232) THEOLOGICAL POLITICS SURROUNDING THE EMERGENCE OF THE SHULCHAN ARUCH:

A 1754 edition of Shulchan Aruch, published during R. Yosef Karo's lifetime.

INTRODUCTION:

In this article, we will explore some of the reasons that are given for the necessity to override and replace the 12^th century Maimonidean Halachic Code of Law - the Mishneh Torah – with R. Yosef Karo’s 16^th century Shulchan Aruch.

THE MAIMONIDEAN CODE WAS ORIGINALLY ‘ACCEPTED BY ALL OF ISREAL’:

The world authority on accurate Maimonidean texts [see previous article] R. Yosef Kapach (1917-2000) wrote:

“It is clear that the method of Maimonides [in his Mishneh Torah] is a standard for the whole world to use...” [1]

Not surprisingly, according to an avowed ‘student of the Rambam’ like R. Kapach, the Mishneh Torah should still remain the essential Code of Jewish Law and should never have been superseded by any other Code. So to further support his thesis, R. Kapach shows how historically there was an agreement in Toledo that no one should rule in any matter against Rambam. The same applied in Castile and in Tunis.

And R. Avraham Zacuto wrote:  

“When the Mishneh Torah was published and distributed in all of the Diaspora, all Israel agreed to follow it and to act according to it in all laws of the Torah.”[2]

This last point is an interesting one because the argument usually goes that the reason why we accepted the Babylonian Talmud over the Jerusalem Talmud is that ‘all Israel agree to follow it’.

And the reason why we follow R. Yosef Karo’s Shulchan Aruch over the Mishneh Torah of Rambam is also that ‘all Israel agree to follow it’.

And yet we see, historically, that after Rambam wrote his Mishneh Torah, ‘all Israel agreed to follow it’ – and, notwithstanding, for some reason it was later superseded by the Shulchan Aruch.

MISHNEH TORAH - TUR – SHULCHAN ARUCH:

Between Rambam’s Mishneh Torah (1180) and R. Karo’s Shulchan Aruch (1563) there was yet another Code of Law known as Arba’ah Turim (around the1300s) which was authored by R. Yaakov ben Asher[3]. R. Karo wrote a commentary on the Arba’ah Turim, known as the Beit Yosef, which became the precursor to his later work, the Shulchan Aruch.

JUSTIFICATION FOR THE TUR:

This is how the Tur justified the need for his new Code, just a century after Rambam’s Mishneh Torah: 

“As a result of our long exile, our strength is weakened...our thinking has become flawed, dissension (as to the clarity of the Halacha) has increased (bringing with it) opposing viewpoints - to the extent that one cannot find a single practical Halacha that does not involve some controversy.”[4]

According to the Tur, just one hundred years after Rambam had laid out his Halachic Code in the Mishneh Torah - which was written in clear and simple Hebrew -  the Halachic world was apparently in such turmoil that it necessitated a new Code.

JUSTIFICATION FOR BEIT YOSEF (WHICH LED TO THE SHULCHAN ARUCH):

This is how R. Yosef Karo justifies the need for a new Code, 300 years after Rambam:

“As a result of our long exile where we have been dispersed from place to place, endured different hardships in close succession...(as the Prophet Isaiah warned us) our Sages have lost their wisdom. The strength of Torah and the number of its students have diminished. There are no longer just two opposing schools (like Hillel and Shammai) but an immeasurable number of (Halachic) schools.

This was brought about because of the number of different Halachic works. Although the authors of these many works sought to enlighten us, they instead added to the confusion...

Many of these authors would quote a Law as if it were universal and undisputed, whereas the reality is the exact opposite.”[5]

R. Karo essentially mirrors and expands on the same sentiments as expressed by the Tur above.

R. KARO’S CRITICISM OF RAMBAM’S MISHNEH TORAH:

But R. Karo also offers a criticism of Rambam’s Mishneh Torah, essentially disapproving of Rambam’s lack of providing any Talmudic sources for his rulings, and insists that the Halachic process is far more complicated that Rambam had made out:

“If one wanted to trace the Rambam’s sources for his Laws back to the Talmud, it would be extremely difficult. Although G-d has blessed us with a (remedy for Rambam’s lack of Talmudic source material) in the commentary of the Rav haMaggid[6] who did trace the Talmudic origins of Rambam’s laws – nevertheless there are many limitations because unless one is a great scholar those sources will be difficult to comprehend.

Furthermore, it is not enough just to know the Talmudic source, but one also must consult Rashi, Tosafot, the Mordechai, Rambam, including the responsa literature to see whether a particular ruling was universally accepted.”

WHY R. KARO CHOSE TUR OVER RAMBAM:

Then R. Karo goes on to explain why he decided to attach his Beit Yosef commentary (the precursor to his Shulchan Aruch) to the Tur and not to the Mishneh Torah of Rambam:

“Because of all this, I Yosef ben haRav Efraim...have taken the drastic action to remove all the pitfalls, and have decided to author a work that will incorporate all the Laws that are practised today – together with their sources as found in the Talmud and the views of the Halachic decisors, without exception.

To avoid repetition, I decided to append this work to a previous Halachic work...Originally I thought to append it to Rambam’s Mishneh Torah, but I because he only brings his own opinion, I rather decided to append it to the Arba’ah Turim because he included most of the other opinions.

I have determined that because of the three pillars of Halachic thought upon which all the House of Israel rests, namely Rif, Rambam and Rosh (the father of the Tur), it would be prudent to rule according to the majority (i.e. two out of three).”

THE HISTORICAL RECORD?

Clearly, R. Karo did not consider Rambam to have been the final word on Halacha. He respected Rambam, but considered him only as a part or a component in a far more elaborate scheme of Halachic endeavour.

This appears to be in sharp contradistinction to the apparent historical record as noted by R. Avraham Zacuto (mentioned above) and others, who paint a picture of the Mishneh Torah being widely accepted as the authoritative text across the Jewish world in the generations immediately following Rambam.

MAHARSHAL’S RADICAL STANCE AGAINST THE SHULCHAN ARUCH:

R. Shlomo Luria (1510-1573) - known as Maharshal - was a major Ashkenazi Halachic decisor who wrote rather scathingly against R. Karo and his new Shulchan Aruch:

“Rabbeinu Yosef Caro, took upon himself to render final Halachic decisions on his own accord...This flies in the face of our traditions which we have upheld until this day.

Those reading his work, are totally unaware that oftentimes his decisions run counter to the accepted rulings of Tosafot and the Halachic decisors, whose ruling we follow...

Unfortunately, this places us in a predicament because the fact is that what people read in a book is always taken seriously[7] (and considered to be authoritative and accurate). To the extent that even were one to ‘shriek like a crane’ and show with compelling proofs that something is inaccurate - no one will pay any attention...

It is bad enough that he used the majority principal of choosing two out of three with regard to Rif, Rosh and Rambam, disregarding everyone else – as if he alone received the Tradition directly from the Elders; but he never delved deeply enough into the mechanics of the Halacha...

Additionally, he did not work from accurate texts and source material and hence he often copied and perpetuated mistakes and errors.”[8]

Besides the very vocal objection of some rabbis like Maharshal, there were some other fundamental issues as well:

DO WE  DERIVE HALACHA FROM THE ZOHAR?

It is a well-established principle in Halacha that we do not follow the Zohar or any form of mysticism when it comes to defining and determining the practical Law.

Yet we also know that R. Karo was a fervent Kabbalist who was, apparently, taught by an angelic being known as a ‘Maggid’. This Magid informed him that Rambam had endorsed his new Shulchan Aruch. And we know that many Kabbalistic practices were indeed incorporated within his Shulchan Aruch:

In the words of the Magid Meisharim [258] itself, there is no doubt that R. Karo merged Kabbalah with Halacha:

“Because you have combined (the Law and Kabbalah) together, all the celestial beings have your interests at heart...”

R. KARO ACKNOWLEDGES THE ZOHAR AS A HALACHIC REFERENCE:

In his Introduction to Beit Yosef, R. Karo writes:

“Anyone who has this book before him will have the words of the Talmud, Rashi, Tosafot, Ran, Rif Rosh [and he enumerates about another 30 other sources]...all clearly arranged and well explained in front of him. Also, in some places, we quote from the Zohar.”

THE CHIDA POSITIONS R. KARO WITH THE MYSTICS OF SAFED:

The 18th-century Halachist and Kabbalist, R. Chaim Yosef David Azulai, known as the Chida (1724-1806) writes:

“The Maggid (angelic being) told him to call his work Beit David or Shulchan Aruch...

Know that I received a tradition from a great man both in wisdom and fear of Heaven, who received it from a great rabbi who in turn received it from the elders, that during the generation of R. Yosef Karo – a generation with holy people such as R. Moshe Cordovero and the Arizal – there was a special assistance from Heaven because the Jews need a Halachic work which would collate the Laws and their sources and establish the final Halachic conclusion.

There were three candidates for this task during that generation...and one of them was R. Yosef Karo, and because of his humility, he was chosen (to author the Shulchan Aruch).”[9]

The Chida appears to lend a mystical air to the story of the composition of the Shulchan Aruch, thus seemingly elevating it above its practical function as a Code of Law. He continues along this vein:

“Know that I received a tradition from pious elders who in turn received it from the great Master and Holy Man, R. Chaim Abulafia [21], that...about 200 rabbis in his generation acquiesced to R. Karo’s position [of writing a new Code of Law]. And Abulafia used to say obeying R. Karo was like obeying the 200 rabbis...

I also heard that when the Beit Yosef first came out, R. Yosef ben Levi [Maharival] opposed it and forbade his students to study from it, saying it would diminish Talmudic scholarship.

Instead, his students would study Tur in his presence. One it happened that the Maharival was unable to find a particular source and the declared: ‘I see that Heaven has indeed decreed that the Beit Yosef must spread throughout the world.’ And thereafter he permitted his students to study it.”[10]

Again we see the Chida framing of the events relating to the emergence of the Shulchan Aruch in a supernatural idiom.

What is also interesting, though, is that to best of my knowledge, this is the only account (albeit from a tertiary source) of some 200 rabbis accepting the new Shulchan Aruch as binding over the other Codes.

[To more fully understand the extent and significance of this Kabbalistic connection, the Reader is urged to see A Mystical Side to R. Yosef Karo.]

BACK TO THE ORIGINAL QUESTION:

Having established that there was quite a strong Kabbalistic association around the surfacing and perpetuation of R. Karo’s Shulchan Aruch, and having shown that some, like the Maharshal were rigorously opposed to its sudden emergence – we can go back to our original question: If we already had the widely accepted Code of the Rambam (and, apparently it was accepted by more than just 200 rabbis) why the need for another Code three hundred years later?

The answer may lie in the fact that, besides being a rationalist, Rambam, lived in the pre-Zoharic era. The mysticism of the Zohar was unknown before its appearance during the mid-1200s and Rambam passed away in 1204. 

[See Mysteries behind the  Origins of the Zohar.]

However, the appearance of the Zohar changed the face of Judaism forever, with its influence - to a greater or lesser degree - affecting almost all its subsequent thought and literature.

R. Israel Drazin proposes an interesting answer as to why the later rabbis may have preferred the Shulchan Aruch to the well established Mishneh Torah of Rambam[11]:

‘CODIFYING NON-RATIONAL BEHAVIOURS’?

“The omission of rabbinical discussions and the source of the laws were the ostensible, though probably not the entire, reason other rabbis felt they had to write their own codes. This is obvious because if these two omissions were what really bothered the rabbis who composed new codes, they should have been satisfied by only adding glosses indicating the sources and opposing views.

The true reason, in all likelihood, was the inability of the non-rationalists to deal with Maimonides’ rationalism and his refusal to include superstitious practices, magical conduct, use of omens, mysticism and other irrational behaviors that were so dear to the general public. These non-rational behaviors were rampant among many Jews – including numerous rabbis...

The post-Maimonidean law books codified these types of behaviors.”

R. Drazin then goes on to give some examples of ‘superstitious practices’ which are not to be found in Rambam’s Code, but yet are common in the Shulchan Aruch:

WEDDINGS DURING FULL MOON:

According to the Shulchan Aruch[12], weddings should only take place during the full moon. (Ramah comments that in Ashkenazi countries weddings took place at the beginning of the month.)[13]

This practice is not mentioned in Talmudic or Gaonic literature and is certainly not found in Mishneh Torah. 

Rambam does discourage weddings to take place on Fridays and Sunday because of possible Shabbat desecration, but not for any supernatural reasons (Ishut 10:14):

RIGHT SHOE LEFT SHOE:

R. Drazin explains that Rambam begins his Mishneh Torah by speaking about the need to acquire knowledge, while the Shulchan Aruch instructs us to put the right shoe on before the left and tying the left shoelace before the right.[14] 

Drazin mentions that Rambam does reference the preference of right over left with regard to entering the site of the Temple from the right, but for practical reasons other than ‘superstitious notions’.[15]

SLEEPING:

According to Shulchan Aruch one must not sleep in a bed facing east or west.[16]

“The commentary Magen Avraham refers to the Zohar and states that there is a mystical reason for this requirement. The author of the Shulchan Arukh and many other non-rationalists were convinced that the shekhinah, the divine presence, was not a human feeling of the presence of God, but an actual divine being. Therefore, the commentary Magen David explains that since the shekhinah dwells in the west, it is forbidden for a person to turn his face or rear toward the shekhinah...

In Mishneh Torah...Maimonides states that a person should not sleep or use the bathroom while facing west but explains that it is one of many ways in which Jews remember the ancient Temple with respect: since the holy of holies was in the west of the Temple...”

WASHING HANDS:

According to the Shulchan Aruch, we wash our hands upon awakening from sleep in order to expel the ruach ra’ah, or evil spirit, which descended upon us during the night.[17]

Rambam, on the other hand, did not believe in evil spirits and regarded the washing of the hands as a mere ablution.

[See Netilat Yadayim – A Means of Expelling Evil Spirits or a Simple Ablution?]

EVIL EYE:

1) The Shulchan Aruch prohibits two brothers, or a father and a son, from receiving an aliyah at the Torah one after the other, for fear of the evil eye.[18]

2) The Shulchan Aruch says we should not read the prayer ‘Me’ein Sheva’ (a short repetition of the Amidah) on Pesach night, because it was originally instituted to protect latecomers to the synagogue from demons. On Pesach night, we are automatically protected from demons because it is a ‘night of protection’.[19]

3) For the same reason, we do not dip Matzah into salt on Pesach evening, because the usual dipping of bread into salt is to protect from demons and this is not necessary on Pesach, as it is a ‘night of protection’. [20]

DEMONS PERVERTING JUSTICE:

In his Beit Yosef on the Tur, R. Karo mentions the idea of Mazal (constellations or demonic forces) affecting the outcome of a legal judgement. This is where the Mazal is said to favour one of the litigants over the other and the law is unable to run its normal course.

RAMBAM’S VIEW ON THESE NON-RATIONAL MATTERS:

Rambam, on the other hand, did not deal with such cases because he didn’t believe in demons or the evil eye. The purpose of his Mishneh Torah was simply to present a clear concise and understandable Code which was easy to reference (as it was one of the first Jewish works to have an index).

CONCLUSION:

R. Drazin leaves us with this thought – and it may answer our question as to why there was the need to minimise Mishneh Torah in favour of other Codes.

In true, classical, outspoken and unapologetic Maimonidean style, he suggests:

“Being rational in an irrational world has its disadvantages, especially when the world is committed to believing in and applying non-rational practices. Thus, although Maimonides’ code of law was by far the most rational code written – in style, language, and content – and the most easily understood, and although the rabbis for the most part recognized that it contained the truth, the rabbis felt it was advisable to incorporate many folkways into their codes, including practices based on superstition, because they believed in the efficacy of such practices or, when they did not, because they were so dear to the general population.

This has always been the only successful way of dealing with humanity. People can only be taught at their level; it is impossible to transform the opinions and practices of the general population suddenly by mandate or by persuasion.”

Considering all the above, might it be accurate to propose that the 16^th Century Shulchan Aruch was essentially the mystical response and counterpart to the rationalist 12^th Century Mishneh Torah – in the same way as the Shulchan Aruch haRav was later to become the Chassidic response to Shulchan Aruch itself – and the Ben Ish Chai and Mishna Berurah were likewise to become the  (Iraqi) Sefardi and Ashkenazi responses respectively?

---

[1]Introduction of Rabbi Yosef Kapach to his edition of Moses Maimonides’ Mishneh Torah, translated by Michael J. Bohnen.

[2] Sefer Yuchasin p. 122.

[3] R. Yaakov was the son of the Rosh.

[4] From the Introduction to the Tur, by R. Yaakov ben Asher (Rosh). These loose translations are my own.

[5] From the Introduction to the Beit Yosef, by R. Yosef Karo.

[6] Also known as the Maggid Mishna, namely R. Vidal of Tolosa (mid-1300s).

[7] Remember that Mishneh Torah and the Arba’ah Turim would have been composed and disseminated before the invention of the printing press in the mid-1400s. The Shulchan Aruch, though, would have been published just after the printed book made its appearance. Hence it would have certainly appeared more authoritative than a handwritten manuscript.

[8] Introduction to Yam Shel Shlomo (Chulin).

[9] Chidah, Shem haGedolim, Ma’arechet haSefarim Erech Beit Yosef.

[10] Chida, Ma’arechet Beit Yosef.

[11] Why do the Rabbis Prefer Shulchan Aruch over Maimonides’ Code of Law? By Israel Drazin.

[12] Yoreh Deah 179:2.

[13] R. Yosef Karo wrote his Shulchan Aruch for Sefardi Jewry, and R. Moshe Isserless (Ramah) wrote addendums to R. Karo’s work, for Ashkenazim.

[14] Orach Chaim, 2:4, 5.

[15] Hilchot Beit haBechirah 7:2.

[16] Orach Chaim 3:6.

[17] Orach Chaim 4:2.

[18] Orach Chaim 140.

[19] Orach Chaim 487.

[20] Orach Chaim 475.

[21] Not to be confused with R. Avraham Abulafia (1240-1291). There was a R. Chaim Abulafia the 'first' (1580-1668) and another by the same name during the eighteenth century.

153) A MYSTICAL SIDE TO R. YOSEF KARO:

INTRODUCTION:

R. Yosef Karo (1488- 1575) is well recognised as the great codifier of Jewish law who was responsible for the Shulchan Aruch.

Many are familiar with the logical and methodical nature of this legal code. For practical purposes today, he is widely regarded as the last of the great codifiers if not the codifier par excellence.

However, not many are aware of an extremely mystical component to his makeup, which may seem rather surprising for someone so steeped in the pragmatism of legal codes.

He kept a diary in which he recorded some of the teachings he had acquired from an apparent spiritual or angelic being, known as a Maggid.

These were later published under the title Maggid Meisharim.

R. YOSEF KARO’S BACKGROUND:  

     

R. Yosef Karo was born in Toledo, Spain in 1488. At the age of four, as a consequence of the Alhambra Decree, he was forced to flee to Portugal – only to be expelled from there in 1497. He then settled in Nikopolis in the Ottoman Empire (now Bulgaria), after the Ottomans had opened their doors to the fleeing Jews. In 1535, after some time in Salonika and Istanbul, he moved to Safed, then also under the Ottomans.

HIS WORKS:

R. Yosef Karo wrote a commentary on legal work Arba’ah Turim - composed by Yaakov ben Asher (1270-1340) – which became known as the Beit Yosef. This then served as the basis for his magnum opus the Shulchan Aruch which he completed in 1555. In this sense, he effectively authored two codes.

Although there was some opposition to the Shulchan Aruch[1], after a century or so it became almost universally accepted as the most authoritative compendium of Jewish law – and still retains that status today.

He further penned a commentary to Rambam’s legal code, the Mishneh Torah, which became known as the Kesef Mishneh.  In it, he provided source references which were omitted in the Rambam’s original text.[2]

MAGGID MEISHARIM: 

As clearly evident, R. Karo wrote extremely technical and legalistic works and codes. It is, therefore, most unusual to see his only openly Kabbalistic writing, the Maggid Meisharim, which comes in the form of a diary he kept of apparent heavenly visitations by Maggid, over a period spanning about fifty years. This diary was published in two parts (in 1646[3] and 1654).

What is most astonishing about Maggid Meisharim is not just the theoretical, but the explicit mystical nature of the writing which include topics like: ‘secrets of creation’, the ‘revelation of Eliyahu haNavi’, ‘resurrection of the dead’, ‘reincarnation’ and ‘dream interpretation’.

Interestingly, Maggid Meisharim appears to have not been officially edited, and it seems as if R. Karo never intended for these copious writings to be published.

SOME EXAMPLES FROM HIS MYSTICAL DIARY:

THE MAGGID BECOMES THE ‘PERSONIFIED MISHNA’:

“Know that I am the Mishna that speaks in your mouth. When you will be expert in the six orders of the Mishna you will be elevated to the highest levels. The conduits of true wisdom will be open before you, for I am the Mishna and within me is true wisdom.”

“Therefore take care from today not to let your mind wander from the Mishna as you have done in the past, for although you occupy yourself with Halachic decisions, nevertheless, studying the Mishna will raise you to a higher level.”[4]  

ASCENSION OF THE MISHNA:

The Mishna was completed at the end of the 200’s and became the major legal text which formed the basis of the Talmud. It was always referenced and used as legal precedent by the Sages.

However, in the 1500’s it assumed a new role, where instead of just being used as a primary legal text to be studied, it began to be recited. This recitation turned the Mishna into a technique for receiving ‘revelation’ which was often achieved through the agency of a Maggid.

HOW TO SEE ELIYAHU HANAVI:

After elaborating on various calculations (including the Atbash code)[5] involving the letters in the name Eliyahu, together with other techniques including allusions to the Ten Sefirot and Partzufim, we read:

“...With this secret of the final hei [of the Ineffable Name, which receives from the previous three letters, and] is therefore comparable to the body [that receives the soul], Eliyahu becomes clothed in a physical body and appears in this world.

Therefore, when you desire that Eliyahu appear to you, meditate on these matters when you go to sleep, and then he will appear to you.”[6]

“I shall grant you (permission) to see Elijah, for the Ancient of Days will be clothed in white garments and will sit facing you and will speak to you as a man speaks unto his friend... and although your wife and other men and women will be in your house, he will speak with you and you shall see him but they shall not.”[7]

BURNED ON THE ALTAR:

According to Maggid Meisharim (pp. 15, 145 and 100.) R. Yosef Karo's Maggid repeatedly promises him a great privilege - to be burned on the Altar. His ashes will be gathered on the Altar of the Beit haMikdash and will rise like the fragrance of the ketoret or incense, when the words of his scholarship are recited in public. (This may be a reference to Shlomo Molcho whose burning by the church was envied by R. Karo).

HIS WRITINGS RECEIVE ‘SANCTION’ FROM THE EARLY RABBIS AND FROM G-D:

The Maggid informs R. Karo (who lived in the 1500’s) that R. Yehudah haNasi (Compiler of the Mishna, who lived in the 200’s) as well as Rambam (who lived in the 1100’s), all endorse his work.[8]

Then the Maggid assures R. Yosef Karo that his Halachic writings are also endorsed by the ‘Heavenly Yeshiva’:

חזק ואמץ אל תירא ואל תחת כי כל אשר אתה עושה ה, מצליח וכל אשר עשית והורית עד היום הזה ה’ מצליח בידך וכן מסכימים במתיבתא דרקיעא חי ה’ כי פסק זה אמת ויציב הלכה למשה מסיני הלכה כוותך … לכן חזק ואמץ אל תירא כי כל אשר עשית והורית עד היום הזה ה’ מצליח ומסכים בו וכן כל מה שתעשה ותורה מכאן והלאה הב”ה

“Be strong and do not fear because G-d will make you successful in all that you are doing...and the Heavenly academy agrees with your (rulings) up to this time. As G-d lives, these (rulings) are true...are like laws from Moshe at Sinai. And all that you do from now on will be successful and sanctioned by G-d.”[9]

           

R. YOSEF KARO AS REINCARNATION OF MOSHE:

R. Karo believed he was a reincarnation of Moshe Rabbeinu and he, therefore, paralleled Moshe’s legislating prowess and his ability to prophecy (which R. Karo achieved through the Maggid).     

THE MYSTICAL STORY OF HIS WIVES:

R. Yosef Karo had three (according to some perhaps five) wives. Their names are not mentioned - only their father’s names are recorded.

His first wife was the daughter of R. Yitzchak Saba. They were married around 1522 and settled in Salonika.  A few years later, she and three (or possibly four) of their children died of the plague, while still in Salonika.

A year later, he married his second wife, the daughter of R. Chaim Al-Balage of Nicopol, and they moved to Safed. She appears to have been the mother of his son Shlomo.

Around 1565, after his second wife died in Safed, he married his third wife, the daughter of R. Zecharia Vernek. She was the mother his youngest son, Yehudah who was born to R. Karo when he was 82 years old.

This story so far would have passed as relatively normal had we not been privy to Maggid Meisharim which paints a very unusual picture:

The Maggid warned R. Karo not to “write in an accessible way for (other) people to comprehend”, so he wrote some of the sensitive issues in code.

R. Karo believed strongly in reincarnation – and he believed he knew some of the secrets of who was reincarnated into whom. When, for example, it came to his second wife, she was said to have been someone previously known as ‘Shahaktecha’[10]. When using the Atbash code, it translates as ‘Betzalel’.

Interestingly Betzalel was a male and was the Biblical architect and builder of the Sanctuary in the desert.

But the Maggid also predicted that R. Karo’s second wife would be ‘nashim kefulot’[11] or ‘multiple women’ – meaning that she would have had two separate incarnations, and therefore possess two souls.

The first soul was from Betzalel and the second, also a male, was from the Sage of Mishnaic times, R. Tarfon.[12]

The Maggid Meisharim describes the nature of the two souls:

“And I shall give you from this modest and worthy woman (the first wife) another son, for she deserves it because of all she has suffered … and when she departs this life you will marry (your second wife), one after the other, two married/multiple women … and from these (women) you will have gifted sons, knowing His name and studying His Torah.”[13]

R. Tarfon, however, was known to have been rather miserly. He did not want to give money to charity nor did he want to share his knowledge with others. As a punishment, he was to be reincarnated into a woman’s body!

The Maggid Meisharim records the Maggid speaking to R. Karo:

“Hence, you witness her charitable behaviour. She does a lot of charity, and she also loves you very much because you let Torah stream by writing books to teach others...and those activities are her ‘tikkun’ (spiritual rectification); therefore she loves you.”[14]

It continues:

 “And when you find out who (he) was in the first incarnation you will be in awe and you will treat her with great respect and you will be ashamed to have marital relations.”[15]

This prediction apparently began while R. Karo was still married to his first wife and while they were still living in Salonika.

RE-ESTABLISHING THE SANHEDRIN AND THE SMICHA ORDINATION:

R. Karo was intent on re-establishing the Sanhedrin of old and reinstituting the traditional practice of rabbinical ordination which had been abolished.

Here is an extract from Maggid Meisharim referring to the semicha program:

“Indeed I am the Mishnah speaking from your mouth...I shall elevate you to be a minister and chancellor on the entire diaspora of Israel in the kingdom of Arabistan, since you have dedicated yourself to cause the return of the ordination (semicha) to its former glory, you will merit to be ordained by all the sages of the land of Israel and by the sages abroad, and by you I shall return ordination to its former glory and I shall cause that you will finish your book.”[16]

The Maggid also encouraged R. Karo to finish his book as soon as possible, before a ‘certain’ Rabbi in Krakow would finish his. This rabbi was R. Moshe Isserless (1530 -1572) who wrote a parallel work for Askenazim, which corresponded to R. Karo’s work which was created for Sephardim. According to this account, there appears to have been some rivalry between the two.

ASCETICISM:

The Maggid would frequently rebuke R. Karo and insist he practised a rather ascetic lifestyle:

“Regard yourself as standing before the King, King of kings, the Holy One blessed be He, whose Shechinah hovers over you and continuously accompanies you. Accordingly, be wary of taking pleasure in eating, drinking, or marital relations, as I have taught you; such pleasures should be repugnant to you and you should not crave them.”[17]

The Maggid also admonished R. Karo for drinking more than one glass of wine as well as for eating meat.

One wonders how much of this asceticism was later to weave its way into his legal writings.

COMPOSER OF ‘LECHA DODI’ ENDORSES ‘MAGGID’S’ VISITATIONS:

R. Shlomo Alkabetz, the Kabbalist who composed Lecha Dodi, wrote that he was once present at one of these spiritual visitations by R. Karo’s Maggid, which took place one Shavuot evening:

“I have been granted the merit of hearing the voice speaking to the Chassid (R. Yosef Karo); an intense clear voice, and all neighbours heard this and did not comprehend; the revelation was pleasant and the voice became stronger and more powerful, and we fell on our faces and lost consciousness out of reverence and awe”.

KABBALISTIC INFLUENCES ON HALACHIC MATTERS?

Going by what is written in Maggid Meisharim, it is clear that R. Yosef Karo was deeply involved in matters mystical. The question is how much of that mysticism was allowed to spill over into his Halachic writings, which in principle, are not supposed to be practically influenced by Kabbalah.

While it is generally contended that Kabbalah was never allowed to interfere with his Halachik process, opinion is divided on the matter:

NO INFLUENCE?

According to R. J. Zwi Werblowsky[18], R. Karo was known to have displayed a: “well-known unwillingness to allow kabbalistic considerations or mystical experiences to influence halachic decisions, which, he felt, should be arrived at exclusively by the traditional methods of rabbinic dialectic.”[19]

As a support, he mentions R. Shmuel Vital who also stresses that R. Karo relied solely on regular rabbinical ‘pshat’ not allowing for any mystical considerations at all.

INFLUENCE?

However, Jacob Katz maintains that R. Karo did indeed infuse some considerable amounts of mysticism into his Halacha.

As a support, he shows how R. Karo, in his introduction to the Beit Yosef, clearly admits to using the Zohar as one of his sources of reference.

An example is the hand washing ritual performed in the mornings: The earlier Rishonim were divided as to whether it was a spiritually cleansing ritual (Rashba) or simply a hygienic morning ablution (Rosh). Yet R. Karo chose to follow the less legal and the more mystical approach by requiring the water to be poured into another vessel and not directly onto the ground because of ‘spiritual contamination’. He also prescribed (the Kabbalistic tradition) that the water is first to be poured over the right hand and then the left.

Other examples are the Levi’im pouring water over the hands of Cohanim before the priestly blessings[20] and the notion that women should not attend funerals[21], which have their basis in Kabbalah.

Furthermore, R. Karo wrote that as long as the Zohar does not contradict a Talmudic text, it can ‘gain precedence over other poskim (Halachic decisors)’. This view ‘empowers the kabbalistic text with legal significance.’

In another example, R. Karo states his position that “the Zohar cannot override a Talmudic ruling but can take primacy in medieval debates.”[22]

Reference to the Zohar takes place, according to R. Brody, ‘dozens of times. The inclusion of the Zohar in his writings significantly impacted the influence of Kabbalistic teachings for centuries (to come)’.

He often (although not exclusively) introduces Kabbalistic practices with terms like: ‘some say’, ‘the preferred custom’ or ‘it’s good to be stringent’.

It is significant that at around this time, many Sephardim (such as R. David Ibn Zimra[23] and Yaakov Ibn Chaviv[24]) began to openly quote the Zohar in relation to Halachic matters.

On the other hand, in Eastern Europe, where the Zohar was less known, the Halachic decisors did not defer to it.

In the words of the Maggid Meisharim itself, there is no doubt that R. Karo merged Kabbalah with Halacha:                                                       

“Because you have combined (the Law and Kabbalah) all together, all the celestial beings have your interests at heart...”[25]

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ‘GUIDE FOR THE PERPLEXED’ AND ‘MAGGID MEISHARIM’:

The two great codifiers, Rambam and R. Karo, wrote non-legal texts as well. To highlight the significant difference between Rambam’s Guide for the Perplexed and R. Karo’s Maggid Meisharim, R. Brody poignantly points out how two approaches towards Halachic thought developed:

                                                                                                                                                                    

“In Moreh Nevukhim, rabbinic Judaism confronted medieval philosophy, and a rationalistic divine law emerged.  In Magid Mesharim, the scholarly Karo confronts the magid’s world of symbolism and reveals a rich and learned Kabbalistic halakha.”[26]

These words need to be taken in context as there is no doubt that the vast majority of R. Karo’s Shulchan Aruch is clearly and undisputedly based on the accepted principles of Halachic derivation.

So while the content is generally similar the approaches may be different.

ANALYSIS:

As we have seen, the Maggid Meisharim paints a very different, picture of R. Yosef Karo, compared to the popular image he has as the sober codifier par excellence.

Perhaps if we remember the period of Jewish history in which R. Yosef Karo lived – the1500’s - when the Zohar was exerting much influence on rabbinic thinking, it is understandable that these mystical tendencies would have deeply touched him as well.

I remember walking around with huge and heavy tomes of Shulchan Aruch when I was studying for semicha – and yet I had no idea that there was such a mystical angle to its author.

Neither did anyone else I knew.

For some, this revelation is too much to bear and, understandably, there have been attempts to discredit the authenticity of the Maggid Meisharim.

Marvin J. Heller writes:

“Caro’s authorship has been disputed. A number of writers, particularly those who did not wish to attribute a mystical work to a leading halachic authority, questioned Caro’s authorship.”

However: “Contemporary evidence comes from R. Solomon Alkabez, who wrote that he and others heard the maggid speak on Shavuot night; R. Hayyim Vital refers to the maggid in Sefer ha-Gilgilim; and R. Moses Cordovero has a quote in Pardes Rimonim (1591) found in Maggid Mesharim...Caro’s children never expressed any doubt as to his authorship.”[27]

It is further interesting to note that although the Maggid foretold that R. Karo would die a martyrs death and that he would be able to restore the semicha ordination to its former status – none of these were actualized. Had the work been a forgery, it is hard to imagine why they would have discredited it by referencing predictions that did not transpire in reality.

We do know that, according to the Chida[28], the publications of Maggid Meisharim as we have them, represent only a fiftieth of the original mystical work.

This means that there must have been so much more material of perhaps even more mystical nature, which we shall never see.

It is fascinating to see how the man responsible for most of our official, sober and technical jurisprudence, may have had a side to himself many could ever have imagined.

---

[1] The Maharshal, for example, opposed the inclusion of the Shulchan Aruch in the canon of Halachic literature. He said:  “Codes generate commentaries, since human language and intellect cannot produce a work of eternal, unambiguous meaning.” (Introduction to Bava Kama)

[2] After R. Karo’s passing his following works were published: Bedek haBayit (additions and correction to his original Beit Yosef). Kelalei haTalmud (a work on Talmudic methodology).  Avkat Rochel (response). Derashot (a collection of speeches). He also wrote commentary to the Mishna as well as supercommentaries to Rashi and Ramban which are no longer extant.

[3]This edition was brought to print by R. Yitzchak Binga in Lublin (1646). The first complete publication of both sets was in Amsterdam 1708. The work was originally titled Sefer haMaggid but was later changed to Maggid Meisharim (after Isaiah 45:19 “I declare that things are right”).

[4] Maggid Meisharim, Bereishit. (Some of these translations are from R. Moshe Miller.)

[5] Atbash is where the first letter of the Hebrew alphabet (alef) becomes the last letter (tav)  - and the second letter (bet) becomes the second-last letter (shin) – making the acronym Atbash.

[6]Maggid Meisharim, Bereishit.

[7] Maggid Meisharim p. 185.

[8] Maggid Meisharim 7.

[9] Maggid Meisharim 381.

[10] Some editions leave this out while other manuscripts by certain copyists record this name.

[11] Some editions use ‘nashim beulot’ or previously married women.[12] See “Revealing the Secret of His Wives” - R. Joseph Karo’s Concept of Reincarnation and Mystical Conception, By Mor Altshuler.

[13] Maggid Meisharim p. 5 and 6.

[14] Magid Meisharim p. 38.

[15] Maggid Meisharim p. 38. We do see, nevertheless, that he was also told that ‘from this woman (his second wife) you will have gifted sons...”

[16] Maggid Meisharim p. 211.

[17] Maggid Meisharim p. 138.

[18] Cited in Halakha and Kabbalah: Rabbi Joseph Karo’s Shulchan Aruch and Magid Mesharim by Shlomo Brody.

[19] Joseph Karo:  Lawyer and Mystic, JPS, 1977, by R.J. Zvi Werblowsky. 

[20] Orach Chaim 128.[21] Yoreh Deah 359.

[22] This is with regard to wearing teffilin on chol hamoed where he rules against some Rishonim and sides with the Zohar’s proscription from wearing teffilin.

[23] Also known as Radbaz.

[24] Author of Ein Yaakov.

[25] Maggid Meisharim 258.

[26] Emphasis mine.

[27] The Seventeenth Century Hebrew Books (2Vols), by Marvin J. Heller. p. 665. (I did, however, come across a reference that R. Karo’s son Yehudah, did not list the work on his list of his father’s writings. Perhaps some of the confusion stems from the fact that R. Karo, evidently, didn’t want Maggid Meisharim to ever be published.)

4 R. Chaim David Azulai (1724-1806).