547) From the Nile to Safed: Egyptian Judeo-Sufism as an influence on Lurianic Kabbalah

 

Cairo Geniza fragment of the writings of  Maimonides' son, Avraham ben haRambam

Introduction

This article—drawing extensively on research by Professor Paul Fenton—expands upon the previous discussion of six generations (Fenton 2025-)[1] of Maimonides’ Egyptian descendants who embraced and disseminated a synthesis of Jewish mysticism and Islamic Sufism, known as Judeo-Sufism. This movement, with large numbers of adherents known as Chassidim, followed a mystical path called Derech haChasidut (Fenton 2017:50). Its influence eventually reached Safed, transmitting Judeo-Sufi ideas and practices that arguably informed the Arizal’s sixteenth‑century Lurianic Kabbalah. 

509) When authority becomes the determinant of reason, meaning and truth

An early manuscript of Meirat Einayim by the 14th century R. Yitzchak of Acre

Introduction

This article—based extensively on the research by Professor Eitan Fishbane[1]—examines the rabbinic notion of the authenticity of a teaching or text being reliant on the perceived authority of its transmitter or originator. In other words, the greater the rabbi the more authentic the teaching, regardless of the intrinsic value, nature and validity of the actual teaching itself. 

As a test case, we analyse the writings of a fourteenth-century Kabbalist, R. Yitzchak ben Shmuel of Acre in his Meirat Einayim which is a supercommentary (i.e., a commentary on a commentary) on Nachmanides’ Commentary on the Torah. Interestingly, R. Yitzchak of Acre—who lived at the same time as R. Moshe de Leon who had claimed to have discovered the ancient Zohar—questioned the attribution of the Zohar to the second-century Tanna, Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai, who lived a thousand years earlier.[2] 

501) Were some early Spanish Kabbalists defending a Maimonidean position?

An image believed to be that of R. Yitzchak the Blind occupied with the Sefirot

Introduction

This article ꟷ based extensively on the research by Professor Tzahi Weiss[1] ꟷ examines an interesting and unusual approach to understanding how thirteenth-century Kabbalah suddenly emerged in Provence (southern France) and Catalonia (northeastern Spain). With this emergence, there was now a rapid interest in, and wide reception of, the notion of Sefirot (Divine emanations). Although the term ‘Sefirot’ was used in the earlier mystical work of the Bahir, it suddenly took on a specific meaning in thirteenth-century Spanish Zoharic Kabbalah. 

Weiss, a professor of Jewish mysticism, offers a unique interpretation as to why the Spanish Kabbalists reworked and redefined the older existing notion of Sefirot.  While the Spanish Kabbalists are usually depicted as radical mystics in direct conflict with Maimonidean rationalism ꟷ Weiss fascinatingly sees these Kabbalists as having more in common with some aspects of Maimonides’ Halachic writings (Mishneh Torah) and his philosophical writings (Moreh Nevuchim or Guide for the Perplexed) than usually imagined!

408) Rebbe Professor Isadore Twersky

 

The two faces of  Rabbi Professor Twersky

Introduction

This article, based extensively but not exclusively on the research by Rabbi Dr Carmi Horowitz,[1] looks at the extraordinary story of Rabbi Professor Isadore (Yitzchak) Twersky (1930-1997). As both a rebbe and professor, Isadore Twersky straddled two very distinct worlds.

The story

Rebbe Professor Twersky, as he was affectionately known, was born into a Chassidic line of rebbes from the Chernobyl dynasty. He was a great-grandson of Rabbi David of Talne, an important leader of the Chassidic movement in Ukraine during the nineteenth century. By all expectations, he should have just grown up to become another rebbe in the chain going back to R. Nachum of Chernobyl (1730-1789), a student of the Baal Shem Tov. The Talner Chassidim are a branch of the Chernobyl Chassidic dynasty.

266) BETWEEN FRANKFURT AND TZFAS:

                                            

 Guest Article by Rabbi Boruch Clinton.                                                  

INTRODUCTION:
(By Gavin Michal)

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

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

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

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

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

245) R. YOSEF KAPACH - THE SUPPRESSION OF A RATIONALIST TRADITION?

R. Yosef Kapach's signature on a Jerusalem Rabbinical Court document together with R. Ovadiah Yosef and R Waldenberg.

INTRODUCTION:

Rabbi Yosef Kapach[1] (1917-2000) is widely considered to have been a world authority on Maimonidean texts. He compiled what is today regarded as the most accurate publication of Rambam’s Mishneh Torah - working as he did, not from printed versions but from manuscripts written in Rambam’s own hand.

R. Kapach produced a 23 volume edition of Mishneh Torah with his own extensive notes which compare - for the first time - each concept and ruling in the Mishneh Torah, to Rambam’s ideas on the same topic but taken from his other writings. The work also includes an anthology of about 300 additional commentaries as well. This allows the student to acquire a well-rounded overview of Rambam’s thoughts instead of just reading them in a vacuum.

 [For more on R. Kapach’s fascinating story, see The Search for the Most Accurate Maimonidean Texts, and A Traditional School of Yemenite Rationalism.]

Rabbi Kapach was highly respected and served for some decades on Israel's highest religious court.

Besides his impressive credentials, R. Kapach had some very interesting – some would say controversial - views on a number of pertinent and important issues affecting contemporary Judaism.

In this article, we will look at some of these matters through the eyes of one of his students, Professor Tzvi Langermann from Bar Ilan University, who refers to R. Kapach (Kafah) as “mori Yusuf”, my teacher Yosef.[2]

R. KAPACH’S VIEW ON TALMUDIC SCIENCE:

Scattered amongst the non-legal sections of the Talmud (0-500 CE) are many ancient statements that were once considered to have been innovatory science, but in the fullness of time have subsequently been replaced by more accurate scientific assumptions. 

The modern student of Talmud today is faced with the dilemma of either choosing to disregard modern science in favour of the Talmudic version, or to discard the current science. The choice becomes more than academic when general science crosses over into practical medical science.

Some claim that whatever is recorded in the Talmud is sacrosanct and is therefore not subject to alteration or review under any circumstances.

[NOTE: Our discussion is only concerned with scientific and non-Halachic issues, and it must be taken as obvious that no one is suggesting tampering with actual Halacha.]

Regarding Talmudic science, R. Kapach took a forthright and unabashed position. He followed a rationalist approach which he inherited from his grandfather R. Yichya Kapach – and openly and boldly claimed that the Talmudic statements on science, simply reflected the science of its day; and therefore was not part of the orally transmitted tradition from Sinai!

Thus, when the Talmud spoke of Halachic matters, those would have been part of the ancient oral tradition going back to Sinai. But the scientific, historical and medical matters recorded in the Talmud were merely a reflection of the general views of the world at that time, and were not, in his view, to be regarded as ‘holy’.

THE HELIOCENTRIC VS THE GEOCENTRIC THEORIES OF THE UNIVERSE:

Regarding the matter of whether the sun revolves around the earth (which many contemporary Orthodox Jews still steadfastly maintain to be the truth) or whether the earth revolves around the sun, R. Kapach clearly maintained that the earlier belief that the sun revolves around the earth was not something that had its roots in Sinai. Therefore that assumption was not something one had to bend over backwards to try and support.[3]

R. Kapach writes:

“On the contrary... [the Talmudic scientific views are][4] due either to ...[the Sages’][5]...understanding and conclusions, on the basis of the astronomy of their day, or else they received it from the non-Jewish scholars...

It is important to know that this is the situation, because in our own day these concepts have changed from one extreme to the other.

Some things that were once the absolute truth have been totally destroyed.

If someone who does not know their source imagines that their source lies in a tradition of the Sages, he could make the same mistake with regard to things that really are a tradition of the Sages, ‘from person to person,’ and that are fundamental to Judaism.

Therefore, it is good to know the truth, so that if these [old astronomical ideas] are refuted, as they have indeed been refuted, it does not matter at all, and the matter has no bearing at all on the Jewish faith.”[6]

Langermann refers to the “danger of sanctifying the scientific claims of the rabbis” and echoes his teacher’s fear that:

“[w]hen discerning persons realize that these claims are wrong, as they surely will, they may be led to reject the entire tradition.”

THE SAME MUST BE SAID OF RAMBAM’S SCIENCE:

Interestingly, although an avowed Maimonidean, R. Kapach said that the same applied to the relatively more recent science as recorded within his beloved Rambam’s writings (1135-1204). Rambam also wrote on scientific and medical matters as they were understood during his time, but he did not expect his readers to retain them in light of more accurate discoveries and developments he knew would take place in the future. 

[Again, of course, the purely Halachic writings of Rambam like those of the Talmud continue to retain their obvious authority.]

Concerning his teacher’s view, Langermann writes:

“Thus those assertions that have since been disproved, or at least rejected by the consensus of the scientific community, are wrong, plain and simple, and may be jettisoned.” 

IGNORE THEIR CONTENT BUT RESPECT THEIR INTENT:

Even though R. Kapach completely rejected the since disproved Talmudic and Medieval science which he never regarded as ever being part of the authentic Torah tradition, he nevertheless emphasized something Rambam said that is often overlooked:

Rambam explained that although much of Talmudic science had been displaced even in his day, nonetheless it is not an indictment against the rabbis of the Talmud because it still shows how they:

 “made it their business to learn thoroughly the science current in their own time.”

The sages were interested in science! 

And the content of their scientific conclusions is not the crucial issue – what is important, is that they attempted to understand the science of their day to the best of their ability! Their intent was more important than their content.

R. Kapach maintained that if the Sages attempted to understand science, then there is no reason for us not to do the same today.

WHAT ABOUT DAAT TORAH?

Some might argue that if a great rabbi, especially a Talmudic authority, pronounces on any issue, his verdict is not only final but he is actually speaking on behalf of the Torah itself (if not G-d Himself). 

This hypothesis is common and is known as Daat Torah.

[For more on Daat Torah see Contemporary Daas Torah – Protecting or overstepping the Boundaries?]

According to this view, whatever the Talmudic Sages said, must certainly be Daat Torah and their views on science and medicine must of necessity be correct.

While many do assume this position, certainly in the view of Rambam, such a notion could not ever be entertained.

Professor Menachem Kellner, considered an authority on Maimonidean thought, writes that according to Rambam:

“Truth is absolute and objective; there can thus be no such things as intellectual (or spiritual) authority per se.

Statements are true irrespective of the standing of the person making them.

Maimonides could thus have no patience for the sorts of claims to rabbinic authority which underlie the contemporary doctrine of da’at Torah (charismatic rabbinic authority) in its various permutations.”

KODESH AND CHOL – RELIGIOUS AND SECULAR STUDIES AT SCHOOLS:

When it came to the much debated issue of religious and secular studies at Torah schools - relating to whether secular studies should be allowed at all and if allowed to what extent - R. Kapach was, to say the least, completely outspoken.

Some schools allow equal time allocation for both subjects while others only permit a minimal amount of secular literacy, and almost everyone only allows the secular to take place at the end of the learning day[7], and only permit the science that does not contradict their version of the Torah.

However, Langermann writes that his teacher:

“...Rabbi Kafah was quite distressed by this attitude.

In his view, the very dichotomy between ‘sacred’ and ‘profane’ subjects, a self-evident truth in the mind of so many Jews, is misguided. In this matter as in just about every other, the rabbi's outlook was grounded in the thought of Saadia Gaon and especially Moses Maimonides.

Following their lead...Rabbi Kafah drew a sharp distinction between blind belief and true conviction...

A scientific education is a sine qua non for the attainment of sound convictions. Only the precise, impartial, critical, and rigorous method of the sciences can lead to this type of conviction. In addition, the strongest indications of the truth of the existence of God and other basic principles come from the investigation of the world of phenomena; and their investigation is the province of science.

The conclusion to be drawn from all of this is that science, too, should properly be classified as limmudei qodesh, sacred studies.

Thus there is a first-class religious obligation (‘a mitzvah from the Torah’) to study science.”

And if that wasn’t controversial enough, he continues:

“Moreover, the rabbi held that much of what is generally taken to be limmudei qodesh is anything but holy.

He disliked the intricate analysis of purely hypothetical legal problems, something that many consider to be the acme of Torah study....

He listed the following sciences as obligatory: logic, astronomy, natural science (biology, zoology, physics), medicine, and language.”

In a similar fashion, Menachem Kellner writes:

“... Maimonides imports science... into the very heart of Torah.

Indeed the twentieth century’s leading Maimonidean, Rabbi Josef Kafih, went so far as to deny the possibility of secular studies (limmudei hol) for Maimonides: if a discipline yields truth, it is not secular.

One who has mastered what Maimonides calls (in the Introduction to the Guide of the Perplexed) the legal science of the Torah (i.e. the Talmudist) is thus inferior to one who has mastered the secrets of the Torah, i.e. the person who understands physics and metaphysics...

An enthusiastic Maimonidean such as Jacob Anatoli (thirteenth century) understood the implications of this clearly: in his eyes a scientifically trained Gentile is superior to a punctilious Jew who has no scientific training.”[8]

This is one of those views that will either resonate innately withn - or utterly repel - the Reader. There is no middle ground here.

While some might scorn Rambam - and by implication, R. Kapach - for these views, others would laud them for their ‘wisdom to develop them and the courage to voice them.’

IMPACT OF SUCH VIEWS:

Either way, the impact of R. Kapach’s thoughts has been minimal despite his being recognized as one of the great authorities on Maimonidean texts and thought.

“Many of these ideas were developed by Rabbi Kafah in a short article which, though reprinted several times and translated into English, seems to have had little or no impact.”

R. Kapach was fatigued and frustrated by the attitude of the establishment and:

“...concluded that without some common ground of belief shared by the participants, argument or discussion is pointless.

Hence he would dispute with other Maimonideans with fury and passion; but he limited himself to dry exposition when writing for those whose world-views were far-removed from his own.”

He seemed to have resigned himself to the fact that his was a battle he could never win, having already witnessed his grandfather’s futile campaign to rid his fellow Yemenites of their belief in magic and theurgical mysticism.

Menachem Kellner acknowledges that hardly anyone took notice of R. Kapach’s views, and adds that the same was true of Rambam himself:

“None of these positions had much impact on Judaism after Maimonides, and many people today who revere his memory and devote themselves to the study of his Mishneh Torah would probably deny that he held them...”[9] 

Besides R. Kapach’s negligible influence on the contemporary study curriculum at schools, some of his students like Langermann, appear reluctant to even share some of their teacher’s other views on other issues. 

So, for example – whether Langerman felt he didn’t quite understand his teacher’s interpretation in a certain matter or whether he was simply reticent to express it – he writes:

“If I understood him properly, Rabbi Kafah may have gone even farther in his interpretation of Maimonides, but I cannot say more on this subject.”

Why could he not say more on the subject?

ANALYSIS:

Some admittedly highly subjective questions follow:

Why is it that our (teenage) children can come home from school having been taught the most extreme midrashim and tacitly expected to take them literally – yet others can’t fully express the views of someone like R. Kapach?

Why can respectable organizations publicise and advise with impunity, all sorts of almost theurgical activities which are purported to heal and save – yet others can’t teach correspondingly radical views as put forth in commentaries such as Rabbeinu Nissim of Marseilles?

How can some peripheral, mystical and magical concepts be openly taught as if they were core Torah values – yet one hundred thousand pages of Rav Kook have been withheld from us?

Why are some of the normative, balanced and rational notions which Judaism is also rich in, often denied, ignored, suppressed or relegated to some vague category of non-authoritative status - and those that wish to study and teach such matters are compelled to do so apologetically!

Not everyone has to adopt these notions, and the masses probably never will, but at least they should be presented as equal and legitimate alternatives - which they, being rooted in Rambam surely are - for those who seek them. 

A whole new generation might find it easier to come back to Judaism.

‘Hilkach Nimrinhu leTarvaihu' ...Therefore let us express both (world-views)!

Or have these ideas been so repeatedly driven underground to the extent that they have, ironically, become a new hidden tradition of sod and nistar and secrets of Torah?

---

[1] Also known as Kafach, Kafih or Qafih.

[2] “Mori Yusuf”: Rabbi Yosef Kafah (Qafih) (1917-2000), by Y. Tzvi Langermann.

[3] Many, including the Lubavitcher Rebbe, had written in defence of the earlier hypothesis. He based his arguments around the theory of relativity.

[4] Parenthesis mine.

[5] Parenthesis mine.

[6] R. Kapach’s commentary to Mishneh Torah, Yesodei haTorah, ch.3.

[7] The Lubavitcher Rebbe supported this notion based on the verse ‘kol hachelev lahaShem’, where the ‘fat’ or best part of the day was to be dedicated to Kodesh.

[8]Kafih J. Cross-roads: Halacha and the Modern World. Alon Shvut: Zomet; 1987. Secular Studies in the Rambam; pp. 109–16.

[9] From Moses to Moses by Menachem Kellner.

241) FOLKLORE – ALIVE AND WELL IN A MODERN WORLD:

INTRODUCTION:

I have always been fascinated by the difference between superstition and religion – and by just where one delineates between superstitious or magical practices and genuine Halacha.

In this article, I have drawn extensively from the research of Professor Gideon Bohak[1] who is a specialist scholar of Jewish magic.

Professor Bohak writes:

“Jewish magic is thriving in present-day Israel, in spite of the supposed disenchantment of the modern world.”

NOTE:

In this discussion, the term ‘magic’ is used with reference to any ritualistic activity or folkloric belief - usually presented as a religious undertaking involving recitations or actions - which attempts to theurgically change the fabric of reality, without the individual actually trying to affect it by pragmatic endeavours.

Similarly, the term ‘Kabbalah’, in our context, refers to practical and particularly theurgical Kabbalah, and not to theoretical or theosophical mysticism.[2]

A SHORT HISTORY OF JEWISH MAGIC:

2^nd CENTURY BCE:

Gideon Bohak explains that Jewish magic, although a factor since “time immemorial”, only really becomes traceable from the second century BCE. We know this because of the proliferation of magical texts from that period onwards. 

These texts are regarded as ‘magical’ because they aimed at changing the world around them through the use of amulets, holy names of G-d, angelic and demonic powers. Some of these included the intention to harm or even kill opponents.

Bohak writes very tellingly that throughout Jewish history:

“...for every Jewish community for which we have reasonable amounts of written evidence, the evidence also includes extensive documentation of Jewish magical activities.”

11^th CENTURY – RATIONALIST OPPOSITION:

Interestingly, as we move on to the 11^th century when medieval rabbinic rationalists like Maimonides opposed many of these rituals and practices which had sometimes become indistinguishable from normative Judaism, these rabbis were aggressively challenged by many of their contemporaneous mystical colleagues.

15^th CENTURY – THE PRINTING PRESS:

Then, from the mid 15^th century, with the invention of the printing press, Kabbalistic medicine, practical Kabbalah and mystical literature in general, received a boost and were quickly spread throughout the Jewish world.

16^th CENTURY - SHIMUSH TEHILLIM (1551):

One newly printed book was Shimush Tehillim (How to Use Psalms) which was published in 1551. It is an anonymous work from a much earlier time. The printed edition, in a mixture of Hebrew and Aramaic, shows how to get practical benefit from the 150 Psalms:

According to this work, Psalm 1; - for example - could prevent an abortion. Psalm 2; could help with a headache and also saves from a storm at sea. Psalm 3; alleviates shoulder pain. Psalm 5; helps find favour in a governor. Psalm 16; helps with catching thieves. Psalm 54; helps with taking revenge on an enemy. And Psalm 124; helps find a runaway slave and gets him to return.

18^th CENTURY - RAZIEL HAMALACH:

Books of Segulot (Kabbalistic amulets, remedies and recipes) became very popular particularly after Sefer Raziel was printed in 1701. This book became an amulet in itself as it suggested that even if one did not study from it but merely kept it in the home “together with his silver and gold” then the house would be protected from fire and evil spirits.

IMPACT OF PRINTED MAGICAL TEXTS:

Sociologically, the popularity of these types of books had a huge impact because now the reader could simply open the book (some even came with indexes) and did not need to visit the Kabbalist or one of the Baalei Shem (medicine men).

This, in turn, led to a reaction from the Kabbalist practitioner who now felt aggrieved, and often tried to ban the publication of such works, claiming that the printing of various holy names amounted to a desecration of G-d’s name.

On the other hand, some Baalei Shem like Yoel Baal Shem (the Second) took advantage of the need for such works and used the technology of his day to actively produce even more books for wide dissemination.

Printed Segulot for newborn babies also became very popular as they were ubiquitous and cheap.

19^th CENTURY HASKALAH:

The proliferation of magical texts continued until the early 19^th century when the Jewish Enlightenment Movement or Haskalah, declared a “war on magic” and tried, instead, to emphasise reason over folklore and magic. To some extent and in some circles the Jewish magical texts were then marginalised but certainly not eradicated.

“However, just as Maimonides and his followers had found out several centuries earlier, any attack on ‘superstition’ and magic in the Jewish world soon ran into the problem that the Jews’ sacred texts—and especially the Babylonian Talmud—are full of elements which the rationalists were wont to disparage.”

(These were issues that many of the post-Talmudic Gaonim[3] as well as the rationalist Rishonim[4] dealt and grappled with. See Angels in Rabbinic Literature, and A Newly Minted Chareidi Amulet.)

Although there were orthodox rabbis who embraced the Haskalah Movement [See Talmudic Commentators Who Embraced the Enlightenment], the Haskala is generally associated with reform. Unfortunately, opposition to magic was now seen as a reform innovation and an attack on the orthodox. This may have had the effect of strengthening the belief in magic in some of the more conservative orthodox circles.

Either way, the albeit partial marginalization of magic only took place in Europe but did not affect the Jews of Muslim countries who continued to practice a very traditional or “conservative” form of magic.

JEWS IN MUSLIM LANDS:

The Jews in Muslim countries were not generally exposed to the printed Kabbalistic texts published after the 15^th century (as printing was strictly regulated in those countries) nor were they exposed to the influence of the Enlightenment Movement (opposing magic) which was predominantly felt only in Europe.

Even long after the emergence of the printing press, most of Middle Eastern, North African and Sefardic magic was still transmitted in manuscript form, and often assumed the format of a ‘recipe book’.

PLOTTING THE GRAPHS OF ASHKENAZI AND SEFARDI MAGIC:

Bohak points out an interesting difference between the practical Kabbalistic literature developing in Europe as opposed to that which flourished in Muslim countries: In the European or Ashkenazi world, the numbers of such books rise during the 17^th century, peak during the 18^th century, dwindle in the 19^th century (largely due to the Haskala), and all but vanish in the 20^th century.

However, in the Sefardic countries, the numbers of such works rise continuously from the 17^th century right up to and including the 20^th century!

R. AVRAHAM HAMUY (1839-1888):

One particularly interesting Sefardic writer of Segulot was R. Avraham Hamuy who wrote over 50 books. Once, on a visit to the Moroccan city of Marrakesh in February 1881 - on a Thursday - he was asked by the Jewish community to end a drought that had plagued them for some time. 

He performed various rituals including writing out G-d’s name in circumcision blood, and by Friday evening the heavens opened up and the drought was assuaged. This gained him much admiration from Marrakesh’s Jewish as well as its Muslim inhabitants.

THE 1942 PLOT TO KILL HITLER:

In 1942 some Jerusalem Kabbalists used various rituals to try and kill Hitler.[5]

They procured an airplane from the RAF to spray the blood of white roosters over the Land of Israel to protect it from the armies of Rommel.

1948 - THE STATE OF ISRAEL:

THE ATTEMPT TO THWART JEWISH MIDDLE EASTERN MAGICAL PRACTICES:

With the establishment of the Jewish State in 1948, both European and Middle Eastern Jewish cultures confronted each other and the Ashkenazim tried to “disenchant” their Middle Eastern and North African brethren of their magical practices, but with little success.

“[Israel’s] founding fathers had little patience for demons, amulets, and Jewish magical beliefs and practices, and neither would the ‘new Jew,’ which they hoped to create.”

The ‘new Jews’ thus came into ideological conflict with the ‘old Jews’, also known as the ‘old yishuv’ (or old ‘establishment’) who had already been residing in Ottoman Palestine and after 1922, in Mandatory Palestine. The ‘new Jews’ were embarrassed about, and therefore opposed to, the superstitious and magical practices of the older communities.

David Ben-Gurion dreamed of Israel becoming a melting pot with new Israelis emerging who had let go of practices that he believed could only hinder them in the future.

1980s - RESTORATION OF HONOR:

This model proved to be effective for the first few decades until the 1980s when a push-back was expressed by - amongst other groups - the formation of the Shas party[6] which vowed to restore the ‘honor and glory’ of North African, Middle Eastern and Sefardic Jews, which had been ‘stolen’ from them by the Israeli state.

This restoration of honor and the holding on to traditional beliefs, also indicated to all that the magical and practical Kabbalistic tradition was never eradicated in Israel but, instead, remained alive and well. 

1990s – ‘SUSPICION OF REASON’ IN THE POSTMODERN AGE:

Then, during the 1990s with the advent of the Postmodern Era and its “cultural sensitivities and...New Age religiosities” (which brought with it a “suspicion of reason; and an acute sensitivity to the role of ideology”[7]), “the Jewish magical tradition is now more vigorous, and more visible”[8] than ever imagined.

MAGIC IN THE ‘START-UP NATION’:

During the 1996 Israeli elections, the Shas party, comprised of Sefardic Orthodox Jews, distributed amulets which had the image of the ‘eldest Kabbalist’, R. Yitzchak Kaduri (1898-2006), and which were ‘blessed’ by him.

These amulets were greatly in demand but were only given to voters who promised to vote for the Shas party.

When the opposition got wind of this, they claimed it was election bribery and the matter went to adjudication. The distribution of amulets was dully halted by the law. This did not stop Shas gaining 10 seats.

2000:

As a result of previous electioneering with amulets, Israeli law now prohibits anyone using:

“...adjuration, curse, excommunication, ban, a vow, the dissolution of a vow, a promise to grant a blessing, or the giving of an amulet; in this regard, ‘an amulet’ includes any object that in the eyes of a part of the public has the power to grant it benefits or harm it.”    

The clause “any object that in the eyes of a part of the public has the power to grant it benefits or harm it,” is interpreted by Bohak as:

 “...an honest admission by the Knesset that while some of the citizens of the modern State of Israel deny the efficacy of amulets, others certainly do not.”

And therefore:

“By the year 2000, when this clause was added to the law, the Jewish magical tradition was finally winning official recognition of its existence and wide appeal...”

However, even this legislation did not curb the continued (and illegal) use of amulets and even “aggressive magic” in election campaigning in a country that prides itself as one of the most technologically advanced in the world.

ANALYSIS:

Gideon Bohak writes:

“The impact of this multifaceted and multidirectional shift is still in progress, and it is too early to tell where exactly it will lead, but one of its obvious features is that magic is once again in vogue...

In a postmodern world, modernity’s aversion towards magic and ‘superstition’ is being replaced by suspicion of the rationalistic discourse...”

If Gideon Bohak’s analysis is correct and if we are indeed living in a Jewish world defined by suspicion of the rationalistic discourse, then we need to know this. Those of us who are happy to remain in this state have every right to do so, but those who are not, need to sit up and take notice.

CONCLUSION:

To end on a philosophical note, this is how R. Jonathan Sacks uses the biblical incident of the Golden Calf to describe magic:

“...the Israelites sought an oracle, something to tell them what to do and what to become. They were still in an age of magical thinking in which people do what the gods require and gods produce the outcome the people desire.

That is not what the biblical covenant is about...It is about the acceptance of responsibility. It is about being guided by the experience of history, not about having the responsibility for history taken from the people and assumed by God Himself.”[9]

[For more see Chassidei Ashkenaz: ‘These are not Superstitions’, and The Magic of Kiddush Levana.]

---

[1] See: How Jewish Magic Survived the Disenchantment of the World, by Gideon Bohak.

[2] These definitions are mine.

[3] Rabbis during the period 650 to 1038.

[4] Rabbis from the period 1038 to 1500.

[5] See Three Charms for Killing Adolf Hitler, by Yuval Harari.

[6] Not wishing to go into the politics of the matter as it is a complicated affair because one of Shas’ main leaders was R. Ovadya Yosef (1920-2013) and he did try to wean his followers off some of the mystical practices of the Ben Ish Chai (1832-1909) of Baghdad.

[7] As Postmodernism is defined by Encyclopaedia Britannica.

[8] All quotations are from Professor Gideon Bohak unless otherwise indicated.

[9] Covenant &Conversations; Deuteronomy, p. 6. (I thank Ariel Elliasof for pointing this description out to me.)