Kagan, Tevie

English

Hochschulschriftenserver - Universität Frankfurt am Main

 Tevie Kagan: The Enigmatic R. David Lida Part IIPosted by: Dan Rabinowitz, November 24, 2008 9:30 AM | Comments (5) | Link to this postTevie KaganThe Enigmatic R. David Lida Part IIby Tevie KaganR. David of Lida and SabbateanismThe case for Sabbatean leanings in R. David ben Aryeh Leib of Lida's works aresomewhat cloudy. The first clear accusation in this regard is from R. YaakovEmden in his Toras Hakanaos. [1] Specifically, R. Emden, dealt with theconclusion of one of Lida's poem's entitled Shir Hillulim, which was printed withhis Migdol David. Shir Hillulim was written in honor of a torah dedication inAmsterdam in 1680. It was comprised of verses to be recited by thecongregation and cantor. The letters at the end that are enlarged spell out"Tishbi," and says "Tishbi, he will redeem us." In traditional Jewish literature,Tishbi (Elijah) is referenced as a forerunner for the messiah. Emden saw this asan allusion to Shabbetai Zevi, as the letters in "Tishbi" form "Shabbetai" whentransposed. Emden continues and notes that the letters between the last lines(spelling out "David") demonstrate that Lida was attempting to equate David withTishbi, and, consequently, with Shabbetai Zevi.There are those who argue with Emden's assertion that Shir Hillulim displaysSabbatean tendencies. Specifically, they note that David de Castro Tartas, whoroutinely printed prayer books and other works of sabbatean nature, [2] printedShir Hillulim. Eisner, for example, postulates that Tartas added the problematiclines and that Lida knew nothing about it. [3] However, as Heller [4] points out,it would seem unlikely that a printer would modify such a small work, and that ofthe chief rabbi, meant for immediate distribution. Even more so, if this were thecase, why would Lida use the same printer again, as he did with for his ShomerShabbos in 1687?Indeed, it is especially difficult to determine whether a work is Sabbatean innature.  Within Sabbatean writings there are certain recurring themes. There isoften a thematic fixation on the Messiah. The writings often focus on King David,and explain how he did not sin with Bat-Sheba (Samuel II, Chapter 11). Theyalso frequently discuss the concept of "mitzvah ha-ba'ah be-averah," the notionof reinterpreting biblical figures actions as foreshadowing Shabbetai Zevi's acts(particularly Esther or King David), and the rabbinic dictum that "greater a sindone for heavens sake than a commandment done other than for the sake ofheaven." Writing about any one of these topics alone does not deem one to be aSabbatean. However, a recurring reference to these beliefs within ones writings,combined with a less then stellar character, may deem one suspect.  Coupledwith actual accusations from one of the foremost experts on Sabbateanism (R.Yaakov Emden), one must be wary and investigate further.Aside from the obvious reasons for not overtly stating the sabbatean nature of awork, inherent in Sabbateanism is the notion of a "dual nature."  Scholemdescribes this dualism as having one side bordering on nihilism and another thatis outwardly religious. Elsewhere, [5] Scholem states that "[a] double-facednature came to be seen as a characteristic trait . . . [to] live in a high tensionTRADITION SEFORIM BLOGTradition Seforim Blog: Tevie Kagan: The Enigmatic R. David Lida Part II http://seforim.traditiononline.org/index.cfm/2008/11/24/Tevie-Kagan-T...1 von 4 09.12.2008 15:38between outward orthodoxy and inward antinomianism." This corresponds withthe paradox that the followers of Shabbetai Zevi were left with after heapostatized in 1666. This also follows Sabbatean teachings that corrupted theLurianic doctrine of tikun, using sin as the preferred medium for rectification, asopposed to mitzvoth. Shabbetai Zevi sought to abolish many commandments,stating that since it was the messianic age they no longer were applicable. Heinstead preached a doctrine of "mitzvah ha-ba'ah be-averah," asserting that thepath to a mitzvah is through a sin.[6] This is one of the many ways thatShabbetai Zevi's followers attempted to rationalize his apostasy.  They arguedthat he was merely gathering "sparks" from within the broken shards that residein the Islamic faith. Shabbetai Zevi advocated certain sins outright, such aseating chelev, the forbidden fat of an animal, and abolishing the fast of the 9th ofAv (Tisha B'Av"). Thus, it is unsurprising that it is difficult to uncover what truly isa Sabbatean work and what is not.   Migdol David was Lida's first major work that was disseminated widely. It waswritten on the book of Ruth and seeks to explain the Davidic lineage. MigdolDavid does have messianic tones; yet, if the author was truly a Sabbatean, onewould expect to find it overflowing with Sabbatean references. Oddly enough,though, through most of the work there are few Sabbatean references.  Theending lines are what lead to its Sabbatean suspicion, as they include the words" ש ב ת י   ב ב י ת   ה ' " This verse is in of itself not problematic, but the choice of  " ש ב ת י "would fit with a common trait of Sabbatean writing to identify ones work to thosewho knew of certain code words. This was a fairly common tactic as can beadduced from Emden's list in Toras Hakanaos, where many books were bannedfor similar reasons.[7] Within Lida's Sod Hashem, a manual of the rules of milah (circumcision)  with arunning commentary called Sharbit Hazahav, there are a couple of problematicthemes. While describing the kabalistic reasons behind mila, Lida explains thatthe foreskin is as an offering to Samael and, because of the phrase "nachash eferlachmo," the foreskin is placed in dirt. Sabbatean Kabbalah often equates thenachash (snake) with the messiah, as both have the same numerical value. Thisdoes not mean that every reference to the nachash is suspect; in this case,though, clearly equating it with Samael and the offering is odd. Slightly moreproblematic is the quote[8] from R. Yehoshua Heshel from Vilna that discussesthe verse: "Abraham was ninety-nine years old and the Lord appeared to him"(Gen. 17:1). He proceeds to give an interpretation explaining its significancewithin the sefiros of the numbers involved. Now, one would assume this to bethe same R. Heshel under which Lida studied. However, it is R. Heshel Zoref[9](c.1663-1700), the noted Sabbatean Kabbalist, and supposed prophet of theSabbatean movement in Poland, to whom Lida is referring. Zoref wrote the SeferHa-Zoref where, among other things, he proclaimed himself Messiah b. Josephand Shabbetai Zevi as Messiah b. David. Lida's quoting of Zoref is not a damningpiece of evidence on its own, as it is one isolated quote, and as Naor pointsout,[10] classic works such as Kav Hayashar contain quotes from Zoref as well. Still, this does not help Lida,s case. Quite possibly the most egregious piece of suspect Sabbateanism that Lidapublished is the homily at the beginning of his Be'er Esek.[11] After discussingthe Medrash that the Yalkut Shimoni brings in Samuel (151) that David climbedthe olive crop and cried, Lida goes into detail about why David would cry andwhy these do not suffice as reasons. Lida brings quotes from the Zohar andPeliah that say that David did not sin with Bat-Sheba, but that rather she wasprepared for him from the six days of creation and that, indeed, it was a goodthing that he had relations with her. David saw himself as Adam, Bat-Sheba asEve, and Uriah the Hittite as the nachash. By having relations with Bat-Sheba,David rectified the sin of Adam and the act of the Snake having relations withEve, ultimately bringing death to this world. Next Lida equates David, Adam andMessiah, explaining how David did not sin, but in fact effected a great tikun(rectification). Lida continues in this vein for at least another page and a half,equating his own travails with David being maligned for taking Bat-Sheba andTradition Seforim Blog: Tevie Kagan: The Enigmatic R. David Lida Part II http://seforim.traditiononline.org/index.cfm/2008/11/24/Tevie-Kagan-T...2 von 4 09.12.2008 15:38running from Absalom.[12] This work is ostensibly setting out to clear his nameof all Sabbatean charges, yet within the work Sabbatean charges are nevermentioned, and the work opens with the epitome of a Sabbatean sermon! Lest one think this is an isolated instance, one has but to look at much of Lida'sIr David to see this is more the norm than the exception. Ir David was Lida'smagnum opus. He was only able to bring the first third to print, as he states inthe introduction. Lida's son Pesachya ended up printing the entire work inAmsterdam in 1719, through the press run by Solomon Proops.[13] In theintroduction Lida discusses the rabbinic claim that when the messiah comes allholidays will be nullified except for Purim. This saying had become a popularadage among the Sabbateans, since Shabbatai Zevi had abolished all holidays(including the 9th of Av), as he believed he was the Messiah. Lida proceeds toexpound on a passage (#143) in the Megaleh Amukos (by R. Nathan NataShapiro) that the Merkavah Chariot is alluded to in the letters  ש ב " ת  implying,therefore, that the redemption is connected to the Jews keeping shabbos. Lidaproceeds to equate this using the gematria   ש י ן ,   ב י ת ,   ת י ו  and  א ל י ה ו   מ ש י ח   ב ן   ד ו ד     whichequal 496. The equation of these two sets of words is suspect, since a popular"pastime" of Sabbateans was to show that Shabbetai Zevi's name wasnumerically similar to the numerical value of the word "messiah." If we supposethat Lida had a Sabbatean mindset, than one more passage in the introduction issuspect as well. Lida bring uses a statement from R. Isaac Luria, the Ari, thatstates that all souls stem from the same 248 souls, which are mired in impuritiesand kelipot, except those of certain individuals, one of them being the messiah.Scholem, in his article on Shabetai Zevi in the Encyclopaedia Judaica, explainshow Sabbateans viewed the messiah's soul within their own kabalistic view:[14]"He is essentially different from all those souls which play their part in theprocess of tikkun. In fact, he was never under the authority of the Torah,which is the mystical instrument used by the power of the thoughtful light andthe souls connected with it. He represents something utterly new, anauthority which is not subject to the laws binding in the state of cosmic andhistoric exile. He cannot be measured by common concepts of good and eviland must act according to his own law, which may become the utopian law ofa world redeemed. Both his history and his special task explain his behaviorafter he had freed himself from the prison of the kelippah."This can be used as a rationale for Shabbetai Zevi's apostasy, for if his soul wasnot from among the "regular souls," it could not be influenced by the impuritiesinherent in regular souls. Accordingly, he had the ability to save those whoneeded to be saved. Lida ends with one of his favorite verses, " ו ש ב ת י   ב ב י ת   ה '"  w i t h ,once again, his "favorite letters" standing out. As mentioned previously, all of thisis innocuous on its own, but taken within the larger picture, gives one pause.Within Ir David there are certain recurring pieces. As in his Be'er Esek, theconcept that King David didn't sin with Bat-Sheba is an important and recurrenttrope. In part 42,[15] for example, Lida argues that the reason David wasperceived to have sinned was to inspire the concept of repentance in individuals.Similarly, the Israelites were perceived to have sinned by the golden calf toinspire repentance among larger groups. In part 54, Lida explains that Davidcame to replace Adam and rectify the snake's relations with Eve. This discussioncontinues in part 55 where Lida discusses two interpretations of what happenedwith the snake and Eve, and how this affects, depending on the interpretation,our interpretation of whether or not David sinned. Lida continues with this themein part 58, which also combines one of Lida's favorite aspects of David's life, thatof David being persecuted by Absalom (perhaps a reference to Shabetai Zevi orSabbateans being persecuted). In part 64 we are reminded that King David knewhe was not sinning and that, on the contrary, he was eventually rewarded with aspot in the merkavah with the forefathers. Part 86 continues this theme byasserting that David, Moses, and the Israelites all did not sin because theirmotivations were right; through this, Lida sets forth the concept of "better a sindone for the sake of heaven than a mitzvah done with the wrong intention."Finally, part 88 references the Talmud in Shabbos 56 that asserts that anyonewho says David sinned is wrong, as well as referencing a passage in the AssarahMaamaros that discusses why David's name is not invoked in prayer.Tradition Seforim Blog: Tevie Kagan: The Enigmatic R. David Lida Part II http://seforim.traditiononline.org/index.cfm/2008/11/24/Tevie-Kagan-T...3 von 4 09.12.2008 15:38 If one views Lida as a Sabbatean, then David is not the one speaking, but ratherthe Messiah, Shabbetai Zevi.[16] This further complicates much of Lida'ssermons, since this implies that he is no longer merely using Psalms as aspringboard for simple rabbinic-homiletic discourse; on the contrary, this giveseverything he states a double meaning.           It cannot be disputed that Lida was a great scholar and a prolific author. Whetherhe plagiarized works or held Sabbatean beliefs remains up for discussion.However, much of his writing lends proof to the fact that he did. Why his worksare still in print today, as opposed to the works of other possible Sabbateans,has more to do with the luck that Lida had of being reprinted early on by theHasidic Rabbi Tzvi Hirsh of Liska (1808-1874) (and why a Hasidic rabbi chose tolatch on to such a controversial figure may have to do with the similar ideologicalmindset of early Hasidism and Sabbateanism).[17]*The author would like to thank the editors of the seforim blog who make this great forum available.I would like to thank Professor S.Z Leiman for helping me with the idea for this post and guidancethroughout, and Efraim Keller at the Habad Library who helped with attaining Eisner's Toldos ofLida. and Achron Achron Chaviv Eli Meir Cohen who has been a tremendous asset with his wealth ofknowledge of everything seforim related especially getting out of print items. [1] Emden, Toras Hakanaos (Amsterdam, 1752), 71b[2] See Rosenthaliana Studia- http://cf.uba.uva.nl/nl/publicaties/treasures/text/t18.html[3] Eisner, Toldot ha-Goan Rabbi Dovid Lida, pg.12[4] pg.123[5] 'Shabbetai Zevi," Encyclopaedia Judaica, pg.1251[6] See Scholem, Mitzvah Habah Beaverah: Mechkarim Umekoros LetoldosHashabsaut Ugilgoeha (Jerusalem, 1982)[7] For an examination/explanation of Emden's list, see S.Z. Leiman, SeferHazikaron R. Moshe Lipshitz (New York, 1996)[8] David Lida, Sod Hashem (Kiryath Joel, 2002), pg. 25[9] Strashun, Mivhar Kesavim (Jerusalem, 1995), pg.128, n 2[10] Betzalel Naor, Post-Sabbatian Sabbatianism (Spring Valley, 1999), pg.43[11] Aaron Freimann, Sefer Hayovel for Nahum Sokolow (Warsaw, 1904), pg. 464[12] While this is most probably just a standard writer's convention, it lends credence toEmden's contention that Lida may have had some messianic aspirations. See Emden'sToras Hakanaos, discussing Shir Hillulim.[13] For more about Solomon Proops, see Richard D. Abraham, "Selomoh Proops,Corrector or Copyist?" Hispanic Review, Vol. 43, No. 3. (Summer, 1975), pp. 317-320;Quaerendo, Volume 37:2 (April, 2007), pg. 96-110; Marvin J Heller, Printing the Talmud:A History of the Individual Treatises Printed from 1700[14] pg. 1242[15] All numbers refer to the paragraphs assigned in Amsterdam edition.[16] See Naor, Post-Sabbatian Sabbatianism, pg. 168, n 16[17] See Scholem, Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism (New York, 1967), "Ninth Lecture-Hasidim: The Latest Phase"Comments (5)Copyrights © 2008 Dan Rabinowitz in coordination with Rabbinical Council of America. All rights reserved.Tradition Seforim Blog: Tevie Kagan: The Enigmatic R. David Lida Part II http://seforim.traditiononline.org/index.cfm/2008/11/24/Tevie-Kagan-T...4 von 4 09.12.2008 15:38

The enigmatic R. David Lida part II

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Hochschulschriftenserver - Universität Frankfurt am Main