Responsum: On a Convert Studying in Latin

[And there went forth a wind] from the Lord (Numbers 11:31) and it rested in the heart of this man, R. Abraham, son of our forefather Abraham. And it came to pass, when the spirit rested upon him [see Numbers 11:25], he approached the labor of the Lord, to seek God and study the sacred texts and the holy tongue. He sojourned with us for many days [see Genesis 21:34], and he was a simple man, who lived in tents [see Genesis 25:27]. One day, I, the undersigned, found him sitting and copying a book of the Pentateuch from a book [considered] invalid [pasul] of Christian priests. I said to him, “What is that in your hand?” [see Exodus 4:2]. He answered me as follows, “I know the language of priests, but I do not know the holy tongue. Thus, for me it is like a commentary. In addition, the sages of Speyer lent me books of priests for copying, and they did not object. If it displeases you, I will return from it [see Numbers 22:34], and I will do so no more.” I replied, “You should know that I consider this an evil deed.” He then asked me to write on his behalf to my teachers in Speyer; perhaps they would find a lenient ruling for him.

Knowing that his intent was for heaven, on account of my youth I was brazen toward my teachers, thinking that perhaps it was an error [see Genesis 43:12]. For we learned in the first chapter of tractate Megillah [8b]: There is no difference between scrolls versus phylacteries and mezuzot, except that scrolls may be written in any language, [but phylacteries and mezuzot may be written only in the Assyrian script (i.e., Hebrew characters)]. R. Simeon ben Gamaliel says: Even scrolls were permitted [to be written only in Greek. This means]: Only in the Greek language and the Greek script, or the Assyrian script and in the holy tongue. However, any other writings or other languages are forbidden. Thus, it is forbidden to write these.

It is further implied in chapter sixteen [b. Shabbat 115a] that it is forbidden to read other languages even if they are written in the Assyrian script, and certainly other scripts. [ . . . ] It can be inferred that is it forbidden to read other languages, even if the content is the holy writings. As for our practice of reading the Targum [Aramaic translation] of the Pentateuch and the Prophets, we rely on the statement in tractate Megillah [3a] that it was composed by Jonathan [ben Uzziel] and Onkelos, and this applies only if they were written in the Assyrian script or Greek. Rashi wrote at the beginning of chapter sixteen [b. Shabbat 115a] that while Jonathan and Onkelos composed them, they did not write them down.

I also maintain that there is another proof from a statement of R. Ḥisda in tractate Sanhedrin [21b]: And they left the Hebrew script and the Aramaic language for commoners. That is referring to the Targum, and we are considered commoners, and thus they permitted us the Targum. But this requires further analysis—does R. Ḥisda disagree with the ruling in tractate Megillah, where Rabbi [Judah the Prince] ruled [that even Torah scrolls could be written in Greek] in accordance with R. Simeon ben Gamaliel [see b. Megillah 9b]?

It seems to me regarding the [Latin] script of [Christian] priests, or any other script apart from Assyrian or Greek, that if a Jew wrote them on a Sabbath, he is exempt [from punishment] according to biblical law, as this is not considered writing and is thus not a labor. Even though Rashi explained in chapter twelve [b. Shabbat 103a] that the ruling “one who writes two letters in any language is liable” means “in the script of any nation,” that is not the case. For we learned in the Jerusalem Talmud [Shabbat 69a]: What is the meaning of “in any language”? Alef—alpha; bet—beta. Now, this is the Greek language, which implies either in our script or in the Greek script. Even so, I am hesitant to explain that it means our script, as it takes four [Hebrew] letters to write out alpha and beta. This is also the import of the ruling: We may write a bill of sale for this,¹ even on a Sabbath, etc., one instructs a non-Jew, and he does it. This is referring to their script, as it² is forbidden only by rabbinic decree, and they did not impose the decree upon their script because of our script, which is forbidden. This need not be pointed out to the wise, and a little is much for the intelligent. However, in the case of our script, it is a rabbinic decree that involves an act prohibited by biblical law. [ . . . ]

There are also some who permit him to read the script of priests because of: It is time to work for the Lord; they have made Your Torah void (Psalms 119:126),³ in a similar manner to the Targum, and why we may write down the Oral Law, but that is incorrect.

Source: Responsum 549.