R. Jacob ben Meir (Rabbeinu Tam), EJ 15:779-781.

Medieval W. Christendom
TAM, JACOB BEN MEIR (Rabbenu; c. 1100–1171), tosafist and leading French
scholar of the 12 th century. Rabbenu Tam was the grandson of Rashi
and the son of Meir
b. Samuel, Rashi’s son-in-law. His teachers were his father, his brother Samuel, and
Jacobb. Samson, a pupil of Rashi. Little is known of the members of his family, save
that his wife Miriam was the sister of R. Samson b. Joseph of Falaise
and that four of his
sons were named Joseph, Moses, Solomon, and Isaac, about whom nothing is known. R.
Tam lived in Ramerupt where he engaged in moneylending and viticulture, typical
occupations of the Jews there at that time, and became well-to-do. His business affairs
brought him into contact with the nobility and the authorities, who occasioned him much
trouble. To a great extent his attitude toward non-Jews in various halakhic questions was
conditioned by his direct contact with them and his knowledge of their character. During
the Second Crusade he was attacked by Crusaders who were passing through, and was
miraculously saved from death (1146). After this experience R. Tam left Ramerupt.

Tam was recognized by all contemporary scholars, even by those in remote places, as the
greatest scholar of the generation.Abraham ibn Daud
of Spain, and Abraham b. Isaac
and Zerahiah ha-Levi
of Provence, refer to him with great esteem, while the scholars of
southern Italy, some his senior in years, submitted their halakhic problems to him. Pupils
came to his bet midrash from as far away as Bohemia and Russia, and took Tam’s
teachings back with them on their return to these lands. He won this great renown
although he never moved or traveled far from his place of residence in northern France.
Nor was he unaware of his outstanding reputation as a scholar, for on it he based the
claim that his bet din had the authority to issue decisive pronouncements. He even “wrote
a prosbul declaring that it had to be done by the foremost bet dinof the generation” (Tos.
to Git. 36b, S.V. de-allimei). Tam violently attacked scholars, even in distant places, who
refused to accept his decisions and pronouncements, revealing a desire to impose his
halakhic authority also on Provence and Germany, a tendency which R. Abraham b.
David of Posquières vehemently opposed.

His attitude on this is reflected in the correspondence between him and Meshullam b.
Nathan
of Melun. The original subject at issue was not of the greatest halakhic and
practical importance, but it gradually developed into a controversy about several customs
followed and instituted by Meshullam in his community, that differed from those of Tam.
Writing in an extremely aggressive style, Tam threatened to excommunicate anyone who
adopted the customs of Meshullam, and severely rebuked the latter for the lack of respect
he had shown toward the French scholars including Rashi, and for what Tam regarded as
his irresponsible attitude in emending talmudic texts. The extant correspondence is
fragmentary and its chronological order cannot be established, but from it as a whole
there emerges a clear picture of Tam’s bitter fight against Meshullam and his aggressive
attempt to impose his own views and decisions on him. Of a similar nature was the
correspondence between Tam and Ephraim b. Isaac of Regensburg.

R. Tam proved to be a high-handed leader of his generation who did not refrain either
from abolishing several customs which did not appeal to him or from introducing
important ordinances and legal permissions dictated by the times. Despite this, he was in
principle extremely conservative on questions of custom as is clearly evident from his
correspondence with Meshullam. Among later scholars these decisions of Tam at times
occasioned great surprise, while some of the earlier authorities contended that they had
merely a theoretical character, and that he himself never applied them in practice. On the
basis of these lenient pronouncements by him, some scholars of the Haskalah even sought
to make him a “reform” rabbi in the spirit of the later Haskalah, but in doing so they
completely ignored the sources which indicate that he adopted a strict approach
especially as regards unimportant customs observed by ignorant people or women, and
that there are no grounds for maintaining he adopted a systematically lenient or a strict
attitude. The leader of his generation, he was permeated with the consciousness of this
leadership and animated by a desire to maintain communal unity and peace through a life
based on the teachings of the Torah and on faith. R. Tam had many pupils and some of
his contemporaries, among them also those older than he, regarded themselves as his
disciples although never taught by him. Among his best known pupils were Hayyim b.
Hananel ha-Kohen
,Moses b. Abraham
of Pontoise, Joseph Bekhor Shor
of Orleans,
Yom Tov b. Isaac
of Joigny, and Eliezer b. Samuel
of Metz.

The tosafot of the Babylonian Talmud are based on Tam’s explanations, glosses, and
decisions, and are pervaded throughout by his statements. In addition to this, his literary
production was large and ramified. His principal work is Sefer ha-Yashar (Vienna, 1811)
which consists of two parts, the one, responsa (issued in a scholarly edition by S.P.
Rosenthal, Berlin, 1898), and the other, novellae on the Talmud (a scholarly edition was
published by S. Schlesinger, Jerusalem, 1959). But this work contains only a small part of
his responsa, others being scattered throughout the entire literature of the earlier halakhic
authorities and in various manuscripts. There is still no complete edition of his responsa.
The main trend of his novellae is to corroborate the talmudic texts and to prove that
nothing is to be emended, either by deletions or by addenda, whether on the basis of
logical argument or on that of other works or parallel sources. Preserved in an extremely
corrupt state,Sefer ha-Yashar, even after the great labor expended on editing it, still
contains many obscure and inexplicable passages. In its present form it comprises
excerpts collected in the days of the earlier halakhic authorities and represents the work
of many hands, including that of Tam himself, who repeatedly emended and improved
much of it. The earlier authorities also refer to Tam’s Sefer ha-Pesakim, which is no
longer extant. It is doubtful whether he wrote a special commentary on the Pentateuch,
although biblical comments of his are quoted by the earlier tosafists. It is, however, clear
that he composed a commentary on the Book of Job. His Hilkhot Sefer Torah are printed
in Mahzor Vitry (1923), 651–73.

Tam was also the first French scholar to compose rhymed poetry, in which he was
undoubtedly influenced by the Spanish and southern French scholars with whom he came
into contact. He exchanged poems with Abraham ibn Ezra
. His piyyutim were written
largely in the Franco-German style.

Tamalso devoted himself to Hebrew grammar. His Sefer ha-Hakhra’ot(1855), the
purpose of which was to decide the points of dispute in grammar between Menahem ibn
Saruk and Dunash b. Labrat, is particularly well known. Tam defended Menahem
against the 160 criticisms of Dunash and mostly decided in his favor. Tam’s knowledge
of grammar was far from perfect, and it is difficult to assume that he discovered the
triliteral nature of the Hebrew root himself, independently of Judah b. David Hayyuj
, as
suggested by some scholars. Joseph b. Isaac Kimhi
wrote his Sefer ha-Galui in answer
to the Sefer ha-Hakhra’ot justifying the criticisms of Dunash. Tam also wrote a didactic
poem on the cantillation of the Torah. Sefer ha-Yashar ha-Katan, which deals with ethics,
was wrongly ascribed to Tam.