Menu

Showing posts with label Origins of Chassidism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Origins of Chassidism. Show all posts

Sunday, 18 March 2018

168) R. YAAKOV KOPPEL LIFSCHITZ - A SABBATIAN WHO INFLUENCED THE BAAL SHEM TOV?





Shaar Gan Eden, by R. Yaakov Koppel Lifschitz.

BACKGROUND:

In order to understand the milieu into which the Baal Shem Tov was born, one must take into consideration the widespread - yet devastating - success of the false messiah, Shabbatai Tzvi who had died just two decades earlier.

Shabbatai Tzvi and his followers, known as Sabbateans, managed to engineer one of the biggest movements in Jewish history, with estimates that more than half of Jewish population at that time believed him to have been the Messiah.

These followers included many scholarly rabbis and even kabbalists. After Shabbatai Tzvi died in 1676, the Jewish world was permeated with secret Sabbateans, many of whom presented a facade of Halachik observances to hide their messianic agendas and aspirations. See Shabbatai Tzvi – Roots run Deep.

In this article, we will look at the question of whether or not R. Yaakov Koppel Lifschitz was such an individual:

(NOTE: R. Yaakov Koppel Lifschitz must not be confused with R. Yaakov Koppel Hager, who was an early follower of the Baal Shem Tov and also his Shaliach Tzibur.)

SHAAR GAN EDEN:

R. Yaakov Koppel Lifschitz is best known for his Shaar Gan Eden which he wrote in Volhynia in the early 1700’s and which was printed posthumously in 1803.

In the preface to Shaar Gan Eden, R. Yaakov Koppel writes strongly against Sabbateanism. However, the actual contents of his book show subscription to much of Sabbatean ideology. This disavowal was a common technique used frequently by many secret Sabbateans during that time.
[See Chemdat Yamim.]
Shaar Gan Eden, by R. Yaakov Koppel Lifschitz.


In one section of Shaar Gan Eden, R. Yaakov Koppel writes:

At the end of the sixth millennium the light which precedes the cosmic Sabbath will spread its rays, swallowing death and driving the unclean spirit from the world. Then many commandments will be abrogated, for example, those relating to clean and unclean...

(and) ‘A new Torah will go forth’...the letters of the Torah will combine in a different way, according to the requirements of this period, but not a single letter will be added or taken away.”[1]

These, as well as other references, lead some to believe that R. Yaakov Koppel may have been sprouting aspects of Sabbatean ideology. The original Sabbateans (and I am certainly not implicating R. Yaakov Koppel with this) were known to have been quite promiscuous, and the notion of the ‘abrogation of clean and unclean’ was distorted to allow for such behaviour in an era believed to be preceding the Messiah. In other words, these rules of ‘clean and unclean’ would fall away and no longer be applicable.

In another section of Shaar Gan Eden, Moshe Rabbeinu is described as being both human and divine:

It is said about Moses that he is an ‘ish ha-Elokim (a man of G-d). But if he is a man (‘ish) then he is not G-d (Elokim)?!

- Rather, Above (i.e. in Heaven) he is called G-d (Elokim) and below he is called a man (‘ish).”[2]

According to Shaul Magid:

This is so striking because...it rejects, even subverts, the more common euphemistic rendering of the passage (i.e. Moses is a “godly man”) opting for a rendition that enables Moses to be both human and divine simultaneously.”[3]

Thus “Moshe” or any corresponding leader would assume a type of role of G-d incarnate!

We know that Sabbateans did give divine-like reverence to their leader, which correlates with this ‘precedent’ of ‘Moshe’ being ‘both human and divine’.

According to Gershom Scholem:

"Although the book was regarded with some suspicion by orthodox Kabbalists outside the Hassidic camp it enjoyed a wide reputation with the Hassidim. But only recently it has been proved conclusively...that the author was an outstanding crypto-Sabbatian and based his doctrine to a very considerable extent on the Sabbatian writings of Nathan of Gaza (the prophet of false messiah Shabbatai Tzvi)." [4]

KOL YAAKOV SIDDUR:

R. Yaakov Koppel also produced a prayer book with Lurianic and Kabbalistic meditations, entitled Kol Yaakov[5], which followed the rite of the Ari Zal; as well as a Kabbalistic commentary on the Haggadah. His prayer book was to form the basis of later Chassidic prayer books:


Kol Yaakov Siddur with reference to Shaar Gan Eden.


The Kol Yaakov Siddur contains the approbation of R. Asher Tzvi of Ostroh, who writes “I heard that the Baal Shem saw this siddur and it pleased him”:




















In the siddur there is a clear reference to his other work Shaar Gan Eden - so it is likely that the Baal Shem Tov was aware of the existence of the book:



According to the title page and the approbations, when the Baal Shem Tov saw the manuscripts of Shaar Gan Eden and Kol Yaakov, he "hugged and kissed them...and used a lot of energy to hug with his arms the author's writings".

The approbations include R. Efraim Zalman Margoliot, as well as R. Levi Yitzchak of Berdichev, who wrote that the author "was a loyal Kabbalist and all his words were said with divine inspiration...This is the gate to approach the inner hall, the inner sanctum of the holy writings of the Ari Zal."


APPARENT SABBATEANISM?

Professor Joseph Dan writes in no uncertain terms:

Jacob Koppel...was influenced by the Shabbatean movement in Poland, and he himself influenced Ḥasidism.

Besides (Shaar Gan Eden and Kol Yaakov)...he apparently wrote Naḥalot Ya'akov, an extensive commentary on the Zohar, which has been lost.

Jacob denounces the followers of Shabbetai Zevi and messianic speculation in general in a few scattered remarks. However, it has been proved that he was the brother and pupil of a known Shabbatean, Ḥayyim of Ostraha (Ostrog), who influenced his writings.

A close study of the kabbalistic doctrine of Jacob proves conclusively that his works included at least one part of a "credo" of Nathan of Gaza, the prophet of Shabbetai Ẓevi...

...in his descriptions of development within the realm of the Sefirot (the divine emanations), Jacob uses a series of extremely radical sexual symbols found only in Shabbatean writings...

Finally, some scattered hints (which were fully developed in at least one of his works) allude to a heretical, antinomian concept of the Torah and the mitzvot, following the Shabbatean distinction between the laws governing the world before the coming of the messiah, Shabbetai Ẓevi, and the new laws following his appearance.

Jacob and his writings were highly praised by the early Ḥasidim, who published his works and used them extensively.

A reliable ḥasidic tradition even quotes some words of praise attributed to Israel b. Eliezer Baal Shem Tov.

Thus Jacob's Shabbatean writings form one of the links between late East European Shabbateanism and early Ḥasidism.”[6]


R. NACHMAN OF BRESLOV:

Fascinatingly, according to R. Dovid Sears, R. Nachman of Breslov discusses Shaar Gan Eden in his Chayey Moharan, and he is critical of the work.

And R. Natan of Breslov mentions the Introduction to the Siddur Kol Yaakov in his Likkutei Halachot and is similarly critical of it. [7]


A CONTEMPORARY KABBALIST:

According to Pinchas Giller, the contemporary kabbalist R. Yaakov Moshe Hillel recommends against reading Kabbalistic works which cite R. Yisrael Sarug (1590-1610), who was one of the students of the Ari Zal. He believes it was only through the other student, R. Chaim Vital, that the authentic Lurianic teachings were transmitted.

However, in the strangest of ironies:

"...some works are acceptable, notwithstanding their citation of Sarug. These include the Sabbatean work Sha'arei Gan Eden by Jacob Koppel Lifscheutz...For Hillel, the odd inclusion of occasional Sabbatean materials...is less of a problem than the appearance of Sarugian materials." [8]

According to this view, there is not even a question as to the Sabbatean nature of Shaar Gan Eden.


ANALYSIS:

The possible influence of Sabbateanism on early Chassidism has intrigued me since I started translating the Letters of the Cherson Archive and found numerous references which indicated a frantic need to hide certain writings from unnamed rabbis and sources.

Considering the historical timing, it is not a big jump to speculate on the nature and content of those writings.

Sabbatean writings were very mystical and messianic - and although they distorted and often even perverted Kabbalistic teachings - in principal, they presented a worldview of mysticism for the masses, not unlike that of the Chassidic movement which followed so close on its heels.

It is possible that the early Chassidim had found a model that had proven successful in terms of disseminating mystical teaching amongst the common folk and may have adopted some of those proven and positive techniques, while leaving aside the negative aspects.

This would not have been the first time in Jewish history that various elements from contemporary popular worldviews were selected and infused back into the mainstream.

[NOTE: One needs to be careful how one interprets the above-mentioned suggestion. Chassidism is a mystical movement which undoubtedly has roots in ancient Jewish mystical traditions. Whether there may or may not have been some overlap with the popular mysticism of the time is up to the Reader to decide. Any tradition can be shown to have common overlap with another - especially with another contemporary tradition.]

To be clear: The suggestion is not that the Baal Shem Tov was a secret Sabbatean – but rather that he may have used some of their neutral mystical content and approach, after eliminating and discarding the more subversive aspects of that movement.

Besides R. Yaakov Koppel, this apparent association between both movements is particularly evident with regard to the Sefer haTzoref, by R. Yehoshua Herschel Tzoref (1623-1700).

It is this connection that may have had to be hidden away because the rest of the orthodox mainstream would not have entertained the notion that anything was salvageable from the Sabbatean movement.

Were it not hidden away, it is probable that the new movement would never have enjoyed acceptance and the extensive success it managed to achieve.




...........................................................................................

NOTES:

[1] Sha’ar Gan Eden by R. Jacob Koppel, Cracow 1880, p. 12c:
Interestingly, he provides a reference to Sefer haTemunah or Book of the Shape (of the Hebrew letters), written in the late 1200’s but attributed to Nechunya ben Hakanah and R. Yishmael, Tanaim of the first and second centuries.
[2] Shaar Gan Eden 44b.
[3] Hasidism Incarnate: Hasidism, Christianity, and the Construction of Modern Judaism, by Shaul Magid, p.18.
[4] Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism, p 333
[5] Also known as HaKol Kol Yaakov.
[6] Joseph Dan, Encyclopaedia Judaica under R. Yaakov Koppel ben Moses of Mezhirech, based on Isaiah Tishby, in Netivei Emunah u-Minut (1964), 197–226, 331–43.
[7] Breslov Center, Gates of Eden, 11 Nov 2010.
[8] Shalom Shar'abi and the Kabbalists of Beit El.


Sunday, 19 March 2017

119) CHASSIDISM - A RUSSIAN CONNECTION?

Shivchei haBesht, Laszczow, 1815.
INTRODUCTION:

Did early Chassidism overlap with some aspects of folk Russia or Ukraine in the early 1700’s?
Certainly in terms of music, dress and possibly even certain aspects of philosophy, many would say yes.

Some, however, have tried to downplay this Russian or Ukrainian folk influence, and I could never understand why. I then discovered that there are a number of - albeit controversial - schools of thought which suggest that the Baal Shem Tov (or Besht) may have been influenced by various folk groups, religious cults or even breakaway mystical movements.

SOME PROVOCATIVE THEORIES:

ADAM BAAL SHEM TOV:

The Besht is known to have studied the secrets of mysticism from a certain Adam Baal Shem Tov. His identity is somewhat obscure and there are is some speculation as to who he really was:

R. JOSHUA HESHEL TZOREF?

 According to some researchers, Adam, not being a common Jewish name at that time may have been a pseudonym for R. Heshel Tzoref a known Sabbatean (or follower of the false Messiah, Shabbatai Tzvi who passed away just thirty years earlier)[1] The Besht is known to have had in his possession, and to have made reference to, a book called Sefer haTzoref which contained a reference to Shabbatai Tzvi being the Messiah.

(I’m not suggesting in any way that the Besht subscribed to that view, but am simply recording the piece of information. See KOTZK BLOG 117.)

ADAM ZERNIKOV?

According to other far more radical speculation, this ‘Adam’ may have been a well-known Russian priest Adam Zernikov, of the Raskolnik cult. Y. Eliach suggests that the Besht may have been influenced by Raskol literature and just as they kept their teachings secret, so did he. Raskol literature was outlawed by the Russian Church and the ban was only lifted in 1906. [2]
Adam Zernikov, born in Koenigsberg in 1652, met R. Eliezer, the father of the Besht in Russia, where he - allegedly- transmitted some of his teachings to him.
(Again, I am in no way suggesting that that is true or not. I am merely recording the speculation.)

THE KHLYSTY SECT?

Another group active at the same time was known as the Khlysty sect. They would dress in white, dance during prayers and believed that their leaders could predict the future. The adherents would confess their sins to the leaders who were said to be able to identify the sinners from within the group. They advocated a degree of abstinence and called children ‘little sins’.


Early Kapust edition of Shivchei haBesht.

According to an early Kapust edition of Shivchei haBesht[3], after the passing of his first wife, the Besht was encouraged to marry again. He responded that he did not need a new wife because his son was born by the ‘word’.  For this reason, he had no need to marry again.

This text, however, does not appear in any of the later editions.

SHIVCHEI HABESHT:

It is fascinating to see that this tension of views regarding a possible ‘outside’ influence (to whatever extent) on the founder of Chassidism, is reflected in two different biographical accounts which deal with stories of the Besht.

These books are:  Shivchei haBesht (first published in 1814 in Kopys, White Russia) and Rachamei haAv (first published Chernovitz in 1865).

The Shivchei haBesht appears to be quite comfortable with recording a strong (possibly) Russian influence on the Besht and particularly his father, R. Eliezer. On the other hand, the later work Rachamei Av, written after Chassidism had been firmly established, seems to negate it completely.

The popular Shivchei haBesht, however, is not unanimously accepted as authoritative in all Chassidic circles[4].
Perhaps the fact that it records this Russian influence may be one of the reasons for that.

It’s interesting to note that even secular historians acknowledge that there is, what they refer to as a ‘kernel of historical truth’, in the general theme of events (as opposed to the details of all the actual stories) as described in Shivchei haBesht.

THE SHIVCHEI HABESHT VERSION:

The Shivchei haBesht was written by Dov Baer ben Shmuel haShochet, who was the son-in-law of the Besht's scribe, Alexander Shochet and obviously had personal contact with the Besht himself. It contains more than two hundred stories about the Besht and those associated with him. During the first two years the book sold more than ten thousand copies.[5]

There are two stories in Shivchei haBesht which do appear to link the Besht to strong cultural ties with Russia:

Shivchei haBesht Lemberg (Lvov) Edition. 1885, p. 4.

According to this version:

Before the Besht was born, his father, R. Eliezer had been living in Wallachia. He and his wife were already old. It happened that bandits came and took R. Eliezer captive. His wife had to flee and because of her poverty she was forced to become a midwife. He was taken to a far-away where there were no Jews and sold. He served his new master well and became head of the household. He was given permission not to have to work on Shabbat. After much time he decided to flee, but was told in a dream to stay where he was because there was still something he had to accomplish there. The master had dealings with the king’s advisor and offered his servant to him as a gift.’

This event must have occurred towards the end of the 1600’s, as the Besht was only born around 1700.

It appears as if the place which barred all Jews from entering, and even from doing business at that time, was the Muscovite Duchy in Russia. So it seems that R. Eliezer spent some time in Russia.




The story continues:

Then one time the King took his soldiers on boats to wage war...’

Historically this may coincide with the Azov Campaign of 1695/6, where Peter the Great attacked the city of Azov, and this happened to be Russia’s first sea battle. The attack was a failure and Shivchei haBesht describes this following chain of events:





R. Eliezer is one of the sailors on the ships and advises on how to achieve victory, by informing the navy that iron pillars were embedded within the ocean floor, preventing the ships from approaching the enemy port. For this information, he is hailed as a hero and is brought to the king on a ‘small boat’. He is then shaved and made to change his clothes.

Peter the great was known to have disliked beards and even the old Russian traditional clothes. He ordered people to be clean shaven and to wear ‘modern’ clothing.

As a reward, R. Eliezer was given the minister’s daughter as a wife. Of course, he did not consummate the marriage. Eventually, he revealed to her that he was a Jew and she allowed him to return to his home where he was reunited with his real wife.

Soon, although both were now in their nineties, a son was born. He was called Israel and became known as the Baal Shem Tov.



Another story which also indicates some knowledge and interaction with Russian culture can be seen in the following story:

It once happened that the Besht was unable to speak. He hinted to his students that they should bring him his teffilin, which he then put on. His power of speech returned to him. When asked what had happened, he explained that as a result of a sin of his youth he had been punished by losing his ability to speak. He explained that the prosecuting angel had appeared in the form of a gentile carrying a metal rod and wanting to assault him. The teffilin had saved him. But the attacker shouted in Russian to ‘take off the leather’ but to no avail.

Because of the reference to the Russian language, this too may indicate that the Besht was either born or spent his early years in Russia.[6]


THE RACHAMEI HA’AV VERSION:

About a hundred years after the passing of the Besht, a newer and different version concerning the birth of the Besht is presented by the Rachamei haAv:[7]

The Besht’s father, R. Eliezer was a very kind person. Once, Elijah the prophet decided to test him and appeared to him on Shabbat afternoon dressed like an old man who desecrated the holy day. Instead of rebuking the Shabbat desecrator, R. Eliezer invited him into his home and gave him a Shabbat meal. After Shabbat he gave the old man some money. Then Elijah revealed his true self to R. Eliezer and told him that as a reward he would be given a son who would brighten the whole world.

According to this version, there is no mention made of any time spent in Russia. There is also no mention of the close relationship between R. Eliezer and the ministers of the king, of the meeting with Peter the Great and haven been given the minister's daughter was a wife.  Nothing of the culture of Russia is alluded to as an influencing factor whatsoever.

Could it be that later writers of Chassidic history wanted to remove all traces of any foreign influences surrounding the birthing of the new movement?



Shivchei haBesht Berditchev Edition, 1865.


ANALYSIS:

Sadly, so many question the authenticity of so much that is written about such a pivotal spiritual figure in Jewish history.

It’s interesting to see that some historical tax registers record that the house in which the Besht lived in his later years enjoyed tax-free status, which shows the esteem in which he was held by the government. Also, some court records refer to him and some of his contemporaries which appear to correlate with a number of events as described in Shivchei haBesht.

1758 Polish tax census of Medzhybizh showing Baal Shem occupying house #95


Even if we leave alone some of the radical and perhaps preposterous (although not impossible) theories concerning just how far Chassidism was influenced by these foreign cultures, are we not mirroring the same bias in the other direction if we deny any overlap whatsoever?

We do know that the Besht lived in the forests and came into contact with folk communities, either from Russia or the Ukraine. He knew how to use plants for healing, he distributed amulets and was generally regarded as a medicine man. Since he didn’t fit the mould of typical urban rabbis of the time, it is quite within reason to assume that he took some of this knowledge from folk culture.

Carpathian Mountains today.


In my youth and early adulthood, I fell under the spell and allure of Chassidism. The rabbis and teachers whom I allowed to influence me were all Chassidim. I was intrigued by the Baal Shem Tov and his teachings but particularly by his stories.

While listening to the stories which were a central part of the Chassidic oral tradition, no one ever made any attempt to hide the fact that the Baal Shem Tov interacted with all levels of Russian society, including non-Jews. On the contrary, it was considered praiseworthy to recount how the Besht sought out shepherds and ordinary folk who spent their lives in the mountains and composed beautiful melodies which tugged at the heart-strings.

Ordinary love songs were converted and elevated to holy songs of yearning for G-d, and often even wordless melodies were adopted into Chassidism without denying their secular and non-Jewish origins. (This is something that the Chabad movement, for example, also appears to be quite comfortable with, although obviously without the more radical speculation as to how far it may have gone.)

Early Chassidism probably was, to a large extent, unashamedly rooted in folk culture and what we today would call the ‘populist’ movements of that time.

If a degree of reasonable overlap is acknowledged by many, the question remains as to why did some of the later writings, originating well after the movement had already been firmly established, feel the need to deny this?

And - given the wide range of provocative speculation - is the fact that the Shivchei haBesht does not hide the potential for such possible influences, one of the reasons why some came to regard it as being an unauthoritative account of the origins of Chassidism?




[1] See: The Sabbatean Prophet R. Heschel Zoref - R. Adam Baal Shem, by G. Scholem.
[2] This is the view of Y. Eliach in The Russian Dissenting Sects and Their Influence on Israel Baal Shem Tov, Founder of Hassidism.
See Proceedings of the American Academy for Jewish Research36 (1968): 67-68. - For a critique of this theory, see chap. 3, 68-75.
See also: On the Origins of the Chassidic Movement – A Critique By Rabbi Dovid Markel:
[3] P. 36.
[4] According to R. Dovid Markel: “See Shem HaGedolim HaChadash (R. Ahahon Valdin) who writes that the author did a disservice to the Besht by printing inauthentic stories—thus causing a reader to doubt authentic ones as well. See as well Likutei Halachot, Pesach 7:3 from R. Nachman of Breslav who expressed that although in general the stories are true, details may not be. Additionally, in the work Ohr Pnei Yitzchak (pg. 56) the author expresses an account in the name of the Rebbe, Rabbi Yitzchak of Gur that the stories are untrue. While Chabad Rebbe’s have indeed praised the work, it seems possible that it because they believed all the stories may have taken place, not that they actually did. For further discussion see Yehoshua Mundshein, Shivchei Ha-Besht (Jerusalem 1982) pg. 53ff.”  [Note: I believe R. Nachman quoted above should instead read R. Natan.]
[5] According to Moshe Rosman: “The text itself is problematic. The first Hebrew edition of 1814 was not based on an autograph manuscript. The one manuscript that does exist (and is also not an autograph) differs significantly from the printed text and from the manuscript employed by the printer. Moreover, the printer informed his readers that he edited the manuscript he utilized. He changed the order of some of the stories, added material from other sources, enclosed sixteen passages in parentheses, and emended the text.”
See Life Stories: Shivchei Ha-Besht by Moshe Rosman.
[6] Again, see a critique of this view by R. Dovid Markel above.
[7] Rachamei haAv, p. 47.