Papers by Nathaniel Hershkovitz
The present article seeks to present a case study of the attitude of Sephardi Kabbalists to Zioni... more The present article seeks to present a case study of the attitude of Sephardi Kabbalists to Zionism and the establishment of the State of Israel. The article presents the image of Rabbi Ovadia Hadaya and discusses his Kabbalistic thought regarding Zionism and the State of Israel. In addition, the article examines two interpretive readings, one by Rabbi Hadaya and the other by Rabbi Yoel Teitelbaum, the Satmar Rebbe, on the issue of the "Three Oaths" and their extent compatible with their treatment to Zionism. This Talmudic issue deals with the "Deh'ikt Ha'Ketz" ("hurrying the end"), i.e. encouraging the messianic era, and they are almost the only ones how dealing with those specific sources at that time.
The article discusses their interpretation that contradicts the same sources and shows the gap in this reading. It examines the interpretive method, i.e. the tools for constructing the interpretation, whose result is the different meta-hermeneutics of each one. This is particularly evident in their Kabbalistic concept of redemption and its implications for our times.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
This paper presents the Kabbalistic thought of Rabbi Ovadia Hadaya. The aim of this paper is to a... more This paper presents the Kabbalistic thought of Rabbi Ovadia Hadaya. The aim of this paper is to add to the research of the world of the Kabbalah and the kabbalists in the first half of the twentieth century, particularly that of the Mizrahi scholars. In the wake of Gershom Scholem’s views, there is a gap in the research description of the period, both from a historical point of view and from the point of view of research of kabbalistic thought. This gap has increasingly been filled in recent years and this paper is a modest addition to this trend.
The introduction describes the kabbalistic and halakhic background to Rabbi Hadaya’s thought. The kabbalistic background is based on the interpretative school of the Kabbalah of the Ari (Rabbi Isaac Luria), particularly that of the Kabbalah of the Rashash (Rabbi Shalom Sharabi), whom Rabbi Hadaya saw as the Ari’s most qualified commentator. In the halakhic background Rabbi Hadaya’s commitment to the Kabbalah is emphasized and the fact that in his halakhic writing the weight of the kabbalistic considerations is equal to that of the scholarly and halakhic ones.
The first chapter portrays Rabbi Hadaya, his childhood and the different places where he studied and the positions he filled. It also describes his extensive network of connections with the Eastern and Western rabbinical world, with emphasis on the changes caused by the establishment of the state of Israel and the consequent change in the traditional Jewish Diaspora. The chapter ends with a description of Rabbi Hadaya’s writings, their content and the years in which they were printed.
The second chapter discusses Rabbi Hadaya’s national, Zionist and messianic thought. In the first part his Zionist-messianic thought is discussed. Rabbi Hadaya’s thought has three dimensions – the human dimension, the physical dimension and the dimension of time, which are connected to each other and to the quality of the Torah in the Jewish people. In the human dimension Rabbi Hadaya emphasizes the organic nature of the Jewish people, its uniqueness and unity and its special quality compared to the nations of the world. In the physical dimension Rabbi Hadaya emphasizes the quality of the Land of Israel, its uniqueness, the special connection of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel and the importance of the people’s sovereignty over the land. The dimension of time relates to his messianic perception, which sees his period as the period of redemption. However we see that the messianic dimension increases as the Zionist idea is realized in the form of the state of Israel. So although he did not develop a new kabbalistic method following the establishment of the state, in contrast to the view of Jonathan Garb, the state did constitute a messianic peak for him.
The second part of the chapter discusses possible influences on Rabbi Hadaya’s Zionist-messianic thought from the direction of Rabbi Kook’s circle. We see parallels and contrasts between the two views, and we see that the development of a messianic view of Zionism and the state could also develop internally and not just as a consequence of external influence. We see other Sephardi kabbalists who developed such thought and who could not have been influenced by Rabbi Kook’s circle.
The third chapter discusses the relationship between modernity and tradition in Rabbi Hadaya’s thought, with emphasis on kabbalistic considerations in his halakhic writing. Three circles of change that were caused by modernization are discussed. In each of the circles we see that Rabbi Hadaya imposes his kabbalistic view, which from his point of view is the true reality, on practical reality. The first circle is modernization as technological change, in which we see that when there is a contradiction between technological development and metaphysical reality, the latter takes precedence. The second circle is modernization as social change, particularly with emphasis on the change in the status of women. Here too Rabbi Hadaya imposes metaphysical reality onto practical reality, although sometimes this results in a more lenient approach. We also see that on the one hand Rabbi Hadaya has difficulty in accepting the permissive norms and on the other hand he recognizes and sometimes has a relaxed approach to them. The third circle relates to modernization as secularization. Rabbi Hadaya sees secularization as a deviation from the religious norm, but he views the acts of the secular Zionists positively and this will even cause them eventually to return to religion. However, he surprisingly applies the most stringent halakhic categories to them. Here too we see that Rabbi Hadaya consistently imposes metaphysical reality on practical reality.
From this chapter we see that Rabbi Hadaya’s reaction to changes encompasses the entire spectrum of Orthodox reactions. This seems to reinforce Benjamin Brown’s view that the differences between Ashkenazi and Sephardi halakhic rulings are derived from the extent of exposure to full modernization.
At the end of the chapter we touch upon Rabbi Hadaya’s attitude to the Holocaust. In contrast to the establishment of the state of Israel, Rabbi Hadaya hardly applies his messianic thought to the Holocaust, but includes it in traditional categories of “reward and punishment” and “measure for measure.”
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Conference Presentations by Nathaniel Hershkovitz
The current lecture deals with the concept of 'Eretz Israel of Ma'aleh (above)'- the spiritual - ... more The current lecture deals with the concept of 'Eretz Israel of Ma'aleh (above)'- the spiritual - and the Eretz Israe of Matah (below)' - the concrete - with Rabbi Yosef Hayyim of Baghdad and two of his disciples- Rabbi Shimon Agassi and Rabbi Yehuda Fetay.
In the lecture we will see how the perception of the Land of Israel as a symbolic-spiritual perception affects its concrete realization in the actual Land of Israel. In the first part of the lecture we will see the complexity of the spiritual and ambivalent conception of the Land of Israel with Rabbi Yosef Hayyim and in the second part we will see how this conception is expressed differently by two of his disciples - Rabbi Agassi and Rabbi Fatya.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
The current lecture examines from a perspective the relationship between the Kabbalistic percepti... more The current lecture examines from a perspective the relationship between the Kabbalistic perception of redemption and the Zionist process and the establishment of the state of Israel in the Kabbalistic thought of Rabbi Ovadia Hadaya and also examines these changes in relation to the timeline.
Rabbi Ovadia Hadaya (Aleppo, Syria 1889-Jerusalem 1969) was a Kabbalist and Posek (ruling of law), member of the Aleppo community that operated mainly in Jerusalem until the end of the seventh decade of the twentieth century and had a pro-Zionist attitude.
In the lecture, it seems that along the timeline there is a development in the relationship between the Messianic-Kabbalistic conception of Rabbi Hadaya and the Zionist move. His Messianic-Kabbalistic conception intensifies as the Zionist move takes shape, but only after the establishment of the state of Israel does this move gain truly divine messianic validity.
In addition, in the lecture it seems that while at the preaching and Kabbalistic level Rabbi Hadaya often emphasizes the messianic dimension of Zionism and especially that of the state of Israel, at the Halakhic and especially Halakhic-Kabbalistic level things are more complex.
Thus, it seems that despite his positive attitude towards the Zionist enterprise and the state of Israel, an attitude which he anchored in Kabbalistic arguments and ideas, he did not fully adopt all the Halakhic innovations proposed by the Chief Rabbinate of Israel and other circles in Religious Zionism and adhered to a conservative Halakhic-Kabbalistic approach.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
The lecture discusses an exegetical approach to Kabbalistic sources on the subjects of redemption... more The lecture discusses an exegetical approach to Kabbalistic sources on the subjects of redemption and messianism and the attitude toward the modern Jewish national movement – Zionism.
The lecture examines two interpretative readings of Kabbalistic sources and their ramifications in terms of the attitude toward Zionism. The first reading is that of Rabbi Ovadia Hadaya (Aleppo, Syria 1889 – Jerusalem 1969), a Kabbalist and religious arbiter from the Aleppo Jewish community who was active mainly in Jerusalem until the end of the 1960s. Hadaya was active in various public and official fields and positions and maintained a pro-Zionist approach. The second reading is that of Rabbi Joel Moshe Teitelbaum of Satmar (Hungary 1887 – US 1979), a Hasidic rebbe who was active mainly in pre-war Hungary and in the post-war US. Teitelbaum also served as the president of HaEdah HaCharedit in Israel – the right-wing faction of the ultra-Orthodox community in the country. Teitelbaum is considered one of the most prominent orthodox theological critics of Zionism and as the exponent of the harshest, most consistent, and most coherent philosophy.
In the lecture we will see how these two men interpret the same Kabbalistic sources relating to the subject of the Three Oaths (a Talmudic discussion concerning “expediting the end”, i.e. the prohibition against engaging in messianic actions to accelerate redemption). These two scholars were almost the only authorities to address the same specific sources, yet they interpret them in opposite ways, each adopting the exegesis that serves his approach. The main argument that will be presented in the lecture is that Rabbi Hadaya interprets actual reality according to the Kabbalistic sources, rooted in his messianic perception in the Lurianic Kabbalah thought, while Rabbi Teitelbaum interprets the Kabbalistic sources in accordance with his anti-Zionist approach that negates any proactive steps to expedite redemption.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Uploads
Papers by Nathaniel Hershkovitz
The article discusses their interpretation that contradicts the same sources and shows the gap in this reading. It examines the interpretive method, i.e. the tools for constructing the interpretation, whose result is the different meta-hermeneutics of each one. This is particularly evident in their Kabbalistic concept of redemption and its implications for our times.
The introduction describes the kabbalistic and halakhic background to Rabbi Hadaya’s thought. The kabbalistic background is based on the interpretative school of the Kabbalah of the Ari (Rabbi Isaac Luria), particularly that of the Kabbalah of the Rashash (Rabbi Shalom Sharabi), whom Rabbi Hadaya saw as the Ari’s most qualified commentator. In the halakhic background Rabbi Hadaya’s commitment to the Kabbalah is emphasized and the fact that in his halakhic writing the weight of the kabbalistic considerations is equal to that of the scholarly and halakhic ones.
The first chapter portrays Rabbi Hadaya, his childhood and the different places where he studied and the positions he filled. It also describes his extensive network of connections with the Eastern and Western rabbinical world, with emphasis on the changes caused by the establishment of the state of Israel and the consequent change in the traditional Jewish Diaspora. The chapter ends with a description of Rabbi Hadaya’s writings, their content and the years in which they were printed.
The second chapter discusses Rabbi Hadaya’s national, Zionist and messianic thought. In the first part his Zionist-messianic thought is discussed. Rabbi Hadaya’s thought has three dimensions – the human dimension, the physical dimension and the dimension of time, which are connected to each other and to the quality of the Torah in the Jewish people. In the human dimension Rabbi Hadaya emphasizes the organic nature of the Jewish people, its uniqueness and unity and its special quality compared to the nations of the world. In the physical dimension Rabbi Hadaya emphasizes the quality of the Land of Israel, its uniqueness, the special connection of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel and the importance of the people’s sovereignty over the land. The dimension of time relates to his messianic perception, which sees his period as the period of redemption. However we see that the messianic dimension increases as the Zionist idea is realized in the form of the state of Israel. So although he did not develop a new kabbalistic method following the establishment of the state, in contrast to the view of Jonathan Garb, the state did constitute a messianic peak for him.
The second part of the chapter discusses possible influences on Rabbi Hadaya’s Zionist-messianic thought from the direction of Rabbi Kook’s circle. We see parallels and contrasts between the two views, and we see that the development of a messianic view of Zionism and the state could also develop internally and not just as a consequence of external influence. We see other Sephardi kabbalists who developed such thought and who could not have been influenced by Rabbi Kook’s circle.
The third chapter discusses the relationship between modernity and tradition in Rabbi Hadaya’s thought, with emphasis on kabbalistic considerations in his halakhic writing. Three circles of change that were caused by modernization are discussed. In each of the circles we see that Rabbi Hadaya imposes his kabbalistic view, which from his point of view is the true reality, on practical reality. The first circle is modernization as technological change, in which we see that when there is a contradiction between technological development and metaphysical reality, the latter takes precedence. The second circle is modernization as social change, particularly with emphasis on the change in the status of women. Here too Rabbi Hadaya imposes metaphysical reality onto practical reality, although sometimes this results in a more lenient approach. We also see that on the one hand Rabbi Hadaya has difficulty in accepting the permissive norms and on the other hand he recognizes and sometimes has a relaxed approach to them. The third circle relates to modernization as secularization. Rabbi Hadaya sees secularization as a deviation from the religious norm, but he views the acts of the secular Zionists positively and this will even cause them eventually to return to religion. However, he surprisingly applies the most stringent halakhic categories to them. Here too we see that Rabbi Hadaya consistently imposes metaphysical reality on practical reality.
From this chapter we see that Rabbi Hadaya’s reaction to changes encompasses the entire spectrum of Orthodox reactions. This seems to reinforce Benjamin Brown’s view that the differences between Ashkenazi and Sephardi halakhic rulings are derived from the extent of exposure to full modernization.
At the end of the chapter we touch upon Rabbi Hadaya’s attitude to the Holocaust. In contrast to the establishment of the state of Israel, Rabbi Hadaya hardly applies his messianic thought to the Holocaust, but includes it in traditional categories of “reward and punishment” and “measure for measure.”
Conference Presentations by Nathaniel Hershkovitz
In the lecture we will see how the perception of the Land of Israel as a symbolic-spiritual perception affects its concrete realization in the actual Land of Israel. In the first part of the lecture we will see the complexity of the spiritual and ambivalent conception of the Land of Israel with Rabbi Yosef Hayyim and in the second part we will see how this conception is expressed differently by two of his disciples - Rabbi Agassi and Rabbi Fatya.
Rabbi Ovadia Hadaya (Aleppo, Syria 1889-Jerusalem 1969) was a Kabbalist and Posek (ruling of law), member of the Aleppo community that operated mainly in Jerusalem until the end of the seventh decade of the twentieth century and had a pro-Zionist attitude.
In the lecture, it seems that along the timeline there is a development in the relationship between the Messianic-Kabbalistic conception of Rabbi Hadaya and the Zionist move. His Messianic-Kabbalistic conception intensifies as the Zionist move takes shape, but only after the establishment of the state of Israel does this move gain truly divine messianic validity.
In addition, in the lecture it seems that while at the preaching and Kabbalistic level Rabbi Hadaya often emphasizes the messianic dimension of Zionism and especially that of the state of Israel, at the Halakhic and especially Halakhic-Kabbalistic level things are more complex.
Thus, it seems that despite his positive attitude towards the Zionist enterprise and the state of Israel, an attitude which he anchored in Kabbalistic arguments and ideas, he did not fully adopt all the Halakhic innovations proposed by the Chief Rabbinate of Israel and other circles in Religious Zionism and adhered to a conservative Halakhic-Kabbalistic approach.
The lecture examines two interpretative readings of Kabbalistic sources and their ramifications in terms of the attitude toward Zionism. The first reading is that of Rabbi Ovadia Hadaya (Aleppo, Syria 1889 – Jerusalem 1969), a Kabbalist and religious arbiter from the Aleppo Jewish community who was active mainly in Jerusalem until the end of the 1960s. Hadaya was active in various public and official fields and positions and maintained a pro-Zionist approach. The second reading is that of Rabbi Joel Moshe Teitelbaum of Satmar (Hungary 1887 – US 1979), a Hasidic rebbe who was active mainly in pre-war Hungary and in the post-war US. Teitelbaum also served as the president of HaEdah HaCharedit in Israel – the right-wing faction of the ultra-Orthodox community in the country. Teitelbaum is considered one of the most prominent orthodox theological critics of Zionism and as the exponent of the harshest, most consistent, and most coherent philosophy.
In the lecture we will see how these two men interpret the same Kabbalistic sources relating to the subject of the Three Oaths (a Talmudic discussion concerning “expediting the end”, i.e. the prohibition against engaging in messianic actions to accelerate redemption). These two scholars were almost the only authorities to address the same specific sources, yet they interpret them in opposite ways, each adopting the exegesis that serves his approach. The main argument that will be presented in the lecture is that Rabbi Hadaya interprets actual reality according to the Kabbalistic sources, rooted in his messianic perception in the Lurianic Kabbalah thought, while Rabbi Teitelbaum interprets the Kabbalistic sources in accordance with his anti-Zionist approach that negates any proactive steps to expedite redemption.
The article discusses their interpretation that contradicts the same sources and shows the gap in this reading. It examines the interpretive method, i.e. the tools for constructing the interpretation, whose result is the different meta-hermeneutics of each one. This is particularly evident in their Kabbalistic concept of redemption and its implications for our times.
The introduction describes the kabbalistic and halakhic background to Rabbi Hadaya’s thought. The kabbalistic background is based on the interpretative school of the Kabbalah of the Ari (Rabbi Isaac Luria), particularly that of the Kabbalah of the Rashash (Rabbi Shalom Sharabi), whom Rabbi Hadaya saw as the Ari’s most qualified commentator. In the halakhic background Rabbi Hadaya’s commitment to the Kabbalah is emphasized and the fact that in his halakhic writing the weight of the kabbalistic considerations is equal to that of the scholarly and halakhic ones.
The first chapter portrays Rabbi Hadaya, his childhood and the different places where he studied and the positions he filled. It also describes his extensive network of connections with the Eastern and Western rabbinical world, with emphasis on the changes caused by the establishment of the state of Israel and the consequent change in the traditional Jewish Diaspora. The chapter ends with a description of Rabbi Hadaya’s writings, their content and the years in which they were printed.
The second chapter discusses Rabbi Hadaya’s national, Zionist and messianic thought. In the first part his Zionist-messianic thought is discussed. Rabbi Hadaya’s thought has three dimensions – the human dimension, the physical dimension and the dimension of time, which are connected to each other and to the quality of the Torah in the Jewish people. In the human dimension Rabbi Hadaya emphasizes the organic nature of the Jewish people, its uniqueness and unity and its special quality compared to the nations of the world. In the physical dimension Rabbi Hadaya emphasizes the quality of the Land of Israel, its uniqueness, the special connection of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel and the importance of the people’s sovereignty over the land. The dimension of time relates to his messianic perception, which sees his period as the period of redemption. However we see that the messianic dimension increases as the Zionist idea is realized in the form of the state of Israel. So although he did not develop a new kabbalistic method following the establishment of the state, in contrast to the view of Jonathan Garb, the state did constitute a messianic peak for him.
The second part of the chapter discusses possible influences on Rabbi Hadaya’s Zionist-messianic thought from the direction of Rabbi Kook’s circle. We see parallels and contrasts between the two views, and we see that the development of a messianic view of Zionism and the state could also develop internally and not just as a consequence of external influence. We see other Sephardi kabbalists who developed such thought and who could not have been influenced by Rabbi Kook’s circle.
The third chapter discusses the relationship between modernity and tradition in Rabbi Hadaya’s thought, with emphasis on kabbalistic considerations in his halakhic writing. Three circles of change that were caused by modernization are discussed. In each of the circles we see that Rabbi Hadaya imposes his kabbalistic view, which from his point of view is the true reality, on practical reality. The first circle is modernization as technological change, in which we see that when there is a contradiction between technological development and metaphysical reality, the latter takes precedence. The second circle is modernization as social change, particularly with emphasis on the change in the status of women. Here too Rabbi Hadaya imposes metaphysical reality onto practical reality, although sometimes this results in a more lenient approach. We also see that on the one hand Rabbi Hadaya has difficulty in accepting the permissive norms and on the other hand he recognizes and sometimes has a relaxed approach to them. The third circle relates to modernization as secularization. Rabbi Hadaya sees secularization as a deviation from the religious norm, but he views the acts of the secular Zionists positively and this will even cause them eventually to return to religion. However, he surprisingly applies the most stringent halakhic categories to them. Here too we see that Rabbi Hadaya consistently imposes metaphysical reality on practical reality.
From this chapter we see that Rabbi Hadaya’s reaction to changes encompasses the entire spectrum of Orthodox reactions. This seems to reinforce Benjamin Brown’s view that the differences between Ashkenazi and Sephardi halakhic rulings are derived from the extent of exposure to full modernization.
At the end of the chapter we touch upon Rabbi Hadaya’s attitude to the Holocaust. In contrast to the establishment of the state of Israel, Rabbi Hadaya hardly applies his messianic thought to the Holocaust, but includes it in traditional categories of “reward and punishment” and “measure for measure.”
In the lecture we will see how the perception of the Land of Israel as a symbolic-spiritual perception affects its concrete realization in the actual Land of Israel. In the first part of the lecture we will see the complexity of the spiritual and ambivalent conception of the Land of Israel with Rabbi Yosef Hayyim and in the second part we will see how this conception is expressed differently by two of his disciples - Rabbi Agassi and Rabbi Fatya.
Rabbi Ovadia Hadaya (Aleppo, Syria 1889-Jerusalem 1969) was a Kabbalist and Posek (ruling of law), member of the Aleppo community that operated mainly in Jerusalem until the end of the seventh decade of the twentieth century and had a pro-Zionist attitude.
In the lecture, it seems that along the timeline there is a development in the relationship between the Messianic-Kabbalistic conception of Rabbi Hadaya and the Zionist move. His Messianic-Kabbalistic conception intensifies as the Zionist move takes shape, but only after the establishment of the state of Israel does this move gain truly divine messianic validity.
In addition, in the lecture it seems that while at the preaching and Kabbalistic level Rabbi Hadaya often emphasizes the messianic dimension of Zionism and especially that of the state of Israel, at the Halakhic and especially Halakhic-Kabbalistic level things are more complex.
Thus, it seems that despite his positive attitude towards the Zionist enterprise and the state of Israel, an attitude which he anchored in Kabbalistic arguments and ideas, he did not fully adopt all the Halakhic innovations proposed by the Chief Rabbinate of Israel and other circles in Religious Zionism and adhered to a conservative Halakhic-Kabbalistic approach.
The lecture examines two interpretative readings of Kabbalistic sources and their ramifications in terms of the attitude toward Zionism. The first reading is that of Rabbi Ovadia Hadaya (Aleppo, Syria 1889 – Jerusalem 1969), a Kabbalist and religious arbiter from the Aleppo Jewish community who was active mainly in Jerusalem until the end of the 1960s. Hadaya was active in various public and official fields and positions and maintained a pro-Zionist approach. The second reading is that of Rabbi Joel Moshe Teitelbaum of Satmar (Hungary 1887 – US 1979), a Hasidic rebbe who was active mainly in pre-war Hungary and in the post-war US. Teitelbaum also served as the president of HaEdah HaCharedit in Israel – the right-wing faction of the ultra-Orthodox community in the country. Teitelbaum is considered one of the most prominent orthodox theological critics of Zionism and as the exponent of the harshest, most consistent, and most coherent philosophy.
In the lecture we will see how these two men interpret the same Kabbalistic sources relating to the subject of the Three Oaths (a Talmudic discussion concerning “expediting the end”, i.e. the prohibition against engaging in messianic actions to accelerate redemption). These two scholars were almost the only authorities to address the same specific sources, yet they interpret them in opposite ways, each adopting the exegesis that serves his approach. The main argument that will be presented in the lecture is that Rabbi Hadaya interprets actual reality according to the Kabbalistic sources, rooted in his messianic perception in the Lurianic Kabbalah thought, while Rabbi Teitelbaum interprets the Kabbalistic sources in accordance with his anti-Zionist approach that negates any proactive steps to expedite redemption.