REeeasees FE The Brantshpigl (1596) and the Popularization of Kabbalah Morris M. Faierstein The Branishpig. first published in Cracow, 1596, was one ofthe most popular Early Modem Yiddish works of religious ethics and social criticism? Relatively little is known about the author, Moshe Henochs Altschul- Yerusahlmi of Prague.’ However, his son, Henoch ben Moshe (1564-1633), was the shamash and secretary of the Prague Jewish community.* The Brantshpigl is of particular interest because unlike most of the other works of this genre published in the second half of the sixteenth century and the first third of the seventeenth, it is an original composition and not a paraphrase ot reworking of an earlier Hebrew work. As a result, it more accurately reflects the religious trends and interests of the Ashkenazi Jewish community at the end of the sixteenth century In a previous study, I described the significant interest in Kabbalah among ‘Ashkenazi Jews, even ordinary houscholders, that is recorded as early as the The text of the Cracow, 1596 edition was transcribed into Latin characters and annotated by Sigrid Riedel, Mases Henochs Alischul-Jerushalmi ‘Bramtspigl Transkribiert und ediert nach der Erstausgabe Krakaw 1596, Frankfurt a, Main, 1993. All references are to this edition. The Basel, 1602 edition was also consulted. Riedel, p. VIL, suggests that the term ‘Branishpigl” is best translated as “magnifying glass’. Her suggestion has merit, The author explains the name of the book in the Introduction, He writes: ‘I call it Branishpigl because the ordinary mirrors show something very small. Thus, people do not want to bother to wash it off, but chis Brantshpigl shows that it is large, and one will want to wash it ofF In addition to the first edition, it was reprinted in Basel, 1602; Prague, 1610; Hanau, 1626; Prague, 1630; Frankfurt am Main, 1676, 1680, 1696, 1703, 1706. Riedel, Branishpigl, p. xiv-xv has collected the few pieces of biographical information we have. His dates are uncertain, though he is still mentioned as being alive in the Prague, 1610 edition. For a brief biographical overview see, Encyelopedia Judaica, Jerusalem 1971, vol. 1, p. 780 Kabbalah: Journal for the Study of Jewish Mystical Texts 27 (2012), pp. 173-193174 ‘The Brantshpigl (1596) and the Popolarization of Kabbalah middle of the sixteenth century.* Rabbi Moses Isserles in his book, Torar ha- Olah, described the interest in Kabbalah. Many ordinary people run to study the subject of Kabbalah, for itis very desirable in their eyes.... Not only that the scholars should understand it, but even hhouscholders, who don’t know their right from their left and walk in darkness, not even knowing how to explain the weekly Torah portion or a Torah passage with the commentary of Rashi, run to learn Kabbalah * Jacob Elbaum, in his seminal study of the scholarly Hebrew literature of this cra found that Ashkenazi kabbalistic texts written in this period had certain characteristics. Authors were not interested in theology per se, but sought to integrate kabbalistic practices and halakhic rulings based on kabbalistic sources into general usage. They saw kabbalistic ideas as sacred and kabbalistic practices as a means of attaining devekut and holiness. The study of the Zohar became a part of the regular curriculum for scholars. Biblical commentaries written during this period cited Kabbalistic texts. Printers published kabbalistic texts, even printing some for the first time.” One of the unusual characteristics of the Brantshpigl is its numerous references to Kabbalah, which are much more extensive than what is found in other Yiddish works of this period. In the Introduction, explaining why he wrote this book, the author alludes to Kabbalah as a commonplace component of synagogue sermons. He writes: ‘There are those who cannot always come to the sermons... and when they do come itis of litle use, They do not understand everything that is preached. When they ‘ive explanations from the weekly Torah portion and cite midrashim and aggadot ‘on a verse, [itis] mostly in Hebrew. Everyone cannot understand it, even more so ‘when they quote Targum or Kabbalah.” The association of Targum and ‘Kabbalah’ in this passage suggests that he is referring to the Zohar, which like the Targum is in Aramaic, He also gives another reason for his interest in Kabbalah. He writes: Morris M. Faierstein, “Kabbalah and Early Modem Yiddish Literature Prior to 1648", Revue des études juives 168 (2009), pp. 505-518, Torat ha-Olah, Prague, 1570, 4, 3 (p. 726). Quoted in, Jacob Elbaum, Openness and insularity: Late Sixteenth Century Jewish Literature in Poland and Ashkenaz, Jerusalem 1990, p. 183 [Hebrew]. Elbaum, Openness and Insularity, 184-186. Riedel, Branishpigl, p. 5 (1). Page numbers refer to Riedel edition. Numbers in parentheses are chapter numbers in traditional editions Tigqun There major chapter Hasot period the des the red better before the sev The before wash o dress i Holy CMorris M.Faicrstein 175 Torat ha- Many positive attributes are found in the Yiddish translations, but they do not discuss the virtues of the next world or the punishments of Gehenna. However, the iidesienbte {great masters of the Kabbalah teach and write about it, but not all of my equals can but even q understand it. Thus, I am writing this book for the women and men like me who Boies, not cannot thoroughly read and understand Hebrew books and the sermons that are , iter with preached om the Sabbath, Tigqun Hasot ® of this 4 certain Bught to sources bbalistic te Zohar dentaries bbalistic There are close to sixty references to Kabbalah in the Brantshpigl."° The majority are brief references to religious practices or customs, but a whole chapter (39) is devoted to a ritual related to the kabbalistic custom of Tigqun Hasot." It describes the practice of awakening before dawn and devoting a period of time before the morning prayers, to a ritual that includes, mourning the destruction of the Temple and exile of the Jewish people, and praying for the redemption of the Jewish people and the coming of the Messiah. The better-known version ofthis rtual that entails wakening at midnight rather than before dawn is a later development and became popular only in the middle of ba the seventeenth century." 7 The title of the chapter is, ‘his chapter explains that one should wake up before dawn’. It begins with an assertion that one should wake up before dawn, ponent wash one’s hands to remove the spirit of impurity that rests on the hands and dress in clean clothes."’ He should then, ‘recite ehinnot" and prayers that the do come Holy One should send us the Messiah and rebuild the Temple in our days, with ben they ‘aggndo: Riedel, Branshpigl, p.25 Q) more so j A ist of citations can be found in, Faierstein, “Kabbalah and Early Modern Yiddish’, p. 518 on The term Tiggun Hasot was not used until Nathan Hannover's Sha ‘arei Sion, frst ibe is published in 1662. I is used here for the sake of convenience, as this ritual has © gives become known by this name ‘On the development of the midnight version of this ritual see, Elliot Horowitz, “Coffee, Coffeehouses, and the Nocturnal Rituals of early Moder Jewry’, A/S Review 14 (1989), pp. 17-46, . ‘These are all practices consistent with Kabbalistic tradition and practice. See, Issachar Baer of Krementz, Yesh Sachar (Prague, 1609), Dinei Hashkamat ha: omens Boker, Dinei Netilat Yadayim. ‘The term rehinnor is used here in its original meaning, e., prayers of petition and supplication. It has no gender associations. The use of the term as a primary a : Ma ‘amador, Tarbiz 42.(1973), pp. 304-327. It is reprinted in idem. Me-Olamam s Shel Hachamim: Qoves Mekgarim. Jerusalem, pp. 269.293 thterest Facow on for in-his “is no Safed years tions yarce. fore ports E tthe Morris M. Faierstcin 179 group of Israelites would accompany them to Jerusalem. Other members of the community who could not make the trip to Jerusalem would assemble in their town to recite Biblical passages that were being recited in Jerusalem as part of the Temple service.”* This tradition was discussed in the Talmud and lingered in the collective Jewish memory. Rav Amram Gaon mentioned it in his Siddur, but it was only in medieval Ashkenaz that a list of prescribed readings was prepared. References to this custom were made in several works.” Originally, it was a custom followed only by pious individuals. However, in the sixteenth century it became an integral part of Jewish piety, particularly in Italy. A separate booklet containing this service and called Seder Ma'amadot, was published in numerous editions.”® By the last quarter of the sixteenth century, hevrot, or societies dedicated to performing this worship service in a communal setting were founded in a number of cities in Italy." Most of what we know about this activity has come from Italian sources. However the Brantshpigl shows that it ‘was more widely disseminated throughout the Ashkenazi cultural area. Another indicator of the popularity of reciting the Ma amador is found in the lists of book submitted to the censors in Mantua, 1595. S. Baruchson has studied these lists and found that 21.6% of the lists submitted included a copy of the Seder Ma‘amadot. To put it in context, 35.1% listed a Haggadah and 23% a copy of the Selichor. Thus, the Seder Ma‘amadot was the third most popular work found in Jewish homes when one discounts core books, like Bibles, and prayer books.”* Unfortunately, the lists do not differentiate between Yiddish and Hebrew editions, so there is no way of knowing if any of these copies were of the Yiddish text. ‘The publication of the Seder Ma‘amadot in a Yiddish translation is. an indication of its popularity among ordinary men and women, and reinforces the statements at the end of the chapter in the Branishpigl. The translator, Joseph ‘Mishmarot and Ma'amadot’, Eneyelopedia Judaica, vol. 12, pp. 89-93 Israel Ta Shma, Ha-Teftlah ha-Ashkenazit ha-Kedumah, Jerusalem 2003, p. 143- 149, discusses the medieval Ashkenazi origins of the order and format of the ‘Ma amadot. ‘The first edition was Constantinople, 1540, There were 23 editions published by 1600, most of them in Italy. See, Yeshaya Vinograd, Osar Ha-Sefer ha-Ivri, Jerusalem 1993, vol. |, p. 91. There was also a Yiddish translation published in Verona, 1594, See, Horowitz, Confraterities, chapter 4. Shifta Baruchson, Books and Readers: The Reading Interests of Italian Jews at the Close of the Renaissance, Ramat Gan 1993, pp. 121-122, [Hebrew],180 The Brantshpigl (1596) and the Popularization of Kabbateh Heilprun mentions the popularity of this service in his Introduction and cites the usual reasons given for Yiddish translations of texts, that they are for women and men who do not understand Hebrew well, and that they should be able to better understand the meaning of the Biblical and Talmudic passages that they were reading. I was able to examine a copy of the Yiddish translation of the Seder Ma'amacior.”” Aside from the Title page and Introduction it contains a Yiddish translation of the text of the Seder Ma’amadot as it is found in the Hebrew editions. The translation seems to be complete and accurate,** A literary genre that may have also been influential ate the collections of Penitential prayers that were published in the course of the sixteenth century They were usually called Selichot, Takanunim, and Tehinnot. Some were originally intended for the penitential period of the High Holy Days, others for daily use. A common characteristic is that they were meant to be recited at dawn or even before dawn, prior to the regular moming liturgy. Horowitz suggests that the Shomrim le-Boker confraternity that he studied may have used these collections as a resource until they published their own manual for their daily devotions.”* It is possible that these publications also influenced the author of the Brantshpigl. Women ‘An interesting aspect of this chapter that is devoted to a male ritual are the references to women. It is not entirely surprising when one remembers that the author addresses women as an important part of his audience in his work. The chapter begins with advice to wives that they should not allow their husbands to sleep late, but should wake them before dawn so that they would not miss the pre-dawn prayers. Later in the chapter we leam that women should also recite ehinnot while their husbands engaged in their prayers.°* Another reason On this work see, Viddish in Italia: Mamuscripts and Printed Books, ed. Chava Tumiansky & Erika Timm, Milano 2003, p34, n° 19. My thanks to Prof, Jean Baumgarten for bringing this translation to my attention and providing me with a Photocopy of this rare work ‘An English translation of the Title Page and Introduction can be found in “Appendix I Horowitz, Confiatemities, pp. 156-161; Meir Benayahu, ‘Orders of Prayer Published in Italy forthe Shomrim la-Boker Confraterites Based on the Sages of Salonika’, Asufor 11 (1998), pp 87-99, [Hebrew] This probably refers to personal pettionary prayers in a general way, and aot specie prayers for women, WAL FRELEEETE. geB a5 2 FRbi PereyChava of. Jean ne with a found in £ Prayer Sages of sand not Mortis M. Faicrstein 181 for women to awake before dawn was to fulfill their domestic responsibilities to prepare food for their family Though women did not participate directly in the prayers lamenting the destruction of the Temple and the hopes for future redemption, the author reminded his readers that through the actions of pious women, the Jewish people were redeemed in the past. He also reminded his female readers that if they read his book and followed its prescriptions, then their merit would also contribute to the redemption of the Jewish people. ‘At the very end of the chapter, in his discussion of reciting the Ma amadot, the author adds an intriguing comment, He says that women should not recite a hymn he calls Ha-dderer” and he adds that they are not obligated to recite the parts of the Ma amadot belonging to the Talmud, but should recite the fehinnor that are part of the Ma ‘amadot. The distinction is probably that women are not obligated to study Torah and some authorities even forbade it, while women are obligated to pray and the fehinnot were prayers. Like many other aspects of this chapter, it is premature to reach any conclusions about his discussion of the rote of women in this classic work of Early Modem Yiddish religious literature without much more study. This chapter in the Brantshpig! indicates that the popularization of kabbalistic and other Jewish teachings and traditions considered to be elite, ‘were disseminated to « popular audience at an earlier date and more thoroughly than has been assumed until now. The relation of Early Modern Yiddish literature and its primary audience is a question that needs more research. The evidence does not support the common assumption that this literature was primarily for women and a small number of ignorant men. Max Weinreich in his monumental history of the Yiddish language, cites with approval a survey by Isracl Zinberg of mote than seventy early Modern Viddish title pages and found only nine spoke of women as the primary audience. Weinreich also provides additional sources to support his contention that women were not the primary audience for Yiddish literature, Rather, the audience was all members of the Jewish community, men, women and children. * Moshe Rosman’s important caveats about reading this literature through the prism of Presumably this is a reference to the hymn, ‘Ha-dderet veha-Emunah which is & ‘mystical hymn popularized by the Hasidei Ashkenaz. However, itis not part of the standard Ma amador. ™ Max Weinreich, History of the Yiddish Language, New Haven 2008, vol. 2, p. p. 1265,The Brantshp il (1596) and the Popalarization of Kabbalah contemporary gender studies should also be kept in mind. ‘The interested reader of Early Modem Yiddish religious literature, of either gender, could acquire a broad knowledge of rabbinic traditions from this literature. The Serious study of this literature is still is infaney and many more important discoveries remain to be made Appendix I -Brantshpigl chapter 39° This chapter explains that one should wake up before dawn, (39) Conceming prayer, she should be wamed that she should not allow her husband sleep late, but should wake up before dawn, If he is sleeping, she should wake him, In tractate Baba Bathra, Rabbi Eliezer the Great teaches that one is obligated t0 wake up before dawn from the fifteenth of 4b until Shavuot, since the night is long. One must assume that from Shavuot until the fifteenth [of 48] cone wakes up in daytime.*' The rabbis learn this from verses in Ecclesiastes and Ruth and write that one is obligated to wake up at dawn and not that the daylight should wake him up. King David says in Psalms, “J will wake che dawn’ (5739], This means, I will wake up the morning. When one wakes up, one puts on clean clothes and should be careful that they should not put on Previously wom ones. He washes his hands and pours [water] three times over them and washes off the evil spirits.” Rabbi Eliezer the Great writes that an impurity rests on the hands when they are not washed in the moming, He forbids and one is not ellowed to touch the eyes with unwashed hands, since he will damage his sight.” If he wants to hurt his enemy and his friend is