Geniza Lab

Forms of excommunication in Arabic, Aramaic, and Hebrew. (Information from Mediterranean Society, II, 332) VMR

Letter from Abū l-Majd, in Qūṣ, to Abū l-Mufaḍḍal the judge, in Fustat. Mentions Egypt, Abū l-Riḍā, Ibn Ibrahim al-ʿArīf, Abū l-ʿAlā b. Ḥassūn, Abū l-Ḥasan and Abū l-Khayr. Dated: Wednesday, 23 Tammuz (1400+)145 = 1545 Seleucid, which is 21 June 1234 CE. (Information in part from CUDL.)

Letter in Hebrew by the muqaddam (head) of the community of Minyat Zifta, announcing that he had excommunicated a debtor according to an instruction by the Nagid. The Nagid had previously arranged for the debtor to repay part of what was owed to his creditors, but he reneged on his agreement and an excommunication was about to be enacted against him as per the Nagid’s instructions. The muqaddam, however, asks for a respite of one or two months for the debtor. Ca. 14th century. (Information from Mediterranean Society, I, 465 and CUDL)

Recto: Letter from Shelomo b. Yehuda to Shelomo Ha-Rofe b. Eli, Tripoli (Lebanon), 1039. Shelomo b. Yehuda writes about Natan b. Avraham, a young challenger who had set himself up as a rival Gaon in Ramla and had written letters to Egypt soliciting support. Shelomo was livid and describes how he set off for Ramla and excommunicated Natan and his supporters. He warns Shelomo b. Eli that any letters arriving from Natan should be ignored as they are ‘iniquitous scribblings and mischievous missives’. Verso: Address and, in a different hand and ink (brown), a Hebrew piyyut referring to the story of Pharaoh and the exodus, concluding in two lines at the top of recto.

Witness statement in which a proselyte known by the name of Abu al-Khayr takes out a Torah scroll from the Holy Ark and proclaims a ban on an adversary. This statement concerns Yehuda b. Chaim, about his behavior in the synagogue when the ban was pronounced, and his subsequent incarceration. Dated 25 Tevet 1393/ November 1081. (Information from Mediterranean Society, II, pp. 306, 592 and from CUDL)

Court record of an excommunication ban pronounced against Sulayman the blacksmith after he insulted the court when it failed to take his side in a court case between him and Salman b. Shabib over the sum of 40 dinars. The court appointed Yefet ha-Levi b. Toviyya as Sulayman the blacksmith’s representative. Fustat, August or September 1031.

Copy of a long letter sent by Ḥananya b. Yosef ha-Kohen, Av Bet Din. Dating: ca. 1020 CE, according to Gil. Probably addressed to the community in Fustat. Mentions Tiberias and a ban of excommunication on the Mount of Olives. The writer excuses his delay in responding to the previous letter, as he was suffering a severe relapse of his illness at the time that he received it. Gil summarizes the contents of the letter as follows: "At the beginning of the eleventh century, Geniza letters definitely disclose that Tiberias is no longer the seat of the yeshiva. The av-bet-din of the yeshiva, Ḥananya ha-Kohen b. Yosef, mentions in his letter the serious differences within the Tiberias community and the yeshiva’s intervention. It appears that Ḥananya's brother served as judge in Tiberias, and when he died, the people of Tiberias asked the yeshiva to send them someone to take his place. Someone was indeed sent, after a group of Tiberian notables promised they would treat him well, but that person apparently tried to discard the authority ofJerusalem, and even took the liberty of proclaiming leap years(!), whereupon the Gaon and the yeshiva excommunicated him. Nevertheless, he continued to do as he saw fit and even organized a faction of supporters, and it seems that they also took for themselves the revenue from the ritual slaughtering that was intended for Jerusalem. [Two brothers in Fustat were apparently helping him.] It does appear, then, that there was some sort of rebellion in Tiberias which tried to re-establish the old order." On the biography of Ḥananya ha-Kohen Av Bet Din, see Gil, History of Palestine, section 854 (pp. 664–65). And see ENA 4009.4 (a letter addressed to him from Sicily) and Moss. Ia,9 (a document drawn up in his court, dated 1007 CE). (Information from Gil and CUDL.)

Fragmentary letter from the office of Yehoshua Maimonides to a certain Avraham, concerning the affairs of a man, his wife, and a young boy, and mentioning issues of habitation and an excommunication. See discussion in Goitein, "The Twilight of the House of Maimonides," Tarbiz 54 (1984), 96–97.

Letter in Judaeo-Arabic. Dating: Likely Tammuz 1232 CE, and almost definitely 1232–37 CE. See below for explanation. Writer and addressee are unidentified. The writer dictated the letter to his son. They were evidently affluent merchants and suppliers to the army. The letter is mainly about the controversy over the prayer reforms of the Nagid Avraham Maimonides. The sons of the Sixth (the family members of the previous dynasty of Nagids) submitted a petition against Avraham to the Sultan al-Malik al-ʿĀdil, to which Avraham responded with a counter-petition signed by almost 200 people from the community, testifying that he had not forced his prayer reforms on anybody. The writer maintains that all those who signed in favor of Avraham testified falsely and deserve to be punished by the shaving of their beards, for he claims that Avraham certainly did force his prayer reforms on the community in their synagogues. The writer goes on to report on recent deaths, including that of Shelomo b. Eliyyahu (who predeceased his father) and Yūsuf b. al-Kharrāz (who ate dinner and went to sleep and died; in the morning, his face was "black as ink"). There is a section on the prices of various commodities, a section on relations with the military officer Kātib al-ʿArab, and greetings. As for the justification for the dating: Avraham Maimonides died in 1237. There were two sultans named al-Malik al-ʿĀdil. The first was the brother of Saladin and reigned 1200–18. The second was the grandson of the first (the son of al-Malik al-Kāmil) and reigned 1238–40, after the death of Avraham Maimonides. However, during the years 1232–38 when al-Malik al-Kāmil lived in Syria, al-Malik al-ʿĀdil the Younger sometimes represented his father in Egypt. Goitein determined that the reference must be to al-Malik al-ʿĀdil the First, which would date the document to 1204–18. But the plot thickens, because Shelomo b. Eliyyhau—whose death is reported in this document—was still alive in the month of Av in 1231 CE (Med Soc II, 575 n. 60) and Heshvan 1231 CE (Freer F 1908.44H). The present letter is dated Sunday 5 Tammuz. This narrows the window to 1232–37 CE. The trouble is that the 5th of Tammuz can never fall on a Sunday.... so either the scribe was off by a day or meant to write 15th of Tammuz. The latter option is supported by the phrase "may its sadness be turned to joy," which might refer to the upcoming 17th of Tammuz fast. (Information mainly from Friedman's article on this document; see also Mediterranean Society, I, p. 141; II, p. 485).

Court order forcing a husband, by threat of excommunication, to write a bill of divorce for his wife and not run away, leaving her 'a widow in his lifetime.' Written in Fustat ca. 1240. (Information from Mediterranean Society, III, pp. 195, 468)

Legal document, fragmentary, calling for someone to give evidence about a certain person's misconduct and who is subject to a herem (excommunication). (Information from Goitein's index cards). Written by Halfon b. Menashshe Halevi (Date: 1100-1138)

Record of a testimony written in Alexandria regarding a family excommunicated by Daniel b. Azarya. The members of the family desecrate his memory. Date: May 1079.

Court document. Declaration of a ban of excommunication against anyone who owes money in any form to Abū l-Khayr al-Ṣayrafī known as Ibn Khalfa and does not hand it over to his son Abū Saʿīd, and against anyone who has relevant testimony and does not bring it to the attention of the court. "He will be cursed to the God of Israel etc., after the Torah scroll is dressed in black and the shofar is blown." There is the beginning of a postscript perhaps stating that anyone owed money by Abū l-Khayr should also come forward. On verso there is a very similar document but wiht stronger curses.

Document in the hand of Mevorakh b. Natan. Not entirely clear if it is a letter or legal document. It describes the measures that will be taken to discipline a certain Mūsā (l. 1) who has persisted in spreading slander (וצאעף אלרכילות, l. 2). He will be sternly warned (ll. 2–4), but if he continues to persist (l. 5), the communal leader (אבירנו) will remove three Torah scrolls from the ark, dress them in black, and blow the shofar before the congregations and excommunicate him. (Information in part from Goitein's index card.)

Letter fragment from Shelomo b. Yehuda to an unidentified personality in Fustat, approximately 1029. Concerning the excommunication of the Karaites.

List of people to be excommunicated ('by name'/באסם). The left halves of ~7 entries are preserved. "In the bar (mashraba) with... and her children... a place with drunk people... between her and them..." With the join, we now have the right halves of 3 of the original entries and the right halves of 2 new entries. 2 of the entries are now complete (if not entirely clear): “Every woman who wraps a turban or braids her hair [….], even in her own house" and "Every man who is able to marry but does not do so because he is too busy with sinful things." ASE

Note from Abū Thābit al-Ṣayrafī to a certain Rabbenu Shemuel asking him to declare a ban of excommunication against whoever cast a spell on someone or willed him harm and does not reverse it immediately. Shelomo b. Eliyyahu makes the same request in ENA 4020.49, but without further evidence about the identities of Abū Thābit and Shemuel, there is no way to know if the two documents are connected. ASE

Legal document in a gathering of the Karaites in Cairo, mentioning the instrument of the herem to elicit information concerning a rumor some women had heard about a husband. NB: This description and transcription are to be merged with PGPID 2728.