Tuesday, July 10, 2012

What do you think this 'haskama' is about?

Only one hint: 1809.


26 comments:

  1. I'm guessing Amsterdam because of the two communities. The only thing I can think of that fits the text would be that manners manual from 1809 that you posted awhile back?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Are we guessing places? Hamburg.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Very intriguing (and a difficult one to figure out!)

    Amsterdam is a good guess. But there were other communities with both Sephardi and Ashkenazi communities during this period in history. Bucharest, Bulgaria, and London are ones that come to mind. And of course, within Israel, Safed, Jerusalem, Tiberias and Hebron.

    Baal Hablog, give us another hint!

    ReplyDelete
  4. The content! Why would they say this, "no need for a haskamah; and we we agree" but not put it in writing - or why would he claim it?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Guess: The Biur

    ReplyDelete
  6. something to do with responses to napoleon or his laws in amsterdam?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Okay, there's been a lot of guesses. In an alternate universe someone even figured it out.

    Should I say, or one more hint?

    ReplyDelete
  8. Okay. I think we can well understand the Sefardi rabbi agreeing, but the Ashkenazi one is a little surprising.

    ReplyDelete
  9. An alternate universe???

    ReplyDelete
  10. I'm going to credit you!

    ReplyDelete
  11. The biur wouldn't be a ''מאמר''or a ''מחברת''

    ReplyDelete
  12. Iggeret Hahitnatzlut by Samson Bloch?

    ReplyDelete
  13. If the Ashkenazi rabbi is surprising, I say Pressburg. Were there Sfardi rabbis there? I have no idea!

    ReplyDelete
  14. Surprising and alternate universe because the ashkenazi rabbi is willing to pay full price?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You think the Sephardim don't have the same reputation?

      Delete
  15. Okay, I suppose this has gone on long enough. Thanks to all who made attempts. :-)

    This is from a book called אמרה צרופה published in Amsterdam in 1809. The author was Moses Lemans; his name appears as משה בן טרייטל on the title page, but the last page is indeed hand signed "Moses Lemans."

    The theme of this work is to propound the idea that the Sephardic pronunciation of Hebrew is correct and this can be proven by the statements of Chazal, the Masoretes and the grammarians. Thus, the implication is, the Ashkenazim should switch their pronunciation.

    Predictably, this engendered a controversy, and pamphlets and counter pamphlets were published on this topic.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And Abe, who posted above, figured it out - in less than an hour!

      Delete
  16. I also thought of the Biur because that was Mendelsohn's rationale for not asking for a haskamah. But the date doesn't fit unless we are seing of a reprint.

    I thought of the second edition of Sefer ha-Berit. But that was published in 1807.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Somebody thinks it was published in 1808:

    http://books.google.com/books?id=ZOkZAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA427&lpg=PA427&dq=%D7%90%D7%9E%D7%A8%D7%94+%D7%A6%D7%A8%D7%95%D7%A4%D7%94&source=bl&ots=4hhKrNx9M1&sig=jazi0nqkQkDUlQjI6c-CvhT98dc&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Ian9T_zVDIyi8QTJ2KnfBg&ved=0CDcQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%D7%90%D7%9E%D7%A8%D7%94%20%D7%A6%D7%A8%D7%95%D7%A4%D7%94&f=false

    ReplyDelete
  18. Here too.

    http://books.google.com/books?id=2okdPwAACAAJ&dq=%D7%90%D7%9E%D7%A8%D7%94+%D7%A6%D7%A8%D7%95%D7%A4%D7%94&source=bl&ots=I4UQl3qy3M&sig=c2lVlqulyKuCtvRYqtc-Z5o8_pw&hl=en&sa=X&ei=4an9T8WOD4-08ATLt9nZBg&ved=0CFkQ6AEwBw

    ReplyDelete
  19. Could be, but neither of us know. It says 5569 and has no equivalent date. More months of 5569 are in 1809.

    ReplyDelete
  20. By the way, in this post I showed a picture of Lemans.

    ReplyDelete

LinkWithin

Related Posts with Thumbnails
'