What is Kabbalah?

From Sebomenoi

See further:

• What is Oral Law?
• What is Zohar's place in Judaism?
• TORAH 101: Kabbalah and Jewish Mysticism
• Kabbala and Halakha
• The Death of Reincarnation

(Scroll Down for Growing List of Rabbis Pertinent to Topic)

Kabbalah means "reception" or "that which was received." This term was used in reference to the full body of Jewish Law, including Tanakh (Hebrew Bible / O. T) and the Talmudic texts which the Jewish people had inherited (received) from their ancient ancestors. The general meaning of the term remained unchanged until the late Middle Ages. Beginning with the supposed "revelation" of the Zohar in the 1300's (which, by the way, means that it was not part of what the Jews as a people had inherited (ie: received [Kabbalah]) from their ancestors up unto that time), the term Kabbalah slowly began to be applied to mystical teachings as promoted by certain rabbis. Over several hundred years this use of the term eventually caught on to such an extent that in our day, except among serious Torah scholars, the term Kabbalah almost automatically brings esoteric mystical knowledge to mind. While there is no doubt that there is a true esoteric aspect to Torah learning -- referred to in Talmudic literature as Ma'aseh Merquva and Ma'aseh B'resheyth -- yet that which today is known as Kabbalah is neither learned nor taught according to the codified Talmudic laws (halakha) concerning how valid esoteric teachings are to be conveyed (see Hilkhoth Yesodei Torah); Nor does the modern idea of Kabbalah match the historical use of the term. Historical Kabbalah referred to publically known and publically taught Torah teaching which had been passed down generation after generation from the time of the Sanhedrin in accordance with the laws by which these teachings were to be conveyed -- and all without secretes and without unrectifiable contradictions. No concept of the modern Kabbalah (Zohar, etc...) was written about or referred to by any known Jewish leaders until the around the 1300's when this supposed pillar of Judaism was suddenly revealed to the world, without the authority of the Sanhedrin, needless to say. After the revelation of the modern Kabbalah, many innovations began to "revitalize" the Jewish religion and enlighten the masses to the "true" and "deeper" meanings of the commandments and halakhot (rabbinic laws). Consequently, over time certain rabbis and communities began to feel that they no longer needed to continue in particular practices long rooted in the Reception of Talmudic texts (historical kabbalah), since the deeper purposes of such laws may be achieved in more productive ways, or for other reasons. So the situation continued, with the "Orthodox" Enlightenment slowly spreading through the Jewish world until modern times. On this page I list the names of prominent Jewish leaders who are known to have spoken out against various aspects this "Orthodox" Enlightenment, whether in whole or in part.

The following is a list of some well-known Jewish leaders among the Orthodox world who cast doubt on major aspects of what today is commonly, though mistakenly, referred to as Kabbalah:

Rabbi Saadiah Gaon wrote in his book Emunot v'Deot that Jews who believe in reincarnation have accepted a non-Jewish belief.

Maimonides (12th Century) discounted the mystical work Shiur Komah, with its starkly anthropomorphic vision of G-d, which is a popular kabbalistic text even in modern times.

Abraham ibn Daud, around 1110 to 1180; rejected reincarnation.

Rabbi Avraham ben haRambam, like his predecessors, writes at length in his book Milhhamot HaShem that the Almighty is in no way literally within time or space nor physically outside time or space, since time and space simply do not apply to His Being whatsoever. His book is almost undeniably targeted at the forbearers of much of kabbalistic thought.

Leon de Modena rejected reincarnation.

Rabbi Nissim ben Reuven (The Ran), 1320-1380; reproved the Nachmonides (Ramban) for devoting too much to kabbalah and is said to have been "no friend of mysticism."

Yedayah Bedershi, early 14th century; rejected reincarnation.

Rabbi Yitzchak ben Sheshet Perfet (The Rivash), 1326-1408; he stated that Kabbalah was "worse than Christianity", as it made God into 10, not just into three.

Hasdai ben Abraham Crescas, 1340-1410/11; rejected reincarnation.

Joseph Albo, 15th century; rejected reincarnation.

Rabbi Leon Modena, a 17th century Venetian critic of Kabbalah, wrote that if we were to accept the Kabbalah, then the Christian trinity would indeed be compatible with Judaism, as the Trinity closely resembles the Kabbalistic doctrine of sefirot.

Rabbi Yaakov Emden, 1697-1776, wrote the book Mitpahhath Sfarim (Scarf / Veil of the Books) which is a detailed critique of the Zohar. He concludes that certain parts of the Zohar contain heretical teaching and therefore could not have been written by Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai. Opponents of the book claim that he wrote the book in a drunken stupor.

Rabbi Samuel Strashun, 1794-1872, in Bava Metzia 107a, in his famous commentary to the Talmud, R' Strashun (the "Rashash" of Europe) points out a Talmudic proof against gilgulim. A rebbi in Kol Torah put out a book called 'dvar yakov' on tractate bava metzia. In commenting on this particular statement by the Rashah, the author of the book is goes off on how the Rashash could contradict "kabbalistic masters."

Rabbi Shimshon Raphael Hirsch, 1808-1888, among other things, specified that belief in reincarnation is one of the major distinctions between what were the religious opinions (hashqafa) of the Ancient Egyptions in contrast to the religious perspective (hashqafa) of the Jewish Faith. He writes that reincarnation was central to the Egyptian Faith.

Rabbi Yihhyah Qafehh, an early 20th century Yemenite Jewish leader wrote a book called Milhhamoth HaShem, (Wars of the L-RD) against what he perceived as the false teachings of the Zohar and "Lurianic Kabbalah."

Nechama Leibowitz, [alive] ; renown modern scholar and commentator to the Tanakh - avoided making use of kabbalistic works in her commentaries.

Yeshayahu Leibowitz 1903-1994, the brother of Nechama Leibowitz; he publically shared and supported views expressed in Rabbi Yihhyah Qafehh's book Milhhamoth HaShem that much of popular 'kabbala' is idolatrious; was against allowing kabbalistic texts to influence halakhic practice.

Rabbi Yosef Kapach taught against allowing kabbalistic texts to influence halakhic practice.

Rabbi Jose Faur

CHAPTER LXXI of Moreh HaNevukhim by the Rambam

(from http://www.mesora.org/guide.html)

KNOW that many branches of science relating to the correct solution of these problems, were once cultivated by ourforefathers, but were in the course of time neglected, especially in consequence of the tyranny which barbarous nations exercise dover us. Besides, speculative studies were not open to all men, aswe have already stated (Introd. P. 2, and 1. chap. xxxi.), only the subjects taught in the Scriptures were accessible to all. Even the traditional Law, as you are well aware, was not originally committed to writing, in conformity with the rule to which ournation generally adhered," Things which I have communicated toyou orally, you must not communicate to others in writing." With reference to the Law, this rule was very opportune; for while it remained in force it averted the evils which happened subsequently, viz., great diversity of opinion, doubts as to the meaning of written words, slips of the pen, dissensions among the people, formation of new sects, and confused notions about practical subjects. The traditional teaching was in fact, according to the words of the Law, entrusted to the Great Tribunal, as we have already stated in our works on the Talmud. (Introd. toMishneh Torah and Introd. to Commen. on the Mishnah).

Care having been taken, for the sake of obviating injurious influences, that the Oral Law should not be recorded in a form accessible to all, it was but natural that no portion of "the secrets of the Law" (i.e., metaphysical problems) would be permitted to be written down or divulged for the use of all men.... [The underlined statement is in contrast to the Oral Law, which was always permitted to be written down in the form of notes and was later permitted by the Sanhedrin to be codified in written form for public use.] ....These secrets, as has been explained, were orally communicated by a few ablemen to others who were equally distinguished. Hence the principle applied by our teachers," The secrets of the Law can only been trusted to him who is a councillor, a cunning artificer, etc." The natural effect of this practice was that our nation lost the knowledge of those important disciplines. Nothing but a few remarks and allusions are to be found in the Talmud and the Midrashim, like a few kernels enveloped in such a quantity of husk, that the reader is generally occupied with the husk, and forgets that it encloses a kernel.