Menu

Showing posts with label R. Chaim Vital. Show all posts
Showing posts with label R. Chaim Vital. Show all posts

Sunday, 8 December 2024

496) Kabbalah: To print or not to print the ‘lost’ mystical tradition

 

The first printed edition, the "editio princeps", of the Zohar published in Mantua, Italy in 1558.


Introduction

This article based extensively on the research by Avraham Oriah Kelman[1] examines the little-known crisis in Kabbalistic transmission that became evident between the thirteenth and sixteenth centuries. 

The earlier Sefaradic Kabbalistic tradition, which had peaked in Spain in the thirteenth century (with the Zohar first published around 1290) had now spread to central Europe. The expulsion from Spain in 1492 can be seen as precipitating this spread of Kabbalistic influence to Europe. This was coupled with the simultaneous spread of Kabbalah from the various mystical schools of Safed, including Lurianic Kabbalah from the Ari Zal (1534-1572). By the sixteenth century, Central European Ashkenazi Jewry was well-exposed to, and keenly influenced by, Kabbalah from both its eastern and western co-religionists. But Kabbalah, although now widely disseminated and popularised, was in an internal state of crisis. This created a tension between the leadership of the mystical movement and those who were publishing mystical works, and it is to that tension and theological strain that we shall now turn. 

Sunday, 10 December 2023

455) The three-pronged mystical revolution of the 16th century

 

Seventeenth century manuscript of Eitz Chaim by R. Chaim Vital

Introduction

This article based extensively on the research by Professor Rachel Elior[1] and Professor Zvi Werblowsky[2] − examines the three-pronged mystical revolution of the sixteenth century that changed the face of much of subsequent Judaism. 

In general terms, it is true that despite the calamitous events of the fifteenth century which saw the expulsion of Jews from Spain in 1492: 

“[t]he majority of exiles rehabilitated themselves by pursuing a normal life, conducted according to usual mundane considerations” (Elior 2000:187). 

On the other hand, a smaller but very influential number of Jewish mystics saw the world of the sixteenth century as anything but normative. They turned to Kabbalah and mysticism as the only way to explain the trauma of the expulsion. They believed and taught that the world was on the cusp of an imminent messianic redemption. Instead of engaging with the normative world like the majority of their co-religionists which included scholars and rabbis, they sought to detach themselves from reality as they experienced what they believed were the messianic birthpangs. These circles of mystics were known as Mechashvei Kitzim (Calculators of the End). 

Sunday, 24 January 2021

311) THE EMERGENCE OF CHARISMATIC JUDAISM:

 

The Pledge of Allegiance to R. Chaim Vital effectively making him the keeper of the secrets of the Ari Zal.

INTRODUCTION:

From around the sixteenth century, rabbinic leadership experienced a dramatic change. No longer were the credentials of leadership solely based on knowledge and erudition. Now leadership became largely defined by personal charisma.

This does not mean that knowledge played no role at all, but it does mean that it was no longer the main criterion.

In this article, based extensively on the work by Professor Morris Faierstein[1], we shall explore some of the effects of this change in the style of rabbinic leadership.

Saturday, 7 November 2020

301) HOW KABBALAH ‘GOES BACK’ TO FIX A TORAH NARRATIVE:

1906 edition of Eits haDa'at Tov by R. Chaim Vital.
INTRODUCTION:

One often tends to view kabbalistic thought as if it were a homogenous ancient tradition passed down faithfully from generation to generation without any additions or innovations. This article, based extensively on the research and thought[1] of Professor Shaul Magid, we explore how R. Chaim Vital Calebrese of Safed (1543-1620) - considered to be the main student of the Ari[2] - may have used his experience of contemporary realities to innovate aspects of his mystical ideology.

These ideas are found in R. Chaim Vital’s less examined work, Eits haDa’at Tov, which remained in manuscript form until 1871. Key to the work is his novel interpretation of the biblical community which accompanied the Israelites in the desert, known as the Eirev Rav, or mixed multitude (Ex. 12:38). Later rabbinic literature - and more relevant to our study, zoharic literature -  ascribed much blame to the Eirev Rav who were described as a negative influence on the Jewish people. R. Chaim Vital’s novel approach to this traditional negative view of the Eirev Rav is of particular interest.[3]

16th CENTURY CONVERSOS BECOME THE NEW EIREV RAV:

Following the expulsion of the Jews from Spain and Portugal after 1492, marranos and conversos (Jews who had converted to Catholicism and were looking to return to their faith) had moved westwards into Europe and many had gone to Eretz Yisrael and particularly to Safed. The population of Safed had swelled and within one particular year, the village turned into a town which now had the largest Jewish community in Ottoman Syria, with over 1000 families. Many conversos were hoping to become reabsorbed within the Jewish community, claiming that their previous conversion to Christianity had been under duress - but the Jews were not sure how to deal with them.[4]

Although many rabbis did not trust the sincerity of these conversos, R. Chaim Vital championed their cause and even developed a kabbalistic theology to help their reinstation as Jews. In fact, he went even further by showing how integral the conversos were to the scheme of messianic redemption.

This notion of messianic redemption was very much the theological vogue of the mystics of Safed, particularly under the R. Yitzchak Luria (1534-1572) known as the Ari (or Arizal).[5] The atmosphere of Safed was rich with messianic tension and both the Ari and his student R. Chaim Vital had expressed their claims to the role of Messiah. The appearance of a multitude of conversos in Safed played into the hands of this messianic drama because they were equated to the Eirev Rav of biblical times, who also didn’t know if they were non-Jews or Jews or somewhere in between.

R. Chaim Vital records that the Ari confirmed that the conversos were indeed the spiritual equivalent of the Eirev Rav and it was his (R. Chaim Vital’s) duty to facilitate their absorption back into Judaism and Torah.[6]

R. CHAIM VITAL’S VIEWS ON THE EIREV RAV ARE IN CONTRADISTINCTION TO THE ZOHAR:

R. Chaim Vital’s comparison of conversos to the Eirev Rav, produced what Magid refers to as a “counter-narrative” to the hitherto negative manner in which traditional rabbinic literature - and significantly the Zohar - portrayed the biblical mixed multitude. The Eirev Rav were often blamed and made a scapegoat for the sins of the Israelites. The Zohar goes so fas as to say that the Eirev Rav were evil, dangerous, and even demonic.

However, the new Lurianic narrative found redemptive features and qualities within the Eirev Rav and, by extension, within the conversos. The ancient Eirev Rav had finally been mystically vindicated and that was to become the model through which to deal with the matter of contemporary conversos.

The radical significance of this vindication should not be lost, particularly because it stood out against the foundational mystical work, the Zohar.

MYSTICAL POLITICS?

Why was there suddenly such an unusual about-face in an ancient mystical interpretation of the Eirev Rav? Considering the relatively large numbers of conversos who had descended upon the mystical town of Safed, it not impossible that there was not some form of political consideration at play.

Magid points out that although a mystic, R. Chaim Vital was also concerned about and involved in communal affairs and “held strong opinions on important matters”. The Eirev Ravmay have been a vehicle for fashioning new identities, perhaps proto-messianic identities”. Historical documents show how Rabbinic courts in Safed were continuously dealing with such matters of Jewish identity at that time.[7]

Magid shows how:

“Vital was indeed invested in the realia of his world, especially on the issue of the conversos, and used his exegetical skills to convey his position on this matter under the guise of his metaphysical or, in this case, kabbalistic-exegetical writings.”

The Eirev Rav and the conversos, although separated by thousands of years, had dimensions that were similar to each other. The Eirev Rav been present at the revelation at Sinai and the conversos had once been Jews, but both were not entirely regarded as a fully-fledged Jewish community.

THE TIKKUN:

The ‘re-judaization’ of the conversos and accepting then back within the Jewish fold was to be one of the final steps in the process of bringing about the messianic age that was expected to have been immanent. A tikkun or rectification of the how the Eirev Rav was viewed and treated in the past was to be effected through a new approach by absorbing the conversos back into Judaism.

Now, as a pre-requisite to the final redemption, the Safed mystics were going to rectify the failed biblical mission of the Eirev Rav and finally bring them home through the guise of the conversos.

R. CHAIM VITAL’S INNOVATIVE INTERPRETATION OF THE EIREV RAV:

The Eirev Rav and its converso counterparts (or reincarnations) were explained to have existed in a spiritual twilight zone. R. Chaim Vital said that at Sinai they experienced (or ‘saw’) the G-d’s voice, or kol but did not hear or understand the words, or dibbur.[8] Magid describes their position as having “a claim to and a stake in the covenant while not being fully a part of it”.

THE EIREV RAV’S DEPENDENCE ON MOSHE:

Because the Eirev Rav did not have the same status as the Jewish people they felt like, what Magid terms, “excluded insiders”. R. Chaim Vital evokes compassion for their spiritual plight as they want to be part of the people but G-d turns them away at every opportunity and seems only concerned about His people. It was only on the insistence of Moshe that the Eirev Rav remained.

According to R. Chaim Vital’s Eits haDa’at Tov:

[The Eirev Rav][9] said to Moses, ‘‘We do not, God forbid, disbelieve!’’ This is because it [revelation] had already become certain for them (nit’amet lahem). They said, ‘‘We acknowledge the truth of God and his Torah, and we also know that we are not fit like Israel to receive it. Yet we are also not, God forbid, equal to the other nations because we have converted….For this reason we should have a higher status from all the other nations. That is, we received the Torah through you [Moses]. [10]

On this view, an interesting shift took place after the Sinai experience. The Jews became less dependent on Moshe while the Eirev Rav became more dependent on him.

Know that God took Israel out of Egypt. This is not the case with the ‘erev rav, who were taken out by Moses, as it says, who you took out of the Land of Egypt (Ex 32.7). It does not say ‘‘I [God] took them [the ‘erev rav] out.’’ Therefore the ‘erev rav are called ‘‘Moses’ people’’ . . . They are no worse than the other nations, in fact, they are better since they came [out] in order to convert…[11]

THE GOLDEN CALF BECOMES UNDERSTANDABLE:

According to R. Chaim Vital, while not condoning it, the incident with the Golden Calf becomes somewhat justifiable. In order to understand this, one must be aware of the complicated and intimate relationship that developed between Moshe Rabbeinu and the Eirev Rav. He even calls the Eirev Rav the ‘Am shel Moshe’, or Moshe’s people.[12] The Torah also says that G-d told Moshe to go down the mountain because his (Moshe’s) people had sinned.[13]

Many commentaries understand that the Golden Calf affair occurred because the Jewish people were afraid that Moshe had perhaps died on Sinai, or even abandoned his people. After all, he delayed to come down. However, the Zohar understands that it was the Eirev Rav and not the Israelites who were most concerned about Moshe. This difference comes about depending on how one reads the following verse from Shemot (32:1):

וַיַּ֣רְא הָעָ֔ם כִּֽי־בֹשֵׁ֥שׁ מֹשֶׁ֖ה לָרֶ֣דֶת מִן־הָהָ֑ר וַיִּקָּהֵ֨ל הָעָ֜ם עַֽל־אַהֲרֹ֗ן וַיֹּאמְר֤וּ אֵלָיו֙ ק֣וּם ׀ עֲשֵׂה־לָ֣נוּ אֱלֹהִ֗ים אֲשֶׁ֤ר יֵֽלְכוּ֙ לְפָנֵ֔ינוּ כִּי־זֶ֣ה ׀ מֹשֶׁ֣ה הָאִ֗ישׁ אֲשֶׁ֤ר הֶֽעֱלָ֙נוּ֙ מֵאֶ֣רֶץ מִצְרַ֔יִם לֹ֥א יָדַ֖עְנוּ מֶה־הָ֥יָה לֽוֹ׃

When the people saw that Moses was so long in coming down from the mountain, the people gathered against Aaron and said to him, “Come, make us a god who shall go before us, for that man Moses, who brought us from the land of Egypt—we do not know what has happened to him.”

Most commentaries take “the people” to refer to the Israelites. The Zohar takes it to refer to the Eirev Rav, and as mentioned, viewed them as a demonic entity because they built the calf.

R. Chaim Vital bases himself on this zoharic interpretation but rejects that they were irretrievably evil. They just need the intermediary effect of their leader, Moshe – while the Israelites would have been able to carry on even had Moshe died on the mountain.

According to Eits haDa’at Tov:

They [the Isrealites] already heard the voice of God in the Ten Commandments and they already entered into a covenant and oath with God. This covenant would not have collapsed with Moses’ death…

[The Eirev Rav knew that] God wanted to reject them. It was only Moses who accepted them against God’s wishes . . .

[The Eirev Rav][14] immediately approached Aaron and said Come make us a god [elohim] who shall go before us . . . (Ex 32.1) because Aaron was a partner with Moses in taking them out.[15]

The Eirev Rav need a Moshe more than the Israelites. Their spiritual existence depended upon the intermediary support and intervention of a Moshe, an Aharon or…a Golden Calf to defend them (perhaps even from G-d) until Moshe returned.

Eits haDa’at Tov continues recording the view of the Eirev Rav:

This is not for the purpose of idolatry; God Forbid, we only desire the living God. The calf is a likeness [of the divine] like the Tabernacle, and the cherubim with human faces, where I [God] will dwell . . . Therefore, the reason [for the calf] is that when Moses was here (kayam) he protected us like a merciful father. He was, for us, like an elohim.[16]

R. Chaim Vital supports the Eirev Rav further by arguing that they only experienced the voice of God but not his words, and therefore did not hear the commandment against making images. For this reason, the Golden Calf was not their transgression! This is why Aharon agreed to assist them.

Ultimately, R. Chaim Vital agrees that they sinned, but only when they tried to equate their status with that of Israel. In other words, their sin was not the calf but that they tried to draw Israel into the worship of G-d through the agency of intermediaries. They could use intermediaries, but not Israel. Had they simply worshipped the calf, even as an Elohim or intermediary, while making a distinction between the intermediary and G-d, it would have not been a tragic event.

Once Israel worships Elohim through any elohim, they refute their unique status and relationship to God as YHVH and, by extension, diminish their experience at Sinai to the experience of the ‘erev rav.[17]

DRAWING ISRAEL INTO SIN:

The Eirev Rav draw Israel into the sin of worshipping the Golden Calf (according to the Midrash). R. Chaim Vital develops a theology as to why they did so. Since the Eirev Rav were desperately trying to become part of the people, they had to show that the Israelites were no better than them.

REPLACEMENT THEOLOGY:

The style of mystical literature in general and the Zohar, in particular, may be termed replacement theology. This means that Moshe in the story of the Eirev Rav may be replaced by the Moshe of the generation. Accordingly, R. Chaim Vital, with his messianic ambitions would be the new Moshe who champions the new Eirev Rav, or conversos.

Thus the essence of the Eirev Rav remained hidden and dormant until the time just before redemption. Then, as a tikkun and prerequisite to the revelation of the Messiah, they must finally be absorbed back into the Jewish fold.

The Zohar, in principle, even hints at such notion:

[T]he problem of the ‘erev rav will be resolved when Moses returns.’[18]

Magid emphasises this point very poignantly:

Paradoxically, it is the excluded insiders (the ‘erev rav / the conversos) who carry the weight of redemption. By shedding their status of exclusion and by Israel acknowledging their covenantal importance, the final stage of exile comes to a close.

THE LOST REMNANT OF MOSHE:

This was the time when Safed was the centre of a messianic fervour (that later went on to contribute to the fever of messianism of Shabbatai Tzvi[19] who was born just six years after R. Chaim Vital’s passing).

R. Chaim Vital took this replacement theology very seriously. The connection between Moshe and the Eirev Rav existed in the physical world because in the spiritual world the two were part of the same fallen soul of Adam. Thus Moshe and the Eirev Rav were inextricably attached to each other. Moshe showed compassion to the Eirev Rav because they were a part of his own spiritual makeup. Additionally, he too was raised in Egypt and he understood them as they were also largely Egyptians. He was, on this view, simply returning a lost component of his own soul to Judaism. And the corollary is also true because the Eirev Rav needed Moshe just as much, as he was their only gateway to G-d and tikkun. If the Eirev Rav were a part of Moshe, they were also a part of G-d and His people. Moshe was bent on helping the Eirev Rav convert fully because they were a lost part of his soul.

R. Chaim Vital develops this notion more by saying that the Eirev Rav were the negative part of Moshe’s soul (because after Adam sinned, all the souls that came from his root contained a mixture of good and evil).

Moshe had to return and fix his Eirev Rav for his mission to be completed. Magid describes this as “the struggle for Moses to reunite the lost remnants of his soul in order to fulfill his role as the archetypal Jewish leader—that is, the Messiah.”

This is why Moshe felt more responsibility for the Eirev Rav than for the Israelites.[20]

[Later, the Sabbatian ideologue, R. Abraham Miguel Cardozo (1627–1706), who was also a converso and student of Nathan of Gaza, writes, ‘‘In the future Messiah the King will don the garments of a Marrano, and on account of that the Jews will not recognize him.’’][21]

This idea of ‘fixing’ the negative is also found in another of R. Chaim Vital’s writing, Sha’ar haGilgulim, where he mentions that lofty souls like Avraham, David and even converts can dodge the negative kelipot, by being born through sin.[22]

CONVERSOS BECOME THE NEW EIREV RAV:

We have seen how R. Chaim Vital intertwines the fate of the Eirev Rav with the fate of Moshe. Interestingly, both[23] die in the desert and neither reach the land of Israel – their missions uncompleted.

It is most likely that R. Chaim Vital is speaking in metaphor and alluding to his role as a Moshe in supporting the new Eirev Rav, the conversos.

In the ensuing messianic drama playing out in Safed, it appears that the influx of conversos could now rectify and complete the work started in biblical times. These souls had been in limbo since the time of Moshe, waiting for a historical opportunity to replay and rectify the ancient events. Although Eits haDa’at Tov does not specifically mention conversos, it seems that this is its message and R. Chaim Vital can assume his role of Moshe/Messiah and finally fix the soul of Adam by reconnecting the lost Eirev Rav to Moshe - and the covenant at Sinai is remedied and restored.

ANALYSIS:

Technically we must remember that the Torah only tells us that the Eirev Rav left Egypt during the Exodus. 

The Midrash adds that they were present at Sinai.

Medieval commentary informs us that they caused Isreal to serve the Golden Calf soon thereafter. 

The Zohar presents the evil and demonic character of the Eirev Rav.

Now Lurianic Kabbalah adds another layer where not only is the biblical narrative amplified and enhanced - but essentially rewritten as playing out in the present with the promise of a  retroactive tikkun and rectification of the original events of the past. 



[1] Shaul Magid, The Politics of (Un)Conversion: The ‘‘Mixed Multitude’’ (‘Erev Rav) as Conversos in Rabbi Hayyim Vital’s ‘Ets Ha-Da’at Tov.

[2] See The Battle for the Soul of the Arizal, in Root Causes of the Sabbatian Movement,.

[3] It must be pointed out that Magid describes his analysis of Eits haDa’at Tov, as a “speculative leap” because the work does not directly equate the Eirev Rav to conversos. However, based on a literary reading of the text and being cognitive of the historical context, the “leap” may not be so “speculative” considering that the work follows the typical Kabbalistc style of writing where the ‘intelligent will understand’.

[6] R. Chaim Vital, Sefer haChezyonot, Aescoli edition, 1954, p. 222

[7] Werblowsky, Joseph Karo: Lawyer and Mystic (New York and Oxford, 1962).

[8]Although in a very different context, Rambam uses a similar description to differentiate between what Moshe experienced and what the Israelites experienced at Sinai. See The Guide of the Perplexed, 2.33, p. 364, Pines’s edition (Chicago, 1963).

[9] Parenthesis mine.

[10] Eits haDa’at Tov, 77c.

[12] See also the Zohar 1.25a.

[13] Ex. 23:7.

[14] Parentheses mine.

[17] Eits haDa’at Tov, 106d. For more on the distinction between Elokim, Havaya and Ein Sof see the paragraph The Coded Wording of R. Eibeschuetz's anti-Sabbatian Ban in Unimaginable Writings of R. Yonatan Eibeschuetz (and follow the other links provided there).

[18] Zohar 2.181b.

[19] See link in note 4.

[20] Eits haDa’at Tov, 173a.

[21] Inyane Shabbatai Zevi, ed. A. Friedman (Berlin, 1912), 88.

[22] Sha’ar haGilgulim, Introduction 38, p. 369, ed. Bnei Aaron. This concept, too, was taken up by the Sabbatians, although to a far greater extent than it was probably meant.

[23] That is, those of the Eirev Rav who did not get absorbed into the Israelites.

Saturday, 26 September 2020

296) ROOT CAUSES OF THE SABBATIAN MOVEMENT:

 


INTRODUCTION:

The Sabbatian movement is the name given to the followers of the false messiah Shabbatai Tzvi (1626-1676). At the peak of the movement, around half or even more than half of the Jewish population at that time, including prominent rabbis, believed that Shabbatai Tzvi was the Messiah.

Historians have not reached consensus as to the influences which gave rise to the Sabbatian movement. While Scholem acknowledges the significance of the Khmelnytsky massacres which occurred between 1648 and 1657 - which left between one hundred thousand and five hundred thousand[1] Polish Jews dead (Dubnow 1916:1:156-157) - as a factor leading up to the Sabbatian movement, he takes the view that the causes are more nuanced.

Scholem (1973:1) writes:

The weightiest argument against overestimating the causative role of the massacres of 1648 follows from a consideration of the difference between the Sabbatian outbreak and previous messianic movements. This difference lies in the extension, in space and time, of Sabbatianism. All other messianic movements...were limited to a certain area....

Never before had there been a movement that swept the whole House of Israel.

Because, in Scholem's estimation, “the whole House of Israel”, was swept into the vortex of Sabbatianism, the reasons for its emergence had to be more fundamental and theologically underlying.

Scholem argues that if, as many posit, the massacres were the main cause Sabbatianism, the movement would have been localized to Poland. However, the movement did not even start in Poland but in Palestine - and, also, there were notably few Polish leaders of the Sabbatian movement.

It spread to wherever Jews were living which included Yemen, Morocco, Persia, Kurdistan, Holland and Poland. Scholem suggests that the Jews of Morocco would probably not even have been aware of the massacres.

Historically, with previous messianic claimants, the movements died out very soon after the claimant was shown to be false. In the case of Shabbatai Tzvi, however, the movement did not dissipate but persisted for generations. Its root causes, therefore, had to lie deeper.

One cannot claim that economic conditions were the cause, either, because Sabbatianism was equally embraced by the impoverished communities of Poland as well as the wealthier communities of Constantinople, Amsterdam and Hamburg.

Furthermore, the Jews of Persia, Yemen and Morocco were experiencing some manner of persecution, yet they did not resonate with Sabbatianism any more than the Jews who lived in relative freedom.

With other messianic movements, once the messiah was shown to be false, the people experienced great disappointment and crises of faith, some followers lingered for a while and then the movement wilted away. This was not the case with Sabbatianism as the movement continued to survive and even prosper.

One cannot say that the Sabbatian movement comprised of the rabble and poorer classes because as Scholem (1973:5) attests:

All the more surprising is the real proportion of believers and unbelievers within the ruling class. All later statements notwithstanding, the majority of the ruling class[2] was in the camp of the believers [in Shabbatai Tzvi][3], and the prominent and active part played by many of them is attested by all reliable documents....

The essential correctness of this picture is not impugned in the least by the ‘revised version’ of events that was put forward afterward by a kind of self-imposed censorship.”

The movement knew no social boundaries because there were millionaire patrons like Amsterdam based Abraham Pereira who offered all his wealth to Shabbatai Tzvi. There were also beggars from the poorest regions, who joined together in Sabbatian fellowship.

For all these reasons, the intriguing roots causes of this movement must, therefore, have been deeper than any other messianic movement before.

LURIANIC KABBALAH:

Scholem understands the deep-seated roots of the Sabbatian movement as originating in something far more theologically universal than any one particular historical event. That universal influence was Kabbalah - specifically Lurianic Kabbalah - as it originated during the sixteenth century, in the mystical town of Safed in northern Ottoman Syria, now Israel. The Sabbatian movement was to use and abuse Lurianic Kabbalah as a mainstay for their messianic enterprises.

Mystics and mystical teachings became so popular that the quiet town of Safed which started out with just twelve hundred inhabitants, became a bustling centre of Kabbalah with eighteen thousand Jews, by the end of the sixteenth century (Giller 2001:14).

In contrast to medieval Kabbalah which remained the domain of a select few, Lurianic Kabbalah soon to spread from Safed throughout the Diaspora. R. Yitzchak Luria Ashkenazi, known as the Lion or the Ari, passed away in 1572, just fifty-four years before Shabbatai Tzvi was born. Lurianic Kabbalah had already created a defacto earlier movement so “highly charged with messianic tension” that it found its outlet and “discharge” just decades later in the Sabbatian movement.

The writings of the Ari were first printed in 1630, just four years after Shabbatai Tzvi was born. Scholem (1973:24) reminds us that the masses considered Lurianism to be the “final and ultimate revelation of kabbalistic truth,“ and the distillation of the Zohar appropriate to that generation. Without this powerful and popular mystical foundation, the Sabbatian movement would never have been able to take root, develop and – importantly - continue to perpetuate itself after the demise of its leader.

Scholem (1973:22) writes that at the time of the genesis of the Sabbatian movement:

“...kabbalistic esotericism and messianic eschatology were intertwined and acted in combination.”

What the Ari did that was so appealing to that generation (Scholem 1973:26), was to perfect the concepts of exile and redemption and elevate them to cosmic and divine levels thus removing them from a narrow historical interpretation. Scholem put it succinctly: “Lurianic kabbalism hinges on the idea of redemption.

Exile and redemption now existed even within the Godhead, within the fabric of creation and was no longer just a tenet of faith with a future utopian promise. Because the interconnectedness of exile and redemption was so primary to God and creation, it was a short step to translate that, with immediate effect, into historical reality on the ground.

 “In the popular mind, the history of the world was essentially the drama of God seeking to perfect His true image and ‘configuration’ and of man seeking to promote this aim by means of good work.”

Many of these Lurianic ideas were being perpetuated and popularised amongst the masses by preachers and moralists, and they would have emphasized the more dramatic, spectacular and immediate aspects and potential effects of this ideology.

Scholem maintains that trying to try to find a basis for these concepts within the Zohar, would be in vain as they are a uniquely Lurianic reworking of broader Zoharic ideas:

“There is something startlingly novel about this kabbalistic explanation which regarded exile not merely as a test of our faith or a punishment for our sins, but first and foremost as a mission. The purpose of this mission was to raise the scattered, holy sparks...”

These “holy sparks” are explained by R. Vital as follows:

“[Egypt, or exile, represented the Kelipot, or unclean husks which the holy sparks had to elevate. M]any sparks got entangled there and Israel too was enslaved there. Even the Shekhina [God’s Pressence] was exiled with it in order to raise the sparks that were there....For that reason Israel had been condemned to bondage among the seventy nations, so that it might extract the holy sparks that had fallen among them.”[4]

We must also remember, though, that even what we refer to as Lurianic Kabbalah is not a monolithic mystical literature. In other words, when we refer to Lurianic kabbalah which Lurianic Kabbalah are we referring to?

THE BATTLE FOR THE SOUL OF THE ARIZAL:

1) On the one hand, R. Chaim Vital (1543-1620) claimed to be the foremost student of the Ari who, unfortunately for the theologian, never published any of his original teachings. R. Vital, similarly, did not allow his interpretations of his master’s teachings to be copied. When the teachings were finally published in printed form in 1630, a decade after R. Vital’s passing, they were no longer the original pure Lurianic teachings.

2) Another important student of the Ari was R. Yosef Ibn Tabul (c.1545-early seventeenth century) from North Africa, known as Yosef haMa’aravi or Yosef from the west. He also spent time in the Ari’s kabbalistic circle in Safed, and like R. Vital, he kept his written notes out of public circulation.

3) Additionally, R. Yisrael Sarug, from Egypt and Italy, also claimed to be a foremost student of the Ari, although according to Scholem (1939-40:214-241) he certainly was not. Unlike the former two students, R. Sarug, due to his “missionary zeal” did hold back on publicising his interpretations of the Ari. According to some accounts (Eldridge 2010:9-10), R. Yisrael Sarug obtained stolen copies R. Vital’s writings and between 1592 and 1598, published them in Italy.

4) Yet another student, R. Moshe Yonah, published his own manuscripts in Europe, under the title Kanfey Yonah (the Wings of the Dove).

5) Additionally, most of the writings of the Ari were edited by R. Natan Nata Shapira (1585-1633), the Chief Rabbi of Kracow who later settled in Palestine. Besides a kabbalist, he seems to have been a social activist in terms of criticising the wealthy (of the Diaspora) and championing the poor (of Jerusalem). He never took a salary during his tenure as Chief Rabbi. He wrote:’

[When the Messiah comes, the dead Jews of the Holy Land will arise and] fly in the air like eagles – all this in the sight of the returning exiles. When the returning exiles see that their [Palestinian] brethren have become a new creation and are flying in the air toward the lower Paradise where they will study the Law from the mouth of God, then their heart will fill with sorrow and dismay and they will complain to the messianic king, saying, “Are we not Jews like the others? And why have they become spiritual beings and we not?” Then the messiah will answer them, “It is known to all that God dispenses justice measure for measure. Those of the Diaspora who endeavored to come to Palestine to receive a pure soul, who spared neither money nor efforts and came by sea and by land and were not afraid of being drowned in the sea or captured by cruel masters [pirates]: because they were concerned primarily for their spirits and their souls and not for their bodies and money, therefore they were turned into spirits—measure for measure. You, however, who could have come to Palestine like them, but failed to come because of your cupidity, having made a principal concern of your wealth and your bodies, while considering your souls and spirits a lesser concern: you shall remain corporeal—measure for measure. As for the money that you coveted, behold God shall give you riches…. However they that were not concerned with their bodies and their possessions but only with their spirits, God shall make of them a new creation and lead them into Paradise.[5]

Perhaps the writings of the Ari were edited through this filter of ‘spiritual activism’ of R. Natan Nata Shapira, and this may have had some bearing on its widespread acceptance by the common masses. Scholem may have alluded to this when he wrote that R. Natan Nata Shapira edited most of the “so-called Lurianic writings”, indicating that we do not have the authentic Lurianic traditions.

R. Natan Nata Shapira’s student, R. Berachya Berach wrote:

I have seen a scandalous thing in the matter of kabbalistic studies …,

[T]here have appeared presumptuous men who abuse the crown [of heavenly wisdom], turning it into a spade with which to feed themselves. They write books on kabbalistic subjects, obtain permission to print them, and then hawk them around to “divide [that is, distribute] them in Jacob.” … They reveal hidden and secret things to great and small, and even mingle the inventions of their hearts with [authentic] kabbalistic teachings, until it becomes impossible to distinguish between the words of the kabbalist masters and their own additions….

But even if they contented themselves with merely copying faithfully the words of the kabbalist masters, their sin would be too great to bear, for they make public this wisdom and turn it into common talk....

I know that the rabbis of old kept aloof from this science because they feared it might have been adulterated by unqualified persons, as indeed we now see it has been….

May the sages of our generation forgive me if I say that they are responsible for this abuse, because they grant approbations and licenses for printing [these books], commending, justifying, and extolling them to heaven, whereby they make themselves like false witnesses on behalf of liars.[6]

In effect, there was a veritable battle for the soul of the Ari because all his students and editors brought different interpretations of their master’s Kabbalah and claimed to most accurately represent his teachings. By 1650, Lurianic Kabbalah had become a well-known and well-accepted composite and blend essentially of Vitalian and Sarugian Kabbalah (Scholem 1973:25).

In R. Vital’s autobiographical notes (known as the Book of Visions) from between 1610-12, he describes his teacher, the Ari, as a potential messiah and doesn’t exclude himself from such a role either. R. Vital also saw himself as a reincarnation of some earlier figures in Jewish history (Faierstein 1990:156) and he wrote of himself that ‘half the world exists through my merits” and that he was told by “a woman who was an expert in divining by dropping oil into water...[that] – you will undoubtedly rule over all of Israel in the future.” R. Vital records that the woman said that she “never saw anyone, in my practice of oil divination, on such a high level in this whole generation.” (Faierstein 1990:44).

The Lurianic doctrine was according to Scholem (1973:26) “more likely than any other to increase messianic tension among the people.” This doctrine was based on the assumption that the process of Tikkun, or restoration of the fallen sparks had almost been fully accomplished and achieved, and messianic redemption was at hand. Everything now was dependant on the holy mystic who alone knew how to effect the final rectifications.

Against this backdrop, Lurianic Kabbalah emerged as the mystical literature of “almost unchallenged supremacy” (Scholem 1973:25). Its widespread acceptance set the stage for the inevitable emergence of not just a ‘potential’ messianic figure, but the ‘real’ Messiah, in the form of Shabbatai Tzvi who, as Yehuda Liebes (1993:93) puts it, created:

“the largest, most important, and most sweeping messianic movement that arose in Jewish history.”

Significantly, and perhaps ironically, Scholem considers the Lurianic doctrine in general to have presuppositions that are “essentially gnostic.”

Mystical thinking changed dramatically from the traditional mystical experience to a focus on a cosmic “drawing down” of the messiah, particularly after the emergence of Lurianic Kabbalah. Consider the following text from the seventeenth century kabbalist Moshe Prager who wrote:

Since the year 335 [1575] the souls from the world of tiqqun shone forth, and the Emanator [God] granted him [Isaac Luria] permission to open the supernal sources and channels with the mysteries of Torah; and he [Luria] expressly told us that at the present time esoteric knowledge has become like that which was formerly exoteric knowledge. Although Luria’s disciples discretely concealed his teaching from the years 335–390 [1575–1630], which is the mystery of pure oil.…

The year 390 contains the mystery of drawing the pure oil down on the head of the kingdom of the House of David which is the perpetual union of Ze’ir Anpin with his consort, the mystery of redemption and freedom, the shining forth of the souls from the world of tiqqun according to the degree attained by these souls in the year 390, as is known to us [kabbalists]. From 390 onward we are in duty bound, every one of us, to achieve the tiqqun of our souls in their aspects of nefesh, ruaḥ, and neshamah, and to accomplish, together with our own tiqqun, that of the whole world … [and] to refine and purify the holy sparks by the study of the Zohar and the Tiqquney Zohar according to their Lurianic interpretation.

Scholem points out that Moshe Prager was no Sabbatian, yet clearly the world was seen to have pivoted spiritually since the Ari - and particularly from 1630 when Lurianic teachings were publicised, there was to be a renewed emphasis on redemption.

ANALYSIS:

We must draw attention to the fact that not all scholars agree with Scholem’s well-argued and convincing thesis that Lurianic Kabbalah was the great catalyst that prepared the way for an inevitable messianic outbreak. His former student, Moshe Idel, challenges Scholem on the assumption that Lurianic Kabalah was all that widespread because of the inherent difficulty in understanding its contents. He encourages scholars to seek out wider-ranging explanations for the rise of Sabbatianism (Idel, Fall 1993:79-104).

My analysis of this challenge that Lurinic Kabbalah was difficult and therefore not as widespread as Scholem suggests, is based on contemporary observation of much of modern Jewish mystical approaches. Today, popular groups such as, Chabad and Breslover Chassidism which are largely based on Lurianic Kabbalah, are easily teaching and understanding these concepts of spiritual exile and redemption. Not everyone might understand the intricate depths of the Kabbalah of the Ari,  but everyone is conscious of the basic structures and promises of modern messianism.

Furthermore, even before the popularisation of Lurianic Kabbalah in 1630, the printing presses of Cracow and Lublin were producing large amounts of general kabbalistic material and had been doing so since the sixteenth century. This shows a real demand for mystical teachings, so much so, that even as early as 1570 R. Moses Isserles, known as the Ramah, criticised the “ignorant crowd” for dabbling so enthusiastically in such matters:

Many of the unlettered crowd jump at kabbalistic studies, for they are a lust to the eyes, especially the teachings of the later masters who expounded their doctrines clearly and in detail. And especially now that kabbalistic books such as the Zohar, Recanati, and [Gikatila’s] Sha’arey Orah are available in print every reader can indulge in their study believing that he has penetrated their meaning; whereas in reality it is impossible to understand these things unless they are expounded orally by a master. Not only scholars try to study it, but even ordinary householders, who cannot discern between their right hand and their left hand and who walk in darkness unable to explain [even] a portion of the Pentateuch or a chapter of the same with Rashi’s commentary, rush to the study of kabbalah.… A single coin in a box causes a noisy rattle, and anyone who has merely sniffed a little [kabbalah] preens himself on it and discourses on it in public—but he will have to render account [at the day of judgment].[7]

A short while later R. Shmuel Edeles (1555-1631), known as the Maharsha, expressed a similar sentiment:

[I]t behooves us to protest against those who discourse on it [kabbalah] in public.[8]

If general Kabbalah was in such demand by the “ignorant crowd”, then after 1630 when Lurianic Kabbalah became available, it is most likely that it similarly enjoyed widespread and popular attention.

In 1660, R. Yakov ben Moshe Temerles, a kabbalist who had been actively teaching in Volhynia for many decades, wrote the following about the spread of Lurianic Kabbalah:

They [the kabbalistic mysteries] have spread to all sides, … they are known in the gates, … and the earth is full of knowledge. Verily, all, great and small, are knowledgeable in the mysteries of the Lord. This is my comfort in my affliction: to behold the great desire and longing of our contemporaries for this hidden wisdom, and all—people and priests, small and great—desire to be admitted to the mystery of the Lord and live by it. Surely this signifies that our salvation is soon to come.”[9]

THE KABBALISTIC WORK ‘GALI RAZAYA’ AS ANOTHER INFLUENCE ON SABBATIANISM:

Other mystical works may also have contributed theological influences that gave rise to Sabbatian eschatology. One such work was the Gali Razaya or Revealed Mysteries, attributed to the Moroccon born R. Avraham haLevi Beruchim who became an important part of the circle of Safed Kabbalists. It was he who introduced many of ascetic and devotional practices which became the hallmark of the mystical Safed circle (Scholem 1973:61).

The Gali Razaya became popular and was widely disseminated in written form as well as in oral teaching in the era just prior to the appearance of the Sabbatian movement.

It must be borne in mind, while reading the following text, that the Sabbatians were intentionally promiscuous as part of their theology was to sin in order to repent and thereby, they claimed, become more elevated.

The text deals with the ‘reason’ why so many biblical personalities had relationships with “strange women” who would normally have been considered out of bounds. These include the relationships such as Judah and Tamar, Josef and Potiphar’s wife, Joshua and Rahab, and Boaz and Ruth.

According to Gali Razaya:

Whenever God wants to raise a king or hero to wreak vengeance on the heathen, it is necessary that there be some kind of relationship or rapport between the gentile nations and the Jewish king, so that Scripture should be fulfilled [Isa. 49:17]: ‘Thy destroyers and they that make thee waste shall go forth from thee’..., for whoever is born in order to humble the foes of Israel must have some measure of communion with the ‘left side’.[10]

The ‘left side’ refers to the ‘feminine’ side (that ‘receives’ emanation from the ‘male’ side) of the Kabbalistic model of the cosmic Tree of Life, and it is the source of Kelipah:

All offspring of the ‘pure side’ have a part in the ‘impure side,’ through the females...[11]

Then we read an articulation of this mystical idea that leaves room for much (mis)interpretation:

Know for sure that the ‘other side’ has been permitted to contract marriages between some of its women and the heroes and saints of Israel. The souls of these women are descended from pious gentiles, and the pious gentile thereby acquire a share in the world to come because [in this way] they mingle with Israel. Therefore, whenever the ‘other side’ sends its impure forces to oppress Israel by destroying its religion, it is necessary that an Israelite king or hero, who has some contact with the ‘impure side’ through the daughter of a strange god [a gentile woman], step out against them.[12]

Scholem (1973:62) sums this up as follows:

More than a hundred years before the Sabbatian movement we find a philosophy of history based on a mystical psychology exhibiting striking similarities to some of the doctrines of later Sabbatians...

This theology is related to the doctrine known as “holy deceit” which is paralleled in Lurianic Kabbalah, and which the Sabbatians were very familiar with.

R. Vital wrote that:

[W]hen a soul is exceedingly great [holy], it is impossible to save it from qelippah[13] except by ruse and cunning....

Then R. Vital adds in a personal note:

In my case too, the evil powers did not mind the matter [of my soul coming into this world] because they thought that I was already lost, but God snatched me from them....

They thought it would be to their advantage [to use me for their purposes], but I became their enemy.[14]

Thus, sometimes the birth of a ‘great soul’ has to come about as a result of deceit or even a sinful union and a Tikkun or rectification is thereby allowed to occur.

This notion of ‘holy deceit’ was later to be seized upon by the Sabbatians and even used in the first instance, to bring about a state of redemption.

 

SOURCES:

Dubnow, S 1916. History of the Jews in Russia and Poland, trans. Israel Friedlander, 3 vols. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society.

Faierstein, MM 1990. Jewish Mystical Autobiographies: Book of Visions and Book of Secrets (Classics of Western Spirituality). New Jersey: Paulist Press.

Scholem, G 1973. Sabbatai Sevi: The Mystical Messiah, 1626-1676. Princeton University Press.

Idel, M Fall 1993. One from a Town, Two from a Clan: The Diffusion of Lurianic Kabbala and Sabbateanism: A Re-Examination. Jewish History 7;2, 79-104. Springer.

Liebes, Y 1993. Studies in Jewish Myth and Jewish Messianism (trans. A. Schwarz, S. Nakache and P. Peli). Albany NY: State University of New York Press.

Giller, P 2001. Reading the Zohar: the sacred text of the Kabbalah. New York: Oxford University Press.



[1] According to Eldridge (2010:5), about twenty percent of the Jewish population (90,000 out of 450,000) may have perished during the massacres.

[2] Scholem points out that the ruling class, includes “rich merchants, lay leaders, and rabbis.”

[3] Parenthesis mine.

[4] Chaim Vital, Sefer haLikuttim (Jerusalem 1913), fol. 89a.

 [5] Natan Nata Shapira, Tuv haAretz, fol. 37a.

[6] Introduction, Zera Berach, II (Amsterdam, 1662).

[7] Isserles, Torat haOlah, III, ch. 4.

[8] Edeles, Novellae to B. Ḥagigah 13a.

[9] This extract is from R. Yakov Temerles’ unpublished approbation for a Kabalistic prayer book, which his student, R. Chaim Buchner intended to publish. However, the approbation was eventually printed by Buchner in his introduction to his Or Chadash (Amsterdam, 1672–75).

[10] Gali Razaya, 1812, fol. 23a.

[11] Gali Razaya, 1812, fol. 6d.

[12] Gali Razaya, 1812, fol. 29.

[13] Kelipah or husks.

[14] Chaim Vital, Sha’ar haGilgulim, fol. 65a.