About 150 years later, in the Land of Israel, the Jerusalem Talmud was compiled. Later, in Babylonia, the Babylonian Talmud was written. Both Talmuds expand upon and explain the Mishnah, documenting legal discussions and the evolution of Jewish law as debated by the sages of their time. However, not every tractate of the Mishnah is included in the Talmud (Gemara), and some tractates appear in only one of the two Talmuds. For instance, the Babylonian Talmud contains tractates from parts of Kodashim, but the Jerusalem Talmud lacks the order of Kodashim altogether.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Or at least, that\u2019s what was believed\u2014until 120 years ago. And thus, the controversy was born.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n
A Lost Manuscript or a Fabrication?<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\nFor centuries, scholars debated whether the Jerusalem Talmud once included the order of Kodashim and was lost over time, or if it was never compiled in the first place. According to Maimonides and several other authorities, a Jerusalem Talmud for Kodashim did exist nearly 1,700 years ago. Others argue that it never did.<\/p>\n\n\n
\n![\"Layden660\"](\"https:\/\/blog.nli.org.il\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/layden660.jpg\")
Manuscript of the Jerusalem Talmud<\/a>, Leiden 1289 (Image from Leiden University website).<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\nIn 1868, Rabbi Benjamin Hirsch Auerbach claimed he had heard that a manuscript of the Jerusalem Talmud on Kodashim was hidden in the Vatican Library in Rome. This rumor attracted fraudsters, who, in 1873, attempted to collect money from unsuspecting Jews to fund a trip to Rome, where they would supposedly retrieve and publish the lost text. However, they were exposed before any damage was done, and Vatican experts confirmed that no such manuscript existed in their collection.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Fifty years later, in the 1920s, Rabbi Mordechai Farhand, a dayan (rabbinical judge) from the Nitra community, traveled to the Vatican to search for the manuscript. He found nothing.<\/p>\n\n\n
\n![\"Vatican660\"](\"https:\/\/blog.nli.org.il\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/vatican660.jpg\")
The Vatican Library, image from the Vatican Library website<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\nBut in fact, the Vatican episode was one of the milder chapters in the saga of the missing tractate.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\nA Dramatic Announcement<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\nIn 1905\u20131906, an electrifying proclamation spread across the Jewish communities of Europe. According to the announcement, Rabbi Shlomo Yehuda Elgazi S\u201dT (Sephardi Tahor, or \u201cpure Sephardi\u201d), also known by the Ashkenazi surname Friedl\u00e4nder, from the city of Satmar, had discovered the lost Jerusalem Talmud order of Kodashim. He intended to publish it, complete with his own original commentary, as a continuation of his earlier work Cheshek Shlomo<\/em>, which covered other orders of the Jerusalem Talmud.<\/p>\n\n\n\nExcitement swept through the world of Torah study. Leading rabbis endorsed the printing of the long-lost text. A year later, the first volume, containing the tractates Chullin and Bekhorot, was offered for sale.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Seemingly overnight, contradictions that had puzzled scholars for centuries\u2014regarding laws of ritual slaughter, Temple service, and sacrificial offerings\u2014were resolved. Difficult halakhic questions found clear answers, all thanks to Friedl\u00e4nder\u2019s newly printed Talmud.<\/p>\n\n\n
\n![\"Buber660\"](\"https:\/\/blog.nli.org.il\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/buber660.jpg\")
A letter written by Friedl\u00e4nder to the scholar Shlomo Buber regarding the Jerusalem Talmud. From the Shwadron Collection, the National Library of Israel.<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n
\n\n\n\nA Treasure Hunt Across Turkey<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\nWhere had Friedl\u00e4nder found the lost order of Kodashim?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In his introduction to Tractate Chullin, he described the discovery in vivid detail. According to his account, his brother, Eliyahu Elgazi, traveled to Izmir on business and purchased books from the estate of Rabbi Yehoshua Benveniste, who had died in Turkey 250 years earlier. Among the volumes were first-edition printings of the Jerusalem Talmud, annotated by Benveniste himself. Eliyahu, knowing his brother was writing a commentary on the Jerusalem Talmud, sent the books to him.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In one of the volumes, Friedl\u00e4nder allegedly found two old letters that deepened the mystery.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
One letter, signed by the Chief Rabbi of Constantinople, expressed support for publishing Rabbi Benveniste\u2019s annotations on the Jerusalem Talmud for Kodashim. This suggested that such a manuscript did indeed exist. The letter detailed how a converso named Don Abraham HaLevi, who lived in Lisbon, had befriended a priest from Barcelona who was also a former converso. The priest entrusted Don Abraham with a bundle of manuscripts, which he then carried with him to Turkey. There, he gifted them to Rabbi Benveniste, who had helped him return to Judaism. Among the documents, Rabbi Benveniste was astonished to find the long-lost Jerusalem Talmud on Kodashim.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
But the second letter painted a different picture. According to this letter, Rabbi Benveniste ultimately decided not<\/strong> to publish the manuscript, fearing that it would be seen as heretical. At the time, the Jewish world\u2014especially in Turkey\u2014was still reeling from the false messianism of Shabbetai Tzvi, whose radical teachings had led to the abolition of many religious commandments. The discovery of a \u201cnew\u201d Jewish text, especially one as significant as a missing section of the Talmud, might have raised suspicions and been used as justification for further religious upheaval.<\/p>\n\n\n\nFriedl\u00e4nder was captivated by these letters. He had<\/strong> to find the manuscript.<\/p>\n\n\n\nHis brother Eliyahu and their friend, Rabbi Yaakov Kobi, embarked on an adventure across Turkey, searching for descendants of Rabbi Benveniste in the hopes that one of them still possessed the treasure. Eventually, they tracked down a villager named Suleiman Benveniste, who showed them an amulet wrapped in silk, claiming it was the missing Talmud. To their disappointment, the manuscript was in terrible condition, with large sections missing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Eliyahu and Yaakov convinced Suleiman to send the manuscript to Friedl\u00e4nder in Hungary, promising him a share of the profits from its publication. According to Friedl\u00e4nder, a colophon at the end of the text revealed that the scribe, Yitzhak Bar Yosef Albergloni, had copied the Talmud in the year 1212 from a carefully edited manuscript once owned by Hai Gaon, the leader of Babylonian Jewry at the time.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
If true, this was a stunning discovery. The lost Jerusalem Talmud had finally been revealed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The War for the Truth<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\nBut the euphoria was short-lived. The first to dampen the excitement of Torah scholars and talmudic researchers was Rabbi Dov Aryeh Ritter of Rotterdam, who, in an article, described his initial joy at hearing about the discovery\u2014only to later express disappointment upon realizing it was a forgery. Soon, other rabbis across Europe began questioning the authenticity of the book. Rabbi Dov Baer Ratner of Vilna published a series of articles<\/a> exposing Friedl\u00e4nder\u2019s fraud.<\/p>\n\n\n\n![\"Paper660\"](\"https:\/\/blog.nli.org.il\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/paper660.jpg\")
Rabbi Ritter’s article (Der Israelit<\/em>, June 1907).<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\nFriedl\u00e4nder, however, did not sit idly by. He fiercely responded to anyone who suggested that the text was a forgery. One of his students, Avraham Rosenberg, wrote a scathing rebuttal in his book Aneh Kesil<\/em> (Answer a Fool), directly attacking Rabbi Ratner.<\/p>\n\n\n\n![\"Casil660\"](\"https:\/\/blog.nli.org.il\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/casil660-378x600.jpg\")
Aneh Kesil<\/em> (Answer a Fool), Avraham Rosenberg, 1908.<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\nAnother prominent critic of Friedl\u00e4nder was Rabbi Meir Dan Plotzky, who, in his book She\u2019alu Shalom Yerushalayim<\/em>, systematically analyzed the text and demonstrated that it was fraudulent. Another of Friedl\u00e4nder\u2019s students, Yosef Ben Mahar\u201di, came to his teacher\u2019s defense in his book Herev Nokemet<\/em> (Avenging Sword<\/em>), launching personal attacks on Rabbi Plotzky but failing to address the substantive evidence of forgery.<\/p>\n\n\n\n![\"Shaalu660\"](\"https:\/\/blog.nli.org.il\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/shaalu660.jpg\")
She\u2019alu Shalom Yerushalayim<\/em> and Herev Nokemet<\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\nDespite mounting skepticism, Friedl\u00e4nder published another volume of the so-called Jerusalem Talmud\u2014this time on the tractates Zevachim and Arakhin.<\/p>\n\n\n
\n![\"Zvahim660\"](\"https:\/\/blog.nli.org.il\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/zvahim660.jpg\")
Jerusalem Talmud, Tractate Zevachim<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\nMeanwhile, the Rebbe of Gur and many others demanded to see the original manuscript, which Friedl\u00e4nder claimed was kept by Suleiman Benveniste. But Friedl\u00e4nder repeatedly evaded such requests. No one ever saw the manuscript or the letters he claimed to have discovered in Turkey.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The Mask Falls<\/strong><\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\nJewish Europe was in turmoil. Some were thrilled by the discovery, while others decried it as an elaborate fraud. At the height of the controversy, Rabbi Zvi Hirsch Halevi Horowitz of Hermannstadt published damning information on another deception by Friedl\u00e4nder: He had claimed to have received an amulet from a Zurich museum, allegedly written by Rabbi Jonathan Eybeschutz, from which he supposedly deduced that Eybeschutz was a Sabbatean. Rabbi Horowitz\u2019s investigation, however, revealed that no such amulet existed\u2014Friedl\u00e4nder had fabricated the entire story to bolster his supposed expertise in deciphering manuscripts. With this revelation, many concluded that his “students” Avraham Rosenberg and Yosef were fictitious as well, and that Friedl\u00e4nder himself had authored the books defending his fraudulent claims.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The final blow to Friedl\u00e4nder\u2019s reputation came from the rabbis of Dvinsk\u2014Rabbi Yosef Rosen, known as the Rogatchover Gaon, and Rabbi Meir Simcha of Dvinsk\u2014who officially declared the Jerusalem Talmud on Kodashim a forgery. It remained unclear, however, whether Friedl\u00e4nder had personally forged it or had acquired the forgery from another source.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Over time, pieces of real information about Friedl\u00e4nder surfaced. He had claimed to have studied at the famed Volozhin Yeshiva and to have served as deputy rabbi of Frankfurt, head of a rabbinical court in western Germany, assistant rabbi of Satmar, and head of a yeshiva. None of this was true.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
So, who was he, really?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
He was born in Belarus under the name Zusia. A gifted and intelligent young man, but certainly not a Sephardi named Elgazi. He married a woman, abandoned her during his wanderings, and later married another without ever divorcing the first. He was a talented scholar, impressing rabbis with his knowledge and articles published in Torah journals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n\u201cThe Truth Is That I Forged It\u201d<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
In 1868, Rabbi Benjamin Hirsch Auerbach claimed he had heard that a manuscript of the Jerusalem Talmud on Kodashim was hidden in the Vatican Library in Rome. This rumor attracted fraudsters, who, in 1873, attempted to collect money from unsuspecting Jews to fund a trip to Rome, where they would supposedly retrieve and publish the lost text. However, they were exposed before any damage was done, and Vatican experts confirmed that no such manuscript existed in their collection.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Fifty years later, in the 1920s, Rabbi Mordechai Farhand, a dayan (rabbinical judge) from the Nitra community, traveled to the Vatican to search for the manuscript. He found nothing.<\/p>\n\n\n
But in fact, the Vatican episode was one of the milder chapters in the saga of the missing tractate.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n
A Dramatic Announcement<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\nIn 1905\u20131906, an electrifying proclamation spread across the Jewish communities of Europe. According to the announcement, Rabbi Shlomo Yehuda Elgazi S\u201dT (Sephardi Tahor, or \u201cpure Sephardi\u201d), also known by the Ashkenazi surname Friedl\u00e4nder, from the city of Satmar, had discovered the lost Jerusalem Talmud order of Kodashim. He intended to publish it, complete with his own original commentary, as a continuation of his earlier work Cheshek Shlomo<\/em>, which covered other orders of the Jerusalem Talmud.<\/p>\n\n\n\nExcitement swept through the world of Torah study. Leading rabbis endorsed the printing of the long-lost text. A year later, the first volume, containing the tractates Chullin and Bekhorot, was offered for sale.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Seemingly overnight, contradictions that had puzzled scholars for centuries\u2014regarding laws of ritual slaughter, Temple service, and sacrificial offerings\u2014were resolved. Difficult halakhic questions found clear answers, all thanks to Friedl\u00e4nder\u2019s newly printed Talmud.<\/p>\n\n\n
\nA letter written by Friedl\u00e4nder to the scholar Shlomo Buber regarding the Jerusalem Talmud. From the Shwadron Collection, the National Library of Israel.<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n
\n\n\n\nA Treasure Hunt Across Turkey<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\nWhere had Friedl\u00e4nder found the lost order of Kodashim?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In his introduction to Tractate Chullin, he described the discovery in vivid detail. According to his account, his brother, Eliyahu Elgazi, traveled to Izmir on business and purchased books from the estate of Rabbi Yehoshua Benveniste, who had died in Turkey 250 years earlier. Among the volumes were first-edition printings of the Jerusalem Talmud, annotated by Benveniste himself. Eliyahu, knowing his brother was writing a commentary on the Jerusalem Talmud, sent the books to him.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In one of the volumes, Friedl\u00e4nder allegedly found two old letters that deepened the mystery.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
One letter, signed by the Chief Rabbi of Constantinople, expressed support for publishing Rabbi Benveniste\u2019s annotations on the Jerusalem Talmud for Kodashim. This suggested that such a manuscript did indeed exist. The letter detailed how a converso named Don Abraham HaLevi, who lived in Lisbon, had befriended a priest from Barcelona who was also a former converso. The priest entrusted Don Abraham with a bundle of manuscripts, which he then carried with him to Turkey. There, he gifted them to Rabbi Benveniste, who had helped him return to Judaism. Among the documents, Rabbi Benveniste was astonished to find the long-lost Jerusalem Talmud on Kodashim.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
But the second letter painted a different picture. According to this letter, Rabbi Benveniste ultimately decided not<\/strong> to publish the manuscript, fearing that it would be seen as heretical. At the time, the Jewish world\u2014especially in Turkey\u2014was still reeling from the false messianism of Shabbetai Tzvi, whose radical teachings had led to the abolition of many religious commandments. The discovery of a \u201cnew\u201d Jewish text, especially one as significant as a missing section of the Talmud, might have raised suspicions and been used as justification for further religious upheaval.<\/p>\n\n\n\nFriedl\u00e4nder was captivated by these letters. He had<\/strong> to find the manuscript.<\/p>\n\n\n\nHis brother Eliyahu and their friend, Rabbi Yaakov Kobi, embarked on an adventure across Turkey, searching for descendants of Rabbi Benveniste in the hopes that one of them still possessed the treasure. Eventually, they tracked down a villager named Suleiman Benveniste, who showed them an amulet wrapped in silk, claiming it was the missing Talmud. To their disappointment, the manuscript was in terrible condition, with large sections missing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Eliyahu and Yaakov convinced Suleiman to send the manuscript to Friedl\u00e4nder in Hungary, promising him a share of the profits from its publication. According to Friedl\u00e4nder, a colophon at the end of the text revealed that the scribe, Yitzhak Bar Yosef Albergloni, had copied the Talmud in the year 1212 from a carefully edited manuscript once owned by Hai Gaon, the leader of Babylonian Jewry at the time.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
If true, this was a stunning discovery. The lost Jerusalem Talmud had finally been revealed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The War for the Truth<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\nBut the euphoria was short-lived. The first to dampen the excitement of Torah scholars and talmudic researchers was Rabbi Dov Aryeh Ritter of Rotterdam, who, in an article, described his initial joy at hearing about the discovery\u2014only to later express disappointment upon realizing it was a forgery. Soon, other rabbis across Europe began questioning the authenticity of the book. Rabbi Dov Baer Ratner of Vilna published a series of articles<\/a> exposing Friedl\u00e4nder\u2019s fraud.<\/p>\n\n\n\nRabbi Ritter’s article (Der Israelit<\/em>, June 1907).<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\nFriedl\u00e4nder, however, did not sit idly by. He fiercely responded to anyone who suggested that the text was a forgery. One of his students, Avraham Rosenberg, wrote a scathing rebuttal in his book Aneh Kesil<\/em> (Answer a Fool), directly attacking Rabbi Ratner.<\/p>\n\n\n\nAneh Kesil<\/em> (Answer a Fool), Avraham Rosenberg, 1908.<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\nAnother prominent critic of Friedl\u00e4nder was Rabbi Meir Dan Plotzky, who, in his book She\u2019alu Shalom Yerushalayim<\/em>, systematically analyzed the text and demonstrated that it was fraudulent. Another of Friedl\u00e4nder\u2019s students, Yosef Ben Mahar\u201di, came to his teacher\u2019s defense in his book Herev Nokemet<\/em> (Avenging Sword<\/em>), launching personal attacks on Rabbi Plotzky but failing to address the substantive evidence of forgery.<\/p>\n\n\n\nShe\u2019alu Shalom Yerushalayim<\/em> and Herev Nokemet<\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\nDespite mounting skepticism, Friedl\u00e4nder published another volume of the so-called Jerusalem Talmud\u2014this time on the tractates Zevachim and Arakhin.<\/p>\n\n\n
\nJerusalem Talmud, Tractate Zevachim<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\nMeanwhile, the Rebbe of Gur and many others demanded to see the original manuscript, which Friedl\u00e4nder claimed was kept by Suleiman Benveniste. But Friedl\u00e4nder repeatedly evaded such requests. No one ever saw the manuscript or the letters he claimed to have discovered in Turkey.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The Mask Falls<\/strong><\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\nJewish Europe was in turmoil. Some were thrilled by the discovery, while others decried it as an elaborate fraud. At the height of the controversy, Rabbi Zvi Hirsch Halevi Horowitz of Hermannstadt published damning information on another deception by Friedl\u00e4nder: He had claimed to have received an amulet from a Zurich museum, allegedly written by Rabbi Jonathan Eybeschutz, from which he supposedly deduced that Eybeschutz was a Sabbatean. Rabbi Horowitz\u2019s investigation, however, revealed that no such amulet existed\u2014Friedl\u00e4nder had fabricated the entire story to bolster his supposed expertise in deciphering manuscripts. With this revelation, many concluded that his “students” Avraham Rosenberg and Yosef were fictitious as well, and that Friedl\u00e4nder himself had authored the books defending his fraudulent claims.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The final blow to Friedl\u00e4nder\u2019s reputation came from the rabbis of Dvinsk\u2014Rabbi Yosef Rosen, known as the Rogatchover Gaon, and Rabbi Meir Simcha of Dvinsk\u2014who officially declared the Jerusalem Talmud on Kodashim a forgery. It remained unclear, however, whether Friedl\u00e4nder had personally forged it or had acquired the forgery from another source.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Over time, pieces of real information about Friedl\u00e4nder surfaced. He had claimed to have studied at the famed Volozhin Yeshiva and to have served as deputy rabbi of Frankfurt, head of a rabbinical court in western Germany, assistant rabbi of Satmar, and head of a yeshiva. None of this was true.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
So, who was he, really?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
He was born in Belarus under the name Zusia. A gifted and intelligent young man, but certainly not a Sephardi named Elgazi. He married a woman, abandoned her during his wanderings, and later married another without ever divorcing the first. He was a talented scholar, impressing rabbis with his knowledge and articles published in Torah journals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n\u201cThe Truth Is That I Forged It\u201d<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Excitement swept through the world of Torah study. Leading rabbis endorsed the printing of the long-lost text. A year later, the first volume, containing the tractates Chullin and Bekhorot, was offered for sale.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Seemingly overnight, contradictions that had puzzled scholars for centuries\u2014regarding laws of ritual slaughter, Temple service, and sacrificial offerings\u2014were resolved. Difficult halakhic questions found clear answers, all thanks to Friedl\u00e4nder\u2019s newly printed Talmud.<\/p>\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n
A Treasure Hunt Across Turkey<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\nWhere had Friedl\u00e4nder found the lost order of Kodashim?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In his introduction to Tractate Chullin, he described the discovery in vivid detail. According to his account, his brother, Eliyahu Elgazi, traveled to Izmir on business and purchased books from the estate of Rabbi Yehoshua Benveniste, who had died in Turkey 250 years earlier. Among the volumes were first-edition printings of the Jerusalem Talmud, annotated by Benveniste himself. Eliyahu, knowing his brother was writing a commentary on the Jerusalem Talmud, sent the books to him.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In one of the volumes, Friedl\u00e4nder allegedly found two old letters that deepened the mystery.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
One letter, signed by the Chief Rabbi of Constantinople, expressed support for publishing Rabbi Benveniste\u2019s annotations on the Jerusalem Talmud for Kodashim. This suggested that such a manuscript did indeed exist. The letter detailed how a converso named Don Abraham HaLevi, who lived in Lisbon, had befriended a priest from Barcelona who was also a former converso. The priest entrusted Don Abraham with a bundle of manuscripts, which he then carried with him to Turkey. There, he gifted them to Rabbi Benveniste, who had helped him return to Judaism. Among the documents, Rabbi Benveniste was astonished to find the long-lost Jerusalem Talmud on Kodashim.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
But the second letter painted a different picture. According to this letter, Rabbi Benveniste ultimately decided not<\/strong> to publish the manuscript, fearing that it would be seen as heretical. At the time, the Jewish world\u2014especially in Turkey\u2014was still reeling from the false messianism of Shabbetai Tzvi, whose radical teachings had led to the abolition of many religious commandments. The discovery of a \u201cnew\u201d Jewish text, especially one as significant as a missing section of the Talmud, might have raised suspicions and been used as justification for further religious upheaval.<\/p>\n\n\n\nFriedl\u00e4nder was captivated by these letters. He had<\/strong> to find the manuscript.<\/p>\n\n\n\nHis brother Eliyahu and their friend, Rabbi Yaakov Kobi, embarked on an adventure across Turkey, searching for descendants of Rabbi Benveniste in the hopes that one of them still possessed the treasure. Eventually, they tracked down a villager named Suleiman Benveniste, who showed them an amulet wrapped in silk, claiming it was the missing Talmud. To their disappointment, the manuscript was in terrible condition, with large sections missing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Eliyahu and Yaakov convinced Suleiman to send the manuscript to Friedl\u00e4nder in Hungary, promising him a share of the profits from its publication. According to Friedl\u00e4nder, a colophon at the end of the text revealed that the scribe, Yitzhak Bar Yosef Albergloni, had copied the Talmud in the year 1212 from a carefully edited manuscript once owned by Hai Gaon, the leader of Babylonian Jewry at the time.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
If true, this was a stunning discovery. The lost Jerusalem Talmud had finally been revealed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The War for the Truth<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\nBut the euphoria was short-lived. The first to dampen the excitement of Torah scholars and talmudic researchers was Rabbi Dov Aryeh Ritter of Rotterdam, who, in an article, described his initial joy at hearing about the discovery\u2014only to later express disappointment upon realizing it was a forgery. Soon, other rabbis across Europe began questioning the authenticity of the book. Rabbi Dov Baer Ratner of Vilna published a series of articles<\/a> exposing Friedl\u00e4nder\u2019s fraud.<\/p>\n\n\n\nRabbi Ritter’s article (Der Israelit<\/em>, June 1907).<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\nFriedl\u00e4nder, however, did not sit idly by. He fiercely responded to anyone who suggested that the text was a forgery. One of his students, Avraham Rosenberg, wrote a scathing rebuttal in his book Aneh Kesil<\/em> (Answer a Fool), directly attacking Rabbi Ratner.<\/p>\n\n\n\nAneh Kesil<\/em> (Answer a Fool), Avraham Rosenberg, 1908.<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\nAnother prominent critic of Friedl\u00e4nder was Rabbi Meir Dan Plotzky, who, in his book She\u2019alu Shalom Yerushalayim<\/em>, systematically analyzed the text and demonstrated that it was fraudulent. Another of Friedl\u00e4nder\u2019s students, Yosef Ben Mahar\u201di, came to his teacher\u2019s defense in his book Herev Nokemet<\/em> (Avenging Sword<\/em>), launching personal attacks on Rabbi Plotzky but failing to address the substantive evidence of forgery.<\/p>\n\n\n\nShe\u2019alu Shalom Yerushalayim<\/em> and Herev Nokemet<\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\nDespite mounting skepticism, Friedl\u00e4nder published another volume of the so-called Jerusalem Talmud\u2014this time on the tractates Zevachim and Arakhin.<\/p>\n\n\n
\nJerusalem Talmud, Tractate Zevachim<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\nMeanwhile, the Rebbe of Gur and many others demanded to see the original manuscript, which Friedl\u00e4nder claimed was kept by Suleiman Benveniste. But Friedl\u00e4nder repeatedly evaded such requests. No one ever saw the manuscript or the letters he claimed to have discovered in Turkey.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The Mask Falls<\/strong><\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\nJewish Europe was in turmoil. Some were thrilled by the discovery, while others decried it as an elaborate fraud. At the height of the controversy, Rabbi Zvi Hirsch Halevi Horowitz of Hermannstadt published damning information on another deception by Friedl\u00e4nder: He had claimed to have received an amulet from a Zurich museum, allegedly written by Rabbi Jonathan Eybeschutz, from which he supposedly deduced that Eybeschutz was a Sabbatean. Rabbi Horowitz\u2019s investigation, however, revealed that no such amulet existed\u2014Friedl\u00e4nder had fabricated the entire story to bolster his supposed expertise in deciphering manuscripts. With this revelation, many concluded that his “students” Avraham Rosenberg and Yosef were fictitious as well, and that Friedl\u00e4nder himself had authored the books defending his fraudulent claims.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The final blow to Friedl\u00e4nder\u2019s reputation came from the rabbis of Dvinsk\u2014Rabbi Yosef Rosen, known as the Rogatchover Gaon, and Rabbi Meir Simcha of Dvinsk\u2014who officially declared the Jerusalem Talmud on Kodashim a forgery. It remained unclear, however, whether Friedl\u00e4nder had personally forged it or had acquired the forgery from another source.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Over time, pieces of real information about Friedl\u00e4nder surfaced. He had claimed to have studied at the famed Volozhin Yeshiva and to have served as deputy rabbi of Frankfurt, head of a rabbinical court in western Germany, assistant rabbi of Satmar, and head of a yeshiva. None of this was true.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
So, who was he, really?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
He was born in Belarus under the name Zusia. A gifted and intelligent young man, but certainly not a Sephardi named Elgazi. He married a woman, abandoned her during his wanderings, and later married another without ever divorcing the first. He was a talented scholar, impressing rabbis with his knowledge and articles published in Torah journals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n\u201cThe Truth Is That I Forged It\u201d<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Friedl\u00e4nder was captivated by these letters. He had<\/strong> to find the manuscript.<\/p>\n\n\n\n His brother Eliyahu and their friend, Rabbi Yaakov Kobi, embarked on an adventure across Turkey, searching for descendants of Rabbi Benveniste in the hopes that one of them still possessed the treasure. Eventually, they tracked down a villager named Suleiman Benveniste, who showed them an amulet wrapped in silk, claiming it was the missing Talmud. To their disappointment, the manuscript was in terrible condition, with large sections missing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Eliyahu and Yaakov convinced Suleiman to send the manuscript to Friedl\u00e4nder in Hungary, promising him a share of the profits from its publication. According to Friedl\u00e4nder, a colophon at the end of the text revealed that the scribe, Yitzhak Bar Yosef Albergloni, had copied the Talmud in the year 1212 from a carefully edited manuscript once owned by Hai Gaon, the leader of Babylonian Jewry at the time.<\/p>\n\n\n\n If true, this was a stunning discovery. The lost Jerusalem Talmud had finally been revealed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n But the euphoria was short-lived. The first to dampen the excitement of Torah scholars and talmudic researchers was Rabbi Dov Aryeh Ritter of Rotterdam, who, in an article, described his initial joy at hearing about the discovery\u2014only to later express disappointment upon realizing it was a forgery. Soon, other rabbis across Europe began questioning the authenticity of the book. Rabbi Dov Baer Ratner of Vilna published a series of articles<\/a> exposing Friedl\u00e4nder\u2019s fraud.<\/p>\n\n\n Friedl\u00e4nder, however, did not sit idly by. He fiercely responded to anyone who suggested that the text was a forgery. One of his students, Avraham Rosenberg, wrote a scathing rebuttal in his book Aneh Kesil<\/em> (Answer a Fool), directly attacking Rabbi Ratner.<\/p>\n\n\n Another prominent critic of Friedl\u00e4nder was Rabbi Meir Dan Plotzky, who, in his book She\u2019alu Shalom Yerushalayim<\/em>, systematically analyzed the text and demonstrated that it was fraudulent. Another of Friedl\u00e4nder\u2019s students, Yosef Ben Mahar\u201di, came to his teacher\u2019s defense in his book Herev Nokemet<\/em> (Avenging Sword<\/em>), launching personal attacks on Rabbi Plotzky but failing to address the substantive evidence of forgery.<\/p>\n\n\n Despite mounting skepticism, Friedl\u00e4nder published another volume of the so-called Jerusalem Talmud\u2014this time on the tractates Zevachim and Arakhin.<\/p>\n\n\n Meanwhile, the Rebbe of Gur and many others demanded to see the original manuscript, which Friedl\u00e4nder claimed was kept by Suleiman Benveniste. But Friedl\u00e4nder repeatedly evaded such requests. No one ever saw the manuscript or the letters he claimed to have discovered in Turkey.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Jewish Europe was in turmoil. Some were thrilled by the discovery, while others decried it as an elaborate fraud. At the height of the controversy, Rabbi Zvi Hirsch Halevi Horowitz of Hermannstadt published damning information on another deception by Friedl\u00e4nder: He had claimed to have received an amulet from a Zurich museum, allegedly written by Rabbi Jonathan Eybeschutz, from which he supposedly deduced that Eybeschutz was a Sabbatean. Rabbi Horowitz\u2019s investigation, however, revealed that no such amulet existed\u2014Friedl\u00e4nder had fabricated the entire story to bolster his supposed expertise in deciphering manuscripts. With this revelation, many concluded that his “students” Avraham Rosenberg and Yosef were fictitious as well, and that Friedl\u00e4nder himself had authored the books defending his fraudulent claims.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The final blow to Friedl\u00e4nder\u2019s reputation came from the rabbis of Dvinsk\u2014Rabbi Yosef Rosen, known as the Rogatchover Gaon, and Rabbi Meir Simcha of Dvinsk\u2014who officially declared the Jerusalem Talmud on Kodashim a forgery. It remained unclear, however, whether Friedl\u00e4nder had personally forged it or had acquired the forgery from another source.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Over time, pieces of real information about Friedl\u00e4nder surfaced. He had claimed to have studied at the famed Volozhin Yeshiva and to have served as deputy rabbi of Frankfurt, head of a rabbinical court in western Germany, assistant rabbi of Satmar, and head of a yeshiva. None of this was true.<\/p>\n\n\n\n So, who was he, really?<\/p>\n\n\n\n He was born in Belarus under the name Zusia. A gifted and intelligent young man, but certainly not a Sephardi named Elgazi. He married a woman, abandoned her during his wanderings, and later married another without ever divorcing the first. He was a talented scholar, impressing rabbis with his knowledge and articles published in Torah journals.<\/p>\n\n\n\nThe War for the Truth<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
The Mask Falls<\/strong><\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n\u201cThe Truth Is That I Forged It\u201d<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
![\"Ramia660\"](\"https:\/\/blog.nli.org.il\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/ramia660-385x600.jpg\")
![\"Ziyuf660\"](\"https:\/\/blog.nli.org.il\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/ziyuf660.jpg\")