 |
| Tiferet Yisrael by Maharal of Prague. First edition, Venice 1599 |
Introduction
This article—based extensively on the research by Dr Leore Sachs-Shmueli and Eynel Kapach—examines the question of whether the Maharal of Prague (1512-1609) was a philosopher or a Kabbalist. The Maharal has long been the subject of much scholarly debate over his relationship to Kabbalah. This new research situates Maharal as a discreet Kabbalist who hid his deep mystical views behind a veil of philosophy.
Defining the thought
of Maharal
Until now, many scholars have classified Maharal as primarily a philosopher who was somewhat indifferent or ambivalent to Kabbalah. Nevertheless, his relationship to Kabbalah, has often been questioned. The problem is that Maharal only made occasional use of overt Kabbalistic language:
“displaying instead a marked preference for philosophical language and a consistent resistance to conflating philosophy with Kabbalah” (Sachs-Shmueli and Kapach 2026:1).
This makes it very difficult to determine the extent to which Kabbalah influenced Maharal’s writing. Unlike other rabbinic writings that were often published posthumously, Maharal would have been fully aware of the printed versions of his writings as they were published during his lifetime and under his supervision. This means that even nuanced texts of Maharal can be considered intentionally nuanced, and our study deals with one such example—Chapter 13 of his work Tiferet Yisrael.
Who influenced
Maharal?
The interesting thing about Maharal is that we do not even know who influenced him because he:
“never reveals how and by whom the tradition was conveyed to him. We know nothing about who his teachers were, who influenced him, how he was initiated to Jewish learning, particularly into the mysteries of the Jewish mystical tradition” (Sherwin 2001:4).
This only deepens the mystery. Ironically, he had a profound influence on the development of later Chasidism. Rav Kook even considered Maharal to have been “the father of Chassidism” (Sherwin 2001:4). The teacher of the Kotzker Rebbe, R. Simcha Bunam of Peshischa, introduced Maharal into the study curriculum as a basis for understanding the teachings of Chassidism. However, considering that the Kotzker Rebbe was not interested in mysticism, this may raise more questions than answers and put an intriguing spin on the character of Maharal’s writing [see: Kotzk Blog: 010) The Rebbe Who Didn't Like Mysticism].
Previous scholarship
Previous scholarship does not present a unified vision of Maharal’s literary project, making it very difficult to define him:
Scholars like Heinrich Graetz, Arthur Green and Yosef Ben-Shlomo have placed Maharal squarely outside the boundaries of mysticism and Kabbalah (Ben-Shlomo 2015:39-40).
Dov Schwartz describes Maharal’s relationship to Kabbalah as “indifference” (Schwartz 2020:9-15).
On the other hand, Marc B. Shapiro and Byron Sherwin consider Maharal to be a significant Kabbalist (Sherwin 1982:51-55).
Yehudah Liebes also identifies a mystical layer within Maharal's otherwise philosophical writing.
Yoram Jacobson describes Maharal as a “non-kabbalistic kabbalist” (Garb 2016:347-83).
Jonathan Garb situates Maharal in a unique category of “Prague Kabbalists” who shifted the mystical traditional focus from higher spiritual worlds to the individual’s inner world and also to national history and destiny. This idea was then seized upon by the later mystics of subsequent generations including some Chassidim.
According to Benjamin Gross, Maharal draws on Kabbalah, not to engage with mysticism, but to reinforce his opposition to philosophy. Instead, Maharal consistently bases his ideas on the Talmudic sages. This places him in a central and mainstream rabbinic position without leaning toward either philosophy or mysticism.
Pursuing this idea of Maharal locating himself within centrist and mainstream rabbinic Judaism is Nili Weinstein, who maintains that Kabbalah was indeed an important—although not a primary—point of departure for Maharal, because he viewed Kabbalah as a “continuation of rabbinic tradition (unlike his view of philosophy)” (Sachs-Shmueli and Kapach 2026:2). As we can see, there are many and diverse ways to describe Maharal’s relationship to mysticism, and there does not seem to be any consensus on the matter.
The hidden mystical
Maharal
This study, however, argues for a deep but hidden mysticism in the teachings of Maharal. Sachs-Shmueli and Kapach’s research locates Maharal fundamentally within a Kabbalistic worldview:
“[Maharal’s] emphasis on devekut (cleaving) through Torah study shifts the focus from intellectual apprehension to a magico-spiritual attachment. These findings situate the Maharal within the concealed Kabbalistic milieu of the sixteenth century” (Sachs-Shmueli and Kapach 2026:1).
This notion of a “concealed
Kabbalistic milieu” around the sixteenth-century is fascinating because it
draws our attention to the possible existence of Kabbalists working in a
distinctly enlightened Renaissance environment, subtly introducing
mystical ideas to their overtly philosophical writings.
Hiding clues in
rabbinic writings
The idea of leading rabbinic figures like Maharal ‘hiding’ subtle ideas within their normative writing is nothing new. According to Micha Goodman, Maimonides (although for more rationalist reasons and while working in a distinctly mystical environment) was intentionally hiding provocative philosophical ideas within his texts, and he provided clues for the astute reader to uncover them. Maimonides believed that the greatest loss to Judaism was not the destruction of the Temple or its rituals, but the loss of knowledge. Maimonides (Introduction to Moreh Nevuchim, section 3) writes that he managed to re-establish the hidden secret that our Masoret (Tradition) had lost. He did this, not through revelation or prophecy but through the capacity of the mind. He wrote in a series of carefully structured layers, so that only an exclusive audience yearning for such knowledge could be worthy of it. This is how he created an elitist reading audience (Goodman 2024:3).
Maimonides purposefully did not expound on the knowledge (yeda) in its entirety, but only revealed kernels, chapter headings, or beginnings (reshit), which he dispersed among the layers of his writing. His reading audience was expected to then take these chapter headings or clues and apply their minds to develop them further and thus restore the essence of the ancient knowledge. This way, the reader of Moreh Nevuchim becomes an active reader, if not a co-writer of Moreh Nevuchim. It also allowed Maimonides to express certain contentious ideas without overtly putting them to paper [see: Kotzk Blog: 532) Dialogues of vision: How we view Maimonides and how he might view us (Part II)].
Adopting this discreet methodology, Maimonides was also able to subtly introduce his unique, radical, and purely rationalist concept of an intellectual form of unio mystica [see Kotzk Blog: 561) Maimonidean philosophy as a form of rationalist mysticism?].
It is, however, important to point out that my comparison of Maimonides to Maharal is more interpretive than demonstrative. Showing that a text can be read differently from the way it is presented is not the same as proving the author intended every hidden reading. However, it is indeed possible that both Maimonides’ and Maharal’s ‘hidden layers’ can also be legitimately explained as pedagogical caution or polemical strategy to avoid opposition. Sachs-Shmueli and Kapach (2026:2), are convinced that a “close reading” of Maharal’s Chapter 13 will “demonstrate” his hidden yet “deep affinity” to a Kabbalistic and mystical worldview.
Kabbalah hidden
within Maharal’s overtly philosophical idiom
Chapter 13 of Maharal’s third book, Tiferet Yisrael, comes after a long process of philosophical (as opposed to mystical) discussion on universal and expansive “great matters” concerning the structures of the cosmos. Only by contemplating extensive and broad ideas can the human being flourish to full potential. By contrast, the Torah seems only focused on the minutiae of the law, which restricts the reach of the soul.
Maharal resolves this conundrum: The human being on this earthly plane is but a reflection of a higher supernal entity. The same division of higher and lower realms can be said of the Torah. On the earthly level, the Torah deals with very mundane matters, but it too is a reflection of a higher supernal entity:
“[The Torah’s] engagement with material reality is but an outer garment for its divine wisdom, which originates in a higher realm. Thus, the Torah is the medium through which heavenly truths can be revealed within the earthly domain, and its study connects the individual to a transcendent, divine truth” (Sachs-Shmueli and Kapach 2026:2).
Importantly, Maharal did all this surreptitiously by:
“choosing to conceal the mystical foundations of his teaching beneath the surface of his philosophical discourse” (Sachs-Shmueli and Kapach 2026:2).
Chapter 13 of Maharal’s Tiferet Yisrael
According to Maharal:
ולפיכך העוסק בתורה, העסק הוא בדברים גדולים. כי אין לך לומר כי כאשר יעסוק בדברים הגשמיים, כמו נזק שור ובור וכיוצא בזה, שאין לו עסק בדברים הפנימים. שאם כן האדם שהוא עומד בעולם התחתון, אין לו חלק בעולם העליון הנבדל
“One who occupies himself with the Torah occupies himself with great matters. One should not say that when (the Torah) deals with mundane issues, like the damages of an ox or a pit, one is not engaged with lofty matters. Because if that was so, then when the person is attached to this lower world, they have no share in the higher world that is separated from us [—yet the Torah has to encompass “great matters”!] (Maharal, Tiferet Yisrael, Chapter 13, Translation mine).
The subject matter of Chapter 13 appears deceptively simple, even marginal. He does not really seem to say anything unusual. He begins with:
“As we have said... the primary value lies in the Torah insofar as it is the decree of the blessed God.”
Similarly, at the end of the chapter, he writes:
“The clear matter through which you know the supreme virtue of Torah study has already been explained to you, namely, that this Torah draws the human being beyond nature.”
These words imply that there is nothing particularly new or different in this chapter. However, hidden between the rather benign beginning and the conclusion, Maharal subtly introduces a “fundamentally new perspective on the nature of the Torah” (Sachs-Shmueli and Kapach 2026:3). Initially, Maharal simply, ubiquitously and typically portrayed the Torah as the means to elevate humans to a higher level. Yet simultaneously, Maharal suddenly makes an apparently inverse, if not contradictory, claim: It is the Torah that descends to this earthly domain and clothes itself with seemingly mundane matters and physical details. Then, when humans engage with such material and everyday matters as the Torah deals with, they are thereby elevated and capable of cleaving to the transcendent God. This is an extremely mystical characterisation of an almost magical capacity and theurgy of the Torah—disguised in ‘garments’ of the mundane and even the trivial—to function as a chariot of ascendence into the world of the spirit. It is not even the human who is making making the effort, but, instead, the magico‑spiritual power and theurgy of the Torah, as long as the person observes its simple and mundane instructions. Essentially, ordinary observance of the Torah becomes a mystical conduit for spiritual ascent. This is a profoundly Kabbalistic notion.
Support for this
mystical thesis
To support this thesis that Maharal’s thirteenth chapter of Tiferet Yisrael signals a concealed Kabbalist worldview rather than maintaining his usual philosophical stance, note that this is the only chapter in the entire book (besides the introduction) that contains the expression Tiferet Yisrael (the book’s very title).
Additionally, Chapter 13 is the sole chapter to quote the Zohar explicitly! Sachs-Shmueli and Kapach (2026:3) describe this direct quotation from the Zohar as a “highly uncharacteristic move.” These two distinctly infrequent features seem to reinforce Chapter 13 as the locus for the Maharal’s concealed mystical view of the Torah. Describing the Torah as descending into the mundane for the sake of theurgically uplifting the observant is a distinctly mystical approach and would not be categorised as a philosophic position.
The Zoharic section is from Midrash haNealam (which, incidently, reflects sections of Philo of Alexandria, as does Bereishit Rabbah):
במדרש הנעלם (זוהר בהעלותך קנב.), אמר רבי שמעון, ווי לההוא בר נש דאמר דהא אורייתא אתא לאחזאה ספורין בעלמא ומלין דהדיוטי
“Woe to the man who says: ‘The Torah came only to be taken as worldly stories and the words of the unlearned.’ …Rather, all the words of the Torah are supernal words and secrets of the highest. Behold: there is an upper world and a lower world joined together. When the angels of the upper world… descend to the lower world they clothe themselves in the garment of this world. If they do not clothe themselves in the garment of this world, they cannot be established in this world, nor can this world bear them. Similarly, the Torah…” (Zohar, Midrash haNealam, Behalotecha).
Usually, Maharal comments on his quotations, but here he remains largely silent:
“[This] reflects the Maharal’s deliberate strategy of concealing his core teachings, to be grasped by those able to understand them. Precisely because of the centrality of this Zoharic passage to his thought—indeed, he builds his entire conception of Torah upon it—he chooses to cite it without commentary” (Sachs-Shmueli and Kapach 2026:3).
Maharal’s about-turn
Maharal sets himself apart from the philosophy he is usually associated with:
“The Maharal opens the chapter by presenting the view of the philosophers, who maintain that engagement with the celestial spheres and the so-called ‘important matters’ is key to human success. He refutes their claim, arguing instead that it is the Torah—concerned with the ‘lowly and inferior’ aspects of reality—that holds true value because it is the decree of the Blessed God. In so doing, the Maharal sets divine revelation in opposition to human wisdom” (Sachs-Shmueli and Kapach 2026:4).
Maharal’s refutation of the views of the philosophers and his emphasis on ‘lower matters’ over ‘higher matters’ reveal that he is essentially a mystic.
Yehudah haLevi
Maharal’s charade-like portrayal of philosophy, which is subtly overshadowed by Kabbalah in his about-turn in Chapter 13, is reminiscent of the style of Yehudah haLevi, who, in his Kuzari, uses philosophy to reject astral magic. However, he simultaneously attributes a theurgic efficacy to the Divine working through the stars and astrology. So, what appears as a philosophical stance subtly harbours a mystical theurgy. This is a mystical approach disguised as a philosophical position. Similarly, Maharal employs philosophical motifs only to subordinate them to mystical and not speculative reason. This may define Maharal and Yehudah haLevi, ultimately, as mystics and not philosophers.
Do not look at the vessel
Maharal even seems to admit to this concealed methodology when he cites Pirkei Avot (4:20): “Do not look at the vessel, but at what it contains.”
“This suggests that the Maharal intentionally embedded this Mishnah in his text as a literary foreshadowing, guiding the attentive reader to seek out the hidden layers of the [mystical] chapter rather than settling for its overt [philosophic] meaning” (Sachs-Shmueli and Kapach 2026:4, parentheses mine).
Maharal reveals his mystical secret quite openly in Chapter 13, with a reference to an “inner secret”:
“So it is with the commandments of the Torah: although they are physical acts, they contain an inner secret that stands at the summit of the world” (Maharal, Tiferet Yisrael, Chapter 13).
This, again, supports the notion of Maharal as a mystic because once Torah is explained as adopting a physical garment, then:
“even if the great matters are not known to the comprehender, the garment is close to the body, and the body is close to the soul until all is joined and cleaves in a supreme apprehension…This accords profound significance to studying the revealed topics in the Torah, even without understanding their inner content” (Sachs-Shmueli and Kapach 2026:7).
Thus, the mystical cleaving can take place without sechel or comprehension which is the hallmark and pillar of philosophy. In this way:
“[Maharal] transfers the principal realm of the Torah’s influence from the revealed and perceptible world to an internal and hidden realm, and which shifts its operation from the domain of intellect…claiming that its highest merit is the cleaving... [This] is distinctly kabbalistic in nature… Accordingly, the Torah is not a body of knowledge that is acquired and internalized but rather a dynamic arena of movement. This understanding further sets the Torah apart from all other branches of wisdom [and philosophy]” (Sachs-Shmueli and Kapach 2026:6-8).
Conclusion
We have examined a robust theory that describes Maharal—often thought of as a philosopher and non-Kabbalist—as a shrewd and veiled Kabbalist:
“[T]he emphasis on devekut (cleaving) as a supreme value, and the shift in emphasis from intellectual apprehension to magical–spiritual attachment all indicate a clear kabbalistic foundation, albeit stylistically veiled” (Sachs-Shmueli and Kapach 2026:12).
If Sachs-Shmueli and
Kapach are correct, this reveals the deep Kabbalistic underpinnings
of the Maharal’s thought and also exposes the contemporaneous and common “concealed
Kabbalistic milieu of the sixteenth century” (Sachs-Shmueli and Kapach 2026:13), where mystics routinely adopted the
outward guise of Renaissance philosophers while advancing a hidden mystical
agenda.
Bibliography
Ben-Shlomo, Y., 2015, ‘Historiya Ve-utopiya
Be-mishnatam Shel Ha-Maharal Ve-shel Ha-Raya Kook’ in Historiography and
Jewish Studies, Edited by Michael F. Mach and Yoram Jacobson, Tel Aviv
University.
Garb, J, 2016, ‘Al Mekubalei Prag Ve-haspa’atam
Le-Dorot’, Kabbalah, vol. 14, 347–83.
Goodman, M., 2024, Online source:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2izQrXkLAwo&t=632s
Sachs-Shmueli, L. and Kapach, E., 2026, ‘The Soul of
the Torah: The Kabbalistic Conception in Tiferet Israel by the Maharal of
Prague,’ Religions, 17, 841,
1-15.
Schwartz, D., 2020, Reason against Herself: Forms and
Patterns in the Thought of Maharal of Prague, Idra, Tel Aviv (Hebrew).
Sherwin, B. L., 1982, Mystical Theology and Social
Dissent: The Life and Works of Judah Loew of Prague, The Littman Library of
Jewish Civilization, London.
Sherwin, B.L., 2001, ‘The Legacy of Rabbi Judah Loew of
Prague’, European Judaism: A Journal for the New Europe, vol. 34, no. 1,
124-130.
I thank Dr Avi Harel for these sources:
בנימין גרוס, נצח ישראל: השקפתו המשיחית של המהר"ל
מפראג על הגלות והגאולה, תל אביב: הוצאת דביר, תשל"ד-1974
בנימין גרוס, יהי אור: נר מצווה למהר"ל מפראג,
ירושלים" ראובן מס, תשנ"ו
הרב משה צוריאל, אוצרות מהר"ל, הוצאת יהדות התורה
בע"מ, תשנ"א 1991אנדרה נהר, משנתו של המהר"ל מפראג, הוצאת ראובן מס,
ירושלים (תרגום מצרפתית)
דוד סורוצקין, התאולוגיה של הנבדל: המהר"ל מפראג
וצמיחתו של המודרניזם האורתודוקסי המוקדם בהגות היהודית, קבלה, 14, לוס אנג'לס:
הוצאת כרוב, תשס"ו-2006
חיים הלל בן-ששון, על חופש הביטוי במשנת המהר"ל ומשנתו
החינוכית: בתוך תולדות ישראל בימי הביניים, תל אביב: הוצאת דביר
מרדכי נויגרשל, באר הגולה למהר"ל מפראג - עם ביאור
בארה של מרים, ירושלים: הוצאת יהדות מזווית שונה, 2007
יודל רוזנברג, נפלאות המהר"ל – ספר בדיוני על
המהר"ל והגולם
ר. פרידמן, המהר"ל מפראג: ספור חייו ופעלו של
המהר"ל מפראג
אוטו דב קולקה, הרקע ההיסטורי של משנתו הלאומית והחינוכית
של המהר"ל מפראג, ציון, נ', תשמ"ה-1985, עמ' 277–320
יחזקאל לביא, צ'כיה וסלובקיה במבט יהודי וכללי, פיענוח מצבת
המהר"ל, תשנ"ה-1995 נספח בסוף הספר
אהרן פריץ קליינברגר, המחשבה הפדגוגית של המהר"ל
מפראג, הוצאת הספרים ע"ש י"ל מאגנס, ירושלים, תשכ"ב 1962
אלחנן ריינר (עורך), מהר"ל: אקדמות - פרקי חיים, משנה,
השפעה, מרכז זלמן שזר, 2015
אורית רמון, מהר"ל באור חדש - זהות יהודית בסדר עולם
משתנה, מרכז זלמן שזר, 2017
דב שוורץ, תבונה נגד עצמה: תבניות ודפוסים בהגותו של
המהר"ל מפראג, הוצאת אדרא, 2019
יהודה אדרי, רבי יהודה ליווא: המהר"ל מפראג, קריית גת:
דני ספרים, תשס"ט
בן-ציון גרשוני, מהר"ל מפראג: סיפור חייו ותקופתו,
ירושלים: משאבים, תש"מ
א. בן יעקב, גלות וגאולה במשנת המהר"ל מפראג, ירושלים:
אריאל, תשמ"ט
גוטסדינר אברהם (בעריכת י.ל. הכהן פישמן), הארי שבחבורת
פרג: ר' ליווא ב"ר בצלאל (המהר"ל) תולדות חייו, השקפותיו ודעותיו,
ירושלים תרצ"ח
בנימין בראון, "שני מיני האחדות": המהר"ל,
השפת אמת והמפנה הדואליסטי בהגות החסידית המאוחרת, מהר"ל – אקדמות, מרכז זלמן
שזר, ירושלים תשע"ה, עמ' 448-411, באתר
Academia.edu.
No comments:
Post a Comment