Should Jews study the Zohar? If so, how? Academically and historically? Or should we study it religiously? Aren’t there serious problems with “orthodox” approaches to accepting the Zohar? As we know, much of Orthodoxy assumes that the Zohar is not only true but also primary – they see it as holding the official theology of Judaism. Yet as we also know, some Orthodox and many non-Orthodox Jews are very much against the Zohar and related mysticism. Here we present the case for seeing the Zohar as religiously important and valid, but not in what one might call the “orthodox” understanding.
What are the problems, and what might ways of looking at could we have?
Problems with the Zohar and Kabbalah
Just look around the Jewish community and you’ll see people making a living selling expensive sets of the Zohar to people who can’t even read it let alone understand it. People may be told to “scan” the pages with their fingers and they supposedly will receive mystical energy from the Zohar. Others sell red strings to wear around the wrist, or bottles of supposedly blessed water. Madonna and other non-Jewish celebrities endorse the Kabbalah, which feels like a good reason alone for us to reject it. There are countless other scams that have existed for ages, and much of these wacky mystical money making scams come from the Kabbalah Centre by Philip Berg and his family. So right off the bat
Even beyond the modern crass ways that some monetize Jewish mysticism, many teachings of authentic Jewish kabbalists are theologically problematic, at best, and avodah (idolatry/heresy) at worst: Over the centuries some people have distorted Kabbalah into a form of magic. They have created kabbalistic rituals to try and force God into doing what they want. This practice is called “practical” or “theurgic” Kabbalah. Yet as we know, magic is not acceptable in any normative form of rabbinical Judaism. God is not an app or a vending machine that we can manipulate to our advantage.
There are other problems with some interpretations of Kabbalah: There is a Kabbalistic concept of Ze`ir Anpin זְעֵיר אַנפִּין, an Aramaic term meaning the “Lesser Countenance/Small Face” – a smaller version of God, in some sense. This idea is not a part of earlier, pre-Zohar Jewish mysticism, nor does it seem to be in the core, original part of the Zohar. But by the 1400s some Kabbalists considered Ze`ir Anpin to be a revealed aspect of God. Basically, the idea was that the ultimate level of God is Ein Sof, the infinite, unknowable, and beyond human comprehension – even beyond human prayer, or the ability to interact with us. Some Kabbalists concluded that we can’t or shouldn’t pray to God, but rather instead only pray to Ze`ir Anpin.
So they believe that there is a higher God, Ein Sof, and effectively also a lower God that we can connect to in our world, Ze’ir Anpin. But this theology ultimately is Gnosticism, not Jewish monotheism. Gnosticism had always been considered a theological sin in Judaism, a mistaken form of faith from ancient religions. So to see it develop within late medieval Judaism is something of an odd surprise.
Another problem with the Zohar is that a later addition to it (which many Orthodox Jews view as essential and important) clearly contains a Trinitarian Christian teaching. Yes, shockingly in the Zohar, Idra Zuta, 3:288b, someone inserted a medieval Spanish Christian teaching about the trinity, yet somehow most Jews never noticed what it said or meant. Read here for more details. Even if you don’t click the link, here’s the takeaway – there indeed are non-Jewish statements in the Zohar, and if one isn’t well learned in Jewish theology and philosophy, then one might end up believing anything in it. Thus some otherwise Orthodox Jews repeat and believe statements that are dualist, Gnostic, or in this particular case, Christian.
Can we avoid the errors in the Zohar and find beauty and value in it?
Given all this, if we want to be good Jews then it seems that we shouldn’t accept the Zohar (and all the subsequent mysticism based on it.) But here’s where it is going to get interesting: Many religious Jews feel that we can study the Zohar and related Kabbalah, without falling victim to avodah zarah and superstition.
How would this be possible? Well, classically we have been told that there are only two positions – full acceptance, or total rejection. If we only have two positions then we feel forced to choose. But there is a third option!
The “orthodox” pro Zohar position
In this position we’re told to accept the entire Zohar as true. It is taught as a divine revelation from God and angels to Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai, also known as Rashbi , 1900 years ago. In this position the Torah itself is seen as incomplete, a book which offers only a storyline, rules, and surface teaching, while it is in fact the Zohar which offers the real, deeper teachings behind the Torah itself.
The skeptical, anti-Zohar position
In this position we understand that the Zohar was not written by Shimon ben Yochai, and that it was really mostly written in the 1200s by Moses de Leon. Those of us with this point of view care deeply about monotheism, and we have become aware of those sections of the Zohar which have problematic theologies. Those in this camp may refer to the Zohar as a hoax, and even if written with good intent, ultimately harmful as some of it contains avoda zara. This is the position of a some Orthodox and Sephardi rabbis, and probably the majority of non-Orthodox Jews who have studied this issue.
The third way
Given only those two options, some choose the Orthodox position of full acceptance, while the rest of us understandably walk away from the Zohar. Yet there is a distinct third way of looking at this issue. One may refer to this as a religious, un-Orthodox position.
In this view we accept that the Zohar indeed was written in 1200s Spain, that it’s not a divine revelation like the Torah, and even that it’s not a unitary document. Rather, the Zohar is a composite of several different sections that were put together over 200 years by publishers, who sometimes added other manuscripts to the core work originally written by Moses de Leon.
What makes the position unique is that the Zohar is seen as a medieval midrash! Professor Daniel Matt has written
The Zohar is basically a mystical midrash. In fact, one of its earliest names reflect this fact: מדרשו של רשב”י (the Midrash of Rashbi). The title מדרש הנעלם (Midrash ha-Ne’lam, the Concealed Midrash) now refers to one part of the Zohar, but at an earlier stage it sometimes referred to the Zohar in general. In Ramdal’s (Moses de Leon’s) Hebrew writings, he often alludes to the Zohar and paraphrases it. Sometimes he refers to his source as follows: ראיתי במדרש (I have seen in the Midrash…).
In this position we view the Zohar as a midrash collection with a human authorship, and we do not see it as infallible. We agree that there are sections of it which are unacceptable, and so have no problem saying “hey, this part or that part has dualism. Or Gnosticism. So these parts are theologically unacceptable.” Yet one considers the rest of it to be a powerful and beautiful midrash collection.
To offer an example of people with this POV –
“Was it literally written by RASHBI? Of course not. Who cares? Mystical ideas can stand on their own. I say that David Hamelech wrote Tehillim, the Mishna was compiled by RYHN, and that Ravina and Rav Ashi compiled the Gemara. I know what research shows, and it would matter a lot if I was studying history, but I’m not. I’m learning the Torah of Hashem, and, based on Rav Kook, I give tremendous value to what Knesses Yisrael decides.”
Rabbi Shlomo Pill writes
“I find the language and metaphor of primary source Kabballah to be immensely valuable. It prompts me to an expansive, open, and broad mindset that has me connecting dots in my own background knowledge in whatever few areas of Torah with which I have some facility, and has me turning inward with a kind of searching and awareness that I simply don’t get when I am consuming other giants’ applications of background Kabballah in their own Torah. When I read Maharal or Pachad Yitzchak, I am trying to understand what Rav Loew or Rav Hutner said. When I learn Kabbalistic sources directly, I am trying to understand and make connections between every aspect of my own universe of experience and awareness.”
I have a bit of a Mordechai-Kaplanian approach. The Zohar (and Torah, Talmud, midrash, commentaries, sermons, Hasidut, etc) is part of my people’s never-ending attempt to find meaning in existence and is thus holy.
_____________________________________
While you’re here, join our Facebook havurah, Coffeehouse Torah Talk or read our articles on Jewish beliefs, Jewish ethics, Halakhah, holidays, Kashrut (keeping kosher) , Lifecycle events, Mishnah and Talmud study, Tefila (prayer), Torah study, Tanakh (bible), fighting antisemitism, and Zionism.
Merrimack Valley Havurah 