Misplaced Pages

#494505

63-478: The Zohar speaks of two types of Yichudim in general, a Yichud Mah u Ban and a Yichud Ava . These divine names derive from esoteric expansions of the Tetragrammaton , representing different supernal forces. Kabbalistic theosophy explores the esoteric function of Yichudim in the unfolding creation of the spiritual realms, while meditative Kabbalah experiences and influences these supernal forces through

126-734: A comprehensive process, enabled him to extract Yichudim meditation practices from the most esoteric descriptions in the Zohar. These elite meditative practices engaged the attention of subsequent Kabbalistic worship, and were further expanded, and practiced in a communal setting by Shalom Sharabi and the Beit El circle. In the same way that the Lurianic partzufim interact and enclothe within each other, so in Lurianic Yichudim meditations these supernal processes are theurgically enacted in

189-560: A different ancient mystical book in a cave near Toledo , which may have been de Leon's inspiration. Within fifty years of its appearance in Spain it was quoted by Kabbalists, including the Italian mystical writer Menahem Recanati and Todros ben Joseph Abulafia . However, Joseph ben Waqar harshly attacked the Zohar , which he considered inauthentic, and some Jewish communities, such as

252-464: A discourse on chiromancy by ben Yochai. h. Old Man (סבא) An elaborate narrative about a speech by an old Kabbalist. Kavanot Kavanah , kavvanah or kavana (also pronounced /kaˈvonə/ by some Ashkenazi Jews) (כַּוָּנָה; in Biblical Hebrew kawwānā ), plural kavanot or kavanos (Ashkenazim), literally means "intention" or "sincere feeling, direction of the heart". It is

315-1157: A kind of gnostic inclination within Kabbalah, and as a predecessor of the Sitra Ahra (the other, evil side) in the Zohar . The main text of the Castile circle, the Treatise on the Left Emanation , was written by Jacob ha-Cohen around 1265. Tikunei haZohar was first printed in Mantua in 1557. The main body of the Zohar was printed in Cremona in 1558 (a one-volume edition), in Mantua in 1558-1560 (a three-volume edition), and in Salonika in 1597 (a two-volume edition). Each of these editions included somewhat different texts. When they were printed there were many partial manuscripts in circulation that were not available to

378-500: A liturgical recitation driven religiosity. In esoteric Jewish mysticism ( Kabbalah ), kavanah refers to the practice where the devotee concentrates on the secret meanings of prayer letters and words, sometimes referring to the permutations of the divine name. Some kavanot are particular to the tradition of Kabbalah during meditation. Kavanah has been much debated subject among Judaism scholars, with traditional sources accepting that Jewish rituals without at least minimal kavanah

441-609: A medieval date. In the Ashkenazi community of Eastern Europe, religious authorities including Elijah of Vilna (d. 1797) and Shneur Zalman of Liadi (d. 1812) believed in the authenticity of the Zohar , while Ezekiel Landau (d. 1793), in his sefer Derushei HaTzlach (דרושי הצל"ח), argued that the Zohar is to be considered unreliable as it was made public many hundreds of years after Ben Yochai's death and lacks an unbroken tradition of authenticity, among other reasons. Isaac Satanow accepted Emden's arguments and referred to

504-525: A speech is quoted in which he explains the previous section. e. Assembly of the Tabernacle (אדרא דמשכנא) This part has the same structure as c. but discusses instead the mysticism of prayer . f. Palaces (היכלות) Seven palaces of light are described, which are perceived by the devout in death. This description appears again in another passage, heavily embellished. g. Secretum Secretorum (רזא דרזין) An anonymous discourse on physiognomy and

567-620: Is "highly oracular and obscure," citing no authorities and explaining nothing. c. Greater Assembly (אדרא רבא) This part contains an explanation of the oracular hints in the previous section. Ben Yochai's friends gather together to discuss secrets of Kabbalah. After the opening of the discussion by ben Yochai, the sages rise, one after the other, and lecture on the secret of Divinity, while ben Yochai adds to and responds to their words. The sages become steadily more ecstatic until three of them die. Scholem calls this part "architecturally perfect." d. Lesser Assembly (אדרא זוטא) Ben Yochai dies and

630-538: Is certain that God listens, precisely during the ecstatic action of the bond with God, in this realization. According to the Hasidic tales but not only, children also know how to reach a good level of kavanah and it isn't absolutely useless to teach them Shema , even before Bar mitzvah . Chovot HaLevavot "Duties of the Heart" by Bahya ibn Paquda (section 8, chapter 3), gives 3 general categories for kavanah under

693-417: Is insufficient. Different Jewish authorities see various levels of kavanah required for various rituals, and especially for prayer. Some prayerbooks ( siddurim ) list kavanot for particular prayers. Some particular kavanot are associated with particular holidays, for example Sukkot , Pesach , Shavuot , and others. Kavanah comes from an ancient verbal root also found where the object or subject

SECTION 10

#1732800871495

756-545: Is not. Ovadia Yosef (d. 2013) held that Orthodox Jews should accept the Zohar 's antiquity in practice based on medieval precedent, but agreed that rejecting it is rational and religiously valid. Joseph Hertz (d. 1946) called the claim of ben Yochai's authorship "untenable", citing Gershom Scholem 's evidence. Samuel Belkin (d. 1976) argued that the Mystical Midrash section, specifically, predated de León. Joseph B. Soloveitchik (d. 1993) apparently dismissed

819-562: Is nullified within the Divine totality, Yichudah Tata'ah (Lower Unity) in which Creation perceives its own existence dependent on God. Isaac Luria , the father of modern Kabbalah, developed the Zoharic references to Yichudim into a complete esoteric system of meditation, based on the new mythological scheme of Lurianic Kabbalah . Outwardly, the Zohar appears to be solely a theosophical text. However, through Luria's theosophical description of

882-679: Is obvious they understood its nature. The manuscripts of the Zohar are from the 14th-16th centuries. By the 15th century, the Zohar 's authority in the Iberian Jewish community was such that Joseph ibn Shem-Tov drew arguments from it in his attacks against Maimonides , and even representatives of non-mystical Jewish thought began to assert its sacredness and invoke its authority in the decision of some ritual questions. In Jacobs' and Broyde's view, they were attracted by its glorification of man, its doctrine of immortality , and its ethical principles, which they saw as more in keeping with

945-442: Is the "heart". It connotes "to direct, to prepare, to establish", an orientation of mind, heart, intention. According to Moshe Halbertal, it implies concentration and sincerity, it is not rote recitation but the very essence of a prayer where the devotee expresses a plea and supplication to God, while really believing, feeling, meaning the prayer. kavanah is both emotional and intellectual devotion, states Herman Cohen. According to

1008-581: Is twofold. One, to uncover the inherent Godliness in the subject that is being meditated on, and second, to bring the Godliness "back home", so to speak. Once the Godliness of the thing is uncovered, the Kabbalist will endeavour to conceptually understand how all the levels that once separated him and God are actually all one. Hasidic thought describes two levels of this Divine Yichud (Unity) with Creation: Yichuda Ila'ah (Higher Unity) in which Creation

1071-690: The Sefer Yetzirah and the Bahir and the medieval writings of the Hasidei Ashkenaz . Another influence that Scholem, and scholars like Yehudah Liebes and Ronit Meroz have identified was a circle of Spanish Kabbalists in Castile who dealt with the appearance of an evil side emanating from within the world of the sefirot . Scholem saw this dualism of good and evil within the Godhead as

1134-563: The Baal Shem Tov , based on its concern with deveikut direct internal consciousness of divinity. However, a very small number of extant Yichudim for other purposes, taught by the Baal Shem Tov, are recorded in early Hasidic texts. Zohar The Zohar ( Hebrew : זֹהַר ‎ , Zōhar , lit. "Splendor" or "Radiance" ) is a foundational work of Kabbalistic literature . It is a group of books including commentary on

1197-577: The Babylonian Talmud . "The Hebrew of the Midrash haNe'elam is similar in its overall form to the language of the early midrashim, but its specific vocabulary, idioms, and stylistic characteristics bear the imprint of medieval Hebrew , and its midrashic manner is clearly that of a later imitation." Authorship of the Zohar was questioned from the outset, due to the claim that it was discovered by one person and referred to historical events of

1260-529: The Dor Daim from Yemen, Andalusian (Western Sefardic or Spanish and Portuguese Jews ), and some Italian communities, never accepted it as authentic. Other early Kabbalists, such as David b. Judah the Pious (fl. c. 1300), Abraham b. Isaac of Granada , (fl. c. 1300), and David b. Amram of Aden (fl. c. 1350), so readily imitate its pseudepigraphy by ascribing contemporaries' statements to Zoharic sages that it

1323-522: The Zohar as a forgery, also offering new evidence. By 1813 Samuel David Luzzatto had concluded that "these books [the Zohar and the Tiqqunei Zohar] are utter forgeries," in part because they repeatedly discuss the Hebrew cantillation marks, which were not invented until the 9th century. In 1817 Luzzatto published these arguments, and in 1825 he penned a fuller treatise, giving many reasons why

SECTION 20

#1732800871495

1386-400: The Zohar could not be ancient. However, he did not publish this until 1852, when he felt it justified by the rise of Hasidism . Moses Landau (d. 1852), Ezekiel's grandson, published the same conclusion in 1822. Isaac Haver (d. 1852) admits the vast majority of content comes from the 13th century but argues that there was a genuine core. Solomon Judah Loeb Rapoport (d. 1867) spoke against

1449-519: The Zohar could not be attributed to Simeon ben Yochai, by a number of arguments. He claims that if it were his work, the Zohar would have been mentioned by the Talmud , as has been the case with other works of the Talmudic period; he claims that had ben Yochai known by divine revelation the hidden meaning of the precepts, his decisions on Jewish law from the Talmudic period would have been adopted by

1512-534: The Zohar include Yehuda Liebes (who wrote his doctorate thesis for Scholem on the subject, Dictionary of the Vocabulary of the Zohar in 1976), and Daniel C. Matt , a student of Scholem's who has published a critical edition of the Zohar . 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: At

1575-457: The Zohar includes a translation of a poem by Solomon ibn Gabirol (d. 1058) and that it includes a mystical explanation of a mezuzah style only introduced in the 13th century. Adolf Neubauer and Samuel Rolles Driver were convinced by these arguments, but Edward Bouverie Pusey held to a Tannaitic date. By 1913, the critical view had apparently lost some support: Israel Abrahams recalls that "Zunz, like Graetz, had little patience with

1638-471: The Zohar only when it does not conflict with any other source and records that "You asked me about scribes modifying torah scrolls to accord with the Zohar ... and I was shocked, for how can they consider the Zohar better than the Talmud Bavli, which has come down to us? ... So I went myself to the house of the scribe and I found three scrolls which he had edited, and I fixed them, and I restored

1701-524: The Zohar to de Leon's Hebrew works, were accepted by every other major scholar in the field, including Heinrich Graetz ( History of the Jews , vol. 7), Moritz Steinschneider , Bernhard Beer , Leopold Zunz , and Christian David Ginsburg . Ginsburg summarized Jellinek's, Graetz's, and other scholars' proofs for the English-reading world in 1865, also introducing several novel proofs, including that

1764-687: The Zohar was accepted by such 16th century Jewish luminaries as Joseph Karo (d. 1575), and Solomon Luria (d. 1574), who wrote nonetheless that Jewish law does not follow the Zohar when it is contradicted by the Babylonian Talmud. Luria writes that the Zohar cannot even override a minhag . Moses Isserles (d. 1572) writes that he "heard" that the author of the Zohar is ben Yochai. Elijah Levita (d. 1559) did not believe in its antiquity, nor did Joseph Scaliger (d. 1609) or Louis Cappel (d. 1658) or Johannes Drusius (d. 1616). David ibn abi Zimra (d. 1573) held that one can follow

1827-672: The Zohar 's antiquity. Eliakim ha-Milzahgi (d. 1854) accepted Emden's arguments. The influence of the Zohar in Yemen contributed to the formation of the Dor Deah movement, led by Yiḥyah Qafiḥ in the later part of the 19th century. Among its objects was the opposition of the influence of the Zohar , as presented in Qafiḥ's Milhamoth Hashem (Wars of the Lord) and Da'at Elohim . Shlomo Zalman Geiger (d. 1878), in his book Divrei Kehilot on

1890-440: The Zohar 's antiquity. Moses Gaster (d. 1939) wrote that the claim of ben Yochai's authorship was "untenable" but that Moses de León had compiled earlier material. Meir Mazuz (alive) accepts Emden's arguments. Yeshayahu Leibowitz wrote (1990) that "Moses de León composed the Zohar in the 1270s as certainly as Theodor Herzl composed Der Judenstaat in the 1890s ... the Zohar was influential because in every generation

1953-569: The Zohar , including Tiqqune hazZohar and Ra'ya Meheimna , were composed by a 14th century imitator. According to Gershom Scholem and other modern scholars, Zoharic Aramaic is an artificial dialect largely based on a linguistic fusion of the Babylonian Talmud and Targum Onkelos , but confused by de León's simple and imperfect grammar, his limited vocabulary, and his reliance on loanwords, including from contemporaneous medieval languages. The author further confused his text with occasional strings of Aramaic-seeming gibberish , in order to give

Yichudim - Misplaced Pages Continue

2016-524: The Book of the Zohar was found, which Simeon ben Yochai and his son Elazar had made in the cave . . . and some say that [de Leon] forged it among his forgeries, but [Isaac] said that the Palestinian Aramaic sections were genuinly written by Simeon b. Yochai . . . And [Isaac] wrote: Isaac goes on to say that he obtained mixed evidence of Zohar's authenticity from other Spanish Kabbalists, but

2079-651: The Sefirah Tiferet ) in the Universe of Assiah. He should then bind this to the name Ehyeh (AHYH "I Am" associated with the Sefirah Keter ) in the Universe of Assiah. He should then meditate on this, elevating the name Ehyeh of Assiah, and binding it to Adonay of Yetzirah . Adonay of Yetzirah should then be bound to YHVH of Yetzirah. One proceeds in this manner step by step, until he reaches Ehyeh of Atziluth . He should then bind Ehyeh of Atzilut to

2142-521: The Talmud, that it would not contain the names of rabbis who lived at a later period than that of ben Yochai; he claims that if the Kabbalah were a revealed doctrine, there would have been no divergence of opinion among the Kabbalists concerning the mystic interpretation of the precepts. Believers in the authenticity of the Zohar countered that the lack of references to the work in Jewish literature

2205-454: The Torah to its proper glory." Debate continued over the generations; del Medigo's arguments were echoed by Leon of Modena (d. 1648) in his Ari Nohem , by Jean Morin (d. 1659), and by Jacob Emden (d. 1776). Emden—who may have been familiar with Modena through Morin's arguments —devoted a book to the criticism of the Zohar , called Mitpachas Sefarim (מטפחת ספרים), in an effort against

2268-485: The Zohar . . . at this date we are much more inclined to treat the Kabbalah with respect." Gershom Scholem , who was to found modern academic study of Kabbalah , began his career at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem in 1925 with a lecture in which he promised to refute Graetz and Jellinek. However, after years of research, he came to conclusions similar to theirs by 1938, when he argued again that de León

2331-416: The authenticity of the Zohar , as did Menachem Mendel Kasher (d. 1983), Aryeh Kaplan (d. 1983), David Luria (d. 1855), and Chaim Kanievsky (d. 2022). Aryeh Carmell (d. 2006) did not, and Eliyahu Dessler (d. 1953) accepted the possibility that it was composed in the 13th century. Gedaliah Nadel (d. 2004) was unsure if the Zohar were genuine but was sure that it is acceptable to believe that it

2394-573: The book of the Zohar had been printed (in Mantua and in Cremona, in the Jewish years 5318–5320 or 1558–1560? CE), many more manuscripts were found that included paragraphs pertaining to the Zohar which had not been included in printed editions. The manuscripts pertained also to all parts of the Zohar ; some were similar to Zohar on the Torah, some were similar to the inner parts of the Zohar ( Midrash haNe'elam, Sitrei Otiyot and more), and some pertained to Tikunei haZohar . Some thirty years after

2457-472: The cosmic structure as a complete interacting dynamic system, the soul of man embodies and dynamically interacts with the supernal processes of creation. Where Moses Cordovero previously developed a linear Zoharic method of meditation based on his conception of the sephirot as discreet powers, Luria's Yichudim meditation method is based on the sephirot as anthropomorphic mutually enclothing Partzufim (divine personas). His systemisation of Zoharic doctrine into

2520-429: The divine ( devequt ), intensely ecstatically feels the divine ( hitlahavut ), and is intently devoted to this divine ( kavanah ). God was pleased with the heartfelt prayers and simple faith of ordinary Jews The kavanah is therefore the strength that the devotee uses in the intention towards God: in other words, it is a sort of concentration followed by the truthful perception of a response to faith, that is, when one

2583-506: The entire Zohar and Tikunim. Citations referring to the Zohar conventionally follow the volume and page numbers of the Mantua edition, while citations referring to Tikkunei haZohar follow the edition of Ortakoy (Constantinople) 1719 whose text and pagination became the basis for most subsequent editions. Volumes II and III begin their numbering anew, so citation can be made by parashah and page number (e.g. Zohar: Nasso 127a), or by volume and page number (e.g. Zohar III:127a). After

Yichudim - Misplaced Pages Continue

2646-408: The female Malkuth (which descends immanently into creation as the exiled Shekhina divine Presence). Yichud Mah u Ban in the human psyche is the unification of one's emotions with action. Yichud Ava is the process whereby a Kabbalist traces an object or concept in this physical world, up through the various levels of God's creative process of that object or concept. The goal of a unification

2709-418: The first 18 (a.–s.) are the work of the original author (probably de Leon) and the final 3 (t.–v.) are the work of a later imitator. a. Untitled Torah commentary A "bulky part" which is "wholly composed of discursive commentaries on various passages from the Torah". b. Book of Concealment (ספרא דצניעותא) A short part of only six pages, containing a commentary to the first six chapters of Genesis . It

2772-559: The first edition of the Zohar was printed, the manuscripts were gathered and arranged according to the parashiyot of the Torah and the megillot (apparently the arrangement was done by the Kabbalist, Avraham haLevi of Tsfat ), and were printed first in Salonika in Jewish year 5357 (1587? CE), and then in Kraków (5363), and afterwards in various editions. According to Scholem, the Zohar can be divided into 21 types of content, of which

2835-436: The first printers. These were later printed as Zohar Chadash (lit. "New Radiance"), but Zohar Chadash actually contains parts that pertain to the Zohar , as well as Tikunim (plural of Tikun , "Repair", see also Tikkun olam ) that are akin to Tikunei haZohar , as described below. The term Zohar , in usage, may refer to just the first Zohar collection, with or without the applicable sections of Zohar Chadash , or to

2898-400: The fragment ends abruptly, mid-sentence, without any conclusion. Though Isaac is willing to quote it in his Otzar haChayyim and his Meirat Einayim , he does so rarely. Isaac's testimony was censored from the second edition (1580) and remained absent from all editions thereafter until its restoration nearly 300 years later in the 1857 edition. In 1243 a different Jew had reportedly found

2961-399: The human psyche, as mystical Kavanot intentions during prayer, Jewish observance, or isolated practice. Kabbalistic doctrine sees unifications in the divine realm among the sephirot , and between God and lower creation, as the theurgic restorative task of man. Among the sephirot this is symbolised by the unification of the revealed male principle Tiferet ("The Holy One Blessed be He") and

3024-699: The idolatrous influence outpowers the true faith". Early attempts included M. H. Landauer 's Vorläufiger Bericht über meine Entdeckung in Ansehung des Sohar (1845), which fingered Abraham Abulafia as the author, and Samuel David Luzzatto 's ויכוח על חכמת הקבלה (1852), but the first systematic and critical academic proof for the authorship of Moses de León was given by Adolf Jellinek in his 1851 monograph "Moses ben Shem-tob de León und sein Verhältnis zum Sohar". Jellinek's proofs, which combined previous analyses with Isaac of Acre 's testimony and comparison of

3087-575: The impression of obscure knowledge. The original text of the Zohar , as cited by various early Kabbalists beginning around the 14th century (e.g. Isaac b. Samuel of Acre , David b. Judah the Pious, Israel Alnaqua , Alfonso de Zamora ) was partly in Hebrew and partly in Aramaic. By the time of the first edition (1558) the text was entirely in Aramaic, with the exception of the Midrash haNe'elam , where Hebrew words and phrases are often employed as in

3150-553: The liturgical practice of Frankfurt am Main , records that "We do not say brikh shmei in Frankfurt, because its source is in the Zohar , and the sages of Frankfurt refused to accept Qabbalah." In 1892, Adolf Neubauer called on the Orthodox rabbinate to reject the Zohar as a forgery and to remove Zoharic prayers from the liturgy. However, Yechiel Michel Epstein (d. 1908) and Yisrael Meir Kagan (d. 1933) both believed in

3213-462: The mindset often described as necessary for Jewish rituals ( mitzvot ) and prayers. Kavanah is a theological concept in Judaism about a worshiper's state of mind and heart, his or her sincerity, devotion and emotional absorption during prayers. In Hasidic Judaism , a Jewish tradition that emphasizes piety, kavanah is the emotional devotion, self-effaced absorption during prayers rather than

SECTION 50

#1732800871495

3276-500: The mystical aspects of the Torah and scriptural interpretations as well as material on mysticism , mythical cosmogony , and mystical psychology . The Zohar contains discussions of the nature of God , the origin and structure of the universe, the nature of souls, redemption, the relationship of ego to darkness and "true self" to "the light of God". The Zohar was first publicized by Moses de León (c. 1240 – 1305 CE), who claimed it

3339-547: The post- Talmudic period while purporting to be from an earlier date. Abraham Zacuto 's 1504 work Sefer Yuhasin (first printed 1566) quotes from the Kabbalist Isaac ben Samuel of Acre 's 13th century memoir Divre hayYamim (lost), which claims that the widow and daughter of de León revealed that he had written it himself and only ascribed the authorship to Simeon ben Yochai for personal profit: And [Isaac] went to Spain, to investigate how it happened in his time that

3402-495: The psyche by combining, and usually enclothing the letters of particular divine names within each other. A simple Yichud meditation example: "The lower soul (nefesh) is from the Universe of Assiah , which is associated with the name Adonay ("Lord" the divine name associated with the Sefirah Malkuth ). One should therefore meditate on the name Adony (ADNY) binding it to the name YHVH ( Tetragrammaton name associated with

3465-402: The rabbinic tradition, both action and proper intention is important during a prayer, and kavanah refers to the latter. A related term in Judaism is kavanot , states Pinchas Giller, which refers to "ideas, texts and formulae" to be contemplated during praying. Kavanah in prayer requires devotional belief and not merely reciting the words of a prayer. According to Sutnick, this implies that

3528-473: The remaining adherents of the Sabbatean movement (in which Sabbatai Zevi , a Jewish apostate , cited Messianic prophecies from the Zohar as proof of his legitimacy). Emden argued that the book on which Zevi based his doctrines was a forgery, arguing that the Zohar : Saul Berlin (d. 1794) argued that the presence of an introduction in the Zohar , unknown to the Talmudic literary genre, itself indicates

3591-700: The same time, Scholem says, the author "invent[ed] a number of fictitious 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." The Zohar also draws from the Bible commentaries written by medieval rabbis, including Rashi , Abraham ibn Ezra , David Kimhi and even authorities as late as Nachmanides and Maimonides , and earlier mystical texts such as

3654-535: The spirit of Talmudic Judaism than are those taught by the philosophers , and which was held in contrast to the view of Maimonides and his followers, who regarded man as a fragment of the universe whose immortality is dependent upon the degree of development of his active intellect. The Zohar instead declared Man to be the lord of creation , whose immortality is solely dependent upon his morality. Conversely, Elia del Medigo ( c.  1458  – c.  1493 ), in his Beḥinat ha-Dat , endeavored to show that

3717-596: The very highest level, which is the Ein Sof." Luria instructs many detailed and advanced Yichudim meditations for particular purposes. As well as Kavanot for prayer and to accompany Jewish observances, these include meditations enacted while prostrated on the grave of a saint, a practice of the 16th century Safed Kabbalists in order to commune with the righteous soul. The elaborate esoteric Lurianic Yichudim to accompany liturgical prayer were replaced in early 18th century Hasidism by new Jewish meditation forms taught by

3780-410: The worshiper understand the words of the prayer and mean it, but this can be difficult for many Jews today when they pray using liturgical Hebrew , which many Jews outside of Israel do not understand. In Hasidism, it is one of four themes of religious worship and spiritual striving. The true faithful constantly contemplates the presence of the divine ( hitbonenut ), constantly cleaves and communes with

3843-437: Was a Tannaitic work recording the teachings of Simeon ben Yochai ( c.  100 CE ). This claim is universally rejected by modern scholars, most of whom believe de León, also an infamous forger of Geonic material, wrote the book himself between 1280 and 1286. Some scholars argue that the Zohar is the work of multiple medieval authors and/or contains a small amount of genuinely antique novel material. Later additions to

SECTION 60

#1732800871495

3906-463: Was because ben Yochai did not commit his teachings to writing but transmitted them orally to his disciples over generations until finally the doctrines were embodied in the Zohar . They found it unsurprising that ben Yochai should have foretold future happenings or made references to historical events of the post-Talmudic period. By the late 16th century, the Zohar was present in one-tenth of all private Jewish libraries in Mantua. The authenticity of

3969-458: Was the most likely author. Scholem noted the Zohar's frequent errors in Aramaic grammar, its suspicious traces of Arabic and Spanish words and sentence patterns, and its lack of knowledge of the Land of Israel , among other proofs. Scholem's views are widely held as accurate among historians of Kabbalah, but they are not uncritically accepted. Scholars who continue to research the background of

#494505