Article:1.6.3 - Revision history

FrontUI: Edited via Kirby Panel: ilialurie@yahoo.com

2026-10-11T19:51:31Z

Edited via Kirby Panel: ilialurie@yahoo.com

FrontUI: Edited via Kirby Panel: ilialurie@yahoo.com

2026-08-29T11:42:16Z

Edited via Kirby Panel: ilialurie@yahoo.com

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:42, 29 August 2026
Line 47:		Line 47:
	As for the legal methodology underpinning his rulings, Rema declared that he had privileged custom and given precedence to the halakhic positions of recent Ashkenazi scholars. In this way, Rema indicated that his method diverged from that of two great decisors of his generation – Rabbi Karo and Maharshal.		As for the legal methodology underpinning his rulings, Rema declared that he had privileged custom and given precedence to the halakhic positions of recent Ashkenazi scholars. In this way, Rema indicated that his method diverged from that of two great decisors of his generation – Rabbi Karo and Maharshal.

	Rabbi Karo codificatory writings relied on principles that he himself had formulated. In particular, Rabbi Karo based his decisions on “the three pillars of instruction” – Rabbi '''~~Yiẓḥaḳ~~ Alfasi''', the '''Rif''' (1013-1103), '''Moses Maimonides''', the '''Rambam''' (1138-1204), and Rabbi '''Asher ben Yeḥiel''', the '''Rosh''' (1250-1327). These medieval scholars came from different locations and lived in different periods, such that Rabbi Karo had created a virtual panel of judges who never actually sat together.		Rabbi Karo codificatory writings relied on principles that he himself had formulated. In particular, Rabbi Karo based his decisions on “the three pillars of instruction” – Rabbi '''Yisḥak Alfasi''', the '''Rif''' (1013-1103), '''Moses Maimonides''', the '''Rambam''' (1138-1204), and Rabbi '''Asher ben Yeḥiel''', the '''Rosh''' (1250-1327). These medieval scholars came from different locations and lived in different periods, such that Rabbi Karo had created a virtual panel of judges who never actually sat together.

	Maharshal’s method was to examine legal topics from their roots in the Talmud, through the ebb and flow of the discourse over the ages. Maharshal avoided privileging the opinions of specific decisors, received traditions, or existing custom. His analytical method was rigorous, independent, and merits-based.		Maharshal’s method was to examine legal topics from their roots in the Talmud, through the ebb and flow of the discourse over the ages. Maharshal avoided privileging the opinions of specific decisors, received traditions, or existing custom. His analytical method was rigorous, independent, and merits-based.

FrontUI: Edited via Kirby Panel: ilialurie@yahoo.com

2026-08-29T11:38:13Z

Edited via Kirby Panel: ilialurie@yahoo.com

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:38, 29 August 2026
Line 17:		Line 17:
	'''Levi Cooper'''		'''Levi Cooper'''

	Rabbi Mosheh Isserles (d. 1572) is the doyen of Jewish law for Ashkenazi Jewry. A native of Kraków, he is widely known by the acronym Rema which gave rise to the motto: “''U-venei yisrael yotse’im be-yad'' ''Rema''” – and the children of Israel go out by the hand of Rema, a pun on the biblical verse in Exod. 14:8 where the final word means high hand and is originally spelled with the Hebrew letter ''heh'' at the end, but here spelled with an ''aleph'' to indicate Mosheh Isserles. Rema’s halakhic positions are best known from his annotations to [[https://encyclopedia.yivo.org/article/44\|''Shulḥan ʻArukh'']] [The Set Table] – the code of Jewish law penned by Rema’s contemporary, Rabbi '''Joseph Karo''' (1488-1575).		Rabbi Mosheh Isserles (d. 1572) is the doyen of Jewish law for Ashkenazi Jewry. A native of Kraków, he is widely known by the acronym Rema which gave rise to the motto: “''U-venei yisrael yotse’im be-yad'' ''Rema''” – and the children of Israel go out by the hand of Rema, a pun on the biblical verse in Exod. 14:8 where the final word means high hand and is originally spelled with the Hebrew letter ''heh'' at the end, but here spelled with an ''aleph'' to indicate Mosheh Isserles. Rema’s halakhic positions are best known from his annotations to [https://encyclopedia.yivo.org/article/44\|''Shulḥan ʻArukh''] [The Set Table] – the code of Jewish law penned by Rema’s contemporary, Rabbi '''Joseph Karo''' (1488-1575).

	Rema was born in Kazimierz just outside Kraków and journeyed to Lublin to study with Rabbi '''Shalom Shakhna''' (d. 1558). At that time, a debate took place among scholars in Lublin concerning the codification of Jewish law. The issue at hand was whether it was an appropriate and worthy enterprise to write a book of rulings that summarizes the halakhic discourse and establishes clear rules of conduct. The debate in Lublin was occurring at the same time as Rabbi Karo was busy with his codificatory projects, but the two deliberations were independent of each other. Indeed, the first volume of Rabbi Karo’s halakhic work, ''Beit Yosef'' [The House of Joseph], was published in Venice in 1550, while the debate in Lublin preceded that date, before Rema returned to Kraków sometime before 1547.		Rema was born in Kazimierz just outside Kraków and journeyed to Lublin to study with Rabbi '''Shalom Shakhna''' (d. 1558). At that time, a debate took place among scholars in Lublin concerning the codification of Jewish law. The issue at hand was whether it was an appropriate and worthy enterprise to write a book of rulings that summarizes the halakhic discourse and establishes clear rules of conduct. The debate in Lublin was occurring at the same time as Rabbi Karo was busy with his codificatory projects, but the two deliberations were independent of each other. Indeed, the first volume of Rabbi Karo’s halakhic work, ''Beit Yosef'' [The House of Joseph], was published in Venice in 1550, while the debate in Lublin preceded that date, before Rema returned to Kraków sometime before 1547.
Line 25:		Line 25:
	Despite his students’ entreaties, Rabbi Shalom Shakhna refused to write a code of law, or any legal treatise. He feared that such a book might limit the freedom of future jurists to rule as they saw fit, since they might feel bound by the written word. His own approach, as his son communicated it, was to encourage “each person to make time-sensitive rulings (''hora’at sha‘ah'') according to his own heart.”<ref><span dir="rtl"></span>''Teshuvot mei-ha-rema'' (Kraków 1640), §25, fol. 59 col. 4 – fol. 65 col. 4.</ref>		Despite his students’ entreaties, Rabbi Shalom Shakhna refused to write a code of law, or any legal treatise. He feared that such a book might limit the freedom of future jurists to rule as they saw fit, since they might feel bound by the written word. His own approach, as his son communicated it, was to encourage “each person to make time-sensitive rulings (''hora’at sha‘ah'') according to his own heart.”<ref><span dir="rtl"></span>''Teshuvot mei-ha-rema'' (Kraków 1640), §25, fol. 59 col. 4 – fol. 65 col. 4.</ref>

	One of Rabbi Shalom Shakhna’s disciples, Rabbi '''Ḥayim ben Betsalel of Friedberg''' (ca. 1525-1588), followed his teacher’s approach and staunchly opposed any type of codification of Jewish law. He specifically attacked one of Rema’s codificatory works, as well as Rabbi Karo’s ''Shulḥan ʻArukh''. Rabbi Ḥayim’s younger brother – Rabbi '''Yehudah Löw''', the famed [[https://encyclopedia.yivo.org/article/414\|'''Maharal''' '''of Prague''']] (d. 1609) – also opposed codification of Jewish law. Rabbi Ḥayim’s resistance was articulated in the introduction to his book, which was printed many years after his death under the provocative title ''Vikuaḥ Mayim Ḥayim'' [The Flowing Waters Polemic], Amsterdam 1712.		One of Rabbi Shalom Shakhna’s disciples, Rabbi '''Ḥayim ben Betsalel of Friedberg''' (ca. 1525-1588), followed his teacher’s approach and staunchly opposed any type of codification of Jewish law. He specifically attacked one of Rema’s codificatory works, as well as Rabbi Karo’s ''Shulḥan ʻArukh''. Rabbi Ḥayim’s younger brother – Rabbi '''Yehudah Löw''', the famed [https://encyclopedia.yivo.org/article/414\|'''Maharal''' '''of Prague'''] (d. 1609) – also opposed codification of Jewish law. Rabbi Ḥayim’s resistance was articulated in the introduction to his book, which was printed many years after his death under the provocative title ''Vikuaḥ Mayim Ḥayim'' [The Flowing Waters Polemic], Amsterdam 1712.

	Another student of Rabbi Shalom Shakhna, Rabbi [https://encyclopedia.yivo.org/article/1183\|'''Shelomoh Luria'''], the '''Maharshal''' (1510-1573), suggested combining theoretical study with halakhic ruling, striking a balance between adherence to the argumentative discourse in talmudic pericopes and the need to reach a halakhic verdict from the inter-generational discussions and debates. This method was presented in his book ''Yam shel Shelomoh'' [The Sea of Solomon], which was written on some – though not all – tractates of Talmud.		Another student of Rabbi Shalom Shakhna, Rabbi [https://encyclopedia.yivo.org/article/1183\|'''Shelomoh Luria'''], the '''Maharshal''' (1510-1573), suggested combining theoretical study with halakhic ruling, striking a balance between adherence to the argumentative discourse in talmudic pericopes and the need to reach a halakhic verdict from the inter-generational discussions and debates. This method was presented in his book ''Yam shel Shelomoh'' [The Sea of Solomon], which was written on some – though not all – tractates of Talmud.

FrontUI: Edited via Kirby Panel: ilialurie@yahoo.com

2026-08-29T11:35:55Z

Edited via Kirby Panel: ilialurie@yahoo.com

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:35, 29 August 2026
Line 27:		Line 27:
	One of Rabbi Shalom Shakhna’s disciples, Rabbi '''Ḥayim ben Betsalel of Friedberg''' (ca. 1525-1588), followed his teacher’s approach and staunchly opposed any type of codification of Jewish law. He specifically attacked one of Rema’s codificatory works, as well as Rabbi Karo’s ''Shulḥan ʻArukh''. Rabbi Ḥayim’s younger brother – Rabbi '''Yehudah Löw''', the famed [[https://encyclopedia.yivo.org/article/414\|'''Maharal''' '''of Prague''']] (d. 1609) – also opposed codification of Jewish law. Rabbi Ḥayim’s resistance was articulated in the introduction to his book, which was printed many years after his death under the provocative title ''Vikuaḥ Mayim Ḥayim'' [The Flowing Waters Polemic], Amsterdam 1712.		One of Rabbi Shalom Shakhna’s disciples, Rabbi '''Ḥayim ben Betsalel of Friedberg''' (ca. 1525-1588), followed his teacher’s approach and staunchly opposed any type of codification of Jewish law. He specifically attacked one of Rema’s codificatory works, as well as Rabbi Karo’s ''Shulḥan ʻArukh''. Rabbi Ḥayim’s younger brother – Rabbi '''Yehudah Löw''', the famed [[https://encyclopedia.yivo.org/article/414\|'''Maharal''' '''of Prague''']] (d. 1609) – also opposed codification of Jewish law. Rabbi Ḥayim’s resistance was articulated in the introduction to his book, which was printed many years after his death under the provocative title ''Vikuaḥ Mayim Ḥayim'' [The Flowing Waters Polemic], Amsterdam 1712.

	Another student of Rabbi Shalom Shakhna, Rabbi [[https://encyclopedia.yivo.org/article/1183\|'''Shelomoh Luria''']], the '''Maharshal''' (1510-1573), suggested combining theoretical study with halakhic ruling, striking a balance between adherence to the argumentative discourse in talmudic pericopes and the need to reach a halakhic verdict from the inter-generational discussions and debates. This method was presented in his book ''Yam shel Shelomoh'' [The Sea of Solomon], which was written on some – though not all – tractates of Talmud.		Another student of Rabbi Shalom Shakhna, Rabbi [https://encyclopedia.yivo.org/article/1183\|'''Shelomoh Luria'''], the '''Maharshal''' (1510-1573), suggested combining theoretical study with halakhic ruling, striking a balance between adherence to the argumentative discourse in talmudic pericopes and the need to reach a halakhic verdict from the inter-generational discussions and debates. This method was presented in his book ''Yam shel Shelomoh'' [The Sea of Solomon], which was written on some – though not all – tractates of Talmud.

	Rema was the one student of Rabbi Shalom Shakhna who sought to contribute to the codification of Jewish law, by providing crisp rules that could be understood by all.		Rema was the one student of Rabbi Shalom Shakhna who sought to contribute to the codification of Jewish law, by providing crisp rules that could be understood by all.

Liat: Import from JSON

2026-07-12T16:10:43Z

Import from JSON

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:10, 12 July 2026
Line 9:		Line 9:
	\|HasRelatedEntries=Article:1.6.1; Article:1.6.2		\|HasRelatedEntries=Article:1.6.1; Article:1.6.2
	\|HasMainPicture=Image:1.6.3-Rema-7a		\|HasMainPicture=Image:1.6.3-Rema-7a
	\|HasGalleryImages=Image:1.6.3-Rema-1; Image:1.6.3-Rema-2; Image:1.6.3-Rema-3; Image:1.6.3-Rema-4; Image:1.6.3-Rema-5; Image:1.6.3-Rema-6; Image:1.6.3-Rema-7a; Image:1.6.3-Rema-7b; Image:1.6.3-Rema-8; Image:1.6.3-Rema-9~~; Image:Rema Synagogue~~		\|HasGalleryImages=Image:1.6.3-Rema-1; Image:1.6.3-Rema-2; Image:1.6.3-Rema-3; Image:1.6.3-Rema-4; Image:1.6.3-Rema-5; Image:1.6.3-Rema-6; Image:1.6.3-Rema-7a; Image:1.6.3-Rema-7b; Image:1.6.3-Rema-8; Image:1.6.3-Rema-9
	\|HasNationalLibraryCode=997013604473405172		\|HasNationalLibraryCode=997013604473405172
	}}		}}

Liat: Import from JSON

2026-06-28T13:01:27Z

Import from JSON

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:01, 28 June 2026
Line 6:		Line 6:
	\|HasTimePeriod=Before 1772		\|HasTimePeriod=Before 1772
	\|HasRegion=Galicia		\|HasRegion=Galicia
	\|HasExtension=Extension:Ex-1.6.3-1; Extension:Ex-1.4.3-2; Extension:Ex-1.6.3-3; Extension:Ex-1.6.3-4; Extension:Ex-1.6.3-5		\|HasExtension=Extension:Ex-1.6.3-1; Extension:Ex-1.6.3-2; Extension:Ex-1.6.3-3; Extension:Ex-1.6.3-4; Extension:Ex-1.6.3-5
	\|HasRelatedEntries=Article:1.6.1; Article:1.6.2		\|HasRelatedEntries=Article:1.6.1; Article:1.6.2
	\|HasMainPicture=Image:1.6.3-Rema-7a		\|HasMainPicture=Image:1.6.3-Rema-7a
	\|HasNationalLibraryCode=~~997013604472605171~~		\|HasGalleryImages=Image:1.6.3-Rema-1; Image:1.6.3-Rema-2; Image:1.6.3-Rema-3; Image:1.6.3-Rema-4; Image:1.6.3-Rema-5; Image:1.6.3-Rema-6; Image:1.6.3-Rema-7a; Image:1.6.3-Rema-7b; Image:1.6.3-Rema-8; Image:1.6.3-Rema-9; Image:Rema Synagogue
			\|HasNationalLibraryCode=997013604473405172
	}}		}}

	<span id="rabbi-mosheh-isserles-and-the-codification-of-jewish-law"></span>		<span id="rabbi-mosheh-isserles-and-the-codification-of-jewish-law"></span>
	= Rabbi Mosheh Isserles and the Codification of Jewish Law =		= Rabbi Mosheh Isserles and the Codification of Jewish Law =

Liat: Import body from Word

2026-06-05T11:51:52Z

Import body from Word

Show changes

Liat: Import from JSON

2026-06-05T11:44:48Z

Import from JSON

Show changes

Liat at 11:25, 5 June 2026

2026-06-05T11:25:32Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:25, 5 June 2026
Line 7:		Line 7:
	\|HasExtension=Ex-1.6.3-1; Ex-1.4.3-2; Ex-1.6.3-3; Ex-1.6.3-4; Ex-1.6.3-5		\|HasExtension=Ex-1.6.3-1; Ex-1.4.3-2; Ex-1.6.3-3; Ex-1.6.3-4; Ex-1.6.3-5
	\|HasRelatedEntries=1.6.1; 1.6.2		\|HasRelatedEntries=1.6.1; 1.6.2
	\|HasMainPicture=1.6.3-Rema-7a		\|HasMainPicture=Image:1.6.3-Rema-7a
	\|HasNationalLibraryCode=997013604472605171		\|HasNationalLibraryCode=997013604472605171
	}}		}}

Liat: Import body from Word

2026-06-05T11:19:19Z

Import body from Word

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:19, 5 June 2026
Line 10:		Line 10:
	\|HasNationalLibraryCode=997013604472605171		\|HasNationalLibraryCode=997013604472605171
	}}		}}



Line 21:		Line 22:
	Rema was born in Kazimierz just outside Kraków and journeyed to Lublin to study with Rabbi '''Shalom Shakhna''' (d. 1558). At that time, a debate took place among scholars in Lublin concerning the codification of Jewish law. The issue at hand was whether it was an appropriate and worthy enterprise to write a book of rulings that summarizes the halakhic discourse and establishes clear rules of conduct. The debate in Lublin was occurring at the same time as Rabbi Karo was busy with his codificatory projects, but the two deliberations were independent of each other. Indeed, the first volume of Rabbi Karo’s halakhic work, ''Beit Yosef'' [The House of Joseph], was published in Venice in 1550, while the debate in Lublin preceded that date, before Rema returned to Kraków sometime before 1547.		Rema was born in Kazimierz just outside Kraków and journeyed to Lublin to study with Rabbi '''Shalom Shakhna''' (d. 1558). At that time, a debate took place among scholars in Lublin concerning the codification of Jewish law. The issue at hand was whether it was an appropriate and worthy enterprise to write a book of rulings that summarizes the halakhic discourse and establishes clear rules of conduct. The debate in Lublin was occurring at the same time as Rabbi Karo was busy with his codificatory projects, but the two deliberations were independent of each other. Indeed, the first volume of Rabbi Karo’s halakhic work, ''Beit Yosef'' [The House of Joseph], was published in Venice in 1550, while the debate in Lublin preceded that date, before Rema returned to Kraków sometime before 1547.

	The efforts to write comprehensive and summative halakhic works were related to the invention of the printing press, which triggered codificatory processes in many jurisdictions. Thus, in 1506 a collection of Latin sources of Polish law was published in Kraków. The work included the laws of the Sejm, royal edicts, international agreements, and customs [[1.6.3-Rema-1\|'''(fig.1)''']]. In 1519, King Sigismund I the Old (1467-1548) approved the codification of Armenian law in Latin for the Armenians residing in his kingdom. Nearby territories responded with their own codifications, such as that of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania (1529, 1566, 1588), and the province of Mazovia (1532, 1540). These cultural and intellectual trends within the Kingdom of Poland did not bypass the Jewish world.		The efforts to write comprehensive and summative halakhic works were related to the invention of the printing press, which triggered codificatory processes in many jurisdictions. Thus, in 1506 a collection of Latin sources of Polish law was published in Kraków. The work included the laws of the Sejm, royal edicts, international agreements, and customs [[Image:1.6.3-Rema-1\|'''(fig.1)''']]. In 1519, King Sigismund I the Old (1467-1548) approved the codification of Armenian law in Latin for the Armenians residing in his kingdom. Nearby territories responded with their own codifications, such as that of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania (1529, 1566, 1588), and the province of Mazovia (1532, 1540). These cultural and intellectual trends within the Kingdom of Poland did not bypass the Jewish world.

	Despite his students’ entreaties, Rabbi Shalom Shakhna refused to write a code of law, or any legal treatise. He feared that such a book might limit the freedom of future jurists to rule as they saw fit, since they might feel bound by the written word. His own approach, as his son communicated it, was to encourage “each person to make time-sensitive rulings (''hora’at sha‘ah'') according to his own heart.”<ref><span dir="rtl"></span>''Teshuvot mei-ha-rema'' (Kraków 1640), §25, fol. 59 col. 4 – fol. 65 col. 4.</ref>		Despite his students’ entreaties, Rabbi Shalom Shakhna refused to write a code of law, or any legal treatise. He feared that such a book might limit the freedom of future jurists to rule as they saw fit, since they might feel bound by the written word. His own approach, as his son communicated it, was to encourage “each person to make time-sensitive rulings (''hora’at sha‘ah'') according to his own heart.”<ref><span dir="rtl"></span>''Teshuvot mei-ha-rema'' (Kraków 1640), §25, fol. 59 col. 4 – fol. 65 col. 4.</ref>
Line 55:		Line 56:
	Rema may have begun to compose ''Torat Ha-ḥaṭat'' even before he learned of the existence of ''Shulḥan ʻArukh'' – Rabbi Karo’s second halakhic work that was printed in 1564-1565, only five years before ''Torat Ha-ḥaṭat'' was published. Stylistically, both works were codificatory works that presented the reader with succinct directives, without in-depth discussions.		Rema may have begun to compose ''Torat Ha-ḥaṭat'' even before he learned of the existence of ''Shulḥan ʻArukh'' – Rabbi Karo’s second halakhic work that was printed in 1564-1565, only five years before ''Torat Ha-ḥaṭat'' was published. Stylistically, both works were codificatory works that presented the reader with succinct directives, without in-depth discussions.

	In his introduction to ''Torat Ha-ḥaṭat'', Rema explained why there was a need for a ''kashrut'' treatise, even though ''Shulḥan ʻArukh'' included ''kashrut'' laws. First, he argued that Rabbi Karo – a native of Spain who had been exiled to Portugal, Turkey, Greece, Bulgaria, and Egypt, eventually settling in Safed – had not given proper voice to Ashkenazi conventions. In response, Rema sought to add Ashkenazi voices to the halakhic conversation. Second, Rema wrote for Jews “in these lands.” The title page of ''Torat Ha-ḥaṭat'' [[1.6.3-Rema-5\|'''(fig. 5)''']] – penned by Rema, the printer, or both together – specified that “these lands” referred to Poland, Lithuania, Ukraine, Bohemia, Moravia, and Germany and France. In this way, Rema sought to unify Halakha for all the communities that would come to be included under the rubric “Ashkenazim.” This aspect of his enterprise provoked the ire of his former peer at the yeshiva in Lublin, Rabbi Ḥayim ben Betsalel of Friedberg, who believed in local rabbinic authority and preservation of customs and practices within each community of those lands, rather than unifying the entire region.		In his introduction to ''Torat Ha-ḥaṭat'', Rema explained why there was a need for a ''kashrut'' treatise, even though ''Shulḥan ʻArukh'' included ''kashrut'' laws. First, he argued that Rabbi Karo – a native of Spain who had been exiled to Portugal, Turkey, Greece, Bulgaria, and Egypt, eventually settling in Safed – had not given proper voice to Ashkenazi conventions. In response, Rema sought to add Ashkenazi voices to the halakhic conversation. Second, Rema wrote for Jews “in these lands.” The title page of ''Torat Ha-ḥaṭat'' [[Image:1.6.3-Rema-5\|'''(fig. 5)''']] – penned by Rema, the printer, or both together – specified that “these lands” referred to Poland, Lithuania, Ukraine, Bohemia, Moravia, and Germany and France. In this way, Rema sought to unify Halakha for all the communities that would come to be included under the rubric “Ashkenazim.” This aspect of his enterprise provoked the ire of his former peer at the yeshiva in Lublin, Rabbi Ḥayim ben Betsalel of Friedberg, who believed in local rabbinic authority and preservation of customs and practices within each community of those lands, rather than unifying the entire region.

	Another halakhic work by Rema was appended to the volume of ''Torat ha-ḥaṭat'': The laws of ''Niddah'' [a menstruating woman] from Rabbi Karo’s ''Shulḥan ʻArukh'', accompanied by Rema’s annotations. As Rema stated on the title page of the addendum, his annotations were intended to “make known what is the custom in these lands.”<ref><span dir="rtl"></span>''Zot Torat Ha-ḥaṭat'' (Kraków [1569]), fol. 85r.</ref> [[1.6.3-Rema-6\|'''(fig. 6)''']] This addendum is the first installation of Rema’s great halakhic enterprise: annotations on the entire ''Shulḥan ʻArukh''.		Another halakhic work by Rema was appended to the volume of ''Torat ha-ḥaṭat'': The laws of ''Niddah'' [a menstruating woman] from Rabbi Karo’s ''Shulḥan ʻArukh'', accompanied by Rema’s annotations. As Rema stated on the title page of the addendum, his annotations were intended to “make known what is the custom in these lands.”<ref><span dir="rtl"></span>''Zot Torat Ha-ḥaṭat'' (Kraków [1569]), fol. 85r.</ref> [[Image:1.6.3-Rema-6\|'''(fig. 6)''']] This addendum is the first installation of Rema’s great halakhic enterprise: annotations on the entire ''Shulḥan ʻArukh''.

	In Rema’s eyes, ''Shulḥan'' ''ʻArukh'' was indeed a marvelous work, although it was marred by substantial flaws. First, as mentioned above, it did not give adequate expression to halakhic opinions and customs of Ashkenazi Jewry. Second, Rabbi Karo’s decision-making rules, especially his reliance on a virtual panel of judges, contravened the halakhic tradition that avoided ruling according to rigid rules. Third, ''Shulḥan ʻArukh'' presented Halakha as a legal system devoid of divergent opinions and steely debate. Rema sought to remedy these flaws by presenting contrary views held by Ashkenazi sages alongside the ''Shulḥan ʻArukh'' text, “in order to awaken the minds of students in every place, that they should know that his words are subject to disagreement,” as well as to document the accepted custom in his own geographic region.		In Rema’s eyes, ''Shulḥan'' ''ʻArukh'' was indeed a marvelous work, although it was marred by substantial flaws. First, as mentioned above, it did not give adequate expression to halakhic opinions and customs of Ashkenazi Jewry. Second, Rabbi Karo’s decision-making rules, especially his reliance on a virtual panel of judges, contravened the halakhic tradition that avoided ruling according to rigid rules. Third, ''Shulḥan ʻArukh'' presented Halakha as a legal system devoid of divergent opinions and steely debate. Rema sought to remedy these flaws by presenting contrary views held by Ashkenazi sages alongside the ''Shulḥan ʻArukh'' text, “in order to awaken the minds of students in every place, that they should know that his words are subject to disagreement,” as well as to document the accepted custom in his own geographic region.