Rabbi Joseph Karo (1488-1575) lived between Spanish-Catholic, Ottoman and Jewish cultures. Footnote 36 His family lived in Spain for several generations and had to leave the country upon general expulsion in 1492. Karo is one of the most emblematic representatives of Sephardic heritage, footnote 37 and bearer of its legal halakhic tradition, which later spread throughout the Mediterranean. The Sephardic Talmudic tradition he followed, like some of the leading Sephardic rabbis of his generation, was inspired by the Talmudic methodology of Rabbi Isaac Canpanton, the “Eminent of Castile” (1360-1463). Canpanton implicitly adopted Christian scholasticism in his teachings. In addition, legal practice in Sephardic Jewish communities has been profoundly influenced by local municipal regulations (fueros), as evidenced by rabbinic literature and non-Jewish legal testimony. Footnote 38 The Spanish halakhic tradition of the early modern period had deep roots in research before exile. But in the early modern period, new cultural and political encounters confronted him with a broader context, namely the Ottoman Empire and its particular legal tradition. Rabbi Karo`s early years were spent in the western part of the Ottoman Empire, and later he moved to the city of Safed as an adult and mature lawyer. During these years and during his stay in some cities, such as Rumeli (the “Christian” western part of the Ottoman Empire) and Bilad a-Sham (“Greater Syria”, since Safed was administratively and economically subordinate to Damascus), he wrote his double codes of law: the long version, called Beit-Yosef (The House of Joseph), and the abridged version or the Shulchan-`Aruch (A Well-Laid Table).
In his biography, Karo integrated the great cultural horizons of the Jewish diaspora, especially the Iberian diaspora, between the European zone – Catholic and Protestant – and the Ottoman Empire. At the same time, as already mentioned, it marked a clear shift in the center of gravity from the European Empire to the Ottoman Empire. A clear indication is the fact that, in addition to his legal expertise and high position, Rabbi Karo was an active mystic who documented his incessant divine revelations in a mystical journal, “The Just Revelator” (Meghid Meisharim). The interplay between legal expertise and active mysticism is hardly known in the European context – certainly not among lawyers of this caliber – but it is fairly well known in the Ottoman Empire. Footnote 39 Rabbi Karo`s legal background, dual code, teaching, and work as a judge in a court were closely linked to his European background. and especially with its Ottoman environment. Some countries have national ideas that shift their monthly piety rating to legalism (+) or mysticism (−). There are also events and missions that have a monthly piety effect. Legalism elevated to spam invalidates money and has no corruption Piety is rated on a scale between −100 (mysticism) and +100 (legalism). Each side of the scale offers a different set of scale bonuses, while the middle (piety 0) offers no bonuses.
I can`t decide, all bonuses look great, but I tend to spam mysticism because all military bonuses are useful for my war game. The changes taking place in the field of Jewish law and its concepts of legality were undeniably at the forefront of the transition to modernity, as this article will show, as will Joseph Karo`s codification project in his triple encounter of the Judeo-European-Ottoman legal heritage. An important Jewish condition that must be taken into account in this context is the very limited ability of Jewish communities to enforce their legal norms and court judgments. Especially in the Ottoman context, the limits of their legal autonomy vis-à-vis other non-Muslim minorities became even clearer. Footnote 16 – such as the Greek Orthodox or Armenians, who relied on political forces beyond the Ottoman Empire. Footnote 17 In this respect, there was little difference between communities in Amsterdam, Italian communities in major cities, or the Ottoman Empire – mainly in the Rumeli area. Footnote 18 Maimonides` idea in the Middle Ages – “We are not powerful enough to enforce religious law” Footnote 19 – also applied in the early modern period. The pagan political authorities, determined to emphasize their political power and sovereignty, defined the limits of Jewish legal autonomy. These borders hindered the development of a legal heritage that may have been shared by key elements of Jewish ecumenism. Instead, he encouraged local perspectives and fragmentary loyalties to Indigenous rabbis and jurists. Jewish communities have experienced both the advantages and disadvantages of legal pluralism and the various judicial bodies and have competed with each other.
Footnote 20 23 Sbriccoli, Mario, “criminale, Giustizia,” in Fioravanti, Maurizio, ed., Lo Stato moderno in Europa: Istituzioni e diritto (Firenze, 2005), 163–205Google Scholar. See also Sbriccoli, “Legislation, Justice, and Political Power in Italian Cities, 1200–1400,” in Padoa-Schioppa, Antonio, ed., Legislation and Justice (Oxford, 1997), 37–55Google Scholar.