaedia Judaica site:https://www.encyclopedia.com/”.
    3. Bar-Ilan University overview: “Provides an overview of Jewish life and knowledge from the Second Temple period to the contemporary State of Israel, from Rabbinic to modern Yiddish literature, from Kabbalah to “Americana” and from Zionism to the contribution of Jews to world cultures.”
  2. Encyclopedias published by Brill, in English:
    1. Encyclopaedia of Judaism Online.
      1. From the webpage: “The prize-winning Encyclopaedia of Judaism is now available online. More than 200 entries comprising more than 1,000,000 words. This unique reference tool offers an authoritative, comprehensive, and systematic presentation of the current state of scholarship on fundamental issues of Judaism, both past and present. Comprehensive and up-to-date, it reflects the highest standards in scholarship. Covering a tradition of nearly four thousand years, some of the most distinguished scholars in the field describe the way of life, history, art, theology, philosophy, and the practices and beliefs of the Jewish people.”
    2. Encyclopedia of Jews in the Islamic World Online.
      1. From the webpage: “[T]he first cohesive and discreet reference work which covers the Jews of Muslim lands particularly in the late medieval, early modern and modern periods. The expanded online version, EJIW Online (started in 2010), is updated twice annually with newly commissioned articles, illustrations, multimedia, and primary source material. Interdisciplinary articles cover a wide range of topics from history, law, music, visual arts, social sciences, philosophy, anthropology and demography.”
    3. Encyclopedia of Jewish History and Culture Online.
      1. From the webpage: “From Europe to America to the Middle East, North Africa and other non-European Jewish settlement areas the Encyclopedia of Jewish History and Culture covers the recent history of the Jews from 1750 until the 1950s. Translated from German into English, approximately 800 keywords present the current state of international research and depict a complex portrait of Jewish life – illustrated by many maps and images. About 40 key articles convey central themes on topics like autonomy, exile, emancipation, literature, liturgy, music or the science of Judaism.”
    4. Encyclopedia of Hebrew Language and Linguistics Online.
      1. From the webpage: “[A] systematic and comprehensive treatment of all aspects of the history and study of the Hebrew language from its earliest attested form to the present day. The encyclopedia contains overview articles that provide a readable synopsis of current knowledge of the major periods and varieties of the Hebrew language as well as thematically-organized entries which provide further information on individual topics. With over 950 entries and approximately 400 contributing scholars, the Encyclopedia of Hebrew Language and Linguistics is the authoritative reference work for students and researchers in the fields of Hebrew linguistics, general linguistics, Biblical studies, Hebrew and Jewish literature, and related fields.”

[13] For overview, see the recent presentation, available on YouTube: “eScriptorium for Handwritten Text Recognition in Humanities Research” (uploaded Mar 3, 2021. accessed 25-Feb-2022).

For use on Hebrew manuscripts, there is a gated presentation cited by Katz 2022, footnote 16:
D. Stoekl Ben Ezra, “Sofer Mahir: Opening Up Rabbinic Manuscripts Towards Scholarly Editions”.

Presentation at the DHJewish conference in Luxemburg, January 2021. URL:

https://sofermahir.hypotheses.org/59.

Katz and Gershuni point out: “Unfortunately, the ability to use OCR to read Hebrew or Aramaic manuscripts is not yet sufficiently developed. When textual manuscript-based projects such as Stoeklet al.’s Sofer Mahir and Tikoun Sofrim will reach a more mature stage, the extension of the edition to the entire Talmud will be far easier to achieve.” (Katz 2022, section 4.1).
[14] See his article:משה פינצ’וק, “מאגרי מידע לתלמוד הירושלמי“, עלי ספר כב (תשע”ב), עמ’ 165-171.
[15] Search done on 23-Jan-2022. Example of books available: Ari Bergmann’s recent book, The Formation of the Talmud: Scholarship and Politics in Yitzhak Isaac Halevy’s Dorot Harishonim (2021) ; Guggenheimer’s recent translation into English and short commentary of Talmud Yershalmi. (Guggenheimer’s translation is also available in Sefaria.)
[16] Such as for the series משנת ארץ ישראל. It appears that the entire series is on Kotar, see Merhav search results and Kotar search results.
[17] This books is also available open-access, in a very user-friendly format, at a dedicated website: מבוא למדרשים | מחלקי המים . Thanks to Eliezer Brodt for pointing this out.
[18] As of 20-Jan-2022.
[19] Previous issues of Dinei Yisra’el available at Nevo (נבו) with subscription, years available: 1970 -.
[20] See index of Hebrew Wikipedia entries on Torani journals here: קטגוריה:ישראל: כתבי עת תורנייםויקיפדיה




Review of Shaul Stampfer, Families, Rabbis & Education

Review of Shaul Stampfer, Families, Rabbis and Education: Traditional Jewish Society in Nineteenth-Century Eastern Europe
by Marc B. Shapiro
The continuation of my last post will be ready soon, but in the meantime I am posting my short review of Shaul Stampfer’s new book. It appeared on the H-Judaic listserv, but since most readers of Seforim Blog probably did not see it, I am posting it here as well.
For many years, Shaul Stampfer has been recognized as an authority in all things dealing with nineteenth-century Jewish Eastern Europe. In his newest book, we have a collection of numerous essays representing more than twenty years of his scholarship, including one essay published for the first time (“The Missing Rabbis of Eastern Europe”). Stampfer’s focus is not on the purely intellectual debates between rabbinic elites. He is more interested in social history, how average people and in particular women lived. Even his discussions of rabbis emphasize such matters as inheritance of rabbinic positions and the rabbi’s role in communal life. His sources are quite broad: traditional rabbinic works as well as Hebrew, Yiddish, and Russian texts and newspapers.
I could write extensively about every essay, each of which taught me a great deal. (And I never imagined that an entire essay could be written on the pushke and its development.) Yet to remain within the word limit for this review, let me just mention some of Stampfer’s most important points, the major theses of the book.
People have generally assumed that marriages in Jewish Eastern Europe were very stable, with divorce being quite rare. Stampfer, however, provides evidence to demonstrate that divorce was common and not shameful. Based on his evidence, he is fundamentally correct. In addition to citing statistics, Stampfer also refers to memoir literature that mentions divorce. Yet I also think that Stampfer (and ChaeRan Y. Freeze before him) exaggerates the frequency of divorce. For example, one of his statistics of marriage and divorce is from the 1860s in the city of Berdichev where for every three to four marriages, there was one divorce. He cites similar statistics for Odessa (p. 46). Stampfer goes so far as to claim that “it may well be the case that there were thirty divorces for every hundred weddings in the nineteenth century” (p. 128). However, these numbers are certainly skewed for the simple reason that while marriages took place in every town, to obtain a divorce couples had to travel to a larger city where there was a beit din and scribe. Thus, divorces from any one city do not reveal a ratio of marriage to divorce. The situation is identical to what happens today. Couples get married anywhere they want, but must come to a central location for their divorce.

Stampfer also argues that contrary to another popular stereotype, early teenage marriage was not at all common in traditional Jewish society. While it occurred among the economic and intellectual elite, and is immortalized in memoirs of the latter, early teenage marriage does not reflect the life experience of the average young Jew. Similarly, the lower class, which encompassed most Jews, did not have much use for matchmaker services, and indeed, romance was a factor in their marriages.

Tied to the points made so far is the place of women in society. Many of us are accustomed to think of traditional society as one in which men had all the power and made all the decisions, and in which the husband went out to work while the wife served as a homemaker. Yet Stampfer shows that while this perception fits in very well with contemporary “family values,” it is not how East European Jewish society functioned. Women generally worked, were involved in business ventures, and were thus “out of the home.” Unlike today, the stay-at-home wife and mother was not necessarily an ideal. Stampfer also notes that many Jewish names were created from women’s names, which he thinks “reflects a reality in which both men and women could be in the centre” (p. 133).

Adding to these arguments, Stampfer includes the following suggestive comment: “Another indication of the place of women in Jewish society can be found in the aesthetics of Jews in Eastern Europe. Males were regarded as attractive if they were thin, had white hands, and wore glasses. These were all reflections of lives devoted to study and perhaps to asceticism. On the other hand, attractive women had full bodies and were strong and active. Their appearance promised work and support. Different ideals are expressed here, but the image of the ideal woman is not one of weakness” (p. 133). In short, East European Jewish society was not what we would regard as a patriarchy. Conservative views on the importance of women staying in the home to raise children might be sound social policy, yet we should not assume that this is how East European Jews ever actually lived.

Another fact noted by Stampfer, which will no doubt be surprising to readers, is the existence of coed heders. This is certainly not the image that people have of this institution. Yet while the coed aspect is interesting, especially, as Stampfer states, “given the contemporary concern (or obsession) in certain very Orthodox Jewish circles regarding co-educational education even in elementary grades,” even more significant is what this says about education for girls (p. 169 n. 11; see also p. 32). Contrary to what many think, there were East European Jewish girls who were educated just like their brothers, and Stampfer thinks that the ratio of girls to boys in heder was approximately one to eight (p. 170).

As for education in general, while some people like to imagine Eastern Europe as a placenwhere Torah study always thrived, Stampfer notes that “one can safely conclude that by the mid-1930s there were far more young Jewish males in secondary schools than in yeshivas” (p. 272). Also worthy of note is Stampfer’s point that the kollel (a school of rabbinic studies for married men) system developed because there were no longer many rich fathers-in-law willing to support a son-in-law who was studying. In addition, he argues that the shrinking of the job market for rabbis also had a share in the development of the kollel.

Let me conclude with some minor comments and corrections. On page 69, note 39, the proper reference in  Pithei Teshuvah  is  Even ha-Ezer 9:5, and the rabbi cited should be R. David Ibn Zimra (Radbaz), not R. Jacob Willowski (Ridbaz).On page 181, Stampfer discusses the famous description by R. Barukh Epstein of his aunt, Rayna Batya, the wife of R. Naphtali Zvi Judah Berlin. While acknowledging that some have doubted the veracity of Epstein’s story, Stampfer states that “the account seems plausible.” Here I must disagree. While there can be no doubt that Batya was an unusual woman, Epstein’s account of his conversations with her, as with much else in his autobiography, cannot be relied on. I have discussed this at length elsewhere, and readers can examine my arguments at the Seforim Blog here.

On page 285, Stampfer refers to the Moscow crown rabbi Jacob Mazeh (1859-1924) as having been martyred. Yet this is incorrect as Mazeh died a natural death. On page 326, note 6, regarding the Vilna Gaon’s attitude toward R. Jonathan Eibeschuetz, see Sid Z. Leiman, “When a Rabbi Is Accused of Heresy: The Stance of the Gaon of Vilna in the Emden-Eibeschuetz Controversy,” in Ezra Flescher, et al, eds., Meah Shearim (2001). Finally, on page 327, Stampfer offers evidence of criticism of the Vilna Gaon during his lifetime. In my September 12, 2009, post at the Seforim Blog, available here, I offer another example of such criticism. This is reported by R. Hayyim Dov Ber Gulevsky who heard it from his grandfather, R. Simhah Zelig Rieger, the dayan of Brisk. (Incidentally, Gulevsky is quoted by Stampfer on page 353.)

As mentioned at the beginning of this review, there is much more that can be said about Stampfer’s careful scholarship, which is a treat for all readers. I know that many share my wish to soon see in print the English edition of his classic work on the Lithuanian yeshivot.
* * *
Let me now add a few additional comments especially for the benefit of those who had already read the review before I posted it here.
1. Stampfer’s book is published by my favorite press, Littman Library. I want to call readers’ attention to another recent and wonderful book published by Littman: Sharon Flatto, The Kabbalistic Culture of Eighteenth-Century Prague. Interestingly, two dissertations were written at the same time on the Noda bi-Yehudah. The other was by David Katz, which bears the interesting title “A Case Study in the Formation of a Super-Rabbi: The Early Years of Rabbi Ezekiel Landau, 1713-1754 (University of Maryland, 2004). Although Katz’ dissertation has not yet appeared in print, there is definitely room for the two as they focus on different areas and are both works of great learning. (Yet I hope that when Katz publishes his book, he changes the title. It is bad enough that today we have people writing about how they “consulted Daas Torah” as if there is such an individual so named. The only thing worse would be to hear people recount how “I asked the Super-Rabbi his opinion” or to have Yated tell how how “The Super-Rabbi has issued his Daas Torah.” That will surely leave the religious Zionists reaching for their kryptonite.)

Regarding how Landau was indeed a “Super-Rabbi,” to use Katz’ expression, I found interesting testimony in R. Shraga Feivish Shneebalg, Shraga ha-Meir, vol. 2, no. 76. He states that he heard from R. Dov Berish Wiedenfeld, who heard from R. Meir Arik, that the Noda bi-Yehudah was the posek ha-dor. Assuming there is such a position, I don’t know of anyone more qualified for it than Landau. I must admit, however, that this is an Ashkenazic-centered perspective, because it is unimaginable that a Sephardic scholar would ever come into consideration by most of those who like to speak of the gadol ha-dor. Thus when people refer to R. Yitzhak Elhanan Spektor, R. Hayyim Ozer Grodzinski, etc. as the gadol ha-dor. they never wonder if perhaps there was a great sage in the Sephardic world who fit the bill. When people speak about the gadol or posek ha-dor, it really means the gadol or posek of their world.

Returning to Arik, he said that after the Noda bi-Yehudah the Hatam Sofer held that role. Here again, I don’t think there will be much argument. But the names he gives after this show how Arik, a Galician scholar, sees matters differently than a Lithuanian. He claimed that R. Solomon Drimer was the next posek ha-dor, yet I don’t think most people reading this post have even heard of him. For the next period, he gave the Hungarian posek R. Solomon Leib Tabak of Sighet (died 1908), author of Erekh Shai. Again, I don’t think most people reading this post have ever heard of Tabak. Yet Arik regarded him as the posek ha-dor. As a Galician, not a Lithuanian, Arik had a different perspective on who the great poskim were.[1] Yet a Lithuanian hearing this would laugh. If you asked him who the posek ha-dor was for the period of Tabak, he could give all sorts of names: R. Yitzhak Elhanan Spektor, R. Naftali Zvi Judah Berlin, R. Jehiel Michel Epstein, R. Joseph Zechariah Stern, and the list goes on, but Tabak wouildn’t even make it to the top twenty.

This different perspective was recognized by R. Jehiel Jacob Weinberg. In one responsum (Kitvei R. Weinberg, vol. 1, no. 11), after quoting a position of a Hungarian posek, Weinberg writes:

ודאי שרבני ליטא ופולין ילעגו על דברים אלה ואולם המחבר הנ”ל הי’ גאון וצדיק מפורסם וחלילה לבטל דבריו בתנופת יד גרידא. כתבתי כל הנ”ל כדי להוכיחו שצריך הוא להיות זהיר ומתון ולא להמשך אחרי הקולות של רבני ליטא ופולין שהם גדולים וחכמים בהלכה אבל בהוראה למעשה עולה עליהם רבני אונגארן וגאליציען ומובחרי השו”ת בהוראה למעשה שיצאו בזמן האחרון נתחברו על ידם.
Earlier in this responsum Weinberg writes:
כבר רמזתי לכת”ר שבעינים כאלו יש לסמוך יותר על רבני אונגארן הקרובה לאשכנז ויודעים מצב הדברים באשכנז יותר מרבני פולין וליטא. ובכלל נוטה אני מדעת חברי ורבותי רבני פולין וליטא שאינם משגיחים הרבה ברבני אונגארן. גם אני הייתי סבור כן קודם בואי לכאן, אבל אח”כ ראיתי כי בעניני הוראה עולים הם על רבני פולין וליטא, כי יש להם חוש מיוחד להוראה מעשית וכמעט כולם נתחנכו בבית מדרשו של רבינו שבגולה החת”ס ז”ל שהוא הי’ עמוד ההוראה כידוע ומפורסם.
These words are amazing because Weinberg is admitting that before he came to Germany, he too shared the feeling of superiority that he describes here. Before then it was unimaginable to him that a posek outside of Lithuania or Poland would have had much of value to add.
2. In a previous post, available here, I wrote about rabbis who began writing books at a very young age. I was asked if there are additional examples of this. There are indeed a number, and in a future post I will discuss one in more detail. For now, here is the title page of R. Aaron Friedlander’s Avrekh, where it tells us that part of the book was written when the author was nine years old! See also the approbations to this volume.

Here is the title page of R. Hezekiah David Abulafia’s Ben Zekunim. If you read the introduction you will see that the first part of this book was written when the author was thirteen years old.

R. Yitzhak Arieli reported being told by R. Kook that the latter authored a book on Song of Songs when he was only eleven years old. You can find Arieli’s testimony here.
As I am writing this people are once again outraged by something R. Ovadiah Yosef said, in that he attributed the fires in Israel to lack of Sabbath observance. Obviously, this is not the sort of comment that appeals to those with a modern temperament, but in traditional societies it is an expectation of the people that the leading rabbis will find some spiritual reason to explain tragedies. So why I am mentioning this now? Because in the document from Arieli, no. 38, he quotes R. Kook as saying something that people will find even more shocking than anything R. Ovadiah has ever said. (I don’t think you will find the students of R. Kook ever repeating it.) R. Kook wondered if the 1929 pogrom in Hebron was perhaps due to the fact that the Hebron Yeshiva brought in their “modern” ways to Israel, by which he means their way of dressing, hair style and beardless faces.
בהפרעות (בשנת תרפ”ט) בחברון מצאתיו ביום ראשון יושב ובוכה והבליט מפיו שמא מפני שהכניסו תלבושת והנהגה חדשה בארץ (היה מתנגד לגלוח הזקן (כמובן במכונה או בסם) ובלורית ואולי גם בגדים קצרים, ובישיבה העיר כ”פ ע”ז ( אבל קשה היה לשנות ההרגלים שבחו”ל).
I agree that this sounds shocking and offensive to modern ears, especially to those who lost family members in this event. I mean, can you imagine telling someone whose child was killed that it was because certain yeshiva students were dressing in a modern fashion? But again, the traditional mind works differently than the modern mind. I say this not to recommend that we all reprogram our minds so that these sorts of explanations are once again appealing, any more than I would wish that, as with Jews in medieval Germany, we once again believe that demons are all around us causing all sorts of problems. I mention it only to add some context and help explain how the most influential rabbinic mind of the twentieth century could say something which to modern ears sounds outrageous. Just as it wrong to judge pre-modern science negatively because it didn’t have access to modern technology, so too we must be careful about being prejudiced against traditionalist explanations because we might no longer share the same assumptions as our predecessors
3. With regard to R. Baruch Epstein’s discussions about his uncle the Netziv in Mekor Barukh, the irony is that the Netziv thought that there was no good purpose in reading the biographies of great Torah sages. He thought that this was nothing less than bitul Torah. See the letter from R. Hayyim Berlin printed at the beginning of his father’s Meromei Sadeh.
The Netziv’s concern with bitul Torah was such that when his wife (I presume his first wife, Rayna Batya) had to have an operation and the students wanted to say Tehillim for her, the Netziv refused to stop the learning for this. After the students continued to push, he agreed to allow five minutes of tehillim. This was reported by R. Zvi Yehudah Kook, who must have heard it from his father. See R. Hayyim Avihu Schwartz, Be-Tokh ha-Torah ha-Goelet (Beit El, 2006), p. 201.
In an e-mail discussion with one reader, he contrasted the Netziv to R. Chaim Soloveitchik and R. Velvel ,saying that the Netziv was so “normal”. I don’t want to use words like that, and while R. Chaim had many unique qualities, I don’t think the stories told about him are any more unusual than those told of other gedolim. Most of these stories are, in fact, quite inspiring. The stories about R. Velvel are, I admit, of a different flavor. I mentioned two such examples here.

Yet lest one thing that these type of stories are unique to R. Velvel, let me mention a story about the Aderet “brought down” (to use the yeshiva lingo) in the book I just referred to, Be-Tokh ha-Torah ha-Goelet, p. 324. R. Zvi Yehudah told how one of the Aderet’s sons died right after birth, just as Shabbat was starting . The Aderet told his wife that she should perpare the Shalom Zakhor as if everything was normal, for there is no avelut on Shabbat and the community does not need to know that anything is wrong. When the Rebbetzin began to cry the Aderet replied to her that she is acting this way because she doesn’t study Talmud. If she studied Talmud she would know that there are often times when we are left with questions, and the same is true in life.

4. Stampfer’s point about the frequency, and lack of shame, of divorce in Eastern Europe was an eye-opener to me. In Between the Yeshiva World and Modern Orthodoxy, p. 22, I mention that divorce was very uncommon in traditional Lithuanian Jewish society, and almost unheard of among the rabbinate. I now see that I was mistaken in this assumption (which was based on my general impressions, not on the sort of evidence Stampfer makes use of). For examples of rabbinic figures who got divorced, see here.
5. I referred to Daas Torah above, and since someone asked me if I could write up what I said about it in a recent lecture, I will do so now. In this lecture I quoted what appears in R. Yitzhak Dadon’s new book, Rosh Devarkha. This is the follow-up to his earlier book, Imrei Shefer, both of which record the teachings of R. Avraham Shapiro, Rosh Yeshiva of Merkaz ha-Rav. On p. 10 one finds R. Avraham’s very harsh comments against Daas Torah. He would refer to it as Ziyuf ha-Torah. Here are some of his words:

האם התורה עוברת רק דרך אדם אחד?! בחו”ל לא היה כדבר הזה! זה אמר כך, וגדול פלוני חלק עליו וחשב אחרת, מישהוא אמר שהפלוני הזה הוא נגד “דעת תורה”?! מהיכן הביאו את הדבר הזה? אם ה”חפץ חיים” סבר כך ורבי מאיר שמחה אחרת ופלוני גדול אחר
חלק עליהם, יש מי מהם שהוא נגד “דעת תורה”? איזו הנהגה היא זו? זו השתלטות על דעת הרבנים, ולא היה כזאת בעם ישראל.

As for the practice of declaring what the Daas Torah is through the newspaper or through placards, without any sources to support this, here are R. Avraham’s strong words (and apologies if any wives are offended):

כלפי רבנים המוצאים חוות-דעת ותלמידיהם מפרסמים זאת תחת הכותרת: “דעת תורה”, בלי שום אסמכתאות ומקורות נאמנים היה מרן זצ”ל אומר: “איזו מין דעת תורה היא זו? כשאדם אומר “דעת תורה” בלי שום מקורות, אז הכוונה היא כזאת: זה קצת מבוסס על מה שהוא למד, והרוב זה מה שאשתו אמרה לו, זה הפירוש דעת תורה.

Anyone who is honest will admit that the current practice of Daas Torah is completely phony. My proof of this is very simple. If tomorrow R. Elyashiv would declare that everyone has to say hallel on Yom ha-Atzmaut, would the Lithuanian yeshiva world listen to his Daas Torah? Of course not. They would simply replace him with another gadol whose Daas Torah is more palatable to them. In other words, the gadol only has Daas Torah because the masses, or the askanim, let him have it, and only when they like what he says. (I am curious. Has R. Elyashiv’s ruling that fashionable sheitls are forbidden had any effect on his supposed followers?).

Try to imagine what would happen if someone in the haredi world discovered a letter from the Hazon Ish, the ultimate Daas Torah authority, in which he said that only the best and the brightest in the State of Israel should devote themselves to Torah study. However, everyone else should go to work. Does anyone think that this letter would ever see the light of day? Of course not! We all know what would happen. The letter would be kept hidden, and if by chance some rebel did publish it, the haredi world would find a way to justify why they don’t accept the Hazon Ish’s viewpoint.

6. In this post I referred to a mistaken point by R. Ezriel Tauber in his recent book Pirkei Mahashavah al Yud Gimel Ikarim le-ha-Rambam. I was asked if my negative comment relates to the entire book, or just the one point I referred to. My answer is that I wasn’t referring to the entire book, and I am sure that people will find things that are valuable in it. Yet I have to say that I don’t find it helpful when an author like Tauber asserts, p. 428, that people who claim to be atheists are really not. Rather, they just don’t want to believe, but deep down they know the truth.

Contrary to Tauber (and he is not the only one to express himself this way), the only intellectually honest position is to take people like Christopher Hitchens at their word and deal with it. Claiming that the atheist really believes is no better than the atheist saying that the believer really knows the truth that there is no God.
Furthermore, from my perspective I can’t take an author seriously when he says things like how in the Far East there are people who have the power to use black magic, and their knowledge is part of a tradition that goes back to Abraham. P. 133:
ואכן במזרח הרחוק יודעים שמות של טומאה, ויש להניח ששורש הידיעה היא מאברהם אבינו. ואף על פי שהם כוחות אמיתיים, אסור לנו להשתמש בהם.
*  *  *
I want to take this opportunity to invite all Seforim Blog readers on what I know will be an amazing Jewish heritage tour to Central Europe this summer. Details can be found here. They are still working on the price, and it will be posted soon. Those who want further details are invited to contact me.
With Christmas Eve almost upon us, I also invite readers to watch, or listen to, my lecture “Torah Study (or Lack of It) On Christmas Eve: The History of a Very Strange Practice.” It is available here. The few dollars (Canadian) that it costs go to support a very worthy organization, Torah in Motion.
Notes


[1] Wiedenfeld, who is the source for the information from Arik, actually had a special place in the eyes of the Lithuanian yeshiva  world. Haym Soloveitchik writes (TUMJ 7 [1997],  p. 144):

Intellectually, the Lithuanian approach to talmudic study (derekh ha-limmud) has triumphed. One could scarcely imagine a Hungarian rosh yeshiva being considered as a candidate to head a Lithuanian yeshiva. Nor is it accidental that with one early, minor exception (the Tchebiner Rav [Wiedenfeld]), all the embodiments of da’at Torah, both in America and Israel, have been Lithuanian.



A Compromise in Halacha – On Menachot 33a

A Compromise in Halacha – On Menachot 33a
By Eli Genauer
A common D’var Torah delivered at a wedding goes something like this: “Dear Chatan and Kallah. You are standing beneath a Chupah which is representative of the home you will build within the Jewish people. When you walk into your home, you will notice that that Mezuzah is placed in a diagonal position on the doorpost. There is a disagreement between Rashi and his grandson Rabbeinu Tam as to whether the Mezuzah should be affixed in a vertical or horizontal position. Later decisors ruled that a compromise between those two opinions was in order and therefore prescribed that the Mezuzah be affixed diagonally. This lesson of compromise is an important one as you embark upon you marriage and the Mezuzah on your door is an important reminder of this principle. Mazal Tov!”
This wedding Dvar Torah is based on a Gemara in Menachot 33a
אמר רב יהודה אמר רב, עשאה כמין נגר פסולה.
איני? והא כי אתא רב יצחק בר יוסף אמר כולהו מזוזתא דבי רבי כמין נגר הוו עביד……. ?
לא קשיא, הא דעבידא כסיכתא, הא דעבידא כאיסתוירא. 
Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: If one affixes a Mezuzah like a bolt, it is invalid. Is this so? But when Rav Yitzchak bar Yosef came ( from Eretz Yisroel ) he said that all Mezuzot in the house of Rebbe ( Yehuda HaNasi) were affixed like a bolt……? This is not difficult. This ruling (where it is ruled as being unfit) is where it was prepared like a peg; that ruling (in the house of Rebbe where it is ruled as being fit) is where it is prepared like an ankle. [1] 
Rashi explains that a “נגר” is something that is embedded in a wall “שתוחבין הנגרין בכותל”[2] 2. He then writes the word “כזה” and illustrates this with a drawing showing a horizontally placed Mezuzah. This is one of many times here that Rashi tells us something and then uses the word “כזה” which is then followed by a diagram. In this case, the illustration shows a horizontally affixed Mezuzah and it is a mezuzah affixed in this direction that is improper.
Rabbeinu Tam (תוס’ ד״ה “הא דעבידא כסיכתא) is bothered by the explanation of Rashi because he feels that it is more honorable to have the Mezuzah affixed in a horizontal position just as it is more honorable to have a Sefer Torah lying horizontally than standing vertically. He therefore translates the word “נגר” as a “peg” and says that the disqualification of a Mezuzah affixed כמין נגר is that it is affixed vertically, like a peg. He also translates the word כסיכתא as a peg and therefore disqualified because it is vertical, and the word איסתוירא, which is considered to be proper, as the part of the foot below the ankle which is horizontal.
The idea that affixing the Mezuzah diagonally is a compromise between the positions of Rashi and Rabbeinu Tam is based on the Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh Deah 289:6

צְרִיכָה לִהְיוֹת זְקוּפָה, אָרְכָּהּ לְאֹרֶךְ מְזוּזַת הַפֶּתַח….. הַגָּה: וְכֵן נָהֲגוּ. (בֵּית יוֹסֵף) אֲבָל יֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים שֶׁפְּסוּלָה בִּזְקוּפָה, אֶלָּא צְרִיכָה לִהְיוֹת שְׁכוּבָה, אָרְכָּהּ לְרֹחַב מְזוּזַת הַפֶּתַח (טוּר וְהַפּוֹסְקִים בְּשֵׁם רַבֵּנוּ תָּם). וְהַמְּדַקְדְּקִין, יוֹצְאִין יְדֵי שְׁנֵיהֶם, וּמַנִּיחִים אוֹתָהּ בְּשִׁפּוּעַ וּבַאֲלַכְסוֹן (טוּר וְהַגָּהוֹת מַיְמוֹנִי ומהרי”ל ות”ה סי’ נ”ב), וְכֵן רָאוּי לִנְהֹג, וְכֵן נוֹהֲגִין בִּמְדִינוֹת אֵלּוּ.

In truth, it is not really a compromise but rather an effort to affix the Mezuzah in a way in which both Rashi and Rabbeinu Tam would approve. Rashi says that vertical is the proper way, horizontal is Pasul, but bent ( or diagonal) is also Kosher. Rabbeinu Tam says that horizontal is the proper way, vertical is Pasul, but bent is also Kosher. Some Meforshim take this idea even further by saying that since in the house of Rebbe the Mezuzot were affixed כאיסתוירא, this was some sort of Hidur and therefore something to be emulated.
The classic edition of the Vilna Shas (Vilna 1885) renders this Sugya and the accompanying diagrams as such
Here are the words of Rashi which correspond to these two diagrams which show the positioning of four Mezuzot
  1. עשאה כמין נגר – שקבעה ותחבה בסף כנגר, שתוחבין הנגרין בכותל כזה.
  2. פסולה – דמצותה לתתה באורך בסף כזה …. נגר, קביליא
  3. עבידא כסיכתא – נגר כשל אומנים כזה פסולה
  4. איסתוירא – היינו מקום חיבור השוק והרגל ומעומד הוא כזה, כשירה:
  5. ל”א איסתוירא, כי היכי דמקום חיבור השוק והרגל הוי השוק זקוף מלמעלה והרגל שוכב כזה כך הניחה למזוזה כשירה הואיל וראשה אחד זקוף:
The doorframe in the top illustration shows the position of two Mezuzot.
The one on top is horizontal which is improper, and the one on the bottom is vertical which is Kosher.
  1. עשאה כמין נגר – שקבעה ותחבה בסף כנגר, שתוחבין הנגרין בכותל כזה.
He affixed and inserted it in the doorpost like a bolt, for workmen who work with bolts insert it in the walls like this[3] 
  1. פסולה – דמצותה לתתה באורך בסף כזה ….
It is improper- Because the Mitzvah is to affix it vertically in the doorpost like this….
The doorframe in the lower illustration also shows two Mezuzot.
The one on top is horizontal and therefore improper and the one on the bottom is bent (it looks like the Hebrew letter Nun), and therefore Kosher. Here are the words of Rashi which correspond to these two Mezuzot.
עבידא כסיכתא – נגר כשל אומנים כזה פסולה
A bolt as fashioned by workmen like this is disqualified
ל”א איסתוירא. כי היכי דמקום חיבור השוק והרגל הוי השוק זקוף מלמעלה והרגל שוכב כזה כך הניחה למזוזה כשירה הואיל וראשה אחד זקוף
Another explanation of איסתוירא – like the point at which the “Shok” joins the ”Regel”, where the “Shok” is upright and the “Regel” rests, like this, so too if he affixes the Mezuzah like this it is Kosher because the top part is upright.
There is no diagram associated directly with this comment of Rashi
איסתוירא – היינו מקום חיבור השוק והרגל ומעומד הוא כזה, כשירה:
Whether a נגר is normally inserted horizontally or vertically is also “illustrated” in Jastrow’s explanation of the word
In Bava Batra 101a he describes it “like an upright bolt” and in our Gemara he describes it as “like a bolt shoved into a case, i.e. horizontally
There are two issues with the standard depiction of the two diagrams in the Vilna Shas. Rashi uses the word כזה five times and there are only four “illustrations” (2 in each diagram) Also, we would expect that there would be a diagram after each time it says כזה.
This problem is solved when we look at the only handwritten manuscript we have of Rashi on this part of Menachot.
The National Library of Russia, St. Petersburg, Russia Ms. EVR IV 25:

http://aleph.nli.org.il:80/F/?func=direct&doc_number=000159163&local_base=NNLMSS
It contains five depictions of the placement of the Mezuzot and each כזה is followed by a depiction.
The problem is also solved when we look at the first printed edition of Menachot ( Bomberg 1522) whose source had to be a manuscript. [4] 
This printed edition leaves space after every כזה. It even includes a rudimentary depiction of the last כזה looking like a “Nun” which is supposed to depict where the ankle meets the leg.
It looks very much like the Nun in the National Library of Russia manuscript and may have emanated from the same source.
It was very exciting for me personally to discover this “diagram” which clearly was added to illustrate the כזה. In his Maamar ‘al hadpasat ha-Talmud with Additions, (ed. A.M. Habermann, Mossad ha-Rav Kook, Jerusalem: 2006, p.41)  Rav Natan Nata Rabbinowicz, writing about the first Bomberg edition, states as follows:

״ובכל התלמוד (וכן בכל הדפוסים הישנים עד דפוס בערמן) נשמטו הציורים בגמרא, רש״י ותוספות,ונשאר מקומם חלקמלבד בסוטה מגשישנו הציור ברש״י
“In all of the Talmud (and in all other older printed editions of the Talmud until the Berman edition ( Frankfurt an Der Oder 1697-99) the diagrams were not included in the Talmud, Rashi and Tosfot, and their space remained empty, except for Sotah 43A, where we find a diagram in Rashi.”

It turns out there was a diagram included in the second Bomberg edition of Zevachim( 1528) on 53b, which Rabbinowicz probably never saw. See my article here.
He may have also missed this one because it does not look much like a diagram, but just a letter, or perhaps he felt it was of no significance.
This depiction of the last כזה looking like a “Nun” was maintained by subsequent editions of the Talmud printed in Basel 1580, Cracow 1605, Amsterdam 1644, and Frankfurt an der Oder in 1699.
It was only dropped and replaced with the two larger diagrams we have today in the Frankfurt am Main edition of 1720.
Since many people follow the advice of the Rema and affix the Mezuzah diagonally, it is important to understand the source. This is the word in the Gemara which state that in the house of Rebbe, the Mezuzot were affixed כאיסתוירא. This word is etymologically related to the Latin word astragalus which is described as “the bone in the ankle that articulates with the leg bones to form the ankle joint”. It is more commonly known today as the Talus and looks like this:[5] 
As used in the Gemara, it probably meant the entire area where the bottom of the foot ( which is horizontal) met the bottom of the leg ( which is vertical) at the ankle, thereby looking like something that was bent.
Finally, there is a fascinating story about the Talus bone related by Rav Yisroel Shachor in the Sefer “Dovair Yesharim”.[6] In discussing the איסתוירא, he writes that he was in a terrible automobile accident and בחסדי ה׳ escaped death by climbing out of the rear of the car only seconds before it burst into flames. The only injury he sustained was a broken bone in his foot, which he identified as the Talus. He had many opportunities to view x-rays of his broken foot and concludes “I see this as a source of amazement that the only bone of all 248 bones in my body which was broken, allowed me to understand the words of Torah, and to understand that this was the איסתוירא which is mentioned in Gemarot.”[7]

[1] Translation courtesy of Sefaria.org and follows the interpretation of Rashi.
[2] There is discussion on whether what is shown as Rashi in our editions of Menachot was actually written by Rashi. Rav Natan Nata Rabbinowicz ( author of Dikdukei Sofrim) writes that our “Rashi” was written by a student of Rabbeinu Gershom. ( Dikdukei Sofrim on Menachot 86a note 6 where he writes …מפני שהפרוש הזה המיוחס לרש״י הוא כנראה מתלמיד הרבינו גרשום מאור הגולה והעתיק ברובו לשון הרבינו גרשום מאור הגולה) Rav Betzalel Ashkenazi (the author of the Shita Mekubetzet) writes that for chapters 7-10, the “Rashi” in the standard editions was not written by Rashi and he substitutes his own version which is indicated by the words “Rashi Ktiv Yad” in the Vilna Shas. The editors of the Vilna Shas record this opinion at the beginning of the 7th chapter ( Menachot 72a) as follows: וזה לשונו “זה הפּרוש אשר הוא בדפוס מפרק אלו המנחות עד שתי הלחם אינו מפי׳ רש״י ז״ל והוא של פרשן אחר, וזה לשון רש״י כּ״י”.But Rav Ashkenazi seems to indicate that the Rashi of other chapters was in fact written by Rashi. ( see his note to the beginning of Menachot chapter 11 where he writes מכאן ואליך הוא פירוש רש״י ז״ל).
[3] We only know that it is affixed in a horizontal direction from the picture, not from Rashi’s words.
[4] The Soncino family printed many tractates of the Talmud from 1483-1519 before Bomberg printed the complete Talmud in 1520-1522, and those Soncino editions often formed the basis for the text of the Bomberg edition. But the Soncino family did not print tractate Menachot meaning the Bomberg edition was based solely on manuscripts.
[5] My source for this information is Dr. Carol Teitz who is a member of my Shul. Dr. Teitz is an orthopedic surgeon and most recently, the dean of admissions at the University of Washington Medical School
[6] Doveir Yesharim, Sefer Shemot, Jerusalem. 2014, page 128

[7] This source was brought to my attention by a Torah scholar named Aharon who has helped me immensely in my research on diagrams.



Guide and Review of Online Resources – 2022 – Part I

Guide and Review of Online Resources – 2022 – Part I

By Ezra Brand

Ezra Brand is an independent researcher based in Tel Aviv. He has an MA from Revel Graduate School at Yeshiva University in Medieval Jewish History, where he focused his research on 13th and 14th century sefirotic Kabbalah. He is interested in using digital and computational tools in historical research. He has contributed a number of times previously to the Seforim Blog (tag), and a selection of his research can be found at his Academia.edu profile. He can be reached at ezrabrand-at-gmail.com; any and all feedback is greatly appreciated.[1]

Intro

It’s an exciting time to be a reader of scholarship, and to be engaged with the field. The dramatic shift to “remote” and “virtual” over the past two years may be on par with the shifts to writing and the codex around the 9th century) and the printing press in the 15th.[2]

Digital publishing has become more and more mainstream. As defined by Wikipedia (in entry “Electronic publishing”):

“Electronic publishing (also referred to as publishing, digital publishing, or online publishing) includes the digital publication of e-books, digital magazines, and the development of digital libraries and catalogs. It also includes the editing of books, journals and magazines to be posted on a screen (computer, e-reader, tablet, or smartphone.”

Regarding Hebrew books specifically, and for recent data, Israeli National Library annual statistics for 2020 state (Hebrew, my translation):

“In 2020, digital publishing was significantly expanded. Not all the digital books have been processed [by the library] yet, but already 799 digital books have been registered in the National Library, from publishers, research institutions, private individuals and more […]

For many in the past year, digital publication has become the primary mode of distribution, as opposed to paper. Notable in this area is the relatively small amount of children’s books (8%) compared to the high number of digital reference literature (69%).

The share of [books put out by] associations (43%) is particularly high, especially for reference books in the field of Israeli society and Jewish studies. [The share of books put out by] [p]rivate publishers (37%) include[s] many biographies, rabbinic literature and a few children’s books that have come out. Commercial publishers released most of the digital prose books.”

Specifically regarding rabbinic literature, one scholar pointed out already in 2016: “Searching for ancient original Jewish sources online, it is astonishing how diverse and numerous are the websites that are available.”[3]

At the same time as the trend towards digital publishing and distribution is occurring, there is also a movement towards “open access”. In this context, “open access” means an academic resource, whether databases, journals, or other tools, with no paywalls or subscriptions required to access content.

Over the first few decades of electronic resources, most of the resources were proprietary. They were generally available on a CD, which had to be bought. With the shift to the internet, many of these resources became available online, but required a subscription.

The movement towards freely available scholarship has continued to gain steam, making a huge amount of cutting edge scholarly publications available for free, and for all. In addition, there are a huge amount of grassroots initiatives to make available primary sources for study.

Open-access can be financially sustained in one of the following major ways:

  1. Volunteer work
  2. Funding by institution (esp. non-profit, university, or government) or individual donation
  3. Advertising

The open-source resources in this guide are mostly supported in one of the first two ways.

Besides for full open-access, another model is called “freemium”. Freemium, as I use it in this context, means that some very basic part is provided for free, with the hope that the main product will be bought.

Some examples of freemium content that I’ve found helpful are:

Amazon listing pages for books. Amazon has bibliographical info, blurbs of reviews by scholars and media, crowd-sourced reviews and free excerpts of ebooks for Kindle, called “sample”, and the ability to add to a list.

Another example is JSTOR, with bibliographical info and first page of article.

On these resources, see more detail later in the guide.[4]

Electronic vs. physical – pros and cons

Electronic material has a lot of advantages, though there are some disadvantages.
For the intellectually curious, the relative ease of access is honestly astonishing, and it’s truly a wonderful time to be a book lover (not to mention the higher level of book typesetting).

Of course, physical books have certain advantages, tangible and intangible, that people get roused up about, especially traditionalists. And of course Orthodox Jews don’t use electronic sources on Shabbat and holidays. But electronic sources have their own massive advantages:

  1. Instantly accessible
  2. Searchable
  3. Can do various data analysis
  4. Easily shared and saved via copy-paste and screenshots
  5. Easily highlighted and annotated
  6. Text size can be customized
  7. Takes up far less physical space
  8. Allows for new forms of scholarship (such as Prof. Moshe Koppel’s algorithms for proving authorship, discussed in a number of Seforim Blog posts).[5]

I personally have switched over to electronic texts wherever possible.

Of course, traditional physical seforim and internet-based resources aren’t mutually exclusive. One can have the best of both worlds. In Modern Orthodox yeshivot it’s been a common sight already for many years for people to have a laptop before them. Admittedly, the main use of the laptop is for notetaking, but it can also act as a portal to a world of supplemental seforim.

About this guide

Jewish culture is stereotypically one of the book. There is understandably a huge literature on of books in Jewish history. For one example, on the material aspect of books in Jewish history, see Malachi Beit-Arié’s monumental 700-page book, Hebrew Codicology, recently finalized, and available for free online here and here. With the shift to virtual, Jewish studies haven’t been slacking.

Scope of the Guide

This guide will mostly not cover resources related to the following topics:

  1. Primary sources and studies of Tanach/Bible , Dead Sea Scrolls, Pseudepigrapha (=”Seforim Hitzonim”), meaning works up to the period of Chazal, circa 100 BCE. So for example, I didn’t include Bar Ilan University’s Mikra’ot Gedolot Haketer (מקראות גדולות הכתר – see on this project Wikipedia here (English) and here (Hebrew)) or their weekly Parshat Hashavua sheet.
  2. At the opposite end, the Late Modern period (circa 1850-2000). So it won’t cover resources related to modern Hebrew literature, Haskalah, Zionism, the modern State of Israel, Holocaust, contemporary Jewish thought and hashkafa, or more contemporary seforim (such as R’ Ashlag’s commentary on Zohar, and those of his descendants).

A large part of my annotations are taken from the descriptions provided by the maintainers of the project and from Wikipedia. All translations are my own, unless noted otherwise.

My translation is sometimes loose, and I did not always fact-check. The info in this guide should definitely be double-checked if used for anything more scholarly.

In general, my main intention is to raise awareness and point readers to some of the incredible resources currently available to anyone with an internet connection.

Note: The website of the resource is hyperlinked in the name. In cases where only a part of a website is relevant to the resources under discussion, I try to link to the page on the website that best acts as a portal to the resources.

Another note: It’s quite incredible how much is now available on the internet. At the same time, projects become outdated and links become broken very rapidly. I hope to be able to update this guide every once in a while, but unfortunately the rapid changes in the layout of the internet is one of the blessings and the curses that come with this new medium (victims of the unfortunate phenomenon of “link rot”).

While researching this guide, I constantly found new resources that I was not aware of, and I’m certain (and hoping, in a good way) that this guide will rapidly become more and more outdated as more resources come online, and (negatively) as links break.

Other Guides

There are other guides, such as that of university library guides and other websites.[6] However, many of these guides are meant for students and researchers, and less for the general educated reader with an interest in these topics. In addition, many previous guides are from ten years ago or longer, and many of the links no longer work .

Outline of this Guide

Primary texts

A huge amount of primary texts have been transcribed and scanned, and are readily available.

Primary texts – transcribed

Digital editions in text format.[7]

Open-access

  1. Sefaria . Large number of texts, as well as English translations.
    1. Wikipedia – English: “Sefaria has a vast library of Jewish text, including Tanakh, Talmud, and Jewish prayers alongside sources in philosophy, mysticism, Jewish law, and newer works. Some works, such as Tanakh and Talmud, feature English translations. These are either crowdsourced, provided by publishers, or in the public domain. Contains a complete English translation of Rashi’s commentary on the Torah, the William Davidson Talmud translation,[8] and a complete translation of Ibn Ezra’s Torah commentaries, one of the only resources to have a complete translation of these works in English. Many works are linked with their respective commentaries. For example, clicking on a verse in Tanakh will open a window on the side, allowing the user to open a commentary on that verse.”
    2. Some of the texts available, all highly credible works, and that I’ve personally used in Sefaria for study (all with hyper-linked table of contents, transcribed, searchable, downloadable, ability to make text larger, and many other features):
      1. Steinzaltz-Koren translation into English and commentary on Talmud Bavli
      2. Guggenheimer translation and commentary of Talmud Yerushalmi
      3. Mishnat Eretz Yisrael commentary on Mishnah
      4. Jastrow Dictionary
  2. Al-Hatorah (על-התורה) .
    1. I only discovered this resource while researching this guide. My take: Recommended. Both Al-Hatorah as well as Sefaria are very user friendly and powerful both for looking up references, as well as for studying. However, not all of the transcriptions on Al-Hatorah are complete.
    2. Al-Hatorah has more developed tools for serious study (see my “story” earlier in this piece). While Sefaria has a bit of a cleaner interface and more modern UX/UI with lots of whitespace.
    3. The UX/UI is quite similar to the “Bar Ilan Responsa Project,” where the Table of Contents are set up as “trees”.
    4. From the About page: “ALHATORAH.ORG was founded by Rabbi Hillel & Neima Novetsky and their children, Yonatan, Aviva, Ariella, and Yehuda. Hillel is a musmakh of RIETS (YU) and earned an MA in Jewish History from Bernard Revel Graduate School and a PhD in Bible from Haifa University. Neima earned an MA in Bible from Bernard Revel Graduate School (YU) and teaches in Torah institutions in Israel. The content of the website is the product of an ongoing, worldwide, collaborative effort of Rabbis, scholars, educators, and laypeople.”
    5. See also their mission statement.
    6. Some of the works available there (many from recent critical editions):
      1. Targum Yerushalmi – Neofiti (תרגום ירושלמי – ניאופיטי). See description there: “This targum, based on a single known manuscript (Neofiti 1) in the Vatican Library copied in 1504, is the only known complete text of the “Targum Yerushalmi” on the Torah. Previously known brief extracts related to this targum had long been known in manuscripts of what is referred to by scholars as the “fragment targums”, which are cited in Jastrow’s Dictionary under the rubric “YII” and appear in various editions of Miqraot Gedolot interspersed with Targum Pseudo Jonathan under the rubric “Targum Yerushalmi”. Extensive manuscript pages of related material were also discovered in the Cairo Geniza in the 20th Century. This electronic text has been provided by the Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon (CAL) project of the Hebrew Union College – Jewish Institute of Religion. It was originally entered under the guidance of Prof. M. Sokoloff for the preparation of his A Dictionary of Jewish Palestinian Aramaic based on the multi-volume editio-princeps of Prof. A. Diez-Macho (1968ff.) and a photographic edition of the manuscript by Makor Press. Additional marginal or interlinear variants have been added by CAL staff based on the photographs.”
      2. Mishnat Eretz Yisrael – modern scholarly commentary on Mishnah. (This commentary also in Sefaria, as mentioned in its entry.)
      3. Steinsaltz-Koren commentary on Talmud Bavli in Hebrew (Sefaria has the English translation and commentary, as mentioned in its entry.)
      4. List of translated works into English.
      5. Visualizations. Very interesting visualizations: timelines, maps, and lists.
  3. Daat (דעת).
    1. Has both books as text, as well as scanned PDFs. Includes lots of out-of-copyright books, as well as recent open-access scholarly books, see here, and here.
    2. Wikipedia – Hebrew: “Daat is a Hebrew website whose main content is texts in the fields of Judaism and the humanities that were collected from various printed sources. The site contains learning and teaching materials in various fields: Bible, Torah Sheba’al Peh, Shabbat and festivals, Jewish history, Jewish thought, literature, studies of the Land of Israel, Shemita, medicine and halakhah, education, Hasidism, family studies, Hebrew law, army and war, the Holocaust, and more. The site includes extensive databases containing entire books, full text of articles published in about 30 different journals, photos and maps, illustrations, photographs and presentations.”
  4. Kodesh.Snunit (סנונית – מאגר ספרות הקודש). Basic rabbinic texts.
    1. Great for referencing Tanach. Often is the first to come up in Google searches in Hebrew. For example, if I come across a reference to “Bereishit 1:1”, I’ll just google בראשית א, and generally the first result is to the first chapter of Bereishit.
  5. Wikitext – Hebrew (וויקיטקסט).
    1. Wikipedia – Hebrew: “In May 2009, the Hebrew Wikitext reached 25,000 text units upon completion of uploading all of Maimonides’ Mishneh Torah.”
    2. Due to the fact that it’s a crowd-sourced project, it very much has the feel of a “work-in-progress”, with lots of individual chapters missing transcriptions, and of uneven editorship.
    3. Despite this, a great resource, and one that many of other websites draw on.
    4. For example of interesting sefer found there, see R’ Heiman’s Toldot Tana’im VeAmora’im. I recently used Wikitext’s transcription to do various analyses of the entire corpus of names of rabbis found in Chazal.
  6. Historical Dictionary Project of the Hebrew Language (המילון ההיסטורי ללשון העברית).
    1. Not especially user-friendly, meant for rigorous research.
    2. Wikipedia – Hebrew: “Includes a database of all the major works of the Hebrew language in antiquity. As of 2012, more than 7,900 works have been typed into the database, which include more than nine million words, and contain more than 36,000 entries. Work on the database continues consistently, both because of the need to update the database according to updated research, as well as due to the discovery of additional ancient works.”
  7. Mamre Institute (מכון ממרא).
    1. Wikipedia: “The Mamre Institute is an Israeli research institute aimed at providing accessible and accurate texts for the Hebrew Bible, Mishnah, Tosefta, Babylonian Talmud, Jerusalem Talmud, Mishneh Torah and Targum Onkelos.”
  8. Ben-Yehuda Project (פרויקט בן-יהודה) .
    1. Wikipedia – Hebrew: “The project includes, among other things, poetry, fiction, translation, research (עיון) and essays in Hebrew from the Middle Ages to the present day. As of October 2021 it includes over 28,000 works, by about 1,000 different authors.”
  9. An Invitation to Piyut (הזמנה לפיוט).
    1. Tremendous database of piyyutim, with a huge number of piyyutim transcribed.
    2. Wikipedia – Hebrew: “A cultural-educational project that works to preserve and revive the traditions of piyyut and prayer of the Jewish people, through a website, publishing, conservation activities, community education and cultural events. The site has about 1,000 columns and articles, including personal columns, memoirs, introductory passages, and reviews. Among the authors of the site are Prof. Ephraim Hazan, Dr. Meir Buzaglo, Prof. Haviva Pedia, Prof. Edwin Seroussi, Rabbi Dr. Benny Lau and many others.”
  10. Grimoar .
    1. Focuses on kabbalistic texts.
    2. Wikipedia – Hebrew: “A database collecting a large amount of Kabbalah books and books of Jewish thought typed and open for use.”
    3. Unfortunately, the website contains no bibliographical information whatsoever, such as on what edition or manuscript the text is based on. In general it’s unclear who hosts the website.
  11. Chabad Library.
    1. Works of Chabad Chasidut transcribed.
  12. Ramhal.net (קהילת הרמח”ל).
    1. Works of the Ramhal transcribed.
    2. From the About page: “The community was founded in 2002 with the aim of making Ramchal’s teachings accessible to the general public.”
  13. Hassidout.org. Works of Kabbalah transcribed.
  14. Moreh Nevuchim (מורה נבוכים) with mark-up.
    1. See description here: Hillel Gershuni and Yohai Makbili, “Guide for the Perplexed – Glossary and bibliography” (2019).

Requires subscription or purchase

  1. Bar Ilan Responsa Project . Massive number of texts, with very high level of accuracy. Requires subscription.
    1. Wikipedia – English: “The database consists of one of the world’s largest electronic collections of Jewish texts in Hebrew. It includes numerous works from the Responsa Literature. The database also includes the Bible and the Talmud (with commentaries); articles about Jewish law and customs; Maimonides’ Mishneh Torah and the Shulchan Aruch with main commentaries; Zohar, Midrashim, and the Talmudic Encyclopedia.”

Primary texts – scanned

Mostly searchable via OCR, and in PDF format.

Open-access

  1. HebrewBooks .
    1. Wikipedia – Hebrew: “Free online digital library for Torah literature. The site contains about 61,000 scanned Torah books and journals, from the beginning of printing to contemporary authors, most of them in Hebrew. The books can be viewed, downloaded and textually searched for in the book’s content. The site is accessible in Hebrew and English.”
    2. HebrewBooks is likely well-known to most readers. However, something that might be less well-known is that HebrewBooks has a new search page, officially in beta: https://beta.hebrewbooks.org/#gsc.tab=0. It’s a much more powerful search engine, with many new, modern features (bringing it closer to the Otzar HaChochma experience).[9]
  2. Israel National Library (הספרייה הלאומית).
    1. Links to seforim accessed via search or direct link, no way to browse. However, the “Halach Brura” index (see later, under section “Index”) often links to it.
    2. Unfortunately, due to many changes and updates to the National Library website over the years, many of the links to the website found at outside websites are now broken.
    3. Presumably, the best way to find the work is to as follows:
      1. Search the name of the work in the National Library website search box (“Merhav”).
      2. Filter for “Available online” AND “Books”
      3. Click on “Online access”
    4. URLs of open-access works appear to following template: “https://www.nli.org.il/he/books/NNL_ALEPH00XXXXXXX/NLI”. For example, Ohev Yisra’el: https://www.nli.org.il/he/books/NNL_ALEPH001091556/NLI
  3. Center for Jewish History.
    1. Links to seforim accessed via search or direct link, no way to browse. Has many primary texts available. Couldn’t find a simple way to search for seforim. However, the “Halach Brura” index (see later, under section “Index”) often links to it. For example, the sefer “Derech Yeshara”.
  4. Portal HaDaf HaYomi (פורטל הדף היומי) .
    1. Has a few hundred scanned seforim, mostly relating to Talmud Bavli, many of them not available elsewhere. Examples: R’ Kashet’s highly methodical works on lomdus ( קובץ יסודת וחקירות ; אמרי במערבא ; פלפולא דאורייתא ; דרכי התלמודים ; see also there R’ Kashash’s similar style work, קובץ מיסודות השס); R’ Amitai’s well-researched and highly-structured works on Torah and science (דע מאיין באו ; הידיעות המדעיות שבדברי חזל ; היחס שבין היקף המעגל לרוחבו ; באהלי שם ; מנא להו ; אמונה טהורה); R’ Pinchuk’s intro to Talmud Yerushalmi (מבוא ללימוד התלמוד הירושלמי); some great works on Talmudic humor (Engleman’s שעשועי ; Lifshitz’s ברוח טובה ).
  5. Goethe University Frankfurt Library.
  6. Massorti.com . Has all of Lieberman’s Tosefet Rishonim and Tosefta Kifshuta available. See links at Halacha Brura > מפרשי תוספתא.
  7. Abuelafia.blogspot.
    1. A number of seforim by the medieval kabbalist R’ Avraham Abulafia, published recently by R’ Amnon Gros. This is R’ Gros’s website.[10]
  8. Google Books.
    1. No way to browse, only search. But relevant works can be found using Halacha Brura’s index (see appendix), see this webpage especially. Has a few hundred scanned manuscripts and early printed works.
  9. Israel613 .
    1. An eccentric website, mostly dedicated to contemporary hareidi works and polemics. However, there are some PDFs of interest, of historical hasidic works. No realy browsing capabilities on the website, but can be found using Halacha Brura’s index (see appendix).
  10. Google Drive. Sometimes individuals upload scans of seforim, and share the links. For example, the full set of R’ Moshe Cordevero’s Or Yakar is currently hosted by an unknown host on Google Drive (see Halacha Brura > Kabbala > “אור יקר, ר’ משה קורדוברו, פרוש על הזהר, ירושלים תשכ”ב”).
  11. Epidat .
    1. See description at the website of European Association for Jewish Studies (EAJS): “Epidat, short for epigraphic database, is a research platform for Jewish funerary epigraphy. Currently, Epidat contains transcriptions, translations, descriptions, and iconographic documentation of 43,838 headstones (with 79,972 digital images) from 233 historical Jewish cemeteries, spanning a period of 900 years (1040-1952) and covering six European countries (Germany, The Netherlands, Poland, Spain, Latvia and Czechia).”

Requires subscription or purchase

  1. Otzar HaHochma (אוצר החכמה).
    1. Generally requires subscription. However, interestingly enough, as of this writing (23-Jan-2022), it appears that the entire basic Otzar HaHochma is open-access, and has been for three months already! As per the pop-up notification on the website, and the banner at the top while browsing: “בס”ד 19/10/2021 . Dear users, the system is undergoing upgrades at this time, some users may experience technical difficulties, therefore we are giving free access to the beta site: beta.otzar.org. This service will be free of charge until further notice. Please note the printing option as well as the add-on packages are available for purchase only on the old website.” Add-ons include seforim from the following publishers (in order of price): Oz VeHodor, Mossad HaRav Kook, Mechon Yerushalayim, Mechon Ahavat Shalom, Mechon Ofek, Mechon Hochmat Shelomo.
    2. Wikipedia – Hebrew: “Otzar HaHochma is a database containing over 110,000 Torah and academic books scanned in the same format as the original printing pages that have undergone optical character recognition, which allows information to be retrieved using a search engine embedded in the system. In version 19.0 (summer 2021) of the database there are 112,749 titles. The update rate of the database is about 5,000 books annually. The database allows the books to be divided into categories, such as: Bible and its commentators; Mishnah and its commentaries; Babylonian Talmud and its commentaries; Jerusalem Talmud and its commentaries; Kabbalah; Mussar; Hasidut; history; disputes (פולמוסים); journals; community books (ספרי קהילות), jubilee books (ספרי יובל), memorial books (ספרי זיכרון), manuscripts and first editions.”

Primary texts – manuscripts – scanned and transcribed

Open-access

  1. Ktiv (כתיב) .
    1. Wikipedia – Hebrew: “The Ktiv project, launched with the 17th World Congress of Jewish Studies in August 2017, is the next stage in the Institute of Microfilmed Hebrew Manuscripts’s life, designed to make photographs of all Hebrew manuscripts in the world accessible to the public on the Internet. Upon its launch, four years after the digitization project began, Ktiv had full scans with an excellent resolution of 45,000 manuscripts (out of 90,000) that together hold 4.37 million pages available to the public. The project was organized in collaboration with the National Library of France (BnF), the Rabbinical Seminary of America (JTS), the Palatine Library, the British Library, the National Library of Austria, the Bavarian State Library, the Rosenthaliana Library, Yad Yitzhak Ben-Zvi, the Vatican Library, Hebrew Union College, The State Library in Berlin, the National Library of Russia, the National Library of Florence, and more.”
    2. See also “Moreshet B’reshet” of the National Library of Israel. From the page: “This page focuses on webpages set up by the National Library over the years. Although these webpages are not updated, they preserve valuable items and information for future generations. Therefore, these sites are maintained and made accessible.”
    3. For example, see the webpage for searching for images of Talmudic manuscripts (עיון בכתבי היד).
  2. Friedberg projects. Each will have its own entry below. See YouTube video for recent discussion of some of these projects (uploaded 2-Feb-2022). Each will have its own entry below. All require registration (free). The first two projects appear to be the ones most actively used and developed: Hachi Garsinan and Genizah Project.
    1. Hachi Garsinan – The Friedberg Project for Talmud Bavli Variants (הכי גרסינן).
    2. Friedberg Genizah Project.
    3. Mahadura – the Friedberg Site for Transcriptions and Synopsis (מהדורא).
    4. Yad Harambam (יד הרמב”ם – פרוייקט פרידברג לשינויי נוסחאות ברמב”ם).
    5. The Nahum Collection of Yemenite Manuscripts (אוסף נחום לכתבי יד תימניים).
    6. The Friedberg Judeo-Arabic Project (פרויקט פרידברג לערבית יהודית).
  3. Hachi Garsinan – The Friedberg Project for Talmud Bavli Variants (הכי גרסינן).[11]
    1. Requires registration (free).
    2. From the webpage:
      1. “The Hachi Garsinan site displays all variant-readings of the Talmud Bavli, including images and transcriptions, with sophisticated comparison tools between the variants.
      2. The “Hachi Garsinan” site is meant to serve the wide range of all Bavli learners and researchers: from academic researchers, through Yeshiva communities and Torah students, as well as anyone interested in exploring the variations of the Talmud Bavli and its transformations throughout the ages.
      3. The site contains high quality digital images of all original textual witnesses that exist for the Talmud Bavli (manuscripts, early printings, Genizah fragments, binding fragments and other fragments), accompanied by precise transcriptions of the text in the image. The site integrates additional functions, including full text search, Sussmann catalog, Dikdukei Sofrim, and also save, copy and print options.
      4. The Amuta was established as a joint venture of the “Friedberg Genizah Project” (FGP) and the “Friedberg Jewish Manuscript Society”(FJMS). The textual witness’ transcriptions, as well as the software for connecting the image and its transcriptions, are prepared by the Amuta Transcription Team.
      5. Five hundred years after the publication of the Talmud Bavli masterpiece in Venice by Daniel Bombergi, the Hachi Garsinan Talmudic project, is a breakthrough presenting all variant-readings in a precise and sophisticated manner.”
    3. See the review by Amit Gvaryahu: ““We Read Thus”: On Hachi Garsinan and Learning Talmud in the 21st century | The Talmud Blog” (June 19, 2016).
    4. Also includes the following foundational works, open-access and user-friendly:
      1. Jacob Sussman, Otzar Kitvey Yad Talmudiyyim (יעקב זוסמן, אוצר כתביהיד התלמודיים)
      2. R’ Raphael Nathan Nata Rabbinovicz, Dikdukei Sofrim (ר’ רפאל נתן נטע ראבינאוויטץ, דקדוקי סופרים)
      3. Many relevant articles (“Ref. Materials > Introductions”).
  4. Friedberg Genizah Project .
    1. Requires registration (free).
    2. From the homepage:
      1. “The Friedberg Genizah Project (FGP) presents a real revolution in the study and research of the field of Cairo Genizah and Jewish Studies in general. Its main task is to computerize the entire corpus of Genizah manuscripts and Genizah-related materials: images, identifications, catalogs, metadata, transcriptions, translations and bibliographical references. In the course of this project a full digitization of the entire Genizah collections has been done, together with a huge database which is accessible to every scholar and student. The project also introduces new designated tools for Genizah research which are based on advanced technologies of image processing.
      2. The Site was developed by Genazim Digital, headed by Professor Yaacov Choueka. Currently it is supported by the Association for the Study of Jewish Manuscripts.”
  5. Mahadura – the Friedberg Site for Transcriptions and Synopsis (מהדורא).
    1. I tried browsing existing projects, got a lot of errors.
    2. From the homepage:
      1. “The Mahadura site is designed to create, preserve and share transcriptions and synopses of manuscripts and early printings. The site is meant for Academics, Biblical and Religious Scholars, anyone who is interested in publishing new transcriptions of ancient Jewish texts and preparation of critical revisions. Currently the site allows the user to create new projects in any area of Jewish studies, including uploading of images and texts and to create new transcriptions of manuscripts and prints in a simple painless way, and to view images and transcriptions, and to try the transcription tools in the existing projects. The creator of each project will be able to define a closed group of colleagues to work together on a project, and then decide when it will be publically available. In the future you will be able to create variant synopsis comparisons, using specialized algorithms.
      2. The Amuta was established as a joint venture of the “Friedberg Genizah Project” (FGP) and the “Friedberg Jewish Manuscript Society”(FJMS).”
  6. Yad Harambam (יד הרמב”ם – פרוייקט פרידברג לשינויי נוסחאות ברמב”ם).
    1. Requires registration (free).
    2. From the webpage:
      1. “The “Yad HaRambam” site was established for the purpose of presenting all versions of the Rambam’s Mishneh Torah (“haYad haHazaka”). It includes images, transcriptions and a sophisticated synopsis (comparison) system between versions.
      2. The site is meant to serve all who want to study the Mishneh Torah; academic researchers, Torah students in Yeshivot, everyone who is interested in historical versions of The Mishneh Torah and its changing unfolding versions through the ages.
      3. The site includes high resolution digital images of early versions of the Mishneh Torah including manuscripts and early printings. Each image is supplemented by an accurate transcription.
      4. The site also integrates additional functions, including full text search on all Rambam textual witnesses, the ability to save, copy and print, personal workspaces, and more.
      5. The Amuta was established as a joint venture of the “Friedberg Genizah Project” (FGP) and the “Friedberg Jewish Manuscript Society”(FJMS). The textual witness’ transcriptions, as well as the software for connecting the image and its transcriptions, are prepared by the Amuta Transcription Team.”
  7. The Nahum Collection of Yemenite Manuscripts (אוסף נחום לכתבי יד תימניים).
    1. Requires registration (free).
    2. From the webpage:
      1. “The aim of this website is to present efficient research tools for researchers interested in the Nahum Collection of Yemenite Manuscripts. The website contains about 80,000 high-quality digital images of the (mostly) handwritten fragments and volumes in this collection. The site also contains short (1-2 lines) identifications of these manuscripts, whenever available, as well as scanned images of the corresponding entries from the relevant catalogs The site is under continuous development, and we hope to include in it more information in the future. The shelfmarks of the various manuscripts were primordially determined by the existing shelfmarks as marked on the manuscripts and in the catalogs, and when these were missing, new serially shelfmarks were given. In addition, there is a correspondence table in the website that enables direct access to the available information according to the entry-number in the above-mentioned catalogs. Viewing entire volumes can be efficiently browsed using special software that simulates the manual flipping of pages as in a real book. This Site was initially developed by Genazim Digital, headed by Professor Yaacov Choueka and is now supported by the Association for the Study of Jewish Manuscripts.”
  8. The Friedberg Judeo-Arabic Project (פרויקט פרידברג לערבית יהודית).
    1. Requires registration (free).
    2. From the webpage:
      1. “This site is designed to assist researchers of the Judeo-Arabic gain a comprehensive and fundamental knowledge of this language, especially in the lexicon, semantics, idiomatic expressions, and word-related areas. This is done by establishing an extensive computerized corpus of titles and advanced software that can search for words and phrases and display their instances in the corpus (or selected parts thereof) with suitable context and various statistics.
      2. For every page of every work in the corpus, a good quality image is available and can be viewed with its transcription, for testing and comparison. In the first stage, the site will contain Judeo-Arabic titles that have already appeared in print, focusing on titles that were written up to the 16th century. With time, the corpus will be expanded, hopefully encompassing all Judeo-Arabic titles in the mentioned group.
      3. When the corpus will be sufficiently broad, advanced tools of computational linguistics and natural language processing will be developed and will reveal interesting structures and linguistic connections that can be discovered only with the help of a computerized system. This Site was initially developed by Genazim Digital, headed by Professor Yaacov Choueka and is now supported by the Association for the Study of Jewish Manuscripts.”
    3. Includes foundational works, open-access:
      1. מרדכי עקיבא פרידמן, מילון הערבית יהודית מימי הבינים : לתעודות הגניזה של ספר הודו ולטקסטים אחרים

  9. Talmud Yerushalmi digital critical edition (תלמוד ירושלמי מהדורה דיגיטלית).
    1. Project of Prof. Menachem Katz of University of Haifa. In beta, only Yevamot is available.[12]
    2. An incredible project, with tremendous potential.
  10. Hebrew Manuscripts : Free Texts . Hosted on archive.org. From the About section: “Hebrew and Judaica manuscripts from Columbia University’s Rare Book & Manuscript Library.” Currently shows 334 manuscripts.
  11. Digitized Items: Hebrew Manuscripts . From the About page: “[t]his project will make 1.5 million digitized pages freely available over the next three years. Portions of the Bodleian and Vatican Libraries’ collections of Hebrew manuscripts […] have been selected for digitization by a team of scholars and curators from around the world.”
    1. Based on my count, links to 773 Bodleian manuscripts, and 641 Vatican manuscripts.
    2. See also here: Hebrew Manuscripts and Printed Books, wide range of ways to browse 806 Bodleian manuscripts.

Requires subscription or purchase

  1. The Sol and Evelyn Henkind Talmud Text Databank ; Primary Textual Witnesses to Tannaitic Literature.
    1. From the home page:
      1. “Welcome to our new integrated website: Cooperative Development Initiative – Created by CDI Systems in partnership with the Saul Lieberman Institute of Talmudic Research of the Jewish Theological Seminary and Bar Ilan University’s Institute for Computerization in Jewish Life.
      2. This new resource upgrades and integrates the three Judaic studies databases developed by these institutions:
        1. The Sol and Evelyn Henkind Talmud Text Databank.
        2. The Index of References Dealing with Talmudic Literature, offering pinpointed citations from hundreds of classic and modern scholarly works directly related to the specific selected passage within Talmudic literature.
        3. Primary Textual Witnesses to Tannaitic Literature.”
    2. See under section “Bibliographic info” for “The Index of References Dealing with Talmudic Literature”.

[1] I’d like to thank Eliezer Brodt, Sholom Licht, and my father and brother for looking over previous drafts of this piece, and providing very helpful comments and feedback. Of course, the final product is mine, for better or for worse.
[2] On the late shift to writing, Yaakov Zussman and others have convincingly argued that Torah Sheba’al Peh was written down only in the post-talmudic era, besides for midrashim in Eretz Yisrael.  For the Jewish shift to using the codex, see Malachi Beit-Arie, Hebrew Codicology (2022), pp. 39ff (the entire book is open-access on Academia.edu). For the influence of the printing press on the Jewish community, see Zeev Gries (2007), The Book in the Jewish World, 1700–1900.
[3] “Apolline Thromas, “12 Digital Resources of the Rabbinic Literature: Radical Change with a Click of the Mouse“, in: Ancient Worlds in Digital Culture (2016).
[4] It should be pointed out that many resources that are behind a paywall can be accessed for free by using easy to use “shadow libraries”. Especially for academic literature, Sci-Hub and Library Genesis (Libgen) are some of the best such libraries. Of course, every person must decide whether they consider this contravention of paywall to be halachic and/or ethical.
[5] Koppel, “Attribution and Misattribution: On Computational Linguistics, Heresy and Journalism” (July 11, 2011): “Some of this work has been applied to topics of particular interest to students of Jewish texts, such as strong evidence that the collection of responsa Torah Lishmah was written by Ben Ish Chai (although he often quoted the work as if it were written by someone else) and that all of the letters in Genizat Harson are forgeries”. Moshe Schorr, “Who Wrote the Late Volumes of Igrot Moshe?” (January 20, 2019): “Given the preponderance of evidence that the later Igrot Moshe volumes are real (and spectacular), I think we can put the various theories of alternative authorship to rest. The claims of the editors — that the latest teshuvot were dictated — explains the ‘steroid spike’, and all available evidence supports their central contention, that they didn’t change the actual content. In short: it’s legit.”
[6] Here are some guides that I found especially useful:

Guides by librarians: 

  1. eBooks | Libraries and Information System | Bar-Ilan University
  2. Talmud & Oral Law | Libraries and Information System | Bar-Ilan University
  3. Jewish History | Libraries and Information System | Bar-Ilan University
  4. המכללה האקדמית הרצוג > ספריות > מאגרים בחוג ללשון עברית
  5. המכללה האקדמית הרצוג > ספריות > מאגרים בחוג למחשבת ישראל
  6. המכללה האקדמית הרצוג > ספריות > מאגרים בחוג לספרות עברית
  7. Center for Jewish History > LibGuides > A-Z Databases
  8. ארון הספרים היהודי המקוון – מאגרי מידע ואתרי ספרים סרוקים | Safranim’s Blog
  9. Recommended Websites – *Jewish Studies – Research Guides at Northwestern University
  10. eTexts – Directory of Judaica online resources – Guides at Penn Libraries
  11. Resources for Doing Research – Jewish Studies – Guides at Johns Hopkins University
  12. Turning the Page: Jewish Print Cultures & Digital Humanities – An EAJS Roundtable

Others: 

  1. מאגר תורני – ויקיפדיה
  2. Torah database – Wikipedia
  3. השפה העברית – קישורים
  4. פורטל הדף היומי > כלי עזר ללומד
  5. הלכה ברורה > ספרייה וירטואלית
  6. Search Engines and Other Web-Resources | The Talmud Blog
  7. Textual Witnesses | The Talmud Blog:
  8. Rabbinics
  9. Online Resources for Talmud Research, Study, and Teaching

For a relevant university syllabus, see Prof. Aaron Ahrend’s syllabus to his course “Research Guidance in Bibliography and Writing”, which I took many years ago in the course of my MA in Talmud at Bar-Ilan, see here. The course and course packet went over many digital tools, however the syllabus available online only gives topic headings, and bibliography of published articles.
[7] On the genre, see Kenneth M. Price, “Electronic Scholarly Editions“, in: Susan Schreibman and Ray Siemens (Eds.),  A Companion to Digital Literary Studies (2008); Greta Franzini et. al., “A Catalogue of Digital Editions”, in Digital Scholarly Editing: Theories and Practices, pp.161-182; Menachem Katz et. al., “Talmud Yerushalmi Digital Critical Edition – IRCDL 2022” (2022).
[8] In the About page there: “includes Rabbi Adin Even-Israel Steinsaltz’s complete Modern Hebrew and English translations of the Talmud”.
[9] Thanks to Eliezer Brodt for bringing this new tool to my attention.
[10]  See Boaz Hus, שאלת קיומה של מיסטיקה יהודית, 2016, pp. 146-147, for a discussion of these editions. (Book available in Kotar here.)
[11] See review here: Menachem Katz, Assael Shmeltzer, Hillel Gershuni, Sara Preis, “The Hachi Garsinan Project as a Critical Edition of the Talmud Bavli“, (September 2017).
[12]
 See full overview here: Menachem Katz et. al., “Talmud Yerushalmi Digital Critical Edition – IRCDL 2022” (2022).