Kotzk Blog

by Rabbi Dr Gavin Michal

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.

Sunday, 12 July 2020

284) THE BAVLI ON ‘TWO POWERS IN HEAVEN’:

Babylonian incantation bowls or 'demon traps' which often made reference to Metatron.

SHEMA BEIT RESHUYOT HEN - ARE THERE ARE TWO POWERS?

INTRODUCTION:

In early pre-Zoharic mystical writings - known as the Merkavah and Heichalot literature - the angel Metatron is featured as playing a dominant role in Heaven. Metatron is described as such an elevated angel that he is referred to as Y-H-V-H haKatan or the Lesser G-d.

This is an astounding assumption, even for an early mystical literature, as it opens the door for ‘Two Powers in Heaven’ – G-d and Metatron - which poses a serious threat to basic monotheism which subscribes to only ‘One Power in Heaven.’

What comes as even more of a surprise is that the Two Powers in Heaven concept also features in the Babylonian Talmud.

The notion of Two Powers in Heaven is, as one might expect, subject to much scholarly debate.

In this article, I have drawn from various sources including Professors Alan F. Segal[1], Daniel Boyarin[2], Peter Schafer[3] and Adiel Schremer[4].

POSITION I:

AN EXISTENTIAL CRISIS – ‘GIVING UP ON G-D’:

According to Adiel Schremer of Bar Ilan University, resorting to such an unexpected expression of belief in Two Powers in Heaven was not meant as a theological stumbling block in the way of monotheism, but rather an act of protest against G-d after the destruction of the Second Temple and sprung from a mood of despair.

Schremer writes:

“In contrast to previous interpretations I suggest that Two Powers, as constructed by early rabbinic sources, is one of a variety of theoretical options, which early rabbinic sources view as an expression of existential giving up on God, because of His inability to demonstrate His power, as was exposed in the destruction of the Second Temple and the military defeat of the Jews in the Bar Kokhba revolt. On this reading, Two Powers was not considered by the Rabbis as a threat due to a theological challenge it imposed to the monotheistic principle, as it is frequently seen...

It turns that Two Powers was not conceived of by Palestinian Rabbis as a theologoumenon characteristic of any specific group—either Christianity, as suggested by some scholars, or Gnosticism, as maintained by others. Rather it was understood as an existential response of despair, to what appeared to be God’s refraining from revealing His power.”[5]

POSITION II:

THE MAKING OF A HERESY:

Daniel Boyarin takes another approach and writes:

“[F]rom my point of view, the orthodoxy that the Rabbis [of the Talmud][6] were concerned about was an orthodoxy that they were making by constructing ‘Two Powers in Heaven’ as heresy, at just about the same time that bishops were declaring the belief in ‘One Power in Heaven’ – ‘Monarchianism’[7] – a leading heresy of Christianity.”

According to Boyarin, the rabbis were thus drawing a theological line in the sand at the time Christianity was beginning to develop its dogma.

However, as we shall see, it was not so simple to declare the belief in Two Powers in Heaven as heresy - because it persisted to linger in some of the literature.

POSITION III:

THE NOTION THAT THERE ARE ‘TWO POWERS IN HEAVEN’:

We will now explore a third and perhaps more literal reading of Two powers in Heaven, with G-d somewhat ‘sharing’ His power with Metatron:

THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE BABYLONIAN TALMUD AND THE PALESTINIAN TALMUD:

The notion of Two Powers in Heaven is - by far - more dominant in the Talmud Bavli than in the Talmud Yerushalmi. This highlights the fundamental different theologies or Hashkafot within the two Talmudim.

Peter Schafer writes:

“I have repeatedly argued that certain traditions are unique to the very specific historical and cultural context of Babylonian Jewry, and my findings regarding the figure of Metatron confirm this claim.”

In other words - on this view - the Babylonian Jews were more readily prepared to entertain the notion of Two Powers in Heaven than their Palestinian counterparts.

Even without Shafer’s interpretation, this does appear to be the case by a simple reading of the relevant texts from the Bavli.

This is a fascinating position because it shows a great theological divide between the Bavli and the Yerushalmi on such a fundamental principle.

It must be pointed out that it is not only with regard to Matatron that we see such differences in worldview between both Talmudim. Babylonian culture, in general, was steeped in Angelology and Demonology. This is why Angelology and Demonology are mentioned far more frequently in the Bavli than in the Yerushalmi. Clearly, both Talmudim represented different theologies on these esoteric matters.

EARLIEST MIDRASHIC REFERENCE TO METATRON:

A) SIFRE DEVARIM:

The earliest Midrashic reference to Metatron is in Sifre Devarim which dates back to the 3^rd-century:

Just before Moshe passes away, the Torah tells us that Hashem allows him a glance at the Holy Land:

“...The Lord addressed Moses as follows: Ascend this mountain of Avarim, Mount Nevo, which is in the land of Moav, across from Jericho, and view the land of Canaan, which I am giving the Israelites for a possession.” (Devarim 32:48)

R. Eliezer says: “The finger of the Holy One...is what served Moses as metatron, pointing out to him all the cities in the Land of Israel...”[8]

B) BEREISHIT RABBAH:

Another slightly later Midrashic source is the Bereishit Rabbah:

This Midrash is based on the verse in Genesis describing the creation of dry land: “Let the waters under the sky be gathered together into one place, and let the dry land appear” (Ber. 1:9) and then that verse is related to another verse in Tehillim (104:7): “At Your rebuke they [the waters] flee; at the sound [voice] of Your thunder they take to flight.”

“R. Levi said: ...The voice of the Lord became a metatron to the waters...”

In this second source, it is G-d’s voice not finger that becomes a metatron.

METATOR BECOMES METATRON:

Interestingly the name Metatron is derived from the Latin and Greek word ‘metator’ which means ‘guide’.

Schafer suggests that at this stage these two early Midrashic sources may not necessarily be referring to an angel called Metatron but rather to a power of G-d – His anthropomorphic finger or voice – which serves as a metator or guide.

It was only later, in his view, that medieval scribes replaced metator with Metatron after the well-known angel Metatron who had become popularised in the Babylonian literature.

RE’UYOT YECHEZKEL:

In a mystical work entitled Re’uyot Yechezkel or Visions of Ezekiel, there is another reference to Metatron. This work described its perception of the seven heavens and who or what inhabits which realms. In the description of the third heaven, called Zevul, R. Levi describes the Sar or Prince sitting before myriads of ministering beings.

This is followed by a discussion of what the Prince’s name is. Suggestions follow with the names Kimos, Me’atah, Bi’zevul, Atatyah, and finally Matatron. Metatron is described as being connected to Gevurah which is reference to G-d.

Essentially, Metatron emerges from this text as being very similar and close to G-d Himself.

Re’uyot Yechezkel is associated, according to some scholars including Gershom Scholem[9] with the Merkavah literature. However other scholars disagree and Schafer considers it a later Babylonian composition written pseudoepigraphically - something very common in historical times - as if it were an earlier Palestinian mystical work.

This second view is significant to our discussion as it reinforces the hypothesis that Metatron was a Babylonian innovation and not something entertained by the Palestinian rabbis.

SOURCES FOR METATRON IN THE BABYLONIAN TALMUD:

1) ELISHA BEN AVUYAH:

According to the Talmud Bavli[10] the great heretic Elisha ben Avuyah, also known as Acher, sees Metatron sitting on a throne and he concludes that there are two Reshuyot or Powers in Heaven. Thus Metatron is more than just an angel but enjoys a higher G-d-like status.

The narrative continues with Metatron receiving sixty fiery lashes from another divine power, Anafiel, “so that everyone will know who is the master and who is the slave”.[11] Nevertheless, Acher was led to believe that there were two powers in Heaven and he became a heretic because he was raised believing there was only one.

2) YISHMAEL BEN ELISHA:

According to another source[12], R. Yishmael ben Elisha haKohen once entered the (heavenly) Holy of Holies and he saw Akatriel Ka Hashem Tzevakot seated on an exulted throne. Akatriel[13] here is clearly not a mere angel but, like Metatron (with whom he is identified in Heichalot sources) enjoys a higher G-d-like status as can be seen by his assuming G-d’s names of Ka and Hashem Tzevakot.

Akatriel asks R. Yishmael to bless Him, which he does and the Talmud concluded that the blessing of a simple person should never be taken lightly as even Akatriel/G-d/Metatron needs to be blessed.

This text, surprisingly, leaves room for the notion of two powers in Heaven.

In fact, the Sefaria interpretation of this text clearly states that Akatriel is:

“Akatriel...[is] one of the names of G-d expressing his ultimate authority...If God [Akatriel][14] asked for and accepted a man’s blessing, all the more so that a man must value the blessing of another man.”

RAZO SHEL SANDALFON:

In another version of this story as told in Heichalot work, Razo Shel Sandalfon, R. Yishmael is identified as Acher and he meets Akatriel similarly sitting on an exulted throne at the entrance to the inner sanctum called Pardes, giving the impression that there are two powers in Heaven. Surprisingly, G-d does not, in this version of the narrative, rebuke Acher for drawing this conclusion but simply tells him not to interfere in G-d’s mysteries!

Amazingly, this Heichalot version of the Talmudic story seems to confirm the notion that Akatriel/Metatron is one of those two powers in Heaven (although here, unlike the Bavli version, he does not seem to be equated directly with G-d).

HEICHALOT RABBATI:

Another incident relating to R. Yishmael is recorded in Heichalot Rabbati[15] where R. Nechunya ben Hakana adjures R. Yishmael with a ‘great seal’ to protect him from forgetting all the Torah he had studied. The ‘great seal’ belonged to:

“Zebudiel the Lord, the God of Israel and this is Metatron the Lord Y-H-V-H, the God of Israel, God of heaven and God of earth, God of gods, God of the sea and God of the mainland.”

There is certainly no ambiguity in this source as to who Metatron is.

3) RAV IDIT AND THE HERETIC:

The Babylonian Talmud[16] records a discussion between Rav Idit and a min or heretic. The min points out that the biblical verse: “And to Moses He said: Come up to the Lord,”[17] should have read: “Come up to Me,” – otherwise it implies another power in Heaven.

Astoundingly Rav Idit responds that in that instance, “the Lord” refers to “Metatron, whose name is like that of his Master.”

Rav Idit continues by bringing a scriptural support from another verse describing who should lead the Israelites through the desert during the Exodus:

“Behold I send an angel before you to keep you in the way and to bring you to the place that I have prepared. Take heed of him and obey his voice; do not defy him; for he will not pardon your transgression, for My name is in him.”[18]

The min responds that if so, we should worship Metatron as we worship G-d! The text continues with some to and fro with Rav Idit eventually acknowledging the existence of the ‘Guide’ (be’ farvanka) but clarifying – just on a technicality – that, during the Exodus, we did not accept the other Power (Metatron) but chose only relate to G-d Himself.

This Guide/Metatron would have led the Jewish People to the Land of Israel but Moses told G-d that if G-d Himself does not accompany the Jewish people they do not want to travel to Eretz Yisrael.

Essentially Rav Idit was admitting that there are two powers in Heaven, and even when the ‘second power’ was offered to us in a biblical verse, we chose G-d instead!

METATRON ON BABYLONIAN INCANTATION BOWLS:

The name Metatron appears on many Babylonian incantation bowls, indicating that his name was well-known and well-used during Talmudic times in Bavel. The bowls were turned upside down and set in the foundations of the houses in order to trap demons and keep them contained therein. Many of these bowls were commissioned by Babylonian Jews between the 6^th to 8^th-centuries, corresponding to the period of the Babylonian Talmud.

This makes sense as Angelology and Demonology were popular in Zoroastrian Babylonia and comprised a significant component of Babylonian influence on the Babylonian Talmud.

Metatron was often referred to on the incantation bowls as Sara Rabbah or Great Prince, a title commonly used for Metatron in the Heichalot literature.

METATRON LARGELY ABSENT FROM YERUSHALMI:

By stark contrast - as mentioned earlier - Metatron and the idea of Two Powers in Heaven is almost entirely absent from the Yerushalmi and Palestinian sources.

This supports the idea that Angelology was a common feature of Babylonian Jewry but had little influence of the Jews of Eretz Yisrael.

The notion of Metaton and Two Powers in Heaven belong to Babylonian traditions and, although popular, cannot be considered universal Jewish beliefs as evidenced by them being largely ignored by Palestinian Talmudic sources.

ANALYSIS:

Surprisingly we see how, sometimes, even our primary texts flirt dangerously close to ideas that appear as anathemas to basic and pure monotheism.

The Mishna [Ber. 33b], which preceded the Babylonian Talmud, ruled against an apparent minor matter of saying modim modim (thank You, thank You) in the prayers, as it may appear as if the worshipper was praying to two different entities. Obviously, these were issues that were prevalent within the Jewish community. Yet later, during Gemara or Talmudic times, the Babylonian culture clearly fell foul of Mishnaic rulings such as these.

Perhaps it was because of notions like Two Powers in Heaven that Maimonides, following the Yerushalmi, took a powerful stance against Angelology and Demonology in an attempt to rid Judaism of some of the cultural influences of Babylonia.

The Babylonians sought, as it were, to overpopulate the Heavens with angelic hierarchies, evil entities and even Divine ‘vice-regents’ - while Maimonides theologically ‘depopulated’ the Heavens, removed the esoteric clutter and taught of a clean, open and silent ‘space’ between man and G-d.

Sunday, 5 July 2020

283) ‘MASHIACH NOW’ - OVER THE LAST 500 YEARS:

The Alhambra Decree expelling the Jews from Spain in 1492.

- ESTABLISHING MESSIANIC STUDY CIRCLES IN THE AFTERMATH OF THE EXPULSION FROM SPAIN -

INTRODUCTION:

The Expulsion of the practising Jews from Spain was initiated by the Alhambra Decree which was issued on 31 March 1492 by the joint Catholic Monarchs of Castile and Aragon. The Jews were to have left Spanish soil by 31 July of that year.

The Expulsion from Spain had a tremendous bearing on a number of aspects of Jewish history. In this article, we will explore how it triggered an emphasis on redemptive and messianic fervour which was to become a theological mainstay of future Judaism. Of course, earlier Jewish literature had dealt with such matters, but after the Expulsion, it took on a new and elevated urgency.

I have drawn extensively from the research[1] of Professor Elisheva Carlebach of Columbia University who specializes in the cultural, intellectual, and religious history of the Jews in Early Modern Europe.

INTENSE MESSIANIC SCHOOLS WERE ESTABLISHED IN THE POST-EXPULSION ERA:

As an immediate spiritual reaction to the Expulsion, many intensely mystical and messianic schools, or yeshivot, were established in attempts at theurgically (through magical or supernatural means) bringing about a state of immediate redemption.

Professor Carlebach writes:

“Some of the most intense messianic spirituality was centered in the many yeshivot and study circles established in the period after the Expulsion for the express purpose of hastening the redemption.”

Besides both general Torah learning and the redemptive study circles in particular taking on an urgent and overt messianic accentuation, other aspects of Jewish life - including even the mundane politics within the expelled community - became spiritualized.[2] Everything was imbued with omnisignificance and messianic overtones.

HISTORY HAS OVERLOOKED THE BIRTH OF RADICAL MESSIANISM AFTER THE EXPULSION:

It is important to remember that these redemptive study circles were not just unique to the Spanish Jews of the post-Expulsion era, but they continued in one form or another to dominate the religious study landscape well into the future and their influence was later felt deep within Ashkenazic circles as well.

Carlebach shows how the influence of these Sephardic redemptive study circles spread to the Ashkenazic world and transformed their study ethos to also include a redemptive component. Torah study was no longer just about acquiring knowledge but it took on a pressing theurgic dimension as well. Fascinatingly, for some reason, this important development has been largely ignored by students of history.

According to Carlebach:

“Of all the messianic pathways taken by Iberian [Spanish and Portuguese][3] Jews as a consequence of the persecutions and expulsions of the fifteenth century, this one has been least explored, although it lasted for centuries and spread beyond the Sephardic community...”

“[T]he significance of messianism as a central and fundamental response to the Expulsion [from Spain][4] remains unremarked.”

THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SEPHARDIC AND ASHKENAZIC YESHIVOT:

The Sephardic yeshiva was often called a hesger which was a closed circle of not more than ten elite scholars. In a large community there would be many such study circles. While Ashkenazic rabbis usually sought positions of rabbinic leadership and authority, the Sephardic rabbis were more interested in the prestige that came with heading a redemptive study circle.

It is possible that this difference in the way each group asserted its authority was evidenced by the Ashkenazic rabbis sometimes being Halachically stricter than their Sephardic counterparts.

POSSIBLE ISLAMIC INFLUENCE:

Interestingly, Carlebach writes:

“Similar schools, circles, and voluntary societies, whose structure and function parallel those we have described, flourished in medieval Islam and may have contributed to the genesis or continuity of this form among the Sephardim.”[5]

FUNDING:

The funding for these study circles was from the wealthy within the communities who were happy to be able to contribute and thereby, they believed, vicariously gain a share in bringing about the anticipated messianic state of redemption.

CURRICULA:

These messianic study circles did not just study Torah but they developed specialized mystical curricula which would bring the redemption closer.

As mentioned, these circles were elitist and in the words of R. Raphael Treves:

“Our redemption...cannot be attained by the masses, only by the elite.”

The spread of Lurianic Kabbala (from the Ari Zal) also contributed to the messianic urgency as it imbued the study and practice of Torah with theurgical significance. And many practitioners within the study circles maintained that Kabbalah study should be elevated over traditional Talmudic study.[6]

Bear in mind that the Zohar, a foundation work of Jewish mysticism, had been published in Spain in around 1290, which in relative terms was not that long before the Expulsion, and by its nature would certainly have lent itself to messianic enterprises.

GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION:

While many believed that the Holy land was the ultimate geographical location to host messianic study circles, some maintained that centres within the Diaspora were crucial to prepare the world for the imminent messianic manifestation.[7]

There was much debate over which particular region of the Holy Land was best suited for these messianic circles. Besides the obvious choice of Jerusalem, some preferred Safed (particularly during the 16^th –century), Tiberius, Chevron and even Gaza. Actually, Safed was dominant as long as it held its strong economic position but, as soon as it lost that dominance, Jerusalem took over.

ABULAFIA:

In the 18^th-century, the great mystic R. Chaim ben Moshe Abulafia (1660-1744) founded a yeshiva in Tiberius called Mashmia Yeshua (Harbinger of Redemption). He told the Jews of Tiberius that:

“[T]he messiah would soon arrive and come from the Sea of Galilee.”

OHR HACHAIM:

R. Chaim Benattar (1696-1743), known as the Ohr haChaim, was attracted to Abulafia in Tiberius. He specifically wanted to establish a redemptive yeshiva to hasten the arrival of Messiah and he moved his Kabbalistic circle to Jerusalem. Some believe he was the inspirational model for the up-and-coming Chassidic movement.[8]

ESTABLISHING SETTLEMENTS IN THE HOLY LAND:

The Diaspora communities often supported the messianic yeshivot of the Holy Land. Only selected candidates qualified to be sent to the Holy Land. It was also very expensive to travel during the 18^th-century, as the fare was twice the annual income needed to live in the Land of Israel.

AUSPICIOUS REDEMPTIVE DATES:

Carlebach writes:

“The attempts to establish redemptive centres of rabbinic scholarship [in the Holy Land] began with the first exiles [from Spain][9], and continued for centuries. They tended to cluster around certain redemptive dates, such as 1575, 1700-1706, and 1740...

Rabbinic circles were similarly established all over the Sephardic Diaspora, in Italy, North Africa, and the Ottoman Empire. While some were simply traditional centers of study, many had esoteric agendas which transformed their activities into intense theurgic dramas.“

FROM SMALL ELITIST GROUPS TO WIDER PARTICIPANTS:

The post-Expulsion messianic study circles continued to flourish for centuries into the future. Initially, they maintained their elitist nature but gradually, after being adopted to some degree by the Sabbateans - the followers of the false messiah Shabbatai Tzvi (1626-1676) - and later by the Chassidic movement, they opened up to the masses who were encouraged to participate in the enterprise of study for redemptive purposes. Thereafter, this messianic ethos slowly wound its way into the general mainstream.

SABBATEANS ADOPT THE SEPHARDIC STUDY CIRCLE MODEL:

Bear in mind that the Sabbateans were not just a fringe movement. Their numbers included up to half - if not more - of the Jewish population at that time. Many of their leaders were prominent rabbis and, after Shabbatai Tzvi was shown to be a false messiah and the movement went underground, it was very difficult to distinguish a secret Sabbatean from a mainstream religious Jew. The secret Sabbateans were known to have established secret cells.

[See Shabbatai Tzvi – Roots Run Deep.]

Carlebach writes:

“Many prominent Sabbateans, some with messianic pretensions of their own, planned to build redemptive yeshivot.”

RABBI AVRAHAM ROVIGO:

During the time of the secret Sabbateans similar redemptive study circles were established in Jerusalem by R. Avraham Rovigo in 1702[10], and by R. Isaiah Hasid who established a ten-scholar Sabbatean yeshiva in Mannheim, Germany.[11]

RABBI RAPHAEL MORDEKHAI MALKHI:

Another example of this is the secret or crypto-Sabbatean, R. Raphael Mordechai Malkhi. Malkhi intended to make Jerusalem the centre of Sabbatean ideology and his primary tool for so doing was to establish a redemptive yeshiva.

Raphael Mordechai Malkhi wrote:

“At the end of days...they [the Jews of the Diaspora][12] will establish a midrash [yeshiva] in Jerusalem of seventy scholars over them. The Lord will bring many settlers out of oppression who will cultivate the land...The era of this restoration...is the time of the approach of the redemption...The King Messiah will emerge from them.”[13]

RABBI AVRAHAM CARDOSA:

In 1703, another Sabbatean - R. Avraham Cardosa - who competed for authority with Malkhi, arrived in the Holy Land and also wanted to establish a redemptive yeshiva in Jerusalem. He was an interesting personality because he had lived as a Marrano in Spain until his twentieth year and then became a crypto-Sabbatean. He hired copyists to disseminate his writings in Jerusalem in order to counter the other Sabbatean literature which was popular there.

Cardosa wrote in no uncertain terms:

“In the Academy on High there are two yeshivot, one for Elijah and one for R. Simon bar Yohai. And I will establish a third one...for I possess a veritable treasury of esoteric lore.”[14]

The anti-Sabbatean Rabbinate of Jerusalem, however, blocked him from opening up his yeshiva in Jerusalem. In 1708, his student, Nechemya Hayon collected funds from Smyrna to establish a redemptive yeshiva in Israel but it was also blocked by the Rabbinate.

RABBI MORDECHAI ASHKENAZI:

During the 18^th-century, another crypto-Sabbatean, R. Mordechai Ashkenazi wrote a work entitled Eshel Avraham (Terebinth of Abraham). He named the work after his teacher, R. Avraham Rovigo and writes that most of the ideas in the book were from Rovigo.

What is significant about Eshel Avraham is that it offers a window into the nature of these redemptive study circles. It quotes Rovigo as saying:

“The signs have now been revealed that this is the generation of King Messiah.”[15]

Carlebach writes:

“The curriculum proposed by the Sabbatians did not differ from that of many of their predecessors – they championed an almost exclusive reliance on kabbalistic texts, beginning with the Zohar, and particularly the study of Lurianic Kabbalah.”

However, what set them apart from the other redemptive yeshivot was their insistence that the study of Talmudic literature actually impeded the redemption.

Eshel Avraham explains that Moshe’s Torah from Sinai was not powerful enough to affect a full and permanent redemption, and it was only the Torah of R. Shimon bar Yochai - the alleged author of the Zohar - that could lead to a complete messianic redemption.[16]

Eshel Avraham continues to explain that there are three types of individuals who study Torah: 1) Those who just read it as a story. They are regarded as “the fools of the world.” 2) Then there are those on a slightly higher level who study “the principles of Torah.” 3) And then there are those on the highest level, who:

“penetrate the soul...Because Israel did not engage itself in Kabbalistic lore, but only in peshat [the simple or literal meaning of the words of the Torah][17], there can be no redemption unless the matter is rectified.”[18]

The Talmudic or Halachic study of Torah is compared to the bark of as tree, while the Kabbalah is the sap. Eshel Avraham issues a warning:

“Woe to those rabbis who eat of the husk of the Torah but don’t know its secrets.”[19]

ANALYSIS:

As Carlebach has pointed out, history has overlooked the fundamental and powerful influence of the messianic study circles that sprung up in the aftermath of the Expulsion.

These redemptive attempts at turning mystical study into theurgical catalysts for the dawning of the Messianic Era were the springboard from which many of the more modern messianic movements sprung.

What the redemptive study circles did after the Expulsion from Spain in the 15^th-century, was to transform the traditional view of Torah study into an urgent and powerful tool to bring about the ‘immediate redemption’. It was a mystical attempt to ‘rectify’ the evils of the Expulsion.

This messianic ethos, almost like a manifesto, was then capitalized upon by the mystics of the 16^th-century. They too had study circles and signed pledges of allegiance. [See Appendix to Sefer haTzoref link below.]

A similar mystical character and tenor was then adopted and reworked by the followers of Shabbatai Tzvi in the 17^th-century.

The same thread found its way into the Chassidic Movement of the 18^th-century which also had closed messianic study circles such as the Chevraya Kadisha of the Baal Shem Tov.

All of this was later appropriated to a large degree by the mainstream Jewish world during the 19^th- century which similarly ascribed redemptive and messianic value to Torah Study.

This accounts, in no insignificant manner, for the popular messianism which dominated much of 20^th century Judaism and continues to this day where - not just Torah study - but every event is somehow linked to the immediate redemption.

In a remarkable article published, surprisingly, in the Chareidi Mishpacha Magazine, Rabbi Aaron Lopiansky[20] wrote:

“We need to teach our children history. And that history needs to include much more than dry names and dates and stories of gedolim...

My first concern is our deep ignorance of Jewish history — or any history for that matter. It is simply mind-boggling to hear people state that ‘Never has anything like this happened before. This [Corona][21] virus must be heralding the coming of Mashiach!’...

The second source of distress is the current Mashiach fervor. Klal Yisrael has had many “Mashiach is here” moments. Read the excellent ‘Mashichei Hasheker U’misnagdeihem’ (all 700 pages) of Rabbi Binyomin Hamburger, and you will get a feel for how numerous and how destructive these movements were...”

Menu

Sunday, 12 July 2020

284) THE BAVLI ON ‘TWO POWERS IN HEAVEN’:

Sunday, 5 July 2020

283) ‘MASHIACH NOW’ - OVER THE LAST 500 YEARS: