|
|
Rav
Kook on Sabbatianism from
'Post
Sabbatian Sabbatianism'
by Bezalel
Naor
Copyright © 1999 by Bezalel Naor

(Spring
Valley, NY: Orot, 1999)
softcover
224 pp
ISBN 0-9674512-1-3
19.95 + $5.00 S&H within USA
Available from:
Orot,
Inc.
PO Box 155
Spring Valley, NY 10977
make
checks payable to "Orot Inc".
Between the two world wars, there roamed the streets of Jerusalem
a man who made a nuisance of himself, pestering the populace that
he was the Messiah.
Finally the Messiah was brought to the Chief Rabbi of
Jerusalem. Rav Kook asked to meet with the deranged man alone. After
a few moments with Rav Kook, the Messiah never again
boasted his claim.
Sometime later Rav Kook revealed what produced such a wondrous effect.
I told him: The truth is, there is a spark of Messiah
in every Jew. You obviously have received an especially large endowment.
But the quality of the spark is such that it works only as long
as one does not speak of it to others.
Unlike many Orthodox thinkers, Rabbi Abraham Isaac Hakohen Kook
did not shy away from the subject of Sabbatianism. His published
works reveal a more than fleeting interest in the entire Sabbatian
phenomenon, from the initial impetus of Messianic activity surrounding
the person of Shabbetai Zevi, to the Hayyon and Emden-Eybeschütz
controversies, to that Polish offshoot of Sabbatianism, Frankism.
This interest extends to both the external, historical, as well
as internal, philosophical and psychological aspects. Rav Kook is
even willing to rebut the author of Or la-Yesharim s
comparison of Herzlian political Zionism to Sabbatianism.
In one of his earliest published essays, Derekh ha-Tehiyah, which
translates into English as, The Way of Renascence, Rav
Kook casts all human history, and specifically Jewish history, as
a tug of war between the forces of learning and intellect on the
one hand and the currents of psyche and charisma on the other. In
general, Rav Kook views the various pseudomessianic movements that
plagued the Jewish People in exile, and Shabbetai Zevi and Jacob
Frank in particular, as eruptions of the soulful side of the collective
Jewish personality. He refers to Zevi and Frank en passant as he
attempts to put Hasidism in perspective:
Hasidism too came out of the demand of the psychic current that
lay dormant. After the unsuccessful attempt of the latest false
Messiah, Shabbetai Zevi, who lowered the psychic current to the
level of insanity and wicked intoxication, and that culminated in
all of its apostasy in the semi-official false Messiah Frank and
his entourageafter all these, there was great apprehension
lest the nation totally revile any vestige remaining to it of the
hidden power of the living psychic currents, and revert to repetition
of the letters and observance of the deeds, the commandments and
the customs with a bent back and broken heart. (If that were the
case) eventually the nation would not be able to survive for lack
of freshness and upliftment of the soul.
This thing was felt by the great personality of the fathers of Hasidism,
in which the godly psychic current was alive.
The approach to Sabbatianism is ambivalent. It may best be summed
up by the advice of the Talmud regarding renegade Jews: Push
away with the left hand and bring close with the right. Condemnatory
of the excesses of Sabbatianism, the mental instability of its founder,
and the self-imposed apostasy (nokhriyut ) of his spiritual grandson
Frank, Rav Kook at once acknowledges the kernel of redeeming value
in all this lunacya hankering for vital, existential, as opposed
to rote, religion.
This ambidexterity will be Rav Kooks approach
to various chapters in Jewish history, whether it be the Christianity
of Jesus of Nazareth, the pantheism of Baruch Spinoza7, or the Zionism
of Theodore Herzl. Those who have criticized Chief Rabbi Kook for
his support of and involvement in the Zionist movement, have too
often failed to notice that the posture vis-`a-vis Zionism is but
the most recent application of Rav Kooks historical method.
Convinced of the essential godliness of the Jewish People, he is
forever seeking to glean meaning from the aberrant and absurd. This
posture of attempting to uncover hidden good in the ostensibly evil,
is itself reminiscent of Sabbatian theology, thus exposing Rav Kook
to unfair attack, when in truth, this paradoxical outlook precedes
Sabbatianism, having its source in Zoharic and Lurianic Kabbalah.
Rabbi
Kook is definitely no Sabbatian9. He points out to his correspondent
Samuel Alexandrov the folly of considering the present decrepit
world order the future of which it is said, The commandments
will be null in the future10, citing as an example of this
fools paradise the experiments of the Sabbatians sunk
into the depth of evil.
He is not loath to point out to Rabbi Yahia Kafah of Sana
that the book he quotes from,Oz le-Elohim by Nehemiah Hiyya
Hayyon, is an heretical work by a Sabbatian.
It is also not beyond Rav Kook to display empathy and understanding
for Rabbi Jacob Emdens disparagements of certain passages
in Zohar, motivated as Emden was by the desire to undercut the Sabbatians,
who to a large degree based themselves on Zohar.
And while on the subject of Emdens untiring campaign against
crypto-Sabbatians, let us mention that Rav Kook, when pressed by
his personal secretary Simon Glitzenstein, revealed what he knew
(or thought he knew) of R. Jonathan Eybeschützs youthful
ensnarement by the Sabbatian heresiarch Löbele Prossnitz.
Abutting all this, Rav Kook knows the mysterious light, the pathetic,
yet unredeemed sparks that beckon to us from fallen Messiahs.
. . . mysteries of Torah that as a result of their influence on
those who delved into them without the proper preparation, have
come to be rejected and abused. From this very light of life, from
which improper influences produce world catastrophe and perilprecisely
from it, will sprout eternal salvation.
Alter B.Z. Metzger, English translator of Orot ha-Teshuvah, correctly
caught the veiled reference to Shabbetai Zevi and Frank, who in
distorting the teachings of the Kabbalah, caused them to be reviled
by a good portion of Jewry. But Rav Kook reassures us that these
teachings need not produce the excesses of which Zevi, Frank and
their followers were guilty. The potential for turning the elixir
of life into poison, exists on every level of Torah understanding.
All depends on the spiritual preparation (or lack thereof) of those
involved in its study.
Perhaps the most startling of all Rav Kooks statements concerning
the would-be Messiahs, is the one occurring in the ill-fated Arpilei
Tohar 18 (and later in the more widely circulated Orot 19):
. . . the fetuses who stood to be Messiahs but fell, were trapped
and broken. Their sparks were scattered and seek a living, enduring
correction (tikkun) in the foundation of David, King of Israel,
the breath of our nostrils, the anointed (meshiah) of God.
While it is not at all clear that Rav Kook includes in his list
of Messiahs-in-potentia the likes of Shabbetai Zevi, perhaps reserving
this distinction for a Bar Kochba revered by Rabbi Akiba, this does
not dull the daring of the thought. That the child born after so
many miscarriages (bar niflei ) will encompass in his soul the souls
of his stillborn brothers, is truly remarkable. There is a poetic
justice here. None of the unsuccessful Messiahs attempts at
redemption were in vein; all contribute in some sense to the final
Redemption.
Finally, for Rav Kook as formutatis mutandisSabbatians,
the light of Moses and the light of Messiah
are antithetical, being united only at the root of their souls in
the supernal splendor of Adam (zihara ilaah
de-adam ha-rishon). Though Messiah himself is not portrayed by Rav
Kook as abrogating Mosaic law, the entire phenomenon of Messianism
is painted in distinctly antinomian tones. Whereas Torah requires
an attitude of shamefacedness and humility, Messiah thrives paradoxically
on shamelessness, chutzpah. And Rav Kook is quite explicit as to
what the chutzpah consists of: Sexuality, fleshliness, and forsaking
Torah. As alarming as all this is, it is well within kabbalistic
tradition that again, predates Shabbetai Zevi. One may find in MaHaRaL
of Prague and SheLaH, and needless to say, in Zohar, similar expressions
of the extralegal origins of Messiah, conceived from the less than
immaculate unions of Lot and his daughters, Jacob and Tamar, Boaz
and Ruth the Moabitess, David and Bathsheba, and Solomon and Naamah
the Amonitess. Yet there is a clarity and profundity of thought
in Rav Kooks pitting the two traditions, Mosaic and Messianic,
against one another.
What
puts Rav Kook decisively beyond the reaches of Sabbatian thought,
is his formulation of a future in which, once again the supernal
splendor of Adam will shine through the gathering of the two
luminaries that are one, Moses and Messiah. Unlike the Sabbatian
who revels in the antinomianism of Messianism, Rav Kooks ideal
is the reunification of two traditions that have grown apart, the
legal tradition of Moses and the extralegal tradition of Messiah.
|