Monday, February 27, 2023

Dead rabbi’s pants expected to fetch thousands pulled from NJ auction

 https://nypost.com/2023/02/25/late-rabbi-chaim-kanievskys-pants-pulled-from-nj-auction/

An auction house planned to sell a top Orthodox Jewish leader’s pants, but pulled the dead rabbi’s trousers off the block after an inquiry by The Post.

Hannity admits the lie as 'time travel' scandal hits Fox News empire

Social pressure

 Shabbos(118b) I have never disregarded the words of my neighbours. I know of myself that I am not a priest, yet if my neighbours were to tell me to ascend the dais, I would ascend it R. Jose also said: I have never in my life said anything from which I retracted.[Rashi refers this] to his opinions on other people: even if unfavourable he did not retract even in the owner's presence, because he did not state them in the first place without being perfectly sure of their truth.

Tosfos

אילו היו אומרים לי חברי עלה לדוכן - לא ידע ר"י מה איסור יש בזר העולה לדוכן אם לא משום ברכה לבטלה של כהנים אמרה תורה לברך את ישראל: 

Darchei Moshe, Orach Chaim 128:1:1

כתבו התוס' פרק כל כתבי (שבת קיח:) לא ידעתי מה איסור יש בזר העולה לדוכן אם לא משום ברכה לבטלה שלכהנים אמרה תורה לברך עכ"ל. ומצאתי כתוב ע"ז ולפ"ז יכול הישראל לעלות עם הכהנים והם יברכו לרוב עם הדרת מלך מה טוב אכן לא נהגו באולי אשר אף בלא כהנים יעלו עכ"ל ועל דברי התוס' קשה לי דהא איתא בהדיא בכתובות פרק שני (כד:) דזר הנושא את כפיו עובר בעשה ואפשר דר"י לא קאמר אלא כשעולה עם כהנים אחרים אבל לבד הוא עובר בעשה וצ"ע:  

Sunday, February 26, 2023

Mazal

 Ohr HaChaim (Vayikra 26:09 Israel is not subject to the restrictions inherent in the term mazzal, G-d will turn aside the horoscopic influences and apply a different set of rules to the dispensation of the blessings involving the three areas to which G-d personally holds the keys. Although, our Sages say life children and food are dependent on mazal, G-d will make an exception to this rule by "moving the relevant constellation  "aside," to enable Israel to overcome negative influences. 

BAD BEHAVIORAL SCIENCE EXPOSED

 https://pocketmags.com/us/skeptic-magazine/274/articles/1237823/bad-behavioral-science-exposed

There is probably no other scientific discipline in which fads come and go so quickly, and with so much hype, as psychology. In his Quick Fix, Jesse Singal discusses eight different psychological ideas that have been promoted as quick fixes for different social problems. He refers to these as “halfbaked ideas—ideas that may not be 100 percent bunk but which are severely overhyped” (p. 6)

Thursday, February 23, 2023

Torn pants of late haredi Rabbi Chaim Kanievsky will be auctioned starting at $3,200

 https://www.jpost.com/diaspora/article-732466

Rather, the pants once belonged to the late Rabbi Chaim Kanievsky, an Israeli haredi Orthodox leader considered by his followers to be the leading Jewish authority of his generation. Kanievsky died last year at age 94, and now anyone can be the owner of his trousers – provided they can afford them. The starting bid is $3,200. 

Wednesday, February 22, 2023

Meiri - some statements of Chazal are because they were confused!?

 Meiri (Shabbos 156): …. In general Jews are not controlled absolutely by mazal. Don’t pay attention to the alternative view that says that Jews are in fact controlled by mazal. That view is the result of some of the sages became confused after they saw the lack of order in the manner of mankind’s reward and punishment. This confusion is also manifest in Moed Koton(28a) which states that “Lifespan, children and livelihood are not the result of merit but rather mazal.” This statement was made only because the author saw someone who was a tzadik and great scholar who was unsuccessful in these three areas. 

Meiri (Shabbos 156): Another one of these confused sages stated in Bava Kama (80b): “A door which is locked is not readily opened” and “All those who suffer misfortune do not quickly obtain good fortune” while another one of this group said, “He will never obtain good fortune” . This statement was only made because of bad personal experience as the gemora itself concludes that it was not a general rule but he was only describing his own personal experience. All this shows that these statements asserting the importance of mazal were only made in response to their authors’ personal experiences or what they observed with others. Thus these are only exceptions to the general rule that “Jews are not governed by mazal.” In other words reward and punishment typically determines what happens to a person and not mazal. 

Halacha and Arizal

The following is a transcript I wrote from memory about 2 weeks after I spoke to Rav Shapiro regarding various topics including whether I should publish my sefer Daas Torah. He was very generous with his time and very patient with my questions and poor Hebrew. I added footnotes to clarify what the issues were. This transcript was never reviewed or approved by Rav Shapiro and he obviously should not be responsible for my limited understanding and recall. I thought it was appropriate to publish on the day of his levayah 


Mystical Significance of Hair

 https://www.chabad.org/kabbalah/article_cdo/aid/380719/jewish/Mystical-Significance-of-Hair-Part-1.htm

Kabbalistic and Chasidic practice don't avail themselves of these lenient halachic opinions (Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh Deah 181:3 see Veyesh Osrim & 181:11 and the Arizal quoted above), and so Kabbalistic principles differs in the following ways:

1. A man does not shave, nor permit others to shave, his beard at all, with the exception of the mustache that overlaps the top lip, and this is only to be trimmed to above the lip with a scissors. (Writings of the Ari, Taamei Hamitzvot, parashat Kedoshim)

Tuesday, February 21, 2023

Anti Kabbalah

 Rivash (157)שואח מאד נעלה ישמרך השומר רגלי חסידיו. הגיעוני כתביך האחד על יד היהודי משביליא עוד הגיעני כתב שני על ידי בן ביטש ולשניהם עשו הקהל כראוי. ולבן ביטש חתמתי בשטרו לכבודך כי הולך הוא לבגאי"ה ולקוסטנטי"נה. עוד הגיעני כתב שלישי בחול הסוכות על ידי היקר גיסי. ולכל אלה הכתבים לא הי' לי פנאי ויכולת לענות אליך זולתי בכתב הראשון אשר בו החלוף עניתיך על יד היהודי ההוא והודעתיך איך כתבתי לך דרך הוניי"ן ע"י סוחר נכבד מתלמסאן מכירו של הנעלה רבי אברהם ששפ"ו י"א. ועם כתביו שלחתי לך טופס תשובתי למלק"א וכן מה שנ"ל מתשובתך לשם. ואין ספק אצלי שהגיע אליך או יגיעך ואם לא הגיעך הודיעני ואוסיף שנית לכתבה אליך. וגם הודעתיך כי מורי הרב רבי פרץ הכהן ז"ל לא היה כלל מדבר ולא מחשיב באותן הספירות. גם שמעתי מפיו שהרב רבי שמשון מקינון ז"ל שהיה רב גדול מכל בני דורו וגם אני זכור ממנו ואם לא ראיתיו בעיני והוא היה אומר אני מתפלל לדעת זה התינוק, כלומר להוציא מלב המקובלים שהם מתפללים פעם לספירה אחת ופעם לספירה אחת כפי ענין התפלה. והם אומרים כי זה פי' מה שאז"ל הרוצה להתחכם ידרים להתעשר יצפין, ר"ל יכוין למדת ימין או למדת שמאל. גם בתפלת שמנה עשרה יש להם בכל אחת ואחת כונה לספירה ידועה. וכל זה הוא דבר זר מאד בעיני מי שאינו מקובל כמו הם, וחושבים שזה אמונת שניות. וכבר שמעתי אחד מן המתפלספים מספר בגנות המקובלים והיה אומר הע"ג מאמיני השלוש והמקובלים מאמיני העשיריות. וכבר קרה לי בהיותי בסרקסט"ה שבא לשם החכם הישיש דון יוסף ן' שושאן ז"ל אשר כבר ראיתי אותו בבלנסיא"ה והוא היה חכם בתלמוד וראה בפילוסופיא והיה מקובל וחסיד גדול ומדקדק במצות וביני ובינו היתה אהבה וחשק גדול. ופעם אחת שאלתי לו איך אתם המקובלים בברכה אחת מכוונים לספירה ידועה ובברכה אחרת לספירה אחרת, ועוד הכי יש אלהות לספירות שיתפלל אדם להן, וענה לי חלילה שתהיה התפלה כי אם לשם יתברך עלת העלות. אבל הדבר הזה כמו מי שיש לו ריב ושואל מן המלך שיעשה לו דין יבקש ממנו שיצוה אל היושב על המשפט שידין לו לא שיצוה זה אל הסוכן הממונה על האוצרות כי תהיה שאלתו בטעות. וכן אם ישאל מן המלך שיתן לו מתן לא יאמר לו שיצוה אל השופט אבל שיצוה אל הסוכן. וכן אם ישאל ממנו יין יבקש שיצוה זה לשר המשקים, ואם ישאל לחם יאמר לשר האופים, לא בהפך זה. כך הוא בענין התפלה שהיא לעולם לעלת העלות אלא שמכוין המחשבה להמשיך השפע לאותה ספירה המתיחסת לאותו דבר שהוא מבקש עליו. כמו שתאמר שבברכת על הצדיקים יכוין לספירה הנקראת חסד שהיא מדת רחמים ובברכת המינין יכוין לספירה הנקראת גבורה שהיא מדת הדין, והקש על זה. זה באר לי החסיד הנז' מכונת המקובלים והנה טוב מאד. אמנם מי מכניס אותנו בכל זה, הלא טוב להתפלל סתם לשם יתברך בכונה והוא ידע באיזה דרך ישלים המבוקש, כמאמר הכתוב גול על ה' דרכך ובטח עליו והוא יעשה. וזה מה שאמר הרב הגדול רבי שמשון דקינון ז"ל שהזכרתי למעלה. וכן הודעתיך מה שאמר אלי ביחוד מורי הרב רבינו נסים ז"ל כי הרבה יותר מדאי תקע עצמו הרמב"ן ז"ל להאמין בענין הקבלה ההיא, ולזה איני תוקע עצמי באותה חכמה אחר שלא קבלתיה מפי מקובל חכם. ואם ראיתי באורים על סודות הרמב"ן ז"ל וגם הם אינם מגלי' שרשי החכמה ההיא ומגלים טפח ומכסים כמה טפחים וקרוב לטעות בדבר מהם, ולכן בחרתי לבל יהיה לי עסק בנסתרות. ומה ששאלת אם הספירות למטה ממעלת המלאכים או למעלה מהם, אין ספק כי הספירות הם למעלה והם נאצלו ראשונה מן העשירות נאצלו המלאכים לדעת המקובלים, וכ"כ בפירוש רבי שם טוב בן גאון ז"ל בתחלת באורו לסודות הרמב"ן ז"ל. ורבי יהודה הלוי ז"ל כתב בסלוק אחד שעשה ליום הכפורים היו אומרים אותו בברצלונה בהיותה בשלותה כי דוד ע"ה באמרו ברכו ה' מלאכיו רמז לעולם המלאכים. ובאמרו ברכו ה' כל צבאיו רמז לעולם האמצעי. ובאמרו ברכו ה' כל מעשיו רמז לעולם התחתון. ובעולם המלאכים אמר כלשון הזה וכמה פנים לפני' הנוראים וכמה אחורים לאחורים הנוראים. והספר ההוא אשר אמרת שהוא לחכם רבי יצחק בן לטף קראו צורת עולם הנה הוא אצלי ובו כ"ז פרקים. וכן ספר אחר לו קראו צרור המור ובו י"א פרקים, וענין הספר הזה מענין הספר הקודם. עוד ספר אחר קטן מחזיק ק' עלין קראו רב פעלים לפי שהוא מדבר במינין רבים, וזה לא חלקו לפרקים כי אם למאמרים והם פ"ח מאמרים. עוד לו פירוש קהלת והוא פירוש נאה על דרך הפשט נוטה אל המושכל והחכמה הטבעית. עוד הספר הגדול והנאה שבספריו קראו שער השמים והוא כעין מורה הנבוכים חלקו לארבעה שערי' השער האחד יש בו כ"ח פרקי' השער הב' יש בו כ"ה פרקי' השער הג' יש בו י"ב פרקים השער הרביעי יש בו י"ו פרקים. והספר הזה הוא נכבד מאד ומדבר בו כפי המושכל והחקירה הפילוסופי' אבל מבטל דעותיהם במה שהם כנגד תורתנו. כי החכם הזה נראה שראה הרבה בפילוסופי' והיה עם זה תוריי וחסיד. וכן כתב בו טעמי מצות, ולא ראיתי בספר ההוא שיזכיר עשר ספירות רק עשר מעלות המלאכים כפי שהזכירה הרמב"ם ז"ל בספר המדע. ובספר הזה מרחיב בו הבאור בכל דרכיו זולתי בקצת דברים שמעלים ואומר והבן זה. אבל בספר שרמזת אליו כל דבריו סתומי' אין אדם מבין בהם, ומי שיקדים לזה הספר קריא' ספר שער השמי' יהי' לו תוספת הבנה בזה. ובספ' הזה הסתום הזכיר עשר ספירות אבל לא כדרך קבלת הרמב"ן ז"ל והנמשכים אחר קבלתו. כי בספר הזה נראה כי דעתו שמעלות המלאכים הם מכלל העשר ועשה שלש מעלות ראשונות מן המלאכים המתוארו' באש ובמים ורוח. וכבר הזכירו כי הנברא הראשון נקרא אש לוהט והצורה הרביעית היא אור השמש והחמישית היא גלגל השכל והוא כלל הגלגלי' והארבע צורות הנשארות הם ד' צורות היסודיות, כמש"כ זה בפ"כ מן הספר. ואין זה כלל דעת חכמי הקבלה ונראה שהם דברים בדא אותם מלבו ומשכלו בלי קבלה, וכן הזכיר זה הוא עצמו בפ"ה מן הספר. ומי יטריח מחשבתו להבין הדברים החדשים העולים בלבו והוא מסתיר ומכסה אותם, ולכן אמרתי בלבי יהיו לו לבדו ואין לאחרים אתו. הן אמת פירש ל"ב נתיבות כדרך המקובלים שהם עשר ספירות וכ"ב אותיות שבהם יסוד הדבו' ושהם נרמזות במלות שעולה כ"ב וי' וזה נאה, אך בעצם הספירות בירר דרך לעצמו מלבו. ולזה אני אומר שאין לסמוך בדברים כאלו אלא מפי חכם מקובל ועדיין אולי. 

First reading of bills related to the judicial reform approved in the Knesset

https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/367754

 The Knesset on Monday night approved the first reading of the first two laws of the judicial reform being promoted by Minister Yariv Levin.

Two bills, which relate to the Basic Law: The Judiciary, were voted upon. The two clauses which were approved are a clause dealing with changing the composition of the Judicial Selection Committee, so that it has a majority of members of the coalition, as well as a clause that will prevent the Supreme Court from striking down Basic Laws.

Monday, February 20, 2023

Biden’s Trip to Kyiv is the Ultimate Humiliation for Putin—and Trump

 https://www.thedailybeast.com/bidens-trip-to-kyiv-is-the-ultimate-humiliation-for-putinand-trump?ref=home

Biden went to Europe to send Putin a message of American and allied strength. Trump went to grovel before Putin. Biden stood up for American values and our allies. Trump said he trusted Putin more than America’s own intelligence and law enforcement services. Biden embodied America’s strength. Trump illustrated and represented our greatest weakness.

A year after Trump embarrassed the country in Helsinki, he compounded the offense by withholding aid from Ukraine in an attempt to extort Zelensky into doing political dirty work against Biden to help Trump’s reelection efforts. It was an illegal act that ultimately led to Trump’s first impeachment. At the same time and throughout the following year according to reports from Trump’s own top advisors, he was actively advocating to withdraw American troops from Europe.

Sunday, February 19, 2023

Rolling Stone's disastrous story of gang rape and R Gottesman, Chicago Beis Din & the bloggers Lopin, Maryles and Morris

Now that the Seminary scandal is winding down or rather unraveling from a story of a massive sex scandal where a respected rabbi was accused in federal court of  running four seminaries for the sole purpose of  having girls available for his sexual satisfaction to a growing realization that it was only an inexcusable hug given by a respected rabbi to a student  after which he was promptly kicked out by the staff and he readily acknowledged his misdeed in front of beis din. Headlines of seminaries being run as houses of prostitution has become nothing more than  an inappropriate hug.

The question is why has such a relatively minor - though inexcusable transgression - triggered such strong emotions. Why have sincere and intelligent people believed the worst - even in the face of clear unambiguous facts? A similar thing happened in American in the 1970's and 1980's where thousands were falsely accused of child abuse in a hysteric atmosphere based on no evidence. Many reputations were destroyed and some spent many years in jail. See   Modern Day Witch Trial
 Father Goron Macrae..  Nachlaot     Tablet Magazine regarding Nachlaot

Part of the answer is that serious abuse does occur.  Abuse is so horrible and disgusting that it and the abuser have to be destroyed.  Lives have in fact been ruined by abuse and the betrayal of family and community when the abuse was reported. The reality is that Orthodox community - like the rest of the world - has until recently not dealt properly with abuse. But that is not enough to explain what has happened in terms of peoples emotion and propagation of baseless accusations

I would like to suggest another dynamic. There seems to be the need for people to not only have abuse prevented and abusers jailed - but that they have to be the ones who save the world from abuse. These people lose all objectively when dealing with abuse. They lose all ability to consider alternative explanations of events. They take an extreme position - if there is smoke if there are rumors if there was an over friendly personality - he must have done it.  It is a lynch mob attitude combined with being a savior of mankind from abuse.

Over and over in the comments on the blogs and in the comments of certain people who have led the attack on the seminaries we hear:
"He must have been guilty - did you see the way he conducted himself?"  Of course he is guilty of rape - my wife heard that 40 girls were raped." He must have been guilty if the beis din has suspicions - they would not publicize suspicions unless it really happened." " I am going to close down those seminaries - there is no such thing as a seminary where staff failed to stop abuse that can serve as an educational institution and even if the accusations aren't true but we can't allow a seminary where such rumors exist." "Don't confuse the issue by demanding evidence - everyone knows that in rape cases the girls don't say anything - but he is guilty and the seminaries were guilty because that's what everyone says." "Not only is he guilty of the worst that everyone says - but given the enormity of what is claimed about him the staff obviously knew about it and not only did nothing but they facilitated his abuse - don't defend him by saying there is no evidence. Commonsense tells you that he is guilty and if you don't believe it you are also a facilitator of abuse." "It is better that a 1000 innocent people lives be destroyed if it prevents an abuser from getting away with his crime."
Following is another example where a distinguished University accepted the gang rape charges made by a student because of the investigation of a reporter who wanted to believe it happened and ignored anything which would have ruined her "righteous" expose. Fortunately the Washington Post took the time to check the facts and the "facts" unraveled. The accused must be given the chance to self-defense and the lynch mob must be replaced by a calm and rational evaluation of the evidence
=================================

Washington Post   On Slate’s DoubleX Gabfest podcast last month, reporter Sabrina Rubin Erdely explained why she had settled on the University of Virginia as the focus for her investigative story on a horrific 2012 gang rape of a freshman named Jackie at the Phi Kappa Psi fraternity house. “First I looked around at a number of different campuses,” said Erdely. “It took me a while to figure out where I wanted to focus on. But when I finally decided on the University of Virginia — one of the compelling reasons that made me focus on the University of Virginia was when I found Jackie. I made contact with a student activist at the school who told me a lot about the culture of the school — that was one of the important things, sort of criteria that I wanted when I was looking for the right school to focus on.”

Rolling Stone thought it had found the “right” campus and the right alleged crime: Following her Nov. 19 story on Jackie’s alleged assault in a dark room at the Phi Kappa Psi house, the university suspended all fraternity activities and a national spotlight fell on the issue of campus rape.

Now it’s all falling apart. Thanks to several days of reporting by the Washington Post’s T. Rees Shapiro, Rolling Stone’s account is not even a semester away from becoming part of journalism classes around the country. Jackie’s friends now doubt her account of the traumatic event, reports Shapiro, and the fraternity insists it never held a “a date function or social event” on the weekend of Sept. 28, 2012, which is the date cited by Jackie in the Rolling Stone story.

Rolling Stone has issued a statement apologizing for the story, which includes this misogynistic, victim-blaming line: “In the face of new information, there now appear to be discrepancies in Jackie’s account, and we have come to the conclusion that our trust in her was misplaced.” But Jackie was a freshman in college when her episode allegedly took place; the story itself references her misgivings about putting her life into the public realm; she requested that Rolling Stone not contact “Drew,” the ringleader of the alleged assault; the alleged sequence of events — nine college men conspiring to attack a freshman and sexually assaulting her for three hours — should have triggered every skeptical twitch in the Rolling Stone staff. This disaster is the sole property of editors and a reporter. [...]

The Printed Page of the Talmud by Rabbi HAYM SOLOVEITCHIK

0PEN ANY COPY of the Talmud printed within the past half millennium and you will find on the inner side of the page the commentary of Rashi  and on the outer side of the page Tosafot, the glosses of the French talmudists of the twelfth and thirteenth century. Why did Rashi and Tosafot become so central to talmudic study and why is their study the core of the traditional Jewish canon?

If one reads an accurate translation of the Talmud, such as the translation published by the Soncino press, one will understand all the words of the text and the general line of argument, but the individual steps lack clarity and the argument as a whole hangs loosely together. The reason is that the Talmud is, as it were, a "telegramatic" text, the main points are stated, but the flow, the linkage of the various points, is left up to the reader to reconstruct. It is this flow and linkage that Rashi supplies, and with remarkably few words. Rashi was gifted with an inordinate ability to detect both minor gaps in a presentation and the slightest ambiguity oflanguage and correct them succinctly. Realizing the cumulative effect of trivial errors, he deftly guides the student through the text with a mere word or two, preventing a host of possible misunderstandings. So definitively did Rashi solve these problems that no one ever attempted again to write another commentary to the Talmud and all other commentaries were swiftly consigned to oblivion. Provence discarded its classic commentary, that of R. Abraham ben David of Posquieres (r125-rr98), and even Yemenite Jewry, who revered Maimonides (rr35-1204) as few other Jewish cultures have venerated a scholar, allowed Maimonides' commentary to the Talmud to disappear.

Rashi's commentary did not arise out of nowhere. Genius alone could never discern the meaning of the innumerable Persian, Greek, and Latin words that abound in the Talmud. Behind Rashi stood the traditions of talmudic interpretation of the academies of the Rhineland, the famed yeshivot of Mainz and Worms that Rashi attended as a youth. Those traditions are now known as the Com­mentaries of Rabbenu Gershom Maor ha-Golah (Light of the Exile). Like the ban of polygamy that is attributed to Rabbenu Gershom but is actually a longstanding communal ban, the Commentaries are not his but rather the collective work of the academy of Mainz in the eleventh century.' The com­mentary on several tractates has been preserved and a comparison with that of Rashi is illuminating. Much of the exegetical material of Rashi is already found there, but the commentary lacks those crucial words and comments that give bite and tightness to the talmudic arguments. Much as a great lawyer takes a brief of a competent one and, with an insertion of a phrase or two, transforms the reasonable argument into a convincing one, so Rashi transformed his heritage. The bricks and mortar of his ceuvre are to be found in the works of his predecessors. What those commentaries lack is the magic touch of Rashi's masonry.

The commentaries of Rashi democratized talmudic scholarship. Prior to his work, the only way to master a tractate was to travel to a talmudic academy and study at the feet of a master. No writ¬ten work could systematically convey with any degree of sustained accuracy the precise line of a talmudic argument. That could be conveyed only by oral instruction, by the vibrant voice of gifted teachers. With the appearance of Rashi's work, anyone, regardless of means, could by dint of talent and effort master any talmudic topic. It further expanded the range of knowledge of most scholars. Previously, one knew accurately only what one had been fortunate to study at an academy. Once one departed, one could scarcely expand his range of knowledge, at least not with equal precision. The lifelong study of Talmud, the constant conquest of new tractates, and the unlimited personal acquisi¬tion of knowledge was in many ways the consequence ofRashi's inimitable work of exposition.

This is not to say that Rashi's explanations were definitive. Far from it. For some three hundred years scholars scrutinized his commentary, criticized innumerable passages, and demanded their reinterpretation. Yet, all realized that the problem that had confronted scholars for close to half a millennium- how to turn the abrupt and sometimes gnomic formulations of the Talmud into a coherent and smoothly flowing text- had been solved definitively by Rashi. The subsequent task of scholars, therefore, was to emend and add to his interpretations. Thus came into existence the subsequent genre of talmudic commentary, the Tosafot, or "additions" to Rashi that are printed along side his commentary.

What are the Tosafot? The glosses of scholastic dialectics, the product of collation, contradiction, and distinction. The Talmud is a vast, loosely organized corpus with many overlapping discussions. The tosafists undertook on each and every given topic to collate all the discussions of a given issue in the entire Talmud, to note any contradictions between the different passages, and to resolve them by distinguishing between the cases under discussion. Not that the tosafists were the first to note contradictions in the Talmud. Contradictions have been noted from the moment that the Talmud became normative. The approach that had previously prevailed was to follow, in cases of contradiction, the sugya de-shematsa (dominant discussion). There is generally one major treatment of an issue in the Talmud, though that issue may reappear in the course of many other discussions. When confronted with a contradiction, one should follow the conclusions of the dominant discussion, even if other talmudic discussions of the problem would seem to imply a different outcome. The premise of dialectic is, however, that there are no "major" and "minor" passages in the corpus. All passages are of equal valence. The Talmud in its totality is a harmonious whole. Talmudic discussions are indeed "telegrammatic," and thus, though certain conditions of the case at bar are not always expressly spelled out, they are inferable from the discussion. The task of the scholar is to ferret out the distinctiveness of each of the seemingly similar cases under discussion and, thereby, restore harmony to an apparently dissonant corpus. Not that the tosafists were the first people to distinguish between seemingly similar cases. Just as contradictions were noted from the very outset of talmudic study, so too were distinctions made and contradictions resolved from the beginning. Maimonides often quietly resolved contradictions with an added word or two, and few scholars quietly anticipated and resolved more questions that way than did Rashi. 

Anyone familiar with the super-commentarial works on Rashi knows how frequently the authors note, "and Rashi forfended the problem by .... " What was new in the dialectical approach is the systematic quest for, and resolution of, contradictions. It demanded a new mode of study, in a sense, even a new curriculum. The Talmud could no longer be studied "vertically," or consecutively, line after line, page after page, as had been done previously. It demanded "horizontal" study, where each line of the Talmud was sys¬tematically collated with all parallel passages found in the vast talmudic corpus, and contradictions were uncovered and resolved. The fruit of their labor of some two centuries is Tosafot, the glosses printed alongside Rashi.
Anonymity reigns in the Tosafot. Only too often questions are raised without the name of the interlocutor. We find simply, "ve-temah" (objection) or "im tomar" (should you say). Nevertheless, the acronyms of two speakers do stand out: I1"i and '"i. The former designates Rabbenu Tam, the universally accepted moniker for R. Jacob hen Meir of Ramerupt (r roc--r r yr}; the latter indicates his nephew, R. Isaac of Dampierre ( d. II 8 9). 2 Most of the famed thought of the tosafists is actually the product of these two men. Who were they and why their prominence?

The dialectical method, omnipresent in the Talmud, was revived by Rabbenu Tam. Dialectic was the dominant mode of scholastic thinking in the Middle Ages- it obtained in Roman and canon law and in theology. Was Rabbenu Tam influenced by developments in his surroundings? The revival of Roman law had not come to Champagne by the second or third decade of the twelfth century when Rabbenu Tam began his revolution, and the dialectics of canon law did not appear until later. In theology, dialectics was indeed emerging in northern France at this time, but its concepts and vocabulary were so technical, alien, and, in one sense, repugnant to Jews, that, even if we overlook the fact that these discussions were conducted in Latin, "the language of the priests" as Jews called it, it seems rash to attribute influence to them without concrete evidence. One can of course invoke the zeitgeist (spirit of the age), but that simply is another way of saying we know of parallel develop-
ments without having any evidence of contact.

In one sense the question is bootless. The greatness of Rabbenu Tam did not lie in his discovery of dialectic, which is employed in the talmudic discussions themselves, but rather in the scope and depth of his use of it. Rabbenu Tam's influence extended over the entire talmudic corpus; he scarcely left a topic that he did not revolutionize by dialectic. He was able to offer many hundreds, probably thousands, of legal distinctions that subsequent thinkers found, and to this day still find, essential for any understanding of talmudic law. So fecund were his ideas and so productive was his mode of thinking that this mode of analysis has continued to the present day. Rab¬benu Tam rewrote halakhic thought by his revival and use of dialectic and made this method an indispensable tool of talmudic study.

Though extraordinarily creative, Rabbenu Tam wrote very little. The one small work he authored himself, Sefer ha- Yashar, was first printed in I 8 I I and remains unused to this day. Words came easily enough to Rabbenu Tam when engaged in polemic or in the niceties of polite correspondence, but when called upon to express ideas, the sentences swiftly break down. The flow of words is unable to keep pace with the speed of his thought and with the leaps of his creative association. It is ronic that the one significant tosafist who wielded the metrics of Spanish poetry with any degree of skill was unable to pen a clear sentence, even by the abrupt and inelegant standards of dialectical writing.

Rabbenu Tam's thoughts have come down to us via the agency of his nephew, R. Isaac of Dampierre (Ri). Indeed, were it not for Ri, not only Rabbenu Tam's work, but the very dialectical revolution itself, might well have had no lasting impact. The nephew was the equal of the uncle in genius, but wholly opposite in character. Not for him the communal involvements, the sound and fury of scholarly controversies, the threats of excommunication that characterized the career of his stormy and imperious uncle. Quiet and unassuming, and without any desire to bend others to his will, Ri passed his entire life teaching and writing in a two- or three-street hamlet in Champagne.4 We know little more of his self-effacing life other than that he studied with his uncle, Rabbenu Tam. This meek exterior, however, hid an iron will and a relentless dedication to his craft that few equaled in Jewish history. Just as his great-grandfather, Rashi, humbly but steadfastly sought to explicate the entire Talmud, Ri undertook the protean task of elucidating the entire Talmud in light of dialectic and equally succeeded in his goal. In his school and under his tutelage every line of the Talmud was subjected to the probing light of the newly revived method. The slightest whisper of contradic¬tion was noted and solutions were proffered; solutions and distinctions that have proven so suggestive and fruitful that their study is the staple of the talmudic curriculum to this day. 

Rightly, Nahmanides deemed Ri, baa! ha-Tosafot (the author of the Tosa[ot). Though an easy writer, Ri himself wrote little. He adopted the widely used method of composition, the reportatio.5 The magister (master) would select a stu¬dent to prepare a report of his teaching that he then would correct and certify, or the master would dictate the text himself. While Latin circles attributed these reports to the teacher, the tosafists credited them to the pupil. Nevertheless, all recognized that the work was an accurate report of the master's teachings. Over the course of his life, Ri used four students to write reportatios. The first, his son, R. Elhanan, was in the midst of composing a commentary on the tractate Avodah Zarah when he was murdered in a pogrom in n84. That truncated work is the only one of his many Tosafot that has come down to us. 6 R. Samson of Sens picked up where his fallen colleague had left off and wrote Tosafot on much of the Talmud. These Tosafot form the basis for most of the printed Tosafot on the Talmud. Only three of his original Tosafot have survived, those on Pesabim, Ketubbot, and parts of Avodah Zarah,' R. Judah of Paris penned a third set of reportatios, and those on Berakhot and Avodah Zarah have come down to us.  One student, R. Barukh, felt the need to bring the new discussions and conclusions of the dialectic to a wider audience and to draw practical conclusions from them. That is to say, translate the new ideas of Dampierre into religious practice. He chose several select topics, such as the laws of the Sabbath and kashrut, and composed, under Ri's direction or atleast inspiration, a reportatio elucidating Ri's teachings regarding these matters. Entitled, Sefer ha-Terumah, the work is in every sense a Tosafot from the school of Ri. 

Two areas of Jewish law are not found in either Rashi or Tosafot: agricultural law and the laws of purity. The former, discussed in Zeraim, primarily obtain in the Land of Israel, while the latter, addressed in Tohorot, are operative only when the Temple in Jerusalem is standing. These tractates consist only of Mishnayot. Both Rashi and Tosafot restricted their work to talmudic tractates and therefore left these areas untreated. Ri's pupil, the aforementioned R. Samson of Sens, penned a vast commentary to these Mishnayot, a work that has not been superseded to this day. 10 His departure for Israel in r2II effectively ended the creative period of tosafist thought. 
Most intellectual revolutions take a century or so to be absorbed, not only by the public but also by the discipline itself Such was the case with the joint labors of Rabbenu Tam and Ri. Put differently, intellectual revolutions occur wholesale, their impact is achieved only by retailing it. The thirteenth century witnessed the packaging and delivery, if you wish, of the thoughts of the great men of the twelfth century. This took two forms: the writing of codes and the editing of the Tosafot that had been issued from Ri's academy in Dampierre. 

The first task, foreseen by R. Barukh, was undertaken on a grand scale by R. Moses of Couey, tosafist, preacher, and disputant at the trial of the Talmud in Paris in 1240. Organizing his work according to Maimonides' count of the biblical commandments, he reproduced under the rubric of each commandment, the extensive discussions of the Tosafot of his teacher, R. Judah of Paris. The end product was a massive two-volume work entitled Sefer Mitzvot Gadol, which was accessible only to scholars. II The need for a briefer, practical guide to the tosafists teachings was immediately felt and swiftly met. R. Isaac of Corbeil penned an abridgement of this work called Sefer Mitzvot Katan, which was widely diffused and very influential.  
The editing and abridging of the Dampierre Tosafot occupied such mid- and late-thirteenth-century talmudists as R. Perez of Corbeil and R. Eliezer of Touques. Their works are known, not surprisingly, as Tosafot R. Perez and Tosafot Touques. Oddly enough, these thirteenth-century abridgments became the basis for our printed Tosafot, not the original Tosafot that were issued by Ri's academy in Dampierre. In Italy in the late-fifteenth century, the Tosafot of R. Samson of Sens, were generally available, but by a strange twist of fate this classic set of Tosafot did not make it into the canon. Gershom Soncino, the printer of the first published Talmud, had somehow heard that the Tosafot of Touques and other late Tosafot were the most reliable. So he disregarded the Tosafot of R. Samson that lay readily at hand and at personal risk traveled to France to find these reputedly superior Tosafot. As he wrote thirty years later in a somewhat garbled note: 

I toiled and found books that were previously closed and sealed, and brought them forth to the light of the sun, to shine in the firmament, as the Tosafot from Touques of R. Isaac and Rabbenu Tam(?!). I traveled to France, Charnbery and Geneva, the places where [the books] were conceived, so that the public might benefit from them, for in Spain, Italy and all the lands, we have only heard of the [Tosafot] of Sens, of R. Perez and R. Shimshon and their colleagues. 1 
What he brought back from his foray in France was an assorted mixture of Tosafot from a variety of schools,  and this late medley of Tosafot, wholly derivative of those of Dampierre are what he (and subsequently all other printers of the Talmud) published. And it is they that have become the canonical Tosafot of the printed page. The caliber of Rabbenu Tam and Ri was such, however, that their thinking, even in a somewhat abrupt and abbreviated form, was powerful enough to shape the course of talmudic thought for close to a millennium.