GAON (pl. Geonim),
formal title of the heads of the academies of Sura and Pumbedita in Babylonia.
The geonim were recognized by the Jews as the highest authority of instruction
from the end of the sixth century or somewhat later to the middle of the 11th.
In the 10th and 11th centuries this title was also used by the heads of
academies in Ereẓ Israel. In the 12th and 13th centuries – after the geonic
period in the exact sense of the term – the title gaon was also used by the
heads of academies in Baghdad, Damascus, and Egypt. It eventually became an
honorific title for any rabbi or anyone who had a great knowledge of Torah.
Apparently, the term gaon was shortened from rosh yeshivat ge'on Ya'akov (cf.
"the pride of Jacob," Ps. 47:4). Other explanations of the origin of
the term offered by modern scholars are not acceptable.
The Geonim of Sura and
Pumbedita
The exact time when the
title of gaon came into use cannot be established. *Sherira and later rabbis
automatically designated as gaon the heads of the two academies from the year
900 according to the Seleucid calendar (589 C.E.), when the academies renewed
their normal activity. But Sherira also mentions a tradition that Ravai, of
Pumbedita (c. 540–560), was already gaon. However, some hold that this title
and the special privileges of the academies were not granted until after the
Arab conquest of Babylonia (657 C.E.), Sura receiving them first and later
Pumbedita. Together with the title gaon they also used the titles resh metivta
or rosh yeshivah ("head of the academy") as was customary in the
talmudic period, and the title rosh yeshivah shel ha-golah ("head of the
academy of the exile"), which is not found in the Talmud. According to a
tradition that originated in the Sura academy (Neubauer, Chronicles, 2 (1895),
78), only the heads at Sura were called gaon and not their counterparts in
Pumbedita. This was accepted by some historians but is contradicted by R.
Sherira's account and other sources. The existence of separate traditions, one
in Sura that enumerates "the qualities in which Sura is superior to
Pumbedita" (ibid.), and that of Pumbedita which emphasizes that "the
rabbis of Pumbedita are the leaders of the Diaspora from the time of the Second
Temple" (Iggeret Rav Sherira Ga'on, ed. B.M. Lewin (1921), 82), emphasizes
the competition between the two. Hints of tension and even open quarrels are
found in other sources. Nevertheless, Sura and Pumbedita dominated the
intellectual landscape of the period to the extent that little or nothing is
known about other scholars or academies.
In the talmudic period
the heads of the academies were chosen by the scholars of the academies (BB
12b) while in the geonic period they were appointed by the exilarchs. Geonim
usually (although not always) rose through the hierarchy of positions in the
academies until they attained this highest office. Persons of average ability
therefore also attained the gaonate, and in the entire period of 400 years only
a few geonim were outstanding men who made a lasting impact on Judaism. These
included *Yehudai, *Amram, *Saadiah, Sherira, *Samuel b. Hophni, and *Hai. At
times the exilarchs misused their authority and appointed geonim whom they
expected to be subservient to them and who were not outstanding scholars. For
example, it is related that an exilarch rejected *Aḥa of Shabḥa, author of the
She'iltot, and appointed his disciple Natronai Kahana to the gaonate in Pumbedita
(Ibn Daud, Sefer ha-Kabbalah, 47–49). Thus, the academy in Sura was generally
disturbed by the interference of the exilarchs. Sherira (Iggeret Sherira Ga'on,
105) argues that because of the interference of the exilarchs he could not
exactly record the names of the geonim of Sura until the year 1000 of the
Seleucid calendar (689 C.E.). After the authority of the exilarchs had weakened
under *David b. Judah (ibid. 93) in the times of the caliph al-Ma'mun, from
825, the influence of the group of scholars on the appointment of the gaon
increased, especially in Pumbedita. Traditionally, the gaon had multiple roles.
First and foremost, the gaon was the head of the academy, teaching privately
and publicly, especially during the kallah months (see below). In addition, he
served as judge and the head of the equivalent of a supreme court. He also was
empowered to administer the courts and appoint judges. The leading geonim also
wrote numerous responsa, i.e., correspondence answering halakhic questions from
near and from far. As an arbiter of Halakhah, the gaon was also responsible for
legal innovation when the situation warranted it. Numerous geonim were authors
of commentaries, legal codes, and works of theology (see *Geonic Literature).
Finally, some of the geonim were involved in politics beyond the Jewish
community. They represented the community to the local and state Muslim
governments.
There were cases when
the exilarch and the group of scholars could not agree on the appointment of
the gaon and each side appointed its own candidate. If the two sides did not
reach a compromise as a result of the pressure of public opinion, the quarrel
might last until the death of one of the candidates. Generally, assistants to
the heads of academies were appointed gaon and were called dayyanei de-bava or
av (abbreviation of av bet din). Distinguished geonim, such as Sherira, Samuel
b. Hophni, and Hai had first served as av bet din; a deviation from this
practice was considered derogatory. Because only those who already possessed
such honorific titles as *aluf and *resh kallah and who had formerly served as
scribes or assistants to heads of yeshivot, were appointed to the gaonate, the
choice often fell on old men who could fill the position for only a few years.
In this period the
academies in Babylonia served as the cultural center for world Jewry, and not
only Babylonian-Persian Jewry as was the case in talmudic times. Hence, the
influence of the geonim was now all-important. The geonim viewed themselves as
the heirs to the Babylonian talmudic tradition. They continued the work of the
Babylonian *amoraim as passed on by the *savoraim. This in turn was the source
of their supreme authority in matters of halakhah. During the geonic period the
Babylonian Talmud existed as both oral law and as written texts. Indeed, the
geonim always quoted the oral tradition before citing the written texts. Since
their knowledge of the Talmud was the result of an unbroken tradition, the text
had a certain fluidity. The gaon would often quote from differing oral versions
of the Talmud, even without determining the "correct" version. The
geonim had a three-fold responsibility regarding the Talmud: (a) They were part
of the chain of tradition, transmitting the Talmud to the next generation. (b)
They endeavored to provide the correct interpretation of the Talmud. (c) They
actively facilitated the practice of Judaism according to the Talmud. Until the
second half of the 10th century, very few of their interpretations were written
down. They were simply taught in the academies. Since the geonim spoke an
Aramaic dialect very similar to that of the Babylonian amoraim, they had an
added advantage of correctly understanding the Talmud. They clearly were
intimately aware of the spirit of talmudic discourse and enjoyed a sensitivity
to its literary nature. This profoundly influenced their interpretations in
general and greatly affected the practical application of the Talmud text. The
geonim became skilled at utilizing the advanced communication and travel technologies
developed by the Muslim Empire to get their message to far-flung Jewish
communities in North Africa and in Spain.
The geonim made the
academies a supreme court and source of instruction for all Jewry. Thousands of
persons, occupied with their personal affairs for most of the year, would
assemble in the academies in the *kallah months of Elul and Adar to hear
lectures on halakhah. During those months, three types of study took place: (a)
A specific tractate of Talmud was studied in depth; (b) individual students
were tested to see if they were worthy of the stipend; and (c) the assembly
would discuss questions in halakhah, many of which were sent from throughout
the Diaspora. The floor was open to all scholars. However the gaon made the
final decision. The academies were actually filled with students only during
the kallah months. Throughout the rest of the year, only a small group of
serious students remained. These students received stipends from the academies.
While the Talmud and
Talmud study were the center of the geonic universe, the geonim engaged in
other areas of Jewish study. One such area is biblical exegesis. The innovator
was Saadiah Gaon. Other geonim followed Saadiah's lead in writing biblical
commentary; the most important of them was Samuel ben Hophni. Saadiah was the
first gaon to write monographs on specific topics, a number of which he devoted
to biblical translation and commentary. Saadiah translated the entire
Pentateuch, as well as the books of Isaiah, Proverbs, Psalms, Job, and Daniel.
He wrote commentaries on all of these books, with the exception of the latter
half of the Pentateuch. Samuel ben Hophni translated and wrote commentaries on
three of the five books of the Pentateuch. Each monograph begins with a lengthy
and elaborate introduction in which the gaon describes the biblical text and
explains the methodology of his commentary. On the whole, the commentaries
emphasize the linguistic components of the text, the conflict between the
literal and metaphoric meaning of the text, and theological and polemical
concerns. The geonim commented on the non-legal portions of the Bible, leaving
the legal sections to be dealt with in their halakhic works. At the same time,
their commentaries are more disciplined and far less imaginative than earlier
rabbinic exegesis. Samuel ben Hophni's commentaries do include homilies but
they are not based on a specific text. Rather, they derive from the overall
thrust of the whole portion of the text.
There were two major
courts in Sura and two in Pumbedita. In each academy there was the gaon's court
and that of the av bet din. In addition, the gaonate had jurisdiction over the
organization of the courts in all the districts of Babylonia. However, the
judges were appointed by the exilarch with the assent of the geonim. Only under
Hai Gaon did the supreme court (bet din ha-gadol) of Pumbedita appoint the
judges (Neubauer, Chronicles, 2 (1887), 85; Teshuvot ha-Ge'onim, ed. Harkavy,
no. 180). The geonim were not satisfied with halakhic conclusions derived from
the Talmud; they also made new regulations regarding contemporary needs. Their
takkanot ("ordinances") had legal validity because the geonim
considered themselves presidents of the Sanhedrin of their generation. The
halakhic decisions of the geonim were not made without influence from the
general, non-Jewish legal environment. It has been demonstrated that a number
of geoniccustoms had their origins in Islamic practice. For example, the
question arose as to how a widow who lost her *ketubbah would receive payment. Ẓemah
Gaon suggested that the determination should be made by consulting the ketubbot
of her relatives. Both Sherirah and Hai disagreed with this ruling because it
had no basis in the Talmud. However, a similar practice existed in Islamic law.
Interestingly, the custom was accepted by later authorities, including Solomon
*Duran, Solomon *Aderet and *Asher ben Jeḥiel.
All these tasks
required a large establishment; therefore, the academies employed scribes,
directors of the kallah assemblies, and other officials. Their expenditure was
covered by taxes levied on districts, which were directly subject to their
authority. In addition, the communities which addressed their questions to the
geonim sent them contributions. In isolated instances the geonim would turn to
the communities in the Diaspora with a request for financial support and
usually their request was answered. Real estate also served as a source of
income for the academies. The requests for support of the academies increased,
especially, toward the end of the geonic period. Thus, the candidates for the
office of head of the academies had to be not only learned, but they also had
to possess administrative talents. Descent was also a factor; six or seven
families provided most of the geonim of Sura and Pumbedita. Three of these were
priestly, while Sherira traced his ancestry to King David (Iggeret Sherira Ga'on,
92). His family produced several geonim, many assistant heads of academies, and
other important officials in Pumbedita. In Sura positions were held for 200
years by three families. The geonim Jacob, Ivomai, Moses, and *Kohen Ẓedek (b.
Ivomai) belonged to one priestly family; another such family produced the
geonim *Hilai (788), *Natronai b. Hilai (853), Jacob, and Joseph (942), while a
third priestly family produced the geonim Kohen Ẓedek of Pumbedita, his son
*Nehemiah, Samuel b. Ḥophni grandson of Kohen Zedek, his son *Israel, and his
grandson Azariah of Sura. The geonim Zadok, Kimoi, *Nahshon, *Zemah b. Ḥayyim,
and Hai b. Nahshon were members of one family. However, the position of gaon
was not hereditary. Although Hai attained the gaonate immediately after his
father Sherira, Nahshon did not become gaon until 53 years after the death of
his father Zadok, seven members of other families serving as geonim in the
interim. The difference in time between the death of Hilai and the appointment
of his son Natronai was similar. *Dosa did not attain the gaonate until 71
years after the death of his father Saadiah and when he was more than 80 years
old.
On the appointment of a
new gaon a festive ceremony was held, in which participated the scholars of the
two academies and the dignitaries of all the communities in Babylonia, headed
by the exilarch. According to *Nathan ben Isaac ha-Bavli (Neubauer, Chronicles
2 (1895), 86), the ceremony resembled the installation of the exilarch and the
people honored the geonim royally. Following the method of talmudic references
to heads of academies, Sherira throughout used the word "malakh"
("reigned") to designate the term of service of the gaon.
The geonim were
considered the intellectual leaders of the entire Diaspora and their decisions
and responsa had absolute legal validity in most Jewish communities. It cannot
be assumed that they attained their influence without a struggle and conflict
with other centers, especially Ereẓ Israel. Ben Baboi (see *Pirkoi Ben Baboi)
the pupil of Yehudai Gaon, attested to the intervention of the geonim in the
affairs of Ereẓ Israel, "and he wrote to Ereẓ Israel regarding… all the
mitzvot which are not observed properly according to the halakhah but according
to practice in times of persecution and they did not accept his intervention
and they replied to him: 'a custom suspends a halakhah'" (Ginzberg, Ginzei
Schechter, 2 (1929), 559). Baboi attacked practices of Ereẓ Israel (Tarbiz, 2
(1931), 396–7). He claimed that only the Babylonian customs and practices were
valid. To follow the customs of Ereẓ Israel was a sin. Seventy years later,
Amram polemized against those who followed the customs of the westerners who
deviated from the right path. The aim of the Babylonian geonim was to impose
the Babylonian Talmud and the doctrines of their academies also in Ereẓ Israel
and in this way to lessen the attachment of the Diaspora to Ereẓ Israel.
The gaonate had a
specific political, communal function at the side of the exilarch. The
recognition of the gaonate as a political representation of the Jewish
community is attested by the fact that on the death of the exilarch his income
was given to the gaon of Sura until the appointment of a new exilarch. The
geonim also attempted to influence the policy of the government toward the Jews
via Baghdad Jewry, who had representatives in the court of the caliphs.
However, the particular achievement of the geonim was their success in giving
legal validity to the laws of the Talmud and spreading the knowledge of the
Talmud among the thousands of people who came to Babylonia from all parts of
the world. Their writings in the fields of commentary and halakhah made an
impact on the entire period which is named after them. Their great importance
to Jewry is attested by the paragraph in the *Kaddish where the geonim are
mentioned together with the exilarch (Gedenkbuch… D. Kaufmann (1900), Hebrew
section, 52ff.; Ginzei Kedem, 2 (1923), 46; 3 (1925), 54). They and other high
officials in the academies are also mentioned with the exilarch in the prayer
Yekum Purkan. R. *Ẓemaḥ b. Ḥayyim, the gaon of Sura, expressed this feeling of
authority in his responsa to the community in Kairouan: "And when Eldad
said that they pray for the scholars of Babylonia and then for those in the Diaspora,
they are right. For the major scholars and prophets were exiled to Babylonia,
and they established the Torah and founded the academy on the Euphrates under
Jehoiachin, king of Judah until this day, and they were the dynasty of wisdom
and prophecy and the source of Torah for the entire people…" (Eldad
ha-Dani, ed. by Abraham Epstein (1891), 8).
Even though the leading
geonim were those of the later generations, the gaonate already had declined as
the cultural, religious center of Judaism far before it had ceased to exist.
This was as a result of a combination of internal and external causes. A sign
of its public decline was that from the late ninth century most geonim no
longer lived in the cities of the two academies. They lived in Baghdad, the center
of the authorities and the residence of the exilarch. On the one hand, the
decline of the academies in the eyes of the Diaspora was caused by the
competition between Sura and Pumbedita and the quarrels in the academies
regarding the appointment of the gaon. On the other hand, the essence of the
fulfillment of the mission of the geonim– the spread of the Talmud – lessened
its importance. With the emergence of new centers for talmudic studies and the
appearance of great scholars throughout the Diaspora, its dependence on the two
academies and on the geonim ceased and its attachment to them weakened.
Independent-minded scholars stopped sending questions to the academies and
their geonim, and even important geonim such as Sherira and Hai expressed their
anger at the weakening of the links with North Africa and with Spain (Mann,
Texts, 1 (1931), 109, 120–1). *Ḥanokh b. Moses of Cordoba did not even answer
the letters of *Sherira. The scholars of Spain found encouragement from the
authorities in their tendency to break their dependence on the geonim of
Babylonia. The Umayyad caliphs in Cordoba did not approve the Jewish attachment
to the academies in Babylonia which were under the Abbasids (cf. Abraham ibn
Daud's statement, "The king was delighted by the fact that the Jews in his
domain no longer had need of the people of Babylon," Ibn Daud, Sefer
ha-Kabbalah, 66).
The decline of the
Baghdad caliphate, the impoverishment of Babylonian Jewry which caused the
academies to depend completely on contributions from abroad, the greatness and
the independent intellectual development of the Diaspora, and the persecutions
by the Abbasid and Seljuk rulers put an end to the institution of the gaonate
in about 1040.
List of the Geonim of
Sura and Pumbedita
Because of the dearth
of sources the exact chronology of the geonim cannot be established. The letter
of R. Sherira serves asthe basis for the list but it contains contradictions
and many variant versions. (See Table: Chronological List of Geonim in Sura and
Pumbedita.) The list of Abraham *Ibn Daud in the Sefer ha-Kabbalah does not
clarify these contradictions. Nonetheless, the letter of Sherira remains the
major source for the chronology of the Babylonian geonim. But there is much
material on the history of their period, both in Babylonia and in other
countries, in the collections of the responsa of the geonim (see bibliography).
Chronological List of the Geonim in Sura and
Pumbedita (dates according to year of appointment) Chronological List of the
Geonim in Sura and Pumbedita (dates according to year of appointment)
Sura Pumbedita
589 Hanan of Iskiya
Mar bar Huna 591 (?)
Mari b. Dimi (formerly of Firuz-Shapur and Nehardea)
Ḥanina 614 Ḥanina
of Bei-Gihara (Firuz-Shapur)
Ḥana (or Huna)
Huna 650
Sheshna (called also …
Mesharsheya b. Taḥlifa)
651 Rabbah
… Bosai
Ḥanina of Nehar-Pekod 689 Huna
Mari b. Joseph
… Ḥiyya of Meshan
… Ravya (or Mar Yanka)
Hilai ha-Levi of Naresh 694
Jacob ha-Kohen of
Nehar- 712
Pekod
719 Natronai b. Nehemiah
… Judah
Samuel 730
739 Joseph
Mari Kohen of Nehar- 748 Samuel
b. Mar
Pekod
752 (?) Natroi Kahana b. Mar
Amunah
… Abraham Kahana
Aḥa 756
Yehudai b. Naḥman 757
Gaon
Aḥunai Kahana b. Papa 761 Dodai
b. Naḥman (brother of Yehudai the gaon of Sura)
764 Hananiah b. Mesharsheya
Ḥaninai Kahana b. Huna 769
771 Malkha b. Aḥa
773 Rabbah (Abba) b. Dodai
Mari ha-Levi b. 774
Mesharsheya
Bebai, (Bivoi, Bivi)
ha-Levi 777
b. Abba of Nehar-Pekod
781 Shinoi
782 Ḥaninai Kahana b. Abraham
785 Huna ha-Levi b. Isaac
Hilai b. Mari 788 Manasseh
b. Mar Joseph
796 Isaiah ha-Levi b. Mar Abba
Jacob ha-Kohen b. 797
Mordecai
798 Joseph b. Shila
804 Kahana b. Ḥaninai
810 Ivomai (in both academies)
Ivomai, uncle of his
predecessor 811
814 Joseph b. Abba
Zadok b. Jesse (or Ashi) 816 Abraham
b. Sherira
Hilai b. Ḥanina 818
Kimoi b. Ashi 822
Moses (Mesharsheya) 825
Kahana b. Jacob
828 Joseph b. Hiyya
833 Isaac b. Hananiah
836¹
Kohen Ẓedek b. Ivomai 838
839 Joseph b. Ravi
842 Paltoi b. Abbaye
Sar Shalom b. Boaz 848
Natronai b. Hilai 853
857 Aḥa Kahana b. Rav
Amram b. Sheshna² 858 Menahem
b. Joseph b. Ḥiyya
860 Mattathias b. Mar Ravi
869 Abba (Rabbah) b. Ammi
Nahshon b. Zadok 871
872 Ẓemaḥ b. Paltoi
Ẓemah b. Ḥayyim 879
Malkha 885
Hai b. Nahshon 885
890³ Hai b. David
Hilai b. Natronai 896
898 Kimoi b. Ahai
Shalom b. Mishael 904
906 Judah b. Samuel (grandfather of Sherira)
Jacob b. Natronai 911
917–926 Mevasser Kahana b. Kimoi
Yom Tov Kahana b. Jacob 924
926–936 Kohen Ẓedek b. Joseph (appointed
during the lifetime of his predecessor)
Gaon
1. Until 838 position
not filled in Sura.
2. Ruled with above
853–858.
3. The first of the
geonim who lived in Baghdad (R. Isaac ibn Ghayyat, Sha'arei Simhah, pt. 1 no.
64).
4. The academy was
closed for about 45 years. However, several teachers and pupils apparently
remained.
Saadiah b. Joseph 928
936 Zemah b. Kafnai
938 Hananiah b. Judah
Joseph b. Jacob 942–944
943 Aaron b. Joseph haKohen Sargado
960 Nehemiah b. Kohen Ẓedek
968 Sherira b. Hananiah
Ẓemaḥ b. Isaac 988
(descendant of Paltoi)
(?) Samuel b. Hophni
ha-Kohen 997
998 Hai b. Sherira
Dosa b. Saadiah 1013
Israel b. Samuel b.
Hophni 1017
Azariah ha-Kohen (son
of Israel?) 1034
(?) Isaac 1037
1038–(1058) Hezekiah b. David (exilarch and head of the
academy)
[Simha Assaf and
Jehoshua Brand]
Geonic Responsa
The collecting of
scattered material in the anthologies of geonic responsa, both printed and in
manuscript, and in their editing, according to the order of the tractates of
the Babylonian Talmud, was begun by B.M. Lewin in Oẓar ha-Ge'onim, which he
published in 12 volumes to Bava Kamma (1928–43). The 13th volume was published
posthumously to part of Bava Meẓia and one volume of Oẓar ha-Ge'onim to
Sanhedrin was published by H.Z. Taubes (Jerusalem, 1966).
The following are the
editions of geonic responsa: Halakhot Pesukot min ha-Ge'onim (Constantinople,
1516, and again published by J. Mueller, 1893); She'elot u-Teshuvot
me-ha-Ge'onim (Constantinople, 1575); Sha'arei Ẓedek (Salonika, 1792;
Jerusalem, 1966); Sha'arei Teshuvah (in Naharot Dammesek of Solomon Kamondo,
Salonika, 1802, and separately; Leipzig, 1858; Leghorn, 1869; New York, 1946);
Teshuvot Ge'onim Kadmonim (Berlin, 1848); Ḥemdah Genuzah (Jerusalem, 1863);
Toratam shel Rishonim (published by Ch. M. Horowitz, Frankfort, 1881); Teshuvot
Ge'onei Mizraḥ u-Ma'arav (published by J. Mueller, Berlin, 1888); Kohelet
Shelomo (published by S.A. Wertheimer, Jerusalem, 1899); Ge'on ha-Ge'onim
(published by S.A. Wertheimer, Jerusalem, 1925); Mi-Sifrut ha-Ge'onim (published
by S. Assaf, Jerusalem, 1933); Teshuvot ha-Ge'onim (standard title for
different texts), published by J. Musafia (Lyck, 1864); by N.N. Coronel
(Vienna, 1871); by A. Harkavy (Berlin, 1887); by S. Assaf (Jerusalem, 1927,
1928, 1942); by A. Marmorstein (Déva, 1928). Geonic responsa appeared also in
several anthologies and periodicals such as Ta'am Zekenim (ed. by E. Askenazi,
1855); Oẓar ha-Ḥayyim (ed. by Ch. Ehrenreich, 1925–38); Ginzei Kedem (1922–44);
in REJ, JQR, Tarbiz, KS, Sinai (see their index volumes), and in various
Festschriften.
The Geonim of Baghdad
after the Geonic Period
The heads of the
Baghdad academy saw themselves as the successors of the geonim of Sura and
Pumbedita because the last of them had lived in Baghdad after the tenth century.
It may be assumed that many students and teachers from the older academies came
to the academy that opened in the second half of the 11th century. The heads of
the academies in Baghdad attempted to preserve, if at all possible, the
continuity of their connection with the geonic period and called themselves, in
the manner of their predecessors in Sura and Pumbedita, rosh yeshivat ge'on
Ya'akov and rosh yeshivah shel ha-golah. The first known Baghdad gaon was Isaac
b. Moses b. Sakri who came to the East from Spain in about 1070 after he failed
to receive recognition in his native country. There is no information on the
academy of Babylon, except for the period of 1140–50 when its head was Eli
ha-Levi, the rabbi of David *Alroy. The names of the geonim who followed him
are known from letters and responsa. The most famous was *Samuel b. Ali ha-Levi
who opposed *Maimonides; he is praised by the travelers *Benjamin of Tudela and
*Pethahiah of Regensburg. Judah *Al-Ḥarizi found that the liturgical poet
*Isaac b. Israel ibn Shuwaykh was the head of the Baghdad academy. He was also
known because of his connections with Abraham *Maimuni. In 1258 Baghdad Jewry
was threatened by the attack of the Mongols and with the decline of Babylonian
Jewry the position of gaonate declined as well. In 1288 the head of the Baghdad
academy was Samuel b. Abi al-Rabīʿa ha-Kohen. This is known from his letter
concerning the Maimonidean controversy (published by Halberstam in J. Kobak's
Jeschurun, vol. 7, pp. 76–80). Henceforth, nothing is known about the fate of
the Baghdad academy in the Middle Ages.
Chronological List of the Baghdad Geonim
Chronological List of the Baghdad Geonim
1070 Isaac b. Moses
1140 Ali ha-Levi
1150 Solomon
1164 Samuel b. Ali ha-Levi
1194 Zechariah b. Barachel
1195 Eleazar b. Hillel
1209 Daniel b. Eleazar b. Ḥibbat Allah
1218 Isaac b. Israel ibn Shuwaykh
1240 Daniel b. Abi al-Rabīa ha-Kohen
1250 Eli II
1288 Samuel b. Daniel b. Abi al-Rabīa ha-Kohen.
The Gaonate in Ereẓ
Israel
Little information on
the beginnings of the gaonate in Ereẓ Israel is available. Sources increase
only in the beginning of the 10th century as a result of the dispute between
Saadiah Gaon and Aaron *Ben Meir and the bitter polemic between Rabbanites and
Karaites. However, even here there is no reliable information on the gaonate in
Ereẓ Israel, as was the case with the letter of R. Sherira regarding Babylonia,
and was similarly true concerning the chronology of the geonim in Ereẓ Israel
as given by Ben Meir. In any case it is clear that the title of gaon was not
used in Ereẓ Israel until the academy of Tiberias moved to Jerusalem, which was
several generations after its use in Babylonia. One may assume that the
Babylonian geonim did not recognize the right of the heads of academies in Ereẓ
Israel to use this title which they called rosh ḥavurah or roshyeshivah. Since
the Jerusalem academy was considered the successor to that of Tiberias, its
leaders were sometimes called "ge'on Teveryah." The scholars in Ereẓ
Israel could not compete in Talmud interpretation and halakhah with the
scholars of Babylonia. A crucial turning point in the relationship between the
gaonate in Babylonia and that of Ereẓ Israel was the dispute between Aaron Ben
Meir and Saadiah Gaon. Ben Meir announced a new calendar computation that
resulted in Passover beginning on a Sunday as opposed to the Babylonian
calendar that determined the beginning of the holiday on a Tuesday. Six months
later, by New Year 922 the debate was over, Saadiah had won and the Babylonian
calendar was again used universally. The leadership of the academy of Ereẓ
Israel was held by a group of seven scholars, often called "Sanhedrin
Gedolah," and at its head was ha-shelishi ba-ḥavurah ("the third of
the group of scholars"), the gaon and the av betdin or his substitute. The
rest of the five members were called ha-revi'i ba-ḥavurah ("the fourth of
the group of scholars"), etc., or briefly, ha-shelishi, etc. The
appointment to positions was done according to a fixed hierarchy. After the
death of the gaon, his position reverted generally to the av bet din and the
rest of the leadership was promoted according to the hierarchy of positions. It
is possible, however, that this order began only after the death of Ben Meir.
Contrary to the Babylonian practice, the position of the gaon in Ereẓ Israel
was hereditary. Sometimes the father would serve as gaon, one of his sons as av
bet din, and the second son would be shelishi or revi'i in the ḥavurah; there
is no doubt that this practice negatively influenced the matters of study in
the academy of Ereẓ Israel.
The geonim of Ereẓ
Israel in the 10th and 11th centuries were mainly from the family of Ben Meir,
which claimed relation to *Judah ha-Nasi and thus to King David, and two
families of kohanim, one of which was the family of *Abiathar and was related
to *Eleazar b. Azariah. However, S. Abramson concludes that the family of
kohanim that claimed relation to the House of David stemmed from the academy in
Ereẓ Israel in one family. Abramson discovered in the Genizah fragments of an
unknown document, which contained a list of the heads of academies for several
generations. From this document it is apparent that one family of kohanim was
merely a branch of the Ben Meir family. Thus, the gaonate of Ereẓ Israel was
held by one family and its different branches for perhaps 200 years. *Solomon
b. Judah, a native of Fez, next to Ben Meir the most famous of the geonim in
Ereẓ Israel and whose family is not known, and his successor *Daniel b.
Azariah, a descendant of one of the families of the exilarchate in Babylonia,
were heads of academies and were not descendants of the geonim of Ereẓ Israel.
Daniel was known as a strong leader, was esteemed by his contemporaries, and
was a friend of Samuel ha-Nagid (Ibn Nagrela).
Besides managing the
academy, the work of the gaon included all Jewish affairs in Ereẓ Israel. The
designation of powers among the heads of academies and exilarchs, as was
practiced in Babylonia, was not known in Ereẓ Israel. The geonim ordained the ḥaverim,
appointed the dayyanim in Ereẓ Israel and Syria, and managed the economic
affairs of the Jewish community in Ereẓ Israel. They were recognized by the
foreign ruler as the representatives of the Jewish community in Ereẓ Israel.
After Ereẓ Israel was politically allied with Baghdad and later with Egypt, the
geonim corresponded with highly influential Jewish dignitaries in the two
capitals. In these cases of emergency they were accustomed to travel there
personally to negotiate in the court of the rulers. The halakhic and literary
activity of the geonim is attested by some responsa. Hundreds of letters asking
the geonim to aid the Jewish community and the academies were discovered in the
Cairo Genizah. The geonim of Ereẓ Israel were not as learned as the geonim in
Babylonia. Their major achievement was the maintenance of the continuity of the
tradition of the academies in Ereẓ Israel under difficult political conditions.
Abrahamson assumes that
Ẓemaḥ, who served as head of the academy from about 884–915, was a
fourth-generation descendant of *Anan b. David, the founder of the Karaites,
and he was a nasi and a gaon. Aaron Ben Meir succeeded in deposing Anan's
family only after a bitter struggle in which he was assisted by the scholars
and heads of the Baghdad community.
Chronological List of the Geonim of Ere Israel
Chronological List of the Geonim of Ereẓ Israel
… Moses (head of the academy?)
… Meir I (head of the academy?)
884–915 Ẓemaḥ
915–932 Aaron b. Moses Ben Meir
932–934 Isaac (son of Aaron)
934–948 … Ben Meir (brother of Aaron)
948–955 Abraham b. Aaron
c. 955 Aaron
… Joseph ha-Kohen b. Ezron (ruled two
years)
… …(ruled thirty years)
988-? Samuel b. Joseph ha-Kohen
… Yose b. Samuel
… Shemaiah
1015 Josiah b. Aaron ('member of the Great
Synagogue') b. Abraham (lived in Ramleh)
1020–1027 Solomon b. Joseph ha-Kohen
1027–1051 Solomon b. Judah
1051–1062 Daniel b. Azariah (nassi and gaon)
1062–1083 Elijah b. Solomon b. Joseph ha-Kohen
1084–1109 Abiathar b. Elijah
The Geonim of EreẒ
Israel in Damascus, and the Geonim of Egypt
The occupation of
Jerusalem by the Seljuks in 1071 completely destroyed the city's Jewish
community. The gaon *Elijah b. Solomon moved the academy to Tyre, which was
subject to Fatimid rule. Elijah's son Abiathar headed the Tyre academy until
the conquest of the city by the crusaders. Afterward he moved to Tripoli,
Syria, where he died before 1110. His brother Solomon, who served as an av bet
din, fled in 1093 to Hadrak (near Damascus) because of the decrees of David b.
Daniel b. Azariah, head of Egyptian Jewry. In Hadrak he assembled the survivors
of the Ereẓ Israel academy which apparently included his brother's son Elijah
b. Abiathar. Later his position was given to his son Maẓli'aḥ, who went to
Egypt in 1127 where he received the title of gaon. The academy of Ereẓ Israel
was moved from Hadrak to Damascus and still existed during the 12th century
when *Benjamin of Tudela reported that it was subject to the rule of the
Babylonian gaonate (Baghdad). The names of two geonim who were descendants of
the Abiathar family, Abraham b. Mazhir and his son Ezra, are known. The latter
was ordained by Samuel b. Ali of Baghdad. In his time or shortly afterward the
continuity of the geonim of Ereẓ Israel was broken. It is possible that he was
followed by Zadok, who was dismissed from his position (Taḥkemoni, ed. by A.
Kaminka (1899), 354).
In Fostat, Egypt, the
academy existed in the time of Elhanan, the father of Shemariah, who is known
from the story of the "*Four Captives." His title "chief
rabbi" and his position were inherited by his son and then his grandson
Elhanan who called himself rosh ha-seder or "rosh ha-seder of all
Israel." *Shemariah and Elhanan, both of whom had previously studied in
the Pumbedita academy, corresponded with Sherira and Hai. Only after the
decline of the Babylonian and Palestinian academies did the large communities
in Egypt request the establishment of their own gaonate. David b. Daniel
(1083–89) was the first who attempted to do this. Like his strict father, he
hoped to become nasi and gaon and to exert his power even over the head of the
Tyre academy and on the communities in the coastal cities of Ereẓ Israel.
However, the nagid Mevorakh, who supported him at first, later rejected him. In
1127 Maẓliaḥ b. Solomon, the aged head of the Ereẓ Israel academy, moved from
Hadrak to Fostat and called himself rosh yeshivat ge'on Ya'akov. Several of his
documents and letters are extant. After his death in 1138, his position was
apparently given to Moses ha-Levi b. Nethanel; however, it is possible that
Samuel b. Hananiah, who met Judah Halevi when he traveled from Egypt to Ereẓ
Israel, was given the position. After Moses, his son Nethanel was gaon
(1160–70) and was followed on his death by his brother Sar Shalom who was
appointed gaon at Fostat. Sar Shalom, who was perhaps of Palestinian geonic
descent, sometimes called himself rosh yeshivat Ereẓ ha-Ẓevi, as if his
activities were a continuation of the academies of Ereẓ Israelnot only in
Damascus but also in Fostat. With his death the gaonate in Egypt ceased to
exist. Maimonides, who lived at that time in Egypt, did not possess the title
of gaon.
The Title of Gaon in
Other Countries
The title of gaon was
also used by great scholars in other countries. Maimonides writes in his
introduction to the Mishneh Torah, "the geonim of Spain and France."
The geonim of Africa, Lotharingia (Lorraine), Mainz, and Narbonne are mentioned
in the literature of the early posekim. Thus, the title was given to well-known
individuals from the early rabbinic period, such as R. *Hananel, R. *Nissim, R.
*Moses b. Ḥanokh and his son *Ḥanokh, R. *Joseph b. Abitur, R. Kalonymus of
Lucca and his son R. Meshullam, and others.
[Simha Assaf /
David Derovan (2nd
ed.)]
BIBLIOGRAPHY:
GENERAL:
Assaf, Ge'onim;
Abramson, Merka zim; Mann, Egypt; Mann, Texts. BABYLONIA: L. Ginzberg, Geonica,
2 vols. (1909, repr. 1968); idem, Ginzei Schechter, 2 (1929); J. Mueller,
Mafte'aḥ li-Teshuvot ha-Ge'onim (1891); B.M. Lewin, Meḥkarim Shonim bi-Tekufat
ha-Ge'onim (1926); V. Aptowitzer, Meḥkarim be-Sifrut ha-Ge'onim (1941); M. Ḥavaẓẓelet,
Ha-Rambam veha-Ge'onim (1967); H. Tykocinski, Die gaonaeischen Verordnungen
(1929); S.D. Goitein, Sidrei Ḥinnukh (1962); Iggeret Rav Sherira Ga'on, ed. by
B.M. Lewin (1921); S. Abramson, in: Sinai, 54 (1963/64), 20–32; 56 (1964/65),
303–17; Epstein, in: Festschrift… A. Harkavy (1908), 164–74 (Heb. sect.); Y.L.
Fishman (Maimon), in: Sefer ha-Yovel… B.M. Lewin (1940), 132–59; Krauss, in: HḤY,
7 (1923), 229–77; J. Mann, in: JQR, 7 (1916/17), 457–90; 8 (1917/18), 339–66; 9
(1918/19), 139–79; 10 (1919/20), 121–51, 309–65; 11 (1920/21), 409–71; idem,
in: Hebrew Union College Jubilee
No comments:
Post a Comment