Customer Reviews

Karaite Judaism and Historical Understanding (Studies in Comparative Religion)

5 star:		(0)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

I knew a little bit about Karaism from pages here and there in other books- mostly that the Karaites were Biblical literalists who repudiated rabbinic tradition and who went without heat on Shabbat (although as this book points out, they eventually moved away from this harsh view). This book fills in a few blanks.

During the Karaites' early period, there was no unified Karaite halachah- obviously an impractical way of functioning. Instead, Karaites were expected to do their best to interpret the Torah themselves, and to ignore rabbinic tradition. For example, the opinions of Anan (who may or may not have founded Karaism) were by no means universally accepted. Astren implies that the need to create functioning communities forced them to create more uniformity of practice, which in turn forced them to create a chain of interpretive tradition. And if Karaites were going to rely on tradition rather than on their own judgment, why not at least adopt some of the traditions of the Jewish mainstream? In fact, by the 15th century the Karaites had moved towards mainstream Jewish halachic positions on a wide variety of issues, and in some parts of the world (the Ottoman Empire in particular), the Karaites had relatively good relationships with mainstream Jewry. (On the other hand, in Russia the Karaites became totally severed from Jewry, mainly to avoid Tsarist oppression of Jews).

I suspect that the growth of Karaite tradition destroyed the rationale for Karaism - which is perhaps why Karaism dwindled; to have uniformity, they had to be able to agree on rules other than those suggested by literal interpretation of the Torah, yet the logic behind Karaism was that the Torah should take priority over tradition.

Another factor that led to the Karaite evolution towards tradition may have been the movement of many Karaites from Jerusalem to Christian Byzantium after the Crusades. In the early Islamic empire "a claim to historical anteriority was of negligible value. Islam itself was dominant, yet historically recent." By contrast, in a Christian environment "the Karaites were considered immigrant newcomers, whose pedigree was highly questionable." (p. 148) So once Karaites moved into Christian areas, they had a strong incentive to claim that they too had a chain of tradition in order to avoid Christian hostility.

Astren also speculates on how Karaism came about. In the centuries before the Talmud, Jewish communities outside Israel and Babylon become more isolated and autonomous. When the Muslims swept through the Middle East in the 7th and 8th centuries, centralization of political power increased communications, which in turn made the Talmud more available to Jews. Karaism may have began with Jews unhappy with Talmudic centraliztion of Jewish law.

One small thing I did not like about this book: because its focus is so narrow, it sometimes throws in obscure terms without any explanation. For example, the book repeatedly refers to Jewish sects more obscure than the Karaites (such as Mishawites and Tiflisites) without explaining who they were and what they believed.