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. 

462) Efodi’s challenge to the study of Talmud, Maimonidean Philosophy and Kabbalah

 

Abstract

Efodi (d. 1433) is well acquainted with three powerful streams of Jewish learning ─ Talmud, Maimonidean Philosophy and Kabbalah. He argues that each of these schools has inherent and significant flaws in terms of their authenticity of tradition, let alone that they promote scholarly elitism. In their place, he boldly and controversially suggests a democratisation of Jewish scholarship through a return to the basics of Torah (i.e., biblical) study. Was this radical attempt at reshaping the Jewish learning curriculum a response to the Christian persecutions in Spain in 1391, or was it meant only as a remedy for the hour?

Introduction

This article ─ based extensively on the research by Professor Yoel Marciano[1] ─ examines how Perfeyt Duran, known as Efodi, introduced and proposed a change in the traditional study curriculum, ironically by going back to pure grassroots.  His approach was anti-elitist and empowered all Jews, particularly non-scholars, to reach perfection without the need to pass through the three options of the rigours of Talmud study, Maimonidean Philosophy, or Kabbalah. He suggested, instead, a return to the simple study of the Tanach (Hebrew Bible). 

266) BETWEEN FRANKFURT AND TZFAS:

                                            

 Guest Article by Rabbi Boruch Clinton.                                                  

INTRODUCTION:
(By Gavin Michal)

A wonderful benefit - from the treasury of unearned gifts - is that by writing KOTZKBLOG, I get to meet some of the most wonderful writers and thinkers from all around the Jewish academic and Torah world.

One such individual is Rabbi Baruch Clinton, an author, educator and scholar who has the rare attribute of being able to think for himself and speak his mind honestly while remaining steadfastly true to Torah Judaism. He introduced himself to me as a Hirschian (a student of R. Shimshon Refael Hirsch) but he is so much more.

What follows is one of his articles which I share (with permission):

It deals with the important idea of Jewish mysticism which has today become the mainstream. Mysticism, of one sort or another, is now the default setting of probably most religious Jews, even those from non-Chassidic camps. Clinton’s article questions whether popularity alone is sufficient to override the small still voice of spiritual rationalism which may claim even deeper and more authentic roots.

Between Frankfurt and Tzfas touches on the theological tension between 19^th- century Hirschian thought and 16^th-century Kabbalistic theurgy and theosophy. Frankfurt was the centre for the rational thinking of R. Hirsch, and Tzfas (Safed, a town in northern Israel) became the new home of mysticism after the expulsion of Jews from Spain in 1492.

186) MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE ATTITUDES TOWARDS KABBALAH:

INTRODUCTION:

In this article, we will look at a number of very different attitudes and approaches towards the study of Jewish mysticism and Kabbalah. The intention is not to persuade the Reader one way or the other, but rather to show just how diverse some of these approaches are one from the other:

R. CHAIM VITAL:

Let us begin with some very strong theosophical argument as put forth by the student of the Ari Zal, R. Chaim Vital (1543-1620)[1]:

“Why is the exile taking so long to end? Why has Moshiach not yet come?

I have found the following explanation:

It is due to the lack of study of the inner parts of Torah.

One who places his focus to only study the revealed aspects of the Torah, the Mishneh and Talmud Bavli, its physical laws and details, and does not give time to study also the inner parts of the Torah, is considered to be studying for the sake of reward. He is like a body which sits in darkness without the light of Hashem.

This was precisely the sin of Adam Harishon who chose to eat from the tree of good and evil. This means that he chose to spend his time only studying the revealed aspects of Torah and repulsed from taking from the tree of life, which is the study of Kaballa.

This was also the sin of the Eiruv Rav [Mixed Multitude], who asked Moshe to only teach them the revealed aspects of the Torah and not its secrets, as they feared it would shorten their lives.

This is also the mistaken belief of some people today that studying the inner aspects of the Torah can lead to death prior to one’s time.

This is untrue. On the contrary, the focus in learning only the revealed aspects of Torah, and ignoring the inner aspects of Torah, is what caused the destruction of the first and second Temple, and is the cause of our long and bitter exile.

Only through tasting the tree of life, which is the study of Kaballa, will the Jewish people leave the exile. The sin of not learning the inner aspects of Torah began with Adam Harishon and when we do Teshuvah [repentance] to study this wisdom with love we will be redeemed.

Those who despise learning the inner aspects of Torah do not receive Divine success in their learning of the revealed aspects of Torah and often end up permitting that which is forbidden and prohibiting that which is permitted.”

THE LUBAVITCHER REBBE:

The following is an excerpt from a letter of R. Menachem Mendel Schneerson encouraging the study of Chassidut (Neo-Kabbalistic mysticism)[2]:

“...I am happy to read in your letter that you have fixed times for the study of Torah, both Nigleh, [the Torah’s revealed, legal dimension,] and Chassidus. Surely you will be steadfast in this, for these are broad mediums to draw down and receive all forms of good, both material and spiritual.

You mention in your letter that your younger brother is now in our Holy Land. It would be appropriate to suggest to him that he contact the members of the Chassidic brotherhood in Jerusalem and explain to him, in a manner appropriate for his nature, the great importance of studying Chassidus, the Tree of Life, particularly in these generations of ikvesa diMeshicha, the time when Mashiach’s approaching footsteps can be heard. As the Zohar has promised:  With it, Israel will be redeemed from exile with kindness and mercy. Certainly, with fitting effort, you will succeed in [inspiring] your brother to start [this study]...”

Here is an excerpt from another letter of the Lubavitcher Rebbe[3]:

“...Thank you for your letter of 22 Nissan which brought good tidings about the public classes you have been leading in the maamarim of my revered father-in-law, the Rebbe, הכ"מ, and also, that you are trying to have his directives brought into practice by the members of the Chassidic brotherhood and the temimim [Chabad students], so that they fulfil their general missions, and in particular, [the mission of] guarding our special vineyard, [i.e.,] the dissemination of the wellsprings [of Chassidus] within [the Chassidic community] and outside of it.

Please, please, strengthen and reinforce yourself in putting into practice your plan that the young men and the students review the teachings of Chassidus in different synagogues. What captured my heart in particular were your strong efforts to draw students from all the yeshivos close in order to study Chassidus and to show the path of G‑d to Jewish children of all groups in all the proper and possible ways.

If there are ordinary expenses [arising as a result of] any of these [efforts], please notify us and we will participate in them...”

This last letter emphasises not just the importance of this field of study but also the urgency and missionary-like zeal with which it must be disseminated.

AN ARGUMENT AGAINST STUDYING KABBALAH:

R. David Bar-Hayim is most outspoken in his view on Jewish mysticism in general. He says:

“The Torah perspective...as is mentioned explicitly in the Mishna...that we should not ask questions...regarding the nature of Hashem etc.

Because these things, by definition are beyond our human capacity for understanding...and beyond the scope of the human mind and soul[4] to comprehend - therefore such speculation can lead to negative results.

It can only lead to a human being postulating various ideas, making certain assumptions, or claims which are not true or accurate – and in fact, cannot be true or accurate because we simply don’t know the truth about such things.

We only know about Hashem...(through) His will as revealed to us in the Torah. Anything...beyond that, regarding Hashem Himself and the nature of his existence – and what was before and what will come after, according to the Mishna...are both superfluous and in fact pernicious.

And if a person were to say...that certain branches of Medieval Jewish philosophy and Kabbalah deal with precisely these issues that according to the Mishna...we should not...speculate about – such a person would be right.

Any discussion which one can find in various ...Kabbalistic Jewish texts, which deal with these issues, are essentially - by definition - mistaken. Because it is clear and obvious both by dint of logic...and by the dictates of the Torah, that such speculation is beyond our capacity and can therefore lead to nothing positive. In fact, it is almost certain to lead to negative outcomes.”

RAMBAN/RAMBAM DEBATE:

This last view, perhaps, also relates to the great debate between Ramban and Rambam over whether Kabbalah and the mystical tradition was an unbroken chain dating back to Sinai (like the rest of the Oral Tradition), or not.

According to Ramban, the mystical tradition was indeed an ancient tradition with roots going all the way back to the revelation at Sinai.

However, according to Rambam, although there were great mystics and prophets in the past, that tradition has been broken and we can no longer claim an uninterrupted mystical chain reaching back to Sinai.

R. MOSHE ZURIEL ON ‘OVERSTATED MYSTICS’:

R. Moshe Zuriel adopts an interesting stance positioning himself somewhere in the middle[5]:

“We must make mention of those misguided scholars who advertise their [alleged] knowledge of ‘Kabbalah’.

Even though they might not [explicitly] tell others to ‘come and give honour to me’, however [by their demeanour] they hint and allude very clearly that they know many secrets of the world.

And they ‘solve’ issues relating to the depths of the souls of those who come knocking at their door to ask [for spiritual] advice and salvation.

[The irony is that] all this is [theurgical insinuation is actually] against the tenor and ethos of this [very] disciple."

"In fact, all that the Kabbalists have written in their books is not the revelation of secrets – because if one has not [actually] experienced the concepts [which the Kabbalists speak about, in real and not imagined reality], it is like one is just reading [mere words and simple letters of the] Alef-Bet.

Therefore all those pregnant [Kabbalistic] terms that people wax lyrical about concerning the ‘Holy Names’, ‘Spheres’ and Numerical Values etc – are mere ‘illustrations’ but not [actual] Secrets of Torah.

They are ‘speculations which depend upon a [subjective] heart’[6].

[In reality, though,] those who really do know in truth, [and have experienced] the Secrets, conceal them and reveal them only to modest students and do not reveal them [to the populace].”

Thus, according to R. Zuriel, although some true Mystics may exist, most of Kabbalistic literature just deals with ‘illustrations’ which are simply ‘like reading words and letters’ which have no bearing on true spiritual or G-dly reality.

In this view, the minuscule number of people who do know - don’t tell.

And those who do tell - don’t know.

ANALYSIS:

At the end of the day, because this is such an emotional issue, one will find oneself drawn very quickly to one of these approaches at the exclusion of the others.

The different hypotheses sometimes almost appear to be like different religions.

What immediately strikes one about these perspectives is that they are so divergent from each other.

We have views like: 

“Mashiach hasn’t yet come - and both Temples were destroyed - and we permit the impermissible - because we don’t study the inner Torah.”

This combined with views likening Kabbalah to: “Pernicious and mistaken speculation which is almost certain to lead to negative outcomes.”

And that: “Kabbalah is not the revelation of secrets, but simple words and letters which depend on the speculation of the heart.” 

To the discussion over whether Kabbalah truly has roots “going back to Sinai”!

It would have been nice to conclude that regardless of our emotionally charged spiritual preferences and arguments, all these views could find their place somewhere within the vastness of Torah Judaism - and that Judaism was broad enough to absorb such mutually exclusive views – but, as we have seen, this may be easier said than done.

What emerges, therefore, taking all views into account, it that is very difficult to speak of a definitive ‘Torah attitude towards Kabbalah’.

---

[1] Sha’ar haHakdamot, Hosafot Kuntres Eitz Chaim. Translation follows that of R. Yaakov Goldstein.

[2] Letter no. 715.

[3] This letter was sent to Rav Nachum Shemaryahu Sossonkin, an active member of the Lubavitch community in Jerusalem, on 6 Iyar, 5710.

[4] This reference to the soul should not be lost on the Reader because even a ‘spiritual experience’ is not a ‘G-dly experience’ – as G-dliness does not only infinitely transcend physicality, but it also infinitely transcends spirituality (especially when the individual himself experiencing the ‘spiritual’ is the sole arbiter of the depths of the experience.

[5] Otzarot haMussar, Chelek Bet, by R. Moshe Zuriel; p. 846.

[6] A Talmudic expression.