#Shulkhan Arukh

[todaysjewishholiday]

2 Elul 5784 (4-5 September 2024)

The invention of the moveable type printing press in the fifty third century of the Hebrew calendar set off far reaching transformations in numerous human endeavors, with the study of halakha being no exception. Prior to mechanical printing, each copy of any book had to be laboriously and meticulously copied by hand, with the result being that most people simply did not own books. For many centuries after the Talmud was first put into writing rather than being transmitted entirely as an oral tradition through repetition and memorization, most Jewish study was still performed collectively, with hand-copied seforim being discussed and commented on collectively in batei midrash. Hand-made copies had to be very carefully checked to ensure a text remained the same through multiple copyings and variants were still often introduced. And most Jews would not have owned any books personally, with the exception of especially erudite scholars. The printing press made mass production, and thus mass ownership of books, possible. The result was not just more books, but different kinds of books. Most halakhic seforim prior to the invention of printing assumed a high level of expertise from their readers— they were written not for the average Jew but for scholars engaged in the multigenerational process of halakhic rulings, and assumed a high level of familiarity with the entirety of the Tanakh and Talmud and participation in the pandiasporic community of Torah scholarship and halakhic analysis. Those who weren’t already experts in these subjects were assumed to have teachers and colleagues who would guide them as they interacted with halakhic texts. Rather than reading commentaries directly, Jews who weren’t engaged in the lifelong pursuit of Torah learning were expected to consult somebody with that expertise on any practical matter in which they needed guidance.

The printing press, by giving non-experts access to private book ownership, created demand for introductory texts for a general audience without a thorough background in thousands of years of halakhic debate. One of the most legendary texts to meet this demand was the Shulkhan Arukh, a halakhic compendium by Yosef Karo, which was first printed on the second of Elul 5325.

Karo was born into a Sephardi family in Toledo four years prior to the edict of expulsion issued by Ferdinand and Isabella. His family journeyed through a full range of the potential refuges found by Sephardi emigrants, spending five years in Portugal before that monarchy followed suit in expelling Jewish subjects, followed by years in Morocco, Nikopolis, Adrianopolis, Thessaloniki, Istanbul, and finally Tzfat in the Galilee. These travels introduced Karo to a wide range of Torah scholars and communal minhagim, and he began to harbor hopes of creating a halakhic code which would serve to unify Jewish practices throughout the diaspora. Karo’s main text, Beit Yosef, sought not only to state halakhic conclusions in an encyclopedic manner but to provide detailed examinations of the generations of debates behind those conclusions. The Shulkhan Arukh was a reference text which presented only the halakhic conclusions, without the details of the logic by which those conclusions were reached. While the book’s author and a majority of rabbinical sages of the time considered it insufficient for drawing conclusions about halakha due to its simplicity and far from traditional univocality, the book proved hugely popular with the Jewish masses, who wanted a reference text they could keep at home which would offer answers to daily practical questions. It was precisely what Karo and his contemporaries saw as the book’s oversimplification of a gloriously rich and varied tradition that made it approachable and beloved.

Karo himself realized during the process of composing his magnum opus, Beit Yosef, that his youthful hopes for bringing about global uniformity in halakhic practice were misguided. In his later years he spoke out against attempts to use his works to pressure communities with distinct minhagim or who chose to hold by other poskim to adopt his conclusions, emphasizing that Judaism was the process of engaging with halakhic reasoning and debate and should be defined by variety, not an insistence on adherence to any one set of halakhic rulings. And in fact his landmark code, which harmonized generations of Sephardi tradition, was soon joined by a commentary by one of Karo’s contemporaries, Moshe Isserles, which delineated the distinct Ashkenazi minhagim which differed from Karo. This text came to be known as the Mappah, or tablecloth, to the Shulkhan Arukh, or set table, and has been printed as an integrated part of the text beginning twelve years after its first printing. Other integrated commentaries followed as well, injecting the multivocality of Jewish tradition back into Karo’s simplified halakhic compendium. To this day, the Shulkhan Arukh remains the most influential and widely consulted single halakhic code ever compiled.

[girlactionfigure]

TALMUD LIES DEBUNKED

In our latest episode of “Google Talmudic scholar”, our totally unbiased friend makes some bold claims. let's break it down:

First off, his screenshot (featuring a bunch of fake Hebrew) refers to the Talmud as the "holy Bible of the Jewish religion."

Right there, he's exposing his ignorance. Jews don’t use the Talmud as their Bible—that's the Torah. The Talmud is a massive collection of legal debates and discussions, not a religious manifesto. The Talmud is not law. Period. If you want law, that’s the Shulkhan Arukh.

Now, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt that he’s not just malicious, but genuinely clueless. Because understanding the Talmud requires, at the very least, a working knowledge of Hebrew and Aramaic. And no, you can’t just Google translate your way through it. Funny enough, this is a problem Islam faces too—people ripping Quranic verses out of context because they don't understand Arabic.

So, what actually *is* the Talmud? It’s a collection of legal arguments—also known as “the conversations of Abaye and Rava,” two of the greatest scholars in Jewish history. They ran rival schools and almost never agreed on anything. And they weren’t alone. Over 1,500 rabbis are quoted in the Talmud, and surprise, surprise—they didn’t all agree either.

The Talmud is not some monolithic belief system. It’s a complex web of ideas, questions, and hypotheses. It’s studied deeply, sifted through, and only when something aligns with the Torah itself does it become law. So no, just because something is in the Talmud doesn’t mean Jews believe it. In fact, for every opinion, there’s usually an opposing view right next to it.

Now, onto his favorite subject—how Jews supposedly view gentiles.

Here’s context: the Hebrew word for “gentile” (goy) simply means “nation.”

The Talmud’s references to gentiles usually concern ancient, pagan nations—people who actively sought to destroy morality and decency.

When you see negative references to “gentiles,” it's about those ancient, hedonistic, genocidal empires, not your average non Jew today.

And that is clarified time and time again.

For some real context, look at the intro to the Artscroll Talmud, the most widely used edition.

It cites the Noda BiYehudah, who writes:

“Wherever there is a derogatory statement about ‘idol worshipers’ or ‘gentiles,’ one should not mistakenly apply it to the peoples of our times. It was meant for those in earlier eras who worshipped the stars and constellations.”

Even Rebbe Nachman, a Jewish mystic, made it clear:

“The gentiles of the past were idol worshipers, far from monotheism. But the gentiles of today are different—they recognize the one true God. We should never apply the same judgments to them.” So if your grand revelation about the Talmud comes from a few screenshots you found online, congrats—you’ve successfully proven you’re an idiot.

@Haqiqatjou

Simcha Brodsky

@simchabrodsky

[germiyahu]

And also, I saw a (presumably) American Jew get in a fight with an Israeli because the Israeli expressed... uncharitable thoughts toward Palestinians. This came from a place of frustration and resentment that non Israelis simply won't understand on a visceral level.

But the American Jew decried the Israeli as "not living up to Jewish values." I hope everyone realizes that half of Israelis are completely secular. Their Jewish identity has nothing to do with religious beliefs or practices.

The IDF does not consult the Shulkhan Arukh before making military decisions. The Israeli government is not pondering what the Great Sages of the Talmudic era would think of every law they pass. I'm sorry but for millions of Israelis they don't care. Your invoking Tikkun Olam or Pikuach Nefesh or this or that or the third thing won't sway many Israelis.

They don't live their lives by the Torah, and you come across as incredibly preachy and corny when you try to lecture them about how they're not "upholding Jewish values," when they, in this example, don't give Life unparalleled primacy. That's one of your values, and that's awesome, and most Rabbis would agree it is a core value of Judaism, but Israelis are not failing to be Good Jews when they don't live their lives by this or any other value.

Israel is a real country with real concerns, full of real people who need practical solutions to everyday problems. We as Americans probably are more religious than non-Orthodox Israelis on the whole, because religious thought and practice is a more necessary component of a Jewish identity here. You need to define yourself against the gentile majority. That's not the case in Israel. And religious Israelis often simply can't afford to have this demure affectation of nonviolence.

I don't know it just rubbed me the wrong way, to see an Israeli declare they didn't care about Palestinians going hungry, clearly from a place of pain, and to see Americans wag their fingers and say "Ugh you're being such a bad Jew!"

[progfanandradfem]

If you happen to follow one of those abrahamic religions, you name it, Christianity, Islam, Judaism and any other potentially misogynistic religions, then you're not a real feminist. Why? I would like to quote the misogynistic passages from Bible, Quran, Talmud, Shulkhan Arukh, but I'm afraid I'm gonna be shunned by Tumblr users. Anyway, the religions have a well-documented history of misogyny and undermining the legitimate women's movements, women's activities etc.

[yidquotes]

If a person is near death, it is forbidden to leave him, so that he should not die alone. (And it is a mitzvah to stand by a person at the moment of death.)

Shulkhan Arukh, the comment in parentheses is by Rabbi Moses Isserles.

[lucioborges]

RS Notícias: Judeus da Pérsia - História virtual

RS Notícias: Judeus da Pérsia – História virtual

  Conteúdo da série Judaísmo    Textos[Esconder] Tanakh Torá – Neviim – Ketuvim Humash Sidur – Piyyut – Zohar Rabínico Mishná – Talmude – Midrash – Tosefta Halacá[Esconder] Mishné Torá Tur – Shulkhan Arukh Mishnah Berurah – Aruch HaShulchan Cashrut – Tzniut – Tzedaká – Niddá – Leis de…