Rabbi Israel Lipschitz

Communal Biography and Historical Context

Rabbi Israel Lipschitz, known for generations after his foundational work as the author of the "Tiferet Yisrael," was born in the year 5542 (1782) in the town of Obrzycko in the Kingdom of Prussia ^{[cite: 1]}. He sprang from a glorious rabbinic dynasty of immense halakhic influence in Ashkenaz; his father, Rabbi Gedaliah Lipschitz, was a prominent Torah scholar and the author of the commentary "Avi Ezer" on the Shulchan Arukh, and he himself was the grandson of Rabbi Israel Lipschitz, who in his day conducted and arranged the Get of Cleves, one of the most turbulent and influential halakhic affairs of the eighteenth century ^{[cite: 1]}. Rabbi Israel acquired the foundations of his learning from his father, and afterwards went to study in Posen with the great man of the generation and luminary of the Diaspora, Rabbi Akiva Eger, who deeply influenced his interpretive and scholarly path ^{[cite: 1]}.

In the course of his life Rabbi Israel served as head of the rabbinic court (av beit din) and as spiritual leader in a series of central communities in Prussia and Germany, among them Wronke, Chodziesen, Dessau and the suburbs of the city of Danzig, which included the communities of Schottland, Weinberg and Langfuhr ^{[cite: 1]}. During his tenure in Danzig, Rabbi Israel stood at the forefront of the struggle against the beginnings of the Reform movement, which sought to introduce far-reaching changes in the character of the prayer service and in the traditional structure of the synagogues ^{[cite: 1]}. His firm and uncompromising stand guarding halakha and tradition ultimately led to the separation of the communities in the city, a step that preserved the independence of the Orthodox community ^{[cite: 1]}.

Alongside his official public roles, Rabbi Israel was known for his ascetic and austere way of life, which was exceptional even among the great men of his generation ^{[cite: 1]}. He used to undertake continuous fasts of three days and three nights, during which he devoted himself completely to uninterrupted Torah study, wrapped in a tallit and crowned with covered tefillin ^{[cite: 1]}. His death took place on the Fast of Gedaliah, 3 Tishrei 5621 (19 September 1860), in the midst of prayer in the synagogue in Danzig, at the age of 78, leaving behind a rich Torah legacy that changed the face of Mishnah study in the generations that followed ^{[cite: 1]}.

The Literary Enterprise and the Tiferet Yisrael Commentary

The monumental interpretive enterprise of Rabbi Israel Lipschitz is his commentary on the six orders of the Mishnah, called "Tiferet Yisrael" ^{[cite: 1]}. The commentary was first printed in various editions between 1830 and 1850 in Hanover, Danzig and Königsberg, and was quickly accepted throughout the Jewish diaspora as the ultimate aid to Mishnah study ^{[cite: 2]}. The commentary excels in the clarity of its formulation, in its consistent aim of setting the plain sense of the words on their realistic footing, and in its tendency to decide the practical halakha according to the great decisors ^{[cite: 1]}.

In the second edition of the work, published in 1862 by his son, Rabbi Baruch Yitzchak Lipschitz, the commentary was divided into two separate parts named after the pillars of the Temple ^{[cite: 1]}:

• Yachin: This part serves as a short, continuous and simple literal commentary, intended to give the learner a quick and precise understanding of the plain sense of the language of the Mishnah without complex casuistry (pilpul) ^{[cite: 1]}.
• Boaz: This part is intended for deeper study, and contains scholarly discussions, halakhic expansions, comparisons with the discussions of the Gemara and original insights (chiddushim) of the author ^{[cite: 1]}.

Rabbi Israel Lipschitz enriched his commentary with comprehensive introductions and thematic essays incorporated before and after the various orders of the Mishnah, in order to ease the learner's entry into the conceptual world of the Tannaim ^{[cite: 1]}. Among the works embedded in the commentary one may count:

• Batei Kil'ayim: A detailed halakhic essay incorporated in the order Zera'im, explaining the definitions, concepts and practical laws of mixed seeds, of trees and of sha'atnez ^{[cite: 1]}.
• Avi Ezer: The inclusion of the linguistic-halakhic work of his father, Rabbi Gedaliah, which constitutes an abridgment of the laws of marriage on the Shulchan Arukh, Even ha-Ezer ^{[cite: 1]}.
• Chomer ba-Kodesh and Tzurat Beit ha-Mikdash: Introductory essays to the tractates Zevachim, Menachot and Middot, which make the laws of the sacrifices and the physical structure of the Temple accessible with the help of diagrams and architectural explanations ^{[cite: 1]}.
• Yevakesh Da'at and Mar'eh Kohen: Detailed halakhic and scientific introductions to the complex laws of impurity and purity and to the laws of leprous afflictions (nega'im) ^{[cite: 1]}.
• Hilkheta Gevirta: A practical halakhic summary of the rulings of the Mishnah, appearing at the end of each chapter in the orders Zera'im, Mo'ed and Tohorot, which helps the learner translate theoretical study into practical halakha ^{[cite: 1]}.

Alongside his central commentary on the Mishnah, Rabbi Israel undertook the writing of further works that attest to the breadth of his Torah and linguistic horizons ^{[cite: 1]}. Prominent among these writings is the abridged commentary "Zera Yisrael," which is a summary and simplification of the commentaries of the Ra'av (Rabbi Ovadia of Bartenura) and the Tosafot Yom Tov ^{[cite: 1]}. In the framework of mussar study and philosophical inquiry he composed "Rashei Avot," a comprehensive and profound commentary on tractate Avot ^{[cite: 1]}. His glosses and novellae on tractates of the Babylonian Talmud (Beitzah, Mo'ed Katan, Chagigah, Bava Batra and Avodah Zarah) were printed in the margins of the Vilna Talmud and became an inseparable part of the scholarly bookshelf ^{[cite: 1]}. He also composed "Emek Safa," a pioneering study in the fields of the Hebrew language, linguistics and grammar, alongside a collection of his homilies, varied halakhic responsa, and a detailed ethical will divided into sections that guides his descendants in the paths of fear of Heaven and the refinement of character ^{[cite: 1]}.

Kuppat ha-Rokhlim and the Introductions to the Halakhic Orders

One of the most impressive and methodical components of Rabbi Israel Lipschitz's enterprise is his writing of systematic halakhic introductions, which serve as independent codices for the subjects under discussion ^{[cite: 1, 3]}. The most famous of these introductions is the work "Kuppat ha-Rokhlim" ^{[cite: 2, 3]}. This work, which in its first edition comprised 148 pages, was written in the year 5604 (1844) and was intended to serve as a wide-ranging opening to the entire order Mo'ed ^{[cite: 2, 3, 4]}. Under the roof of "Kuppat ha-Rokhlim," Rabbi Israel gathered a series of booklets containing fundamental and organized rules for understanding the various tractates ^{[cite: 3]}:

• Kalkalat ha-Shabbat: An introduction to tractate Shabbat explaining seven central topics needed for understanding the laws of Shabbat ^{[cite: 3, 5]}.
• Kelalei Chametz ve-Nukshe: Belonging to the third chapter of tractate Pesachim ^{[cite: 3]}.
• Kelalei Bigdei Kodesh: Belonging to the end of the seventh chapter of tractate Yoma ^{[cite: 3]}.
• Kelalei Hakhanah: Belonging to the first and third chapters of tractate Beitzah ^{[cite: 3]}.
• Kelalei Melekhet Chol ha-Mo'ed and Kelalei Semachot: Belonging to tractate Mo'ed Katan ^{[cite: 3]}.

In the booklet "Kalkalat ha-Shabbat," Rabbi Israel likened the seven topics he explained to the seven branches of the Menorah that illuminate the face of the learner ^{[cite: 5]}. The seven rules include:

• Rules of the 39 categories of labor ^{[cite: 3, 5]}
• Rules of insulating food (hatmanah) and cooking on Shabbat ^{[cite: 3, 5]}
• Rules of muktzeh ^{[cite: 3, 5]}
• Instructing a gentile (amirah le-oved kokhavim) ^{[cite: 3, 5]}
• The labor of Shabbat ^{[cite: 3, 5]}
• Resting of animals, utensils and a servant ^{[cite: 3, 5]}
• Handing over an object for work to a gentile on the eve of Shabbat ^{[cite: 3, 5]}

In the framework of his analysis of the 39 categories of labor, Rabbi Israel illustrates the difference between the primary categories of labor (avot) and their derivatives (toladot), and the decrees that the Sages enacted because of "weekday activity" (uvdin de-chol) ^{[cite: 5]}. Thus, for example, he explains that the labor of "selecting" (borer) includes within it its derivative, straining a drink from its dregs, and explains why the Sages forbade straining an already strained drink through a cloth that has a hollow, because of the appearance of the labor of straining ^{[cite: 5]}. A further example is brought from the labor of "grinding" (tochen): one who splits thin pieces of wood for kindling is liable on account of grinding, whereas one who chops large pieces of wood, although he does not appear to be grinding, is forbidden by rabbinic law because of "weekday activity," so that people should not come to chop thin pieces of wood ^{[cite: 5]}. In the area of the labor of "gathering" (me'amer), it is explained that one who presses fruits together is liable on account of a derivative of gathering, and therefore fruits that were scattered in a courtyard may be picked up one by one and eaten, but it is forbidden to gather them together into a basket because of the resemblance to weekday activity and the concern that he might press them in the basket and become liable on account of gathering ^{[cite: 5]}.

Rabbi Israel also discusses the laws of medical treatment on Shabbat and explains that it is forbidden to soak medicinal herbs in water; although the herbs are fit as food for healthy people and may be eaten, soaking them is regarded as preparing a medical remedy and is forbidden because of weekday activity, a decree lest the learner come to grind ingredients and become liable on account of grinding ^{[cite: 5]}. He analyzes the rule that "one who damages on Shabbat is exempt," but qualifies it: if the intention of the one who damages is to repair by means of the damage (such as demolishing in order to build), he is liable ^{[cite: 5]}. The exemption for one who damages does not apply in the case of a "pesik reisha" (an inevitable consequence) that brings about a repair; one who slaughters an animal on Shabbat outside the Temple for idolatry, although he is certainly damaging from a religious standpoint, becomes liable for three sin-offerings, since in the end he renders the animal fit for human consumption ^{[cite: 5]}.

As for the labors of plowing and building, Rabbi Israel notes a distinct topographical distinction: one who digs, plows or makes a furrow in a field is liable on account of "plowing," whereas one who performs these actions inside a house or in a courtyard is liable on account of "building" ^{[cite: 5]}. In addition, he deals with the definition of "a change in nature" in the context of the laws of Shabbat; he cites the law according to which detached branches that were placed in water on the eve of Shabbat may be moved and returned to the water on Shabbat, provided that they are not flowers and roses that open while standing in the water ^{[cite: 5]}. He rules that placing these branches in water for the first time on Shabbat is forbidden ab initio, both because of exertion and because it appears as preparing a utensil (metaken mana) ^{[cite: 5]}.

In the booklet "Kelalei Bigdei Kodesh," which constitutes a further layer of "Kuppat ha-Rokhlim," Rabbi Israel raises a fundamental and incisive discussion regarding the manner of making the priestly garments and the tekhelet of the Temple ^{[cite: 3, 6]}. He rules decisively that dyeing the tekhelet for the priestly garments requires doing it "for its own sake" (lishmah) and the exclusive use of the blood of the chilazon, and that these conditions are indispensable to the validity of the garments ^{[cite: 6]}. In this ruling he joins the view of the Mirkevet ha-Mishneh, the Ben Yedid, the Arukh ha-Shulchan and the authors of Emek Berakha, and disagrees with the opinion of the author of Ma'aseh Roke'ach and the Mishneh la-Melekh, who held that the blood of the chilazon and dyeing for its own sake are not indispensable in the priestly garments, unlike tzitzit ^{[cite: 6]}.

Science, Geology and Kabbalah: The Homily "Or ha-Chayim"

The encounter between the discoveries of modern science and the faith of the generation found its most prominent expression in the "Derush Or ha-Chayim" ^{[cite: 1]}. This homily was delivered by Rabbi Israel Lipschitz in Danzig on the Shabbat of Chol ha-Mo'ed Pesach in the year 5602 (1842) ^{[cite: 7]}. The background to the homily was the rapid development of geological research and the uncovering of gigantic fossils and prehistoric creatures, which posed a significant challenge to the traditional conception of the age of the world ^{[cite: 1, 8]}. Rabbi Israel opened his homily with verses of consolation from Isaiah and with the well-known saying of the Sages from Tanna de-Vei Eliyahu in tractate Sanhedrin (92a), which deals with the fate of the righteous in the years in which the Holy One, blessed be He, will renew His world, when He "makes them wings like eagles and they float upon the surface of the water" ^{[cite: 7]}. From this he developed an existential thought that instructs a person to look at death with open eyes and to set his eternal existence before his eyes ^{[cite: 7]}.

While reconciling the archaeological and geological findings of his time with the Torah of Moses, Rabbi Israel presented a daring line of thought that combines the findings of science with Kabbalah ^{[cite: 1, 8]}. He explained that the discoveries of the strata of the earth and of the various fossils do not contradict the Torah, but rather constitute tangible physical proof of the kabbalistic doctrine known as the "doctrine of the cosmic cycles" (torat ha-shemitot) ^{[cite: 1, 8]}. According to this doctrine, based on the saying of the Sages "that He was creating worlds and destroying them," the present world is the last stage in a chain of ancient worlds that were created and destroyed before the creation of Adam ^{[cite: 1]}. Rabbi Israel argued that the mammoths and dinosaurs found buried in the depths of the earth are the physical remains of those creatures that lived in the earlier worlds, and thereby translated what was perceived as a grave scientific threat into an instrument confirming the depth of the secrets of Kabbalah ^{[cite: 1]}.

These innovative ideas aroused a fierce controversy among conservative circles in the Orthodox world, who saw in them a penetration of foreign and unaccepted views ^{[cite: 1]}. The opposition reached its peak in the words of the Rebbe of Munkatch, Rabbi Chaim Elazar Shapira (author of "Minchat Elazar"), who utterly rejected the idea that a great Torah figure such as the father of the "Tiferet Yisrael" would write such things ^{[cite: 1]}. The Minchat Elazar put forward the hypothesis that "Derush Or ha-Chayim" is a late forgery, and that perhaps it was not written by Rabbi Israel himself but by his son, Rabbi Baruch Yitzchak, who planted the words and hung them on a great tree ^{[cite: 1]}. Even earlier, the Gaon Rabbi Elazar HaKohen of Pultusk turned to the son of the "Tiferet Yisrael" with an urgent request to omit the entire homily from future printings, because of the educational and ideological problems he saw in it ^{[cite: 1]}.

The Controversy over the Facial Features of Moses our Teacher

One of the most turbulent controversies of thought and education in the history of rabbinic literature in recent centuries arose following a legend that Rabbi Israel Lipschitz cited in his commentary at the end of tractate Kiddushin ^{[cite: 1, 9]}. Rabbi Israel noted that he had found in writings "a pleasant thing" ^{[cite: 9]}:

After Moses our Teacher brought Israel out of Egypt and performed his great miracles, his fame reached the various nations ^{[cite: 9]}. One Arab king, who marveled at hearing of Moses's goodness and holiness, decided to send a choice and swift painter to the camp of Israel to paint the portrait of the leader's face and bring it to him ^{[cite: 9]}. When the painter returned, the king gathered his great sages, experts in the science of physiognomy and in diagnosing a person's character by his facial features ^{[cite: 9]}. The sages examined the painting meticulously and concluded unanimously that this was a man of fundamentally corrupt and evil traits, a man characterized by pride, love of money, stubbornness of heart and every possible human failing ^{[cite: 9]}.

The king was angry with his sages and thought that they or the painter had erred, since the report about Moses described a holy man, humbler than any man ^{[cite: 9]}. To clarify the truth, the king himself traveled to the camp of Israel, and when he met Moses he discovered that the painting was wonderfully accurate and that Moses's face matched completely the facial features the painter had brought ^{[cite: 9]}. The king expressed to Moses his astonishment at the verdict of his sages, and then Moses our Teacher gave him a historic answer: the king's sages and the painter were entirely right ^{[cite: 9]}. Moses admitted that by his nature and temperament from the day of his birth he had indeed possessed all these evil traits and desires, and perhaps even more than the sages had identified; but by the power of a mighty will, unceasing work on himself and acceptance of the yoke of Torah, he fought his nature, conquered his inclinations and acquired their opposites until they became second nature to him ^{[cite: 9]}. Rabbi Israel used this legend to prove that the true greatness of a person, and even of Moses our Teacher, does not stem from an innate inclination to holiness, but precisely from inner struggle and the victory of free choice over physical nature ^{[cite: 9]}.

The citing of this tale aroused fierce and unprecedented opposition among many of the great men of Israel, who saw in it a grave injury to the holiness of Moses our Teacher and a distortion of his figure as it is presented in the sources of the Sages and of Kabbalah ^{[cite: 9]}. The opposition was based on a long series of halakhic and philosophical sources and proofs that present Moses as one who was born pure and holy from the outset ^{[cite: 9]}.

Among the central arguments raised against the "Tiferet Yisrael":

The contradiction with tractate Sotah: The Gemara in tractate Sotah (12a) states explicitly that at the moment of Moses's birth "the whole house was filled with light," and the opinions of the Tannaim are also cited according to which his birth name was "Tov" or "Toviah," a fact attesting to absolute and natural goodness from the hour of birth ^{[cite: 9]}.

The position of the Zohar and the kabbalists: According to the holy Zohar, the soul of Moses was hewn from a supreme holy place, and the Holy One, blessed be He, brought forth for him a special spirit from a sapphire quarry of precious stone, which leaves no room for corrupt and wicked character traits ^{[cite: 9]}.

Midrash Devarim Rabbah: In the Midrash (parashah 11, section 5) it is related that Moses came out of his mother's womb circumcised, spoke already on the day of his birth, did not nurse from the milk of foreign women, and prophesied already when he was only three months old, a description that rules out the existence of physical desires and baseness ^{[cite: 9]}.

The compassion of Moses from the start of his path: The Midrash describes Moses's natural compassion for the kid that ran away from the flock, a compassion by virtue of which the Holy One, blessed be He, determined that he was fit to shepherd Israel; hence he was not a man of a cruel or arrogant nature ^{[cite: 9]}.

The position of the sages of the generations: The holy Or ha-Chayim emphasizes that Moses was a prophet even before he came out of his mother's womb ^{[cite: 9]}. The author of the book "Emet le-Ya'akov" explains that Moses had a pure intellect, ready for comprehension from the day of his birth ^{[cite: 9]}. The book "Chavalim ba-Ne'imim" (of Tarnów) defined the story as utterly baseless and said that heaven forbid one should believe it ^{[cite: 9]}. The Gaon Rabbi Chaim Kanievsky wrote in his books "She'elat Rav" and "Esh Dat" that this story must not be relied upon in any way and that its words stand in absolute contradiction to the tradition of the Sages ^{[cite: 9]}.

On the other hand, defenders and supporters of this tale arose, foremost among them the Gaon Rabbi Yosef Zechariah Stern ^{[cite: 1]}. They argued that there is no ground for complaint against the author of the "Tiferet Yisrael," since his words were said with the profound intention of magnifying the stature of Moses our Teacher and showing that his spiritual achievements were the product of his toil and free choice, and not a free gift he received without effort ^{[cite: 1, 9]}. The supporters emphasized the great educational and moral value the story holds for every person struggling with his inclinations, so long as he understands the uniqueness of Moses as the receiver of the Torah and the master of the prophets ^{[cite: 9]}.

The Standing of the Righteous among the Nations and Orthodox Humanism

Rabbi Israel Lipschitz also stood out in his thought by virtue of the respectful and universal attitude he showed toward the righteous among the nations ^{[cite: 1, 10]}. In his well-known commentary on the mishnah "Beloved is man, for he was created in the image" in tractate Avot (chapter 3, mishnah 14), and in his commentary on tractate Sanhedrin (chapter 10), Rabbi Israel discussed at length the question of the reward of the gentiles in the World to Come ^{[cite: 1, 10, 11]}. He determined unequivocally that not only the righteous among the nations have a share in the World to Come, but even the "intermediate" ones (beinonim) among them, and emphasized that the Holy One, blessed be He, does not withhold the reward of any creature that does good and benefits humanity ^{[cite: 11]}.

To ground his humanistic view, Rabbi Israel presented a conception according to which every nation has a basic divine religion that includes three common principles: Torah from Heaven (in the sense of a divine moral law), reward and punishment, and the survival of the soul ^{[cite: 10]}. The differences between the various religions, in his view, are only in the interpretation and details of those principles ^{[cite: 10]}. By virtue of this conception, Rabbi Israel bestowed exceptional praise on the sages and inventors of the nations of the world who worked for the welfare of humanity ^{[cite: 1]}. He mentioned with admiration historical figures such as Edward Jenner, the inventor of the vaccine against smallpox that saved millions of people from death, and Johannes Gutenberg, the inventor of printing, which made possible the spread of wisdom and knowledge in the world ^{[cite: 1]}. Rabbi Israel saw in the enterprise of these individuals part of the revelation of the divine will for the repair of the world, and determined that their good deeds grant them a sublime spiritual standing and a real share in the World to Come ^{[cite: 1]}.

Summary and Conclusions

Rabbi Israel Lipschitz, author of the "Tiferet Yisrael," presents a unique figure of a conservative Ashkenazi halakhic decisor who, alongside extreme ascetic practices and firm struggles to guard the boundaries of Orthodoxy, was endowed with rare intellectual openness and exceptional public courage ^{[cite: 1]}. His commentary on the Mishnah became a Torah classic thanks to its ability to combine an understanding of the realistic plain sense with a clear halakhic decision ^{[cite: 1]}.

His scholarly and methodical outlook found expression in introductory works such as "Kuppat ha-Rokhlim" and "Kalkalat ha-Shabbat," which display an impressive capacity for codification and conceptual organization of the laws of Shabbat and of the Temple ^{[cite: 3, 5]}. His thought, as reflected in the "Derush Or ha-Chayim" and in his commentary on the tractates Avot and Kiddushin, presents a pioneering attempt to reconcile the scientific discoveries of the nineteenth century with the secrets of Kabbalah and the doctrine of the cosmic cycles, while preserving the spiritual supremacy of the Torah ^{[cite: 1, 8, 9, 10]}. Despite the controversies and fierce opposition aroused by his words concerning the facial features of Moses our Teacher and the authenticity of his scientific homilies, his commentary has remained one of the pillars of Mishnah study in all the yeshivot and study halls, offering a winning combination of distinctly traditional scholarship and openness to the spirit of the time ^{[cite: 1, 9]}.