Torah and Jewish Idea > Torah and Jewish Idea
Who wrote the Zohar - Rashbi or Moshe de Leon?
Sefardic Panther:
Quite a few Teymani Yehudim say that Moshe de Leon wrote the Zohar. However parts of this book certainly do have divine origin i.e. the references to black holes (Botsina Deqardinuta - lamp of darkness). If it was a middle ages forgery Moshe de Leon must have had access to genuine teachings.
muman613:
--- Quote from: Sefardic Panther on November 06, 2008, 03:34:04 PM ---Quite a few Teymani Yehudim say that Moshe de Leon wrote the Zohar. However parts of this book certainly do have divine origin i.e. the references to black holes (Botsina Deqardinuta - lamp of darkness). If it was a middle ages forgery Moshe de Leon must have had access to genuine teachings.
--- End quote ---
Shalom,
According to sources on the internet it is clear that Rabbi Shimeon Bar Yochi (Rashbi) wrote the Zorah. It was not published till 1558.
muman613
http://www.meaningfullife.com/spiritual/mystics/The_Rashbi.php
--- Quote ---
http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/361877/jewish/The-Zohar.htm
The Key to Kabbalah
By Nissan Dovid Dubov
The Zohar
It was in the Tannaic period that the Zohar, the most famous text of Kabbalah, was committed to writing by Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochai (also known as the Rashbi). Rashbi lived in tumultuous times when the Roman government was executing all the great Torah teachers, including his master Rabbi Akiva.
Rashbi himself had to flee Roman persecution and hid in a cave with his son, Rabbi Elazar, for thirteen years. During this time, he received Divine Inspiration (Ruach Hakodesh) and merited the revelation of Elijah the Prophet and composed the sacred Zohar.
Based on the five books of Moses and written in Hebrew Aramaic, the text of the Zohar explores and expounds in a most cryptic way the mystical tradition. Its pre-eminent place in Jewish mysticism does not derive solely from its antiquity or its authorship. Other works of the Kabbalah such as Sefer Yetzirah and Sefer HaBahir are of earlier origin. The Zohar’s importance must rather be attributed to its comprehensiveness.
It became the source for practically all the later authoritative Kabbalistic teachings of the Arizal and others.
The Zohar was concealed for many centuries, and the study of the Kabbalah was restricted to a select few qualified individuals. It became revealed only in the thirteenth century and was published by one of the leading Kabbalists living in Spain, Rabbi Moshe de Leon. Some believed that the Ramban (Rabbi Moshe ben Nachman c.1194-1270 C.E.), himself a renowned Kabbalist, had sent the Zohar from Israel by ship to his son in Catalonia, but the ship had been diverted and the texts ended up in the hands of Rabbi Moshe de Leon. Others explained that these manuscripts had been hidden in a vault for a thousand years and had been discovered by an Arabian king who sent them to Toledo to be deciphered. Still others maintained that Spanish conquistadors had discovered the manuscripts of the Zohar among many others in an academy in Heidelberg. Whichever theory is true, the text was accepted as authentic by all pre-eminent Jewish scholars.
The mystics ascribe special potency to the study of Zohar.
It effects a nullification of evil decrees, eases the travails of exile, hastens the redemption, and draws forth Divine blessings. In some mystical circles, great merit is attributed to the mere recitation of the sacred texts of the Zohar, even though one does not understand them. However, ideally an effort is to be made to understand and comprehend the texts. The text has been translated into Hebrew and English. In truth, today it still remains a closed text without many introductions, explanations, and elucidations of later masters.
In summary, at this stage of history the major texts of Sefer Yetzirah, the Sefer HaBahir, the Pirkei Heichalot Rabati, and the Zohar contained the basic teachings that had been passed down through the prophets and sages from Moses. And yet, although committing the mystical tradition to writing had saved it from extinction, it was still a closed book to all but one who would be familiar with the intricacies of the esoteric tradition. The outline had been written but the keys to the tradition remained oral and contained within a small circle.
This remained the case until the next great explosion of Kabbalah to take place in the town of Safed, located in northern Israel, in the sixteenth century.
By Nissan Dovid Dubov More articles... | RSS Listing of Newest Articles by this Author
Rabbi Nissan D. Dubov is director of Chabad Lubavitch in Wimbledon, UK.
The content on this page is copyrighted by the author, publisher and/or Chabad.org, and is produced by Chabad.org. If you enjoyed this article, we encourage you to distribute it further, provided that you comply with the copyright policy.
--- End quote ---
q_q_:
--- Quote from: Sefardic Panther on November 06, 2008, 03:34:04 PM ---Quite a few Teymani Yehudim say that Moshe de Leon wrote the Zohar. However parts of this book certainly do have divine origin i.e. the references to black holes (Botsina Deqardinuta - lamp of darkness). If it was a middle ages forgery Moshe de Leon must have had access to genuine teachings.
--- End quote ---
Taymani are from Yemen. They probably hold fast to the RAMBAM and these RAMBAMists tend to reject all mysticism. They would probably say it's a forgery.
If it says lamps of darkness, that doesn't mean black holes. You are reading things into it. Like reading dinosaurs into the bible. It really doesn't reference them. Though maybe they fit under some created entity mentioned in the 6/7 days.
Infact, i'm sure that kabbalists had a very different understanding of what lamps of darkness were. An understanding that may be more obvious if you included the full context. But it may not be a good idea to do that, too mystical!
There are some criticisms of the zohar, speaking of geographical errors that suggest the person that wrote it lived elsewhere. Something along those lines.
There is a shiur on it by rabbi daweedh bar hayyim. But I can't see it on his machon shilo site, maybe he updated the site..
It would be strong evidence against it being 100% divine. But I seem to recall it's not one book, but a collection of writings.
It's certainly an issue under debate. It is accepted by most great rabbis as completely holy.. And since the great kabbalist, the Arizal, and others too, deem it as holy, it's really generally accepted nowadays as from Shimon Bar Yochai.. Just because so many great kabbalists have held to it.. People wouldn't want to say that the Arizal was wrong! But if you put aside these kind of arguments by authority of those that accept it.
There is reason to be skeptical. And no doubt there are many rabbis that may not believe it but wouldn't speak openly about it, because they'd be ostracised.
Kahane-Was-Right BT:
There are Portuguese (or Spanish) words in the text of the Zohar. Granted, they are very few, but one of them I know for a fact was "Esnoga" which was the word for synagogue in Portuguese or Spanish in Moshe de Leon's day. Very few relative to the mass of text, but nonetheless they are there. There is no way that Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai wrote these out-of-place words. Nonetheless, some of the material in the text is clear to have come from a more ancient (word of mouth) tradition. It could be that most of it was a reliable transmission of tannaic era teachings while more and more got added over the centuries or maybe very little (such as the out-of-place words) was added along the way. Either way, it was under review for a long time (after publication by R. De Leon) before major rabbis accepted it as authentic kabbalah. The kabbalists DID however accept it as authentic. Some of the greatest rabbis in history argued against the Zohar (Rabbi Yaakov Emden for example), while others were cautious and/or accepting of it, but in different degrees. All in all, one can take the extreme view such as that of the Ari where it was written by the tanna Rashbi, which gives it tannaic authority (but certainly less than the mishnayot and braisot), or another accepted view that it has the authority of a rishon if it was truly compiled by Moshe de Leon and not previously written. I was told by someone here that Rav Moshe Feinstein said exactly this opinion - that it is at most the authority of tannaic statements (less than mishna) and at least the authority of a rishon. The person who told me was informed by a Rav here (he is a genius), and I can't remember it exactly so it's not an exact quote but that was the gist of the opinion of Rav Feinstein. Granted there are some who reject it altogether like one group within Taymanim (not all Taymanim reject zohar outright), and perhaps people who follow the Yaavetz. Come to think of it, maybe Rav Feinstein said the most it could have is amoraic authority (given that it is less than mishna, braisa, tosefta), but I'm not sure. Maybe someone can find this opinion.
--- Quote from: q_q_ on November 06, 2008, 04:39:45 PM --- It is accepted by most great rabbis as completely holy..
--- End quote ---
What does this mean "completely holy" ?
In the general sense, all sefarim are holy.
"If it was a middle ages forgery Moshe de Leon must have had access to genuine teachings."
Indeed, the kabbalists who reviewed the text confirmed it to have authentic teachings so it's very possible that Moshe de Leon learned the word-of-mouth kabbalah then in existence (from earlier ages) that was transmitted to his teachers, and he put much of it into writing.
Why he claimed that he found it 'pre-written' (by Rashbi himself) in a cave.... that I don't know.
Sefardic Panther:
Botsina Deqardinuta or in Hebrew "Menorah HaShuka" literally a "lamp of darkness" a lamp that exudes darkness rather than light. Sounds like a black hole to me, the best description in human language of a black hole.
The Teymani are the oldest Yehudi community in the world. They go back to Shlomo HaMelak. They are some of the best Yehudim in the world and I am inclined to go with what they say, although Hakam Abuhatzera and the Ben Ish Hai were also the best Yehudim.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version