Difference between revisions of "Zohar" - New World Encyclopedia

From New World Encyclopedia
({{Paid}})
(8 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Approved}}{{Submitted}}{{Images OK}}{{Started}}{{Contracted}}{{Paid}}
+
{{Approved}}{{Submitted}}{{Images OK}}{{Paid}}{{Copyedited}}
The '''Zohar''' ([[Hebrew language|Hebrew]]: '''זהר''' meaning "Splendor" or "Radiance") is a mystical commentary on the [[Torah]] (the five books of [[Moses]]), written primarily in medieval [[Aramaic language|Aramaic]] and considered to be the most important work of [[Kabbalah]]. It contains an esoteric discussion of the nature of [[God]], the origin and structure of the universe, the nature of [[soul]]s, [[sin]], redemption, good and evil, and other multifarious topics.
 
 
 
 
[[Image:Zohar.png|thumb|right|200px|Title page of first edition of the Zohar, Mantua, 1558. Library of Congress.]]
 
[[Image:Zohar.png|thumb|right|200px|Title page of first edition of the Zohar, Mantua, 1558. Library of Congress.]]
Although the Zohar is considered to be one of the greatest works of Jewish mysticism, reaction to it has been mixed. The text has been lauded by many rabbis for opposing religious formalism, and for reinvigorating the experience of prayer.<ref name="jewcyclo" /> On the other hand, the Zohar has been condemned for propagating superstitious beliefs, especially centered on a host of [[Spirit|spirits]] and [[Demon|demons]].<ref name="jewcyclo"/> Many classical rabbis, especially [[Maimonides]], viewed all such beliefs as a violation of Judaic principles of faith. [[Christians]] have noted that the Zohar contains many religious teachings that are compatible with Christian doctrine.
+
The '''Zohar''' ([[Hebrew language|Hebrew]]: '''זהר''' meaning "Splendor" or "Radiance") is a mystical commentary on the [[Torah]] (the five books of [[Moses]]), written primarily in medieval [[Aramaic language|Aramaic]] and considered to be the most important work of [[Kabbalah]]. It contains an esoteric discussion of the nature of [[God]], the origin and structure of the universe, the nature of [[soul]]s, [[sin]], redemption, good and evil, and other multifarious metaphysical topics (especially cosmology).
  
 +
The Zohar is considered to be the greatest work of Jewish mysticism. However, reaction to it among Jews has been mixed. The text has been lauded by many rabbis for opposing religious formalism, and for reinvigorating the experience of [[prayer]].<ref>Joseph Jacobs and Isaac Broydé. [http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=142&letter=Z#406 "Zohar" article in the ''Jewish Encyclopedia.'']Retrieved January 5, 2008. </ref> On the other hand, the Zohar has been condemned for propagating superstitious beliefs, especially centered on a host of [[Spirit|spirits]] and [[Demon|demons]].<ref>Ibid.</ref> Many classical rabbis, especially [[Maimonides]], viewed all such beliefs as a violation of Judaic principles of faith. [[Christians]] have noted that the Zohar contains many religious teachings that are compatible with Christian doctrine.
 +
{{toc}}
 
Today, the Zohar stands out as one of the most beautiful works of Jewish [[mysticism]] that has survived the passage of time.
 
Today, the Zohar stands out as one of the most beautiful works of Jewish [[mysticism]] that has survived the passage of time.
  
 
==Authorship==
 
==Authorship==
The Zohar claims to be written in the second century by rabbi [[Shimon bar Yochai]],<ref name="jewcyclo">{{cite encyclopedia|last=Jacobs|first=Joseph|coauthors=Broydé, Isaac|encyclopedia=Jewish Encyclopedia|title=Zohar|url=http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=142&letter=Z#406|accessdate=|publisher=Funk & Wagnalls Company}}</ref> during a time of Roman persecution.  It is said that he hid in a cave for thirteen years, studying the Torah, and was inspired by [[Prophet]] [[Elijah]] to write the Zohar.<ref>{{cite book|last=Scharfstein|first=Sol|title=Jewish History and You II|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=uFuBCOzObf0C&pg=PA24&lpg=PA24&dq=simeon+bar+yohai+cave+13+years&source=web&ots=4stAsWsEER&sig=C5d4vwiGMFzn92srw8NHAeqm-iE|accessdate=|series= Jewish History and You|date=2004|publisher = KTAV Publishing House|location=Jersey City, NJ, USA|isbn=|pages=p. 24}}</ref><ref>[http://www.ou.org/chagim/lagbaomer/yochai.htm Lag BaOmer: Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochi]</ref>
+
The question of authorship of the Zohar is highly debated among scholars. The Zohar itself claims to be written in the second century by [[Rabbi]] [[Shimon bar Yochai]].<ref>Ibid. [http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=142&letter=Z#406] </ref> The text states that during a time of Roman persecution, Shimon bar Yochai apparently hid in a cave for thirteen years, studying the Torah, when he was inspired by [[Prophet]] [[Elijah]] to write the Zohar.<ref>Sol Scharfstein. ''Jewish History and You II'' [http://books.google.com/books?id=uFuBCOzObf0C&pg=PA24&lpg=PA24&dq=simeon+bar+yohai+cave+13+years&source=web&ots=4stAsWsEER&sig=C5d4vwiGMFzn92srw8NHAeqm-iE Jewish History and You]. (Jersey City, NJ: KTAV Publishing House, 2004), 24</ref><ref>[http://www.ou.org/chagim/lagbaomer/yochai.htm Lag BaOmer: Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochi] Your gateway to the Jewish Internet. Retrieved January 5, 2008. </ref> Others, however, have argued that the Zohar was probably composed by its unveiler, [[Moses de Leon]], who allegedly discovered the text during his visit to [[Jerusalem]]. Those who favor the authorship of Moses de Leon cite as evidence the story of the rich man from Avila named Joseph who offered Moses' widow (who had been left without any means of supporting herself) a large sum of money for the original text of the Zohar from which her husband had made the copy.<ref>Jacobs and Broydé [http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=142&letter=Z#406 "Zohar" article in the ''Jewish Encyclopedia.'']</ref> It is said that she confessed to him that her husband himself was the author of the work.<ref>Ibid.</ref>  
 
 
However, others have argued that the Zohar was likely written by [[Moses de Leon]], who allegedly discovered the text during his visit to [[Jerusalem]]. Scholars strongly disagree on the question of authorship of the Zohar and their views are summarized below:
 
 
 
===Arguments for a late dating===
 
Those who favor the authorship of Moses de Leon cite as evidence the story of the rich man from Avila named Joseph who offered Moses' widow (who had been left without any means of supporting herself) a large sum of money for the original text of the Zohar from which her husband had made the copy.<ref name="jewcyclo" /> It is said that sShe confessed that her husband himself was the author of the work. She had asked him several times, she said, why he had chosen to credit his own teachings to another, and he had always answered that doctrines put into the mouth of the miracle-working Shimon bar Yochai would be a rich source of profit.<ref name="jewcyclo" /> The story indicates that shortly after its appearance the work was believed by some to have been written by Moses de Leon.<ref name="jewcyclo" />
 
  
Elijah Delmedigo, in his ''Bechinat ha-Dat'' endeavored to show that it could not be attributed to Shimon bar Yochai.<ref name="jewcyclo" /> The objections were that:
+
Moreover, Elijah Delmedigo, in his ''Bechinat ha-Dat'' endeavored to show that it could not be attributed to Shimon bar Yochai because:
  
#If the Zohar was the work of Shimon bar Yochai, it would have been mentioned by the [[Talmud]], as has been the case with other works of the Talmudic period;<ref name="jewcyclo"/>
+
#If the Zohar was the work of Shimon bar Yochai, it would have been mentioned by the [[Talmud]], as has been the case with other works of the Talmudic period;<ref>Ibid.</ref>
#The Zohar contains names of rabbis who lived at a later period than that of Simeon;<ref name="jewcyclo"/>
+
#The Zohar contains names of rabbis who lived at a later period than that of Simeon;<ref>Ibid.</ref>
#Were Shimon ben Yochai the father of the Kabbalah, knowing by divine revelation the hidden meaning of the precepts, his decisions on Jewish law would have been adopted by the Talmud; but this has not been done;<ref name="jewcyclo"/>
+
#Were Shimon ben Yochai the father of the Kabbalah, knowing by divine revelation the hidden meaning of the precepts, his decisions on Jewish law would have been adopted by the Talmud; but this has not been done;<ref>Ibid.</ref>
#Were the Kabbalah a revealed doctrine, there would have been no divergence of opinion among the Kabbalists concerning the mystic interpretation of the precepts (''Bechinat ha-Dat'' ed. Vienna, 1833, p. 43).<ref name="jewcyclo"/>
+
#Were the Kabbalah a revealed doctrine, there would have been no divergence of opinion among the Kabbalists concerning the mystic interpretation of the precepts (''Bechinat ha-Dat'' ed. Vienna, 1833, 43).<ref>Jacobs and Broydé [http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=142&letter=Z#406 "Zohar" article in the ''Jewish Encyclopedia.'']</ref>
  
These arguments and others of the same kind were used by [[Leon of Modena]] in his ''Ari Nohem''.<ref name="jewcyclo"/> A work devoted to the criticism of the Zohar was written, ''Miṭpaḥat Sefarim,'' by Jacob Emden, who, waging war against the remaining adherents of the [[Sabbatai Zevi]] movement, endeavored to show that the book on which Zevi based his doctrines was a forgery.<ref name="jewcyclo"/> Emden demonstrates that the Zohar misquotes passages of Scripture; misunderstands the Talmud; contains some ritual observances which were ordained by later rabbinical authorities; mentions the crusades against the Muslims (who did not exist in the second century); uses the expression ''esnoga'', which is a Portuguese term for "[[synagogue]],"; and gives a mystical explanation of the Hebrew vowel-points, which were not introduced until long after the Talmudic period.<ref name="jewcyclo"/>
+
These arguments and others of the same kind were used by [[Leon of Modena]] in his ''Ari Nohem.''<ref>Ibid.</ref> A work devoted to the criticism of the Zohar was written, ''Miṭpaḥat Sefarim,'' by Jacob Emden, who, waging war against the remaining adherents of the [[Sabbatai Zevi]] movement, endeavored to show that the book on which Zevi based his doctrines was a forgery.<ref>Ibid.</ref> Emden demonstrates that the Zohar misquotes passages of Scripture; misunderstands the Talmud; contains some ritual observances that were ordained by later rabbinical authorities; mentions the crusades against the Muslims (who did not exist in the second century); uses the expression ''esnoga,'' which is a Portuguese term for "[[synagogue]],"; and gives a mystical explanation of the Hebrew vowel-points, which were not introduced until long after the Talmudic period.<ref>Ibid.</ref>
  
There is a small group among the Orthodox who refuse to accept the Zohar, known as [[Dor Daim]] (דרדעים). They are mainly from the Jewish community in Yemen, and claim that the Zohar cannot be true because its ideas clash with the ideas of the Rambam ([[Maimonides]]), the great medieval rabbi and rationalist, Rabbi [[Saadiah Gaon]], and other early representatives of the Jewish faith.
+
There is a small group among the Orthodox, known as [[Dor Daim]] (דרדעים), who refuse to accept the Zohar. They are mainly from the Jewish community in Yemen, and claim that the Zohar cannot be true because its ideas clash with the ideas of the Rambam ([[Maimonides]]), the great medieval rabbi and rationalist, Rabbi [[Saadiah Gaon]], and other early representatives of the Jewish faith.
  
In the mid-20th century, the Jewish historian Gershom Scholem contended that de Leon himself was the most likely author of the Zohar. Among other things, Scholem noticed the Zohar's frequent errors in Aramaic grammar, its suspicious traces of Spanish words and sentence patterns, and its lack of knowledge of the land of Israel. This finding is still disputed by many within [[Orthodox Judaism]], although not because of any scholarly proofs, but rather because of tradition.
+
In the mid-twentieth century, the Jewish historian Gershom Scholem contended that de Leon himself was the most likely author of the Zohar. Among other things, Scholem noticed the Zohar's frequent errors in Aramaic grammar, its suspicious traces of Spanish words and sentence patterns, and its lack of knowledge of the land of Israel. This finding is still disputed by many within [[Orthodox Judaism]], although not because of any scholarly proofs, but rather because of tradition.
  
Professor Yeshayahu Leibowitz claimed that "It is clear that the Zohar was written by de Leon as it is clear that [[Theodore Herzl]] wrote ''Medinat HaYehudim'' ("A State for the Jews")."
+
However, even if de Leon wrote the text, the entire contents of the book may not be fraudulent. Parts of it may be based on older works, and it was a common practice to ascribe the authorship of a document to an ancient rabbi in order to give the document more weight. It is possible that Moses de Leon considered himself inspired to write this text.
  
Even if de Leon wrote the text, the entire contents of the book may not be fraudulent. Parts of it may be based on older works, and it was a common practice to ascribe the authorship of a document to an ancient rabbi in order to give the document more weight. It is possible that Moses de Leon considered himself inspired to write this text.
+
===Arguments for an earlier dating===
 +
Rabbi Menachem Mendel Kasher attempts to refute many of Scholem's points. He writes:
  
====Arguments for an earlier dating====
+
* 1. Many statements in the works of the Rishonim (medieval commentors who preceded De Leon refer to Medrashim of which we are not aware. He writes that these are in fact references to the Zohar. This has also been pointed out by [[R' David Luria]] in his work "Kadmus Sefer Ha'Zohar."
R' Menachem Mendel Kasher attempts to refute many of Scholem's points.<ref>[http://www.daat.ac.il/daat/kitveyet/sinay/hazohar-2.htm Sinai]</ref> He writes:
+
* 2. The Zohar's major opponent Elijah Delmedigo refers to the Zohar as having existed for only 300 years. Even he agrees that it was extant before the time of R' Moses De Leon.
 
 
* 1. Many statements in the works of the [[Rishonim]] (medieval commentors who preceded De Leon)refer to [[Medrash|Medrashim]]  that we are not aware of. He writes that these are in fact references to the Zohar. This has also been pointed out by [[R' David Luria]] in his work "Kadmus Sefer Ha'Zohar".
 
* 2. The Zohar's major opponent Elijah Delmedigo refers to the Zohar as having existed for "only" 300 years. Even he agrees that it was extant before the time of R' Moses De Leon.
 
 
* 3. He cites a document from R' Yitchok M' Acco who was sent by the [[Nahmanides|Ramban]] to investigate the Zohar. The document brings witnesses that attest to the existence of the manuscript.  
 
* 3. He cites a document from R' Yitchok M' Acco who was sent by the [[Nahmanides|Ramban]] to investigate the Zohar. The document brings witnesses that attest to the existence of the manuscript.  
 
* 4. It is impossible to accept that R' Moshe De Leon managed to forge a work of the scope of the Zohar (1700 pages) within a period of six years as Scholem claims.  
 
* 4. It is impossible to accept that R' Moshe De Leon managed to forge a work of the scope of the Zohar (1700 pages) within a period of six years as Scholem claims.  
Line 44: Line 37:
 
* 8. Some hard to understand terms may be attributed to acronyms or codes. He finds corrolaries to such a practice in other ancient manuscripts.
 
* 8. Some hard to understand terms may be attributed to acronyms or codes. He finds corrolaries to such a practice in other ancient manuscripts.
 
* 9. The "borrowings" from medieval commentaries may be explained in a simple manner. It is not unheard of that a note written on the side of a text should on later copying be added into the main part of the text. The Talmud itself has Geonic additions from such a cause. Certainly this would apply to the Zohar to which there did not exist other manuscripts to compare it with.
 
* 9. The "borrowings" from medieval commentaries may be explained in a simple manner. It is not unheard of that a note written on the side of a text should on later copying be added into the main part of the text. The Talmud itself has Geonic additions from such a cause. Certainly this would apply to the Zohar to which there did not exist other manuscripts to compare it with.
* 10. He cites an ancient manuscript that refers to a book Sod Gadol that seems to in fact be the Zohar.
+
* 10. He cites an ancient manuscript that refers to a book Sod Gadol that seems to in fact be the Zohar.<ref>[http://www.daat.ac.il/daat/kitveyet/sinay/hazohar-2.htm Sinai]</ref>
  
Concerning the Zohars's lack of knowledge of the land of Israel, Scholem bases this on the many references to a city Kaputkia (Cappadocia) which he states was situated in Turkey not in Israel.
+
Concerning the Zohars' lack of knowledge of the land of Israel, Scholem bases this on the many references to a city Kaputkia (Cappadocia) which he states was situated in Turkey not in Israel. However, Rabbi Reuvein Margolies (Peninim U' Margolies) states that in an ancient Israeli tombstone there is mentioned a village Kaputkia. In addition, the Zohar states that this village was sitiuated within a day's walk, which would imply that the author of the Zohar had precise knowledge of the geography of Israel.  
  
R' Reuvein Margolies (Peninim U' Margolies) states that in an ancient Israeli tombstone there is mentioned a village Kaputkia. In addition, the Zohar states that this village was sitiuated within a day's walk of Lod and Margolies's research corroborates this. This would imply that the author of the Zohar had precise knowledge of the geography of Israel.
+
As to the references in the book to historical events of the post-Talmudic period, it was not deemed surprising that Shimon ben Yochai should have foretold future happenings.
  
In the same book he cites many statements of [[Maimonides]] that could only have come from a text very similar to the Zohar. In his notes on the Zohar (Nitzotzei Zohar), he points to many corrolaries between statements in the Zohar and other Tannatic literature (Medrashim, The two Talmuds, etc.). Many in the Jewish community accept that the Zohar is an authentic book of mysticism passed down from the second century.
 
 
==Historical Reception==
 
==Historical Reception==
According to legend, Rabbi Shimon predicted that the concealment of the Zohar would last for exactly 1200 years from the time of destruction of the Holy [[Temple in Jerusalem]] (in 70 CE). Just as predicted, Moses De Leon allegedly discovered the manuscripts in a cave in 1270 CE, and then duplicated it in his own handwriting shortly thereafter. Thus, the first extant copy of the Zohar appeared in [[Spain]] in the 13th century. It spread among the Jews with remarkable swiftness.<ref name="jewcyclo" /> Scarcely fifty years had passed before it was quoted by many [[Kabbalah|Kabbalists]], including the Italian mystical writer [[Menahem Recanati]].<ref name="jewcyclo"/> Its authority was so well established in Spain in the 15th century that [[Joseph ibn Shem-Tov]] drew from it arguments in his attacks against [[Maimonides]].<ref name="jewcyclo" />
+
According to legend, the alleged author of the Zohar, Rabbi Shimon, predicted that the work would remain hidden for exactly 1200 years from the [[Temple in Jerusalem]]'s destruction in 70 C.E. until it was rediscovered. Just as predicted, Moses De Leon claimed to have discovered the manuscripts in a cave in 1270 C.E., and then duplicated it in his own handwriting shortly thereafter. Thus, the first extant copy of the Zohar appeared in [[Spain]] in the thirteenth century. It spread among the Jews with remarkable swiftness.<ref>Jacobs and Broydé </ref> Scarcely 50 years had passed before it was quoted by many [[Kabbalah|Kabbalists]], including the Italian mystical writer [[Menahem Recanati]].<ref>Ibid.</ref> Its authority was so well established in Spain in the fifteenth century that [[Joseph ibn Shem-Tov]] drew from it arguments in his attacks against [[Maimonides]].<ref>Ibid.</ref>
Even representatives of non-mysticism oriented Judaism began to regard it as a revered book and to invoke its authority in the decision of some ritual questions.<ref name="jewcyclo"/>
+
Even representatives of non-mysticism oriented Judaism began to regard it as a revered book and to invoke its authority in the decision of some ritual questions.<ref>Ibid.[http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=142&letter=Z#406 "Zohar" article in the ''Jewish Encyclopedia.'']</ref>
 
 
The Zohar was quoted by [[Todros Abulafia]], by [[Menahem Recanati]], and even by [[Isaac of Acco]], in whose name the story of the confession of Moses de Leon's widow is related.<ref name="jewcyclo"/>
 
 
 
Isaac evidently ignored the woman's alleged confession in favor of the testimony of [[Joseph ben Todros]] and of Jacob, a pupil of Moses de Leon, both of whom assured him on oath that the work was not written by Moses.<ref name="jewcyclo"/>
 
 
 
One objection considered by the believers in the authenticity of the Zohar was the lack of references to the work in Jewish literature; and to this they answered that [[Shimon ben Yochai]] did not commit his teachings to writing, but transmitted them orally to his disciples, who in turn confided them to their disciples, and these to their successors, until finally the doctrines were embodied in the Zohar.<ref name="jewcyclo"/>
 
  
As to the references in the book to historical events of the post-Talmudic period, it was not deemed surprising that Shimon ben Yochai should have foretold future happenings. See below however for a more extensive explanation of these problems. <ref name="jewcyclo"/>
+
The Zohar was quoted by [[Todros Abulafia]], by [[Menahem Recanati]], and even by [[Isaac of Acco]], in whose name the story of the confession of Moses de Leon's widow is related.<ref>Ibid.</ref>
  
It is worth noting that most of the major Halachic authorities accept the Zohar as authentic and/or have written works on the Kabala. This includes R' [[Yosef Karo]], R' [[Moses Isserles]], R' [[Solomon Luria]], R' [[Yechiel Michel Epstein]], Rabbi [[Shneur Zalman of Liadi]] (The Alter Rebbe), The [[Vilna Gaon]] and R' [[Yisrael Meir Kagan]].  
+
Isaac evidently ignored the woman's alleged confession in favor of the testimony of [[Joseph ben Todros]] and of Jacob, a pupil of Moses de Leon, both of whom assured him on oath that the work was not written by Moses.<ref>Ibid.</ref>
  
Much of Orthodox Judaism holds that the teachings of Kabbalah were transmitted from teacher to teacher, in a long and continuous chain, from the Biblical era until its redaction by Shimon ben Yochai. Many accept fully the claims that the Kabbalah's teachings are in essence a revelation from [[God]] to the Biblical patriarch [[Abraham]], [[Moses]] and other ancient figures, but were never printed and made publicly available until the time of the Zohar's medieval publication. The greatest acceptance of this sequence of events is held within [[Haredi Judaism]].  
+
Much of Orthodox Judaism holds that the teachings of Kabbalah were transmitted from teacher to teacher, in a long and continuous chain, from the Biblical era until its redaction by Shimon ben Yochai. Many accept fully the claims that the Kabbalah's teachings are in essence a revelation from [[God]] to the Biblical patriarch [[Abraham]], [[Moses]] and other ancient figures, but were never printed and made publicly available until the time of the Zohar's medieval publication. The greatest acceptance of this sequence of events is held within [[Haredi Judaism]]. It is worth noting that most of the major Halachic authorities accept the Zohar as authentic and/or have written works on the Kabala. This includes R' [[Yosef Karo]], R' [[Moses Isserles]], R' [[Solomon Luria]], R' [[Yechiel Michel Epstein]], Rabbi [[Shneur Zalman of Liadi]] (The Alter Rebbe), The [[Vilna Gaon]] and R' [[Yisrael Meir Kagan]].
  
 
Some in [[Modern Orthodox Judaism]] reject the above view as naive and accept the earlier rabbinic position that the Zohar was a work written in the medieval period by Moses de Leon, but argue that since it is obviously based on earlier materials, it can still be held to be authentic, but not as authoritative or without error as others might hold.  
 
Some in [[Modern Orthodox Judaism]] reject the above view as naive and accept the earlier rabbinic position that the Zohar was a work written in the medieval period by Moses de Leon, but argue that since it is obviously based on earlier materials, it can still be held to be authentic, but not as authoritative or without error as others might hold.  
  
Jews in non-Orthodox Jewish denominations accept the conclusions of historical academic studies on the Zohar and other kabbalistic texts. As such, most non-Orthodox Jews have long viewed the Zohar as [[pseudepigraphy]] and [[apocrypha]]. Nonetheless, many accepted that some of its contents had meaning for modern Judaism. [[Siddur]]im edited by non-Orthodox Jews often have excerpts from the Zohar and other kabbalistic works (e.g. [[Siddur Sim Shalom]] edited by [[Jules Harlow]], even though the editors are not kabbalists).
+
Jews in non-Orthodox Jewish denominations accept the conclusions of historical academic studies on the Zohar and other kabbalistic texts. As such, most non-Orthodox Jews have long viewed the Zohar as [[pseudepigraphy]] and [[apocrypha]]. Nonetheless, many accepted that some of its contents had meaning for modern Judaism. [[Siddur]]im edited by non-Orthodox Jews often have excerpts from the Zohar and other kabbalistic works (e.g., [[Siddur Sim Shalom]] edited by [[Jules Harlow]], even though the editors are not kabbalists).
  
 
In recent years, there has been a growing willingness of non-Orthodox Jews to study the Zohar, and a growing minority have a position that is similar to the Modern Orthodox position described above. This seems pronounced among Jews who follow the path of [[Jewish Renewal]].
 
In recent years, there has been a growing willingness of non-Orthodox Jews to study the Zohar, and a growing minority have a position that is similar to the Modern Orthodox position described above. This seems pronounced among Jews who follow the path of [[Jewish Renewal]].
  
 
==Mystical Teachings==
 
==Mystical Teachings==
The Zohar assumes four kinds of Biblical exegesis known as ''Pardes'' to derive its mystical interpretation of the [[Torah]]. these four types of exegesis are: ''Peshat'' ("simple/literal meaning"), ''Remez'' ("hint/allusion"), ''Derash'' ("interpretative/anagogical), and ''Sod'' ("secret/mystic").<ref name="jewcyclo" />
+
The Zohar assumes four kinds of Biblical exegesis known as ''Pardes'' to derive its mystical interpretation of the [[Torah]]. These four types of exegesis are: ''Peshat'' ("simple/literal meaning"), ''Remez'' ("hint/allusion"), ''Derash'' ("interpretative/anagogical), and ''Sod'' ("secret/mystic").<ref>Ibid.</ref>
The initial letters of the words (P, R, D, S) form together the word ''PaRDeS'' ("paradise/orchard"), which became the designation for the fourfold meaning of which the mystical sense is the highest part.<ref name="jewcyclo" /> (Note also the similarity to the word and concept of "paradise.")
+
The initial letters of the words (P, R, D, S) form together the word ''PaRDeS'' ("paradise/orchard"), which became the designation for the fourfold meaning of which the mystical sense is the highest part.<ref>Ibid.</ref> (Note also the similarity to the word and concept of "paradise.")
 
 
The mystic allegory in the Zohar is based on the principle that all visible things, including natural phenomena, have both an [[exoteric]] reality and an [[esoteric]] reality, the latter of which instructs Man in that which is invisible.<ref name="jewcyclo"/>
 
 
 
This principle is the necessary corollary of the fundamental doctrine of the Zohar.<ref name="jewcyclo"/>
 
According to that doctrine, as the universe is a gradation of emanations, it follows that the human mind may recognize in each effect the supreme mark, and thus ascend to the cause of all causes.<ref name="jewcyclo"/>
 
 
 
This ascension, however, can only be made gradually, after the mind has attained four various stages of knowledge; namely: (1) the knowledge of the exterior aspect of things, or, as the Zohar calls it (ii. 36b), "the vision through the mirror that projects an indirect light"; (2) the knowledge of the essence of things, or "the vision through the mirror that projects a direct light"; (3) the knowledge through intuitive representation; and (4) the knowledge through love, since the Law reveals its secrets only to those who love it (ii. 99b).<ref name="jewcyclo"/>
 
  
After the knowledge through love comes the ecstatic state which is applied to the most holy visions.<ref name="jewcyclo" />
+
The mystic allegory in the Zohar is based on the principle that all visible things, including natural phenomena, have both an exoteric reality and an esoteric reality, the latter of which instructs humanity in that which is invisible.<ref>Ibid.</ref> This distinction also shapes the Zonhar's view on the universe is a gradation of emanations, it follows that the human mind may recognize in each effect the supreme mark, and thus ascend to the cause of all causes.<ref>Ibid.</ref>
To enter the state of ecstasy one had to remain motionless, with the head between the knees, absorbed in contemplation and murmuring prayers and hymns.<ref name="jewcyclo"/>
 
  
There were seven ecstatic stages, each of which was marked by a vision of a different color.<ref name="jewcyclo" />
+
This ascension, however, can only be made gradually, after the mind has attained four various stages of knowledge; namely: (1) the knowledge of the exterior aspect of things, or, as the Zohar calls it (ii. 36b), "the vision through the mirror that projects an indirect light"; (2) the knowledge of the essence of things, or "the vision through the mirror that projects a direct light"; (3) the knowledge through intuitive representation; and (4) the knowledge through love, since the Law reveals its secrets only to those who love it (ii. 99b).<ref>Ibid.</ref> After the knowledge through love comes the ecstatic state which is applied to the most holy visions.<ref>Ibid.</ref> To enter the state of ecstasy one had to remain motionless, with the head between the knees, absorbed in contemplation and murmuring prayers and hymns.<ref>Ibid.</ref> There were seven ecstatic stages, each of which was marked by a vision of a different color.<ref>Ibid.</ref>
At each new stage the contemplative entered a heavenly hall (''hekal'') of a different hue, until he reached the seventh, which was colorless, and the appearance of which marked both the end of his contemplation and his lapse into unconsciousness.<ref name="jewcyclo"/>
+
At each new stage the contemplative entered a heavenly hall ''(hekal)'' of a different hue, until he reached the seventh, which was colorless, and the appearance of which marked both the end of his contemplation and his lapse into unconsciousness.<ref>Ibid.</ref>
  
The Zohar gives the following illustration of an ecstatic state:
+
Other teachings of the Zohar include its [[glory|glorification]] of man, its doctrine of [[immortality]], and its ethical principles, which are more in keeping with the spirit of [[Talmud|Talmudic Judaism]] than are those taught by the philosophers.<ref>Ibid.</ref>
 +
While Maimonides and his followers regarded man as a fragment of the universe whose immortality is dependent upon the degree of development of his active intellect, the Zohar declared him to be the lord of the [[Creation theology|Creation]], whose immortality is solely dependent upon his morality.
 +
According to the Zohar, the moral perfection of man influences the ideal world of the [[Sefirot]]; for although the Sefirot expect everything from the [[Ein Sof]] ([[Hebrew language|Heb.]] אין סוף, infinity), the Ein Sof itself is dependent upon man: he alone can bring about the divine effusion.<ref>Ibid.</ref>
 +
The dew that vivifies the universe flows from the just.<ref>Ibid.</ref>
 +
By the practice of virtue and by moral perfection, man may increase the outpouring of heavenly grace.<ref>Ibid.</ref>
 +
Even physical life is subservient to virtue.<ref>Ibid.</ref>
 +
This, says the Zohar, is indicated in the words "for the Lord God had not caused it to rain" ([[Genesis|Gen.]] 2:5), which means that there had not yet been beneficent action in heaven, because man had not yet been created to pray for it.<ref>Ibid.</ref>
  
One of the most central parts of the Zohar is its interpretation of Biblical text.  The Biblical exegesis of the Zohar has been described in the past as a "Mystical interpretation of Biblical verses,"  however this does not accurately describe the Zohar's relationship to the biblical text.  As is often the case in mystical traditions,  the author or authors of the Zohar are not satisfied examining anything from a superficial level. This is especially true regarding the Biblical text, where four different levels of increasingly secretive reading are presented. Collectively known as PaRDeS, they include Peshat (most simple) Remez , Drash and Sod (most secretive).  Interestingly, unlike many philosophical books of its time, the Zohar works closely with the Biblical text. Its authors closely analyze verses from the Bible, trying to make sense of them without imposing any ideology on to them from the outside. Often, the most enigmatic verses can be understood only after the nuances in the biblical text have been sufficiently understood. Unlike many medieval commentators, the Zohar does not apply any sort of order to systematic thought when trying to understand the Bible.  In his book Mishnat Hazohar, Isaiah Tishby describes the style of the Zohar as a "homiletical exegesis." Similarly the style is associative and many verses are explained multiple ways through a constructed dialogue.  However Tishby also notes that this lack of structure also has its downsides.  The reader who is unfamiliar with the internal logic of the Zohar will find it very difficult to decipher its message.
+
Professor Moshe Idel argues that the fundamental distinction between the rational-philosophic strain of Judaism and its mystical strain in the Zohar, is the belief that the Godhead is complex, rather than simple, and that divinity is dynamic and incorporates gender, having both male and female dimensions. These polarities must be conjoined (have ''yihud'', "union") to maintain the harmony of the cosmos. Idel characterizes this metaphysical point of view as "ditheism," holding that there are two aspects to God, and the process of union as "theoeroticism." This ditheism, the dynamics it entails, and its reverberations within creation are arguably the central interest of the Zohar, making up a huge proportion of its discourse.<ref>Moshe Idel, ''Eros and Kabbalah.'' (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2005), 5-56.</ref>
  
Perhaps the most unique aspect of the Zohar's exegesis is its relationship to the Bible itself.  Unlike most commentators who develop a subject-object relationship with the text, the Zohar describes a different sort of relationship, comparing the Torah to a lover. This sort of subject-subject relationship allows the reader of the Torah (the author of the Zohar) to engage in a sort of playful dialogue with the text. Significant is Elliot Wolfson's argument in "Beautiful Maiden Without Eyes: Peshat and Sod in Zoharic Hermeneutics,” in ''The Midrashic Imagination: Jewish Exegesis, Thought, and History'', edited by Michael Fishbane (State University of New York Press, 1993), 155-203, that the zoharic understanding of the literal and mystical is such that the two are in essence one. For one who first sets out on the path, it seems as if the inner and outer are separate, but as one becomes enlightened, one comes to understand that the external is the internal, and the internal is external. In more recent work, for example, in ''Language, Eros, Being'', Wolfson develops his earlier insight by speaking of the dialectic of concealment and disclosure. Prone to paradoxical modes of expression, Wolfson has argued that the secret is seen from within the garment of the text, and not by discarding that garment. In Wolfson's formulation, the mystery lies right on the surface. In that sense, the text of Torah comprises everything; indeed, from the standpoint of the Zohar, the Torah is the name of God, and just as the name is hidden (the written form YHWH is not pronounced) and revealed (it is vocalized by its epithet Adonai), so the Torah is hidden and revealed. The mystic sage, who is the lover of the Torah, knows, however, that the hidden and the revealed are not paradoxically the same. Wolfson has also argued (in the fifth chapter of ''Language, Eros, Being'') that this insight on the part of the zoharic kabbalists is a tacit polemic against Christian exegesis, which is based on a sharper distinction between the literal and the mystical. The kabbalist resists any notion of reaching the spirit of the text without taking hold of the letter.
+
Professor Elliot Wolfson states that the oneness of God is perceived in androgynous terms as the pairing of male and female, the former characterized as the capacity to overflow and the latter as the potential to receive. Where Wolfson breaks with Idel and other scholars of the kabbalah is in his insistence that the consequence of that heteroerotic union is the resotration of the female to the male. Just as in the case of the original Adam, woman was constructed from man, and their carnal cleaving together in portrayed as becoming one flesh, so the ideal for kabbalists is the reconstitution of what Wolfson calls the male androgyne. Much closer in spirit to some ancient Gnostic dicta, Wolfson understands the eschatological ideal in traditional kabbalah to have been the female becoming male.<ref>Elliot Wolfson, ''Language, Eros, Being: Kabbalistic Hermeneutics and Poetic Imagination.'' (Fordham University Press, 2004) and ''Circle in the Square: Studies in the Use of Gender in Kabbalistic Symbolism.'' (State University of New York Press, 1995).</ref> If his reading is accepted, then Idel's ditheism may not be the most felicitous term to characterize kabbalistic theology.
  
They were attracted by its [[glory|glorification]] of man, its doctrine of [[immortality]], and its ethical principles, which are more in keeping with the spirit of [[Talmud|Talmudic Judaism]] than are those taught by the philosophers.<ref name="jewcyclo" />
+
In ''Studies in the Zohar,'' Professor Yehuda Liebes discusses the Zohar's secret teaching of God as a trinity. He says:
While Maimonides and his followers regarded man as a fragment of the universe whose immortality is dependent upon the degree of development of his active intellect, the Zohar declared him to be the lord of the [[Creation theology|Creation]], whose immortality is solely dependent upon his morality.<ref name="jewcyclo"/>
 
According to the Zohar, the moral perfection of man influences the ideal world of the [[Sefirot]]; for although the Sefirot expect everything from the [[Ein Sof]] ([[Hebrew language|Heb.]] אין סוף, infinity), the Ein Sof itself is dependent upon man: he alone can bring about the divine effusion.<ref name="jewcyclo"/>
 
The dew that vivifies the universe flows from the just.<ref name="jewcyclo"/>
 
By the practice of virtue and by moral perfection, man may increase the outpouring of heavenly grace.<ref name="jewcyclo" />
 
Even physical life is subservient to virtue.<ref name="jewcyclo"/>
 
This, says the Zohar, is indicated in the words "for the Lord God had not caused it to rain" ([[Genesis|Gen.]] 2:5), which means that there had not yet been beneficent action in heaven, because man had not yet been created to pray for it.<ref name="jewcyclo" />
 
  
In ''Eros and Kabbalah'', Professor Moshe Idel argues that the fundamental distinction between the rational-philosophic strain of Judaism and theosophic-mystical Judaism, as exemplified by the Zohar, is the mystical belief that the Godhead is complex, rather than simple, and that divinity is dynamic and incorporates gender, having both male and female dimensions. These polarities must be conjoined (have ''yihud'', "union") to maintain the harmony of the cosmos. Idel characterizes this metaphysical point of view as "ditheism," holding that there are two aspects to God, and the process of union as "theoeroticism." This ditheism, the dynamics it entails, and its reverberations within creation is arguably the central interest of the Zohar, making up a huge proportion of its discourse (pp. 5-56).
+
:It is a well-known fact that the Zohar frequently describes the Godhead as a threefold unity, doing so in different ways. The tenfold structure of the Kabbalistic sefirot can actually be fitted into threefold division, particularly in accordance with a certain passages from Pirkei de-Rabbi Eliezer - a passage on which the Zohar bases itself ... - thus remaining within the realm traditional Judaism.<ref>Yehuda Liebes. ''Studies in the Zohar.'' (New York: SUNY Press, SUNY series in Judaica: Hermeneutics, Mysticism, and Religion, 1993), 140.</ref>
  
Professor Elliot Wolfson lstates that the oneness of God is perceived in androgynous terms as the pairing of male and female, the former characterized as the capacity to overflow and the latter as the potential to receive. Where Wolfson breaks with Idel and other scholars of the kabbalah is in his insistence that the consequence of that heteroerotic union is the resotration of the female to the male. Just as in the case of the original Adam, woman was constructed from man, and their carnal cleaving together in portrayed as becoming one flesh, so the ideal for kabbalists is the reconstitution of what Wolfson calls the male androgyne. Much closer in spirit to some ancient Gnostic dicta, Wolfson understands the eschatological ideal in traditional kabbalah to have been the female becoming male (see his ''Circle in the Square'' and ''Language, Eros, Being''). If his reading is accepted, then Idel's ditheism may not be the most felicitous term to characterize kabbalistic theology.
+
Scholem states that the need to posit this hidden trinity is because rabbis wanted to reconcile the existence of ten sefirot ("emanation") with a rabbinic teaching that there are thirteen attributes of God. He concludes the matter by cautioning "It is hardly surprising that Christians later found an allusion to their own doctrine of the trinity in this theory, although it contains none of the personal hypostases characteristic of the Christian trinity." (Ibid.)
 
 
In ''Studies in the Zohar'', Professor Yehuda Liebes discusses the Zohar's secret teaching of God as a trinity. He says:
 
 
 
:It is a well-known fact that the Zohar frequently describes the Godhead as a threefold unity, doing so in different ways. The tenfold structure of the Kabbalistic sefirot can actually be fitted into threefold division, particularly in accordance with a certain passages from Pirkei de-Rabbi Eliezer - a passage on which the Zohar bases itself ... - thus remaining within the realm traditional Judaism.<ref>''Studies in the Zohar,'' pg. 140.</ref>
 
 
 
Scholem states that the need to posit this hidden trinity is because rabbis wanted to reconcile the existence of ten sefirot ("emanation") with a rabbinic teaching that there are thirteen attributes of God. He concludes the matter by cautioning "It is hardly surprising that Christians later found an allusion to their own doctrine of the trinity in this theory, although it contains none of the personal hypostases characteristic of the Christian trinity." (ibid.)
 
  
 
Alan Unterman, Minister of the Yeshurun Synagogue and part-time Lecturer in Comparative Religion at the University of Manchester (UK), writes:
 
Alan Unterman, Minister of the Yeshurun Synagogue and part-time Lecturer in Comparative Religion at the University of Manchester (UK), writes:
  
:Liebes is also quite convincing in showing Christian parallels to the language and images of the Zohar. He argues that some of the more original Christological elements of the Zohar were censored by Jewish copyists and are preserved by Christian kabbalists. He even finds something of Jesus in the literary persona of Shimon ben Yochai in the Zohar.  
+
:"Liebes is also quite convincing in showing Christian parallels to the language and images of the Zohar. He argues that some of the more original Christological elements of the Zohar were censored by Jewish copyists and are preserved by Christian kabbalists. He even finds something of Jesus in the literary persona of Shimon ben Yochai in the Zohar. ...The question he leaves unanswered, however, is why members of the Zohar group, who were antagonistic to Christianity, should have been so ambivalent towards Jesus and have used overtly Christian ideas in formulating their system. He merely remarks about "the spiritual affinity," between Judaism and Christianity, which was indeed "among the causes for the animosity between them."<ref>Alan Unterman [http://www.MyJewishLearning.Com, Kabbalah and Mysticism; Reinterpreting Mysticism and Messianism].Retrieved January 5, 2008. </ref>
:The question he leaves unanswered, however, is why members of the Zohar group, who were antagonistic to Christianity, should have been so ambivalent towards Jesus and have used overtly Christian ideas in formulating their system. He merely remarks about "the spiritual affinity," between Judaism and Christianity, which was indeed "among the causes for the animosity between them."<ref>[MyJewishLearning.Com, Kabbalah and Mysticism; Reinterpreting Mysticism and Messianism]</ref>
 
 
 
==Academic historical views==
 
 
 
The ''Encyclopaedia Judaica'' article written by the late Professor Gershom Scholem (Hebrew University of Jerusalem) has an extensive discussion of the sources that the author of the Zohar drew upon.  Scholem's views are widely held as accurate among historians of the [[Kabbalah]], but like all textual historical investigations, are not uncriticially accepted; many of the following conclusions are still accepted as accurate, but some current academic scholars of Kabbalah have differing ideas.
 
 
 
Scholem views the author of the Zohar as not writing a totally original work, but rather based the Zohar on a wide variety of Jewish sources that existed before him. The author, however, invents a number of fictious works that the Zohar supposedly quotes, e.g., the Sifra de-Adam, the Sifra de-Hanokh, the Sifra di-Shelomo Malka, the Sifra de-Rav Hamnuna Sava, the Sifra de-Rav Yeiva Sava, the Sifra de-Aggadeta, the Raza de-Razin and many others.
 
 
 
While many original ideas in the Zohar are presented as being from (fictitious) Jewish mystical works, many ancient and clearly rabbinic mystical teachings are presented without their real, identifiable sources being named.  Academic studies of the Zohar show that many of its ideas are based in the Talmud, various works of [[midrash]], and earlier Jewish mystical works. Scholem writes:
 
 
 
:The writer had expert knowledge of the early material and he often used it as a foundation for his expositions, putting into it variations of his own. His main sources were the Babylonian Talmud, the complete Midrash Rabbah, the Midrash Tanhuma, and the two Pesiktot (Pesikta De-Rav Kahana or Pesikta Rabbati), the Midrash on Psalms, the Pirkei de-Rabbi Eliezer, and the Targum Onkelos. Generally speaking they are not quoted exactly, but translated into the peculiar style of the Zohar and summarized....
 
 
 
:... Less use is made of the halakhic Midrashim, the Jerusalem Talmud, and the other Targums, nor of the Midrashim like the Aggadat Shir ha-Shirim, the Midrash on Proverbs, and the Alfabet de-R. Akiva. It is not clear whether the author used the Yalkut Shimoni, or whether he knew the sources of its aggadah separately. Of the smaller Midrashim he used the Heikhalot Rabbati, the Alfabet de-Ben Sira, the Sefer Zerubabel, the Baraita de-Ma'aseh Bereshit, [and many others]...
 
 
 
The author of the Zohar drew upon the Bible commentaries written by medieval Jewish rabbis, including [[Rashi]], [[Abraham ibn Ezra]], [[David Kimhi]] and even authorities as late as [[Nahmanides]] and [[Maimonides]]. Scholem gives a variety of examples of such borrowings.
 
 
 
The Zohar draws upon early mystical texts such as the [[Sefer Yetzirah]] and the [[Bahir]], and the early medieval writings of the Hasidei Ashkenaz.
 
 
 
Scholem's studies concluded that the author of the Zohar "develops tendencies which appeared first in the writings of the circle of the Gnostics in Castile in the middle of the 13th century." While this view is still widely accepted as plausible, it is currently being argued that perhaps Scholem has this conclusion backwards. Moshe Idel has argued that the Gnostic views found within the Zohar developed indigenously within Judaism, and from there extended outwards towards adherents of Gnostic theology. A similar approach has been taken by other scholars as well, for example, Yehuda Liebes and Eliiot R. Wolfson. A careful reading of Scholem indicates that Idel's critique is only partially correct. Scholem was equivocal on this point, sometimes arguing that medieval kabbalah was a gnostification of rabbinic thought and practice, and at other time arguing that underlying the ancient gnostic sources we could find a jewish heterodoxy. The latter position is not at odds with the more recent work of Idel, Liebes, and Wolfson.<ref>Moshe Idel, ''Kabbalah: New Perspectives.'' (Yale University Press, 1990); Yehuda Liebes, "How the Zohar was Written," in Studies in the Zohar (Albany: SUNY, 1993), pp. 85-138.</ref>
 
  
 
==Effects on Judaism==
 
==Effects on Judaism==
The Zohar evoked different reactions from the Jewish community. On the one hand, the Zohar was lauded by many rabbis because it opposed religious formalism, stimulated one's imagination and emotions, and for many people helped reinvigorate the experience of prayer.<ref name="jewcyclo" /> On the other hand, the Zohar was censured by many rabbis because it propagated many superstitious beliefs, and produced a host of mystical dreamers, whose overexcited imaginations peopled the world with spirits, demons, and all kinds of good and bad influences.<ref name="jewcyclo"/> Many classical rabbis, especially Maimonides, viewed all such beliefs as a violation of Judaic principles of faith.
+
The Zohar evoked different reactions from the Jewish community. On the one hand, the Zohar was lauded by many rabbis because it opposed religious formalism, stimulated one's imagination and emotions, and for many people helped reinvigorate the experience of prayer.<ref>Jacobs and Broydé </ref> On the other hand, the Zohar was censured by many rabbis because it propagated many superstitious beliefs, and produced a host of mystical dreamers, whose overexcited imaginations peopled the world with spirits, demons, and all kinds of good and bad influences.<ref>Ibid.</ref> Many classical rabbis, especially Maimonides, viewed all such beliefs as a violation of Judaic principles of faith.
  
Elements of the Zohar crept into the liturgy of the 16th and 17th centuries, and the religious poets not only used the allegorism and symbolism of the Zohar in their compositions, but even adopted its style, e.g. the use of erotic terminology to illustrate the relations between man and God.<ref name="jewcyclo" /> Thus, in the language of some Jewish poets, the beloved one's curls indicate the mysteries of the Deity; sensuous pleasures, and especially intoxication, typify the highest degree of divine love as ecstatic contemplation; while the wine-room represents merely the state through which the human qualities merge or are exalted into those of God.<ref name="jewcyclo"/>
+
Elements of the Zohar crept into the liturgy of the 16th and 17th centuries, and the religious poets not only used the allegorism and symbolism of the Zohar in their compositions, but even adopted its style, e.g., the use of erotic terminology to illustrate the relations between man and God.<ref>Ibid. </ref> Thus, in the language of some Jewish poets, the beloved one's curls indicate the mysteries of the Deity; sensuous pleasures, and especially intoxication, typify the highest degree of divine love as ecstatic contemplation; while the wine-room represents merely the state through which the human qualities merge or are exalted into those of God.<ref>Ibid.</ref>
  
 
Originally, many held that only Jewish men who were at least 40 years old could study Kabbalah, and by extension read the Zohar, because they were believed to be too powerful for those less emotionally mature and experienced.
 
Originally, many held that only Jewish men who were at least 40 years old could study Kabbalah, and by extension read the Zohar, because they were believed to be too powerful for those less emotionally mature and experienced.
  
 
==Influence on Christian mysticism==
 
==Influence on Christian mysticism==
The enthusiasm felt for the Zohar was shared by many Christian scholars, such as [[Giovanni Pico della Mirandola]], [[Johann Reuchlin]], [[Aegidius of Viterbo]], etc., all of whom believed that the book contained proofs of the truth of [[Christianity]].<ref name="jewcyclo406">{{cite encyclopedia|last=Jacobs|first=Joseph|author=|authorlink=|coauthors=Broydé, Isaac|editor=|encyclopedia=Jewish Encyclopedia|title=Zohar|url=http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=142&letter=Z#406|accessdate=|accessyear=|accessmonth=|edition=|date=|year=|month=|publisher=Funk & Wagnalls Company|volume=|location=|id=|doi=|pages=|quote=}}</ref> They were led to this belief by the analogies existing between some of the teachings of the Zohar and certain Christian dogmas, such as the fall and redemption of man, and the dogma of the [[Trinity]], which seems to be expressed in the Zohar in the following terms: "The Ancient of Days has three heads. He reveals himself in three archetypes, all three forming but one.<ref name="jewcyclo406" /> He is thus symbolized by the number Three. They are revealed in one another.<ref name="jewcyclo406"/>[These are:] first, secret, hidden 'Wisdom'; above that the Holy Ancient One; and above Him the Unknowable One.<ref name="jewcyclo406"/> None knows what He contains; He is above all conception.<ref name="jewcyclo406"/> He is therefore called for man 'Non-Existing' [''Ayin'']"<ref name="jewcyclo406"/> (Zohar, iii. 288b).
 
 
This and other similar doctrines found in the Zohar are now known to be much older than Christianity; but the Christian scholars who were led by the similarity of these teachings to certain Christian dogmas deemed it their duty to propagate the Zohar.<ref name="jewcyclo406"/> Shortly after the publication of the work (Mantua and Cremona, 1558) Joseph de Voisin translated extracts from it which deal with the soul.<ref name="jewcyclo406" /> He was followed by many others.<ref name="jewcyclo406"/>
 
 
The disastrous effects of the [[Sabbatai Zevi]] messianic movement on the Jewish community dampened the enthusiasm that had been felt for the book in the Jewish community.<ref name="jewcyclo406"/> However, the Zohar is still held in great reverence by many Orthodox Jews, especially the [[Hasidic Judaism|Hasidim]] (Hasidic Jews).<ref name="jewcyclo406"/>
 
  
==Appendices and additions==
+
The enthusiasm felt for the Zohar was shared by many Christian scholars, such as [[Giovanni Pico della Mirandola]], [[Johann Reuchlin]], [[Aegidius of Viterbo]], etc., all of whom believed that the book contained proofs of the truth of [[Christianity]].<ref>Jacobs and Broydé [http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view]</ref> They were led to this belief by the analogies existing between some of the teachings of the Zohar and certain Christian dogmas, such as the fall and redemption of man, and the dogma of the [[Trinity]], which seems to be expressed in the Zohar in the following terms: "The Ancient of Days has three heads. He reveals himself in three archetypes, all three forming but one.<ref>Ibid.</ref> He is thus symbolized by the number Three. They are revealed in one another.<ref>Ibid.</ref>[These are:  first, secret, hidden 'Wisdom'; above that the Holy Ancient One; and above Him the Unknowable One. <ref>Ibid.</ref> None knows what He contains; He is above all conception.<ref>Ibid.</ref> He is therefore called for man 'Non-Existing' [''Ayin'']. <ref>Ibid., iii. 288b).</ref>
The Zohar is not considered complete without the addition of certain appendixes, which are often attributed either to the same author, or to some of his immediate disciples. These supplementary portions are almost always printed as part of the text with separate titles, or in separate columns. They are as follows:<ref name="jewcyclo"/>
 
* ''Sifra di-Tsni`uta'', consisting of five chapters, in which are chiefly discussed the questions involved in the Creation, such as the transition from the infinite to the finite, that from absolute unity to multifariousness, that from pure intelligence to matter, etc;<ref name="jewcyclo" />
 
* ''[[Idra]] Rabbah'', in which the teachings of the preceding portion are enlarged upon and developed;<ref name="jewcyclo" /> and ''Idra Zuta'', giving a résumé of the two preceding sections.<ref name="jewcyclo" />
 
  
To the larger appendixes are added the following fragments:
+
This and other similar doctrines found in the Zohar are now known to be much older than Christianity; but the Christian scholars who were led by the similarity of these teachings to certain Christian dogmas deemed it their duty to propagate the Zohar.<ref>Ibid.</ref> Shortly after the publication of the work (Mantua and Cremona, 1558) Joseph de Voisin translated extracts from it which deal with the soul.<ref>Ibid.</ref> He was followed by many others.
  
* ''Raza de Razin'', ("Secret of Secrets") dealing with the connection of the soul with the body;<ref name="jewcyclo" />
+
The disastrous effects of the [[Sabbatai Zevi]] messianic movement on the Jewish community dampened the enthusiasm that had been felt for the book in the Jewish community.<ref>Ibid. </ref> However, the Zohar is still held in great reverence by many Orthodox Jews, especially the [[Hasidic Judaism|Hasidim]] (Hasidic Jews).
* ''Sefer Hekalot'', describing the seven heavenly halls, paradise, and hell;<ref name="jewcyclo" />
 
* ''Raya Mehemna'', giving a conversation between Moses, the prophet [[Elijah]], and Shimon ben Yochai on the allegorical import of the Mosaic commandments and prohibitions, as well as of the rabbinical injunctions.<ref name="jewcyclo" />
 
* ''Sitre Torah'', on various topics;<ref name="jewcyclo" />
 
* ''[[Midrash]] ha-Ne'elam'', explaining passages of Scripture mystically by way of hints and [[gematria]] (mystical numerology);<ref name="jewcyclo" />
 
* ''Saba'', containing a conversation between the prophet Elijah and Shimon ben Yochai about the doctrine of metempsychosis;<ref name="jewcyclo" />
 
* ''Yanuḳa'', on the importance of washing the hands before meals and on similar subjects, written in the name of a child of Hamnuna Saba, whence the title ''Yanuḳa'' ("child");<ref name="jewcyclo" />
 
* ''[[Tosefta]]'' and ''Matnitin'', in which are sketched the doctrines of the Sefirot, the emanation of the primordial light, etc.
 
<ref name="jewcyclo" />
 
  
 
==Notes==
 
==Notes==
Line 172: Line 109:
  
 
==References==
 
==References==
* Blumenthal, David R. "Three is not enough: Jewish Reflections on Trinitarian Thinking", in ''Ethical Monotheism, Past and Present: Essays in Honor of Wendell S. Dietrich'', ed. M. Vial Theodore and Mark Hadley. Brown Judaic Studies, 2001. ISBN 978-1930675063
+
* Blumenthal, David R. "Three is not enough: Jewish Reflections on Trinitarian Thinking," in ''Ethical Monotheism, Past and Present: Essays in Honor of Wendell S. Dietrich'', ed. M. Vial Theodore and Mark Hadley. Brown Judaic Studies, 2001. ISBN 978-1930675063
  
 
* Dennis, Geoffrey. ''The Encyclopedia of Jewish Myth, Magic, and Mysticism'',  Llewellyn Worldwide, 2007. ISBN 978-0738709055
 
* Dennis, Geoffrey. ''The Encyclopedia of Jewish Myth, Magic, and Mysticism'',  Llewellyn Worldwide, 2007. ISBN 978-0738709055
  
 
* Idel, Moshe. ''Kabbalah: New Perspectives.'' Yale University Press, 1990. ISBN 978-0300046991
 
* Idel, Moshe. ''Kabbalah: New Perspectives.'' Yale University Press, 1990. ISBN 978-0300046991
 +
 +
* Idel, Moshe. ''Kabbalah and Eros.'' Yale University Press, 2005. ISBN 978-0300108323
  
 
* Liebes, Yehuda. ''Studies in the Zohar'', SUNY Press, SUNY series in Judaica: Hermeneutics, Mysticism, and Religion, 1993. ISBN 978-0791411896
 
* Liebes, Yehuda. ''Studies in the Zohar'', SUNY Press, SUNY series in Judaica: Hermeneutics, Mysticism, and Religion, 1993. ISBN 978-0791411896
Line 183: Line 122:
  
 
* Scholem, Gershom. ''On the Mystical Shape of the Godhead: Basic Concepts in the Kabbalah.'' (Schocken, 1997), pg. 265. ISBN 978-0805210811
 
* Scholem, Gershom. ''On the Mystical Shape of the Godhead: Basic Concepts in the Kabbalah.'' (Schocken, 1997), pg. 265. ISBN 978-0805210811
 +
 +
*Wolfson, Elliot. ''Language, Eros, Being: Kabbalistic Hermeneutics and Poetic Imagination.'' Fordham University Press, 2004. ISBN 978-0823224197
 +
 +
*Wolfson, Elliot. ''Circle in the Square: Studies in the Use of Gender in Kabbalistic Symbolism.'' State University of New York Press, 1995. ISBN 978-0791424063
  
 
==External Links==
 
==External Links==
*[http://www.radicaltorahthought.com/Info%20Zohar.htm Scholem, Gershom, ''Zohar'' in ''Encyclopadeia Judaica'', Keter Publishing] Retrieved Sept. 19, 2007.
+
All links retrieved October 16, 2020.
*[http://www.myjewishlearning.com/ideas_belief/Kabbalah_and_Mysticism/Overview_Modern_Times/The_Academic_Study_Of_Mysticism/Mysticism_Liebes.htm MyJewishLearning.Com, Kabbalah and Mysticism. Reinterpreting Mysticism and Messianism. Alan Unterman, ''Yehuda Liebes has revolutionized our understanding of the Zohar and underscored the relationship between kabbalah and Christianity.''] Retrieved Sept. 19, 2007.
+
*[http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=142&letter=Z#406 "Zohar" article in the ''Jewish Encyclopedia.'']  
* [http://www.myjewishlearning.com/ideas_belief/Kabbalah_and_Mysticism/Overview_Modern_Times/The_Academic_Study_Of_Mysticism/Mysticism_IdelSch_Oden.htm MyJewishLearning.Com, Kabbalah and Mysticism. Micha Odenheimer, ''Challenging the Master: Moshe Idel’s critique of Gershom Scholem''] Retrieved Sept. 19, 2007.
 
  
 
[[Category: Philosophy and religion]]
 
[[Category: Philosophy and religion]]

Revision as of 17:52, 16 October 2020

Title page of first edition of the Zohar, Mantua, 1558. Library of Congress.

The Zohar (Hebrew: זהר meaning "Splendor" or "Radiance") is a mystical commentary on the Torah (the five books of Moses), written primarily in medieval Aramaic and considered to be the most important work of Kabbalah. It contains an esoteric discussion of the nature of God, the origin and structure of the universe, the nature of souls, sin, redemption, good and evil, and other multifarious metaphysical topics (especially cosmology).

The Zohar is considered to be the greatest work of Jewish mysticism. However, reaction to it among Jews has been mixed. The text has been lauded by many rabbis for opposing religious formalism, and for reinvigorating the experience of prayer.[1] On the other hand, the Zohar has been condemned for propagating superstitious beliefs, especially centered on a host of spirits and demons.[2] Many classical rabbis, especially Maimonides, viewed all such beliefs as a violation of Judaic principles of faith. Christians have noted that the Zohar contains many religious teachings that are compatible with Christian doctrine.

Today, the Zohar stands out as one of the most beautiful works of Jewish mysticism that has survived the passage of time.

Authorship

The question of authorship of the Zohar is highly debated among scholars. The Zohar itself claims to be written in the second century by Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai.[3] The text states that during a time of Roman persecution, Shimon bar Yochai apparently hid in a cave for thirteen years, studying the Torah, when he was inspired by Prophet Elijah to write the Zohar.[4][5] Others, however, have argued that the Zohar was probably composed by its unveiler, Moses de Leon, who allegedly discovered the text during his visit to Jerusalem. Those who favor the authorship of Moses de Leon cite as evidence the story of the rich man from Avila named Joseph who offered Moses' widow (who had been left without any means of supporting herself) a large sum of money for the original text of the Zohar from which her husband had made the copy.[6] It is said that she confessed to him that her husband himself was the author of the work.[7]

Moreover, Elijah Delmedigo, in his Bechinat ha-Dat endeavored to show that it could not be attributed to Shimon bar Yochai because:

  1. If the Zohar was the work of Shimon bar Yochai, it would have been mentioned by the Talmud, as has been the case with other works of the Talmudic period;[8]
  2. The Zohar contains names of rabbis who lived at a later period than that of Simeon;[9]
  3. Were Shimon ben Yochai the father of the Kabbalah, knowing by divine revelation the hidden meaning of the precepts, his decisions on Jewish law would have been adopted by the Talmud; but this has not been done;[10]
  4. Were the Kabbalah a revealed doctrine, there would have been no divergence of opinion among the Kabbalists concerning the mystic interpretation of the precepts (Bechinat ha-Dat ed. Vienna, 1833, 43).[11]

These arguments and others of the same kind were used by Leon of Modena in his Ari Nohem.[12] A work devoted to the criticism of the Zohar was written, Miṭpaḥat Sefarim, by Jacob Emden, who, waging war against the remaining adherents of the Sabbatai Zevi movement, endeavored to show that the book on which Zevi based his doctrines was a forgery.[13] Emden demonstrates that the Zohar misquotes passages of Scripture; misunderstands the Talmud; contains some ritual observances that were ordained by later rabbinical authorities; mentions the crusades against the Muslims (who did not exist in the second century); uses the expression esnoga, which is a Portuguese term for "synagogue,"; and gives a mystical explanation of the Hebrew vowel-points, which were not introduced until long after the Talmudic period.[14]

There is a small group among the Orthodox, known as Dor Daim (דרדעים), who refuse to accept the Zohar. They are mainly from the Jewish community in Yemen, and claim that the Zohar cannot be true because its ideas clash with the ideas of the Rambam (Maimonides), the great medieval rabbi and rationalist, Rabbi Saadiah Gaon, and other early representatives of the Jewish faith.

In the mid-twentieth century, the Jewish historian Gershom Scholem contended that de Leon himself was the most likely author of the Zohar. Among other things, Scholem noticed the Zohar's frequent errors in Aramaic grammar, its suspicious traces of Spanish words and sentence patterns, and its lack of knowledge of the land of Israel. This finding is still disputed by many within Orthodox Judaism, although not because of any scholarly proofs, but rather because of tradition.

However, even if de Leon wrote the text, the entire contents of the book may not be fraudulent. Parts of it may be based on older works, and it was a common practice to ascribe the authorship of a document to an ancient rabbi in order to give the document more weight. It is possible that Moses de Leon considered himself inspired to write this text.

Arguments for an earlier dating

Rabbi Menachem Mendel Kasher attempts to refute many of Scholem's points. He writes:

  • 1. Many statements in the works of the Rishonim (medieval commentors who preceded De Leon refer to Medrashim of which we are not aware. He writes that these are in fact references to the Zohar. This has also been pointed out by R' David Luria in his work "Kadmus Sefer Ha'Zohar."
  • 2. The Zohar's major opponent Elijah Delmedigo refers to the Zohar as having existed for only 300 years. Even he agrees that it was extant before the time of R' Moses De Leon.
  • 3. He cites a document from R' Yitchok M' Acco who was sent by the Ramban to investigate the Zohar. The document brings witnesses that attest to the existence of the manuscript.
  • 4. It is impossible to accept that R' Moshe De Leon managed to forge a work of the scope of the Zohar (1700 pages) within a period of six years as Scholem claims.
  • 5. A comparison between the Zohar and De Leon's other works show major stylistic differences. Although he made use of his manuscript of the Zohar, many ideas presented in his works contradict or ignore ideas mentioned in the Zohar. (Luria also points this out)
  • 6. Many of the Midrashic works achieved their final redaction in the Geonic period. Some of the anachronistic terminology of the Zohar may date from that time.
  • 7. Out of the thousands of words used in the Zohar Scholem finds two anachronistic terms and nine cases of ungrammatical usage of words. This proves that the majority of the Zohar was written within the accepted time frame and only a small amount was added later (in the Geonic period as mentioned).
  • 8. Some hard to understand terms may be attributed to acronyms or codes. He finds corrolaries to such a practice in other ancient manuscripts.
  • 9. The "borrowings" from medieval commentaries may be explained in a simple manner. It is not unheard of that a note written on the side of a text should on later copying be added into the main part of the text. The Talmud itself has Geonic additions from such a cause. Certainly this would apply to the Zohar to which there did not exist other manuscripts to compare it with.
  • 10. He cites an ancient manuscript that refers to a book Sod Gadol that seems to in fact be the Zohar.[15]

Concerning the Zohars' lack of knowledge of the land of Israel, Scholem bases this on the many references to a city Kaputkia (Cappadocia) which he states was situated in Turkey not in Israel. However, Rabbi Reuvein Margolies (Peninim U' Margolies) states that in an ancient Israeli tombstone there is mentioned a village Kaputkia. In addition, the Zohar states that this village was sitiuated within a day's walk, which would imply that the author of the Zohar had precise knowledge of the geography of Israel.

As to the references in the book to historical events of the post-Talmudic period, it was not deemed surprising that Shimon ben Yochai should have foretold future happenings.

Historical Reception

According to legend, the alleged author of the Zohar, Rabbi Shimon, predicted that the work would remain hidden for exactly 1200 years from the Temple in Jerusalem's destruction in 70 C.E. until it was rediscovered. Just as predicted, Moses De Leon claimed to have discovered the manuscripts in a cave in 1270 C.E., and then duplicated it in his own handwriting shortly thereafter. Thus, the first extant copy of the Zohar appeared in Spain in the thirteenth century. It spread among the Jews with remarkable swiftness.[16] Scarcely 50 years had passed before it was quoted by many Kabbalists, including the Italian mystical writer Menahem Recanati.[17] Its authority was so well established in Spain in the fifteenth century that Joseph ibn Shem-Tov drew from it arguments in his attacks against Maimonides.[18] Even representatives of non-mysticism oriented Judaism began to regard it as a revered book and to invoke its authority in the decision of some ritual questions.[19]

The Zohar was quoted by Todros Abulafia, by Menahem Recanati, and even by Isaac of Acco, in whose name the story of the confession of Moses de Leon's widow is related.[20]

Isaac evidently ignored the woman's alleged confession in favor of the testimony of Joseph ben Todros and of Jacob, a pupil of Moses de Leon, both of whom assured him on oath that the work was not written by Moses.[21]

Much of Orthodox Judaism holds that the teachings of Kabbalah were transmitted from teacher to teacher, in a long and continuous chain, from the Biblical era until its redaction by Shimon ben Yochai. Many accept fully the claims that the Kabbalah's teachings are in essence a revelation from God to the Biblical patriarch Abraham, Moses and other ancient figures, but were never printed and made publicly available until the time of the Zohar's medieval publication. The greatest acceptance of this sequence of events is held within Haredi Judaism. It is worth noting that most of the major Halachic authorities accept the Zohar as authentic and/or have written works on the Kabala. This includes R' Yosef Karo, R' Moses Isserles, R' Solomon Luria, R' Yechiel Michel Epstein, Rabbi Shneur Zalman of Liadi (The Alter Rebbe), The Vilna Gaon and R' Yisrael Meir Kagan.

Some in Modern Orthodox Judaism reject the above view as naive and accept the earlier rabbinic position that the Zohar was a work written in the medieval period by Moses de Leon, but argue that since it is obviously based on earlier materials, it can still be held to be authentic, but not as authoritative or without error as others might hold.

Jews in non-Orthodox Jewish denominations accept the conclusions of historical academic studies on the Zohar and other kabbalistic texts. As such, most non-Orthodox Jews have long viewed the Zohar as pseudepigraphy and apocrypha. Nonetheless, many accepted that some of its contents had meaning for modern Judaism. Siddurim edited by non-Orthodox Jews often have excerpts from the Zohar and other kabbalistic works (e.g., Siddur Sim Shalom edited by Jules Harlow, even though the editors are not kabbalists).

In recent years, there has been a growing willingness of non-Orthodox Jews to study the Zohar, and a growing minority have a position that is similar to the Modern Orthodox position described above. This seems pronounced among Jews who follow the path of Jewish Renewal.

Mystical Teachings

The Zohar assumes four kinds of Biblical exegesis known as Pardes to derive its mystical interpretation of the Torah. These four types of exegesis are: Peshat ("simple/literal meaning"), Remez ("hint/allusion"), Derash ("interpretative/anagogical), and Sod ("secret/mystic").[22] The initial letters of the words (P, R, D, S) form together the word PaRDeS ("paradise/orchard"), which became the designation for the fourfold meaning of which the mystical sense is the highest part.[23] (Note also the similarity to the word and concept of "paradise.")

The mystic allegory in the Zohar is based on the principle that all visible things, including natural phenomena, have both an exoteric reality and an esoteric reality, the latter of which instructs humanity in that which is invisible.[24] This distinction also shapes the Zonhar's view on the universe is a gradation of emanations, it follows that the human mind may recognize in each effect the supreme mark, and thus ascend to the cause of all causes.[25]

This ascension, however, can only be made gradually, after the mind has attained four various stages of knowledge; namely: (1) the knowledge of the exterior aspect of things, or, as the Zohar calls it (ii. 36b), "the vision through the mirror that projects an indirect light"; (2) the knowledge of the essence of things, or "the vision through the mirror that projects a direct light"; (3) the knowledge through intuitive representation; and (4) the knowledge through love, since the Law reveals its secrets only to those who love it (ii. 99b).[26] After the knowledge through love comes the ecstatic state which is applied to the most holy visions.[27] To enter the state of ecstasy one had to remain motionless, with the head between the knees, absorbed in contemplation and murmuring prayers and hymns.[28] There were seven ecstatic stages, each of which was marked by a vision of a different color.[29] At each new stage the contemplative entered a heavenly hall (hekal) of a different hue, until he reached the seventh, which was colorless, and the appearance of which marked both the end of his contemplation and his lapse into unconsciousness.[30]

Other teachings of the Zohar include its glorification of man, its doctrine of immortality, and its ethical principles, which are more in keeping with the spirit of Talmudic Judaism than are those taught by the philosophers.[31] While Maimonides and his followers regarded man as a fragment of the universe whose immortality is dependent upon the degree of development of his active intellect, the Zohar declared him to be the lord of the Creation, whose immortality is solely dependent upon his morality. According to the Zohar, the moral perfection of man influences the ideal world of the Sefirot; for although the Sefirot expect everything from the Ein Sof (Heb. אין סוף, infinity), the Ein Sof itself is dependent upon man: he alone can bring about the divine effusion.[32] The dew that vivifies the universe flows from the just.[33] By the practice of virtue and by moral perfection, man may increase the outpouring of heavenly grace.[34] Even physical life is subservient to virtue.[35] This, says the Zohar, is indicated in the words "for the Lord God had not caused it to rain" (Gen. 2:5), which means that there had not yet been beneficent action in heaven, because man had not yet been created to pray for it.[36]

Professor Moshe Idel argues that the fundamental distinction between the rational-philosophic strain of Judaism and its mystical strain in the Zohar, is the belief that the Godhead is complex, rather than simple, and that divinity is dynamic and incorporates gender, having both male and female dimensions. These polarities must be conjoined (have yihud, "union") to maintain the harmony of the cosmos. Idel characterizes this metaphysical point of view as "ditheism," holding that there are two aspects to God, and the process of union as "theoeroticism." This ditheism, the dynamics it entails, and its reverberations within creation are arguably the central interest of the Zohar, making up a huge proportion of its discourse.[37]

Professor Elliot Wolfson states that the oneness of God is perceived in androgynous terms as the pairing of male and female, the former characterized as the capacity to overflow and the latter as the potential to receive. Where Wolfson breaks with Idel and other scholars of the kabbalah is in his insistence that the consequence of that heteroerotic union is the resotration of the female to the male. Just as in the case of the original Adam, woman was constructed from man, and their carnal cleaving together in portrayed as becoming one flesh, so the ideal for kabbalists is the reconstitution of what Wolfson calls the male androgyne. Much closer in spirit to some ancient Gnostic dicta, Wolfson understands the eschatological ideal in traditional kabbalah to have been the female becoming male.[38] If his reading is accepted, then Idel's ditheism may not be the most felicitous term to characterize kabbalistic theology.

In Studies in the Zohar, Professor Yehuda Liebes discusses the Zohar's secret teaching of God as a trinity. He says:

It is a well-known fact that the Zohar frequently describes the Godhead as a threefold unity, doing so in different ways. The tenfold structure of the Kabbalistic sefirot can actually be fitted into threefold division, particularly in accordance with a certain passages from Pirkei de-Rabbi Eliezer - a passage on which the Zohar bases itself ... - thus remaining within the realm traditional Judaism.[39]

Scholem states that the need to posit this hidden trinity is because rabbis wanted to reconcile the existence of ten sefirot ("emanation") with a rabbinic teaching that there are thirteen attributes of God. He concludes the matter by cautioning "It is hardly surprising that Christians later found an allusion to their own doctrine of the trinity in this theory, although it contains none of the personal hypostases characteristic of the Christian trinity." (Ibid.)

Alan Unterman, Minister of the Yeshurun Synagogue and part-time Lecturer in Comparative Religion at the University of Manchester (UK), writes:

"Liebes is also quite convincing in showing Christian parallels to the language and images of the Zohar. He argues that some of the more original Christological elements of the Zohar were censored by Jewish copyists and are preserved by Christian kabbalists. He even finds something of Jesus in the literary persona of Shimon ben Yochai in the Zohar. ...The question he leaves unanswered, however, is why members of the Zohar group, who were antagonistic to Christianity, should have been so ambivalent towards Jesus and have used overtly Christian ideas in formulating their system. He merely remarks about "the spiritual affinity," between Judaism and Christianity, which was indeed "among the causes for the animosity between them."[40]

Effects on Judaism

The Zohar evoked different reactions from the Jewish community. On the one hand, the Zohar was lauded by many rabbis because it opposed religious formalism, stimulated one's imagination and emotions, and for many people helped reinvigorate the experience of prayer.[41] On the other hand, the Zohar was censured by many rabbis because it propagated many superstitious beliefs, and produced a host of mystical dreamers, whose overexcited imaginations peopled the world with spirits, demons, and all kinds of good and bad influences.[42] Many classical rabbis, especially Maimonides, viewed all such beliefs as a violation of Judaic principles of faith.

Elements of the Zohar crept into the liturgy of the 16th and 17th centuries, and the religious poets not only used the allegorism and symbolism of the Zohar in their compositions, but even adopted its style, e.g., the use of erotic terminology to illustrate the relations between man and God.[43] Thus, in the language of some Jewish poets, the beloved one's curls indicate the mysteries of the Deity; sensuous pleasures, and especially intoxication, typify the highest degree of divine love as ecstatic contemplation; while the wine-room represents merely the state through which the human qualities merge or are exalted into those of God.[44]

Originally, many held that only Jewish men who were at least 40 years old could study Kabbalah, and by extension read the Zohar, because they were believed to be too powerful for those less emotionally mature and experienced.

Influence on Christian mysticism

The enthusiasm felt for the Zohar was shared by many Christian scholars, such as Giovanni Pico della Mirandola, Johann Reuchlin, Aegidius of Viterbo, etc., all of whom believed that the book contained proofs of the truth of Christianity.[45] They were led to this belief by the analogies existing between some of the teachings of the Zohar and certain Christian dogmas, such as the fall and redemption of man, and the dogma of the Trinity, which seems to be expressed in the Zohar in the following terms: "The Ancient of Days has three heads. He reveals himself in three archetypes, all three forming but one.[46] He is thus symbolized by the number Three. They are revealed in one another.[47][These are: first, secret, hidden 'Wisdom'; above that the Holy Ancient One; and above Him the Unknowable One. [48] None knows what He contains; He is above all conception.[49] He is therefore called for man 'Non-Existing' [Ayin]. [50]

This and other similar doctrines found in the Zohar are now known to be much older than Christianity; but the Christian scholars who were led by the similarity of these teachings to certain Christian dogmas deemed it their duty to propagate the Zohar.[51] Shortly after the publication of the work (Mantua and Cremona, 1558) Joseph de Voisin translated extracts from it which deal with the soul.[52] He was followed by many others.

The disastrous effects of the Sabbatai Zevi messianic movement on the Jewish community dampened the enthusiasm that had been felt for the book in the Jewish community.[53] However, the Zohar is still held in great reverence by many Orthodox Jews, especially the Hasidim (Hasidic Jews).

Notes

  1. Joseph Jacobs and Isaac Broydé. "Zohar" article in the Jewish Encyclopedia.Retrieved January 5, 2008.
  2. Ibid.
  3. Ibid. [1]
  4. Sol Scharfstein. Jewish History and You II Jewish History and You. (Jersey City, NJ: KTAV Publishing House, 2004), 24
  5. Lag BaOmer: Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochi Your gateway to the Jewish Internet. Retrieved January 5, 2008.
  6. Jacobs and Broydé "Zohar" article in the Jewish Encyclopedia.
  7. Ibid.
  8. Ibid.
  9. Ibid.
  10. Ibid.
  11. Jacobs and Broydé "Zohar" article in the Jewish Encyclopedia.
  12. Ibid.
  13. Ibid.
  14. Ibid.
  15. Sinai
  16. Jacobs and Broydé
  17. Ibid.
  18. Ibid.
  19. Ibid."Zohar" article in the Jewish Encyclopedia.
  20. Ibid.
  21. Ibid.
  22. Ibid.
  23. Ibid.
  24. Ibid.
  25. Ibid.
  26. Ibid.
  27. Ibid.
  28. Ibid.
  29. Ibid.
  30. Ibid.
  31. Ibid.
  32. Ibid.
  33. Ibid.
  34. Ibid.
  35. Ibid.
  36. Ibid.
  37. Moshe Idel, Eros and Kabbalah. (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2005), 5-56.
  38. Elliot Wolfson, Language, Eros, Being: Kabbalistic Hermeneutics and Poetic Imagination. (Fordham University Press, 2004) and Circle in the Square: Studies in the Use of Gender in Kabbalistic Symbolism. (State University of New York Press, 1995).
  39. Yehuda Liebes. Studies in the Zohar. (New York: SUNY Press, SUNY series in Judaica: Hermeneutics, Mysticism, and Religion, 1993), 140.
  40. Alan Unterman Kabbalah and Mysticism; Reinterpreting Mysticism and Messianism.Retrieved January 5, 2008.
  41. Jacobs and Broydé
  42. Ibid.
  43. Ibid.
  44. Ibid.
  45. Jacobs and Broydé [2]
  46. Ibid.
  47. Ibid.
  48. Ibid.
  49. Ibid.
  50. Ibid., iii. 288b).
  51. Ibid.
  52. Ibid.
  53. Ibid.

References
ISBN links support NWE through referral fees

  • Blumenthal, David R. "Three is not enough: Jewish Reflections on Trinitarian Thinking," in Ethical Monotheism, Past and Present: Essays in Honor of Wendell S. Dietrich, ed. M. Vial Theodore and Mark Hadley. Brown Judaic Studies, 2001. ISBN 978-1930675063
  • Dennis, Geoffrey. The Encyclopedia of Jewish Myth, Magic, and Mysticism, Llewellyn Worldwide, 2007. ISBN 978-0738709055
  • Liebes, Yehuda. Studies in the Zohar, SUNY Press, SUNY series in Judaica: Hermeneutics, Mysticism, and Religion, 1993. ISBN 978-0791411896
  • Scholem, Gershom. Kabbalah in Encyclopadeia Judaica, Keter Publishing
  • Scholem, Gershom. On the Mystical Shape of the Godhead: Basic Concepts in the Kabbalah. (Schocken, 1997), pg. 265. ISBN 978-0805210811
  • Wolfson, Elliot. Language, Eros, Being: Kabbalistic Hermeneutics and Poetic Imagination. Fordham University Press, 2004. ISBN 978-0823224197
  • Wolfson, Elliot. Circle in the Square: Studies in the Use of Gender in Kabbalistic Symbolism. State University of New York Press, 1995. ISBN 978-0791424063

External Links

All links retrieved October 16, 2020.

Credits

New World Encyclopedia writers and editors rewrote and completed the Wikipedia article in accordance with New World Encyclopedia standards. This article abides by terms of the Creative Commons CC-by-sa 3.0 License (CC-by-sa), which may be used and disseminated with proper attribution. Credit is due under the terms of this license that can reference both the New World Encyclopedia contributors and the selfless volunteer contributors of the Wikimedia Foundation. To cite this article click here for a list of acceptable citing formats.The history of earlier contributions by wikipedians is accessible to researchers here:

The history of this article since it was imported to New World Encyclopedia:

Note: Some restrictions may apply to use of individual images which are separately licensed.