Rabbi Yaakov Emden (the Yaavetz)

Biography and Family Background: The Rise of a Meticulous Scholar and Independent Leader

Rabbi Yaakov Yisrael ben Tzvi Ashkenazi, known by his literary name the Yaavetz (Yaakov ben Tzvi), is counted among the front rank of the great Torah scholars of Ashkenaz during the eighteenth century.^{[1, 2, 3]} The Yaavetz was born on 15 Sivan 5458 (June 1697 or 1698) in Altona or in neighboring Hamburg, which together with Wandsbek made up the famous union of communities AHU.^{[1, 2, 3]} His father and principal teacher was Rabbi Tzvi Hirsch Ashkenazi, known as the "Hakham Tzvi," from whom the Yaavetz acquired most of his Torah, his profound method of study and his uncompromising zeal for guarding the boundaries of Orthodoxy.^{[1, 3, 4]} Already in his youth the Yaavetz stood out as a sworn stickler for precision and a wonderful grammarian of the Holy Tongue, a philological skill that later served him in his pioneering projects of textual criticism.^[4]

In the year 5476 (1716) the Yaavetz married Rachel, daughter of Rabbi Mordechai ha-Kohen Katz (son of the author of "Semikhat Chakhamim"), and moved to live in Breslau.^[3] After the death of his wife, he married in his third marriage his niece, the daughter of his brother Rabbi Ephraim Ashkenazi.^[3] In the year 5488 (1728) he was called to serve as rabbi in the city of Emden, and from it he received his well-known family name – Emden.^{[1, 2, 3]} However, his official tenure in the rabbinate lasted only four years.^[3] His forceful character, his moral zeal and his absolute striving for spiritual autonomy prevented him from remaining subordinate to the opinion of the community's lay leaders and its political leadership.^[3]

After resigning his post in Emden, the Yaavetz returned to his native city of Altona.^[3] There, after receiving special permission from Duke Christian VI, he established a private Hebrew printing press.^{[3, 5]} The press enabled him to earn his living from independent trade and to publish his many and varied works without needing the approval of the community councils or the censorship of other rabbis.^[3] Throughout all his years in Altona the Yaavetz refused to accept any official rabbinic post, and used to say with sarcastic humor that every day he recites the blessing "Blessed is He who did not make me an av beit din" ("she-lo asani AB"D," on the pattern of the blessing "she-lo asani eved," "who did not make me a slave"), out of the conception that institutionalized communal leadership binds the hands of the halakhic decisor and prevents him from expressing the Torah truth in its full truth.^[3] The Yaavetz died in Altona on 30 Nisan 5536 (19 April 1776) at the age of 78, and was buried in the local Jewish cemetery in Altona.^{[3, 6]}

Torah Writing and Halakhic Methodology: Independence of Thought, Science and Social Ethics

The halakhic teaching of the Yaavetz was characterized by exceptional originality, by ruling directly from the sources of the Talmud and the Rishonim, and by complete independence from the opinion of earlier decisors or of his contemporaries.^{[2, 3]} He wrote more than sixty works in every branch of the Torah, including commentary on the Mishnah, glosses on the Talmud, novellae on the Tur and the Shulchan Arukh, halakhic responsa and books of thought and mussar.^{[1, 2, 3]}

One of the fascinating dimensions of the rulings of the Yaavetz is his positive attitude to science and medicine and their integral incorporation into halakhic discussions.^[7] He tended to explain difficult laws by means of the medical and scientific terminology of his time.^[7] Thus, for example, in the commentary on the "Beit Yosef" in Yoreh De'ah on the laws of the sorcerer and the soothsayer, the Jerusalem Talmud's word "ofyon" is cited.^[7] The Yaavetz explained this word as the drug opium known in medicine ("the resin of a tree, and its name in the vernacular is opium"), and defined it as an outright deadly poison on the one hand, but as a substance permitted for use and even essential when it is skillfully compounded as an ingredient in complex remedies ("the work of an apothecary").^[7]

In the field of medical ethics and preventive medicine, the Yaavetz presented a sensitive and progressive conception regarding the duty to disclose the truth to a patient who is close to death.^[7] According to his view, if a physician recognizes by the indicators of the urine or by other factors that the patient's end is near, and the patient asks to know his true condition in order to settle his mind ("Do not hide it from me; are you doing this only so that my mind should not be distraught..."), he must be told the truth.^[7] The Yaavetz held that in cases in which the patient suffers severe pain, or is very old and no longer desires life, or when he needs to put his spiritual and material affairs in order ("to give instructions concerning matters of Heaven"), disclosing the truth in a gentle and comforting manner is a moral and halakhic duty.^[7]

The extreme halakhic independence of the Yaavetz found distinct expression in his innovative halakhic ruling permitting the institution of the "pilegesh" (concubine) in the responsa "She'ilat Yaavetz" (Part 2, §15).^[8] In an attempt to find a moral and halakhic answer to the social difficulties of his generation and to prevent grave transgressions of harlotry and prohibitions punishable by karet, the Yaavetz proposed designating a woman for a man without chuppah and kiddushin and without a ketubbah.^[8] He explained that such a designation removes the woman from the category of "kedeshah" (harlot) and establishes her as a "pilegesh," who is a kind of "half-wife" permitted to him.^[8] Nevertheless, the Yaavetz stressed that this ruling must not be taken lightly, and that anyone who wishes to rely on it must consult a local rabbi and authorized teacher of halakha, designate for her a permanent room in his house, warn her against the prohibition of seclusion with other men, and make sure that she is careful to immerse properly according to the law.^[8]

Alongside the intricate halakhic discussions, the Yaavetz attributed supreme importance to human conduct, manners and social ethics, as reflected in the practical guidelines he incorporated into his prayer book.^[4] The Yaavetz instructed his readers to be the first to greet every person, to greet those seated at the entrance to a banquet, to sit in the place appropriate according to honor, and to ask favors in gentle language and in the best of words without pressuring others or judging them unfavorably in case of refusal.^[4]

In addition, the glosses of the Yaavetz on the Talmud reveal his direct way of understanding the words of the Sages and of analyzing aggadic and halakhic topics alike.^[9] In Berakhot 31a, in the discussion of the "tzanita de-Bavel" and the question of whether it is a matter of halakha, the Yaavetz explained the halakhic consequence of the dryness of the lulav and its validity for the commandment.^[9] At the end of Tractate Nazir, the Yaavetz proposed an original explanation of the saying of Rabbi Nehorai concerning the standing of the "one who answers" and the "one who blesses" and their connection to the Nazirite status of Samuel and Samson, while referring to the paucity of Rabbi Nehorai's traditions in the Talmud.^[9] Similarly, in his work "Lechem Shamayim," he proposed original explanations for the endings of Tractates Sotah and Yoma, and discussed the question of the distance and time required of a person in order to be obligated to bring the Passover offering in Jerusalem.^[9]

The Complex Attitude to Kabbalah and the Zohar: Between Textual Criticism and Mystical Holiness

The position of the Yaavetz toward kabbalistic teaching and the Zohar is one of the most complex and fascinating issues in his teaching, and it is often flattened because of his many controversies.^{[3, 5]} The main motive that drove the Yaavetz to engage in critical research of the Zohar was the uncompromising struggle against the remnants of the Sabbatean sect.^{[5, 12]} The Sabbateans tended to rely on the homilies of the Zohar and on obscure kabbalistic expressions to justify their belief in Shabbetai Tzvi and the abrogation of the commandments of the revealed Torah.^{[5, 12]} In order to pull the ground out from under the arguments of the heretics, the Yaavetz turned to challenging the antiquity and the absolute authority of the Zohar.^{[5, 12]}

His monumental book Mitpachat Sefarim, which was written around the year 5488 (1728) and printed some forty years later at his press in Altona in the year 5528 (1768), constitutes the first and most comprehensive critical enterprise in the Torah world dealing with the origin of the Zohar.^{[5, 13]} The Yaavetz applied sharp philological and historical tools of analysis to the Zoharic text, and reached the conclusion that the book is not a uniform work of the tanna Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai of the second century CE.^{[5, 12]} He pointed to the incorporation of Neoplatonic philosophical conceptions and Gnostic ideas within the Zohar, and even found in it literary images that in his opinion recall the writings of the New Testament and carry with them "a whiff of idolatry."^[3]

The Yaavetz argued that even into the ancient parts of the Zohar many glosses of later copyists had crept in over the generations, which were printed by mistake as part of the body of the holy text.^{[3, 12]} From this he determined that there is no obligation whatsoever on a Jew to bind himself to belief in all parts of the printed Zohar, and that it is permitted to doubt it.^[5] In a solemn oath that appeared in his writings, he declared that one folio of the Babylonian Talmud is incomparably more holy and authoritative than the Zohar.^[3] He even leveled a pointed rationalist critique at central principles of the Kabbalah of the Ari, and especially at the concept of the "breaking of the vessels" and the need of the human being for the "repair" of the Godhead, wondering how it is possible that there is a lack of perfection in the Creator such that He would require the deeds of human beings to complete Him.^[3]

However, a deep understanding of the teaching of the Yaavetz shows that he did not negate the wisdom of Kabbalah itself.^[5] At the end of "Mitpachat Sefarim" the Yaavetz stressed that he believes with complete faith in the traditional Kabbalah of truth, and that one who denies it entirely is nothing but "a heretic and a complete apikoros."^[5] True Kabbalah, according to his view, is that which accords with the revealed Torah and does not contradict reason and the laws of halakha.^[5]

His positive conception of true mysticism found distinct expression in his commentary on Tractate Gittin 60a.^[9] The Yaavetz referred to the practice of the sages of the Talmud of studying books of aggadah on the Sabbath, and explained that these are not simple tales but "a book of the wisdom of truth and Kabbalah."^[9] He explained that whereas on weekdays it is fitting to engage in practical laws and halakhot, the holiness of the Sabbath day and the delight of the Sabbath help one to comprehend and understand the hidden wisdom, which he defines as "the Holy of Holies."^[9] This paradoxical combination – of extreme textual skepticism on the one hand, and of deep devotion to the study of the esoteric teaching at sanctified times on the other – represents the depth of the outlook of the Yaavetz.

The Amulet Controversy and the Campaign for the Walls of Orthodoxy

The stormiest public campaign the Yaavetz waged, which shook all of Ashkenazi Jewry and left lasting residues for generations, was the great controversy against Rabbi Yehonatan Eybeschütz.^{[1, 11]} Rabbi Yehonatan Eybeschütz was a halakhic decisor of great stature, a kabbalist, a head of yeshiva and a revered preacher, who was appointed in the year 5501 rabbi of the communities of AHU.^[11] Alongside his famous halakhic rulings, Rabbi Eybeschütz used to write amulets for protection and healing for pregnant women and the sick who turned to him.^[11]

The controversy erupted when several of these amulets reached the hands of the Yaavetz.^[11] After deciphering their encoded formulas, the Yaavetz argued emphatically that he had found in them holy names, allusions and distinctly Sabbatean formulas, attesting to their writer's secret belief in the messiahship of Shabbetai Tzvi.^[11] In the eyes of the Yaavetz, who saw Sabbateanism as a cancer in the body of Judaism, this was an immediate threat to the purity of the faith, and he launched an aggressive public campaign to have Rabbi Eybeschütz excommunicated.^{[1, 11]} He printed a series of sharp polemical pamphlets and books, among them "Akitzat Akrav," "Sefer Hit'abkut" and "Sefer Shimush," intended to expose what he defined as the Sabbatean fraud.^[3]

The controversy tore the Jewish world into two hostile camps between which a fierce political and legal struggle was waged ^[11]:

• The supporters of Rabbi Yehonatan Eybeschütz: Most of the rabbis of the generation, and especially the leaders and lay heads of the communities of AHU, gave complete backing to Rabbi Eybeschütz and saw the accusations as a malicious false libel stemming from jealousy and personal hatred.^[11] The principal disciple of the "Noda BiYehuda," Rabbi Elazar Fleckeles, defined the accusations as "false testimony."^[11] Even the Vilna Gaon, who was asked in his youth to intervene in the controversy, sent a letter of support and blessing to Rabbi Eybeschütz (a letter that the Yaavetz hastened to denounce as forged).^[11]
• The supporters of Rabbi Yaakov Emden: The Yaavetz succeeded in enlisting on his side the elder of the rabbis of the generation, Rabbi Yaakov Yehoshua Falk (author of "Penei Yehoshua"), who sent sharp letters to Rabbi Eybeschütz and, when he did not respond, issued a severe ban against him.^[11] Ultimately, an official ban was proclaimed against Rabbi Eybeschütz in the illustrious community of Brody in the month of Elul 5512 (1752).^[11]

Rabbi Yechezkel Landau, author of the "Noda BiYehuda," tried to propose a complex compromise formula intended to save the honor of Rabbi Eybeschütz on the one hand, and to suppress the suspect amulets on the other.^[11] However, the uncompromising zeal of the Yaavetz prevented any compromise.^[11] He sharply attacked the "Noda BiYehuda," accused him of pursuing personal honor and of trying to obtain the rabbinate of Prague, and even hurled accusations of Sabbateanism at him.^[11] The controversy paralyzed the communities and severely harmed the livelihood of Rabbi Eybeschütz and the health of his wife, who died of grief during the events.^[11] The Sabbatean suspicion later attached also to the sons of Rabbi Eybeschütz: his younger son, Binyamin Wolf, acted openly as a Sabbatean prophet, and his eldest son, Mordechai, was suspected of Sabbateanism and thrown into prison in Pressburg in 1761, until he was released through the intervention of Empress Maria Theresa.^[11]

Autobiography and Historical Testimony: The Book "Megillat Sefer"

The unique and sensational work of the Yaavetz, which places him at an exceptional meeting point between the traditional rabbinic world and the first buds of the modern era and modernity, is the autobiographical book Megillat Sefer.^{[3, 14]} Personal and revealing autobiographical writing in the first person was an extremely rare phenomenon among the great Torah scholars of that period, and the book remained in manuscript for more than a hundred years after his death, until it was first printed in David Kahana's edition in Warsaw in the year 5656 (1896).^[14]

In this book the Yaavetz unfolds the story of his stormy life, the history of his family and the chain of persecutions and battles he experienced throughout his life.^[14] The purpose of writing the work, as the Yaavetz himself defined it, was threefold and fulfilled a religious, psychological and apologetic function at once ^[14]:

• Gratitude to God: The Yaavetz sought to set down in writing the many kindnesses of God done for him throughout the years of his wanderings and struggles, so that he, his family and his descendants after him would remember to thank God for his deliverance.^[14]
• Comfort and strength for the persecuted: The book was meant to serve as a source of encouragement and courage for upright people persecuted and insulted through no fault of their own, in the hope that they would look at the story of his life, trust in God and believe in His ability to save them from the hand of their persecutors.^[14]
• Self-defense against slander: The writing of the autobiography served as a detailed brief of defense against his many enemies who had spread libelous pamphlets and malicious rumors about him during the amulet controversy and the war against Sabbateanism.^[14]

"Megillat Sefer" gives researchers and students a direct view of the social, religious and political reality of German Jewry in the eighteenth century.^[14] In it the Yaavetz reveals with rare candor his dilemmas, the difficulties of earning his living, his complex relations with his contemporaries, and the rationale behind his insistence on not accepting an official rabbinic post ("who did not make me an av beit din") in order to preserve the complete independence of his voice and his writings.^{[3, 14]}

Influence and Reception for Generations: From His Own Generation to Hasidism and Modern Scholarship

Despite the fierce controversies and bans that accompanied the life of the Yaavetz, his Torah works became classic treasures of halakhic literature, and his halakhic responsa and rulings are cited thousands of times in the books of the Acharonim.^[1] His well-known prayer book, "Beit El, Amudei Shamayim," achieved very wide circulation and deeply influenced the shaping of the versions of prayer and of customs in many communities in Ashkenaz and Eastern Europe.^[3]

The influence of the Yaavetz extended beyond the boundaries of the Mitnagdic community and reached even the courts of the Hasidim.^[10] A prominent example of this is the special regard the Lubavitcher Rebbe held for the writings of the Yaavetz.^[10] In writing his Passover Haggadah, which combines collections of reasons and customs, the Rebbe relied systematically on the prayer book of the Yaavetz and referred to it many times.^[10] Although the Yaavetz chose in his prayer book a version of the order of the Passover offering different from that accepted by the founder of Chabad Hasidism, the author of the Tanya, the Rebbe devoted entire Torah talks to resolving all the difficulties of the Yaavetz and defending the Chabad version, out of enormous esteem for the halakhic authority of the Yaavetz.^[10]

The figure of the Yaavetz remains a symbol of an exceptional combination of conservative Orthodox zeal together with pioneering scientific and philological skepticism.^{[3, 5, 7]} While his critical work "Mitpachat Sefarim" met with opposition and a ban on the part of traditional rabbis and was printed mainly by maskilim who saw him as a partner on their path, his halakhic books were accepted without challenge at the heart of the rabbinic consensus.^{[5, 12]} He left behind him a legacy of uncompromising independence of thought, spiritual freedom and the pursuit of truth, which continues to arouse great interest and comprehensive research both in the study halls and in the modern academic world.^[11]