Like Europeans in general, Jews were deeply affected by the spread of printing. Especially in the 16th and 17^th, centuries this phenomenon had a democratizing effect. With printed books cheaper than manuscripts, more sections of the population, besides the scholars or the wealthy, could find their way to knowledge. Unlike previously, where teachers decided what and how to impart knowledge, people could now study on their own.

At the end of the medieval period, manuscripts were used as the basis for the lessons that teachers gave in the yeshivot. Each teacher presented orally the text of the manuscript together with his own interpretations, explanations and analyses. These explanations, called haghot, were noted by his students in the margins of the manuscript. When that manuscript was copied again by hand, these comments were usually incorporated into the main text. This explains why there are several versions of the same text.

But with the advent of the printing press, the author’s original text or the one edited by the editor was permanently fixed. The text had a life of its own, separate from the interpretations of the teachers. The teacher began to lose some of the authority that came with being the sole interpreter of knowledge.

In addition to broadening the audience of scholars and allowing students a bit of independence, the printed book introduced new topics and new information. Thanks to the intense activity of the publishing houses in Italy, the yeshivoth of Ashkenaz and Poland in the 16th and 17th centuries were inundated especially with books written by medieval Sephardic teachers, to which they had very limited access. Maimonides, Nachmanides, Saadia Gaon and many others could now be studied directly and in depth. The teachers themselves had to consider more authors when presenting their classes. They now had greater access to philosophy and to the interpretation of the Bible and the Midrashim.

Opinions against the indiscriminate use of printed books soon arose. In April 1559, the rabbi of Poznan, Aaron Land, wrote a sermon attacking the openness to printed texts. Incredibly, the books that this group of rabbis considered a danger to Judaism were not about philosophy, but about Halacha, such as the new code recently presented by Joseph Karo, the Shuljan Aruch. However, their arguments for opposing it had a certain logic. The new canon that the printing press was imposing implied a fixed text, which did not admit modifications at the time of oral transmission. The printing press could put Jewish law in the hands of novices who read these texts and pretended to know how to apply them. It was like having a recipe book that anyone could use. They were opposed to there being a single rabbi or a single code that would resolve each situation a priori. They said that the law should be interpreted in a particular way in each case, based on the text of the Talmud and not with general formulas. The printing press had its pros and cons.

Prepared by Marcos Gojman

Bibliography: Innovative tradition, Jewish Culture in the Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth, by Moshe Rosman.