Pedro de Luna / Benedict XIII, a Pope of Aragonese origin, honed his argumentative skills in anti-Jewish polemics, and engaged in Christian- Jewish disputations in Pamplona against Shem Tob ibn Shaprut (b. 1379). Although sources on this particular public disputation are scarce, other notable debates from the same era – such as those in Barcelona and Tortosa and, especially, the better-documented ones in the 1370s (Ávila 1374 or 1375, Burgos 1375) – offer a glimpse into Pedro de Luna’s devel- opment as a formidable disputant. As Pope Benedict XIII, Pedro de Luna repurposed this anti-Jewish rhetoric in debates against his internal adversaries within the obediential sphere, using it to bolster his image during a period when his position was politically precarious. In doing so, Benedict XIII weaponized the scholarly anti-Judaism of Jewish-Christian polemics to reinforce his tenuous authority during the turmoil of the Great Western Schism
The role of the Talmud in a humanistic education was a live question in Victorian English intellectual society. The Talmud was often either vilified and lionized, but rarely was it studied dispassionately. The current paper begins by surveying the Victorian discourse about rabbinic literature and history, and the political and cultural purposes that this discourse served. It then moves to provide an initial study of the thought of Solomon Schiller-Szinessy, the first professor of Talmud at Cambridge. The remarkable social and intellectual roles Schiller-Szinessy played in the life of the university is described and laid alongside his theological writings. It is suggested that the theological pluralism articulated in a num- ber of his publications is connected to the fluid circle of non-Jewish stu- dents devoted to Rabbinics that gathered around him. In the final section, we turn to his foil (and successor), Solomon Schechter. While Schechter’s fame now far eclipses that of Schiller-Szinessy, Schechter was less success- ful at bringing Rabbinics to the consciousness of the Cambridge dons and students. Here too, ideology plays a role, as Schechter’s dismissiveness toward Christianity affected his attitude towards rabbinic education and its role in the university.
This article analyzes the symbolic construction of Ḥasidic Jewish masculinity through the concept of “bittul” (self-nullification) in early Ḥabad thought. Examining the works of Rabbi Shneur Zalman of Liadi (1745–1812) and his son, Rabbi Dov Ber Schneerson (1773–1827), the study employs feminist perspectives and critical masculinity theories to explore these authors’ conceptual models. The rabbis’ discussions frequently address gender-oriented themes, particularly erectness versus submissiveness as defining characteristics of Jewish mascu- linity. Their approach presents masculinity as complex and non-homogeneous, positioned on a continuum between masculine and feminine traits, both char- acterizing men. According to them, “masculine” masculinity focuses on giving, while “feminine” masculinity is materialistic and reception-oriented, with an intermediate model that integrates elements from both ends of the spectrum. This concept of multiple masculinities challenges prevailing Western notions of universal masculinity. While Shneur Zalman Rashaz prefers the “feminine” materialistic man, Dov Ber attempts to combine feminine masculinity with balanced masculinity, incorporating “masculine” aspects. Dov Ber’s writings reveal a striking paradox: masculine strength and phallic assertion serve not as ends in themselves, but as means toward complete spiritual nullification before God, manifested in humble physical gestures like kneeling in prayer. Both rabbis prefer physical gestures of self-nullification and extreme humility over an upright posture that maintains personal pride, emphasizing the spiritual and symbolic power of bodily gestures.
This study presents a comparative analysis of the story about the ditch-dig- ger’s daughter that appears in both Talmuds. The analysis indicates that the Babylonian creator made significant changes in the story to argue with the voices protesting against divine injustice heard in the Palestinian source. In the Yerushalmi, justice is done thanks to a person defying God. The Babylonian creator finds it difficult to accept the possibility of divine injustice, and changes the story to take place in God’s dwelling, where He and no other rescues the daughter. The human role is merely to reflect divine justice. The Babylonian story demonstrates how God fairly judges mankind: good deeds are rewarded while evils ones are punished. The conclusions of this analysis are inconsistent with scholars’ prevailing position that the Bavli usually challenges divine justice whereas the Yerushalmi usually adopts theodicy. Thus, such generalizing statements should be used with caution.
This article examines the evolution of rabbinic law on women’s property rights, focusing on the principle מה שקנתה אישה קנה בעלה (“what a woman acquires, her husband acquires”) as it develops across generations of talmudic sages in the Palestinian and Babylonian Talmuds. Through close, comparative readings of parallel sugyot, it traces the layered and often contested discourse within the Yerushalmi, where Amoraim debate whether a husband’s rights over his wife’s property mirror those of a master over a slave. In contrast, the Bavli presents a more systematic and restrictive stance, culminating in Rava’s assertion that the husband’s control is both comprehensive and analogous to slave ownership. Although more moderate views surface later, the Bavli’s redactors endorse Rava’s position, codifying it as a categorical legal principle. The article argues that this editorial move reflects the Bavli’s broader commitment to conceptual clarity and systematization, even as it draws on Palestinian material. The study also considers the broader legal landscapes of Roman Palestine and Sasanian Iran while foregrounding the internal dynamics of talmudic legal development. Reconstructed texts and source-critical notes offer new insights into the Yerushalmi’s transmission and its reception in Babylonia. Ultimately, the article demonstrates how the Bavli’s redactional choices solidified a legal framework that continues to shape halakhic discourse on marital property into the modern era.
