527) Neoplatonic echoes in Chassidic Mysticism

 

Raphael's fresco, School of Athens, painted around 1509.

Introduction

This article explores the intellectual legacy of Abu Ya'qub Isḥāq ibn Sulaymān al-Israeli—also known as Yitzchak ben Shlomo haYisraeli (c.855–c.955)—a pioneering yet largely overlooked figure in early Medieval Jewish philosophy. Through a counterintuitive comparison between Yitzchak haYisraeli’s tenth-century philosophical writings and contemporary Chassidic thought rooted in Kabbalah, the study reveals an unexpected conceptual convergence between the two thought systems. 

526) Are There Controls and Limits to the Creativity of Minhagim?

This post, by Boruch Clinton, originally appeared on the B'chol D'rachecha site.

If we (theoretically) removed all innovations to the modern siddur which were added in the past 500 years, we’d probably spend considerably less time in shul. And from a halachic perspective, that’s a problem. So let’s talk about the prohibition of delaying a congregation (טרחא דציבורא).

We’ll begin with the Gemara (Berachos 12b):

בקשו לקבוע פרשת בלק בקריאת שמע ומפני מה לא קבעוה מפני טורח ציבור

The rabbis sought to include Parashas Balak in the recital of the Shema. Why did they not include it? Because it would delay congregations

It seems there was a compelling reason to add (at least) one more paragraph to the Shema, but it was ruled inappropriate solely due to the fact that countless Jews through countless centuries would be forced to spend more time davening. (Although we see from the subsequent Gemara that, had it been possible to add just the words “כרע שכב כארי וכלביא מי יקימנו" the minimal time delay would not have been a problem.)

525) Tashlich, water and 'bribing' demons

Introduction

Although the Jewish world after Maimonides (1138–1205) gradually embraced a mystical ethos—particularly following the publication of the Zohar some eighty years after his death—his followers remained wary of the burgeoning mystical practices that took root within Judaism, often approaching them with scepticism, if not outright rejection. Drawing on rationalist principles and a commitment to biblical authenticity, Maimonides challenged many mystical rituals, which he saw as later additions rooted in superstition or non-Jewish origins. His opposition reflects a broader philosophical stance: that religious expression should be grounded in reason, ethical clarity, and Torah-based tradition. This article—based extensively on the research by Rabbi Dr Israel Drazin[1]—examines the Tashlich ceremony and attempts to understand Tashlich within the broader context of medieval Jewish thought and its Maimonidean/rationalist reinterpretation. 

524) Editing Jewish texts: Between reverence and revision

 

Shem haGedolim by R. Chaim David Azulai, known as the Chida (1724-1806).

Introduction

This article—based extensively on the research by Dr Oded Cohen[1]—examines the challenges facing editors of religious Jewish texts. It deals with two very different editors and separated by six hundred years, yet who faced similar tasks and scrutiny. 

The first editor is the Maskil of the Enlightenment movement, Isaac Benjacob (1801-1863), who edited the Shem haGedolim of the R. Chaim David Azulai, known as the Chida (1724-1806). 

The second is Maimonides, who—though not an editor of the Babylonian Talmud in the conventional sense—systematically distilled its legal rulings into his Mishneh Torah, the ground-breaking code that stripped away dialectical debate in favour of a clear, authoritative Halachic structure. 

523) Radical rabbinic models of universalism

Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz 1937-2020

Introduction

This article traces the thought of four rabbinic figures—spanning from the sixteenth century to the modern writings of R. Adin Steinsaltz—who identify and exemplify a strikingly universalist approach within Jewish tradition. It highlights how these thinkers engaged with non-Jewish doctrines, religions, and ideologies not with hostility or indifference, but with a rare openness that challenges conventional boundaries of theological discourse. 

1) R. Natan Nata Shapira (1585-1633)

R. Natan Shapira of Kraków, also known as the Megaleh Amukot (Revealer of Secrets), was a student of Lurianic Kabbalah from the school of R. Yisrael Sarug and was responsible for the dissemination of the teaching of the Ari Zal.  He saw the need to extract good from the non-Jewish world as a necessary precursor to the messianic age. 

“[R. Natan Nata Shapira] clarified the mission of Judaism, in light of kabbalistic historiography, as one that aims to gather up the holy sparks scattered among gentiles in order to bring redemption nearer” (Rachel Elior in Yivo Encyclopedia). 

522) Italian letters: The battle over the Zohar

An 1847 letter by Shmuel David Luzatto, to the scholar Meir Halevi Letteris.

Introduction

This article—based extensively on the research by Daniel A. Klein[1]—examines the little-known polemic over Kabbalah between two great Italian rabbis of the nineteenth century. These rabbis were R. Shmuel David Luzzatto (known as Shadal, 1800-1865), a great-grandnephew of the famed R. Moshe Chaim Luzzatto (Ramchal), and R. Elia Benamozegh (1823-1900), the rabbi of Livorno (Leghorn). The two collided in written correspondence—not over Halachah, but over the soul of Judaism itself. Both were outspoken defenders of traditional Judaism, yet each understood its essence in profoundly different ways. 

Shadal emphasised the practical, ethical and rational core of Judaism, rejecting mystical elements like Kabbalah and particularly the Zohar. His approach was more material than ethereal in the sense of being grounded in practical, historical, linguistic, and moral realism. Benamozegh, on the other hand, was a mystic, a Kabbalist, a man who believed the Zohar was not only authentic, but essential. To this day, the Piazza Benamozegh in Livorno, Tuscany, continues to bear his name—a quiet but enduring tribute to the legacy of a man whose ideas once stirred fierce debate within Italian Jewry. 

521) Confronting or Escaping? -Beyond the "Back of the Wagon of the Baal Shem Tov"

 

[Back of the Wagon | Matisyahu | Afiko.man | Alex Clare | TYH Nation - YouTube].

Introduction

This article—based extensively on the research by Dr Leore Sachs-Shmueli[1]—challenges the common assertion that the Baal Shem Tov’s innovative path was primarily one of experiential and joyful spiritual surrender. Instead, it reveals a far more complex and unnerving spiritual trajectory: one that first plunges deliberately into raw fear, negativity, and darkness in order to extract sparks of holiness from the husks of evil. Only then can the state of ecstatic joy be authentically reached. 

One of the most beautiful and catchy hit songs in contemporary Jewish music must be the “Back of the Wagon of the Baal Shem Tov.” It is symbolic of radical trust and letting go, no matter where the storm takes you, as long as you’re in the back of the wagon of the Baal Shem Tov. Here, one rides with spiritual abandon, music, and a bottle of wine, into the Infinite Light: 

“Where we headed? It doesn’t matter as long as I’m in the back of the wagon with the Besht (Baal Shem Tov)” (Opening lyrics of the song). 

520) 'Creating' sacred sites: Who is buried there, and does it matter?

Alleged tomb of Rav Ashi, on the Israel Lebanon border

Introduction

This article—based extensively on the research by Professors Shai Sekunda and Isaac Hershkowitz—examines the historical accuracy of some popular gravesites attributed to biblical figures and great rabbis. Many thousands of fervent worshippers flock to these sites, and the question is: Are the righteous Tzadikim who are claimed to be buried there really buried there, and if not, does it matter? We shall discuss a number of these purported burial sites, including those of Rav Ashi on Mount Shinan, R. Shimon bar Yochai in Meron and the biblical Binyamin in Jerusalem. 

519) When rabbis dared to challenge the Divine: The case of Midrash Tehillim

Midrash Shocher Tov, the first section of Midrash Tehillim (on Psalms 1-118)  produced between the third and eight centuries in Palestine.

 

Introduction

This article—based extensively on the research by Professor Dov Weiss[1]— examines the rise and decline of rabbinic protest theology. It looks at the audacious attempts by some Mishnaic rabbis to defy a general ethos of protest prohibition, particularly upheld by the schools of R. Akiva and R. Elazar. By tracing the gradual evolution of rabbinic protest theology through the Talmudic period to its peak in post-Talmudic times, Weiss maps a distinct theological arc that eventually waned and merged into modern times as a subdued tradition.

518) Messianic Immunity—The Perfect Storm: The case of R. Avraham Baruch haRofeh

Responsa by R. Chaim Benveniste, 1743

Introduction

This article—based extensively on the research by Professor Abraham Ofir Shemesh[1]—examines an extreme case of messianic immunity. In the sixteenth century, a medical doctor, R. Avraham Baruch haRofeh, under the influence of the Sabbatian messianic movement of Shabbatai Tzvi, felt he could administer harmful drugs to non-Jews in order to kill them. Because he believed he was living in the stirrings of the messianic era, he also believed he could do so with impunity—if not hasten the full awakening of the messianic age as he saw it unfolding before his very eyes. 

While R. Avraham Baruch may have been an extreme case, unfortunately, due to the vicissitudes of a long and oppressive Jewish history, he did have some textual precedent to draw upon. We shall look at some of that precedent, but also show how many of the later rabbis contextualised those earlier rulings and declared that they were no longer applicable. 

517) A historical context to Midrashim

 

Introduction

This article—based extensively on the research by Professor Gary Porton[1]— investigates the historical conditions that may have fostered the complex and often elusive evolution of Midrash. Midrashim are the creative and often fanciful interpretations of the biblical text that dramatically expand its plain meaning. While some adopt a literal approach to the interpretation of Midrashim, others opt for an allegorical methodology. Based on a reading of Talmudic texts, Porton suggests a more diachronic or historical approach based on how and where Midrashim were first taught. 

Fascinatingly, he discovers that Midrashim may never have been intended for communal consumption. They were not, as many have claimed, produced for sermons to entertain those in the synagogues. Instead, he hypothesises, they were part of an internal rabbinic tradition that was rarely expounded in the public domain. This research could significantly contribute to the way we read and understand Midrashim. 

516) When Midrash is too much for the Midrash

One of the six known manuscript versions of the Tosafist work Hadar Zekeinim. This one dates around the 15th century.

Introduction 

This article—based extensively on the research by Rabbi Dr Zvi Ron[1]—examines various Midrashim that have been rejected by an unofficial form of collective rabbinic consensus. These include Midrashim from lesser known sources as well as, surprisingly, those from classical Midrashic sources such as Mechilta, Sifra, Sifri, Midrash Raba and Midrash Tanchuma. 

Midrashic ‘status’ 

Not all Midrashim are cut from the same cloth and there appears to be a hierarchy of Midrashic sources. Rav Hai Gaon (939-1038), for example, suggests that those Midrashim that made it into the corpus of the Talmud, are of a superior quality to those that remained in the anthologies of Midrashic works alone. He maintains that the Midrashim not found in the Talmud can be rejected if they do not seem plausible: 

515) Missing in Manuscript: The additional biblical verses added to the Mishna

Tosefet Yom Tov (later  Tosefot Yom Tov) Mishna commentary by R. Yom Tov Lipmann Heller, Prague, 1614-1617. 

 
Introduction

This article—based extensively on the research by Professor Jason Kalman[1]—examines the question of biblical verses, cited as proof texts, that added to our versions of the Mishna. Based on comparisons between our Mishna texts and their earlier manuscripts and printings, in almost twenty per cent of the cases, these scriptural citations are missing in the earlier and more original versions. This means that one out of five biblical verses, acting to compliment or support a contemporary Mishna text, is a later insertion. 

Until recently, not much research had been conducted on the relative absence of biblical citations found in a vast array of manuscripts and early printings of the Mishnah, in comparison with our contemporary version of the Mishna where these extra verses are to be found. 

514) Kabbalah: From Obscurity to the Defining Essence of Judaism

First printing of the Zohar, Cremona 1558.

Introduction

This article—based extensively on the research by Professor David Malkiel[1]—explores the thirteenth-century rise of Kabbalah in Spain and its subsequent peaking in sixteenth-century Safed. Since the Safed period, Kabbalah has come to be widely regarded as embodying the very essence and greatest depths of Judaism in the popular imagination. How did this transformation take place? Some would suggest that this is a natural progression towards messianic times. But any study of Jewish messianism shows that we have always believed we've been living in imminent messianic times. There may be additional ways of tracking the development of Kabbalah.

Malkiel introduces an unusual history of the rise of Kabbalah from a cultural perspective connecting it to the Rennaissance and the emerging preoccupation with ‘realism,’ which (ironically for a study on mysticism) avoids fantasy and idealism in favour of concrete reality. 

513) Secret Mystical and Chassidic societies

The Pledge of Allegiance between the students of the Ari zal (as found in the Stolin Geniza)

Introduction

This article—based extensively on the research by Rabbi Dr Zvi Leshem[1]—examines several secret mystical societies from biblical times to pre-war Europe, with a particular focus on the secretive group established by R. Kalonymus Kalmish (Kalman) Shapira of Piasecnzo (Piasetzna) (1889-1943). 

Secret mystical circles and societies are not well-known in Judaism, but they have always existed. 

Biblical times

The Torah describes the Benei haNevi’im (Sons of the Prophets) who were groups of disciples of prophets like Samuel, Eliyahu and Elisha (see 2 Kings 2:3, 4:1, 6:1 for example). These groups, while not necessarily secretive, played a significant role in preserving prophetic traditions and maintaining spiritual teachings during times of idolatry and apostasy. They used mystical techniques including meditation and even music to train in prophetic inspiration (Leshem 2021:112). 

512) Managing theological differences: Then and now

Introduction

This article—based extensively on the research by Professor Bernard Dov Cooperman[1]—explores how the Italian rabbinic world dealt with their dynamic differences in theological expression during the early Modern period. This was about the same time as R. Yosef Karo was producing his Shulchan Aruch in Safed. If one of the rabbis stepped out of the perceived appropriate theological boundaries, they were officially placed under a ban of cherem, or excommunication. However, what they referred to as cherem differs dramatically from the way we understand and implement the concept of cherem today. The earlier forms of excommunication and even charges of heresy were not as severe or even as binding as they are considered nowadays. 

511) The Zoharic notion of healing a ‘lovesick’ Shechina: A possible medical context

Tikunei Zohar, first edition, Mantua 1558

Introduction

This article—based extensively on the research by Dr Assaf Tamari[1]—examines the Zohar’s unusual depiction of the exiled Shechina (the feminine aspect of the Godhead) as a patient requiring urgent treatment. 

Note: This literature research by Tamari on the Zohar showing a possible medical context to the thirteenth-century emergence of the Zohar, is brand new and was only published recently in a peer-reviewed journal article. Had I read something like this ten years ago I would have rejected it as absolute nonsense. Now I read it with great interest and fascination.

The intertwining of religion and medicine was not an innovation of the thirteenth century when the Zohar was first published, because the two disciplines had always been interrelated since the earliest of times. Sin was traditionally associated with illness and healing with atonement (Tamari 2025:83, note 1). What was new at that time, though, was a proliferation of Jews and rabbis who had entered the medical field and were practising physicians. The number of Jewish physicians was: 

“out of proportion with contemporary demographics and the place of Jews in society” (Shatzmiller 1995:1).[2] 

510) L'shem Yichud: Do You Understand What You're Actually Saying?

This guest post by Rabbi Boruch Clinton originally appeared on the B'chol D'rachecha site.

Some days you just can’t open a regular Artscroll siddur without falling down a deep rabbit hole of theological controversy.

You’d figure that the siddur is the very poster child of consensus and ancient tradition. But you’d be wrong. There are, in fact, some odd expressions of extreme beliefs that many recite daily without giving it a second thought. Today’s example is the “l’shem yichud” attached to sefiras haomer (and to putting on tefilin). Artscroll even printed those in their Ashkenaz editions.

What’s the big deal about l’shem yichud? Well there is that famous Noda B’yehuda (חי”ד סי’ צג) who wasn’t at all shy about sharing his general feelings on the subject. But his forceful criticisms were largely focused on the chutzpa of later generations who felt that the mitzva observance of our ancestors - who simply made berachos and then did the mitzvos - was somehow incomplete. He did hint to something darker, but didn’t elaborate.

509) When authority becomes the determinator of reason, meaning and truth

An early manuscript of Meirat Einayim by the 14th century R. Yitzchak of Acre

Introduction

This article—based extensively on the research by Professor Eitan Fishbane[1]—examines the rabbinic notion of the authenticity of a teaching or text being reliant on the perceived authority of its transmitter or originator. In other words, the greater the rabbi the more authentic the teaching, regardless of the intrinsic value, nature and validity of the actual teaching itself. 

As a test case, we analyse the writings of a fourteenth-century Kabbalist, R. Yitzchak ben Shmuel of Acre in his Meirat Einayim which is a supercommentary (i.e., a commentary on a commentary) on Nachmanides’ Commentary on the Torah. Interestingly, R. Yitzchak of Acre—who lived at the same time as R. Moshe de Leon who had claimed to have discovered the ancient Zohar—questioned the attribution of the Zohar to the second-century Tanna, Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai, who lived a thousand years earlier.[2] 

508) Assessing the Modern "Yeshivishe" Approach to Torah Learning

Tractate Eruvin from the famous Vilna Shas

This Guest Post by Rabbi Boruch Clinton originally appeared on his B'chol D'rachecha site.

Despite what you might think, I’m not going to talk about the way yeshivas largely ignore Tanach or - in many cases - ignore 90 percent of whatever mesechte they’re learning. There may or may not be justifications for such deviations from tradition, but no one’s going to argue that, two thousand - or even two hundred - years ago, abandoning whole curriculum categories was the way things were supposed to work.

Instead, I’m going to discuss the dominance of the Brisker “chakira” style of analysis. I should be clear that I have nothing against the style, and I don’t deny that many people get enormous pleasure from it. My only question is whether making that our primary focus is the best use of the limited time we have available for our learning.

507) The rise of contemporary Religious-Zionism

Torat haMelech: a work by a "fringe element," a "call to terror" or according to R. Dov Lior (a respected figure among many mainstream Religious-Zionists) “very relevant especially in this time”?

Introduction

This article—based extensively on the research by Professor Yoav Peled[1]—examines the rise of the Religious Zionist movement from relative non-dominance in 1948 to a position of unquestionable hegemony in the last decades. The Chabad movement is widely recognized for its messianic focus, yet the similarly fervent messianism of Religious Zionists often receives less attention. 

From Socialist-Zionism to a Labour-Zionism to Religious-Zionism

Two political scientists from Bar-Ilan University, Charles Liebman and Eliezer Don-Yehiya (1983:128-131),[2] show how two significant ideological shifts took place within two decades of the birth of the State of Israel in 1948. Both shifts profoundly influenced the so-called ‘civil religion’ or dominant mindset and worldview of the nascent Israeli society. 

506) Reading the biblical word אות (‘sign’) in its earlier context

 

Introduction

This article—based extensively on the research by Professors Idan Dershowitz and Na’ama Pat-El[1]—examines possible lost meanings of the Hebrew word אות (‘ot’) which is usually simply translated and commonly understood as a ‘sign.’ The word ‘ot’ appears most famously in the Shema prayer in reference to the tefillin (phylacteries) which does seem to refer to a tangible 'sign': 

וּקְשַׁרְתָּ֥ם לְא֖וֹת עַל־יָדֶ֑ךָ וְהָי֥וּ לְטֹטָפֹ֖ת בֵּ֥ין עֵינֶֽיךָ׃

“And you shall bind them for a sign on your hand and they shall be as a symbol (or frontlets) between your eyes” (Deuteronomy 6:8). 

Because the biblical word ‘ot’ is usually translated as a ‘sign,’ it is commonly associated with some object, or some miraculous future event as a symbol of either an ominous or auspicious occurrence. 

“This understanding [of ‘ot’ as a ‘sign’] has long informed interpretations of biblical passages and Hebrew inscriptions” (Dershowitz and Pat-El 2025:1). 

505) Michtav Oz Shel Torah: A 1923 Anti-Zionist Polemical Letter by R. Yosef Yitzchak Schneerson

 

The 1923 Michtav Oz Shel Torah by R. Yosef Yitzchak Schneerson

Introduction

The rise of modern Zionism created some interesting challenges for many within the rabbinic community. Some rabbis believed that Zionism transgressed the Talmudic notion of Shalosh haShavut or the Three Oaths, where Jews were conceptualised to have undertaken oaths to remain in exile until the arrival of the Messiahꟷas discussed in the previous article [see: Kotzk Blog: 504) The ‘Three Oaths’: Theologies of Cancellation and Resurrection]. The list of rabbis who opposed Zionism becomes very interesting when some unexpected names begin to emerge. 

504) The ‘Three Oaths’: Theologies of Cancellation and Resurrection

 

Eim haBanin Semeicha by R. Yisachar Shlomo Teichtel

Introduction

This article – based extensively but not exclusively on the research by Professor Reuven Firestone[1] ꟷ examines the Talmudic concept of שלוש השבועות or Three Oaths. It focuses on the theological tension between the Three Oaths, which prohibit a return to the Land of Israel until the Messiah arrives, and the desire to settle in the Land. The Three Oaths were designed to engender a non-militaristic and exilic ethos within the Jewish people after the defeats of the Bar Kochba revolts against the Romans. It also touches upon the biblical notion of מלחמת מצווה, Mitzvah or Holy War. 

NOTE: This is not intended to be a political discussion or commentary on the present situation in the Middle East. Rather, it is an inquiry into a Talmudic theology that has evolved dramatically and in different directions over time. Firestone’s original article was written in 2006 and I have additionally consulted various other sources entirely unrelated to present-day events. In any case, ideas discussed here can be simultaneously selected and used by protagonists and detractors from all quarters. The main concern here is the vast array of often tendentious exegesis and evolution of a Talmudic theology, paradoxically resulting in both its cancellation and resurrection. 

503) Sebastianism: Crossover messianism that predated Sabbatianism

 

A Chumash printed by R. Menashe ben Yisrael in Amsterdam. Note the interesting way he presents the date.

Introduction

This article ꟷ based extensively on the research by Professor Matt Goldish[1] ꟷ examines the unusual notion of messianic crossover between Jews, Christians and Muslims that developed around the sixteenth century. What is even more unusual, from a Jewish perspective, is that the rabbis who participated in such enterprises were always Kabbalists and often respected Halachists as well.

 

Early forms of ‘messianic crossover’

An early example of messianic crossover may have early Christianity where Paul of Tarsus “deliberately engineered or changed” symbols and messages of his messianic movement (Christianity) to “appeal to people outside that tradition” (Goldish 2018:124). This successful methodology was adopted by Paul and he indeed brought many Gentiles under the wings of Christianity. 

502) Moshe haGoleh of Kiev: a critical devotee of Avraham Ibn Ezra

 

An early manuscript of Moshe haGoleh's Kabbalistic work, Shoshan Sodot.

Introduction

This article ꟷ based extensively on the research by Professor Eric Lawee[1] ꟷ examines a little-known and somewhat neglected exegete and commentator, R. Moshe ben Yakov (1448-1520) who compiled a super-commentary (i.e., a commentary on a commentary) based on R. Avraham Ibn Ezra (1089-1164) who had preceded him by almost four centuries. Moshe ben Yakov is also known as Moshe haGoleh (the ‘exile’) miKiev.^[2] 

Very few have ever heard of Moshe haGoleh, nor of the commentary he authored on Ibn Ezra entitled Otzar Nechmad, but he had some interesting things to say about Ibn Ezra and his relationship to Halacha, and to his 'opponent' Rashi. Moshe haGoleh also shed some light on the existence of diverse Rashi manuscripts. Additionally, he embarked upon a mission to convert Karaites to Rabbinic Judaism. Surprisingly, although Moshe haGoleh was an outspoken supporter of the rationalist Torah commentary of Ibn Ezra and engaged in the sciences and astronomy, he personally remained a Kabbalist. As an exegete, he was able to maintain a level-headed and even critical approach towards his ‘rabbi,’ Ibn Ezra. He is the only known Kabbalist to have written a super-commentary on Ibn Ezra. Yet, he remains: 

501) Were some early Spanish Kabbalists defending a Maimonidean position?

An image believed to be that of R. Yitzchak the Blind occupied with the Sefirot

Introduction

This article ꟷ based extensively on the research by Professor Tzahi Weiss[1] ꟷ examines an interesting and unusual approach to understanding how thirteenth-century Kabbalah suddenly emerged in Provence (southern France) and Catalonia (northeastern Spain). With this emergence, there was now a rapid interest in, and wide reception of, the notion of Sefirot (Divine emanations). Although the term ‘Sefirot’ was used in the earlier mystical work of the Bahir, it suddenly took on a specific meaning in thirteenth-century Spanish Zoharic Kabbalah. 

Weiss, a professor of Jewish mysticism, offers a unique interpretation as to why the Spanish Kabbalists reworked and redefined the older existing notion of Sefirot.  While the Spanish Kabbalists are usually depicted as radical mystics in direct conflict with Maimonidean rationalism ꟷ Weiss fascinatingly sees these Kabbalists as having more in common with some aspects of Maimonides’ Halachic writings (Mishneh Torah) and his philosophical writings (Moreh Nevuchim or Guide for the Perplexed) than usually imagined!

500) Mining Chassidic stories for kernels of historicity

 

Introduction

This article ꟷ based extensively on the research by Professor Glynn Dynner[1] ꟷ examines a possible methodology to extract aspects of historical truths from the often exaggerated and venerating style of Chassidic storytelling. Even within Chassidic circles the ‘Chassidishe Maaseh,’ or Chassidic story, is sometimes acknowledged as a questionable source of information, but this is not always the case. The presentation style of Chassidic stories is often referred to as hagiography as opposed to historiography. Sometimes Chassidic hagiography is so dense and detailed that Ada Rapoport-Albert has coined the phrase “Hagiography with footnotes.”[2] As detailed as the hagiography may be, it is still hard to define Chassidic stories as accurate history. Nevertheless, Dynner asks: 

“Can elements of certain tales stand on their own as historical sources?” (Dynner 2009:655).

 

499) The debate over the authenticity of the portrait of R. Shneur Zalman of Liadi

From the Abraham Schwadron Portrait Collection, National Library of Israel archive

Introduction

This article ꟷ based extensively on the research by Professor Wojciech Tworek[1] ꟷ examines the debate over the authenticity of one of the best-known portraits in Chassidic iconography; that of the Alter Rebbe, R. Schneur Zalman of Liadi, the first Chabad Rebbe. 

Unlike the iconic portrait of the Baal Shem Tov which has conclusively been shown to be not of the Baal Shem Tov of Medzhebuzh (c.1700-1760) but rather of the Baal Shem of London (1708-1782) ꟷ  there is much controversy over the portrait of R. Shneur Zalman of Liadi (1745-1812). 

The portrait of R. Shneur Zalman is published in the haTamim (vol. 2 p. 755) anthology of the sixth Rebbe of Chabad, R. Yosef Yitzchak Schneerson, under the title “תמונת תואר פני קדש הקדשים, The picture of the image of the Holy of Holies...”