The Impact of Halevi in Medieval Ashkenaz

• In Event: Judah Halevi: His Oeuvre and its Reception

Abstract

Previous research has demonstrated that the German Pietists, and related Ashkenazic mystical circles, made use of liturgical poems authored by Yehudah Halevi. Indeed, SEFER HASIDIM itself refers to a Sabbath poem by Halevi. Moreover, a passage in a Bodleian manuscript attributed to Judah the Pious (d. 1217) describes a discussion between Jewish scholars that was presented before a Moslem ruler in Spain who sought to convert, which allowed these scholars to present their views on the Divine Glory (TORAT HA-KAVOD). This suggests that Judah was aware at least of the format of Halevi’s KUZARI, although no trace of Judah ibn Tibbon’s Hebrew translation of the KUZARI (completed in 1167) was identified within Ashkenazic rabbinic texts.
Based on a series of manuscript passages, this paper will examine anew Halevi’s role within the thought of the German Pietists. There is in fact one direct citation from the KUZARI in an Ashkenazic text from the early thirteenth century. Its author, Solomon b. Samuel, hailed from northern France (and his son, Samuel of Falaise, was a leading Tosafist), although Solomon studied in Speyer with Judah the Pious’ father, Samuel HE-HASID, with Judah himself, and with Judah’s brother, Abraham.
The passage cited by Solomon from the KUZARI concerns the sin of the golden calf and is not within the realm of esoteric teachings per se. Nonetheless, we can find other suggestive interactions with Halevi’s PIYYUTIM in esoteric contexts by Judah the Pious (in his SEFER GEMARIYYOT), and in the writings of several colleagues and students (most notably in the voluminous PIYYUT commentary ‘ARUGAT HA-BOSEM, composed by Abraham b. ‘Azri’el). Careful analysis of these interpretational passages, and others from anonymous Ashkenazic liturgical commentaries composed at this time, yield specific instances of how Halevi’s theories of the KAVOD were understood and utilized. Indeed, the use of Halevi’s s writings in medieval Ashkenaz follows a pattern similar to that of the so-called paraphrase of Sa’adyah Gaon’s EMUNOT VE-DE’OT (including its use in several polemical contexts), even as the somewhat later appearance of Halevi’s materials means that there are fewer citations overall.

author

• Ephraim Kanarfogel, Yeshiva University