Moshe Shmuel Glasner

Rabbi Moshe Shmuel Glasner (1856-1924), a renowned Hungarian Talmudic scholar and communal leader, served as chief rabbi of Klausenburg (Cluj) from 1877 to 1923. In 1923 he left Klausenburg for Jerusalem where he resided until his death in 1924.

His father was, Rabbi Avraham Glasner (1825-1877), who preceded him as chief rabbi of Klausenburg, and was in fact his only teacher. His mother, Raizl (nee Ehrenfeld), was the oldest granddaugher of the Chatam Sofer.

Method of Study

A profound and innovative scholar, he was noted for his independence as a halakhic authority. He advocated a return to the method of study of the Rishonim (pre-1500 CE rabbinic scholars) "whose way was to explain with crystal clearness, to examine, to search for truth without any respect for any person" (introduction to the Dor Revi'i); he opposed the method of pilpul (casuistry) that arose during the era of the Acharonim (post-1500 CE scholars), saying pilpul is "as far from the path of wisdom as East is from West" (id.) and "a weakness developed in the Galut during whose millennia of persecutions and migrations our capacity for straight thinking had been wellnigh destroyed". Similarly, in his monograph "Ohr Bahir" (on the laws of mikva'ot), he rejected halakhic reasoning based on esoteric sources or divine inspiration, arguing that only arguments that can be subjected to rational criticism and evaluated in terms of halakhic sources known to halakhic experts at large carry weight in arriving at halakhic decisions.

His work also developed an innovative method in understanding and applying the code of Maimonides (Rambam). Many of Rambam's codifications had perplexed commentators which, in turn led to numerous attempts by later scholars to account for such apparently anomalous rulings by the Rambam. Rabbi Glasner suggested that the source of the difficulty was often that readers assumed that the Rambam had interpreted the Talmudic sources for his codification in the same way that the Franco-German school of Rashi and Tosafot had understood the sources. However, Rabbi Glasner maintained, there was usually another approach to understanding the Talmudic sources from that followed by Rashi and Tosafot (often stemming from the Babylonian Geonic school which the Rambam had followed in reaching his codification. Once one properly understands the manner in which the Rambam interprets the Talmudic sources, the Rambam's codifications follow directly from the sources, and the elaborate rationalizations for his rulings proposed by later authorities and commentators can be seen as redundant. Rabbi Glasner's methods coincided remarkably with those of Lithuanian Rabbi Haim Soloveichik. When Rabbi Glasner's major work, Dor Revi'i came to the attention of the Lithuanian yeshivot in the late 1920s and early 1930s, it caused something of a sensation among Lithuanian scholars who were shocked that a rabbi from Hungary (where theoretical acuity was generally less emphasized than breadth of knowledge of the sources) had independently formulated a method of study so similar to the method of Rabbi Soloveichik.

Zionist Activity

His independence as a thinker was also manifested in his early support for Zionism (almost unique among the Hungarian Orthodox rabbinate). A founder of Mizrachi (religious Zionism), he became personally close to Rabbi Abraham Isaac Kook, especially after taking up residence in Jerusalem in 1922. However, his independence and especially his outspoken Zionism led to his estrangement from many of his rabbinical colleagues in Hungary. After the First World War, he increased his activities for the Zionist enterprise. His "Zionism in the Light of the Faith" is an important source for his philosophy of Zionism: he held that the Balfour Declaration and new political climate in Europe demanded from the Jewish community a new nationalistic spirit, for a true Jewish life can only be lived in the land of Israel, and only there too can the Jewish mission be fulfilled, as a national entity rather than a mere private individual religion as in galut ("exile"). In 1921 he represented Mizrachi at the 12th World World Congress in Carlsbad, and he undertook many trips on its behalf. In Jerusalem he continued his efforts, in particular working to encourage the religious settlements. A particular difficult was the commandment of Shemitah, to let the land lie fallow once in every seven years: to follow this commandment posed a grave difficulty to the fledgling settlements. The question hinged on whether Shemitah in his days (and ours) was Biblical or Rabbinic; if the latter, the law could be avoided through the loophole of temporarily selling the land to a gentile. Rabbi Glasner ruled it was in fact Rabbinic (thus permitting the leniency) through innovative reasoning: as we do not see the Biblically promised triple crop in the sixth year, the commandment is obviously not on the Biblical level today.

See further under "His Zionism and His Philosophy of the Oral Law" below.

Dor Revi'i

Rabbi Glasner's most important halakhic work is Dor Revi'i (New York: Im haSefer, 2004), a commentary on mesechet (tractate) Hullin. This work propounds an entirely new understanding of shehitah (ritual slaughter): Deuteronomy 12:20-21 seems (according to its simple sense, as followed by the classical commentators and Rabbi Yishmael in Hullin 16b-17a) to imply that hullin (ordinary, "secular" meat) was forbidden in the desert, all meat had to be brought first as a shalomim (peace) offering, until the prohibition was lifted, and hullin was thenceforth permitted provided it was ritually slaughtered. However, Rabbi Akiva (Hullin ad. loc.), seemingly contrary to the plain meaning of the Torah, holds that hullin had been permitted without shehitah until this point, and Rambam (Hilkhot Shehitah 4:17) rules according to Rabbi Akiva. Rabbi Akiva's interpretation is extremely difficult, and so the classical commentators on the Torah all followed Rabbi Yishmael; the Dor Revi'i is important for finally shedding light on how to understand Rabbi Akiva.

Philosophy of the Oral Law

This work (the Dor Revi'i) is also noteworthy because of the philosophy of the Oral Law that is expounded in the introduction (haqdamah) as well as his view developed in a second introduction (petiha kelalit) that the Torah presupposes basic principles of morality which are incumbent on all human beings even without any explicit commandment (e.g., a prohibition against eating human flesh). Rabbi Glasner's general philosophical position, and specifically his philosophies of the Oral Law and Zionism, is in fact extremely similar to that of Rabbi Eliezer Berkovits - this in not surprising, as Rabbi Berkovits received semicha from Rabbi Glasner's son Rabbi Akiva Glasner.

In brief, Rabbi Glasner's philosophy of the Oral Law is that the Oral Law was ideally supposed to be sharply demarcated from the Written Law (Pentateuch) by way of a strict Talmudic prohibition against writing down any portion of the Oral Law for the purposes of teaching or transmission. The prohibition was intended to allow for the continuous development and evolution of the Oral Law in keeping with contemporary needs and circumstances. It was only when, in the generation of Rabbi Judah the Prince (third century C.E.), the Oral Law was first written down in the form of the Mishnah that the halakhic decisions of earlier authorities became binding on later authorities, contrary to the original practice - formerly, a later Sanhedrin could overturn the hermeneutic exegeses (as opposed to irreversible Rabbinic decrees) of a prior Sanhedrin - see Maimonides Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Mamrim 2:1-2. The very act of committing the Oral Law to writing meant that the vitality and dynamic nature of the Oral Law as a living tradition was radically circumscribed, because the authority of subsequent authorities to overturn the decisions of earlier authorities w as thereby greatly circumscribed. Thus can be explained the otherwise staunch, almost apocalyptic, resistance of the Rabbis to record the Oral Law in writing; for by writing it (to preserve it), an integral part of it, its raison d'etre in fact, would be thereby destroyed.

Rabbi Glasner's philosophy in this was in fact quite remarkable, despite its being based entirely on traditional sources - especially Maimonides loc. cit., Drashot haRan on the incident of the oven of aknai (Talmud Baba Metzia 59b using "not in heaven" Deuteronomy 30:12), and Sefer haChinuch) on the commandment of going according to the judgment of a given generation's judges (and not relying on the rulings of the previous generation), Deuteronomy 17:8-13. Rabbi Glasner seemed to many to be sanctioning the heresies of Wissenschaft des Judentums and Conservative Judaism, who expounded "positive-historical Judaism". However, Rabbi Glasner's goal, unlike theirs, was not to undermine or reform the law, but was rather an honest search for the truth, and he was absolutely committed to the traditional halakhic system.

His Zionism: Its Relation to His Philosophy of the Oral Law

Although not stated explicitly, it is possible to discern a connection between this philosophy of the Oral Law and Rabbi Glasner's Zionism, inasmuch as the precipitating factor for the writing down of the Oral Law was the impending exile from Palestine. By ending that exile and allowing the reconstitution of unified rabbinic authority, Zionism would eventually allow the Oral Law to be restored to its original form and resume its former dynamic role in the religious and social life of the Jewish people. Furthermore, only dwelling in the Land will allow the Jewish people to focus on their Torah in tranquility and unity that will permit its proper study, whereas in exile their sages are crushed physically and spiritually by their enemies and scatterment; exile had damaged the Jewish national character and its spiritual and intellectual health, and return to the land would rehabilitate them. He added that in exile, the only specifically Jewish occupation is Torah study, but not all are fit to be full-time scholars; thus this arrangement helps neither the individual nor the nation. In the land, being a Jewish worker is an intrinsically Jewish endeavor, and so everyone can work where he is best fit to, and only those intellecual elites specifically fit to be scholars will be such, strengthening Torah study and simultaneously allowing the true Jewish national character and endorsement of honest simple labor, to flourish.

Character and Personality

He was famed for his polemicism and avid search for the truth (not hesitating to criticize those whom he felt to be in error) while being at the same time extremely humble. In the end of his introduction to the Dor Revi'i, he writes "The reader of this work should not suspect that I would imagine that in every place that I have criticized rabbis who came before us, I have discerned the truth, for such a haughty spirit would be incomparably ignorant. . . . [I]t would contradict my approach completely, for whatever I have dared to achieve is built on the principle that every person . . . is liable to err. . . [Others] will find many mistakes that I have made, because man is misled by his own words and ideas. I, too, could not be secure from the snare of error that lies beneath the feet of all men. But this is the way of the Torah: one builds and another comes after and examines his words and removes the chaff from the wheat in order to find truth, which is beloved above all" (Hakdamah 5a-b).

Other Works

Rabbi Glasner also published Shevivei Eish, a shorter work of commentary on the weekly Torah reading and the Festivals (translated in Resources below).

In addition, he published five short halakhic monographs: "Or Bahir" (1908) on the laws of purity and mikvaot; "Halakhah l'Moshe" (1908) and "Y'shanah l'Shehitah" on shehitah; "Makor Davar" (1908) on mixed and civil Marriages; "Matzah Shemurah" on Passover matzot) - all these to be published in January 2008 as "Halakhah l'Moshe".

He also wrote an essay (German) on Zionism, translated into Hebrew as "haTzionut b'Ohr haEmuna" (Mosad haRav Kook, 19xx) and into English as "Zionism in the Light of Faith" (online; see Resources).

He left behind voluminous manuscripts, including novellae on Maimonides's code and most of the Talmud, whose whereabouts are now unknown (lost in the midst of World War II). He wrote hundreds of responsa, of which two volumes were recovered (covering a period of only 10-12 years) and published posthumously (She'eilot u-Teshuvot Dor Revi'i). He was also a frequent contributor to the rabbinic journal Tel Talpiot.

Resources

• Webpage <www.dorrevii.org> dedicated to Rabbi Glasner

The follow are the exclusive sources from which this article has been compiled (except for the personal testimony of Professor David Glasner regarding Rabbi Berkovits's relationship to Rabbi Akiva Glasner).

• An article about him including bibliographic information, his scholarly works, and his views on Oral Law and Zionism. - Glasner, David. "Rabbi Moshe Shmuel Glasner, The Dor Revi'i". Tradition, vol. 32, no. 1, Winter 1998, pp. 40-56.
• Another biographical article; similar to the above, briefer. - Glasner, Isaac. "Moshe Shmuel Glasner (1856-1924)", appeared originally in "Men of the Spirit", edited by Leo Jung, Kymson Publishing Company, New York, 1964, pp. 459-466.
• An abridged translation of his introduction to the Dor Revi'i, on the nature of the Oral Law. - Elman, Yaakov. "Rabbi Moses Samuel Glasner: The Oral Torah". Tradition, vol. 25, no. 3, Spring 1991, pp. 63-69.
• "Zionism in the Light of Faith." - English translation by David Glasner of Rabbi Glasner's essay on Zionism, translated from the Hebrew translation of Naftali ben Menahem ("haTzionut b'Ohr haEmuna", pub. Mosad haRav Kook) from the German original.
• Translations of his commentary on the weekly Torah reading and the festivals from Shevivei Eish