1. Jerusalem, Jewish National Library, MS B964: Divre binah, pp. 329, completed 1800. The author explains that the numerical value of the letters in the title of his book (ʿ im ha-kolel) is the same as the numerical value of the letters in his name (284). There seems to be a page missing between pp. 174 and 175.

2. London, Jews College, Ms. 31 (I found no differences significant for the present article between the manuscript and the printed version); The Memoirs of Ber of Bolechow (1723–1805), translated from the original Hebrew manuscript, with introduction, notes, and map by M. Vishnitzer (Wischnitzer) (London: Oxford University Press, 1922); Mark Wischnitzer, ed., Zikhronot R’ Dov mi-Bolekhuv ([5]483– [5]565) (Berlin: Klal, 1922). Cf. Pamiętniki reba Dowa z Bolechowa, przekład z języka hebrajskiego, wstęp i przypisy, Roman Marcinkowski (Warszawa: Formica, 1994). On the Memoirs, see Roman Marcinkowski, “Dow Ber z Bolechowa: ‘uzupelniać tore wiedza światowa,’” in Żydzi i judaizm we wspólczesnych badaniach polskich, ed. Krzysztof Pilarczyk (Kraków: Księgarnia Akademicka, 1997), 183–90; idem, “Jews in Eastern Galicia in the Light of The Memoirs of Dov Ber of Bolekhov,” Studia Judaica 5, no. 1 (2002): 41–58; Israel Bartal, “Dow m'Bolechów—pamiętnikarz czasów kryzysu Sejmu Czterech Ziem w XVIII stuleciu” [Dov of Bolechow—A diarist of the Council of Four lands in the 18th century], in Żydzi w dawnej Rzeczypospolitej, ed. Andrzej Link-Lenczowski and Tomasz Polański (Wrocław: Zakład Narodowy im. Ossolińskich, 1991), 81–84 (in English, Polin 9 [1996]: 183–91). The author refers to his family name as Brezer (Memoirs, 153; Zikhronot, 94). See also A[braham] J. Brawer, “A Posthumous Change of Name (Birkenthal not Bolechower),” Jewish Quarterly Review, new series, 13 (1922): 99–100. A systematic comparison of Divre binah and the Memoirs is certainly a desideratum. The purpose of the present article, however, is to present only the introduction to Divre binah.

3. Shmu'el Werses, “Ginze Yosef Perl bi-yrushalayim ve-gilgulehem,” Ha-Universitah 19 (1974): 40–45 (38–52). Werses describes the impassioned but only partially successful attempts of Avraham Yaʿakov Brawer, Bialik, Agnon, Dov Sadan, and others to rescue the treasures of the Perl collection. The key figure in this effort was a Tarnopol native who worked at the Jewish National Library, Simḥah Katz (1904–40). See also Werses, “Shivʿim shenot ḥeker yetsirato u-foʿalo shel Yosef Perl,” Ḥuliyot 7 (2002): 327 (321–38).

4. The Perl materials were inaccessible after the War of Independence until they were brought from Mount Scopus in 1958. During the 1980s, the manuscript of Divre binah was misplaced and remained lost until some five years ago, when it was found, misfiled under Djerba (!), and microfilmed. Although I worked with the microfilm, the acting director of the Institute of Microfilmed Hebrew Manuscripts, Dr. Yael Okun, kindly permitted me to examine the original manuscript as well to verify my readings.

5. Avraham Yaʿakov Brawer, Galiẓiyah vi-Yehudeha: Meḥkarim be-toledot Galiẓiyah ba-me'ah ha-shemoneh-‘esreh (Jerusalem: Mosad Bialik, 1965), 200. On Brawer (1884–1975), see below.

6. There is another dating problem that is beyond the scope of the present study. On pp. 54–75, the author quotes in Hebrew from She'erit Yisra'el by Menaḥem Amelander, citing chapter 26, p. 69. Published originally in Yiddish, the first known published Hebrew version of that book appeared in Lwów in 1804. Moreover, in that Hebrew version, the chapter that Ber quotes is numbered chapter 24, and the wording is quite different. Thus, either Dov Ber used a different translation, unknown to us, or he translated the passages himself. In either case, the passages should be of interest to students of the history of Yiddish.

7. Brawer, Galiẓiyah, 208. In the summer of 1802, Ber had sent the manuscript of his book, in fifteen notebooks, to Ḥayyim Kurmash, the former shtadlan of Lwów, asking that he review its contents and consult with others to ensure its accuracy. Ḥayyim's response to this request, which affirms Ber's accuracy, makes it clear that he expected the book would be published; see N. M. Gelber, “Shalosh teʿudot le-toledot ha-tenuʿah ha-Frankit be-Polin,” Zion 2 (1937): 330 (326–32).

8. Memoirs, 72; Zikhronot, 41.

9. The Memoirs include references, in addition to his stepmother, to two other women whom Dov Ber blames for different unhappy developments—the wife of his partner, and his sister-in-law. Both women are portrayed as responsible for coming between Ber and his fellow. The motif of “the quarrelsome woman” in early modern Jewish literature awaits its researcher.

10. Memoirs, 79 (I have altered Wischnitzer's translation to make it more literal); Zikhronot, 45.

11. Memoirs, 177; Zikhronot, 110.

12. Memoirs, 95; Zikhronot, 56.

13. Memoirs, 79–80; Zikhronot, 45–46.

14. Memoirs, 65; Zikhronot, 36.

15. Memoirs, 109; Zikhronot, 65. This episode would tempt the imagination of a novelist. Ber sought to deceive a nobleman and persuade him that he was a resident of Lwów. The nobleman, Ber tells us, asked to meet Ber's wife. So Ber “promptly” sent his Hungarian Jewish assistant to his neighbor's wife—Khule—to ask her to go to Ber's house and “to entertain him in the Polish language after the fashion of the nobles [ke-derekh ha-periẓim] and to make him believe that she was my wife. She came to my house, received him as hostess, and ordered a bottle of good wine, which he drank; and he believed her to be my wife.”

16. Adam Kaźimerczyk, “Converted Jews in Kraków, 1650–1763,” Gal-Ed 21 (2007): 28 (17–52). See also Daniel Stone, “Knowledge of Foreign Languages among Eighteenth-century Polish Jews,” Polin 10 (1997): 200–21; Murray Rosman, The Lords’ Jews: Magnate–Jewish Relations in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth during the Eighteenth Century (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1990), 174–79.

17. Divre binah, 40 (quoting Moshe Hagiz, Mishnat ḥakhamim). See also Hannah Węgrzynek, “The Attitude of the Catholic Church towards Jews in Poland at the Beginning of the Eighteenth Century,” Kwartalnik Historii Żydów 6 (2006): 665 (662–68); Gavri'el ben Ẓevi Hirẓ (Soḥastov), Maẓevat kodesh: hu zikhron ẓadikim ha-nikra bet ya‘akov, sefer zikaron le-khol ge'one u-gedole Yisra'el poh ‘ir Levov, part 4 (Lemberg, 1879), 13–15.

18. See Gershon Hundert, Jews in Poland–Lithuania in the Eighteenth Century (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2004), 154–59 and the references there.

19. Tuvyah ben Moshe Yirmiyahu ha-kohen, Maʿ aseh Tuvyah (Venice, 1707); Menaḥem Amelander, She'erit Yisra'el (Lwów, 1804); Yaʿakov ben Aharon Sasportas (David ben Rafa'el Meldola), Kiẓur tsitsat novel Ẓevi (Amsterdam, 1737; Altona, 1757); Moshe ben Yisra'el Yaʿakov Hagiz, Mishnat ḥakhamim (Wandsbek, 1733). The quotations are not of consecutive pages and are studded with interpolations. For example, he quotes sixteen separate passages from Kiẓur tsitsat novel Ẓevi interspersed with comments and summaries of the elided portions of the work (Divre binah, 75–172).

20. Avraham Yaʿakov Brawer, “Makor ḥadash le-toledot Frank ve-siʿato,” Ha-Shiloaḥ 23 (1917–18), 146–56, 330–42, 439–49; 38 (1921), 231–38. Also published in idem, Galiẓiyah, 197–275.

21. “There appeared in Jerusalem a young scholar who had also been to the Perl Library, found the manuscript [of Divre binah] and copied what I had omitted. He wanted to publish these portions. Professor Simḥah Assaf asked my opinion and I answered that what I omitted was copied by Dov Ber from Hebrew and Polish books. The Hebrew books were checked—the Polish ones were unavailable in the land [of Israel] then—and it was found that my words were correct. The portions copied by that scholar were not allowed to be published.” Mikha'el Ha-kohen Brawer, Avraham Yaʿakov Brawer, Zikhronot av u-beno (Jerusalem: Mosad ha-rav Kuk, 1966), 404; cf. Brawer, Galiẓiyah, 208–209.

22. Divre binah, 3. These lines on page 3 of Divre Binah and some of what follows there replicate almost exactly certain passages in Maʿ aseh Tuvyah by Tuviyah Kohen (Krakow, 1908), ptiḥa, 2:

23. Venice, 1553; 2nd ed., Sabbioneta, 1554.

24. Memoirs, 80; Zikhronot, 46.

25. Divre binah, 6–8.

26. Cf. “We Jews must know all things, so that there may be realized in us the saying from the Bible: ‘For this is your wisdom and your understanding in the sight of the nations’ [Deuteronomy 4:6]. Although our teachers, be their memories for a blessing, applied this saying to our holy Torah, they also taught that it is good to combine Torah with worldly knowledge; and it is advantageous for every intelligent and educated Jew to have a knowledge of the history of the nations of the world. This will sometimes enable him properly to answer questions directed against the Jewish Law and faith, as has occurred to me several times in my discourses with the nobles and the clergy. In most of the cases I have found the right answer, and it is well-known to all that my replies were always convincing” (Memoirs, 141–42; Zikhronot, 87).

27. Divre binah, 18–19.

28. Ibid., 40.

29. Ibid., 8, 9, 25, 36.

30. Ibid., 194–220.

31. Ibid., 4–5.

32. Ibid., 39–42, 176–85.

33. Yaʿakov Emden, Sefer Shimush (Amsterdam [actually Altona], 1758), 20b, refers to the “three leading faiths that have erected their fortresses on the basis of the Torah of Moses” (sheloshet umot [emunot?] rashiyot … she-banu mivẓarehem al yesod torat mrʿ ”h). On Hagiz, see Elisheva Carlebach, The Pursuit of Heresy: Rabbi Moses Hagiz and the Sabbatian Controversies (New York: Columbia University Press, 1990), 262–67. See also the summary and extension of Jacob Katz's work on this subject in Yosef Salmon, “Noẓrim ve-noẓrut be-sifrut ha-pesikah me-shalhey ha-me'ah ha-shemoneh-esreh ve-ʿad ha-maḥaẓit ha-sheniyah shel ha-me'ah ha-tesha-esreh,” in Al pi ha-be'er: Meḥkarim be-hagut yehudit uve-maḥshavat ha-halakha mugashim le-Yaʿ akov Blidstein, ed. Uri Ehrlich, Ḥayyim Kreisel and Daniel Lasker (Beer-Sheva: Ben-Gurion University of the Negev Press, 2008), 635–51.

34. Divre binah, 9.

35. E. Carlebach suggests that this is a pun to yield even (wicked) gilyon (scroll).

36. “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them” (Divre binah, 10). And see the citation of this verse in the context of the description of the debate over the Talmud in 1757, ibid., 213–14.

37. Gaudenty Pikulski, Złość żydowska Przeciwko Bogu y bliźniemu Prawdzie y Sumnieniu na obiaśnienie Talmudystów. Na dowód ich zaślepienia, y Religii dalekiey od prawa Boskiego przez Moyżesza danego. Rozdzielona na trzy części opisana (Lwów, 1760 [1st ed., 1758]).

38. “Daymy to żeby Chrystus był prawdziwym Messyaszem y o nim wszystkie spełnily Proroctwa; iednakże on się oświadczy u Mateusza w Rozd: 5, w. 17 że: Nieprzyszedł prawa psować (Moyżeszowego) ale go wypełnić. Zacoż wy Katolicy nie pelnicie Prawa Moyżeszowego, nie szanuiecie Sabbaszu, ale Niedziele: albo tedy wasz Chrystus zmyślonym sercem te slowa mowił, albo wy ani Boga, any Chrystusa swego niesłuchacie. Tak mowił zemną ieden Żyd we Lwowie” (ibid., 435–36). On Pikulski, see Gershon David Hundert, “Identity Formation in the Early Modern Polish Commonwealth,” in Citizenship and Identity in a Multinational Commonwealth: Poland–Lithuania in Context, 1550–1772, ed. Karin Friedrich and Barbara Pendzich (Leiden: Brill, 2009), 146–47 (131–47).

39. Divre binah, 11.

40. Ibid.

41. Written in 1390 by Yom Tov Lipman Mülhausen (Altdorf, 1644; Amsterdam, 1709).

42. Chronicles I, 1:8.

43. Divre binah, 12.

44. Ibid.

45. Ibid., 12–13.

46. Ibid., 14.

47. The rabbi of Lwów, and the leading representative of the rabbinic side in the disputation with the Frankists, d. 1771.

48. Ibid., 16.

49. Ibid., 4.

50. Ibid., 18–19; cf. Brawer, Galiẓiyah, 203.

51. Ibid., 16.

52. Budapest, Magyar Zsidó Muzeum, Obudai Iratok (Obuda Documents), 8.007 (old no. 8.145): “Die in diesem Königreich wohnenden Juden, haben gemeinschaftlich bey dieser Königl. Statthalterey darüber bittere Klage geführet, dass sie wegen des bei den meisten Christen wieder aufblühenden Vorutheils, als wenn die Juden zur Feyerung ihres Osterfestes Christenblut bedürften, schwere Verfolgungen, besonders von dem gemeinen Volk erdulden müssen; zum Beweis dessen haben sie auch mehrere Beyspiele angeführet. Damit also die durch dergleichen irrige Meynungen geschwächte Rufe und Sicherheit, dieser Nation verschaft werde, so hat diese Königl. Statthalerey zu verordnen für nöthig befunden, daß man sich angelegen seyn müsse, dieses Vorutheil, daß bey dem Jüdischen Gottesdienst Menschen Blut geopfert werde, auf die schicklichste und den local Umständen angemessen seyn, allenfalls auch durch Beyziehung der Seelsorger als den Gemüthern des Volkes herauszureissen, und selbe zu belehren, dass dieses verachtungswürdige Laster dem Monarchie Gesetz und den Schriften der Propheten, mithin der ganzen Vorschrift des alten Testaments auf welche sich doch die Jüdische Religion vorzüglich gründet nicht minder als den Gesetzen der übrigen Religionen zuwider sey. Daher könne auch die von dem ein oder andern Juden verübte Mordthat, wenn sichs auch befinden würde, dass solche aus abergläubischen Absichten geschehen, der ganzen Jüdischen Nazion nicht mit mehr Recht zur Last gelegt werden, als man dergleichen Fälle wegen, wenn sie sich unter den Christen ereigneten, auf alle einen Haß werfet. Übrigens soll darüber ernstlich gewachet werden, dass Juden wider die Vorschrift des 38te Artikels der neueren Gesetze auf keine Weise beunruhigt werden, welches durch die gewöhnlichen Curentales dem Volke auf das nachdrücklichste, und unter Bedrohung der schwersten Strafen zu verbiethen, und im Fall einer Verfolgung, oder den Juden zugefügten Beleidigung der Schuldige, zum Beyspiel der anderen auf das schärfeste zu bestrafen ist. Gegeben aus dem Rathe der Königl. Hungs. Statthalterey Ofen, den 24 Juny 1791.”

53. In response to a blood libel in 1844 in Tarnów, the leaders of the community cited this Hungarian legislation and urged that it be applied to Galicia as well. See Gershon Wolf, “Blutbeschuldigungen der Juden,” Jahrbuch für Israeliten 5623 (Wien 1862), 37–38 (30–39).

54. Divre binah, 37. The end of Jewish communal autonomy was legislated in the Judensystem in Galizien (note that Dov Ber uses the term system) promulgated in May 1785 by Joseph II. Cf. Josef Karniel, “Das Toleranzpatent Kaiser Josephs II. Für die Juden Galiziens un Lodomeriens,” Jahrbuch des Instituts für Deutsche Geschichte 11 (1982), 59, 72–74 (55–89). The notion of courts of arbitration chaired by communal rabbis is anticipated in the Allgemeine Ordnung für die gesamte Judenschaft der konigreiche Galizien und Lodomerien promulgated by Maria Theresa in July, 1776, 5:3, which is headed “Von den jüdischen compromissen.” Continuatio edictorum et mandatorum universalium in Regnis Galiciae et Lodomerie (Lwów, 1774–1818), 20:114. See also Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Michael/448 (F20498); Jerusalem, Central Archives for the History of the Jewish People, PL/617, part 5, item 3. Rachel Manekin notes in an unpublished study that in the discussions between government officials and leading Jews in 1784, the officials emphasized that despite the anticipated disestablishment of Jewish communal courts, the option of arbitration courts would remain available: “wobei es sich jedoch von selbsten verstehet, dass den Parteien immer frei stehet, mit Vorbeigehung des Judicis ordinarii, sich auf ein Compromiss ensulassen.”

55. David Yaʿakov ben Yiẓḥak Izak Heilperin. Cf. Meir Wunder, Me'ore Galiẓiyah: Entsiklopediah le-ḥakhme Galiẓiyah, (Jerusalem: Makhon le-hantsaḥat Yahadut Galitsyah, 1982), 2:588.

56. Divre binah, 37.

57. Ibid. Cf. Karniel, “Das Toleranzpatent Kaiser Josephs II,” 81–82.

58. Ibid., 38. Cf. Bericht über die Verhandlungen des ersten galizisch jüdischen Cultusgemeinde-Tages (Lemberg, 1878), 33.

59. Divre binah, 36.

60. Ibid., 37.

61. Ibid., 39–42; Mishnat ḥakhamim, Part 1, Maʿ aleh 17, Siman 405. Cf. Rosman, Lords’ Jews, 198–204.

62. The phrase is talmudic (e.g., B. Megillah 26a) and stands for the elected leadership of the community.

63. Divre binah, 38–39.

64. Memoirs, 150; Zikhronot, 92.

65. One wonders whether this passage refers to teachers brought to Galicia by (Naftali) Herz Homberg (1749–1841), and especially to the Pedagogical Seminary he established in Lwów in 1792.

66. Ibid., 42. Cf. Brawer, Galiẓiyah, 204.

67. Divre binah, 43–44. Cf. Maʿ aseh Tuvyah, 1: attacks those Jews who believe that everything happens according to ha-teva u-minhago—natural law—without divine intervention in the world.

68. In the Memoirs, there is virtually no attention to Hasidism. Ber does mention a man—subsequently shown to be a fool—who began to behave in the ways of ḥasidut. This, however, seems not to refer to Beshtian Hasidism (Memoirs, 115; Zikhronot, 69). And there is reference to Ber's contacts with the father and uncle of Yitsḥak Eisik of (Nagy) Kallo (1751–1821), then a child, and subsequently the Kaliver Rebbe, well known for his songs and most famously “Szól a kakas már.” Dov Ber says of him, “When he grew up his singing made him famous among the Hasidim, as it is ‘said ‘Sing unto the Lord a new song and His praise in the congregation of the saints [ḥassidim].’… R. Eisik became famous throughout the county on account of his piety [ḥassiduto]. He was diligent in the study of rabbinical authors and became a rabbi and teacher in Israel; to this day he is chief of the bet din in Nagy Kallo” (Memoirs, 130; Zikhronot, 79). On baʿ alei shem, see Hundert, Jews in Poland–Lithuania, 142–53.

69. Divre binah, 19–20.

70. Ibid., 21. Here Ber offers a brief portrait of yeshiva study: “I myself, as a young man, saw this with my own eyes… At the beginning of the term I studied a page of gemara selected by the rabbi, chief judge and mara de-atra, with all of its commentaries. Each student tried, in accordance with his own ability, to innovate something on the basis of the text and the commentators. First the rabbi himself stood and explicated his own innovative perspective on the passage with his great expertise and enormous insight. After him all of the advanced students (lomdim) and the students (talmidim) presented their novel insights in accordance with their abilities (kefi hasagato be-pilpulo). The wealthy would invite the advanced students to their homes and entertain them with delicacies and whiskey.” Cf. Elchanan Reiner, “Yeshiva,” YIVO Encyclopedia of Jews in Eastern Europe (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2008), 2:2051–55.

71. Ibid.

72. Ibid., 22. Cf. “The Writer's [Dov Ber of Liniec's] Preface” to In Praise of the Baal Shem Tov: “There were also mad people who injured themselves with stones during the reading of the Torah, and who used to reveal people's sins to them.” See Dan Ben-Amos and Jerome R. Mintz, In Praise of the Baal Shem Tov (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1970), 4; Shivḥe Ha-Besht, ed. Avraham Rubinstein (Jerusalem: Ruben Mass, 1992), 31.

73. Brawer, Galiẓiyah, 203.

74. Zvi Mark, “Dibuk u-devekut be-Shivḥe Ha-Besht: Heʿarot la-fenomenologiyah shel ha-shigaʿon be-reshit ha-ḥassidut,” in Be-maʿ agale ḥassidim: Koveẓ meḥkarim le-zikhro shel profesor Mordekhai Wilensky, ed. Immanuel Etkes et al. (Jerusalem: Mosad Bialik, 2000), 251 (247–86).

75. Salomon Maimons Lebensgeschichte (München, 1911), 168; Ḥaye Shelomoh Maimon, trans. Y. L. Barukh (Tel Aviv: Masada, 1953), 120. Cf. Hundert, Jews in Poland–Lithuania, 179–81; Zekhariah Mendel of Jarosław, “Igeret ha-kodesh,” at the end of Noʿ am Elimelekh (New York: Shulzinger, 1942), 228–30.

76. The book was published in Amsterdam in 1781 as well. The author was a Spanish exile who, in this work, attacks the study of philosophy and those who study it as responsible for the expulsion from Spain. Note that the initiative for republication, and its funding, came from a local scholar.

77. Divre binah, 34. The quotation takes up most of p. 35.

78. Divre binah, 35–36.

79. Ibid., 22, 24.

80. Ibid., 23.

81. Ibid., 24. Cf. Brawer, Galiẓiyah, 204.

82. Hundert, Jews in Poland–Lithuania, 148. Cf. Moshe J. Rosman, Founder of Hasidism: A Quest for the Historical Baal Shem Tov (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1996); Immanuel Etkes, Baʿ al HaShem: HaBesht: Magiyah, mistikah, hanhagah (Jerusalem: Merkaz Shazar, 2000); idem, “Mekomah shel ha-magiyah u-vaʿalei ha-shem ba-ḥevrah ha-ashkenazit be-mifneh ha-me'ot ha–17 ha–18,” Zion 60 (1995), 69–104.

83. “Mi-pi ha-mekubalim hemah ha-ḥasidim o baʿale ha-shemot shemi-kedem hayu mityaḥasim le-kadmonehem shem zeh” (Divre Binah, 22). In his characterization of the Sabbatian ascetics, Dov Ber says, “they called themselves by the name Kabbalists” (ibid., 187).

84. Ibid., 27.

85. There is sufficient evidence that there were hasidim in Lwów to warrant granting trustworthiness to Dov Ber's claim. Meshulam ben Shimshon Igra (1742–1801) of Tyśmienica wrote a letter in 1793 at the time of his departure for Pressburg, addressed to the leaders of Brody and Lwów, attacking Hasidism. Yisra'el Loebel, in his German antihasidic tract, published in 1799, reports that two hasidic leaders lived in Lwów in 1798. See Mordecai Wilensky, Hasidim u-mitnaggedim, 2nd ed. (Jerusalem: Mosad Bialik, 1990), 1:178; 2:337, 366. Cf. Entsiklopediyah shel galuyot, Lvov (Tel Aviv, 1956), 4:221, 425. Uriel Gellman kindly brought my attention to the fact that the brother-in-law of the Seer of Lublin was an active hasid in Lwów, and that Uri of Strelisk resided in Lwów for a period of time. He added that there are notes about Hasidism in Lwów before 1800 in Yosef Te'omim, Or Torah (Jerusalem, 1999).

86. Divre binah, 22.

87. Ibid., 25.

88. Ibid. Cf. Ḥaye Shelomoh Maimon, 122 (Yosef mi-Kletsk). The term lulke is probably related to the seventeenth-century Turkish term Lületaşi (pipe or pipe stone).

89. Divre binah, 26–27.

90. Ibid., 27.

91. Cf. “the communal officials appoint whoever has a sweet voice to pray on the community's behalf and lead the prayers from the pulpit. This evil custom is especially prevalent in the lands of Ukraine whence it has spread.” Yaʿakov Yisra'el ben Ẓevi Hirsh, Sefer shevet mi-yisra'el (Żółkiew: 1772), pt. 2, 9b.

92. This refers to a penitential practice known as teshuvat ha-kanah. In Sefer ha-kanah (Krakow, 1894 [1st ed., Prague, 1610]), 12a, we read, “One should eat only sufficient bread to sustain life, cut oneself off from social contact, and from meat and from wine and from all living things and things that come from all living things.” On p. 129 of the same book, the author presents “The Secret of Who Is Permitted to Eat Meat.” See Yisra'el Ta-Shma, “Hekhan nitḥabru sifre ha-kanah veha-peli'ah?” in Perakim be-toledot ha-ḥevrah ha-yehudit bi-mei ha-benayim uva-ʿ et ha-ḥadashah, ed. I. Etkes et al. (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1980), 56–63; Steven Bowman, “Mi ḥiber et Sefer ha-kanah, ve-Sefer ha-Peli'ah?” Tarbiz 54 (1985): 150–52; Michal Oron, “Mihu meḥaber Sefer ha-peli'ah ve-Sefer ha-kanah? Tarbiz 54 (1985): 297–98; idem, “Bikoret ha-ḥevrah be-sifrut ha-kabbalah,” Masekhet 2 (2004): 133–46. Cf. Salomon Maimons Lebensgechichte, 168, 170–71; Ḥaye Shelomoh Maimon, 121: the story of a certain scholar who performed teshuvat ha-kanah … and ate nothing that has been living “meat, milk, honey, and the like.”

93. Divre binah, 27–28.

94. Ibid., 27–28. See n. 89 herein.

95. Enam ḥosheshim la-sigufim ha-re'uyim le-teshuvat ha-kanah.

96. On the elimination of kavanot in hasidic prayer, see Pinchas Giller, “Between Poland and Jerusalem: Kabbalistic Prayer in Early Modernity,” Modern Judaism 24, no. 3 (2004): 231–35 (226–50), and the references there.

97. Ibid., 29–30. The reference is to Meshulam ben Shimshon Igra (1742–1801), who left Tyśmienica in 1793. The move to the much more prestigious Hungarian community may well have been motivated by factors other than the attacks of hasidim. It is true, though, that when he left Galicia, Igra sent a letter to the elders of the communities of Brody and Lwów attacking Hasidism. David of Maków published this letter in his antihasidic tract Shever poshʿ im. Wilensky, Ḥasidim u-mitnaggedim, 1:177–79. The letter does not say that its author left Tyśmienica because of the hasidim.

98. Cf. Ada Rapoport-Albert, “Hasidism after 1772,” in Hasidism Reappraised (London: Vallentine Mitchell, 1996), 76–140.

99. For this distinction, see, e.g., Shmuel Feiner, “Ha-haskalah ha-mukdemet be-yahadut ha-me'ah ha-shemoneh-esreh,” Tarbiz 67 (1998): 189–240; idem, Mahapekhat ha-ne'orut: Tenuʿ at ha-haskalah ha-yehudit ba-me'ah ha-18 (Jerusalem: Merkaz Zalman Shazar, 2002), 39–109.

100. Confrontation with Christianity: 3–7, 9–13; confrontation with Hasidism and Kabbalah: 22–29, 31–36; defense of the tradition and confrontation with unbelief: 17–22, 30, 42–48.

101. Divre binah, 30, 36–42.

102. Divre binah, 4.

103. Maʿ aseh Tuvyah, 25.

104. Divre binah, 6, 19, 23, 36, 42.

105. ירושלים, הספריה הלאומית . MS B964.

106. ויניציאה: במצות אלויסי בראגאדין, שי"ג; סביונטה: טוביה פואה, שי"ד.

107. רבי אלעזר [בן ערך] אומר: הוי שקוד ללמוד תורה; ודע מה שתשיב לאפיקורוס; ודע לפני מי אתה עמל, ונאמן הוא בעל מלאכתך שישלם לך שכר פעולתך. (אבות פרק ב, יד, טו).

108. צ"ל מינים.

109. שאלוניק: נדפס בבית דון יהודה לבית גדליה, רפ"ב; ויניציאה: דפוס דניאל בומבירגי, ש"ז; ויניציאה: דפוס אלויזי בראגדין, שכ"ה; ויניציאה: נדפס בבית זואן דיגאה, של"ג; פרנקפורט דאדר: דפוס אלמנת פראפעסר גרילא, תקמ"ה.

110. ויקרא יט: יד.

111. יצחק אברבנאל.

112. וראו גם זכרונות, עמ' 87: ואנחנו בני ישראל מחוייבים לידע הכל. שיתקיים בנו מאמר הכתוב 'כי היא חכמתכם ובינתכם לעיני העמים' (דברים ד’ ו") ואף גם שפסוק זה מפרשים חכז"ל על תורתנו הק', אבל אמרו שטוב תורה עם דרך ארץ, וטוב לכל איש בר ישראל החכם ומבין דבר, שידע אף ממעשה אומות העולם, ומתוך זה יתרחש לו לפעמים שיוכל להשיב להם כהוגן על שאלתם נגד הדת והאמונת ישראל, כאשר הקרה לי כמה פעמים בדברי עם גדולי האומות וכומריהם, ומצאתי ברוב התשובה בצדו כידוע לכל שתשובתי תמיד נצחת היתה.

113. אברהם בן דוד מפושקירה 1197–1120 .

114. וארבעה אנשים היו מְצֹרָעִים . זה גחזי ושלשת בניו (סוטה מז, א). שלושת הבנים נצטרעו כתוצאה מקללתו של אלישע (מל"ב ה, כז). גחזי הוא אחד מארבעה הדיוטות שאין להם חלק לעוה"ב (משנה סנהד' צ, א).

115. "אל תחשבו שבאתי לבטל את התורה, או את הנביאים, לא באתי לבטל כי אם לקיים."

116. Gaudenty Pikulski, Złość żydowska Przeciwko Bogu y bliźniemu Prawdzie y Sumnieniu na obiaśnienie Talmudystów. Na dowód ich zaślepienia, y Religii dalekiey od prawa Boskiego przez Moyżesza danego. Rozdzielona na trzy części opisana (Lwów, 1760).

117. דברי הימים א' א:ח.

118. חגיגה ט^ב: יאהעניותאליהודאי כי ברזא סומקא לסוסיא חיורא.

119. מדרש ויקרא רבה, ערך מרדכי מרגליות (ירושלים תשי"ד), רי.ריא (י, ו).

120. תצ"ה - תצ"ז (יצא בזולקווא: בתק"ב ותק"ו).

121. 54 זלוטי – סכום גדול.

122. משנה עבודה זרה א' ג:ב: דאמר רבי שמעון בן לקיש אין גיהנם לעתיד לבא אלא הקדוש ברוך הוא מוציא חמה מנרתיקה ומקדיר: רשעים נידונין בה וצדיקים מתרפאין בה.

123. ברכות לב ע"א.

124. תה' נא: יב.

125. שבת יד ע"א: : לעולם אל יספר אדם בשבחו של חבירויותר מדאי,שמתוך טובתו בא לידי גנותו.

126. דברים כט:כח.

127. לא מצאתי בתוספתא. בתלמוד, חגיגה יג ע"א מצטטטים מספר בן סירא (ג, יט): במופלא ממך אל תדרוש ובמכוסה ממך אל תחקור במה שהורשית התבונן ואין לך עסק בנסתרות.

128. יוסף יעבץ, אור החיים, לבוב תקנ"א. המחבר לא דייק בהעתקתו; רק שינויים משמעותיים יסומנו כאן.

129. במקור במקום "אי אפשר": מנוע.

130. שמות לג:יג.

131. במקור: והתבוננו.

132. המחבר דלג כאן על המשפט: אמרו [חגיגה יג] במופלא ממך אל תדרוש ובמכוסה ממך אל תחקור במה שהרשית התבונן ואל יהיה לך עסק בנסתרות.

133. במקור: אחרי שרבים עתה (שמות ה:ה).

134. חגיגה יד ע"ב.

135. כתובות מ ע"א.

136. צ"ל קרא

137. צ"ל פן יהרסו אל ד' לראות

138. המחבר דלג כאן על המילים: במאמר הראשון.

139. במקור: ומן.

140. ברכות ז ע"א.

141. תהילים כה: יד.

142. צ"ל ליראיו

143. דלג כאן המחבר על המילים: לאשר קדם לו החלק הראשון ושלא יוודע כי כולם.

144. במקור: דעת.

145. במקור: גשמות.

146. דב' טז:יח.

147. ונדסבק תצ"ג.

148. דלג כאן המחבר על המילים: לעמבורג הנקראת.

149. במקור: לרצץ.

150. במקור: מהרהר.

151. במקור: עקובו.

152. מכאן, דברי דב בר.

153. חוזר המחבר כאן לצטט ממשנת חכמים.

154. ישעיהו מ: י"ח, כה.

155. איוב י"ט:כ"ו –ומבשרי אחזה אלוה.

156. מדרש תנחומא, פרשת אמור, סימן ז.

157. תהילים עד: יב.