The Torah of St Filippo?
Marc Michaels, University of Cambridge
The whole point of a Genizah is to avoid God’s Holy Name being desecrated.
In a traditional Jewish context, you will often hear about a stash of Jewish texts that are put into store, and/or waiting for burial called Shemos (to use the Ashkenazi form, usually pronounced Seamus, as in the Irish name).
Obviously, in the Cairo Genizah this was expanded to many documents, including secular ones, and even some not in Hebrew characters that were thrown into the hole of the chamber in the Ben Ezra Synagogue, used as the storeroom.1 That said even in some of the most secular documents, God’s Name might be used.
The prohibition of erasing the written Name of God is derived from a reading of Deut 12:1-7, the key phrases being ונתצתם את־מזבחתם ושברתם את־מצבתם ואשריהם תשרפון באש ופסילי אלהיהם תגדעון ואבדתם את־שמם מן־המקום ההוא׃ לא־תעשון כן לי-ה-ו-ה אלהיכם׃ (‘and you shall shatter their altars, and break their pillars, and burn their ʾasherim with fire, and cut down the statues of their gods, and destroy their name from that place. You shall not do thus to the Lord your God’, Deut. 12:3–4).
This is very serious, as Qeset ha-Sofer 11:2, a primary halakhic guide for scribes,2 explains, שאם מוחק אפילו אות אחד מן השמות ... הרי הוא עובר בלאו מן התורה וחייב מלקות (‘everyone who damages one letter from the Names ... transgresses a negative Torah commandment and deserves lashes’).
I know that no-one is actually around to administer a beating, but the principle still holds, so you do want to get this right.
Relating to this, is the instruction to buy any STa”M articles found in the possession of a non-Jew. Commenting on this, Qeset ha-Sofer 1:6 further explains, ואין לבקש מן העכו‘‘ם שיתנם לו בזול יותר מדאי פן יכעוס וישליכם למקום אבוד (‘and one does not seek from a non-Jew3 that they should give to him too cheap a price lest he get angry and he sends them [the texts] to a place of destruction’ [my emphasis]).4
This is derived from a practical example concerning Abaye, a 4th-century sage, recorded in b. Gittin 45b, ההיא טייעתא דאייתי חייתא דתפילי לקמיה דאביי אמר לה יהבת לי ריש ריש בתמרי אימליא זיהרא שקלא שדתינהו בנהרא אמר לא אבעי לי לזלזולינהו באפה כולי האי (‘an Arab woman brought a sack of tefillin before Abaye. He said to her, “let me have them for a couple of dates for each pair”. She became angry, and took the tefillin and threw them into the river. Abaye said, “I should not have made them appear so cheap to her”’).
Conversely, commenting on Shulḥan ʿArukh ʾOrekh Ḥayyim 39:7, the Mishnah Berurah, Hilkhot Tefillin 39:18 is not quite as dramatic in its language, and instead renders, ומבואר בש"ס דאסור לומר לעו"ג שיתנם בזול יותר מדאי דלמא ירגז העו"ג וינהג בהם מנהג בזיון (it is clear from the Talmud that it is forbidden to tell the non-Jew that he should give them over too cheaply in case the non-Jew gets angry and treats them in a disrespectful manner [my emphasis]).5
One might think that the different phrasing of וישליכם למקום אבוד and וינהג בהם מנהג בזיון is purely stylistic, but based on the many practical experiences I have had regarding the application of this halakha, I have concluded that there is deeper meaning here, and perhaps two dimensions to this ruling, one of a physical nature and one with more spiritual connotations. The core concept at the heart of a Genizah is to ensure that God’s Name is not despoiled whether that is physically or spiritually.6
With the above as general background, we now turn to a specific example. In August 2024, I was approached to look at a very interesting fragment cut from a Torah, which sadly meets both these dimensions.7 Thus, this month’s Fragment is not from the Cairo Genizah but is a perfect example where a holy text has been desecrated both physically and spiritually. In this, it bears witness to the very need for the Cairo Genizah.
The front of this small piece of parchment (below) has a printed prayer concerning a Saint. On the reverse, however, is the remnant of an ʿamud (column) of Torah that has been cut up and used as a substrate for the printing.
A devotional amulet printed on a reverse of a piece cut from a Sefer Torah. Front and reverse. Images provided by Marshall Kibbey
In part this is similar to the repurposing of Hebrew texts as bindings for books in early modern Europe, catalogued as part of the Books within Books project.8 This project is often referred to as a ‘European Genizah’, however, arguably this is a complete misnomer given that the purpose of a Genizah is to prevent this from happening.
Our fragment measures 8.9 x 6.7 cm. The front is a devotional-amuletic engraving of St Filippo Benizi (1233–85), who was canonized in 1671. The reverse has 5 incomplete lines of Torah text with a script measuring 3.5 cm high. Written in a rather nicely done Beit Yosef Ashkenazi STa"M script, it contains part of Gen. 14:6-14:9 in well preserved dark lettering, but above it, faded and upside down, is a palimpsest text from Genesis 12:17–13:1, which will be explored below. It also has four large blotches situated in each corner.
Torah scrolls are not dated, but the presence of this printed saintly prayer combined with palaeographical analysis of the script helps date and locate this manuscript.
Turning first to the printed prayer, we have an image of the Saint radiating a halo like light, surrounded by a garland of flowers and carrying a cross with the image of Jesus. The prayer reads:
Breve di S Filippo de Servi di M. V. contra la febre. Iesus ☩ Maria ☩ Philippus ☩ Jesus Salus nostra ☩ in nomine meo super aegros manus imponent et bene habebunt. Dominus Iesus Christus Dei et B. M. V. Filius Mundi Salus et Dominus sit tibi Clemens et propitius et per merita et intercessionem eiusdem B. Matris suae et S. Patris nostri Philippi Confessoris ac Servi sui totiusq[ue] Curiae caelestis liberet te ab omni febre tertiana quartana quotidiana et continua ac ab omni malo. Detque tibi Salutem mentis et corporis ad laudem et gloriam sui sanctissimi Nominis Amen.
(First two lines in Italian:) Short letter by S(aint) Filippo of the Servites of the Virgin Mary (MV = Mariae Virginis) against fever. (Thereafter, all Latin:) Jesus ☩ Mary ☩ Philip ☩. Jesus, our Salvation ☩ “in My name they shall lay hands upon the sick and they shall be well” (= NT, Mark 16:17–18). Lord Jesus Christ, the son of God and of the Blessed Virgin Mary (BVM = Beata Virgo Maria), Salvation of the World, and may the Lord be merciful and forgiving to you, and through the merits and intercession of His same Blessed Mother and the Holy (S = sancti) Father Philip our confessor and His servant, and all of the Heavenly Court free you from all tertian (three-day), quartan (four-day), daily and continuous fever, and from all evil. And may He give you health of mind and body to the praise and glory of His most holy Name. Amen.9
According to the seller, ‘St. Filippo Benizi de Damiani (a.k.a., Filippo de Servi) was not a common subject for santini engravers’, and that the engraved amuletic-prayer is otherwise unknown.
Since Benizi was canonized in 1671 under Clement X, it is possible that the engraving was made in the years immediately following this event, and certainly 1671 provides us with our terminus post quem for the Torah fragment. The seller also noted that ‘the style of the engraving also suggests a late 17th or early 18th century date’. This also likely provides the time when our Torah was cut up, thus physically desecrating it, but not necessarily when it was written.10
Echoing our concerns that the Names of God and the kitvey ha-qodeš (holy writings) also not be spiritually desecrated, the seller added the following to the listing, ‘the fact that the engraving was printed on a fragment of Torah scroll opens further questions. This might simply have been a practical matter of recycling the parchment, but it also might suggest a symbolic superseding of one faith over another. Indeed, the Hebrew letters might even have been seen to enhance the amuletic charge of the item’, adding to its apotropaic nature. Paper was available at this time, so it may be that use of parchment from a Torah was a deliberate choice. This kind of replacement theology could well have been a factor in the use of the holy Jewish materials.
However, that this is small prayer to be carried around as a protective amulet might just suggest that parchment was used because it is a more durable material, and this is purely a practical decision with no spiritual dimension. The Torah qelaf (parchment) was just readily available material having been ‘liberated’ from its original owners.
Turning to the Torah scroll element, as noted, it is written in a confident, well-executed Beit Yosef Ashkenazi STa”M11 script. Based on the style, this is possibly Northern Italy (which would accord with the Italian line that begins the printed amulet) or Germany. A large pointer is that the lamed has a properly formed full base, which means it is certainly post 1500s12 Particularly of note are the very thick strokes on the right legs of the letters dalet, he and ḥet, a German trait. It also employs what has become known as a pe shibbur (broken/lazy pe) where the scribe makes a zig-zag movement, which formed a bet shape in the counter (the hollow) within the pe.13 Many halakhic authorities discouraged the form in deference to a style with a rounded right top corner. Based on a comparison of the script, it is likely written in the 1600s.
By drawing an abecedary and creating a font, we can quite easily reconstruct six lines of text and get a view of the Torah in some of its original glory. Not all letters are present in the fragment but gimel, ḥet and nun are in the upside down faded text by the same sofer, and nun sofit, pe sofit and ṣade sofit can be reconstructed based on the medial forms that are present. The reconstruction of the main text is shown below. This text shows through the front of the print, so would have possibly put off potential buyers who could clearly see the Hebrew on the reverse behind the Latin.
A recontruction of six lines of the darker Torah scroll script
There is nothing particularly remarkable about the scroll, as such. However, the most curious element of this fragment is above the main Hebrew text in what is the top margin of the Torah yeriaʿ (sheet). For here there is a very faint text of a different section of Torah text, that is upside down and looks like it is almost in outline.
Though it is hard to see, the script is the same as the darker script. One might therefore think that the faded script is some form of offset from another column pressed against this column when the ink was not fully dry or some water damage that caused a sort of transfer of ink. However both of these eventualities would lead to reversed letters.
The letters do look washed out, as opposed to scraped as the parchment surface does not look disturbed. But washing what is likely iron gall ink on this kind of surface would cause smudges and the letters do not appear to run one into another. Erasure terms used in b. Menachot 30b are מחק and גרר. Rashi explains that מחק means to wipe away wet ink. Hilkhot Sefer Torah (also called Ginzei Mitzrayim)14 further explains that ‘Abrasion is distinct from מחק. Abrasion is with the tip of the razor until [the ink] is scratched off the skin. מחק is when the ink is wet, the scribe rubs his hands over it, thereby erasing it’ [my translation]. There appears to have been some tradition to wash off, perhaps with a sponge. Some limited experimentation I undertook in 2020 suggests that this can work on gewil (unsplit tanned hide) but not on qelaf.
Alternatively the sheet was soaked as whole to remove the letters, but that would them imply a need to stretch the parchment afterwards and re-cut, which would have meant any residues of letters would not retain their shape.
Additionally, returning to the reason for Genizah, a scribe is simply not allowed to scratch or wipe away any of God’s Names and in the reconstruction of the upside down text below we can see that that would have been the case, with the Tetragrammaton on the second line.
A reconstruction of seven lines of the faded upside down Torah text
It is thus highly unlikely our scribe have done this to his own writing, creating a palimpsest. It is very much a puzzle.
Having not seen the item in person, only digitally, it is difficult to speculate. However, discussing this with Prof. Ben Outhwaite, a possible suggestion is that the parchment was quite thin and our Christian printer took two sheets of Torah and glued one to the other. One sheet was applied upside down (in relation to the printed prayer) with the text facing towards the back and is showing through the back. The other was right side up (in relation to the printed prayer) and this is showing through the front. However, if this was the case then why is the back of the upside down sheet not showing through the front image, as much as that of the right way up sheet? One factor at work may be uneven gelatinization of the material. Parchment can do this over time and I have seen it on Sifrei Torah that I have repaired and is also happening to some items in the Genizah collection, which provides conservation challenges.15 It tends to give the parchment a glassine sheen and that element becomes more transparent, enabling more show through.
Ultimately with no access to the original, we cannot reach a definitive conclusion for the doubled Torah text. Additionally, with no access to a time machine to ask the Christian printer in the late 1600s, we cannot know whether his choice of substrate was theologically motivated or purely practical. What we can say without any hesitation, is that the need for a Genizah to protect STa"M objects, both physically and spiritually, is once again reinforced by this fragment example.
Footnotes
1 See Posegay, Nick & Schmierer-Lee, Melonie, The Illustrated Cairo Genizah, Gorgias Press, 2024 pp. ix –xvi for more information and p. xiii for an image of the entrance to the chamber.
2 Qeset ha-Sofer is a core scribal text written by Shelomo Ganzfried and was first published in 1835 in Buda (Offen). However in 1871 Ganzfried published a significantly expanded version in Ungvar.
3 Lit. servants of the stars, i.e. idol worshippers.
4 The root אבד (in Canaanite and Ugaritic) also conveys the sense of being lost, perishing or being ruined (see HALOT).
5 See p. 344 of the Feldheim Edition, Pisgah Foundation, Jerusalem, 1992. This work is also a key halakhic text for scribes and is a commentary to the Shulḥan ʿArukh ʾOrekh Ḥayyim and was written by the Ḥafets Ḥayyim, Rabbi Yisrael Meir Kagan HaKohen (1833-1933). This word, בזיון, which appears in Esther 1:18, conveys contempt (see HALOT), though also a sense of disgrace and shame.
6 For more examples and further discussion of this, see Michaels,‘To a Place of Destruction’—Adventures in Practical Halachah no. 4, Kulmus Publishing, 2019, https://www.academia.edu/39646219/To_a_Place_of_Destruction_Adventures_i...
7 My thanks to Prof. Gary Rendsburg for suggesting my involvement, and his thoughts on the fragment and valued comments on this article. Also to Marshall Kibbey for permitting me to use his images of the fragments. I am not aware of where this fragment now resides.
8 See https://www.hebrewmanuscript.com for more details about the Books Within Books project.
9 My thanks to Prof. Ben Outhwaite, who improved the Latin translation considerably, and for his comments on this article.
10 For more on Saint Fillipo, see Allen Banks Hinds, Saint Philip Benizzi in A Garner of Saints, 1900 at https://catholicsaints.info/a-garner-of-saints-saint-philip-benizzi/, accessed 20/3/25.
11 Beit Yosef is the script most commonly employed by Ashkenazi Jews in Germany, England, Russia and Lithuania, Arizal is the script used by Jews of Chassidic descent or influence, generally from Poland, Galicia, Hungary, Romania and Slovakia. However, scribes in the past often mixed features of each, so it is not as clear-cut as one might think. There is a third Ashkenazi script known as the Alter Rebbe script used only by Chabad-Lubavitch.
12 See Michaels, Marc, Lamed—Getting a Head and Exploring the Basis of the Base, forthcoming.
13 A requirement in later Ashkenazi tradition but not for Sephardim or Yemenites.
14 A medieval work on the laws of writing STa"M. First published from a Genizah manuscript in 1897. Another example of the importance of the Genizah for protecting works. Originally attributed to early 12th-century scholar Rabbi Yehuda ben Barzilai. However, alternative authors, such as 13th-century Iraqi scholar Rabbi Joseph Rosh Haseder, have been suggested.
15 See Q&A Wednesday: Gelatinisation of early parchment fragments in the T-S New Series, with Deborah Farndell https://www.lib.cam.ac.uk/genizah-fragments/posts/qa-wednesday-gelatinisation-early-parchment-fragments-t-s-new-series-deborah.
If you enjoyed this Fragment of the Month, you can find others here.
Contact us: genizah@lib.cam.ac.uk