1. On Joseph Perl see Jonatan Meir, “Perl, Joseph,” http://www.yivoencyclopedia.org/article.aspx/perl_yosef; Sinkoff, Nancy, Out of the Shtetl: Making Jews Modern in the Polish Borderlands (Providence, RI: Brown Judaic Studies, 2004), 225–70Google Scholar.

2. The Jewish population in the Tarnopol district in 1817 was 11,070, out of a total population of 182,303, see Gaspari, Adam Christian et al. , Vollständiges Handbuch der neuesten Erdbeschreibung, vol. 2:1 (Weimar: Verl. des Geographischen Inst., 1819), 439Google Scholar. In 1840 Tarnopol-district Jews constituted only 7.7 percent, as opposed to 60.8 percent Ruthenians and 31.4 percent Poles. See Mark, Rudolf A., Galizien unter österreichischer Herrschaft: Verwaltung, Kirche, Bevölkerung (Marburg: Herder-Institut, 1994), 65Google Scholar. The population in the city of Tarnopol reached 10,450 in that year, and the Jews constituted about half of them. See Bösche, Eduard Theodor, Allgemeine Beschreibung der Erde und ihrer Bewohner (Philadelphia: Leineweber und Rex, 1840), 506Google Scholar.

3. To the best of my knowledge there are only two short contemporary references to Perl's synagogue. The first one is in a letter written in 1836 by Samson Bloch to Solomon Judah Rapoport: “Fear not—who is greater among us in our land's sages than the lordly sage who stands before kings, our teacher Rav Y. Perl, may his light shine … and whom God has enabled … ‘to build a sanctuary like the heights,’ the new synagogue … and who has laid down an inviolate law to praise and to exalt the house of God by forbidding levity, flippancy, and idle conversation, as laid down in the Shulḥan ʿarukh, ʾoraḥ ḥayim 151—and whoever does so intentionally will not be allowed back….” See Bloch, Shimshon ha-Levi, Shevile ʿolam: Zahav she-bah (Warsaw: Yosef Unterhendler, 1883), 79–98, esp. 81Google Scholar. The second reference is in a memoir written by Avraham Dov Gottlober in 1869 (published in 1881). Gottlober writes how he was surprised by his hasidic father who spoke positively about Perl, describing him as “a man who built a splendid prayer house and prohibited all those present there to utter even a single word during the prayer service.” See Gottlober, Avraham Dov, Zikhronot u-masaʾot, vol. 1 (Jerusalem: Mosad Bialik, 1975), 222–27, esp. 224Google Scholar.

4. E.g., Meyer, Michael A., Response to Modernity: A History of the Reform Movement in Judaism (New York: Oxford University Press, 1988), 156Google Scholar; Sinkoff, Out of the Shtetl, 236.

5. E.g., Meir, Yonatan, Ḥasidut medumah: ʿIyyunim bi-khetavav ha-satiriyim shel Yosef Perl (Jerusalem: Mosad Bialik, 2013), 131Google Scholar.

6. See [Joseph Perl], “Allgemeine Ordnung und Vorschriften für das mit der Tarnopoler Israelitischen Lehranstalt vereinigte Bethaus. Nebst einem Anhange von Instructionen und Weisungen für alle bei dieser Betschule dienenden Personen, welche immer die Richtschnur ihres Verhaltens bleiben muß,” f. 146, o. 66, s. 1663, Central State Historical Archives of Ukraine (TsDIAL), Lviv; in microfilm copy in the Central Archives for the History of the Jewish People (CAHJP), Jerusalem, HM3/942.06, 46–65.

7. Friedman, Philip, “Joseph Perl as an Educational Activist and His School in Tarnopol” [in Yiddish], YlVO Bleter 31, no. 2 (1948): 188–89, esp. 188Google Scholar.

8. The visit to Amsterdam is retold by Isaiah Horowitz's son; see Shabetai Sheftel, “Hakdamat sefer vav ha-ʿamudim” (Amsterdam, 1648), 9b. Perl does not mention Shabetai Sheftel as the source of the story, but he is quoted as mentioning him when talking to Nathan Horowitz, see Horowitz, Nathan, “Joseph Perl: eine biographische Skizze,” Kalender und Jahrbuch für Israeliten 5 (1846): 209–32, esp. 216Google Scholar.

9. For a description of the school see Bas, Shabetai Meshorer, Sefer sifte yeshenim (Amsterdam: David Tartas, 1680), 8a–8bGoogle Scholar.  Bas quotes Shabetai Sheftel and adds more details on the manner of study in the Sephardic community in Amsterdam.

10. Berliner, Avraham, Hakdamah ha-kelalit le-siddur R. Shabetai ha-sofer (Jerusalem: Kedem, 1970), 5Google Scholar.

11. Veizel, Naphtali Herz (Wessely), Divre shalom ve-ʾemet: Mikhtav sheni (Warsaw, 1886), 64–65Google Scholar (the first edition is unpaginated).

12. Efron, John M., German Jewry and the Allure of the Sephardic (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2016), 39–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

13. Friedman, “Joseph Perl as an Educational Activist,” 199.

14. Nathan Horowitz, “Joseph Perl,” 216–17.

15. “Uibersicht,” f. 146, o. 66, s. 1665, TsDIAL; HM3/942.07, 74–76, esp. 74, CAHJP.

16. Gelber, N[athan] M[ichael], Tarnopol, ed. Korngreen, P. (Tel Aviv: Ḥevrat ʾEnẓiklopedyah shel Galuyot, 1955), 21–108, esp. 56Google Scholar.

17. Engelbrecht, Helmut, Geschichte des österreichischen Bildungswesens, vol. 3, Von der frühen Aufklärung bis zum Vormärz (Vienna: Österreichischer Bundesverlag, 1984), 226–40Google Scholar; Politische Verfassung der Volksschulen für die k. k. österreichischen Provinzen mit Ausnahme von Ungaren, Lombardie, Venedig und Dalmatien (Vienna, 1806)Google Scholar. This plan remained valid with only slight modifications until 1869.

18. Politische Verfassung, 12, 16–18.

19. Friedman, “Joseph Perl as an Educational Activist,” 39 n. 10.

20. Ingrao, Charles, The Habsburg Monarchy, 1618–1815 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994), 237Google Scholar.

21. Jarrett, Mark, The Congress of Vienna and Its Legacy: War and Great Power Diplomacy after Napoleon (London: I. B. Tauris, 2012), 118Google Scholar. Gelber, Tarnopol, 44–49.

22. For the laws regarding private teaching see Politische Verfassung, 45–55.

23. Stöger, Michael, Darstellung der gesetzlichen Verfassung der galizischen Judenschaft, vol. 1 (Lemberg: Kuhn und Millikowski, 1833), § 45, 66–67Google Scholar.

24. Gelber, Tarnopol, 50. In his 1804 Jewish Statute, Alexander I writes: “If a division into sects should appear in any place, to such an extent that one sect should not be willing to be with another in the same synagogue, in this case one of them is allowed to build its own synagogue and elect its own rabbi; but in each town there was to be only one kahal.” Cited in Vladimir Levin, “The Legal History of Synagogues in Volhynia,” in Synagogues in Ukraine: Volhynia, ed. Sergey R. Kravtsov and Vladimir Levin (Jerusalem: Center for Jewish Art, Hebrew University, 2017). According to Levin, “[I]n the first three decades of the nineteenth century, the Russian state did not execute direct control over the synagogues and prayer houses, regarding them as a Jewish internal affair.” My thanks to Dr. Levin for sharing his chapter with me. While this section was intended to calm internal disputes with Hasidim, it opened up a path for building other synagogues.

25. R[eitman], H[irsch], “Joseph Perl und die Schule zu Tarnopol,” Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift für jüdische Theologie 2 (1839): 312–20, esp. 314–15Google Scholar.

26. “Licitations-Punkte,” f. 146, o. 66, s. 1663, TsDIAL; HM3/942.06, 44–45, CAHJP.

27. Ibid., § 3, 44.

28. Ibid., § 15, 44b–45: “[S]o wird esp. keinem der Platz-Eigenthümer erlaubt seyn, auf seinem Platze irgend eine Veränderung vorzunehmen, ja sogar einen Leuchter an die Wand anzuhängen, wird niemanden erlaubt seyn, weil dadurch das innere Ansehen des Bethauses verunstaltet werden könne.”

29. “Licitations-Punkte,” § 5, 44.

30. Friedman, “Joseph Perl as an Educational Activist,” 147. A list of seat owners from December 1818 shows smaller numbers: 39 names in the men's section and 30 names in the women's section, although some of them owned multiple seats. (Joseph Perl's name appears on eight seats in the male section and on three seats in the women's section.) See “Verzeichnis der im Bethause der Maenner und Weiber verkauften, dann zeitlich verliehenen Staette, mit Benennung der erblichen und zeitlichen Besitzer,” HM3/942.06, 42–43, CAHJP. Interestingly, one of the names in the women's section is the wife of the Galician maskil Samuel “Byk,” ibid., 43. On Jacob Samuel Bick see http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/3276-bick-jacob-samuel.

31. “Verzeichnis der im Bethause,” § 8–11, 44b.

32. Ibid., § 12, 44b.

33. Ibid., § 14, 44b.

34. Ibid., § 13, 44b.

35. For a defense of the adoption of this custom, see Emden, Jacob, Siddur bet Yaʿakov (Zhytomir: Israel Alapin, 1881), 186Google Scholar; Steinhardt, Mendel, Divre ʾiggeret (Rödelheim: Heidenheim, 1812), 10b–11aGoogle Scholar.

36. Neuman is not mentioned in connection with the school after 1816, and apparently there was some disagreement between him and Perl. See Friedman, “Joseph Perl as an Educational Activist,” 149.

37. Ibid., 141.

38. See “Anhang,” Kurze Uebersicht des im Tarnopoler Israelitischen FREYSCHULE eingeführten Lehrplans, nach dem der Unterricht, in allen Classen dieser Schule, ertheilt wird (Tarnopol, 1815)Google Scholar.

39. Friedman, “Joseph Perl as an Educational Activist,” 157.

40. “Anhang,” Kurze Ubersicht.

41. See examples in Johann Ignaz von Felbiger, ABC oder Namenbüchlein, zum Gebrauche der Schulen in den kaiserlich-königlichen Staaten (n. p., 1786), 37–42. Jewish children attending Catholic schools were exempt from participating in the prayers recited before and after school; see Politische Verfassung, 183. School morning prayers composed by Herz Homberg were introduced by him in the German Jewish schools in Galicia, see Sadowski, Dirk, Haskala und Lebenswelt: Herz Homberg und die Jüdischen Deutschen Schulen in Galizien 1782–1806 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2010), 202–3Google Scholar.

42. Shevaʿ tefillot (Tarnopol, 1814)Google Scholar. See also Sinkoff, Out of the Shtetl, 234–35. All prayers were printed in Hebrew and in German in Hebrew letters.

43. On Felbiger see Van Horn Melton, James, Absolutism and the Eighteenth-Century Origins of Compulsory Schooling in Prussia and Austria (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988), 91–105, esp. 103Google Scholar.

44. Gelber, Tarnopol, 52–53.

45. Manekin, Rachel, “The 1816 Ḥerem in Lemberg: Maskilic Triumphalism and Jewish Historiography” [in Hebrew], Zion 73 (2008): 173–98, esp. 198Google Scholar.

46. See f. 146, o. 7, s. 701, TsDIAL; HM2/7983.7, 17–18, CAHJP.

47. Gelber, Tarnopol, 56.

48. Ibid., 56–58.

49. See f. 146, o. 66, s. 1660, TsDIAL; HM2/8296.6, 1–2, CAHJP.

50. Ibid., 2b–17.

51. “Dotation Urkunde,” f. 146, o. 66, s. 1658, TsDIAL; HM3/942.02, 19–23, CAHJP.

52. Ibid., § 4, 20.

53. Ibid., §§ 12–14, 22–22b.

54. Ibid., § 16, 22b.

55. Ibid., § 5:a, 20–20b.

56. See f. 146, o. 66, s. 1664, TsDIAL; HM2/8296.8, 27–28b, CAHJP.

57. Ibid., 42–46b. The district authorities claimed that the number of Hasidim in the place is large, and in their midst there is a leader who was put under surveillance according to an instruction “from above” issued on September 16, 1817; ibid. 45. This is perhaps a reference to the hasidic leader R. Zvi Hirsch of Żydaczów. On the latter's opposition to the school in the next decade see Meir, Ḥasidut medumah, 144–46.

58. HM2/8296.6, 28–29b, CAHJP.

59. Gelber, Tarnopol, 58.

60. “Errichtung einer israelitischen Hauptschule in Tarnopol,” January 7, 1821, Zahl 662, Provinzial Gesetzsammlung des Königreich Galizien und Lodomerien für das Jahr 1821 (Lemberg, n. d.), 7.

61. Friedman, “Joseph Perl as an Educational Activist,” 170.

62. “The prayer leader is required to have a copy of these official duties that he agreed to, and closely familiarize himself with them through frequent reading. This copy will be delivered to the prayer leader in the Hebrew language, and, if needed, will also be explained.” See Perl “Allgemeine Ordnung,” V. Capitel, § 6h, 52.

63. Lowenstein, Steven M., “The 1840s and the Creation of the German-Jewish Religious Reform Movement,” in The Mechanics of Change: Essays in the Social History of German Jewry (Atlanta, GA: Scholars Press, 1992), 92Google Scholar. According to Lowenstein, the first wave of synagogue regulations started in 1810 and ended in 1824, the second wave occurred in the years 1836–1838, and the third from 1838–1844; ibid.

64. Michael A. Meyer, Response to Modernity, 25–27; Michman, Jozeph, “The Establishment of the Supreme Consistory: A Turning Point in the History of Dutch Jewry,” in Meḥkarim ʿal toldot yahadut Holand, ed. Michman, Jozeph, vol. 5 (Jerusalem: Hebrew University, 1988), 155–216Google Scholar.

65. [Graanboom, Israel], Sefer meliẓ yosher (Amsterdam, 1809)Google Scholar.

66. Bekanntmachung wegen besserer Einrichtung des Gottesdienstes in den Synagogen des Königreichs Westphalen (Kassel, 1810)Google Scholar. Printed also in Sulamith 3, no. 1 (1810): 366–80Google Scholar. On the Westphalian consistory and Israel Jacobson see Meyer, Response to Modernity, 28–34.

67. Meyer, Response to Modernity, 37–38; Steinhardt, Divre ʾiggeret, 9b–12b.

68. Meyer, Response to Modernity, 28–43; Marcus, Jacob R., Israel Jacobson: The Founder of the Reform Movement in Judaism (Cincinnati, OH: Hebrew Union College Press, 1972)Google Scholar.

69. Meyer, Response to Modernity, 26; Michman, “The Establishment of the Supreme Consistory,” 186–88.

70. Ellenson, David, “Emancipation and the Directions of Modern Judaism: The Lessons of ‘Meliẓ Yosher,’” Studia Rosenthalia 30, no. 1 (1996): 118–36Google Scholar.

71. Ibid., 118.

72. Ibid., 129.

73. The word “temple” or the phrase “Tempel für Geregelten Gottesdienst” was never used by Joseph Perl or in any of the reports about his synagogue during his time or in the decades after he died, and certainly not in his synagogue regulations. Meyer relies on Idelsohn, Abraham Z., Jewish Music in Its Historical Development (New York: Schocken, 1967), 245Google Scholar, who does not provide a source for this claim. It seems that the source for this is the entry in the Jewish Encyclopedia on Tarnopol by Joseph Jacobs and Schulim Ochser, which includes the following sentence: “The Tempel für Geregelten Gottesdienst, opened by Perl in 1819, also caused dissensions within the community, and its rabbi, S. J. Rapoport, was forced to withdraw,” http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/14249-tarnopol. Not only is the date erroneous, but the authors of this entry clearly confused the name used for the Prague temple (see, “Der Temple des geregelten Gottesdienst in Prag,” Israelitische Annalen, Nr. 11, March 13, 1840) with that of Perl's synagogue, perhaps because of the mention of Rapoport. (See also the entry in the Jewish Encyclopedia on Austria, “The government also took a great interest in the reform of public worship; and the authorities of Prague ostentatiously took part in the dedication of the new ‘Tempel für Geregelten Gottesdienst’ in that city, which was dedicated on the emperor's birthday, April 19, 1837.”) Moreover, the dispute surrounding Rapoport had nothing to do with the establishment of Perl's synagogue more than two decades earlier, and unlike his school, the establishment of Perl's synagogue did not provoke any opposition. The unfortunate confusion in the 1903 encyclopedia entry later made its way into the scholarly literature. See the entry on Simon Dankowicz in Brocke, Michael et al. , Biographisches Handbuch der Rabbiner: Teil 2: Die Rabbiner im Deutschen Reich 1871–1945, vol. 1 (Munich: K. G. Saur, 2009), 147CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

74. There was no choir in Perl's synagogue, as his biographer Nathan Horowitz explicitly writes; see Horowitz, “Joseph Perl: eine biographische Skizze,” 227. See below about the introduction of a choir by Perl's son. The claim in the Jewish Encyclopedia entry on Josef Perl by Israel Singer and N. Slousch that Perl built near his school “a Reform synagogue with a choir” is not only unsupported by the bibliographical sources adduced at the end of the entry, but incorrect according to the historical evidence.

75. I have not come across any source, published or archival, that mentions that there was opposition to Perl's synagogue when it was first established.

76. Meyer, Response to Modernity, 155–56.

77. Sinkoff, Out of the Shtetl, 234.

78. Ibid., 236. Philip Friedman emphasizes the traditional character of Perl's synagogue, writing that it was quite remote from the German Reform temples that introduced radical changes. Perl didn't allow a choir or an organ in his synagogue, and didn't appoint a preacher; see Friedman, “Joseph Perl as an Educational Activist,” 180–81. I haven't come across any source, published or archival, that mentions that there was an organ in Perl's synagogue.

79. “Er [Perl] war ein Mann der That, mehr noch als Jacobson, dem ausgedehntere Mittel und empfänglicherer Boden alle Wirksamkeit erleichterten,” Jost, J. M., Geschichte der Israeliten seit der Zeit der Makkabäer bis auf unsere Tage, 10.3 (Berlin: Schlesingerschen Buch- und Musikhandlung, 1847), 77–79, esp. 77Google Scholar.

80. Ibid., 78.

81. “Auch den Ritus Wußte er in seinem Bethause ansprechender einzurichten; er selbst predigte ansprechend,” ibid., 79.

82. “Joseph Perl, ein unerschrockener Kämpfer für Licht und Warheit […],” Dessauer, Julius Heinrich, Geschichte der Israeliten (Erlangen: Palm'schen Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1846), 532Google Scholar.

83. Ibid.

84. They later included not only a choir and an organ, but also the elimination of many piyyutim. See Marcus, Israel Jacobson, 92–94.

85. On Demant see Gelber, Tarnopol, 92. Demant became the headmaster of the school in Brody in the 1870s.

86. “Briefe aus Galizien,” Ben Chananja 13, 1861, 117.

87. Ibid.

88. “S. D. Tarnopol,” Die Neuzeit 48, 1862, 569.

89. “Letter 15,” Kerem ḥemed 5, 1841, 163–69, esp. 164.

90. Ibid., 166.

91. Goldenberg, Berish, ʾOhel Yosef (Lemberg: Poremba, 1866), 18Google Scholar.

92. Ibid., 14.

93. Ibid. The custom of spreading straw on the floor of the synagogue on Yom Kippur originated in the prohibition of prostrating oneself on a stone floor, which was deemed too similar to an idolatrous practice; since there were places in the Yom Kippur service where the worshippers customarily prostrated themselves, some material such as straw was placed between the worshippers and the floor. It is not clear why Mehlsack wished to dispense with the custom, or whether the practice was halakhically required, which may have been the case if the floor was stone. In any event, changing the custom was grounds for his dismissal. See also Meir, Jonatan, “Haskalah and Esotericism in Galicia: The Unpublished Writings of Elyaqim Hamilzahgi,” Kabbalah: Journal for the Study of Jewish Mystical Texts 33 (2015): 273–313, esp. 279Google Scholar.

94. “Das Institut, welches in allen seinen Theilen immer ein ganzes ausmachen muß, und nie getrennt werden darf, hat nur einen Hauptvorsteher für die ganze Anstalt.” Perl “Allgemeine Ordnung,” III. Capitel, § 1, 48b. Under Austrian law, establishing a synagogue was the exclusive responsibility of the community council, and individuals were prohibited from building synagogues. See Manekin, Rachel, “Hasidism and the Habsburg Empire: 1788–1867,” Jewish History 27 (2013): 271–97, esp. 278CrossRefGoogle Scholar; idem, “Praying at Home in Lemberg: The Minyan Laws of the Habsburg Empire, 1776–1848,” Polin: Studies in Polish Jewry 24 (2012): 49–69, esp. 51 n. 10Google Scholar. Such a project could not have originated under Austria, and so when Tarnopol returned to Austrian rule, having the synagogue already established made things much smoother legally.

95. Perl “Allgemeine Ordnung,” VII. Capitel, § 7, 53.

96. Ibid., I. Capitel, § 5, 47.

97. Bekanntmachung, § 6, 7; § 7, 7; § 15, 10. Petuchowski, Jakob Josef, Prayerbook Reform in Europe: The Liturgy of European Liberal and Reform Judaism (New York: World Union for Progressive Judaism, 1968), 106–10, esp. 108–9Google Scholar: [§ 6] “Everybody should be dressed as cleanly and as decently as possible when appearing in the synagogue. The prayer leader, in particular, must be decently attired”; [§ 7] “Children who have not yet passed their fourth year must not be admitted. In general, the parents of the children who come to the synagogue are responsible for their quiet and good behavior”; [§ 15] “The members of the congregation are reminded and ordered to follow the cantor's prayers quietly and silently. They must refrain from the illegal and cacophonous shouting which so frequently disturbs peaceful and true devotion.”

98. Ellenson, “Emancipation and the Directions,” 126. See also Efron, German Jewry, 46–47.

99. Friedman, “Joseph Perl as an Educational Activist,” 141. See above where “smoking, drinking, and merrymaking” is associated with conduct of Hasidim in synagogues.

100. Meliẓ yosher, 2b.

101. “Nie soll im Bethause des Instituts ein Sänger (Chasan) mit Gehilfen aufgenommen werden.” Perl “Allgemeine Ordnung,” V. Capitel, § 1, 50b.

102. “Das Gebet der Sabat- und Feyertage, kann er zwar nach seinen Fähigkeiten und mit den üblichen Melodien, nie aber mit Gehilfen, Nebensängern (§ 1, C. 5) verrichten.” Ibid., V. Capitel, § 6d, 51b.

103. Marcus, Israel Jacobson, 86.

104. Meyer, Response to Modernity, 38. Steinhardt defended the introduction of German singing by a children's choir in the school synagogue because it would facilitate greater understanding of the prayers and would not be imitating the gentiles. See Divre ʾiggeret, question four, 9b–10a.

105. Marcus, Israel Jacobson, 109–10.

106. Petuchowski, Prayerbook Reform, § 14, 109.

107. Bekanntmachung,  § 14, 9–10.

108. Elbogen, Ismar, Der jüdische Gottesdienst in seiner geschichtliche Entwicklung (Leipzig: Gustav Fock, 1913), 507–8Google Scholar.

109. Ibid. See also Marcus, Israel Jacobson, 92.

110. On the 1829 Viennese synagogue regulations see Rozenblit, Marsha, “The Struggle over Religious Reform in Nineteenth-Century Vienna,” AJS Review 14, no. 2 (1989): 179–221, esp. 185–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

111. See Goldenberg, ʾOhel Yosef, 28. On Sulzer's Shir Ẓion (1840) see Rozenblit, “Struggle over Religious Reform,” 190–91.

112. Meyer, Response to Modernity, 154.

113. Marx, Alexander, “Zunz's Letters to Steinschneider,” Proceedings of the American Academy for Jewish Research 5 (1933–34): 95–153, esp. 105–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

114. “Werden die gebräuchlichen Honeurs, als das Aufrufen zur Tora, das Oeffnen des Tabernakels u. d.g. durch Ausruf an den Meistbietenden verkauft werden, und zwar so, daß das ausgebotene 100, 10 Kopek kostet.” Perl “Allgemeine Ordnung,” VII. Capitel, § 2, 52b–53.

115. Meliẓ yosher, 5–5b.

116. Ibid, 5b.

117. Perl “Allgemeine Ordnung,” III. Capitel, § 3, 48b.

118. Bekanntmachung, § 26, 13.

119. Bekanntmachung, § 29, 15.

120. “Dieser zweyte Schulbediente soll auch immer beim Abschnitt von den Flüchen, zur Tora aufgerufen werden, wenn sich anders in der Gemeinde nicht ein anderer finden sollte, der das alte Vorurtheil nicht scheuend, sich wollte aufrufen lassen.”  Perl “Allgemeine Ordnung,” VIII. Capitel, § 8, 54b.

121. On customs associated with reading and calling up people to make a blessing during the reading of this Torah portion see Talbi, Ḥayim, “Customs of Reading the ‘Curses’ in the Synagogue,” in Kenishta: Studies of the Synagogue World, ed. Tabori, Yosef, vol. 2 (Ramat Gan: Bar-Ilan University Press, 2003), 31–65Google Scholar. Apparently, calling up the beadle for this portion is based on the Maharil (Yaakov ben Moshe Levi Moelin).

122. Bekanntmachung, § 5, 7. Petuchowski, Prayerbook Reform, § 5, 108: “The knocking on the doors and the calling out in the streets, which is customary in several congregations as a sign of the impending worship service, must altogether cease. Instead, the congregations must follow the time of services which will be determined by their rabbi with our approval.…”

123. “Die Versammlung geschieht auf das gewöhnliche Zeichen, das an allen Thüren gegeben wird, und so bald die gehörige Anzahl zugegen ist, so wird auf die vom Schulvater gegebene Erlaubniß, das Gebet angefangen. In Ermanglung eines Schulvaters kann der Vorbeter selbst darüber entscheiden.” Perl “Allgemeine Ordnung,” I. Capitel, § 2, 46.

124. Meliẓ yosher, 4–4b.

125. Ibid., 7–7b. For a similar reasoning see Divre ʾiggeret, 12a.

126. Bekanntmachung, § 34, 16–17. The word “piyyutim” appears in the text in German (Piutim) and in a footnote in Hebrew (פיוטים). For the defense of this innovation see Divre ʾiggeret, question 8, 11a–11b.

127. “Das Gebeth wird immer ohne Ausnahme, nach den herrschenden Gebetsformeln, und ohne die geringste Veränderung oder Einschiebung verrichtet Perl.” Perl, “Allgemeine Ordnung,” I. Capitel, § 4, 47.

128. “Nie darf der Vorbeter dieser Schule, die Form, oder die Ordnung des Gebetes, verändern, oder andere Gebetsformeln einschalten, sondern muß sich hierin, so wie überhaupt in seiner ganzen Amtsverrichtung, nach den allgemein herrschenden Gebräuchen und Vorschriften der Synagoge unserer Nation, und wie solche gegenwärtig in der hiesigen alten Betschule gehalten werden, unabänderlich richten (§ 4, C.1).” Ibid., V. Capitel, § 5e, 51b.

129. Manekin, “1816 Ḥerem,” 185, 191.

130. Bekanntmachung,  § 18, 11.

131. Meliẓ yosher, 2.

132. Bekanntmachung, § 34, 16–17.

133. Such examples include abolishment of lashes on the eve of Yom Kippur, Bekanntmachung, § 38, 18; restrictions regarding customs in Hoshʿana Rabbah, Bekanntmachung, § 39, 18–19.

134. “Wenn er sich für eine besondere Sekte erkläret, so kann er bei diesem Bethause als Vorbeter nicht bleiben, da das Institut keinen andern Zweck hat, als Einigkeit und Friede unter allen Menschen zu verbreiten, und nicht Sekten in seiner Mitte zu nähren.” Perl “Allgemeine Ordnung,” V. Capitel, § 4a, 51.

135. “Die Zusatzgebete (Pait) für Sams- und Feyertage sollen gleichfalls nach den gewöhnlichen herrschenden Formeln, und zwar sowohl vor, als nach den 18 Benedeyungen, und ganz so wie in der alten Bethschule und ohne Veränderung abgehalten werden.” Ibid., I. Capitel, § 7, 47b.

136. This prepartition practice was confirmed by Maria Theresa as a way to broaden the reputation of rabbis and discover the scholars of the community, see “Allgemeine Ordnung für die gesamte Judenschaft der Königreichen Galizien und Lodomerien,” Edicta et mandata universalia Regnis Galiciæ & Lodomeriæ (1776), 78–121, des Zweyter Abschnitt, Erstrer Artikel, § 15, 88.

137. While the Theresian Ordnung upheld the prepartition practice according to which itinerant preachers needed the permission of the rabbi and community elders in order to deliver their sermons (Ibid., Zweyter Abschnitt, Achter Artikel, § 10, 97), the Galician Edict of Toleration forbade this practice altogether, treating itinerant preachers as vagabonds, subject to state laws that treated vagabonds as criminals. See Karniel, Josef, “Das Toleranzpatent Kaiser Joseph II. für die Juden Galiziens und Lodomeriens,” Jahrbuch des Instituts für Deutsche Geschichte 11 (1982): 55–89, esp. § 8, 76Google Scholar.

138. See [Perl, Joseph,] Boḥen ẓadik (Prague: M. J. Landau, 1838), 54Google Scholar.

139. Meliẓ yosher, 3b. See also Ellenson, “Emancipation and the Directions,” 130.

140. Petuchowski, Prayerbook Reform, § 16, 109; Bekanntmachung, § 16, 10.

141. Petuchowski, Prayerbook Reform, § 13, 109; Bekanntmachung, § 13, 9.

142. “Pflichten der Rabbiner,” Sulamith 2, no. 2 (1808/9): 300–305Google Scholar. The instructions are from March 15, 1809. Interestingly, here and in the Bekanntmachung, the term Predigt is not mentioned, but rather Rede or Lehre.

143. Ibid., § 3, 300–301. In addition, the first clause in that document says that “every rabbi must cultivate a strictly moral life style. He must seek to promote the morality of the community entrusted to him by example as well as through teaching.”

144. Perl “Allgemeine Ordnung,” IV. Capitel, § 3, 49b.

145. Ibid., IV. Capitel, § 4, 49b.

146. On the meaning and use of the term Erbauung see Altmann, Alexander, “The New Style of Preaching in Nineteenth-Century German Jewry,” in Studies in Nineteenth-Century Jewish Intellectual History, ed. Altmann, Alexander (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1964), 65–116, esp. 87–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

147. See Gertner, Haim, Ha-rav ve-ha-ʿir ha-gedolah: Ha-rabbanut be-Galiẓyah u-mifgashah ‘im ha-modernah, 1815–1867 (Jerusalem: Merkaz Zalman Shazar, 2013), 142–43Google Scholar, where he cites Perl's criticism of the traditional talmudic sermon in his Boḥen ẓadik, 54–56. As early as 1815, Rapoport voiced a similar criticism against the talmudic-style sermon, advocating ethical sermons instead; see Rapoport, Shlomo Yehudah, “The Light of Commandment,” in Naḥalat Yehudah (Kraków: Karl Bodweizer, 1868), 1–26, esp. 5–6Google Scholar.

148. Sulamith 4, no. 2 (1811): 109–13, 166–78, 274–78Google Scholar. The last two installments were written by “D. H.” (I was unable to identify him), who uses the first-person plural, talking about unsere Anstalt (our institution), a clear indication that he was an insider. See ibid., 167.

149. On Wolf see Philippsohn, Phoebus, Biographische Skizzen (Leipzig: O. Leiner, 1864): 185–91Google Scholar.

150. Wolf, Joseph, Sechs Deutsche Reden, gebhalten in der Synagoge zu Dessau nebst einer hebraischen Uebersetzung derselben (Deßau: M. Philippsohn, 1812–13)Google Scholar.

151. Gertner, Ha-rav ve-ha-ʿir ha-gedolah, 143–44.

152. Perl, Boḥen ẓadik, 55. See also Rapoport, Naḥalat Yehudah, 5.

153. Altmann, “New Style of Preaching,” 74.

154. Ibid., 77.

155. According to Gertner, Rapoport included talmudic casuistries in his sermons, while Perl, who opposed this style, completely avoided them; see Gertner, Ha-rav ve-ha-ʿir ha-gedolah, 144–45.

156. Petuchowski, Prayerbook Reform, § 8, 108; Bekanntmachung, § 8, 8. In Perl's synagogue, the prayer leader had to wait for the rabbi if he was present. See Perl “Allgemeine Ordnung,” I. Capitel, § 6, 47a–47b.

157. Bekanntmachung, § 39, 18. See also Steinhardt, Divre ʾiggeret, 10a–10b.

158. “Pflichten der Rabbiner,” §§ 3, 4, 10.

159. The Hebrew translation of Religionsweiser is moreh ẓedek. On the meaning and use of this term see Manekin, Rachel, “Gaming the System: The Jewish Community Council, the Temple, and the Struggle over the Rabbinate in Mid-Nineteenth-Century Lemberg,” Jewish Quarterly Review 106, no. 3 (2016): 352–82, esp. 355CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

160. “Da dieses Institut keinen andern Zweck hat, als die Jugend unserer Nation, zur Gottesfurcht, Tugend und Wissenschaft anzuleiten, so wie Einigkeit und Menschenliebe zu verbreiten, so wäre es ganz wider die Absicht dieser Anstalt, in dem Bethause desselben, einen besonderen Rabbiner oder Religionsweiser aufnehmen zu wollen, welches zu Entzweyungen, wenigstens zu Zwistigkeiten in der Gemeinde Anlaß geben könnte. Es soll daher außer dem (§  6, Cap. 4) vorkommenden Falle im Bethause des Instituts nie ein besonderer Rabbiner oder Prediger, unter welchem Nahmen es seyn mag, aufgenommen warden.” Perl “Allgemeine Ordnung,” IV. Capitel, § 1, 49b.

161. “Der allgemeine Stadtrabbiner ist auch Rabbiner für die Platzeigenthümer in diesem Bethause, das heißt dieselben haben sich in Religions-Zweifeln, wenn sie solche nicht selbst lösen können, oder wollen, an den Stadtrabbiner zu wenden, der ihnen hierüber Bescheid zu geben hat.” Ibid., IV. Capitel, § 2, 49b.

162. See above.

163. According to Jonatan Meir, R. Babad praised the school in a letter he wrote to Perl in 1814. From another letter of that year it may be inferred that the rabbi visited the school, examined the students, and praised the curriculum. Since it is known that Babad opposed Perl's projects, Meir concluded that the rabbi first supported the school and later opposed it, see Meir, Ḥasidut medumah, 172. Clearly, Babad's support was limited to the period when Tarnopol was under Russian rule.

164. Karniel, “Das Toleranzpatent,” §§ 3, 4, 76.

165. Perl “Allgemeine Ordnung,” IV. Capitel, § 5a–c, 50.

166. The involvement of clergy in school examinations was a requirement of the 1806 Austrian school plan. The local clergy member had to be present during the examination and give his approval, see Politische Verfassung, 38–39.

167. “d) Es läßt sich von einem vernünftigen Religionsweiser mit Grund hoffen, daß solcher von dem Nutzen einer so menschenfreundlichen Anstalt, wie dieses Institut, für unsere Nation, überhaupt seyn, und aus allen Kräften zu dessen Unterstützung und Ausbreitung beitragen wird, und es läßt sich gar nicht voraussehen, daß solcher sich einst weigern sollte, die öffentliche Prüfung im Institute abzuhalten.” Ibid., IV. Capitel, § 5d, 50.

168. “Sollte aber wider alles Vermuthen in der Zukunft ein Rabbiner auf schriftliche Einladung bei 3 Prüfungen nicht zugegen seyn wollen, und dadurch also zu erkennen geben, daß er das Gute für die Israelitische Nation nicht befördern wolle, alsdann wird es der Gemeinde des Instituts-Bethauses frey stehen, für sich einen besondern Religionsweiser zu wählen.” Ibid., IV. Capitel, § 6, 50.

169. Ibid., IV. Capitel, § 10 (should be 9), 50b.

170. Friedman, “Joseph Perl as an Educational Activist,” 178.

171. See above.

172. See Joseph Perl, Uiber die Modifikation der Mosaischen Gesetze, 4° 1153/144, 75–80, the National Library of Israel, Jerusalem, Archives Department. For a different interpretation of Perl's attitude to customs see Sinkoff, Out of the Shtetl, 246–62.

173. This type of innovation was later referred to as “Vienna Rite,” see Rozenblit, “Struggle over Religious Reform,” 180–200.

174. The regulations use different words for Perl's synagogue. In addition to Bethaus and Bethause, which are used most of the time, Bethschule, and Schule are used as well. (Betshcule and Schule are used also when referring to the old Tarnopol synagogue, see I. Capitel, § 7 [alte Bethschule], II. Capitel, § 1a [alte Schule], V. Capitel, § 6e [hiesige alte Bethschule]). Since I don't think the choice of words has any significance, I will use “house of prayer” or “synagogue” interchangeably.

175. Presumably after the ʿaliyot for Kohen and Levi.