Kabbalah from whom? Sinai via teachers or individually from heaven (birds,trees, inanimate objects and the dead)?

I am reading Lawrence Fine’s Physician of The Soul, Healer of the Cosmos available at http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0804748268/sr=8-1/qid=1151656176/ref=pd_bbs_1/104-9902088-9567918?ie=UTF8

It is a fascinating and easy to read study of the Arizal, Rabbi Isaac Luria (1534-72), the great Kabbalist of Tzfat and the main source for contemporary Kabbalah. Reading the book one gets a good feel for the sources of Kabbalah and for me, it confirmed my strong suspicions about its sources.

We have been fed a canard in the Yeshiva world that Kabbalah is an old tradition, a Mesora, going back to Sinai and anyone that doubts it is suspect. I was brought up in that type of an environment, and coming from a very Chassidish background, always felt guilty about my skepticism. During my early teenage years I discovered Rambam and started reading him without understanding much. In Yeshiva I was told that I was going on the wrong path, and told to read Nefesh Hachaim and Tanya, which of course led me back to Ramban, Recanati, Zohar, Maharal and forward to Sifrei Chassidus. I tried hard to understand and believe the stuff I was reading but I knew deep down it was wrong. I have great respect for Ramban and his rational way of thinking in general, so I always felt that I was a bad boy, hoping one day that I will become smarter. I was baffled by the Gaon of Vilna (1720-97), the great genius of the 18th century, who seemed to accept Kabbalah as a tradition. With time, as I was trying to understand more, I read Gershon Scholem and many of his colleagues and pupils, Y.Tishbi, Moshe Idel, and Professor Dan et al and came to realize that I was wasting my time and if I wanted to understand Judaism and what it stands for, I had to turn back to Rambam. There I found the Mesora that leads back to Sinai and explains, from a religious perspective, the existential issues we are confronted with daily. So for the last fifteen years or so, with the help of great Chaverim, Rambam has become my focus both Machshavah and Halacha - and what a great trip it is!

Now back to Fine. The book lays out in the first chapters the background of Tzfat into which Arizal landed. I want to focus however on one section that is an unbelievable revelation. First a quote from Recanati, Parshas Naso, where he describes the sources of Kabbalah.

“For he [Elijah} revealed himself to Rabbi David, head of the rabbinical court [av bet din] and taught him the mysteries of the Kabbalah. He transmitted it, for his part, to his son, the Rabad [i.e. R. Abraham ben David – the Ba’al Hahasagot on Rambam] and he [Elijah] also revealed himself to him, and he transmitted to his son, Isaac the Blind, blind from birth, and to him too he revealed himself. The latter in turn transmitted these teachings to two disciples of his, R. Ezra [of Gerona] author of a commentary on the Song of Songs (see Chavel Kitvei Haramban part 2, Pirush Shir Hashirim Hameyuchas Laramban where he identifies R.Azriel as the author based on a different Recanati – more about this Pirush in a coming post), and R. Azriel [of Gerona] after which it was transmitted to the Ramban.”

Quite an interesting quote. Anyone that is familiar with Rambam and the Hasagot HaRa’avad knows that he mentions several times that Ruach Hakodesh visited his Bet Midrash. (E.g. Hil. Lulav 8:5). The rational explanation is that he wanted to emphasize the Chiddush in his idea and attributed it to inspiration. That in itself is not that outlandish and necessarily mystical or revelatory (Nevuah). I say that because it is a Halachik imperative that revelation has no influence in Halacha after Moshe.

There is no question that tradition allowed for a certain amount of mysticism, (more Platonic then mystical really) and there were legitimate schools that were inclined in that direction going back to Talmudic times. I believe however that they were very contained and did not deviate from the basic axioms about God laid out by the Rabbis. Rambam addresses some of these quotes from Pirkei D’Rabbi Eliezer and other Midrashim. I understand therefore these great Rishonim as claiming new insights in ancient texts and ideas and attributing them to Elijah or inspiration. They however inadvertently opened a Pandora’s Box. Here is a quote from R. Chaim Vital (1543-1620) the great pupil of Arizal and the major source for Arizal thought, in his Sha’ar Ruach Hakodesh p.19:

“Concerning his attainments, it is impossible for one to relate them [even] in general terms, much less in detail. However these are the wondrous and true things I witnessed with my own eyes: He knew how to make a future soul appear before him, as well as the soul of a living or deceased person, from among the early as well as later sages.”

This should be read in contrast with Rambam Hil. Avodah Zara 11:13: -
כללו של דבר: כל העושה מעשה כדי שיבוא המת ויודיעו--לוקה, שנאמר "לא יימצא בך . . . ודורש אל המתים" (דברים יח,י-יא)

That in itself is bad enough when used to learn the future. How much worse when used to teach supposedly God’s words. He continues:

“He could inquire of them whatever he wished concerning knowledge of the future and secret mysteries of Torah. The prophet Elijah may his memory be a blessing, would also appear to him and teach him. He would also recognize the letters on the forehead and [was adept at] the science of physiognomy, as well as at [recognizing] the lights that are upon the skin and body of an individual. [He was also skilled at recognizing] the lights in the hair, the chirping of birds, and the language of trees and plants. [He understood] the speech even of inanimate things… [He knew] the language of the burning candle and the flaming coal. [!] He was able to see the angels who announce all the proclamations [from on high], as is well known, and to converse with them.”

What to me is the most intriguing is that RCV admits that the “secrets of the Torah” transmitted by his teacher the Arizal were a result of Revelation and inspiration, and had no direct connection to Sinai and Mesora. The magical tone to all this is to me very scary. Professor Fine quotes other pupils of Arizal who said similar things about how Arizal acquired his knowledge. I can live with inspiration but what about birds, trees, inanimate things and the dead past and future?!?

At best I can try to argue that Arizal used this inspiration (weird as it is) to explain old texts. That being the case why should that be considered more traditional then Rambam’s rational explanations of similar texts. To my mind the burden of proof that the Kabbalah is Mesora rests on the Mekubal im. Until they can show us that it is, I consider Kabbalah potentially dangerous theologically.

I will show in future posts how insidiously this superstition has penetrated our praxis. It would be a great service to Judaism if a Talmid Chacham would have the courage to uncover these infestations and expunge them allowing us to return to the pure worship of our pre Kabbalah forebears.

I would like to make one point though. We find that these concepts have survived a long time within Judaism and although the theology is erroneous, the followers have stayed within the fold generation after generation. Professor Yeshayahu Leibowitz addressed this many times and argued that a Jew that is theologically misguided, as long as he keeps to Halacha meticulously, he will be accepted within the Jewish people. It is only if he deviates that he slowly falls by the wayside. I believe that he is right although this wrong headedness definitely pushes off the time of “Umale'ah Ha'aretz Dea'ah et Hashem”.

(This is interesting in light of the discussions about “Orthopraxy” that pop up every so often on the JBlogs).

Let us hope we see the light of truth soon. Good Shabbos.