I
frequently discuss and debate with R' ben Chaim of Mesora.org. He is
one of the wisest and most rational people in contemporary Judaism
(even if we occasionally disagree).
A
fascinating argument he makes against the Kabbalah leads to some
surprising conclusions:
“One's
"closer relationship with Hashem" is not something anyone
can validate about another person. And it is arrogant and baseless
for anyone to suggest he or she is now "closer to God." How
does one know this? A tznua [modest person] which is what Moses was,
would never make such a claim. God alone knows whether one person
get's closer to Him. You will never find any Prophet of truly
righteous person boast, nor boast about which he cannot know. And
others cannot know if a given Rabbi is close or distant from God.
Either way, such claims are baseless and contrary to Torah. Torah is
complete, and we are not to add to, or subtract from it. Suggesting
Zohar contains more than Tanach and Torah She B'al Peh, through which
one gets closer to Hashem, is a wrong concept.
Whatever in Zohar is valid,
meaning, what is synonymous with Torah, teaches us nothing new and it
may be followed. Whatever in Zohar opposes Torah, must be rejected.My view is that the ancient Rabbis who supported Kabbala did not have the same Kabbala that exists today that contains false and heretical ideas. Ibn Ezra spoke of Kabbala. There existed a body of transmission, which is what is meant by the word "kabbala." Nothing more. Once one projects mystical notions onto Zohar, Kabbalah and Torah, he no longer follows Torah.”
source: http://www.mesora.org/kabbala4.12.13.html
Now, taking his logic about Zohar, i.e. “what is synonymous with Torah, teaches us nothing new and it may be followed. Whatever in Zohar opposes Torah, must be rejected.” and applying it to the Oral Law, will give us Karaism. That is, whatever the Talmud says which is synonymous with the TNK, teaches us nothing new. But whatever opposes the TNK, must be rejected.
I congratulate R' Ben Chaim for giving a simple approach to determine the truth/falsity of rabbinic Judaism.
I speak only of the Written Law in this excerpt. So your conclusion is in error. You exclude the Oral Law from your equation. Thus, the Rabbis in the Talmud most often do not address the Written Law exclusively, and are based on the Oral Law as well. Therefore, you cannot reject their words as "anti-Torah" when not complying with the Written Law, since in fact they are addressing, and complying with the Oral Law.
ReplyDeleteThank you for taking the time to read and reply to my post.
ReplyDeleteThe fact is that the rabbis of the Talmud do often contradict the Written Torah. Your solution to this is the circular argument that since they comply with the Oral Law, then it is not anti-Torah. But, my dear Rabbi, this new argument that you bring could be used to defend any religion, be it Christianity (which complies with the New testament), Islam, which complies with the Koran; Mormonism, which complies with the book of Mormon, Scientology etc etc. Similarly, your new argument contradicts the first argument (cited in this post). Since the Kabbalists, could and do say that the Kabbalah is kosher because it complies with the Kabbalah, even when it is polytheistic, pantheistic etc.
@ Rabbi Ben-Chaim "Therefore, you cannot reject their words as "anti-Torah" when not complying with the Written Law, since in fact they are addressing, and complying with the Oral Law."
ReplyDeleteThe best address to answer this dilemma is the Torah itself. In Deut 28 it says:
58 If thou wilt not observe to do all the words of this law that are written in this book, that thou mayest fear this glorious and awful Name, the LORD thy God;
59 then the LORD will make thy plagues wonderful, and the plagues of thy seed, even great plagues, and of long continuance, and sore sicknesses, and of long continuance.
Thus, the Torah gives no excuses for not complying with the Torah, even if it is complying with the Oral law or other new testaments!
I think the Rav is completely wrong. Hagaon Rav Chaim Zimmerman Ztzl explained that Kabbalah is basically a theoretical model of how the spiritual world operates. When a scientist is mixing chemicals, he must use the right amount of each one to achieve his end goal or endup with smoke or an explosion or just nothing.
ReplyDeleteThe Kabbalah as it relates to Halacha is merely explaining the same thing. Why must a sacrifice be performed in a certain manner, on a particular altar, why are there specific measurement of grains that are given in a Korban, why a lamb instead of a calf. There is nothing contradictory in the Zohar. This is a failing that people have, that the Zohar somehow appends Chokim or Mishpatim to the Torah, it doesn't. Why does the Parah Aduma purify the one being sprinkled while making Tamei he who does the sprinkling. I have never met a true Talmid of the Kabbalah who mixes it like salt and sugar with the Torah and considers it Kosher. Only certain groups and other do it. Yes Tzimtzum is the Big Bang as an example. But to really appreciate it. Find a teacher. There are many in Yerushalayim who dont seek the fame an fortune and publicity. You get to them by word of mouth and trust.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteRead this on the Red heifer
ReplyDeletehttp://tanakhemet.blogspot.co.uk/2014/07/unholy-cow-or-how-to-destroy-your-own.html
As to why it makes impure the one who sprinkles, this is also the case with other dead animals. The impurity it gives to the sprinkler and gatherer is not the same quality of impurity that one gets from contact with the dead. So this big rabbinic dilemma is just an exaggeration.