Rashi's Writings

The first book printed in Hebrew with a date on it was printed in Italy and dated 18 February 1475. It was a commentary by Rashi on the Chumash (the first five books of the Bible, the Torah, as distinguished from a Torah scroll, which was made by hand on special parchment).

This commentary was completed late in his life (1040 - 1105), and may be a compilation of the lectures he offered at the yeshiva (college) he founded in Troyes. There is a recent phrase in social media: ELI5, which means "Explain Like I'm 5," asking the teacher to put something into very simple terms for easy understanding. Rashi's commentary has been described as so simple that a five-year-old could understand what he is saying.

His focus seemed to be on grammar and syntax, and he defined unusual Hebrew words to explain why that word was chosen over another and the nuances of word choice. He was careful to distinguish between the plain meaning of a word and the rabbinic interpretation of it.

Rashi also wrote the first (near-)comprehensive commentary on the Talmud (the primary source of Jewish law). Phrase by phrase, he went through 30 of the 39 tractates (organizational elements), explaining the meaning of the words and their result. To make things more comprehensive, he often used analogies to common knowledge of daily life, professions, or crafts. He also translated difficult Hebrew or Aramaic words into the local language, Norman French. This attention to vocabulary has given modern scholars insight into spoken French of the 11th century.

His commentaries became "instant classics." They were copied and spread far and wide and embraced by both Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jews.

Near the end of his life he experienced the mass murders of Jews caused by the followers of the People's Crusade (the unofficial first phase of the First Crusade) as they traveled through Europe, fired up with pro-Christian sentiment and the fervor to free the Holy land from non-Christians. Rashi wrote several poems mourning the destruction. Three sons of his teacher, Isaac ben Eliezer Halevi, were killed during this time.

Rashi died at the age of 65 and was buried in Troyes. Although the location of his grave was noted, that information was lost over time. The Jewish cemetery land is now a public square in Troyes, and a monument to Rashi was erected by French Jews. There is a legend, however, that because of the prominence of his life and works—impossible to produce by an ordinary man in one lifetime—that he was so clearly inspired by the Shekinah, the Holy Spirit, that he did not die a natural death. Instead, he was assumed bodily into heaven like the prophet Elijah.

The fifth paragraph mentions that his commentaries were accepted by both Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jews. What was the difference, and why did it exist? I'll explain that tomorrow.

Rashi

An exegete is someone who interprets a text, especially religious texts. One of the leading Jewish exegetes in the Middle Ages was Shlomo Yitzchaki (February 1040 - 13 Juluy 1105), "Shlomo the son of Yitzhak." He became known by the acronym Rashi, Rabbi Shlomo Yitzhaki (although other acronyms were employed).

Born an only child in Troyes in northern France, on his father's side he was said to be descended from Gamaliel, a teacher of Paul mentioned in the New Testament Acts of the Apostles. His father started his education when Rashi was five years old. His father died while Rashi was young, and the young man married at 17 and went to Worms.

At Worms he was privileged to study under two scholars who had been students of the prominent Gershom ben Judah: German rabbi Yaakov ben Yakar and French rabbi Isaac ben Eliezer Halevi (chief rabbi of Worms and a relative of Rashi). After Worms he went to Mainz where he studied under his maternal uncle, the rabbi of Mainz, Isaac ben Judah.

He returned to Troyes at 25 and joined the beth din, the rabbinical court, eventually becoming its head. He founded his own yeshiva (seminary).

His commentary on the Torah was said to be so clear and concise that beginners could understand it and more accomplished scholars could admire it.  Every edition of the Talmud since the 1520s includes Rashi's commentary. His commentary on the Tanakh (the five Books of Moses plus the Nevi'im (Books of the Prophets), and the 11 books of the Ketuvim ('Writings'), became widely studied for centuries.

His writings became so famous that legends sprang up about him. Before his birth, supposedly his father found a jewel and was approached by people who wanted to buy it to adorn a pagan idol. He agreed to take it with them to their land, but along the way had second thoughts and threw the jewel into the sea. The prophet Elijah appeared to him and prophesied that he would have a son "who would illuminate the world with his Torah knowledge."

When Rashi's mother was pregnant, she was walking down a narrow street when two carriages came toward her. With no room to get out of the way, she pressed herself against the wall, which created a depression to save her. The wall of the Worms Synagogue has a niche that is supposed to be this space.

Tomorrow we'll take a look at some of his writings, and another legend about his death.

Apostasy

"Apostasy" is the abandonment or renunciation of a religious (or political) belief. Yesterday's post on Canon 70 of the Fourth Lateran Council discussed the concern over Jews who converted to Christianity turning back to Judaism again.

First, let's address why Jews would convert to Christianity. Some did so to escape the oppressive taxation meted out by governments who used Jews as their purse because Jews were so often money-lenders. Another reason might be the opportunity to advance a political or professional career in fields where the Christian (or Islamic) authorities would not hire Jews. They might have wanted to get out of the ghetto, the place to which Jews were restricted, instead of living in the nicer parts of the city. And let's not omit the possibility of a real change of faith and acceptance of Christianity.

How were conversions received by those who "stayed behind"?

Rabbinic authorities debated whether those who converted were traitors to the faith or victims. Many conversions were victims, because they were coerced under threat of death. Forced baptisms also took place. This could lead to Marranos, so-called "crypto-Jews": individuals who lived publicly as Christians but secretly kept Jewish practices at home. The Spanish Inquisition went after Marranos and Moriscos (converted Muslims) with severe penalties for any who were not fully embracing Christianity and abandoning all facets of their former faith.

Sometimes agreeing to conversion to avoid death did not work because the Christians offering "salvation" were out for blood anyway. Some Jewish parents would kill their children and then themselves in order to avoid forced conversion.

The apostate who turned from Judaism to Christianity was in a strange state of limbo, being neither fish nor fowl. Former fellow Jews rejected him, and Christians still looked at him askance. If he wished to return to Judaism, his former neighbors still might feel awkward, but official rabbinical attitudes were different.

The rabbinic scholar Rashi (1040 - 1105; mentioned here) claimed a Jew remains a Jew regardless. A Jew who fell away from the faith could simply return to Jewish practices and be fine. Another, Gershom ben Judah (c.960 - 1040), forbade mistreating an apostate who returned to Judaism or even mentioning their past choices. This was different from Christian and Muslim attitudes toward those who left those faiths.

Rashi's pronouncements were so respected that he became legendary. Seriously: legends arose about him, even miracles performed while he was in the womb. Let's meet him next time.

The Enactments of SHU"M

The Roman Catholic Church and its followers tried many times to make up sets of rules for interaction with Jews. The Fourth Lateran comes to mind, as does Henry III's Statute of Jewry in 1253 (and his founding of the Domus Conversorum in 1232).

Likewise, Jewish communities sometimes had to establish their own set of policies and practices to govern themselves. After the Rhineland Massacres, three towns of the Rhineland banded together to devise a set of regulations for the future.

The towns were Speyer, Worms, and Mainz, who had suffered in spring of 1096 as the People's Crusade led by Peter the Hermit ravaged them. The leading Jews of the towns created the Enactments of SHU"M. SHU"M comes from the Hebrew names of the towns: Shpira, Vermayza, and Magentza.

The Enactmnets did not happen immediately, though they were a response to further strife that was started because of 1096. Itinerant merchants felt that travel was no longer safe, and so they settled in the towns and became local merchants or, in many cases, moneylenders. This situation created more contact between Jew and Gentile, leading to more problems between the two groups. The Crusades' need for funds also meant more and heavier taxes being levied against Jews.

The first example of such a system appeared in France. About 1160, a synod was held in Troyes, arranged by Jacob ben Meir (1100 - 1171, depicted above), a well-respected teacher (and grandson of Rashi). He, his brother, and over 250 rabbis from all over France gathered to create decrees that would affect the Jewish community as well as when they would rely on Gentile legal systems as opposed to their own. Some of the decisions they wanted people to accept were:

• A strengthening of a ban on polygamy.
• A dispute between Jews over money should not go to a secular court; the beth din, the rabbinical court, should settle it. It should only go to secular authorities if one of the people involved would not accept the decision of the beth din.
• In the case of the Jewish communities own tax system (called the kehillah), a person disputing the tax should pay it first and then bring his or her case to the beth din.
• If you offer a space you own to be used as a synagogue, you cannot restrict it to only certain members of the congregation. You just allow or deny all members.

SHU"M happened a couple generations later, at a synod in Mainz, agreeing to most of the decisions out of Troyes, but adding their own:

• Anyone who informed on another Jew was served with a cherem (essentially an excommunication) until restitution was made.
• No exceptions to kehillah-imposed taxes.
• Lending money to other Jews must follow strict adherence to the halakhot, the body of Jewish law.
• It was prohinbited to call anyone a mamzer (bastard, or any result of an improper relationship).
• If someone dies leaving young children, the estate may be used for their education, even if the deceased left other instructions in their will.

Many of these are still followed, and they have been added to over time.

This has been an important aside after the post on the Rhineland Massacres. Time tomorrow to go back to see what the People's Crusade was getting up to once they reached the Mediterranean.

Noah in the Middle Ages

There is much more to be said about the story of Noah than an ark, a dove, and animals two-by-two (especially since the command was to collect more animals than just pairs). Jewish thinkers of the Middle Ages looked more carefully at the story and asked themselves questions.

For example, we are told that Noah was "righteous in his generation." Did that mean that he was a good man in the context of that time but not necessarily by absolute standards? (Since the point of the Flood was to eliminate wicked humanity.) After all, he followed God's command to build an ark and collect animals, but could he have warned his neighbors to prepare for the coming Flood? Abraham prayed on behalf of Sodom and Gomorrah, but Noah doesn't even talk to God; we never hear his voice; he just follows orders. Noah was the first vintner, a useful thing, but he got drunk and exposed himself. Was he an example of the "righteous man in a fur coat," one who neglects his neighbor while ensuring his own comfort?

One medieval commentator, Rashi, claimed that the building of the ark took 120 years, and that Noah stretched it out to give people time to repent. Rashi also said that the name "Noah" itself supports this, because it means "This one will comfort us in our work and in the toil of our hands, which come from the ground that the Lord had cursed."

The Jewish Encyclopedia points out that there are two different stories of Noah. In one he is the "hero of the flood," in the other he is the savior of mankind who plants the first vineyard. These are two very different anecdotes, and could just as easily have been two different characters.

Adam is described as the first farmer, but farming did not die out with the Flood. It was not necessary for the creation of wine-making to happen post-Flood, so why attach the development to Noah? Was it solely to have his son Ham enter and see his father naked so that Ham could be cursed and explain other human beings in the world who were "cursed"?

Medieval Christianity saw Noah's three sons as the fathers of the peoples in different continents:  Japheth/Europe, Shem/Asia, and Ham/Africa. Ham's curse was intended to explain the dark skins of the African people, and was used as a justification for slavery. All of this was upended after the discovery of animals and people across the Atlantic after 1492, as you can imagine. Even Isaac Newton, writing in the 18th century, saw Noah and his sons as the ancestors of humanity across the world.

There was a medieval group that spent a lot of time on the builder of the ark; tomorrow we'll look at the Anglo-Saxon fascination with Noah.