Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

The politicisation of traditional Polish Jewry: Orthodox German rabbis and the founding of Agudas Ho‐Ortodoksim and Dos yidishe vort in Gouvernement‐General Warsaw, 1916–18

2009; Taylor & Francis; Volume: 39; Issue: 2 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1080/13501670903059530

1743-971X

Tobias Grill,

Polish Historical and Cultural Studies

Abstract In 1916, in the midst of the First World War, Orthodox German rabbis Dr Emanuel Carlebach and Dr Pinchas Kohn played a crucial role in founding and developing the organisation of an Orthodox party in Poland named Agudas Ho‐Ortodoksim. These attempts to politicize traditional Polish Jewry were opposed by a significant part of Polish Jewry. While some circles of traditional Jews disapproved the engagement in politics as a modern and un‐Jewish phenomenon, as a threat for their concept of Judaism, secular Jewish groups objected the new party's purely religious and strictly anti‐nationalist orientation. This orientation imposed upon Aguda by the two German rabbis led to serious clashes between them and Jewish national groups. To avoid any allusion to Zionism, especially to the Mizrachi, the religious current within the Zionist movement, Kohn and Carlebach even neglected Eretz Israel‐activities at first. Given the fact that activists of the organised Orthodox youth rejected such a stance, Aguda was eventually forced to change its policy in this regard. At the end of the First World War, the two German rabbis had to leave Warsaw due to the withdrawal of the German troops. However, what they left behind was an important Orthodox party organisation and a daily newspaper, to be taken serious by the other Jewish political groups and by the Polish authorities. Nevertheless, the accusation of foreign influence prompted the leaders of Aguda to change its name and to found a new daily immediately after the departure of Kohn and Carlebach. Keywords: Agudat Israel Polish JewryPinchas KohnEmanuel CarlebachHasidismFirst World WarWarsawMizrachiRabbisJewish politicsOrthodox JudaismZionism Notes 1. Der Israelit, no. 41 (12 October 1917): 1; Breuer, "Rabanim‐Doktorim be‐Polin‐Lita bi‐yemey ha‐kibush ha‐germani," 124–5 (footnote 31). According to Breuer there is "no doubt" that this editorial was penned by Rosenheim. 2. Bacon, "The Politics of Tradition," 145. 3. Bacon, The Politics of Tradition. Agudat Yisrael in Poland, 37. 4. Isaac Breuer, "Von Kattowitz bis Jeruscholajim," Nachalath Z'wi. Eine Monatsschrift für Judentum in Lehre und Tat (April/ May/ June 1937): 202. 5. On Joel Wegmeister in general, see Guesnet, "Chasydzki klal‐tuer wobec metropolii i nowoczesnosci," 41–57. 6. Guesnet, "Polnische Juden im 19. Jahrhundert," 237. 7. On the founding of Agudat Israel, see Mittleman, The Politics of Torah, 93–140. 8. Breuer, "Rabanim‐Doktorim be‐Polin‐Lita." 9. Bacon, The Politics of Tradition. Agudat Yisrael in Poland, 1916–39. 10. Breuer, "Rabanim‐Doktorim be‐Polin‐Lita," 147. 11. Idem. 12. In a letter to his wife, 4 March 1916, Carlebach reported that there were stormy negotiations in the executive and central council of Agudas Ho‐Ortodoksim (see Carlebach, "A German Rabbi goes East," 88), which indicates that the new organisation existed by this time. The first report of the founding of an Orthodox organisation in Warsaw was only published in Der Israelit (30 March 1916): 4. 13. Bashevis, Mayn tatns beys‐din shtub, 301. 14. Breuer, "Rabanim‐Doktorim be‐Polin‐Lita," 129. 15. Dos yidishe vort (26 June 1918): 3. 16. The proclaimed goals of the new organisation were the reconstruction of destroyed synagogues, yeshivoth, talmud‐toroth, mikvaot, hospitals, homes of rabbis and rebbes, and the support of needy rabbis, shokhtim, hazanim, preachers and other communal employees: see Jüdische Rundschau, no. 14 (7 April 1916): 119–20. 17. Kirschbraun became a Sejm deputy for the Agudah in the 1920s. See Mendelsohn, "The Politics of Agudas Yisroel," 48. 18. Der Israelit (6 April 1916): 5. See also Jüdische Rundschau (7 April 1916): 119–20. Therefore Alexander Carlebach's and later Mordechai Breuer's assumption that the "Radziner" Hasidim had founded Binyan ha‐neherasot as a competitive organisation, because, according to Breuer, they disliked the German orientation of the Agudah (see Carlebach, Adass Yeshurun of Cologne: 62; Breuer, "Rabanim‐Doktorim be‐Polin‐Lita," 129) appears incorrect, since the Gerer Rebbe was involved in the founding of both organisations and Binyan ha‐neherasot clearly lacked a political outlook. 19. Der Israelit (25 May 1916): 4. 20. Bacon, "The Politics of Tradition," 145. 21. Tönnies, Community and Civil Society; Community and Society. 22. Bacon, "Prolonged Erosion," 82. However, this does not suggest that Orthodox Jews in eastern Europe made no moves to organise themselves. As early as 1878, an Orthodox organisation named Mahzikei Ha‐Dat was founded in Galicia under the leadership of Shimon Sofer (son of the Hatam Sofer) and the rebbe of Belz. Five years later it already had 40,000 registered members, and doubtless pursued political goals, see Manekin, "Ha‐Brit ha‐hadashah," 157–86. In Russia initial steps for the first Orthodox political organisation of the Empire were taken in 1907 by the Rabbis Haim Ozer Grodzensky of Vilna, Eliezer Gordon of Tel'shi and Haim Solovejchik of Brisk. However, Knesseth Israel, as it was called, did not fully develop, mainly due to bureaucratic obstacles, see Bacon, The Politics of Tradition, 30–2. In 1909 a convention of rabbis was held in Vilna where the decision was made to found an organisation of all orthodoxy (Mitnagdim and Hasidim) in Russia and Poland, see Der Israelit, no. 19 (13 May 1909): 9. Soon these attempts bore fruit when the Agudat Israel world organisation was established. Nevertheless, we should keep in mind that eastern European orthodoxy, especially in Congress Poland, still had profound reservations on the founding of a modern Orthodox organisation. 23. See, for example, Breuer, "Rabanim‐Doktorim be‐Polin‐Lita," 128. 24. Jüdische Korrespondenz. Wochenblatt für jüdische Interessen (15 February 1917): 1. According to Bacon: "Chronologically, the Orthodox were the last sector of the Jewish public to organise politically, and did so, for the most part, as a reaction to initiatives by secular groups," Bacon, "Imitation, Rejection, Cooperation," 86–7. 25. Neue Jüdische Monatshefte (25 March 1917): 339. Goldmann's thoughts were analysed by Bacon: "Later the Jewish nationalist movements were to present, each in its particular style, new definitions of Jewish identity, that were meant to replace the traditional views. These circles saw in the traditional sector raw material that had to be reshaped; or, alternatively, they saw in the Orthodox masses a demographic reservoir from which they could recruit reinforcements for their ranks (particularly from the Orthodox youth who were liable to be alienated from tradition)," Bacon, "Prolonged Erosion," 72. 26. Der Jude (December 1916): 595. 27. On Polish Zionism, see Mendelsohn, Zionism in Poland; on the Folkists, see Kiel, "The Ideology of the Folks‐Partey," 75–89. 28. Bacon, "The Politics of Tradition," 40–1; Mendelsohn, Zionism in Poland, 49–51; Kiel, "The Ideology of the Folks‐Partey," 77–8; Lewin, The Jewish Community in Poland, 188–9. 29. Thirteenth report of E. Carlebach to Jacob Rosenheim, 29 June 1916, Correspondence Archive of the Orthodox Rabbis, The Institute for Research on Jews of the Diaspora at Bar‐Ilan University, Ramat‐Gan/ Israel. File 132, EC 71–2. Henceforward, CAOR. 30. Der Israelit (22 June 1916): 3. 31. Ibid. 32. Der Israelit (6 July 1916): 1. In a letter to his wife from 6 July 1916 Carlebach explained that in an article to be published that week, penned by him and Kohn, the situation regarding the city council elections was discussed; see Carlebach, "A German Rabbi goes East," 97. The article was published as "Nationalisten und Chassidim," Der Israelit (6 July 1916). 33. Kohn, Eine würdige Jubiläums‐Erinnerung, 28. See also Carlebach, Adass Yeshurun of Cologne, 62. On the problem of Sunday rest in interwar Poland, see Golczewski, "The Problem of Sunday Rest in Interwar Poland," 158–72 (especially 162–72). 34. On the founding meeting, see Lewin, The Jewish Community in Poland, 189–90. 35. Dos yidishe vort (25 April 1917): 6; Der Israelit (3 May 1917): 5. See also Carlebach's statement at an electoral meeting of the Agudah in March 1917 where he emphasised that "our Agudah is not a special party, but is the only one which represents everything what is required from a Jew. The Orthodox is a Zionist, because he longs for Eretz Israel, he is a Folkist, because he loves the people of Israel, he is a Yiddishist, because he uses Yiddish." "When are you able to be all this?" Carlebach asked the audience. His answer was that it was only possible when "you are a pious Jew and you believe in God," Hajnt (6 March 1917): 3. See also Mendelsohn, "The Politics of Agudas Yisroel in Inter‐War Poland," 47. Jacob Rosenheim, for example, emphasised on almost every page of his talk "Was will Agudas Jisroel?" ["What does Agudas Jisroel want?"], during Agudat Israel's founding conference in Kattowitz in 1912, the importance of the Klal Israel‐idea for the new orthodox organisation. See, Rosenheim, Ausgewählte Aufsätze und Ansprachen, vol. II, 165–71. 36. On Weinberg, see Shapiro, Between the Yeshiva World and Modern Orthodoxy. 37. Der Israelit (20 June 1918): 1. 38. Der Israelit (20 June 1918): 2. Weinberg had previously sent a letter to the Agudah conference that took place at the end of 1917. It was published in the Jüdische Presse and, according to Weinberg, misinterpreted. Therefore, he found it necessary to explain his thoughts in an open letter to the editor of Der Israelit. 39. Bacon, Prolonged Erosion, Organization and Reinforcement, 90. 40. See "Dos lebn in Varshe. Der groyser miting fun 'agudas ho‐ortodoksim'." Dos yidishe vort, no. 39 (18 March 1917): 5. 41. Lewin, The Jewish Community in Poland, 192. 42. Vos vil agudas ho‐ortodoksim?, 30. 43. Dos yidishe vort (8 March 1917): 9; Dos yidishe vort (12 March 1917): 7; Dos yidishe vort (13 March 1917): 4; Dos yidishe vort (21 March 1917): 4; Dos yidishe vort (27 March 1917): 4; Der Israelit (5 April 1917): 6; Dos yidishe vort (10 April 1917): 4; Dos yidishe vort (12 April 1917): 9; Dos yidishe vort (20 April 1917): 4; Dos yidishe vort (27 April 1917): 9; Dos yidishe vort (30 April 1917): 5; Der Israelit (3 May 1917): 5; Deutsche Israelitische Zeitung (7 June 1917): 2. Although the Agudas Ho‐Ortodoksim in Warsaw was in a way perceived as the "mother" organisation, all the other Agudot in the province were independent. An umbrella organisation only developed after the war. See also the decision of the Warsaw Aguda that all local Agudot and other orthodox organisations should get in close touch with the Warsaw Aguda in Warsaw which was in touch with the council of Torah sages, see Dos yidishe vort (15 March 1917): 5. 44. Already after "the first Reform rabbinical conference convened (Brunswick, 1844) … leading Orthodox circles realised that a newspaper representing the Orthodox standpoint was urgently needed in the fight against Reform," Breuer, Modernity within Tradition, 166. Thus, in 1845 Der Treue Zionswächter ("The faithful guardian of Zion") was founded, which initially appeared weekly and later twice monthly. The Orthodox weekly Der Israelit operated from 1860 and was closed in 1938, as a result of Nazi pressure. Other important weeklies were Die Jüdische Presse and Die Laubhütte. On the role and importance of an Orthodox press in the religious and communal life of German Jewry, see Breuer, Modernity within Tradition, 166–73. 45. There was the Zionist oriented Haynt (since 1908), Der Moment (since 1910), which propagated Jewish national (folkist) tendencies as well as the following newspapers which were founded during the war: Varshever tageblat, Lodzher tageblat und Lodzher folksblat. See Neue Jüdische Monatshefte (10 October 1916): 25. 46. Golczewski, Polnisch‐Jüdische Beziehungen 1881–1922, 147. 47. Der Israelit (1 February 1917): 4; Neue Jüdische Monatshefte (10 February 1917): 263. 48. Fun noentn ovar, vol. II, 446–8. For an English account, see Dawidowicz, The Golden Tradition, 210–11. 49. According to Bacon this attitude also endured in the interwar period: "The leaders of Aguda, including the rabbis, would urge the party's members and supporters to read the paper and subscribe to it, but in the end, they regarded the paper as an after‐the‐fact (be'diavad) concession to reality, and not an ideal. Reading the party's newspaper could never be regarded as a religious obligation (mitzvah), and reading the paper should never be at the expense of Torah study," Bacon, "Imitation, Rejection, Cooperation," 89. 50. Neue Jüdische Monatshefte (25 April 1917): 424. 51. Fun noentn ovar, 449; Der Israelit (8 February 1917): 5. 52. Singer, In my Father's Court, 211. 53. Dos yidishe vort (5 March 1917): 8. Dos yidishe vort also had (young) employees whose roots were in traditional Polish Jewry, and who also used a modern language. For example, Israel Yoshua Singer "started his career" in the orthodox daily. His first contribution was a "humorous tale of a spinster," something that doubtless also would have displeased Singer's father; Singer, In my Father's Court, 211. 54. How much Carlebach seemed to pull strings can be seen in a letter to his wife, 9 May 1917: "The format of the newspaper was the wish of all readers. Here, the reader wants to get as much as possible for his money. Right now, I am not at all able to write articles, but none will be published which I have not proofread"; COAR, file 132, EC 137. 55. For example, Der Israelit, 21 February 1918: 1–2; 28 February 1918: 1–2; 7 March 1918: 1–2. See also, Dos yidishe vort, 22 March 1918: 2; 27 March 1918: 2; 5 April 1918: 3. 56. For example, on the character of the people of Israel, see Dos yidishe vort, 6 April 1917: 2 and 10 April 1917: 3; on justice, see Dos yidishe vort, 12 April 1918: 4; 26 April 1918: 4; 16 May 1918: 7. 57. On N.H. Ehrmann who was several times named as Ha‐rav ha‐Ga'on ha‐Tsadik and therefore put on the same level with the sages of Chassidim and Mitnaggdim, see Dos yidishe vort (22 March 1918): 5; Dos yidishe vort (27 March 1918): 3. On Shavuot‐Yom‐Tov, see Dos yidishe vort (16 May 1918): 6; on Elul and religious motives, see Dos yidishe vort, 2 August 1918: 3. 58. On the Jewish problem, see Dos yidishe vort (17 July 1918): 3. 59. On the Jewish problem, see ibid. (14 June 1918): 3. 60. On pious‐religious Judaism and Zionism, see Dos yidishe vort (18 January 1918): 5; (25 January 1918): 3; on the negative aspect of Jewish emancipation, see Dos yidishe vort (1 February 1918): 4; (8 February 1918): 3. 61. Additionally, Dr Naftali Herz should be mentioned, who published many articles in Dos yidishe vort; for example, (30 March 1917): 5; (6 April 1917)(12 April 1917). Max Mayer wrote that Herz was also a German Jew and the "pseudonym for a Person who is very close to Rabbi Pinchas Kohn," Jüdische Rundschau (11 May 1917): 157. Most probably it was Emanuel Carlebach himself. The great influence of German Orthodoxy on the shaping of Dos yidishe vort was especially noted by the Zionist Jüdische Rundschau (9 February 1917): 53; (30 March 1917): 107; but it should be added that Dos yidishe vort also published articles of German Jews who were not followers of German Orthodoxy of Frankfurt coinage, such as pieces by Martin Buber and Herman Cohen, Dos yidishe vort (2 August 1918): 3; (12 April 1918): 4, first published in Neue Jüdische Monatshefte (10 March 1918): 254–9. 62. Singer, In my Father's Court: 211. 63. See also Mittleman, The Politics of Torah: 6, who described the attitude of eastern European Orthodox Jews on the founding of Agudat Israel in Kattowitz as follows: "Deeply distrustful of political development as a sign of the new, which was 'forbidden' by the Torah, the heads of Lithuanian yeshivot and hasidic dynasties nonetheless validated the Agudah movement as a purely defensive stratagem." 64. See Carlebach's report to Rosenheim, 29 June 1916: through his "active assistance and through his oral presentations and talks," an orthodox Youth organisation named Tevunah had been founded. See also Kohn, Eine würdige Jubiläums‐Erinnerung: 28. According to one contemporary account the two German rabbis founded 83 orthodox youth organisations until June 1918: see, Der Israelit (27 June 1918): 1. On the importance of Carlebach and Kohn for the Orthodox youth movement in Poland, see Breuer, "Rabanim‐Doktorim be‐Polin‐Lita," 150. 65. Jüdische Rundschau (10 March 1916): 84. The two rabbis also gave talks to youth organisations such as Tevunah or Tzeirei Yehudah. According to Carlebach, he spoke weekly to Tevunah; see his letter, 13 July 1916, in Carlebach, "A German Rabbi goes East," 99. Here he gave a talk on the "Ethics of the Talmud"; see announcement in Dos yidishe vort (2 January 1918): 1; (7 January 1918): 4. A lecture on the "duties of the Torah‐true Jews" had sold 1200 tickets a few days before; see Carlebach's letter, 22 November 1916 in Carlebach, "A German Rabbi goes East," 105. Pinchas Kohn also gave a series of lectures to Tevunah on Jewish history; see Der Moment (8 February 1917): 3. On Carlebach and Tevunah, see letter to his wife, 5 February 1917, COAR, file 132, EC 134–5; file 132, EC 210. 66. For example, Zysha Frydman, founder and leader of the Polish Agudat Israel youth organisation after the war, had studied during the time of German occupation with Emanuel Carlebach. From 1925 he was the General Secretary of Agudat Yisrael in Poland: Sztejn and Wejszman, Pinkas Sochaczew: 676. According to Bacon, The Politics of Tradition, 237: "With the formation of Agudat Yisrael, a third type of leader emerged in the orthodox community. This was the party functionary – the young orthodox Jew who had been recruited by the German rabbis during World War One or who had grown up in the Aguda youth movement. These young men, some of whom even possessed university degrees, took to partisan politics in a much more natural manner than their elders, and functioned in editorial, secretarial, educational, and other staff capacities. Though leaders of this type did not enter parliament, by the thirties they had made their political debut on the local level – in the kehillot and city councils." 67. Jüdische Rundschau (30 March 1917): 107. To accuse the political opponent of assimilation was a reproach often used by both sides, see, for example, Dos yidishe vort (3 May 1918): 5. 68. Der Moment (16 March 1917): 4. 69. Jüdische Rundschau (16 March 1917): 96; (30 March 1917): 107. 70. Pinchas Kohn in Dos yidishe vort, (27 April 1917): 2. 71. Der Moment (10 January 1918): 3. 72. Dos yidishe vort (11 January 1918): 6. 73. This should not suggest that Kohn and Carlebach were the sole initiators of this confrontation. Before the outbreak of the war the attitude of Polish Orthodoxy towards Zionism was already very hostile, see Breuer, "Rabanim‐Doktorim be‐Polin‐Lita," 147; Bacon, "Reluctant Partners, Ideological Opponents," 71–2. 74. Deutsche Israelitische Zeitung (21 February 1918): 10. 75. Mendelsohn, "The Politics of Agudas Yisroel in Inter‐War Poland," 49. 76. Hoher Staatsrat, Warschau, 30 January 1917, in Carlebach, "A German Rabbi goes East," 107–8. The German Zionist Max Mayer criticised this address for its servile content, which was incompatible with the dignity of Polish Jewry, see Jüdische Rundschau (30 March 1917): 107. Nevertheless, such a stance was quickly adopted by orthodox Polish Jews, see, for example, the statement of Moyshe Pfeffer in the Polish state council, summer 1918, Dos yidishe vort (27 June 1918): 4. 77. For example, Carlebach explained in an article in Dos yidishe vort that Orthodoxy never emphasised the national idea because through the Zionists, Folkists and other national Jews it had received a political meaning and therefore lost its holiness; see Tzofnat Paneakh (= E. Carlebach), in Dos yidishe vort (6 March 1917): 2. About 20 years later Kohn wrote: "What the gola had eked out in severe, most severe internal fights that was the primacy of the Torah, eventually culminating in the founding of the Agudas Jisroel. She at that time was signified as the coronation of the opus of S.R. Hirsch, and under this banner she settled in Palestine, however – to deny this would not be historic – with a predominant emphasis on the confessional, in Poland even under a direct battle position against the in a full consequence aspired nationalisation of Jewish affairs of the Zionist side"; Nachalath Z'wi. Eine Monatsschrift für Judentum in Lehre und Tat (October/ November/December 1936): 21. 78. Der Israelit (14 June 1917): 4. 79. Idem. See also, Dos yidishe vort (2 January 1918): 4, which reported that Knesseth Israel would hold a general assembly the next day and that the organisation predominantly strives to found a range of colonies in Eretz Israel in which the Torah should be the only guideline of life. 80. See also the founding meeting of the Agudas Ho‐Ortodoksim in Łódz where several participants required that the settlement of Eretz Israel should be integrated into the programme of activities. Eventually this question was handed over to the future administration to work out proposals; see Dos yidishe vort (27 April 1917): 10. 81. Jüdische Korrespondenz. Wochenblatt für jüdische Interessen (9 August 1917): 2. Such a conference of Orthodox organisations in the realm of the Central Powers eventually took place at the end of January 1918. 82. Even though Neufeld rejoined the Agudah he remained one of its harshest critics, mainly because of its negative attitude towards Zionism and Eretz Israel. 83. Dos yidishe vort (4 September 1917): 6. See Salmon, Religion and Zionism, 364 and Bacon, "Reluctant Partners, Ideological Opponents," 79–81. 84. Jüdische Korrespondenz (16 August 1917): 2. Of course, such a stance was not adopted unanimously. For example, the Lubavicher Rebbe Shalom Dov Baer Schneersohn seceded from Netsakh Israel because of its Zionist tendencies and founded another traditional organisation in Russia, named Shlomey Emuney Israel. Nevertheless, he also refrained from supporting Agudat Israel: Salmon, Religion and Zionism, 324. 85. Breuer, "Rabanim‐Doktorim be‐Polin‐Lita," 143. 86. Supplement to Die Laubhütte (21 February 1918): 11. 87. Jüdische Monatshefte (December 1917): 358–9. This article, probably written by Kohn himself, raised the question of whether the colonisation of Palestine was really a religious duty, a mitzvah. 88. Dos yidishe vort (4 January 1918): 8. 89. Dos yidishe vort (10 January 1918): 4. See similar reports in Der Moment, 10 January 1918: 3; Der Israelit (17 January 1918): 4. 90. Dos yidishe vort (3 February 1918): 4. At the same time a conference of orthodox organisations in the realm of the Central Powers had expressed its positive attitude towards Eretz Israel and settlement there: Der Israelit (7 February 1918): 2–3. As representatives of Agudas Ho‐Ortodoksim were not able to participate in this conference because of the war, they sent their opinions on the agenda. 91. Dos yidishe vort (10 March 1918): 3. 92. Dos yidishe vort (27 March 1918): 7. The programme showed very clearly the Torah im derekh eretz‐approach of Tevunah. 93. Dos yidishe vort (16 May 1918): 7; Der Israelit (30 May 1918): 3. Already in March 1918 a group of Agudah‐affiliated rabbis and rebbes proclaimed that because Yishuv Eretz Israel is a mitzvah, it was therefore a duty of the organisation to act in the spirit of the Torah through a real and dedicated work in this field: Dos yidishe vort, 19 March 1918: 2; Jüdische Korrespondenz (11 April 1918): 4. 94. Der Israelit (27 June 1918): 1. 95. Bacon, "Reluctant Partners, Ideological Opponents," 77. 96. Dos yidishe vort (24 July 1918): 3; Der Israelit (1 August 1918): 4. 97. Dos yidishe vort (25 July 1918): 2; Dos yidishe vort (26 July 1918): 2; Dos yidishe vort (28 July 1918): 2. 98. Der Israelit (17 April 1918): 3. 99. Dos yidishe vort (19 July 1918): 4. 100. Dos yidishe vort (29 October 1918): 4. 101. Letter from Carlebach to his wife (13 July 1917), COAR, file 132, EC 149. 102. Dos yidishe vort (21 May 1918): 3. 103. Dos yidishe vort (2 January 1918): 3. 104. Der Israelit (27 March 1918): 6–7. 105. Bacon, The Politics of Tradition: 85, 193–4. 106. Stein, "Die politische Entwicklung im polnischen Judentum während der Zeit der deutschen Okkupation," 176. 107. Tagesbericht aus der polnischen und jüdischen Presse (16 April 1918): 4. 108. Der Moment, 4 October 1918; Tagesbericht aus der polnischen und jüdischen Presse (8 October 1918): 4. 109. As quoted in Bacon, The Politics of Tradition, 70. 110. Jüdische Rundschau (4 January 1918): 2. Kohn's memorandum was not meant to be published, but it aroused an enormous scandal, among not only nationally oriented Jews, but also orthodox Jews in Germany, such as Rabbi Joseph Wohlgemuth, who attacked Kohn for his memorandum especially because he had accused the national Jews of being mainly responsible for Polish anti‐Semitism and described Litwaks as a destructive element. See Die Jüdische Presse (18 January 1918): 22–4. However, Kohn's dictum about the Litwaks was not unique at this time; see Guesnet, "Polnische Juden im 19. Jahrhundert," 61–78. On the reactions to Kohn's memorandum, see also Breuer, "Rabanim‐Doktorim be‐Polin‐Lita," 139–40. 111. Bacon, "Reluctant Partners, Ideological Opponents," 76. 112. Bacon, The Politics of Tradition, 43. 113. Neue Jüdische Monatshefte (25 March 1917): 342; Jüdische Rundschau (30 March 1917): 107; Jüdische Rundschau (10 August 1917): 261; Neue Jüdische Monatshefte (10 September 1917): 661; Der Moment ((10 January 1918): 3; Stein, "Die politische Entwicklung im polnischen Judentem," 158–9. 114. Stein, "Die politische Entwicklung im polnischen Judentum," 158. 115. Letter of Agudas Shlomey Emuney Yisroel to Emanuel Carlebach, (26 February 1922), COAR, file 132, EC 6–7.