Israelite9191
You should be reading
This is my second semester research paper for my A.P. Modern European History course. The paper is mainly intellectual history in focus, but also includes political and social aspects. Please let me know what you think.
On 28 September 1791 European Jewry was launched headfirst into modernity as the Revolutionary Frances National Constituent Assembly at long last granted full emancipation and citizenship to the Republics approximately 40,000 Jews.[1],[2] A decade later when Napoleon Bonaparte marched through the Rhineland, he spread this newfound emancipation to Germany as he literally tore down the ghetto walls to the cheers of French soldiers and long imprisoned Jews.[3] As well as the destruction of the ghettos, Napoleon brought with him the Code Napoléon, a civil code that would radically alter the social and intellectual status of Jews throughout Western and Central Europe. In particular, the implementation of the Code Napoléon in Western Germany led directly the Reform Movement in Judaism while the maintenance, and indeed harshening, of pre-Napoleonic social structures in Eastern Europe led to the antithetical movement of Hasidism.
Prior to the French Revolution and the rise of Napoleon Bonaparte, the status of European Jewry was disgusting. Both to the east and west of the Vistula, Jews lived in deplorable conditions, existing under the law entirely for the purpose of providing their gentile overlords with taxes. As far as Europes governments were concerned, Jews werent even Europeans, but rather foreigners, despite their communities antedating many of the great European cities and the arrival of Christianity by centuries.[4] Within Europe the existence of the Jews was defined, with few exceptions, by one simple and unavoidable reality: isolation.
Within Western Germany, the Low Countries, and northern and eastern France Jewish isolation was embodied in the Judengasse, the Jewish ghetto, and the associated institution of corporate autonomy. Originating in the feudal systems of the European Dark Ages, the corporate autonomy of the Judengasse was designed to enable to easier, decentralised management of the territorial rulers subjects;[5] by the Eighteenth Century, however, they had become primarily a method for segregating the Jewish population. Additionally, the Judengasse and other restrictions levied against the Jews were used as psychological weapons, useful for maintaining a Jewish culture of submission. This was enabled by the horrific conditions in which the Judengasse were constructed,[6] a Leibzoll, or body tax, that classified Jews as equal to such products as wood, cheese, and charcoal,[7] occupational restriction, and an outwardly imposed economic stratification that splintered the Judengasse into highly opposed classes that remained eternally on the brink of fratricidal conflict.[8] Through the Judengasse and other humiliatingly restrictive policies of the German states, the states of the Low Countries, and the French monarchy, complete isolation, humiliation, and dehumanisation was effectively imposed upon Western Jewry, to the point that the favoured Talmudic quote of the day when gazing upon the walls of the Judengasse read, Since Jerusalem has fallen, closed are all the gates of heaven save one, the gate of tears.[9]
Eastwards beyond the Vistula, in the lands of Kingdom of Poland, a superficially dissimilar but realistically nearly equivalent social structure reigned. Unlike in the West, ghettos were few and far between on the Central European steppes. In their place, however, were entire villages and towns, scattered across the endless plains, inhabited entirely by Jews.[10] Despite their inhabitants legally established freedoms to movement, something completely foreign to the ghettoised Jews of the West, the rural Jews of Poland had far less contact with their gentile co-nationals than inhabitants of the Judengasse. Whereas the Judengasse Jews lived within earshot of gentile communities and often had near constant business contact with them, Polish Jews lived in communities entirely separated from the gentile world, existing in a completely or almost completely self-sufficient world that produced its own agricultural products, its own manufactured goods, and its own services, only occasionally daring to make the long trek to the Jewish ghettos of Warsaw and Kraków or, just as rarely, visiting the neighbouring gentile community.[11]
The isolation of Polish Jewry was even further enforced by the existence of a highly developed corporate autonomy that far exceeded that of Western Jewry. Known as kahalim, the local government units ruled every facet of life, in that sense they were similar to the corporations of the West. What made them so different was the existence of a national kahal, the Kahal of the Four Lands. Because of the Kahal of the Four Lands the average Polish Jew never came into contact with Polish authorities at all, being subject to a local Jewish authority, a secondary Jewish authority, and a tertiary Jewish authority before the gentile powers became relevant at all.[12] All in all, despite their greater legal rights, Eastern Jewry was even more isolated from the greater European community than their Western counterparts.
It is upon this background that the acts of Revolutionary France, Napoleon Bonaparte, and the Paris Sanhedrin must be viewed. Though France had a Jewish population only slightly more than one tenth that of the German states,[13] the emancipation of French Jewry cannot be underestimated as the watermark of the entrance of European Jewry into modernity. French emancipation came five years before another nation, its vassal the Batavian Republic,[14] would grant emancipation and seventeen years before a German state, the vassal Kingdom of Westphalia, would follow suit.[15] As Lippman Cerf-Berr, leader of the French Ashkenazi Jewish community during the period, put it, G-d chose the noble French nation to reinstate us in our privileges and to bring us to a new birth.[16] For Western Jewry, French emancipation was truly a new birth.
Almost as soon as Napoleon penetrated Rhineland and spread his legal code throughout Western Germany, the Jewish Reform Movement took shape. In the newly formed vassal Kingdom of Westphalia Reformism found its new centre. Founded in 1808 by leading Reformist and regular contributor to the pro-Reform periodical Sulamith Israel Jacobson, the Royal Westphalian Consistory of the Israelites was a government backed attempt to reform an entire Jewish population, regardless of local preferences.[17] Completely unprecedented, this new institution went on to introduce a Confirmation ceremony in place of Bar Mitzvoth,[18] sombre synagogue services, holiday celebrations, and marriages,[19] redefinition of the role of rabbi,[20] required German-language sermons,[21] German-language prayers,[22] fully German-language services,[23] bans on minyanim,[24] use of bells,[25] instrumental music,[26] integration of men and women during services,[27] reference to synagogues as temple,[28] changes to the restrictions of kashrus,[29] and other apparently Christian-inspired reforms. Many of these reforms went down hard, with numerous rabbis and lay leaders voicing their opposition, and at one point even prompting a response from leading French rabbis.[30] However, by allying with the Napoleonic government of Jerome Bonaparte, the Consistory managed to implement far reaching reforms and safely usher in a new era of Jewish thought.
All good things must come to an end, however, and the fall of Westphalia in 1813 marked the end of the Consistory. While many of the reforms remained in place in the former kingdoms territories and Cassel remained a major Reformist centre, the days of government engineered reformation had come to an end.[31] In its place rose the great centres of Berlin and Hamburg where the true Reformation would take place.
Despite initial appearances, the rise of Berlin as the new centre of the Reform Movement was, indebted to the implementation of the Napoleonic Code in Western Germany. Though never occupied by Napoleon, the laws of Berlin were still influenced by his code. Following Napoleons successes in Germany, and in particular their victory over the Prussians at the Battle of Jena, the Prussian authorities were forced to recognise the necessity of legal reform, and took it upon themselves to moderately liberalise their society, including the adaptation of almost emancipation for Jews.[32],[33] Even though the de facto reality of this emancipation was unstable in the post-Napoleon period of reaction and the Vormärz, this emancipation allowed Israel Jacobson, aforementioned Westphalian Reformist, to join with native Berliners to form a vibrant new intellectual community.[34] Between 1815 and 1823 Berlin thrived as the most important centre of Reform Judaism, having a large Reform congregation as well as schools and philosophical societies. It would not be until Frederick William III became fearful of Christians possibly choosing the convert to this new form of Judaism that the Berlin Reform community came to an end.[35] Just as the introduction of reforms based upon the Code Napoléon had allowed for the birth of a Reformist community in Berlin, so had their rejection caused its destruction.
In Hamburg, where Napoleon had briefly implemented French law, the Reform Movement was finally able to find a permanent home. Even though the emancipation of Hamburg Jewry was tenuous at best after 1814, and in particular after the anti-Semitic riots of 1819, Hamburgs Jews became more fully integrated into wider society than anywhere else in Germany.[36] This community was thus affected not only by the opening up to Eighteenth Century Enlightenment ideas, but also to the general religious rejuvenation of European society post-1815. With this context in mind Hamburg became the natural successor to Berlin as the centre of Reformism, earning its own Reform temple in 1817.[37] By 1818 the Hamburg Temple was contesting Berlin for leadership of the Reform Movement,[38] and by 1821 the Hamburg synagogue had adopting a Reformist position as well, even if more minor.[39]
In Galicia and the lands of the former Kingdom of Poland, by contrast, the Jews remained an isolated minority. At no point was the Code Napoléon or any similar legal code implemented in these territories, and in fact the isolation of Eastern Jewry was increased by the Austrian authorities during the same period as emancipation in the West.[40] This isolation led to introspective disputes, and eventually to a movement among the uneducated peasantry against the pilpul-focused scholastic religion of the yeshivot.[41] When combined with the extreme poverty a population that was roughly one third unemployed or underemployed,[42] this led naturally to a desire to embrace the mystical, spiritual, and romantic, directly antithetical to the reason and modernism embraced by the Reform Movement. This desire was in turn fulfilled by Reb Yisroel ben Eliezer, otherwise known as the Baal Shem Tov or the Besht, in the founding of the Hasidic movement. Combining Kabalistic mysticism a spiritual enthusiasm and social justice message reminiscent of African American Christianity, the Besht was able to capture the hearts and minds of desperate peasants. The lack of any opening of Eastern Jewish society in line with the effects of the Code Napoléon in the West can thus be seen as directly allowing for the development of Hasidism.
The dramatic effect of the implementation of the Code Napoléon on the development of modern Jewish theologies is at first striking. Where it or law codes influenced by it were established, a vibrant Reformism embracing Enlightenment values of reason and modernity came into being. At the same time, territories that never gained the benefits of these law codes saw the establishment of an equally vibrant movement in complete antithesis to Jewish Reformation, embracing Romantic values of the spiritual and mystical. While other forces were obvious involved in each community, the key difference between the development of Western Reformism and Eastern Hasidism is the amount to which the Jewish society was open to the outside world, and ultimately the amount to which the outside world was willing to accept the Jews as reflected in whether or not the emancipation of the Code Napoléon was implemented.
[1] Michael A. Meyer, Response to Modernity: A History of the Reform Movement in Judaism, ed. Jehuda Reinharz (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988) 27.
[2] Howard M. Sachar, Emancipation in the West, in The Course of Modern Jewish History, ed. Howard M. Sachar (Cleveland: The World Publishing Company, 1958), 53.
[3] Ibid., 66.
[4] Howard M. Sachar, The Jew as Non-European, in The Course of Modern Jewish History, ed. Howard M. Sachar (Cleveland: The World Publishing Company, 1958) 26.
[5] Ibid., 26.
[6] Ibid., 30.
[7] Ibid., 28.
[8] Ibid., 27.
[9] Ibid., 32.
[10] Ibid., 31.
[11] Ibid., 32.
[12] Ibid., 32-33.
[13] Ibid., 28.
[14]Meyer, Response 26.
[15] Ibid., 32.
[16] Qtd. in Sachar, Emancipation 56.
[17] Meyer, Response 33.
[18] David Sorkin, The Subculture: Ideologues and Institutions, in The Transformation of German Jewry, 1780-1840, ed. Jehuda Reinharz (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1987) 128.
[19] Meyer, Response 35-36.
[20] Ibid., 34.
[21] Ibid., 34.
[22] Michael A. Meyer, Jewish Communities in Transition, in German-Jewish History in Modern Times, ed. Michael Brenner, Michael A. Meyer vol. 2 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1997) 122.
[23] Meyer, Response 38.
[24] Ibid., 36.
[25] Ibid., 41.
[26] Meyer, Communities 123.
[27] Ibid., 123.
[28] Meyer, Response 42.
[29] Ibid., 36.
[30] Ibid., 36-37.
[31] Ibid., 42-43.
[32] Jersch-Wenzel, Stefi, Legal Status and Emancipation, in German-Jewish History in Modern Times, ed. Michael Brenner, Michael A. Meyer vol. 2 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1997) 23.
[33] David Sorkin, The Ideology of Emancipation: Emancipation and Regeneration, in The Transformation of German Jewry 1780-1840, ed. Jehuda Reinharz (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1987) 31-32.
[34] Meyer, Response 43-44.
[35] Ibid., 46-53
[36] Ibid., 53
[37] Ibid., 54.
[38] Ibid., 55.
[39] Ibid., 60-61.
[40] Raphael Mahler, Hasidism and the Jewish Enlightenment: Their Confrontation in Galicia and Poland in the First Half of the Nineteenth Century, trans. Aaron Klein, Jenny Machlowitz Klein, Eugene Orenstein (Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society of America, 1985) 3-6
[41] Ibid., 13.
[42] Ibid., 6.
Vive la Différence ! : The Effect of the Implementation of the Code Napoléon and its Successors on the Development of Modern Jewish Theology
On 28 September 1791 European Jewry was launched headfirst into modernity as the Revolutionary Frances National Constituent Assembly at long last granted full emancipation and citizenship to the Republics approximately 40,000 Jews.[1],[2] A decade later when Napoleon Bonaparte marched through the Rhineland, he spread this newfound emancipation to Germany as he literally tore down the ghetto walls to the cheers of French soldiers and long imprisoned Jews.[3] As well as the destruction of the ghettos, Napoleon brought with him the Code Napoléon, a civil code that would radically alter the social and intellectual status of Jews throughout Western and Central Europe. In particular, the implementation of the Code Napoléon in Western Germany led directly the Reform Movement in Judaism while the maintenance, and indeed harshening, of pre-Napoleonic social structures in Eastern Europe led to the antithetical movement of Hasidism.
Prior to the French Revolution and the rise of Napoleon Bonaparte, the status of European Jewry was disgusting. Both to the east and west of the Vistula, Jews lived in deplorable conditions, existing under the law entirely for the purpose of providing their gentile overlords with taxes. As far as Europes governments were concerned, Jews werent even Europeans, but rather foreigners, despite their communities antedating many of the great European cities and the arrival of Christianity by centuries.[4] Within Europe the existence of the Jews was defined, with few exceptions, by one simple and unavoidable reality: isolation.
Within Western Germany, the Low Countries, and northern and eastern France Jewish isolation was embodied in the Judengasse, the Jewish ghetto, and the associated institution of corporate autonomy. Originating in the feudal systems of the European Dark Ages, the corporate autonomy of the Judengasse was designed to enable to easier, decentralised management of the territorial rulers subjects;[5] by the Eighteenth Century, however, they had become primarily a method for segregating the Jewish population. Additionally, the Judengasse and other restrictions levied against the Jews were used as psychological weapons, useful for maintaining a Jewish culture of submission. This was enabled by the horrific conditions in which the Judengasse were constructed,[6] a Leibzoll, or body tax, that classified Jews as equal to such products as wood, cheese, and charcoal,[7] occupational restriction, and an outwardly imposed economic stratification that splintered the Judengasse into highly opposed classes that remained eternally on the brink of fratricidal conflict.[8] Through the Judengasse and other humiliatingly restrictive policies of the German states, the states of the Low Countries, and the French monarchy, complete isolation, humiliation, and dehumanisation was effectively imposed upon Western Jewry, to the point that the favoured Talmudic quote of the day when gazing upon the walls of the Judengasse read, Since Jerusalem has fallen, closed are all the gates of heaven save one, the gate of tears.[9]
Eastwards beyond the Vistula, in the lands of Kingdom of Poland, a superficially dissimilar but realistically nearly equivalent social structure reigned. Unlike in the West, ghettos were few and far between on the Central European steppes. In their place, however, were entire villages and towns, scattered across the endless plains, inhabited entirely by Jews.[10] Despite their inhabitants legally established freedoms to movement, something completely foreign to the ghettoised Jews of the West, the rural Jews of Poland had far less contact with their gentile co-nationals than inhabitants of the Judengasse. Whereas the Judengasse Jews lived within earshot of gentile communities and often had near constant business contact with them, Polish Jews lived in communities entirely separated from the gentile world, existing in a completely or almost completely self-sufficient world that produced its own agricultural products, its own manufactured goods, and its own services, only occasionally daring to make the long trek to the Jewish ghettos of Warsaw and Kraków or, just as rarely, visiting the neighbouring gentile community.[11]
The isolation of Polish Jewry was even further enforced by the existence of a highly developed corporate autonomy that far exceeded that of Western Jewry. Known as kahalim, the local government units ruled every facet of life, in that sense they were similar to the corporations of the West. What made them so different was the existence of a national kahal, the Kahal of the Four Lands. Because of the Kahal of the Four Lands the average Polish Jew never came into contact with Polish authorities at all, being subject to a local Jewish authority, a secondary Jewish authority, and a tertiary Jewish authority before the gentile powers became relevant at all.[12] All in all, despite their greater legal rights, Eastern Jewry was even more isolated from the greater European community than their Western counterparts.
It is upon this background that the acts of Revolutionary France, Napoleon Bonaparte, and the Paris Sanhedrin must be viewed. Though France had a Jewish population only slightly more than one tenth that of the German states,[13] the emancipation of French Jewry cannot be underestimated as the watermark of the entrance of European Jewry into modernity. French emancipation came five years before another nation, its vassal the Batavian Republic,[14] would grant emancipation and seventeen years before a German state, the vassal Kingdom of Westphalia, would follow suit.[15] As Lippman Cerf-Berr, leader of the French Ashkenazi Jewish community during the period, put it, G-d chose the noble French nation to reinstate us in our privileges and to bring us to a new birth.[16] For Western Jewry, French emancipation was truly a new birth.
Almost as soon as Napoleon penetrated Rhineland and spread his legal code throughout Western Germany, the Jewish Reform Movement took shape. In the newly formed vassal Kingdom of Westphalia Reformism found its new centre. Founded in 1808 by leading Reformist and regular contributor to the pro-Reform periodical Sulamith Israel Jacobson, the Royal Westphalian Consistory of the Israelites was a government backed attempt to reform an entire Jewish population, regardless of local preferences.[17] Completely unprecedented, this new institution went on to introduce a Confirmation ceremony in place of Bar Mitzvoth,[18] sombre synagogue services, holiday celebrations, and marriages,[19] redefinition of the role of rabbi,[20] required German-language sermons,[21] German-language prayers,[22] fully German-language services,[23] bans on minyanim,[24] use of bells,[25] instrumental music,[26] integration of men and women during services,[27] reference to synagogues as temple,[28] changes to the restrictions of kashrus,[29] and other apparently Christian-inspired reforms. Many of these reforms went down hard, with numerous rabbis and lay leaders voicing their opposition, and at one point even prompting a response from leading French rabbis.[30] However, by allying with the Napoleonic government of Jerome Bonaparte, the Consistory managed to implement far reaching reforms and safely usher in a new era of Jewish thought.
All good things must come to an end, however, and the fall of Westphalia in 1813 marked the end of the Consistory. While many of the reforms remained in place in the former kingdoms territories and Cassel remained a major Reformist centre, the days of government engineered reformation had come to an end.[31] In its place rose the great centres of Berlin and Hamburg where the true Reformation would take place.
Despite initial appearances, the rise of Berlin as the new centre of the Reform Movement was, indebted to the implementation of the Napoleonic Code in Western Germany. Though never occupied by Napoleon, the laws of Berlin were still influenced by his code. Following Napoleons successes in Germany, and in particular their victory over the Prussians at the Battle of Jena, the Prussian authorities were forced to recognise the necessity of legal reform, and took it upon themselves to moderately liberalise their society, including the adaptation of almost emancipation for Jews.[32],[33] Even though the de facto reality of this emancipation was unstable in the post-Napoleon period of reaction and the Vormärz, this emancipation allowed Israel Jacobson, aforementioned Westphalian Reformist, to join with native Berliners to form a vibrant new intellectual community.[34] Between 1815 and 1823 Berlin thrived as the most important centre of Reform Judaism, having a large Reform congregation as well as schools and philosophical societies. It would not be until Frederick William III became fearful of Christians possibly choosing the convert to this new form of Judaism that the Berlin Reform community came to an end.[35] Just as the introduction of reforms based upon the Code Napoléon had allowed for the birth of a Reformist community in Berlin, so had their rejection caused its destruction.
In Hamburg, where Napoleon had briefly implemented French law, the Reform Movement was finally able to find a permanent home. Even though the emancipation of Hamburg Jewry was tenuous at best after 1814, and in particular after the anti-Semitic riots of 1819, Hamburgs Jews became more fully integrated into wider society than anywhere else in Germany.[36] This community was thus affected not only by the opening up to Eighteenth Century Enlightenment ideas, but also to the general religious rejuvenation of European society post-1815. With this context in mind Hamburg became the natural successor to Berlin as the centre of Reformism, earning its own Reform temple in 1817.[37] By 1818 the Hamburg Temple was contesting Berlin for leadership of the Reform Movement,[38] and by 1821 the Hamburg synagogue had adopting a Reformist position as well, even if more minor.[39]
In Galicia and the lands of the former Kingdom of Poland, by contrast, the Jews remained an isolated minority. At no point was the Code Napoléon or any similar legal code implemented in these territories, and in fact the isolation of Eastern Jewry was increased by the Austrian authorities during the same period as emancipation in the West.[40] This isolation led to introspective disputes, and eventually to a movement among the uneducated peasantry against the pilpul-focused scholastic religion of the yeshivot.[41] When combined with the extreme poverty a population that was roughly one third unemployed or underemployed,[42] this led naturally to a desire to embrace the mystical, spiritual, and romantic, directly antithetical to the reason and modernism embraced by the Reform Movement. This desire was in turn fulfilled by Reb Yisroel ben Eliezer, otherwise known as the Baal Shem Tov or the Besht, in the founding of the Hasidic movement. Combining Kabalistic mysticism a spiritual enthusiasm and social justice message reminiscent of African American Christianity, the Besht was able to capture the hearts and minds of desperate peasants. The lack of any opening of Eastern Jewish society in line with the effects of the Code Napoléon in the West can thus be seen as directly allowing for the development of Hasidism.
The dramatic effect of the implementation of the Code Napoléon on the development of modern Jewish theologies is at first striking. Where it or law codes influenced by it were established, a vibrant Reformism embracing Enlightenment values of reason and modernity came into being. At the same time, territories that never gained the benefits of these law codes saw the establishment of an equally vibrant movement in complete antithesis to Jewish Reformation, embracing Romantic values of the spiritual and mystical. While other forces were obvious involved in each community, the key difference between the development of Western Reformism and Eastern Hasidism is the amount to which the Jewish society was open to the outside world, and ultimately the amount to which the outside world was willing to accept the Jews as reflected in whether or not the emancipation of the Code Napoléon was implemented.
[1] Michael A. Meyer, Response to Modernity: A History of the Reform Movement in Judaism, ed. Jehuda Reinharz (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988) 27.
[2] Howard M. Sachar, Emancipation in the West, in The Course of Modern Jewish History, ed. Howard M. Sachar (Cleveland: The World Publishing Company, 1958), 53.
[3] Ibid., 66.
[4] Howard M. Sachar, The Jew as Non-European, in The Course of Modern Jewish History, ed. Howard M. Sachar (Cleveland: The World Publishing Company, 1958) 26.
[5] Ibid., 26.
[6] Ibid., 30.
[7] Ibid., 28.
[8] Ibid., 27.
[9] Ibid., 32.
[10] Ibid., 31.
[11] Ibid., 32.
[12] Ibid., 32-33.
[13] Ibid., 28.
[14]Meyer, Response 26.
[15] Ibid., 32.
[16] Qtd. in Sachar, Emancipation 56.
[17] Meyer, Response 33.
[18] David Sorkin, The Subculture: Ideologues and Institutions, in The Transformation of German Jewry, 1780-1840, ed. Jehuda Reinharz (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1987) 128.
[19] Meyer, Response 35-36.
[20] Ibid., 34.
[21] Ibid., 34.
[22] Michael A. Meyer, Jewish Communities in Transition, in German-Jewish History in Modern Times, ed. Michael Brenner, Michael A. Meyer vol. 2 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1997) 122.
[23] Meyer, Response 38.
[24] Ibid., 36.
[25] Ibid., 41.
[26] Meyer, Communities 123.
[27] Ibid., 123.
[28] Meyer, Response 42.
[29] Ibid., 36.
[30] Ibid., 36-37.
[31] Ibid., 42-43.
[32] Jersch-Wenzel, Stefi, Legal Status and Emancipation, in German-Jewish History in Modern Times, ed. Michael Brenner, Michael A. Meyer vol. 2 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1997) 23.
[33] David Sorkin, The Ideology of Emancipation: Emancipation and Regeneration, in The Transformation of German Jewry 1780-1840, ed. Jehuda Reinharz (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1987) 31-32.
[34] Meyer, Response 43-44.
[35] Ibid., 46-53
[36] Ibid., 53
[37] Ibid., 54.
[38] Ibid., 55.
[39] Ibid., 60-61.
[40] Raphael Mahler, Hasidism and the Jewish Enlightenment: Their Confrontation in Galicia and Poland in the First Half of the Nineteenth Century, trans. Aaron Klein, Jenny Machlowitz Klein, Eugene Orenstein (Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society of America, 1985) 3-6
[41] Ibid., 13.
[42] Ibid., 6.
