The Mixed Multitude. Pawel Maciejko

polemic. In addressing them in official writings, the Rabbanites of Poland-Lithuania used the expression anshe britenu ha-yekarim, “dear people of our covenant”;²⁹ in internal documents, they usually spoke simply of “the Karaite congregation,” edat ha-karaim,³⁰ without adding any positive epithets but also without dysphemisms habitually added by their Western counterparts. The Karaite leaders, in turn, addressed the rabbis as ahenu (our brethren).³¹ The Christian authorities also acknowledged the legal equality of Rabbanites and Karaites, sometimes emphasizing that the Crown’s grant of general privileges to the Jews included both communities.³² The multiethnic, multireligious corporative structure of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth provided a framework for treating the Karaites as another legitimate Jewish denomination. In contrast to other Christian countries, which offcially acknowledged only one Jewish religion, the legal system of the Commonwealth explicitly allowed for the existence and free practice of Karaism as an alternative form of Judaism. The concept of rite, used in Poland to define the offcial status of Greek Catholics and Catholic Armenians (that is, recognized non-Roman denominations of Catholicism), was employed in delineating the status of the Karaites (that is, a recognized non-talmudic denomination of Judaism) as well: for instance, King Władysław IV guaranteed the freedom of confession to Judaeorum Trociensum rithus Karaimici.³³

      There is no evidence of any direct contact between the Frankists and the Karaites. However, defining the Sabbatians as anti-talmudic Jews who—on the basis of royal privileges—demanded equal rights with other Jews was clearly a strategy aimed at deploying the Karaite precedent as a legal framework to govern the case of the Frankists. The Karaites enjoyed the same rights as the Rabbanites and shared some communal institutions, but in matters of faith and ritual were practically autonomous. Since the legal system of the Commonwealth had already recognized two legitimate independent Jewish rites, there was no prima facie reason that it could not recognize Sabbatianism as a third, or, alternatively, simply subsume the Sabbatians and the Karaites under a wider rubric of “contra-talmudic Jews.” Christian sources explicitly mentioned such a possibility; some later accounts even used the term “Karaite” when talking about Frank and his followers. Thus, the first dispatch of the papal nuncio in Warsaw concerning the Frankists defined the group as “the Jews of other religions, called Karaites [gli ebrei di varie religioni, detti caraiti],”³⁴ while Father Stanisław Mikulski, the administrator sede vacante of the Lwów archdiocese after the death of Bishop Wyżycki, described the Frankists as the “Karaites,” whom he characterized as “the Contra-Talmudists confessing the Trinity, Incarnation, and other dogmas of the [Christian] faith [Caraitarum nomine . . . non aliter interpretor, nisi Contratalmudistas profitentes Trinitatem, Incarnationem, et alia dogmata fidei].”³⁵

      The Kamieniec Disputation³⁶

      The first hearing at the Kamieniec consistory in materia perfidiae Iudaica took place on 4 September 1756.³⁷ This time, it was the Frankists who acted as plaintiffs against the “synagogues of the Kamieniec diocese.” They argued that the charges of immoral conduct in Lanckoronie constituted slander, and the subsequent excommunications were motivated by the desire to brand legitimate opponents of rabbinic Judaism as heretics: according to the Sabbatians, the real reason for the Council of Four Lands’ campaign against them was their rejection of the Talmud and the proximity of their position to some of the tenets of Christianity. They also demanded a written response to their manifesto. On 17 October, Bishop Dembowski sent a pastoral letter to the Jewish leaders of his diocese, commanding that the rabbis come to Kamieniec in person and provide answers regarding the earlier bans of excommunication and the motions presented in the manifesto.

      The rabbis failed to appear. Instead they sent a shtadlan, Simon Herszkowicz, who referred to the privileges of religious and judicial autonomy granted to the Jews by Polish kings, challenged the consistory court’s authority to rule on a case involving Jews and Judaism, and demanded the postponement of the proceedings until the issue of jurisdiction was resolved.³⁸ He also argued that the rabbis needed time to prepare answers to a manifesto in Latin. Dem-bowski rejected Herszkowicz’s arguments challenging his jurisdiction (stating that the Jews themselves had first approached his court) but agreed to give the rabbis time to translate documents and prepare answers. The cross-examination of both sides was postponed for four months, until 25 February 1757. Meanwhile, the consistory carried on with its interrogations of the Contra-Talmudists, who “continued to support their points and provided other interesting information.”³⁹

      On 28 February, Herszkowicz presented the consistory with a written answer to the Frankist manifesto. This document is no longer extant; according to Ber of Bolechów, it “revealed to both Jews and Christians the abominations of the Sabbatians and exposed their misdeeds against the Torah and its commandments as well as against the natural law.”⁴⁰ The rabbis tried to convince the Kamieniec clergy that the points of the Frankist manifesto were deliberately couched in terms designed to mislead the priests and make them believe that these resembled Christian doctrine; as it turned out, they argued, Sabbatianism was much closer to Islam than to Christianity.

      However, the rabbinic response to the charges of the Contra-Talmudists was deemed unsatisfactory by the consistory. The court questioned Herszkowicz’s right to represent the Jewish side and again demanded that the “elders of the synagogue” attend the hearing in person. It threatened to hold them in contempt should they fail to do so. Herszkowicz responded with pleas for clemency, to which the court responded by granting another postponement, until 23 March. When no representative of rabbinic Judaism showed up for the next hearing either, Dembowski issued an edict charging the rabbis with contumacy and obstruction of justice and imposed financial penalties on the Jewish communities in his diocese. He set the final deadline for the confrontation between the Contra-Talmudists and their adversaries for 20 June 1757.⁴¹

      In early months of that year, the Contra-Talmudists composed an expanded version of their theses. As before, the original text was written in Hebrew and then translated into Polish and Latin by Moliwda.⁴² This expanded version of the manifesto contained the following statements:

      1. We believe in everything that was taught and commanded by God in the Old Testament.

      2. The books of Moses and the other books of the Old Testament can be compared to a richly dressed Maiden, whose face is covered and whose beauty cannot be seen. These books are full of the hidden wisdom of God, they speak of things mysterious and of the future, and therefore, they cannot be comprehended by human reason without the assistance of Efficacious Divine Grace.

      3. The rabbis of old times sought to expound the Old Testament. These explanations are known as the Talmud and contain many fables, lies, and much nonsense and hostility to God and His teachings.

      4. On the basis of the Holy Bible of the Old Testament, we believe that there is One God, without beginning or end, maker of Heaven and Earth and all things known and unknown.

      5. On the basis of the same Scripture, we believe that there is one infinite God in three Persons, equal, indivisible, and [acting] in agreement.

      6. We believe that God may take upon Himself mortal human flesh, be born, grow up, eat, drink, sense, sleep, and be subjected to all human passions save for sin.

      7. In accord with Daniel’s prophecy, we believe that the city of Jerusalem will not be rebuilt until the end of time.

      8. We believe that the Jews have waited in vain for the messiah to come, bring them happiness, and grant them power over other nations.

      9. We believe that God Himself cursed all of humankind for the sin of the First Parents. The same God would descend to earth and save the world from the curse. He is the true messiah, not for Jews alone, but for all peoples. All those who believe in Him and do good will be given Eternal Grace, and those who do not will be cast down to hell.⁴³

      As the consistory rejected the written rabbinic response to the first manifesto of the Contra-Talmudists, Bishop Dembowski demanded that the parties choose four representatives each and argue their respective positions in a public disputation. The representatives of the Contra-Talmudists were Leyb Krysa, Hayyim Moszkowicz, Leyb Rabinowicz, and Solomon