Part II
The first part discussed several instances in which there
were mistakes in published books. In one case the digits
"133" were read instead of "tzadi-tzadi-vov. People
devoted considerable efforts over the years to solve the
problem. Some printers offered to pay a reward to anyone who
showed there where there was a mistake in their work.
What, indeed, could the printers do? To avail themselves, for
example, of the services of the readers themselves. Robertus
Stefanus, a well known printer in Paris of the sixteenth
century, used to hang the proofs of his books from the
doorway of his print shop, promising payment to whoever
discovered an error. Christopher Palantin, a printer of the
same era, did the same in his establishment in Antwerp,
Belgium.
The administrators of the Re'em print shop in Vilna, the
widow and her two sons, promised a reward for every error
that was found in the Chumoshim which they printed. It
is told that a simple villager did, in fact, appear one day
and asked to speak with the Dowager (as she was reverently
called) regarding the sum of five rubles which she owed him.
The clerks were amazed, assuming at first that their mistress
had taken a loan from this simple fellow, which didn't make
sense. But he explained that he had found five mistakes in
the Chumash and had come to claim his reward.
No one really knows what ensued. Perhaps he received his
reward, but apparently the many other printers who made
similar promises did not always honor them. Shaul Kronengold
the proofreader, wrote an article which appeared in Otzar
Hasifrus in 1892. It relates that the various printers
had a pat answer whenever confronted with a blunder: "Someone
else has already received the reward for that error . . .
"
Payment for discovered mistakes was still in practice a
generation ago. In 5718 (1958), the "Institute for the
Publication of the Works and Manuscripts of the Chasam Sofer"
in Jerusalem announced that the galleys of the upcoming
publications would be available to whoever wished to examine
them, and for every error found the person would receive a
lira reward. For every ten mistakes — he would receive
a free volume.
Ungentle Gentile
Anyone who would have peeked at the frontispiece of the
Tur Orach Chaim which was printed in Venice in 5313
(1553) would have probably wondered at the date of
publication, it being stated as some 220 years before the
invention of the printing press. To be sure, this was, again,
a blooper of a "printer's boy" who left out the `three
hundred' figure and wrote 5013.
In 5274 (1514), the Sefer HaTanya was published in
Italy. This work of dinim uminhogim has, similarly,
the figure of 200 omitted from the title page, and whoever
saw this book could have thought that it had been printed 200
years before Gutenberg.
An error in the date of publication is pale in comparison to
a title page in which the printer accidentally takes credit
for authorship. In 1714, Dayan R' Leib of Amsterdam printed a
Shas Bavli which included addenda from his father and
grandfather. The title page states: "Shas with addenda of the
Marshal and the Maharsha and novella commentary from my great-
grandfather, the Maharan Shapira, and from the notes of
Adoni Ovi HaRav HaGaon the Moharish zt'l."
Twenty years later, in 1734, D. Yablonitzky also printed a
Shas, in Berlin. He incorporated in his edition the
addendum of the Maharan Shapira and his father, the Moharish,
which had already been printed twenty years prior in
Amsterdam. An overenthusiastic typesetter most probably did
not realize that the title page was also copied, in its
entirety, including the words, "And from what was found . . .
of my grandfather etc." Whoever read the title page was left
with the impression that this referred to the ancestors of
the Berlin printer, himself.
Of a different sort altogether are those blunders made by the
various censors which might have been funny were the
circumstances not so sad. Often as not, they showed a total
lack of understanding of the material they were dealing with.
The problematic words, in their eyes, were "nochri, goy,
min [apostate]" and "oreil." These were summarily
replaced with "aku'm" wherever they appeared. Thus,
the verse "Shomer goy kodosh" was transformed into the
ridiculous "Shomer aku'm kodosh" and "min
kitniyos" to "aku'm kitniyos."
The words of the Beis Yosef in Yoreh Dei'ah regarding
"Nochri she'eino aku'm" [a gentile who did not worship
idols] became, "Aku'm she'eino aku'm." Perhaps,
ignoramus censors who were not illiterate were chosen for
this task so that, when in doubt, they would lean to the more
severe side and erase as much as possible.
Not always was the error a product of ignorance. At times,
when it seemed to a minor censor that things did not jibe
with his religion, he would take the trouble to embellish the
text with pearls of his own `wisdom.' In the abbreviated
Piskei Harosh in Bova Metzia, perek 5:3, it
says that one who finds a lost object after the owners had
already given up on it, can take possession of it. In the
margin was added, "And gentiles publicize and return."
In Yevomos, it is written that "Any person who is not
married is not a [whole] person. The Christian [Catholic]
censor, a priest who was not permitted to marry, must have
squirmed uneasily about this and hastened to amend it to
"Every Jew who has no wife . . . "
The Rov Passed Away — and was Still Living in
Mir
On the fourth of Nisan of 5651 (1891), the newspaper
Hameilitz published an obituary of R' Chaim Leib
Tikochinsky, rosh yeshivas Mir. This was a false report which
somehow crept into the paper as if it were verified.
Interestingly enough, the writer, or the source of the
information, went on to describe the funeral as if he had
been there himself. The story is brought by A. Schwartz in an
article he wrote on the subject.
"Mir, in the region of Minsk, donned mourning on the Thursday
of parshas Tazria . . . for yesterday afternoon, our
crowning glory was removed from our head. The pillar of
Torah, HaGaon R' Chaim Yehuda Tikochinsky, rosh
mesivta of our city who served us for forty years, left
us, having produced in his yeshiva a distinguished roster of
great and famous rabbis.
"All the shops were shuttered down and all the yeshiva
students and the notables of the city went after his bier to
accompany him to his final rest and there, he was duly
eulogized by the rabbi of our city, R' Yom Tov Lipman, and
the rabbi darshan from Turetz."
This article was signed by the reporter who gave the
impression that he had attended the funeral in person.
Mir was shaken to the core and hastened to deny the
disturbing mistake. In one of the successive issues of the
paper, it was written that HaGaon R' Yom Tov Lipman of Mir,
author of Malbushei Yom Tov, sent a telegram stating
that the announcement of the death of HaGaon R' Chaim
Tikochinsky was a figment of someone's imagination.
The administration of Yeshivas Mir also published a
clarification that brooked no misinterpretation: "We were
horrified and shocked to see the announcement in
Hameilitz regarding HaGaon R' Chaim Yehuda Leib
shlita, Rosh Mesivta here, which was a total lie, a
figment of someone's imagination, without an iota of truth to
it. For, thanks to Hashem, the former was not sick, or
debilitated, G-d forbid, and is alive and well with us this
very day . . . And Boruch Hashem, he is healthy and
hearty, immersed in his great diligence and application to
his holy work, actively involved with his burden of students
all day long, and the audacity and falseness of the lie shall
wither and waft away like a passing cloud."
Seven years later, the real funeral of R' Chaim Tikochinsky
took place.
*
A similar woeful mistake occurred in 1919, this time by the
Dvir publication in Jerusalem. The disclosure arrived
by telegram from the Zionist office in Copenhagen. Maran
HaGaon R' Meir Simcha Hacohen, Gavad of Dvinsk, author
of Ohr Somayach, was reported to have fallen victim to
an attack of hooligans as he was walking along the street.
The news caused deep sorrow in Jerusalem. Posters were pasted
throughout the streets calling upon the faithful of Hashem
residing in Zion to gather on Thursday, Erev Rosh Chodesh
Sivan, 5679, in the R' Yochonon ben Zakkai synagogue and the
Churvah Shul. "HaRav HaGaon R' Yehoshua Cherwinsky
shlita shall bemoan the holy, beloved fallen ones in a
bitter eulogy, especially the death of the Tzaddik Gaon,
Minister of Torah, HaRav . . . Maran Meir Simcha, son of
HaRav R' Meshulam Klonymus Hacohen ztvk'l from
Danneburg."
A month later, the truth came out: Maran HaGaon R' Meir
Simcha Hacohen was alive and still actively occupying the
seat of rabbinate in Dvinsk.
It became clear that what had really taken place was that the
Ohr Somayach had been escorted through the streets of Dvinsk
under Bolshevik military guard on one of the days of the
Bolshevik Revolution. But along the lengthy road extending
from Dvinsk to the offices of the newspaper, something had
gone awry . . . One can just imagine the confusion and
embarrassment of the editors of the paper.
The Ohr Somayach passed away in 5686 at the age of 83. He is
said to have remarked that the eulogies that the newspaper
had written about him in his lifetime served him as a living
mussar book for the remainder of that life.
