[Avodah] Nittelnacht

[Richard Wolberg]

Nittelnacht

A few centuries before Jews started observing the custom of eating  
Chinese food on x-mas                          																				Eve  
there was another Jewish custom which was observed on that

night called Nittelnacht. Its observance consisted of an avoidance of
studying Torah and people would do such things as play cards. In some
Ashkenazic communities religious study was actually prohibited on x- 
mas. Card playing was considered as a
form of gambling (or at least as a temptation to
gamble) so devout Jews would never do it the rest of the year. But on
Nittelnacht, it was allowed. Why this should be the case isn't clear --
one source says it was to keep the Jews alert in case of an attack,  
but this
seems a bit unlikely. In the terminology of those communities, x-mas is

referred to as Nittel. The simplest explanation of the word is as a  
variant
form of the Latin natalis, as in dies natalis or natale dominus,
meaning day of birth, the same word that gives us the French Noël.  
Nittel is also
the Yiddish word for x-tmas. My grandmother used the word Chrastmich
(scratch me – a play on the word). However, the Yiddish word also  
carries
another meaning. 'Nit' means 'Nothing' in Yiddish, so with the  
affectionate diminutive ‘l ending, Nittlenacht becomes
"The night of little nothing".

However, later generations, for whom the original derivation was no  
longer familiar,
subjected it to their own imaginative attempts at speculative etymology.

The most frequently cited theory traced Nittel to the Hebrew
form nitleh meaning 'hanged', a word that could legitimately be applied
to a victim of crucifixion.

Other writers favored a derivation from Hebrew nittal, meaning taken.
Though this produces a better similarity of sounds, its connection to  
x-mas
is harder to fathom. Supporters of this reading understood it in the  
sense of
the one who was taken from Judaism or the arrested one, though this  
designation
would apply more appropriately to Easter.

The avoidance of Torah study on a gentile holy day is a
puzzling notion that seems downright pathological in its readiness to  
diminish
one's own spiritual growth in order to deny recognition to someone  
else's
faith. While such narrow-mindedness might have been understandable in  
the
ghettos of medieval Europe where it originated, it is particularly  
distasteful
to find it continued into our own days.

Evidently, this custom was not merely a marginal phenomenon
in Ashkenazic communities; The proscription of study on x-mas is  
mentioned
by several respectable halakhic authorities, and in some circles it  
was treated
as a quasi-obligatory practice.

Occasionally, the differing attitudes towards Nittel-nacht
were recognized as criteria for distinguishing between the Hassidim  
and their
opponents. Thus, we find that the scholarly orientation of the  
Lithuanian
yeshivas led many of their leaders to oppose any interruption of study  
on
x-tmas eve, whereas Hassidic lore depicted the night as a time of  
sinister
metaphysical foreboding that must be treated with grave vigilance.


It has also been said  that some Jews fasted on that night,
as a sign of sorrow for the start of major troubles for the Jewish  
people,
though there are no sources to that effect.

Nowadays, Nittelnacht certainly isn't observed outside the Haredi  
communities, and
probably even by them either. Some of its customs - like playing cards  
- have
been incorporated, more positively, into Hanukah.

Not convinced that mere religious contempt provided a
sufficient justification for abstaining from such a vital mitzvah of  
learning,
some Jewish authors sought other rationales for the custom. Rabbi  
Nathan Adler
of Frankfort interpreted it as an expression of mourning, presumably  
for all
the persecutions that were inflicted on Jews since the inception of x- 
ianity.
In this respect, it was comparable to the prohibition of Torah study  
that is
observed on Tisha b'Av.

His student, the Hassam Sofer of Pressburg,
objected that Rabbi Adler's explanation failed to account adequately  
for the
widespread practice of limiting the prohibition to the hours until  
midnight. He
therefore proposed a different theory: the real purpose of the custom  
was to
encourage Jews to resume their studies after midnight, because
otherwise they might (from a heavenly perspective) be compared  
adversely with
the devout gentiles who were spending x-mas eve in pious devotion in  
their
churches.

A nineteenth-century scholar suggested that the custom had
evolved from what were initially pragmatic considerations. Because in  
earlier times,
x-mas eve had been an occasion for assaults on Jewish institutions, it  
had
been recommended that the yeshivas be left dark and empty during that  
night, in
order to keep potential attackers from being attracted to the lights.  
Such attacks often happened, and
the communities responded by keeping quiet and being ready.

Those who forbade study on Nittel night insisted that grave
consequences would befall people who transgressed the prohibition. One  
Hasidic
rabbi attested that irresponsible individuals who insisted on pursuing  
their
studies had their houses visited by dogs — a terrifying prospect for  
eastern
European Jews, especially since (as the writer hints) dogs have symbolic
associations with the demonic realms.

An odd development in the nineteenth century rabbinic
discourse involved the identification of Nittel with the winter  
solstice.
Because the astronomical definition of the solstice is at variance  
with the
halakhic usage, and the disparities between the Julian and Gregorian  
calendars
lead to divergences in the computations used by different churches, this
interpretation has given rise to some peculiar Gemara arguments over  
such
questions as: the correct halakhic date of x-mas; whether the ban on
learning can override Shabbos; and how to determine the precise moment  
when
x-mas night begins!

Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik used to comment that "he is willing to see  
the Hell he  
gets 
                                                                                                                                                                                                   for 
  learning Xmas eve, and the heaven someone  else gets for playing  
cards instead".



In 1911 there was an infamous blood libel in the Ukraine known as the  
Beilis trial. One of  
the 
                                                                                                                                                                                       "expert 
  witnesses" for the prosecution was the notorious anti-semitic priest  
Justin Pranaitis, the  
author 
                                                                                                                                                                        of 
  the anti-semetic tract The Talmud Unmasked. Louis Ginzberg was asked  
by Louis Marshall  
(constitutional 
                                                                                                                                                              lawyer 
  and Jewish communal leader) to formulate a response to Pranaitis'  
testimony. In his response Ginzberg 																		       noted  
that in at least one place in his book Pranaitis wrote that when the  
Jews called x-mas Nitalthey were  
actually                                                   
										                       cursing Jesus. Ginzberg points out  
that it is actually from the medieval Latin Natale Domini, which means  
"birth of the lord". 																       Ginzberg goes on to say  
"Is it thinkable that a priest should not know the Latin forx-mas? Of  
course we have to admit, we have 														               no  
knowledge of the education of the Turkestan priesthood, and it is  
perhaps possible that Paranaitis does not know Latin".

One time a Professor who explained the custom of not studying Torah on  
Nittelnacht said that it is
nice to know that, no matter how far away from tradition a Jew might  
be, it is
likely that he or she at least observes this one Jewish custom!

Does anyone have an answer for:  If one of the reasons for this minhag  
was the danger of getting beaten up outside, then why isn't there a  
such minhag for  
Easter 
?                                                                   In  
fact, the danger was much greater on the latter day, since that was  
when anti-Semitic sermons were delivered blaming the Jews for the  
crucifixion. Any ideas?




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20071223/28bdba29/attachment.htm>