Darkhe Moshe (The Ways of Moses)

There was a man in Kraków, and his name was Israel, who built with a devoted spirit a synagogue to the Lord, and who was in his generation similar to “the man who says to Ucal and Ithiel” [i.e., like King Solomon; see Proverbs 30:1], a leader who managed and sustained a generation like Jekuthiel [Moses]. Now, I, his son Moses, I was once young and I am still not old [see Psalms 37:25]; I had not kept my own vineyard (Song of Songs 1:6), and yet I was appointed over those of others. I was unworthy of instructing others on the path they should follow, or of having students. The meaning of the rabbis’ statement in the thirteenth chapter of Tractate Menaḥot—R. Joshua ben Peraḥiah said, “Initially, if anyone would say, ‘Ascend to a position of leadership!’ I would tie him up in front of a lion”—escaped me at the time, and likewise their exposition: “This teaches us that once a person becomes a head [rosh] on earth below, he becomes poor [rash] in heaven above” [see b. Sanhedrin 103b]. I did not understand it back then. I merely relied at that stage upon my loved ones and close friends, who told me to ascend. From my old age I reflect back, and I had only good intentions.

This is like the incident related in the Jerusalem Talmud, Tractate Pe’ah chapter 2: R. Jose came to the town of Kufra in order to appoint leaders for them, but they refused to accept the appointment. He came and said to them: Ben Bevay was responsible for shreds [of garments], and if this one, who was appointed over the wicks, merited to be listed with the greatest of that generation, you, who are appointed over life-and-death matters, all the more so. When R. Haggai appointed leaders, he would present them with biblical support, saying, “Even a position of authority is given from the Torah, as it is stated: by me kings reign . . . by me princes rule (Proverbs 8:15–16).” It is likewise stated in the first chapter of Tractate Sanhedrin [14a]: R. Zera would hide so that he would not be ordained, as R. Eleazar said, “Remain always obscure and stay alive.” When he heard the following statement of R. Eliezer: “A person does not rise to greatness unless all his sins are forgiven,” he presented himself for ordination. It similarly states in the ninth chapter of Tractate Berakhot [58a]: “Even an appointee over irrigation is appointed by heaven.”

I saw all this, and I kept it always in my mind [see Psalms 51:5; 16:8]; I did not violate my friends’ instructions, but I ascended. I hoped to be a man in a place where there are no men [see m. Avot 2:5], and I trusted that this ascent would not be a descent for me. I was constantly afraid that I might err in my rulings, and thus I entreated the Lord my God [see 1 Samuel 13:12], “Give Your servant an understanding heart to judge Your people, that I may discern between good and evil [see 1 Kings 3:9], and that I should neither add nor diminish [see Deuteronomy 4:2; 13:1].” To deal with every instruction, I assumed for myself a master and acquired for myself a colleague [see m. Avot 1:6], so that I should not be held solely culpable, as I would be only one splinter from a whole beam [see b. Ḥullin 3b]. If, heaven forfend, I erred in permitting something forbidden, or if I declared a pure item impure, or if I rendered pure an impure object, or prohibited a permitted act, I always had before my eyes those two ancient sources: the words of the Talmud and the geonim, as well as the Rif [Isaac Alfasi (1013–1103), Tosafot [a set of medieval commentaries on the Talmud], the Ramban [Moses ben Naḥman (1194–1270)], and the early authorities, and the Mordechai [ben Hillel (1250–1298)], and the Asheri and the Tur—the later commentaries. For these have entered the innermost chamber, and they are listed at the head of all writers. Furthermore, they are the authorities whose opinions have spread throughout the diaspora.

This was the first rule that arose in my heart: to give instructions to the uncountable assembly [Israel] in accordance with their words. Sometimes I issued a clear ruling from these sources, but then others approached with a hidden scroll, and showed me a responsum of the sages whose opinions we follow—the rulers and the nobles [see Nehemiah 5:7]—such as the responsa of the Rosh, the Rashba, the Maharik, the Rivash, and the Maharai. These are the great lights that enlighten the eyes of men and awaken men when they have drowsed off to sleep. If they are considered men, we are like donkeys relative to them [see b. Shabbat 112b]. Also, there are various statements of the teachers: Mahariv, Maharil, and Maharif, who added many safeguards and severe customs. Thus, my opinion, based on the ancient sources, was smashed, and I was considered an ignoramus by my colleagues. I could not find any stratagem to escape, when I examined their interminable arguments; the labor was great, the days few, and I, the laborer, was lazy [see m. Avot 2:15]. And even if I set my eyes upon them, I would forget them in a flash [lit. “the time it takes (to bring a fish) from the sea to a frying pan; see b. Kiddushin 44a], and their teachings would be gone.

Blessed be He who assists all those who come to purify themselves [see, e.g., b. Yoma 38b]: He opened a gate for me and gave me the idea of condensing and clarifying the content of those responsa in brief form. There was a light at the end of this path, and my mind became settled with regard to the words of the responsa and their relation to the Mishnah and Gemara. In passing, I had another thought, and a vision of a clever idea came before my eyes: to collect together all the novellae of the ruling authorities, so that they should be united in my possession, and to write them down for the record, as a commentary on one of the authorities.

I then decided that there was none better for this purpose than the book of the Turim, as its words are pleasant and organized, and anyone can easily find in it what he is looking for, even an ignorant person, both elderly and young alike. In this manner, the material would be stored up and preserved in my heart. I immediately girded my loins, and woke up from my deep slumber. I received assistance from the Helper, who is enthroned upon praises [see Psalms 22:4], for I completed the task almost as soon as I had thought of it, and I brought together all the novellae of the authorities and the responsa, and arranged them in the order of the author of the Turim. I enjoyed no tranquility or quiet, and sleep was my only rest; this was my portion in all the days of my toil [see Ecclesiastes 2:10]. With the assistance of the true Helper I managed without delay to write down all of the novellae in the form of edited comments alongside the Tur. Sometimes I also cited other opinions, and as best as I was able I selected the fine ones from the bad. For although none of them are less than the words of the living God, nevertheless, in general one may not write down oral traditions [see b. Temurah 14b], in case of error.

My focus was on the end result, not the length of the passages, and therefore I occasionally stopped when it dragged on, so as not to weary the reader. Thus, in every case I took hold of the general principle and the main points and left the rest aside. I followed this method, examining the nooks and crannies as far as my hand could reach, without giving myself rest.

But when it came the turn [tur] of Esther [see Esther 2:15], that is, forbidden [isur] and permitted [heter] items, and I had begun the laws of ḥallah, horror took hold of me, and I shook with convulsions. For I heard that the Lamp of Israel, the Exilarch, the lion [Joseph Karo] had risen up from his thicket [see Jeremiah 4:7] to heaven and he had gathered up in his palms a spirit of the holy gods [Daniel 4:6], and composed the work Bet Yosef, whose qualities and excellence is apparent to all who see it, as well as the great goodness hidden inside it. Then I became afraid that I had produced a pointless product, and that I had labored in vain and in terror [see Isaiah 65:23] and gone sleepless for naught. I prayed when I heard this news, as my words are like nothing in comparison to those of that Sage—what is good is a lamp in broad daylight [b. Ḥullin 60b], and what response could I give, a rafter from dried wood? If I were to speak about one matter, he could provide an answer from another place entirely, for he has all-encompassing knowledge; and the Lord blessed Abraham in all things (Genesis 24:1), he does not lack anything.

I had been in this state of confusion for a long time, with my heart enjoying no proper rest, and it had melted inside me like water, until I prayed to my Father in heaven, saying, “Do you have only one blessing, my Father [see Genesis 27:38]. Place for me the path of truth in my heart, so that all my words will not end up buried away, but rather let there be a hint of them among those that remain.” The Lord saw my prayer and my toil and issued judgment last night [see Genesis 31:42], and He showed me a path as clear as the sun. A spirit was driven into me, saying, “Behold, I have reserved a blessing for you” [see Genesis 27:36].

Then my frenzy was calmed [see Esther 7:10], and I said that I would peruse the book Bet Yosef and understand its purpose, for the Lord had told me, “Do not fear him and his household [beto], and even if he has not left you room for you to distinguish yourself, you can nevertheless attain glory in your labor before kings and nobles. For it enough for you that you have echoed the opinion of great ones, and your words should simply pave the way to his profound statements, in brief form; holy, for giving praise (Leviticus 19:24), a treasury of signs disclosing the words of the one to whom mysteries are revealed [see Genesis 41:45].

I will further add that my work includes three useful aspects: first, it cites the sources without great length, as such passages tire out students such as myself. They wish to learn Torah while standing on one foot [see b. Shabbat 31a] in a few short hours, and therefore I have strengthened tottering knees [see Isaiah 35:3]. For it is well-known that [Maimonides (1138–1204)] wrote in the Guide that overly lengthy sections have a harmful effect on study. I am aware of the statement of the rabbis in the third chapter of Tractate Sotah [22a] that the Tannaim bring destruction upon the world, and that they are worse than ignoramuses, since the brevity of their teachings, lacking explanations of their reasoning, can lead one to purify a creeping animal. Even so, I followed the path of the Rambam [Maimonides] and the Tur, who taught their students in a concise manner [see b. Pesaḥim 3b], and I chose the brief style, like one beloved of the generation.

In addition, in order to avoid error, I included one more feature: they can attest for me up high that I was always careful to quote by name; I never subtracted nor added anything to their statements. Consequently, if my brevity is insufficient for anyone, in each case I provided all the sources for my opinion, and one can find them written down in an orderly manner in the volumes available to him. If he does not believe me, he can examine them and see for himself. In this manner, I have removed the option for the impoverished of mind to claim that the studies are too hard for them and that they are not intelligent enough to understand and issue rulings, on account of the length of the writings, which have exhausted them. For the table is laid out before them succinctly, with a tablecloth spread out upon it, and both rich and poor can gather up their food from its dishes, and judge by the sight of their own eyes [see Isaiah 11:3]. From now onward, one who is lazy has acted with willful disregard, and the soul that sins, it shall die (Ezekiel 18:4). This was one reason, whose benefit is clear to all.

Second, I have added many things that are not in his commentary, in many different directions, for do not interpretations of the opinions of early and latter commentaries belong to God [see Genesis 40:8]? I dwelt with wisdom, and prudence together with the discerning [see Proverbs 8:12], and I hung pomegranates on the edges of his robe [see Exodus 28:33–34], as the sages have said: “one stone in a pitcher makes a loud rattle” [b. Bava Meẓi‘a 85b], while the contrary expression also appears in the sources: “do not be a head to foxes, but be a tail to lions” [see m. Avot 4:15]. I also wrote down many responsa of the geonim, as well as responsa of the later commentaries, such as the responsa of the Mahariv and from the [anonymous] work Ha-isur ve-ha-heter ha-‘arokh [“The Lengthy Book of Ritual Law”], whose waters never fail [see Isaiah 58:11], and which the author of the Bet Yosef never saw. Lastly, he sometimes wrote things that cannot be accepted as correct, in which case I offered my humble opinion and rejected them.

The third point is the main one, as it touches upon my aim in this work. It is well-known that the rabbi, the author of the Bet Yosef, was naturally drawn to the greatest of sages, and thus he invariably issued his halakhic ruling in accordance with two or three witnesses [see Deuteronomy 17:6], i.e., the superlative geonim the Rif, the Rambam, and the Rosh [Asher ben Yeḥiel (ca. 1250–1327)], in any case where at least two of them shared one opinion. He had no concern for other mighty Torah scholars, but preferred to stand in the place of the great ones, to issue rulings based on the opinion of two of them, despite the fact that they are early sources rather than later ones. He took no notice of the complaint raised against him that these are the earliest of the early authorities, and that the Rif himself ruled at the end of the second chapter of Tractate Eruvin—and many other authorities agreed with him—that the ruling of halakhah always follows the later source, while the earlier source is not to be taken into account, even when this involves a student who disputed his rabbi. This approach was consistently followed by the later authorities, led by the Maharik and the Maharai in their fine responsa, in which they illuminated all darkness and revealed all mysteries. In this manner, he discarded all of the customs in these countries, as most of them are based on this rule, which is followed simply and innocently, and nobody questions them. As I do not want to object to them either, I therefore noted the customs pertaining to each law, with reasons and justifications for the practice. In each instance I wrote the source, unless it was my own opinion, in which case I wrote “it seems to me,” to make it clear that it was my view, and therefore if I made a mistake it would be attributed to me, rather than others taking the blame for my faults and errors.

Also, the author himself strayed from this principle of his, for in his introduction he states the general rule that “a matter shall be established based on two” [see Deuteronomy 19:15], and that he would bring two witness as proof, and they would speak on his behalf. However, in Oraḥ Ḥayim, at the beginning of section 259, and at the end of section 299, he ruled not in accordance with them (also, in Ḥoshen Mishpat section 310 he did not rule in accordance with the Rif and the Rosh, but only the Rambam, and he thereby broke his own rule which he set up in his introduction and upon which the author relies). Since in these cases we essentially have his own admission, it is possible that in other instances as well we do not follow his rule. The Mahariv wrote likewise in responsum 171 that we rule follow the majority of opinions, in accordance with Tosafot, the Moharam, and the Ra’avyah. It is similarly a common saying that we rule in accordance with the opinion of the Mordekhai, the Asheri and the author of the Tur, R. Jacob ben Asher. I followed this approach, and left the rest to the side. In sum, I would say about us [i.e., Moses Isserles and Joseph Karo]—although there is no comparison between us two—and Moses took the bones of Joseph with him, for he had surely made [the children of Israel] swear (Exodus 13:19). In other words, I took the essential, the bones, and refrained from touching the rest, and all wise men can see for themselves and decide whether I have stated the truth, and choose that which they wish to draw near them.

Regarding one matter I must apologize, so that a heartless, lazy person will not accuse and say that I did this unintentionally, or that it was a mistake. Not so, for I was aware of this, and any error is mine. I am referring to the fact that since my aim was to be brief, and to select “the edible portion from the waste,” as best as I could, I was sometimes more particular about the meaning than the specific words I used, and on occasion I neglected the details and focused on the general idea, when I knew the main thrust of the argument. Even so, I would note at the end of such passages “here concludes his words [leshono],” despite the fact that I had changed the words. For the word lashon can refer to three things, and it has three different meanings. It can mean the limb called a lashon [tongue], and this is the best-known meaning; it can also denote language, as in the verse: “to a nation whose tongue you shall not understand” [see Deuteronomy 28:49]; and I have also used it in reference to the author’s meaning and intent, as the tongue is the heart’s quill, which brings out one’s thoughts. Accordingly, I wrote “here concludes leshono.” We find a similar practice in the Talmud itself, as Tosafot write in chapter eighteen of Tractate Shabbat [128a] that it is the style of the Talmud to abbreviate, and to cite a verse in a shortened, adjusted form. They cite proofs for this claim, one of which is the phrase “and he shall give the money and it shall be established for him,” as there is no verse like this in the whole Torah, and yet the author of the Talmud quotes it as such in the Gemara.

I will mention one more matter, not in order to decide a dispute that does not involve me, but merely to make known what led me to compose a second edition. For I reviewed the material, examining the Bet Yosef by the light of a candle [see m. Pesaḥim 1:1], to see whether what I had initially written was correct. And here I will mention the kindnesses of the Lord, for He bestowed good upon me and opened my eyes so that I saw many things in his book that were not in order, and which are out of place, completely reversed. There were also some laws that had been split into two, and on occasion one law appears twice, in the opposite, contradictory form, in the style of the gaon, the rabbi, author of the Guide. This was caused by collecting various opinions together, from both early and later commentaries, but with the help of the blessed Lord, who graced man with knowledge, I merited to find the gleanings, forgotten sheaves, and produce of the corners [see Leviticus 19:9–10]; I gathered them all together, without fear, and bound them into stacks, pilling of heaps of wheat from great wisdom. I learnt from a teaching in the Jerusalem Talmud, at the end of Tractate Pe’ah: “anyone who needs to take [what was left for the poor] and does not take them is considered like a blood shedder,” that it is not good for a person to be always shy and silent. I then thought to myself: if this applies to material needs, how much more so to one’s spiritual life. I therefore did not keep back from anything my eyes beheld [see Ecclesiastes 2:10], and I churned out the milk of the Torah and gathered up all of the opinions together.

I first wrote down the words of the Bet Yosef, and attributed the greatness to him in a respectful manner, despite the fact that I had sometimes had the same thoughts myself, and even though he could be lengthy. Generally, I cited together the group of authorities who agreed and the group that took issue with him, and only afterwards would I raise any relevant novel ideas. The sections appear in a designed order, arranged by adding one thing to another, to find out the account (Ecclesiastes 7:27). I composed headings as short paragraphs; sometimes I wrote “there you will find all novelties involving this law,” or “there you will find all relevant cases,” and the like, for the general statement includes all the relevant details to that law, and any other details can be found by those who seek them. My intention in all this was not only to be succinct and informative, and to find out the words of the “skillful enchanters” and the “cunning charmers” [see Isaiah 3:3], in the manner of traditional writings on the Torah, so that one can find what he is looking for in brief form—and raise a cry against writers of fraudulent documents, who forge the laws. For I also had in mind—and may the purpose of the Lord prosper by my hand [see Isaiah 53:10]—the saying of the sages in the first chapter of Tractate Eduyot [1:6]: R. Judah said: why do we cite an individual opinion alongside that of the majority? So that if someone says “this is the tradition I have received,” they can respond, “what you heard is in accordance with So-and-So’s opinion.” I was accordingly afraid that this might happen to me if I wrote down the opinions unattributed, in a decisive fashion, without reservation, that perhaps those who come after me will rely upon me, thinking that it was said by one who rests among lions [see Psalms 57:5], and they will be hesitant to raise difficulties against it, as though they were taking issue with the Torah of Moses itself. I therefore decided to append my name to my statements, and thus whoever wishes to disagree with me can do so, and he who wants to rely on me may likewise act accordingly, as people have the free choice to turn to truth or error. In any case a judge can only decide in accordance with the facts that are before him [see, e.g., b. Bava Batra 131a], and he should always have before his eyes the One who works wonders, for His mercies are everlasting and He will instruct me on how to follow the path of Moses [Darkhe Moshe] His servant.

I have therefore entitled this short composition Darkhe Moshe, and it will state difficult decisions to the righteous and wicked alike, as I drew it out from the waters of the Torah [see Exodus 2:10]. It provides a path to those who seek the countenance of their king and the Torah of his mouth. “And any hard matter they shall bring to Darkhe Moshe” [see Exodus 18:26]. With this, I will beseech the presence of my King, that He will direct my path and send me His assistance for all my needs, and spare me from error, whether in deed, opinion or proof. And now, let me sing of my Beloved [see Isaiah 5:1], who placed my robe upon me; and I will bless the Lord who gave me counsel, and in His great mercy brought me to this point. He is the first Being, without a beginning, and the last, without an end; with His word He established everything out of nothing. He built His world upon kindness [see Psalms 89:3], in order to give His Torah to the uncountable assembly. He redeemed them from Egypt, from backbreaking slavery, may His memory be exalted forever and ever, as He has stood for our ancestors and for us in all manner of ways; He is available for all our needs. He is close to those who call upon Him in truth [see Psalms 145:18], and He lifts up the needy out of the dunghill (Psalms 113:7). Our weakness, the right hand of the Most High could change [see Psalms 77:11]—there is nothing that could hold Him back, for He has not a body or physical form. He who lives forever is elevated without changing, and one who goes to defile himself is disgraced of his own accord. Therefore I will wait for Him and hope [see Lamentations 3:24] that He will quench my thirst with His Torah, and He will help me perform mighty deeds, so that I can meditate on His Torah day and night [see Joshua 1:8], and may He let me merit, together with all Israel, the coming of the redeemer. And then we shall draw water out of the wells of salvation with joy [see Isaiah 12:3], learning and teaching the tradition; may our eyes behold it!