I have always been drawn to the teachings of the Rebbe of Kotzk. His approach was predicated upon uncompromising truth and intellectual independence. This allowed him to be fearless and never to succumb to societal pressures.
He knew that Judaism was so much deeper and more profound than the way it was perceived by the masses and bent by religious populism.
These essays, although not necessarily Kotzker in essence, are certainly Kotzk inspired.
This article—based extensively on the research by
Dr Leore Sachs-Shmueli[1]—challenges
the common assertion that the Baal Shem Tov’s innovative path was primarily one
of experiential and joyful spiritual surrender. Instead, it reveals a far more
complex and unnerving spiritual trajectory: one that first plunges deliberately
into raw fear, negativity, and darkness in order to extract sparks of holiness
from the husks of evil. Only then can the state of ecstatic joy be
authentically reached.
One of the most beautiful and catchy hit songs in
contemporary Jewish music must be the “Back of the Wagon of the Baal Shem
Tov.”It is symbolic
of radical trust and letting go, no matter where the storm takes you, as long
as you’re in the back of the wagon of the Baal Shem Tov. Here, one rides with spiritual
abandon, music, and a bottle of wine, into the Infinite Light:
“Where we headed? It doesn’t
matter as long as I’m in the back of the wagon with the Besht (Baal Shem Tov)”
(Opening lyrics of the song).
This article—based extensively on the research by
Professor Abraham Ofir Shemesh[1]—examines
an extreme case of messianic immunity. In the sixteenth century, a medical
doctor, R. Avraham Baruch haRofeh, under the
influence of the Sabbatian messianic movement of Shabbatai Tzvi, felt he
could administer harmful drugs to non-Jews in order to kill them. Because he
believed he was living in the stirrings of the messianic era, he also believed
he could do so with impunity—if not hasten the full awakening of the messianic age as
he saw it unfolding before his very eyes.
While R. Avraham Baruch may have been an extreme case,
unfortunately, due to the vicissitudes of a long and oppressive Jewish history,
he did have some textual precedent to draw upon. We shall look at some of that
precedent, but also show how many of the later rabbis contextualised those
earlier rulings and declared that they were no longer applicable.
This article – based extensively on the research by
Professor Yehuda Liebes[1]–
examines the theological development of the term ‘Der Pintele Yid.’ We
trace the evolution of conceptualisations of ‘energy points’ from emtza
(center), to nekuda (point), to Pintele Yud and
finally to Pintele Yid.
Der Pintele Yid is the Yiddish equivalent of haNekuda
Yehudi or haNekuda haYehudit, which, in its common usage today,
simply refers to an essential ‘point’ of Jewishness that lies
dormant within every Jew − even the most assimilated − and emerges at unexpected
times.
The anonymous work entitled Ma'aseh Ta'atuim (Act of Deception).
Introduction
This article, based extensively on the research by Professor
Rachel Elior,[1]
explores the little-known story of R. Natan Adler of Frankfurt and his Chassidim,
who were excommunicated twice, in 1779 and 1789 respectively. These Chassidim
of Frankfurt were in some ways similar, but technically unrelated, to the
better-known Chassidim of the Baal Shem Tov.
The eighteenth-century Jewish mystical movement
− the Chassidic movement −
was founded by R. Yisrael Baal Shem Tov (c.1700-1760). It has evolved today
into one of the largest and most identifiable of all the Jewish movements. Yet
the causes that led to its appearance are still debated by scholars. While I
take the view that its major influencing factor was its immediate predecessor, the
mystical Sabbatian movement which arose in the aftermath of the false Messiah
Shabbatai Tzvi (1626-1676), most scholarship tends to seek out other reasons
for Chassidism’s appearance on the scene of history. In keeping with this
majority trend, this brief study explores (and questions) one such view: that
the persecutions following the Khmelnytsky massacres which began in 1648,
coupled with the theological reaction to that violence, were most likely to
have been the overwhelming influence leading to the rise of the Chassidic
movement. Previous scholarship argues that the vehemence of the unrest and
particularly the theological responses to it, led not just to the formation of
the Chassidic movement, but to the birth of the earlier Sabbatian movement in
the first instance, and even to the later conservatism of the Mitnagdic
opposition movement which arose to counter Chassidism. In other words, the physical
persecutions and their spiritual responses spawned not one, but three important
Jewish movements; Sabbatianism, Chassidism and Mitnagdism. Although I do not
necessarily subscribe to the approach that Chassidism emerged primarily as a
reaction to persecution, I do bring support for aspects of it here from a
little-known and under-studied Sabbatian personality who may have been a
critical link between Sabbatianism and Chassidism, R. Heshil Tzoref (1632-1699).
I do this because he introduces a new and unsuspected dynamic. This dynamic is
vengeance coupled with its concomitant theological justification and validation.
The problem is that if one takes the persecutions as a primary cause for the
birth particularly of Chassidism, it becomes very difficult to reconcile a
theology of cathartic vengeance with a spiritual and mystical movement.[1]
The simultaneous emergence of Sabbatianism
and Chassidism
As the seventeenth century fused with the
eighteenth century, the two “major mystical-messianic-charismatic movements,”
as Rachel Elior (2012:85) tellingly describes them, Sabbatianism and Chassidism,
emerged relatively simultaneously. The Khmelnytsky persecutions were still
fresh in the minds of the people who had first-hand experience of its horrors. Both
movements were informal as they did not seek permission from the recognised rabbinic
authorities.
Israel Halpern (1969:55-60) points out that
around this time, less than one per cent of the Jewish population was eligible
to vote for its communal and rabbinic leadership. This was because only the
wealthy, who paid taxes, were permitted to vote. One can understand how, in a
non-representative societal environment like this, charismatic and ground-up
movements could find fertile soil. They offered social elevation and spiritual
status to the average individual. It seems,
therefore, quite feasible to assume that both movements arose in response to the
similar concerns of persecution under Khmelnytsky from without, and societal neglect
from within.
The Khmelnytsky massacres
Although chronologically, Sabbatianism preceded
Chassidism, Elior maintains that both were “spiritual responses to
the tragic circumstances” of the Khmelnytsky massacres, also known as the
Cossack–Polish War. While these massacres are often associated with the
date 1648 when they began, it must be remembered that they continued for about
twenty years up to 1668. This was already two years after Shabbatai Tzvi (the
founder of the Sabbatian movement) had officially been discredited and
branded as a false Messiah when he converted to Islam. It was also just thirty
(or thirty-two, or perhaps only twenty-two)[2] years
before the Baal Shem Tov (the founder of the Chassidic movement) was
born.
Yet even after 1668, attacks against Jews continued.
More than one hundred thousand Jews were killed by the Cossacks between 1646
and 1768 in Ukraine, and Jews were subjected to pogroms in areas where the
Polish army had withdrawn.[3] The
Greek-Orthodox Ukrainian serfs rebelled against the Polish Catholics and the
Jews were caught up in the attacks as they often served as administrators for
the Polish nobility. The Cossacks also attacked the Roman Catholic clergy and
the civilian population, resulting in revenge attacks and “savage reprisals”
by Prince Jeremi Wiśniowiecki (Davies 2005:351).
Documentary evidence spanning a century and a
half between 1650 and the end of the eighteenth century shows how Jews were
emotionally devastated and similarly intent on revenge. Included in this body
of literature is also a strong expression of messianic hope (Elior 2012:86).
The effects and dramatic consequences of the Khmelnytsky massacres are not lost
to Joseph Citron (n.d.:32-33), Jacob Barnai (1995:175) or Moshe Rosman (1982:6) either. Davies (2005:352)
speaks of “[t]he strains of incessant war” which “caused internal
inflammations.” Some of these “inflammations” are also evident in
the Kabbalistic literature produced during that time.
Yehuda Liebes[5]
(2007:7-8) shows how R. Heshil Tzoref had three distinct periods of spiritual
awakening and increased mystical activity. These occurred during the years 1648
(= ת״ח= 408, corresponding to the Hebrew
date of [5]408[6], the beginning of the Khmelnytsky pogroms);
1666 (= תכ״ו= 426, the year Shabbatai Tzvi apostatised to Islam)
and; 1688 (= תמ״ח = 448, a seemingly random date other than
being exactly forty years after 1648). These three dates and phases are
mystically described and interpreted as follows:
1) R. Heshil Tzoref
found a ‘hint’ to the Khmelnytsky pogroms in the Hebrew year ת״ח(408=1648) which he linked to the biblical phrase דֹּ֖ר דֹּֽר (4+200+4+200=408) which is found at the end of the verse מִלְחָמָ֥ה לַיהֹוָ֖ה
בַּֽעֲמָלֵ֑ק מִדֹּ֖ר דֹּֽר, “God
will be at war with Amalek in every generation” (Exodus 17:16). Thus, in
1648 (408) Amalek (represented by Khmelnytzky) is identified as the evil entity
of the generation, and those who fight him wage God’s war.
3) In 1688 − forty years after 1648 (perhaps
corresponding to the biblical delay between the exodus and the promised entry
to the land) − God’s final retribution and victory were to have taken place.
God was going to mete out revenge on Edom which came to represent Christianity
(as Ishmael came to represent Islam). The year 1688 (448) was selected for the
following reason: The biblical Esau (representing Edom=Christendom) was born
while Jacob (representing the Jewish people) was clutching at his heel. The
biblical expression וְיָד֤וֹ אֹחֶ֙זֶת֙ בַּעֲקֵ֣ב עֵשָׂ֔וin the verse, “And his [Jacob’s] hand was clutching (the heel of
Esau)” (Genesis 25:26), has a numerical value of
448.[9]
R. Heshil Tzoref’s elaborate system of mysticism
includes Esau’s grandson, Tsefo (צפו=176), corresponds
in numerology to Polin (Poland) (פולין=176). Samael is the guardian of both Esau
and Tsefo, which means Samael is also the guardian of Poland, hence Poland represents
the Christian the Kingdom of Edom. This construct is strengthened by similarity
between Tsefo (צפו)
and North (צפון). North (צפון=226) is then connected to Polin-Lita (Poland and Lithuania) (פולין ליטא=226). Then R. Heshil
Tzoref relates all this to a verse from Jeremiah (1:14): “out of the north
shall evil break forth,” and R. Heshil Tzoref explains that “when the
messianic redemption arrives, it will first manifest in the north, which is,
Poland-Lithuania.”[10]
It could be said that, over a period of forty
years, R. Heshil Tzoref believed he could reframe, if not cosmically realign,
the three forces of Amalek (1648), Islam (1666) and Christianity (1688), thus
preparing for final messianic era. And in his mystical mind, all these stages are
presented as being supported by biblical verses.
The Tzoref ‘incident’
In a shocking and brutal Sabbatian
mystical interpretation, the vengeance of
1688 is described in sexual terms − but violently so, as assaulting a virgin −
because the year 1688 (448), the last of the three stages, has the same
numerical value as הבתולה (=448=the virgin). Reading between
the lines and considering the appetite for revenge for the blood libels and
massacres against Jews, this may be referring to a reprisal attack to right the
horrors of 1648 and it may have targeted a Christian virgin, perhaps a veiled
reference toMary. It is difficult to sift the
facts from the innuendos, but Liebes writes:
“It seems to me that
this matter was not written about before the event, but was [instead] described
as prophecy after the fact (vaticinium ex eventu) [and it was] an event that
had already occurred on history’s stage, and in the lifetime of R. Heshil. It
is possible that the redemption [to be brought about] by R. Heshil was bound up
with engaging with a virgin of flesh and blood, similar to what we find with
many other messianic characters throughout history. It seems that this sexual
encounter remained within the memory of the Chassidim[11] of R. Heshil for the next generations, and the
words of R. Menachem Mendel of Shklov [a follower
of the Vilna Gaon, representing the opposition or Mitnagdic camp opposing Chassidism] hint at this [encounter as well][12]” (Liebes 2007: 8)[13]
Interpreting the Tzoref ‘incident’
It is very difficult to know how exactly to
interpret this apparent event and identify the perpetrator and the victim. But
it is clear that the logic of restorative consequence and catharticvengeance, in one form or another, features in the Sabbatian
mysticism of R. Heshil Tzoref. This must have been fuelled all the more by a
society overcome by the fear of pogroms, persecuted by a proliferation of blood
libels and seeking revenge against those Christians – or
more accurately, the “Bishops of the Catholic Church in the
Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth” (Elior 2012:102) − who
considered Jew to be “God-killers.” With the irony that Catholic clergy
and civilians themselves subject to attacks by the Cossacks, and their
corresponding reprisals against the Cossacks, it is no wonder that this
ecclesiastical chaos in Poland has been described as “God’s playground”
(Davies 2005). To add to the ironies and chaos of the time, 'Khmyel'nitskiy'
was later remembered (in Soviet Russia) as “a Moses who led his people's
exodus from Polish bondage towards the great Russian homeland” (Davies
2005:353).
“The indignation at
the ‘nation of God-killers’ was inflamed by the belief that the Jews remained
blind to the splendor of the true faith instead of doing penance for their
crime. They had committed the sin of ingratitude and, for this; God, for whom
‘nothing is uglier than ingratitude’, had turned away from them and transferred
His grace to, among other people, the Poles” (Tazbir 1998:235).
Contextualisation is vital in helping to
understand the sentiments of all parties involved in any form of
socio-religious disorder but should never justify outrageous behaviour. Still,
it contributes to the explanation of why ideologies adopt a sense of radical immediacy
and antinomian urgency:
“Sabbatian teachings
entailed messianic hopes of meta-historical vengeance against those who had
murdered thousands of helpless Jews, as well as messianic hopes for redemption
of those who survived” (Elior 2012:87).
R. Heshil Tzoref is regarded by Liebes as one
of the forerunners of the Chassidic movement and is somewhere between Sabbatianism
and Chassidism. This emphasises the effects and influences of the
Khmelnytzky massacres – with their pogroms, ensuing blood libels and
the need for cosmic vengeance and restorative messianism − on Sabbatian
and Chassidic ideology.
Traumatic national events are never to be
minimised in terms of the affected populations. In Jewish history, all roads of
persecution lead to messianism. We see this with the rise of messianism in the
aftermath of the expulsion of Jews from Spain and Portugal in 1492 and 1497
respectively (Biale 1984:314). So too, the Khmelnytsky massacres cannot be
ignored as a major influencing factor in the formulations of Sabbatianism,
Chassidism and Mitnagdism. The problem with this model, of
course, is how to reconcile these movements with their roots in an ignoble
albeit cathartic theology of vengeance.
R. Heshil Tzoref, it seems, faced the same
conundrum. He resolved it by using his mystical interpretations of Exodus 17:16
(מִלְחָמָ֥ה
לַיהֹוָ֖ה בַּֽעֲמָלֵ֑ק מִדֹּ֖ר דֹּֽר), Genesis 25:26 (וְיָד֤וֹ אֹחֶ֙זֶת֙ בַּעֲקֵ֣ב
עֵשָׂ֔ו) and Jeremiah 1:14 (מִצָּפוֹן֙ תִּפָּתַ֣ח הָרָעָ֔ה) as
authoritative proof texts for a treacherous antinomian canonising and theologising
of vengeance.
From a theological perspective, besides the
obvious moral outrage, I prefer the less-popular model where more weight is
placed on the influence the mystico-messianic Sabbatian movement exerted
on the mystico-messianic[14]Chassidic
movement. Although the persecutions were undoubtedly a major and significant
factor, I argue that evidence of a more direct correspondence and intersection
between later Sabbatian rabbinic personalities with their
mystical literature, and the earlier Chassidicpersonalities
with their mystical literature, is far more compelling (like R. Heshil
Tzoref, whose Sefer haTzoref was in the possession of, and praised by,
the Baal Shem Tov).[15]
Bibliography
Barnai, J., 1995, 'The Outbreak of Sabbateanism-Eastern European Factor', The Journal
of Jewish Thought and Philosophy, Brill.
Biale, D., 1984,
‘Jewish Mysticism in the Sixteenth Century’, I n An Introduction to the
Medieval Mystics of Europe, Edited by Paul E. Szarmach, SUNY Press, Albany,
313-329.
Citron, J., n.d.,
‘Can Shabbatai Tzvi's Popularity between 1665-66 be explained by his
faithfulness to Jewish Messianic tradition?’, Thesis, University of Manchester.
Davies, N.,
2005, God's playground: a history of Poland, Columbia University
Press, New York.
Elior, R.,
2012, ‘The Origins of Hasidism’, Scripta Judaica Cracoviensis, vol. 10,
85-109.
Halpern, I., 1969, Jews and Judaism in Eastern Europe (Hebrew), Jerusalem.
Heschel, A. J., 1974, A Passion for the Truth, Secker & Warburg, London.
Liebes, Y., 2007, ‘The Sabbatian Prophecy of
R. Heshil Tzoref of Vilna in the writings of R. Menachem Mendel of Shklov, the
student of the Gaon of Vilna and the founder of the Ashkenazi settlement in
Jerusalem’ (Hebrew), Kabbalah 17, Idra Press, Tel Aviv, 107-168 (1-91).
Rabinovitz, Z., 1941, ‘Al 'Sefer HaZoref' by
Rabbi Yehushua Heschel Zoref’, Zion, VI, 80-84.
Rosman, M.,
1982, Editor, The Stories of the Pogroms in Poland (Hebrew), Jerusalem.
Schatz
Uffenheimer, R., 1968, haChasidut keMistika (Hebrew), Magnes Press,
Jerusalem.
Tazbir, J., 1998,
‘Anti-Jewish Trials in Old Poland’, Scripta Hierosolymitana 38: Studies
in the History of the Jews in Old Poland in Honor of Jacob Goldberg, Edited by
A. Teller, Jerusalem, 233–245.
[1] This paper is adapted from a larger PhD study which I
am currently undertaking, entitled ‘Sabbatian influences on the Chassidic
and Mitnagdic movements: an excursion into messianic Kabbalah and its
disseminators in the aftermath of Shabbatai Tzvi.’
[2] The year of the Baal Shem Tov’s birth is alternately
given as 1698, 1700 and Heschel (1974:3) gives it as early as around 1690.
[3] According to Davies (2005:353) “The total number
of Jewish casualties in the period 1648-56 has been put at 56,000; the over-all
decrease in the Jewish community through death, flight, and destitution
approached 100,000.”
[4] Thus Alef = 1, Bet = 2, Gimel =
three, and so forth.
[5]Yehuda Liebes is one of the few scholars who
postulates a direct link between Sabbatianism and Chassidism
(Etkes 1996:459), a view which I subscribe to as well and deal with in my PhD
dissertation.
[6] The year 1648 in the Gregorian calendar corresponds
to the Hebrew year ת״ח which is 408. The Hebrew year is
technically הת"ח, 5408, but the millennium letter, in this case ה, or numeral 5, is often
omitted from date calculations.
[7] I notice that the Hebrew year 426 (1666) is eighteen
years after 408 (1648). The number eighteen, or חי,which means “life,”is a very well-known,
obvious and recognisable Jewish symbol of restoration. Perhaps this, amongst
other reasons, was why Shabbatai Tzvi declared 1666 to be the apocalyptic year,
the year of restoration and rebirth after the horrors beginning in 1648.
Ironically, his apostasy took place in that very year.
[8] This
calculation is made despite the fact that the fuller version (דר can also be spelt as דור)
is not found in the biblical text.
[9] This calculation assumes a ‘full’ spelling with an
extra vav in the word אוחזת, although the Torah text has it
written without the vav, as אחזת. Both
the numerical extrapolations from דר דר to דור ודור,
and אחזתtoאוחזתinvolve the
inclusion of extra vavs.
[10] See Kav haYashar, Frankfort, 1705, Chapter
102, where its author R. Tzvi Hirsh Koidanover records this teaching which he
maintains he personally heard from R. Heshil Tzoref (who
in turn heard it from a “certainMekubal (mystic).” The identity
of this “certain Mekubal” is not revealed but considering the general
attention to literary sources in the work, and the overwhelmingly influential Sabbatian
milieu and context in which R. Heshil Tzoref operated, it may quite feasibly
even allude to Shabbatai Tzvi or his ‘prophet’ R. Natan of Gaza.
[11] Here, the term Chassidim is used in its
broader context referring to ‘followers’ in general as R. Heshil Tzoref
(1633-1699) pre-dates the Chassidim of the Baal Shem Tov
(1698/1700-1760). Some Sabbatians referred to themselves as Chassidim.
[12] Without
going into the details of R. Menachem
Mendel of Shklov here, suffice it to say that there is a further allusion to
this ‘event’ in at least one other independent source as well.
[14] Some scholars like Gershom Scholem (1941:329) and his
student Rivka Schatz Uffenheimer (1968:168), however, promote the idea of the Chassidic
movement more as “neutralising” extreme messianism.
The anonymous anti-Chassidic polemic, Sefer Chassidim, 1818
Introduction
If you are interested in texts and manuscripts with their varying
Hashkafot (worldviews), then you may find the anonymous 1818 work,
entitled Sefer Chassidim[1]
to be of interest. This little-known work, a polemic (theological argument)
against Chassidism, is a challenge to some of the then-new principles of
the Chassidic movement. The manuscript was never published. In this
article, based extensively on a review[2]
by Professor Jonatan Meir, we look at some of the content of this manuscript,
without necessarily taking any one particular side.
In a most interesting source found in Mekor Baruch, the
first three Rebbes of Chabad are said to have acknowledged the Vilna Gaon for
his role in keeping Chassidism within the framework of traditional
Judaism. Considering that the Vilna Gaon was Chassidism’s most ardent
opponent, this seems like quite an outlandish and unlikely claim.
Mekor Baruch
Mekor Baruch was written by R. Baruch Halevi Epstein
(1860-1941) and is a four-volume collection of memoirs and recollections from
leading personalities of previous generations. His father, R. Yechiel Michel
Epstein (1829–1908), the author of Aruch haShulchan, is said to have
studied together with R. Menachem Mendel of Lubavitch (1789-1866) the third Chabad
Rebbe, known as the Tzemach Tzedek.
Years ago, when I was in yeshiva, Breslov was a rather
unknown Chassidic sect. Today R. Nachman (1772-1810) and his Breslov movement
need no introduction as it has become one of the most popular of the Chassidic
movements. I spent about fifteen years in the movement and have always been
fascinated by the personality of R. Nachman. According to Professor Yehuda
Liebes (1995:109),[1] when it
comes to machshvet Yisrael (Jewish theology), R. Nachman is certainly one
of its key personalities. However, Liebes boldly maintains that R. Nachman was
- at least in his early days (Liebes 1995:109 in the Appendix) - influenced by
the secretive yet powerful and widespread Sabbatian and Frankist movements of Shabbatai Tzvi (1626-1676) and particularly
Jacob Frank (1726-1791) respectively.[2]
Liebes suggests that in his youth, R. Nachman may have had contact with
Frankists who had remained Jewish and who were plentiful in Podolia at that time.
Although, Liebes continues, these influencers may have been factors, nevertheless,
R. Nachman indeed produced highly individualised and unique teachings (Liebes
1995:109).
'Eshel Avraham' by R. Avraham Rovigo and R. Mordechai Ashkenazi.
INTRODUCTION:
In this article, we will look at the surprising ease with which some mainstream rabbis of the 1700’s would delve in and out of known Sabbatean writings as if it were the most natural thing in the world.
Sabbateans were the followers of the false messiah Shabattai Tzvi, who, long after his death still continued to secretly follow his mystical teachings and infiltrate the Torah community. [See previous post.]
Once again I draw from the fascinating and outstanding research of Rabbi Dr Maoz Kahana[1].
We will look particularly at the writings of R. Pinchas Katzenellenbogen who was a typical mainstream rabbi - not a Sabbatean - who openly studied Sabbatean Kabbalah:
R. PINCHAS KATZENELLENBOGEN:
R. Pinchas Katzenellenbogen (1691-1765) was a descendant of R. Meir, the Maharam of Padua (1482-1564). He served in many communities throughout Europe and eventually settled in Boskowitz in Moravia (Czech Republic) and was known as the Rav of Boskowitz.
Fortunately, we know much about him because he fastidiously kept about two thousand pages of notebooks and diaries, some of which are at the Bodleian Library at Oxford, on all matters Halachic, Talmudic, as well as personal encounters with mystics.
ASSOCIATION WITH R. AVRAHAM ROVIGO AND R. MORDECHAI ASHKENAZI:
‘ESHEL AVRAHAM’:
One of R. Katzenellenbogen’s notebooks, Yesh Manchilin[2], records his interaction with two mystics, R. Avraham Rovigo and R. Mordechai Ashkenazi in the early 1700’s:
R. Katzenellenbogen describes how he met: “A holy and pure man...his faith was in the hidden secrets of Torah, and all the pious (Hasidim) including their most learned and ascetic, would approach him in order to draw living waters from his well of kabbalistic wisdom...My father...also attended him.
...his name was the Sage, our Master, Avraham Rovigo.
His student who served him...Rabbi Mordechai from...Lwow...cleaved unto his master’s Torah and faith until he merited...that a [heavenly] Magid was revealed to him in the form of his perfectly wise rabbi, the same master, Rabbi Avraham Rovigo.”
[In other words, R. Mordechai Ashkenazi allegedly merited to be taught by a Maggid or angelic being which resembled his teacher R. Avraham Rovigo, apparently while his teacher was still alive!]
“He studied the wisdom of the Kabbalah with him, and revealed secrets to him until he [R. Mordechai] wrote a book...called Eshel Avraham[3] [so named after his teacher] Rabbi [Avraham Rovigo].
...since I know that...R. Mordechai was not learned enough to be versed in Talmud, he must have obtained the knowledge as a gift from heaven for serving the great man [R. Avraham Rovigo].
...for I have known him [R. Avraham Rovigo] from youth – his countenance is like an angel of G-d, and his appearance is majestic...and every Shabbat I would go to him to receive his blessing.”
The Eshel Avraham was "based on a new interpretation of the Zohar he [R. Moredchai] received from heaven."[4] R. Mordechai Ashkenazi claims that through the principles revealed in this book one can understand more of the Zohar in three months than others have been able to achieve in many years.
Then R. Kahana drops a bombshell:
“Abraham Rovigo and his student Mordecai Ashkenazi were not, however, merely ordinary kabbalists. The pair played an important role at the center of the dissemination of Sabbatean teachings in the early eighteenth century.”
R. AVRAHAM ROVIGO:
R. Avraham Rovigo (1650-1713), a wealthy collector and publisher of Kabbalistic manuscripts, claimed to be the recipient of revelations by otherworldly maggidim. He had studied under the renowned Kabbalist R. Moshe Zacuto in Venice, but broke away from him after Zacuto became an opponent of Shabbatai Tzvi.
R. Avraham Rovigo's signature.
Rovigo chose instead to remain a supporter of Sabbateanism, known as one of the ma’aminim or believers.[5] In 1701 (or 02) he and his followers established a Kabbalistic Sabbatean yeshiva in Jerusalem.
UNABASHED SABBATEAN INFLUENCE:
Surprisingly, Rovigo and Ashkenazi’s combined work Eshel Avraham, has the enthusiastic approbations of very many great rabbis of the period even though both the author and his teacher were known Sabbateans:
R. KATZENELLENBOGEN’S PRAISE OF ‘ESHEL AVRAHAM’:
R. Katzenellenbogen, unashamedly and quite openly, acknowledges and praises the greatness of the authors and the book Eshel Avraham, and thus effectively declares himself as having being influenced by known followers of Sabbateanism!
Importantly though, R. Kahana goes on to make the point that despite this - R. Katzenellenbogen (who associated with avowed anti-Sabbateans like the Nodah biYehuda) was NOT a Sabbatean!
This amazingly shows how easy and common it was for some rabbis of that time to move in and out of Sabbatean teachings, even though they knew full well that Shabattai Tzvi had already been shown to be a false messiah decades earlier in 1666.
ALLUSIONS TO THE ‘FAITH OF SHABBATAI TZVI':
R. Kahana draws our attention to R. Katenellenbogen’s expressions in his aforementioned notebook, like “his faith was in the hidden secrets of Torah” and “R. Mordechai...cleaved unto his master’s Torah and faith”, which may indicate that R. Katzenellenbogen was aware that both Rovigo and Ashkenazi were adherents to an almost distinct ‘faith’– that of messianic Sabbateanism. Also, later in reference to another work, Or Yisrael, R. Katzenellenbogen refers similarly and clearly to ‘the faith of Sabbatai Zevi’.
Amazingly, R. Katzenellenbogen was still prepared to admire and continued to consult many of these Sabbatean mystical teachings.
‘TIKKUNEI TESHUVA’ BY NATHAN OF GAZA:
R. Katzenellenbogen, furthermore, also had a manuscript copy of a Kabbalistic composition of about fifteen pages, entitled Tikkunei Teshuva.[6]
This composition contains the following note:
“Tikunei Teshuva (penitential rectifications), sent from Gaza, instituted by our most dignified teacher, Rabbi Nathan the Prophet Ashkenazi.”[7]
This is a reference to R. Natan haAzati (Nathan of Gaza) who was the prophet and messianic endorser of Shabbattai Tzvi.
And R. Katzenellenbogen identified the copier of this clearly Sabbatean composition as none other than R. Avraham Rovigo!
R. Kahana writes:
“Just as the reference to Nathan of Gaza did not lead Katzenellenbogen to burn the Sabbatean manuscript, or even remove it from his house, so Rovigo’s affiliation with Sabbateanism, clearly established by the manuscript, failed to induce the author [Katzenellenbogen][8] to repudiate his youthful relationship with the latter.”
THE 'VERSE FOR THE NAME':
Additionally, R. Katzenellenbogen claimed (like R. Mordechai Ashkenazi) to have seen R. Avraham Rovigo in a dream where he was taught the Biblical verse which corresponded to his name. (This is a practice whereby a Biblical verse - which begins with the same letter as the first letter of one’s name and ends with the same letter of the last letter of the name – is recited, often at the end of the Amidah prayer.)
And more than fifty years later, R. Katzenellenbogen wrote that he continued to recite it every day “since I merited from heaven that he (R. Rovigo) show it to me, and I heard it from that holy, pure mouth.”[9]
Again, the fact that R. Rovigo was a Sabbatean who taught Sabbatean practices, did not at all deter R. Katzenellenbogen in the slightest.
‘LEST ANYONE SUSPECT ME OF BEING ONE OF THEM’:
About two years later, in 1758, R. Katzenellenbogen added another comment, as if to cover himself from suspicions of Sabbateanism, in that selfsame manuscript:
“Now I have observed in this book that he [R. Avraham Rovigo][10] calls Nathan of Gaza a true and righteous prophet... the same man who prophesied falsely regarding Sabbatai Zevi...who caused a great stumbling-block.
Lest anyone suspect me, G-d forbid, of being one of them, far be it for [me].
However, we do not criticise...[R. Avraham Rovigo][11], that G-d fearing righteous man...for in those days, in the year 1666, most communities in Israel believed in those strange matters [that Sabbatai Zevi was the Messiah][12].
But their disgrace has since been revealed, and no more need be said.”[13]
The fact is that by the time R. Katzenellenbogen wrote this last note (in 1758), the Council of the Four Lands has already banned the possession of Sabbatean literature two years earlier (in 1756)[14] – so perhaps he felt it necessary to explain why he still possessed such writings.
THE OPENLY SABBATEAN ‘OR YISRAEL’:
'Or Yisrael' by. R. Yisrael Yaffe.
In R. Katzenellenbogen’s notebooks[15], he again wrote concerning another Sabbatean work, Or Yisrael, from which he had also studied from. It was authored by R. Yisrael Yaffe.
R. Yisrael Jaffe (1640-1702) had witnessed the suffering brought about by the Chmielnicki massacres of 1648. Thereafter, he dedicated his life to the study of Kabbalah in order to understand why G-d had permitted those terrible tribulations. He rebuked rabbis who did not study Kabbalah and composed his Or Yisrael to encourage the study of mysticism. He repeatedly made use of the word ‘Tzvi’ in his work. He claimed constant heavenly visions and visitations by Elijah the Prophet and spoke urgently about messianic redemption.
The Or Yisrael also came with very many respected rabbinic approbations:
Note R. Katzenellenbogen’s angst when he wrote about R. Yisrael Yaffe’s Or Yisrael:
“When I was [serving as rabbi][16] in the community of Markbreit, a book entitled Or Yisra’el came into my possession. I realised that this man [the author, R. Yisrael Yaffe][17] was a great Kabbalist. I learned wonderful ideas from this book, which I studied literally every day.
However, when I came to realise from his words that he was a believer in the faith of Sabbetai Zevi[18]...I realised that it was a mitzvah to withdraw from the study of this book, so that I should not be drawn into error...
I said that just as I will receive reward for expounding it, so will I be rewarded for withdrawing from it.
Subsequently, however, I retracted and said to myself: why should I refrain from studying this book? It is entirely comprised of kabbalistic explanations, elucidations of the Zohar, and clarifications of the words of the Holy Ari...
All his teachings are insightful, becoming and in good taste. If he is in error of his belief, I will make sure not to follow his mistake, just as R. Meir learned Torah from ‘Aher’[19] by eating the pulp of his words and discarding the rind etc.
I did not want to hold back from the book any longer, but I was confused as to what to do; I would not read it on a regular basis as before, but only occasionally, etc.
[This remained the case] until one time, [a certain individual] appeared to me in a dream and greeted me with peace, and I answered him with peace.
I asked him who he was and he replied that he was Elijah the Prophet.
Among other things, he encouraged me to study the book Or Yisra’el, praising it highly.
I awoke perturbed by this dream and I said myself: who am I that Elijah the Prophet should reveal himself to me?
This dream must be a worthless message that the deceiving and destructive forces have sent to mislead me...
After this incident, which happened in about 5483 (1723), I withdrew my hand from that book, only reading it on the ninth of Av [!], or the occasional halacha which cannot lead one astray, and even this only once or twice a year.
Several years passed during which I did not so much as glance at it...
Nonetheless, this last summer [1756] I have occasionally returned to the book, for he was truly a great and cherished kabbalist, all of his words are in good taste, and composed with perceptive understanding.
And if he was in error - I said to myself – now that I have reached old age [G-d] will assist me and teach me the way of truth, and until the day of my death he will lead me in straight paths...”
This is a fascinatingly personal and honest account of R. Katzenellenbogen’s angst which he experienced over what R. Kahana calls ‘the allure of forbidden knowledge’. He squarely rejected Sabbateanism and he was not a Sabbatean but he had no issue with delving into Sabbatean mysticism wherever he could see its value.
ANALYSIS:
The Sabbatean movement was no mere footnote to Jewish history, although it is often portrayed as such. Its subtle (and sometimes not so subtle) influence can be seen in the Judaism that was to emerge during the 1700s and continues to exist within some trends of Judaism to this day.
R. Nachman of Breslov wrote:
“For that Shabbatai Tzvi...led astray a number of the greatest men of the generation and outstanding scholars...they left the fold and spoke evil regarding the Oral law...but when a Tzadik sweetens their words, he transforms their sayings back into Torah.”[20]
This underscores what we have seen regarding many of the leading rabbis of the 1700’s. It appears as if forays into some forms of Sabbateanism may have been more common than imagined.
According to an account in Shivchei haBesht, Shabbatai Tzvi came in a dream to the Baal Shem Tov, to ask for a rectification. This rectification was to be done “soul with soul, spirit with spirit, and breath with breath...the Baal Shem Tov said that Shabbatai Tzvi had a spark of holiness in him.”
This again shows that the Chassidic movement felt that some Sabbatean elements were considered redeemable.
But it wasn’t just the Chassidic movement, because even rabbis like Menachem Mendel of Shklov, the student of the Vilna Gaon may have been attracted to elements of Sabbateanism.[21] And R. Kahana writes that Sabbateanism presented: “...an attraction common to Hasidim and Mitnagdim, Sephardim and Ashkenazim alike.”
Gershom Scholem writes that Sabbateanism didn’t just influence Judaism in its various forms, but even non-Jewish thought systems:
“Sabbateanism is the matrix of every significant movement to have emerged in the eighteenth and nineteenth century, from Hasidism, to Reform Judaism, to the earliest Masonic circles and revolutionary idealism.” [Definition of 'matrix' - the set of conditions that provides a system in which something grows or develops.]
Sarena Di Nepi writes:
“Sabbateanism has recently been the subject of renewed interest among social and religious historians. Attention has been focused on the vicissitudes of Sabbatai Zevi himself as well as on the movement that gathered around him in 1665 and 1666, and that would continue to express itself through activist missionizing and subterranean conventicles [secret religious meetings] in the decades and even centuries that followed.”[22]
With Sabbateanism exerting such widespread influence (arguably according to some, including aspects of Chassidism, modern Messianism, revival of popular Mysticism, Communism and even Zionism – let alone apparent inroads into the non-Jewish world, as many Sabbateans and Frankists converted to other faiths) – it should not come as a surprise that many in the rabbinical world continued to delve in and out of Sabbateanism as well. See R. Ya’akov Koppel Lifschitz and Sefer haTzoref and Chemdat Yamim and Shabbatai Tzvi.
Might one say that in terms of sheer numbers alone - with most Jews having initially been Sabbatean followers of Shabbatai Tzvi - the movement was probably larger and more successful than many of the other religious Jewish movements which were to rapidly follow on its heels!
That energy, as we have seen, did not just dissipate into thin air.
[1] The Allure of Forbidden knowledge: The Temptation of Sabbatean Literature for Mainstream Rabbis in the Frankist Movement, 1756 - 1761, by Maoz Kahana.
[2] ‘There are Those who Bequeath’, published in 1986 by R. Isaac Dov Feld.
[3] This was a commentary to selections of the Zohar, based in part on dreams.
[5] See The Hebrew Goddess by Rafael Patai, p. 209.
[6]This short manuscript is contained within another larger manuscript of Shulchan Aruch haAri Zal. This was not a work of Halacha, as the name would suggest, but rather a compilation by the Ari Zal’s students of their teacher’s Kabbalistic customs, practices including the use of amulets.
[14] As well as other subsequent events such as the burning of Talmuds after the disastrous Kamenetz-Podolsk debate with the Frankists and their recognition by the authorities.
[18] This was apparent already from page four of the book.
[19] The Talmud records that the great R. Meir continued to study under the rebel sage turned heretic, Elisha ben Avuya who was referred to as ‘Acher’ the ‘Other’.
