Jewish Studies Quarterly

Editors Joseph Dan (Jerusalem) Peter Schafer (Berlin) Advisory Board Philip Alexander (Manchester) • Robert Alter (Berkeley) Michael Brocke (Duisburg) • Jacob Elbaum (Jerusalem) James Kugel (Harvard) • Jehuda Reinharz (Brandeis) Colette Sirat (Paris) Managing Editor Klaus Herrmann (Berlin)

Volume 6

Mohr Siebeck

Papers for publication (preferably in English; French or German may be accepted) should be sent in duplicate to Professor Peter Schafer, FU Berlin, Institut fur Judaistik, SchwendenerstraBe 27, 14195 Berlin, Germany, or to Professor Joseph Dan, The Hebrew University, Dept. of Jewish Thought, Mount Scopus, Jerusalem 91905, Israel. Manuscripts should be typewritten on one side of the paper only, double-spaced with wide margins. Submission of a paper will be held to imply that it contains original unpublished work and is not being submitted for publication elsewhere. The editors do not accept responsibility for damage or loss of papers submitted. All articles are refereed by specialists. Acceptance for publication will be given in writing, provided that the manuscript has not been offered for publication elsewhere. Upon acceptance, the author will transfer to the publisher the exclusive copyright for his/her work. This right to publish and sell the work expires with the termination of the duration of copyright stipulated by law. The author retains the right to grant another publishing company permission to reprint the work one year after the original pubUcalion. The right of publication comprises the right to reproduce the work photomechanically and the right to store the data in a retrieval system and to transmit it in on-line processing. Subscriptions: JSQ is published in quarterly issues of approx. 90 pp. each; annual subscription rate is DM 168,- plus postage. - Please send your subscription order to the Pubhsher: I C . B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), P O. Box 2040, 72010 Tubingen, Germany - or to your usual subscription agency. Printed with financial assistance of the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft. <o 1999 by J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck) Tubingen. - This journal with all articles and figures may not be reproduced in any form (beyond that permitted by copyright law) without the publisher's written permission. This applies particularly to reproductions, translations, microfilms, and storage and processing in electronic systems. - Printed in Germany on acid-free paper. ISSN 0944-5706

Messianic Strains in Rabbi Israel Ba^al Shem Tov^s 'Holy Epistle'^

Israel Ba'al Shem Tov ('Master of the Good Name'), the legendary founder of Hasidism (1700-1760),- left hardly any writings behind him. One of the few pieces in our possession is an epistle addressed to his brother-in-law, Rabbi Gershon of Kutov, who had emigrated to the Holy Land in 1746 and settled in Jerusalem.^ In writing this epistle, the Besht wished to share with Rabbi Gershon a mystical experience, Ihe ascent of the soul,' which he had performed on New Year's Day, 5507 (1746).^ The Besht used a certain technique - ^adjuration''^ - which enabled his soul to separate from his body during the course of prayer. While his body remained on earth, his soul ascended to Heaven and met the Messiah. The epistle, containing details of this event, was originally dictated by the Besht to his disciple. Rabbi Aryeh Leib - ''the

This article is a chapter in a larger research entitled The Messianic Roots of Hasidism. I thank Prof Joseph Dan, Prof Rachel Elior and Prof Moshe Idel for their fruitful remarks. I am most grateful, too, to Rachel Garden for the translation. ^ See: Scholem, G., ''Demuto ha-Historit shel Rabbi Yisrael Ba'al Shem Tov," in: Shapira, A. (editor) Devarim be-Go. Tel Aviv 1976, pp. 287-324; Rosman, M. J., '^Miedzyboz and Rabbi Israel Baal Shem Tov," in: Hundert, G. D., (editor), Essential Papers on Hasidism. Origins to Present, New York and London 1991, pp. 275-299. ^ Regarding Rabbi Gershon of Kutov and his immigration to the Holy Land, see: Heschel, A. J., "Rabbi Gershon Kutover," The Hebrew Union College Annual (HUCA) 33, Cincinnati (1950-1951) part 2, pp. 17-71.Dinur, B.Z., "The Begmning of Hasidism and Its Social and Messianic Elements," (Heb.) in: Be-Mifneh ha-Dorot. Jerusalem 1955, p. 191. Parts of Dinur's article have been translated into English. See: Hundert G. D. (editor). Essential Papers on Hasidism. Origins to Present, New York and London 1991. pp. 86-208; Bernai, J., "Al Aliyato shel Rabbi Abraham Gershon mi-Kutov leErez Yisrael," Zion 42 (1977) pp. 110-119; Bernai, J., Iggerot Hasidim me-Erez Yisraei Jerusalem 1980, pp. 23. • T"|7n r\zwr\ tt^Si. The Hebrew year f p n starts in September 1746 and ends in * 1747.

ny3tz;n Jewish Studies Quarterly, Volume 6 (1999) pp. 55-70 cj Mohr Siebeck - ISSN 0944-5706


Mor Altshuler

J^Q ^

Scribe the Rabbi Reprover of Polonnoye."^ But the missive never reached its destination, perhaps due to an encroaching plague and the ensuing quarantine. In 1750, during the fair of Luka, the Besht received a letter from Rabbi Gershon, from which he learned that his epistle had not arrived in Jerusalem/ Sometime later, probably in 1752, he wrote a second episde,^ repeating part of the information contained in the previous one. He entrusted the second epistle to another disciple of his. Rabbi Jacob Joseph of Polonnoye, to be delivered to Rabbi Gershon in Jerusalem. Yet, "due to an obstruction brought about by God, blessed be He," Rabbi Jacob Joseph cancelled his planned journey to the Holy Land, and thus the second epistle failed to reach its destination as well. It remained instead in the possession of Rabbi Jacob Joseph of Polonnoye, and was pubUshed in 1781 as an appendix to his book Ben Porat Yosef (Korez 1781).**^ In this fashion, some twenty years after his death, the Besht's 'Holy Epistle' became sacred throughout the Hasidic world. The Korez version remained the only printed version until 1923, when David Fraenkel pubhshed another version based on a private manuscript.'^ Mordechai Bauminger reprinted the latter version in 1971, which came to be known as the Fraenkel-Bauminger.'"

^ As he is called in the second epistle. See: "The Holy Epistle," Ben Porat Yosef (appendix), Korez 1781. Rabbi Aryeh Leib was one of the Besht's first disciples, with their affiliation predating the year 1738. See; Rubinstein, A. (editor). Shivhei ha~Besht {In Praise of the Ba'al Shem Tov), Jerusalem 1991, p. 232. See: The Holy Epistle, Ben Porat }b5e/(appendix). Korez 1781. ^ The Fraenkel-Bauminger version, which is the equivalent of Korez. dates the second epistle to Parashat Teruma 1752 in Rashkov. See: The Holy Epistle, Ben Porat }i?j-^(appendix), Korez 1781. '** See: The Holy Epistle. Ben Porat lb.?e/ (appendix). Korez 1781. For English translations of the second epistle, see: Jacobs, L.. Jewish Mystical Testimonies, New York 1976, pp. 148-155; Rosman, M., Founder of Hasidism. A Quest For the Historical Ba'al Shem Tow Los Angeles - London 1996, pp. 97-113. " Fraenkel, D. Mikhtavim meha-Besht Za"i ve~Tah}iida\\ Lemberg 1923. '" The authenticity and reliability of the Fraenkel-Bauminger version has been discussed at length. See: Rubinstein, A., "Tggeret ha-Besht le-Rabbi Gershon mi-Kutov," Sinai 67 (1970) pp. 120-139; Bauminger, M. S., "Le-Iggeret ha-Besht." Sinai 68 (1971) pp. 198-200; Bauminger, M.S.. Tggerot Rabbenu Yisrael Ba'al Shem Tov Za"L veHatano Rabbi Yehiel Mikhal Za"l le-Rabbi Avraham Gershon Za"l mi-Kutov," Sinai 71 (1972) pp. 248-269; Rubinstein. A., "Al Ketav Yad me-Iggeret ha-Besht le-Rabbi Gershon mi-Kutov." Sinai 72 (1973). pp. 189-202; Bauminger. M.S., "Od le-Iggerot ha-Besht ve-Hatano le-Rabbi Avraham Gershon mi-Kutov." Sinai 72 (1973). pp. 270283; Mondschein. Y. (editor). Shivhei ha-Besht (In Praise of The Ba'al Shem Tov). Jerusalem 1982. p. 233: Etkes, E.. "Ha-Besht ha-Histori - Bein Rekonstrukziah le-Dekonstrukziah." Tarbiz 66 (1997). pp. 425^+42.

(1999) Messianic Strains in Rabbi Israel Ba'al Sheni Tor's Holy Epistle' 5' The first epistle was not published by the Hasidim. and scholars considered it lost- Howe\er. Joseph Rozani has recently dl^co^e^ed*- that it had been printed in 1900. in Abraham Kahanas book Rabbi Israel Ba'al Shem Tor (Zilomir 1900).-- Kahana gave no clue as to the source of the episile. noting onh that "The \ ersion of the epistle gi\ en here differs from the printed [Korez] \ersion. and is printed accordine to [a copy of?] a manuscript of Rabbi Ishaia E)une^ ich. belonging to an acquaintance of mine, wliich I had the opportumt\ of \iew-ing-" Rabbi Isaiah Dune\ich was a disciple of the founding fathers of Hasidism - Rabbi Pinchas of Korez. Rabbi Yehiel Mikhal. the Zlotchover maggid. and Rabbi Dov Ber. the Mezeritch maggid. He ovvTied the manuscripts that were used to print Or Tor ah (Korez 1 S<)4) and perhaps Zavxa'at ha-Rivash (1793?). two collections of Hasidic Hanhagot (moral instructions I attributed to the Besht. Rabbi Menachem Mendel of Premishlan. the Mezeritch maggid and the Zlotchover maggid.'^ Moreover. Rabbi Isaiah sponsored the initiative to copy and pr^er^e a Shabbetaian composition. Sefer ha-Zoref. from a manuscript belonging to the Besht's son and grandson.' The fact that Rabbi Isaiah had access to manuscripts held b\' the Besht's offspring suggests that he was connected to authentic Beshtian material- Another point that may be significant is that Sefer ha-Zoref was copied by one of Rabbi Isaiah's disciples in 17S2.'* Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that the Holy Epistle' was also copied around 1TS2. StilL it is not clear how mam copies had been made before Kahana saw the manuscript. His comment about printing from the manuscript - T * " - ' " - ri"5r" '" " r "<-• z r ^ r npr-rn "s 7r is some.vhat ^ague.'^ and could refer either to Rabbi Ishaias handwriting or to a copy of his handwTiting.
' ' See: RozanL X. Iggeret Alixai Seshanm U-Rabb: Yisrael Ba'al Shem Tor. ihes:^. submitted for an Nf. A- degree under the guidance of Prof. Rachel E ' : : ' The HebrrA University of Jenisalem. 199T. ' Kahana. A-. Rabbi Yisraei Ba'al Shem Tor. Zhitomir \9(PJ. pp. 100-102 *' Kahana 1900. p 100: Rozani 199"^, pp. 12-15 '* See: Gries. Z.. Stfrui Hanhagot. Jerusalem 19^9. under the article in the ipperd:>: on Rabbi Isaiah Dime-.^xh: Altshulec M - Rabbi MeshuUam F^-msh Heller u-Mekomo be-Reshii ha-Hasidut. thesis submitted for the degree Doctor of Ph:losopb> under the guidance of Pro£ Joseph Dan. The Hebrew Univers:::- of Jerusalem. 1994. pp. 323-32" '" E-.entuaih. Sefer ha-Zoref ZD6 other Kabbalisiic and H£s:dic matenal were found in the Stohn Geniza. belongiiig to the Karliner rabbinic d>Tia5t>. Th:s Geniz^ w^s foimd and described bv Z. Rabinorich. "M;n ha-Geniza ha-Stolinaitr Z:OK 5 (194^'). pp.I2.^132 ' See: Rabinovicb 1940. p. 131 '•' See: Kahana 1900. p. 100.


Mor Altshuler


In 1980, Y. Mondschein published another version of the Besht's first epistle, based on the 1776 Rothschild manuscript JNUL 8 5979.-*^ The first few sections of this Hasidic manuscript - which predates the publication of Ben Porat Yosef hy ^\VQ years - contain Hasidic 'Hanhagot/ typically ascribed to the Besht and his disciples. It also contains the 'Holy Epistle' and the 'Will of the Zaddik' of Rabbi Aaron of Karlin. All of these sections were copied during June-July 1776, as mentioned explicitly at several points in the text.^^ Separated by an empty page, the last section of the Rothschild manuscript contains the teachings of Rabbi Menachem Mendel of Vitebsk, the leader of the 1777 Hasidic immigration to the Holy Land. This part was not mentioned in the detailed table of contents on the first page, and probably was written some time after 1776." Some additional indications suggest that the manuscript belonged to one of the 1777 emigrants, who had copied Hasidic material - including the Besht epistle - to be taken with the group to the Holy Land.~^'' The
^^ Mondschein. V Migdal Oz, Kfar Habad 1980, pp. 4 1 9 ^ 2 6 ; Mondschein 1982. pp. 229-239. See also: Rosman 1996, pp. 97-113; Altshuler 1994, pp. 127-148. -^ See: Mondschein 1982, pp. 229-230. ^^ See: Mondschein 1982, pp. 229-232. ~^ Signs of this appear on the first page, where the manuscript's owner wrote the " following lines, unrelated to the body of the text: "My innkeeper in Anakal'^ Anabal? Mordechai Chadad ben Gemara? His wife Achyah? Daughter of Esther Her son Eliahu Her daughter Esther His father's name Nissim ben Ephraim His brothers Jehudah and Abraham and Zemach His sisters Channah and Rivka and Gazelle." Conceivably, the manuscript's owner wrote down the names of the Chadad family in order to pray for them. Since the surname Chadad and first names Nissim, Tzemach and Gazelle are common in Oriental communities but not among Ashkenazim. the manuscript evidently belonged to a Hasidic Jew from Eastern Europe who passed through Oriental communities, and promised his innkeepers to pray for them in the Holy Land. We can reasonably assume that the manuscript's owner was one of the members of the 1777 Hasidic immigration to the Land oi Israel that met Oriental -lews on his way. This would explain why teachings of the immigrants' leader. Rabbi Menachem Mendel of Vitebsk, were recorded at the end of the manuscript, and why the first sections of the manuscript were dated the month of Tammuz 1776; as the caravan of immigrants set forth in the month of Adar 1777, a few months earlier the manuscript's owner had copied down Hasidic teachings to take with him to the Land of Israel. Similarly, we hear of Hasidic writings, brought to the Land of Israel by the 1777 immigrants, from Rabbi Meshullam Feibush Heller, who wrote from Eastern Galicia to his brother-in-law Rabbi Joel, one of the 1777 immigrants, about ''a number of wonderful secrets ... some of which are recorded in the writings of your camp." See: Likkutim Yekarim, (Lemberg 1792) Jerusalem 1981, p. I30b. The 'AnabaP or 'Anakal' mentioned here may be a distortion of the name of a city on the way to the Land of Israel. Also see: Asaf, D. "Or Hadash ai Aliyat ha-Hasidim bi-Shenat 1777," Zion 61

(1999) Messianic Strains in Rabbi Israel Ba'al Shem Tov's 'Holy Epistle' 59 owner of the manuscript continued to write in his notebook after 1777, perhaps in order to preserve the oral sermons delivered by Rabbi Menachem Mendel in Safed and Tiberias. The 1776 Rothschild version and the 1782[?] Kahana version are not entirely identical.-'* Some of the words in the Rothschild version were written with a comma in place of the last letter, while most of the words in the Kahana version are complete. It is impossible to determine whether the last letters were left out in the Rothschild version or added in the Kahana version.-^ Moreover, particular words and sentences in the one version differ from the equivalent words and sentences in the other. Therefore, it seems unlikely that the owner of the Rothschild manuscript copied from Rabbi Isaiah Dunevich or vice versa, but rather from a third version, either a previous copy or the original epistle itself. Another possibility is that one of the versions was copied from the original handwriting, while the other was copied from a copy. Either way, we can conclude that at least three versions of the first epistle - the original and two copies - already existed by the early 1780s. Moreover, the fact that in 1776 - five years prior to the 1781 Korez printing - the first epistle was already enfitled The Holy Epistle,'^^ proves that it was regarded as an authentic piece by the Besht. Currently, then, scholars of Hasidism have at their disposal two versions of each of the Besht epistles - the Kahana and Rothschild JNUL 8 5979 first epistles, as well as the 1781 Korez and Fraenkel-Bauminger second epistles. These sources are not sufficient to determine which of the versions of each epistle is more faithful to the original Beshtian epistles. However, they are broad and diverse enough to point up the differences between the first letter and the second one.^^

(1996), p. 325. Another possibility is that the name ^Anakal' is a distortion of the name of a settlement in the Land of Israel, perhaps that of the village Nahaileh, (mistakenly recorded here as 'el-Nachal'?) located in the Hula valley, north of Tiberias. -^ For a detailed comparison between the Rothschild 8 5979 version and the Kahana version, see now: Rozani 1997, pp. 35-50. ^^ Either by one of the copyists, or by Kahana himself when he published the epistle. ^^ In the Rothschild version. See: Mondschein 1982, pp. 229-230. ^^ Some of the differences between the first and second epistles have been discussed at length. See: Mondschein 1982, pp.229 239; Rosman 1996, pp.97-U3; Etkes 1997, pp. 425-442; Rozani 1997, pp. 27-82.


Mor Altshuler B.


The first epistle has its own distinct structure and focus. Still, its text is not as fluent and clear as that of the second; words appear to have been lopped off from the sentences, perhaps due to some kind of censorship. For example, both of its versions omit the opening salutation and the closing greeting and signature, beginning immediately with the Besht's account of his ascent to Heaven. Consequently, the identity of both writer and addressee as well as the date and circumstances of the epistle's composition remain unknown. As for the contents, the first epistle differs from the second one. It does not include the second ^ascent of the soul,' performed by the Besht in 1750 and described in his 1752 epistle.'^'^ This omission suggests that the first epistle was written prior to 1750, probably already by 17461747.^^ Another noticeable difference is the space devoted to the events in the communities of Zaslav, Sivtovka and Dunevich, where Jews had been forced to convert and then been killed. In the 1752 epistle these events preoccupy the Besht to the extent that he appears to have ascended to Heaven on Rosh Hashanah 1746 mainly in order to forestall the decree of forced conversion. Contrary to the impression given by the later epistle, the subject of forced conversion is mentioned in the first epistle only in brief, while the Besht's attention is focused elsewhere." The focus of the first epistle is the messianic quest, as evinced by three topics which do not appear in the second epistle, only in the first one:^^ the Besht's reaction when told of his future death in the diaspora, his interpretation of the divine rejoicing and the extended answer of the Messiah •"^ .^ '
-^ See: Ben Porat Yosef (apptndix), Korez 1781: ^And on New Year's Day 5510 (1750) 1 performed an ascent of the soul, as is known, and 1 saw a great accusation, until the evil side almost received permission to completely destroy regions and communities." ~'^ See: Mondschein 1982, p. 231. ^"^ Sec: Kahana 1900, p. 102; Mondschem 1982, p. 230. ^' The Besht himself confessed that the first epistle had included some information that was left out from the second epistle. However, he ascribed the discrepancies to the weakness of his memory. See: the second epistle, Ben Porat }f'.vt/(appendix), Korez 1781: •"... the news and the secrets which 1 wrote to you via the Scribe the Rabbi Reprover of Polonnoye did not reach you and I was also greatly pained by this ... At the present time 1 have, however, forgotten some of the things in them, but details which 1 do remember 1 will write very briefly." ^^ The paragraphs from the first epistle given here are translated from the Rothschild JNUL 8 5979 version as published by Y. Mondschein 1982, pp. 233-237. For a


Messianic Strains in Rabbi Israel Ba'al Shem Tov's 'Holy Epistle' 61

"The vision that G o d has shown me in the ascents will certainly be a wonder to you and serve to gladden your soul, as it has been a wonder in my eyes as well, wondrous things known to you regarding the ascents of souls ... I saw wondrous things which I had never before seen from the day I reached maturity until now. That which I saw and learned in my ascent is impossible to describe or relate, even mouth to mouth ... I also witnessed the ministers of the nations of the world, who came and submitted as slaves before their masters, before the great angel Michael.^^ And many gifts were given to all the Righteous'*'^ and to all the world, so that they could countenance and endure the rejoicing and great delight, as when the Torah was given,^^^ which is impossible to comprehend in worldliness. I was horrified and shaken by this vision, and said in my heart that this [the rejoicing] may have been for me and - G o d forbid - my time has come to depart from this world. And perhaps because of that it is the appropriate thing to do, Vedd'l}^ My soul grieved for myself and for my friends at the prospect of my dying abroad}'^ detailed comparison between the Rothschild version and the Cahana version, see now: Rozani 1997, pp. 35-50. ^^ See: Daniel 12:1: '"And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince who standeth for the children of thy people." See also: Bavli Hagiga, 12b: "Zevul is that in which [the heavenly] Jerusalem and the Temple and the Altar are built, and Michael the great prince stands and offers up thereon an offering, for it is said (I Kings 8:13): I have surely built Thee a house of habitation - Zevul - a place for thee to dwell in for ever." It should be noted that Rabbi Jacob Joseph of Polonnoye wrote in Toledot Ya 'akov Yosef section 2, Devarim, p. 614: "My Master Teacher [the Besht] performed ascents of the soul and saw how Michael, the great guardian of Israel, spoke in favor of Israel." The great prince Michael is not mentioned in the Besht's second epistle, which was in the possession of Rabbi Jacob Joseph. Therefore, his remark in Toledot Ya 'akov Yoscj strengthens the conclusion that he knew the text of the first epistle as well. ^^ 'Righteous' (Zadikim) - DV">7S. See also: Daniel 2:6, 5:17, 7:9-15. The Besht portrays the day of divine judgment taking place in heaven on New Year's Day (Rosh Hashanah). Apparently, the Besht's description is based on Daniel's prophecy regarding the Day of Judgment. Moreover, Daniel's Day of Judgment is closely linked to his attempt to predict the exact date of the end of days, which is also the Besht's purpose in his ascent to heaven. See also; Elior, R.,"Rabbi Josef Karo ve-Rabbi Yisrael Ba'al Shem Tov: Metamorfoza Mistit, Hashra'a Kabbalit ve-Hafnama Ruhanit," Tarhiz 65 (1996), pp. 671-709. It should be noted that the Besht's great-grandson. Rabbi Nachman of Braslav, also regarded Rosh Hashanah as the day of redemption. See: Liebes, Y, "Ha-Tikkun ha-kelah shel Rabbi Nahman me-Braslav ve-Yehaso la-Shabtaut," Zion 45 (1980), pp. 201-245. Prior to Hasidism, we find it in the writings of Rabbi Abraham Abulafia that connected Rosh Hashana with redemption and the rising of the Messiah, using numerology to prove it. Rabbi Abraham defined the esoteric knowledge about the coming of the Messiah as a prophecy given to him through a divine voice. See: Idel, M., Ha-Havava ha-Mistit ezel Avraham Abulafia. Jerusalem 1988, pp. 110-111.

^^ min inan ins.
^^ Acronym to denote a secret that cannot be revealed - veda"l Yl^ -. ^^ The two marked sentences do not appear in the second epistle. The Besht's remark, "and perhaps because of that it is the appropriate thing to do. veda"l" is not clear. It is difficult to understand what was the ^'appropriate thing to do" before his


Mor Altshuler


I went higher until I actually entered the palace of the King Messiah,^^ and I saw face to face that which I had never before seen from the day I reached maturity until now. And what was revealed to me is not for you. Also revealed to me were wondrous and fearful things regarding the depths of Torah which I have not seen and heard and no ear has heard in many years. And it occurred to me to ask him - perhaps all this delight and rejoicing is in preparation for his good coming-^"^ And when will the Master come? And his lofty reply is not to be revealed.^^ But in this way will you know of it: when your teaching becomes famous and manifest in the world, and your springs are dispersed abroad,'^"^ that which I have taught you and you have comprehended, and they [others] will also be capable of performing unifications and having [soul] ascents as you do. Then will all the kelippot^~ be consumed, and it will be a time of grace and salvation. And I was astonished and I had a great sorrow about the extent of time involved, and when such a thing might be possible." In the second epistle the Besht describes the ascent of his soul to the Palace of the Messiah, where "... I saw a great rejoicing, the reason for which I cannot fathom.""*'* At first he attributed the rejoicing to the prospect of his imminent death, but it was made clear to him that his time had not yet come. Thus, the divine rejoicing remained a mystery to him - "... yet to this very day I do not understand the nature of the rejoicing."'*^ However, the first epistle presents a previous explanation by the Besht for the rejoicing he encountered. When he met the Messiah, "... it occurred to me to ask him - perhaps all this delight and rejoicing is in preparation for his good coming." This sentence, which does not appear in the second epistle, reveals some of the Besht's hidden hopes and expectations of witnessing the immediate coming of the Messiah, as he ascended to the Messiah's palace. Moreover, the Besht's first question refers to the Messiah's future coming. In the first epistle the Messiah's answer includes one significant sentence which does not appear in the second epistle: dying abroad. Maybe the Besht is referring here to his desire to emigrate to the Holy Land, which is mentioned in the next sentence. The marked sentence does not appear in the second epistle. '^" The Besht's question to the Messiah follows a Talmudic dialogue between Rabbi Joshua Ben Levi and the Messiah by the town gates of Rome. See note 49 below. '*' This sentence does not appear in the second epistle. ^~ See Proverbs 5:16, "Let thy springs be dispersed abroad." For a similar use of this verse in the prophets, transmitted to Rabbi Joseph Karo by his divine mentor, see: Ehor 1996, pp. 671-709. '*'* An appellation for the forces of evil - nT3'''?p. '*^ The Holy Epislle, Ben Porat yAvc/(appendix). Korez 1781. "^' The Holy Epistle. Ben Porat )/j.v(/(appendix), Korez 1781.

(1999) Messianic Strains in Rabbi Israel Ba'al Shem Tov's 'Holy Epistle' 63 "And when will the Master come? And his lofty reply is not to be revealed.''^ But in this way will you know of it; when your teaching becomes famous and manifest in the world, and your springs are dispersed abroad, that which I have taught you and you have comprehended, and they [others] will also be capable of performing unifications and having [soul] ascents as you. Then will all the kelippot be consumed, and it will be a time of grace and salvation. And I was astonished and I had a great sorrow about the extent of time involved, and when such a thing might be possible." The Besht asked for the exact date of the Messiah's arrival - "when will the Master come?" But the Messiah answered about the terms of his arrival and conditioned his future coming on the dissemination of the Besht's teaching - "and your springs are dispersed abroad." As a matter of fact, these terms were impossible to fullfill: The Messiah promised to arrive when the secrets he had taught the Besht would be known to others. Yet, he had forbidden the Besht to reveal these secrets even to Rabbi Gershon,'*'' let alone to others. Such a paradoxical condition clarifies part of the Besht's reaction - ' ' . . . when such a thing might be possible." Yet, the other part of his reaction - "and I was astonished and very sorrowful about the extent of time involved" - is unclear, for the Besht could not have concluded the length of time that would elapse until the Messiah's arrival from his answer. Thus, this part of the Besht's reaction corresponds to the Messiah's answer only if part of the answer is understood as referring not exclusively to the terms of the arrival, but also - and perhaps mainly - to the exact date of this arrival: "And when will the Master come? ' m n inmt:^n nn^m (And his lofty reply) is not to be revealed." The expression 'f3"in M^'2WT\ refers to the verses in First Samuel, 7.T5-17: "And Samuel judged Israel all the days of his life. And he went from year to year in circuit to Bet-El, and Gilgal, and Mizpah; and he judged Israel in all those places. And his return was to Rama, for there was his house; and there he judged Israel; and he built there an altar unto the Lord." The words nD"in IDDItt^n in Hebrew means 'his lofty reply,' but as a quotation - nna^in inrnti^n - it also means 'his return to Rama,' the mountainous village that was the prophet Samuel's home-town.

"^ The Besht repeats several times the prohibition to reveal most of the Messiah's ^ secrets, perhaps mainly the secret of redemption, even to Rabbi Gershon. See: The Holy Epistle, Ben Porat yb^e/ (appendix), Korez 1781: "But no permission was given to me to reveal this secret for the rest of my hfe. 1 did request that I be allowed to teach it to you but no permission at all was given to me and I am duty bound on oath to keep the secret."


Mor Altshuler


Moreover, ' n ' n ' a ' i ' n ' is also read as a numerological combination marking the year 1885 - n'^nn"^^. It seems that the Besht understood the Messiah's reply - inmtt^n - to be designating the year 'n'n'a'n'n' (1885) as the year of his future coming: ''and when will the Master come? And his reply - 'n'n'Q'"l'n'." The rest of the sentence, "not to be revealed," is read both as a part of the Messiah's answer and as a clue directed to Rabbi Gershon, hinting that this information was an esoteric secret not to be explicitly written or revealed to others. This interpretation of the Messiah's answer clarifies the Besht's reaction - "And I had a great sorrow about the extent of time involved;" although the date is specified, obviously the Besht would not live for another 138 years to welcome the Messiah in his lifetime. Thus, when read in sequence, the answer refers simultaneously to the date of the Messiah's coming and to the terms of his coming. Both answers lead to a dead end - the date is too far in the future and the terms are impossible to be fullfilled. The double interpretation stems from the enigmatic nature of the Messiah's words. Like the oracle at Delphi, instead of providing the questioner with a simple answer, he replies with a question that creates a contradiction or a paradox. A similar ambiguity can be found in the Talmudic account of a previous dialogue between the Messiah and Rabbi Joshua Ben Levi, which was the sub-text of the Besht's epistle."^^ In this dialogue, the Messiah answers a question which was not directed to him,^^ while responding to the more important question in a most ambiguous way: "'When will the Master come?' asked he. Today,' was his answer." The word 'today' was
• ^ 5645 in the Hebrew counting. ^ '*" Bavli Sanhedrin, 98a: "Rabbi Joshua ben Levi met Elijah standing by the entrance of R. Simeon b. Yohai's tomb. He asked him: 'Have I a portion in the world to come?' He replied: Tf this Master desires it.' He then asked him: 'When will the Messiah come?' 'Go and ask him himself,' was his [Elijah's] reply. 'Where is he sitting?' At the entrance of Rome.' 'And by what sign may I recognize him''" 'He is sitting among the poor lepers. All of them untie [the bandages of their sores for dressing] all at once, but rebandagc them together, whereas he unties and rebandages each separately, thinking, should I be wanted. 1 must not be delayed.' So he [R. Joshua] went to him [the Messiah] and greeted him, saying: 'Peace upon thee, Master and Teacher.' 'Peace upon thee, O Son of Levi,' he [the Messiah] replied. 'When will the Master come?" asked he. Today,' was his answer. On his returning to Elijah, the latter enquired: 'What did he say to you?' 'Peace upon thee, O Son of Levi,' he answered. Thereupon he [Elijah] observed: 'He [the Messiah] thereby assured you and your father of the world to come.' 'He [the Messiah] spoke falsely to me,' R- Joshua rejoined, 'stating that he would come today, but he has not.' He [Elijah] answered him: 'This is what he [the Messiah] said to you; Today, if you will hear his voice."' (Ps. 115:7). ^^ The first question of R. Joshua b. Levi was directed to Elijah: "Have I a portion in the world to come?"

(1999) Messianic Strains in Rabbi Israel Ba'al Shem Tov's 'Holy Epistle' 65 understood by R. Joshua as referring to a specific date, while Elijah completed the quotation - "Today, if you will hear his voice," thus making the Messiah's coming conditional.^' Another possible explanation is that the IVIessiah's full answer to the Besht is a combination of two different versions of the answer, that were pieced together. One version, probably in the first epistle, refers to the date: "And when will the IVIaster come? And his reply - ' n ' n ' a ' T n ' - is not to be revealed... and I was astonished and I had a great sorrow about the extent of time involved." The other version, probably in the second epistle, refers to the terms: "And when will the Master come? In this way will you Icnow of it: when your teaching becomes famous and manifest in the world, and your springs are dispersed abroad, that which I have taught you and you have comprehended. Then will others be capable of performing unifications and having [soul] ascents as you do. Then will all the kelippot be consumed, and it will be a time of grace and salvation ... and when such a thing might be possible." In the first version, the Messiah communicated the date of his arrival the year 1885 - but the Besht was disappointed because it was not the date which he had expected. In the second version, the focus was on the terms of the Messiah's arrival. At a very early stage, somebody had combined the Messiah's answers in the two epistles, expanding the answer and creating a new, integrated text.^-^

C. The text of the first epistle clarifies the messianic purpose of the ascent of the Besht's soul. The Besht ascended to Heaven on New Year's Day, 1746, in order to verify his messianic expectations. The truth that he discovered there brought disappointment and frustration, and smashed his hopes of witnessing the coming of the Messiah in his lifetime. More^' Elijah's role here is that of mediator and interpreter between the Messiah and ordinary people, which is also the Besht's role in his ascent to heaven. Moreover, Elijah's mentor was Ahijah the Shilonite, who was also the heavenly mentor of the Besht. '~ The fact that the expanded reply appears in both versions - the 1776 Rothschild version and the Kahana 1782 [?] version - excludes the possibility of a later addition or fabrication. See also: Mondschein 1982, pp. 231, 235; Rosman 1996. pp. 103-104 My conclusion is that both first and second epistles were known in Hasidic circles by 17761781.


Mor Altshuler


over, the 1746 messianic ordeal could be regarded as the last of the Besht's attempts between the years 1740-1746 to bring the Messiah. The first attempt was his failed journey to the Holy Land^"* in the year p"n (1740), which was predicted by some Kabbalists to be the year of redemption.^"* It may have been the failure of this journey that prompted the Besht to conclude that the Messiah could not arrive before the mission of raising the holy sparks from the abyss of evil was complete.^^ Such a conclusion might explain his subsequent dedication, during the years 1742-1746, to the correction - 'tikkun' - of the sinning soul of Shabbetai Zevi, the false Messiah, in order to complete that process.^^ Only during his ascent to Heaven in 1746 did the Besht learn that despite all his spiritual efforts, he would not be granted the privilege of welcoming the Messiah on earth. The Besht's experience in Heaven also infiuenced his plan to join Rabbi Gershon in the Holy Land. In 1750 the Besht received, at Luka's fair, a letter from Rabbi Gershon^^ informing him that the Jerusalem rabbis "are eagerly awaiting your arrival."''^ However, in spite of his desire to

" S e e : Shivhei ha-Besht (Rubinstein) 1991, pp. 52-54, 129-132; Dinur 1955, pp. 192-206. '•" See: Shivhei ha-Besht (Rubinstein) 1991, p. 239; Bartal, I., 'Aliyat Rabbi Elazar Rokah me-Amsterdam le-Erez Yisrael," in: Michman, Y. (editor) Mehkarim al Toledot Yahadut Holand 4, Jerusalem 1985, pp. 7-25; Bernai, J., "Hidush ha-Yeshuv ha-Yehudi bi-Teveria bi-Shnat 1740 u-Mashmauto ha-Historit," Shevet ve-Am 8 (1978) pp. 35-62; Asaf 1996, p. 340. ^^ See the testimony of Rabbi Jacob Joseph of Polonnoye, Toledot Ya 'akov Yosef p. 729: "I heard in the name of my Master Teacher [the Besht,] that when he went on his famous journey [to the Holy Land], his Rabbi [the prophet Ahijah the Shilonite] showed him in that place, that all the journeys of Israel in the desert and all the journeys of man can be found in the Torah. And when his ship broke and he was in great sadness, his Rabbi came ... and showed him what worlds [sefirotl] he was in - the Iworlds of the] names '\1K and the combination 'TTK. And he [the Besht] strengthened his heart to sweeten them in their roots as he knows etc. .n"nD7V" The Besht intended to "sweeten the worlds," by changing their evil nature into holiness and thereby repairing the Divme Name n"^nx. Reforming the evil soul of Shabbetai Zevi was part of this process. See also: Yaari, A., Iggerot Erez Yisraei Ramat Gan 1971, p. 284; Dinur 1955, p. 196. ^^ See: Shivhei ha-Besht (Rubinstein) 1991, pp. 133-134; Dinur 1955, pp. 188-192; Liebes 1980. p. 226; Liebes, Y, "Hadashot le-lnyan ha-Besht ve-Shabbetai Zevi," Mehkarei Yerushalairn hc-Mahshevet Yisrael 1983. pp. 564—569. ^'' See: The Holy Epistle. Ben Porat Yosef (appendix). Korez 1781: ''I received [the letter] at the Luka fair in the year 5510 (1750) which you sent by the hand of "the envoy from Jerusalem." The letter received at the Luka fair was probably the second letter. The Besht did not receive Rabbi Gershon's first letter, which was written in 1748 and "sent by the hand of a man who was traveling from Egypt." ^^ See: Bernai 1980, p. 40.

(1999) Messianic Strains in Rabbi Israel Ba'al Shem Tov's Holy Epistle' 67 see his beloved brother-in-law, and his affinity for the Holy Land, the Besht made no second attempt to leave the Diaspora. In his 1752 epistle to Rabbi Gershon, the Besht hinted that he would not join him in Jerusalem after all. Although he tendered no explanation, his despair of emigration to the Holy Land as an operative plan was probably connected to his 1746 realization that redemption was still far away.^^ He also ceased to support Rabbi Jakob Joseph of Polonnoye's planned journey to Jerusalem.^^ However, the Besht did not change his view concerning the essential and indispensable role of the Holy Land in the process of historical and cosmic redemption, nor did he develop an alternative concept of redemption in and within the Diaspora. A clue can be found in his words in the first epislle - "My soul grieved for myself and for my friends at the prospect of my dying abroad." A similar note issues from the closing salutation of the second epistle: "God knows that I do not despair of traveling to the Land of Israel, if it be God's will, to be together with you. It is only that the time is not in accord with it."^' Hence, the time of the Messiah had not yet arrived. The hearts were already reclaimed and the bodies were wilhng, but it was not God's will to redeem his people at this specific moment in history. The Besht had no choice but to submit to the Divine Will unprotestingly. Thus, the account of the Besht's voyage to the holy palaces of Heaven is not a tale of personal failure. It does not express a spiritual conversion antagonistic to the Kabbalist method of apocalyptic speculations, nor does it mark the beginning of a new religious path. More than anything, it is an account of misfortune and bad luck; everything is ready for the arrival of the Messiah, except the Messiah himself, for ''the time is not in accord with it.'^^^^ A hint can be found in Rabbi Gershon's letter to the Besht. See: Bernai 1980, p. 40: "[But] what can I do for I know of your nature that you have to pray in your minyan, except for the other things. So I have despaired of your coming to the Holy Land unless the King the Messiah comes." ^" Rabbi Jakob Joseph had planned more than once to immigrate to Jerusalem, but failed to realize his intentions ''due to an obstruction brought about by God. blessed be He." Yet the obstruction was evidently the Besht's objection, as demonstrated in Shivhei ha-Besht. See: Shivhei ha-Besht (Rubinstein) 1991, p. 106. See also: Bernai, J., "Some Clarifications on the Land of Israel's Stories in Praise of the Baal Shem Tov," Revue des Etudes Juives 146 (1987), pp. 367-80. ^^ The Holy Epistle, Ben Porat Yosef i appendix), Korez 1781. ^~ Most scholars have tried to find in the Besht's epistle a manifesto of a new Hasidism or some other original gospel, which it does not include. See: Dubnov, S.. Toledot ha-Hasidut, Tc] Aviv [1931] 1960, pp. 60-62; Buber, M., Be-Pardes ha-Hasidut. Tel Aviv 1945, p. 21: Dinur 1955, p. 206; Scholem 1976, pp. 287-324; Scholem. G., 'The


Mor Altshuler D.


The 1746 messianic expectations of the Besht failed to materialize. Yet they left a legacy, sealed in esoteric writings, which refused to disappear. The messianic impulse burgeoned anew in the proximity of the year 1781, projected to be the year of redemption by Kabbalistic calculations predating Hasidism. One of these Kabbalists, Immanuel Hai Ricchi, was a commentator on Lurianic Kabbalah and the author of Mishnat Hasidim (Amsterdam 1727)^"^ and Yosher Levav (Amsterdam 1737, Krakow 1890), which in certain Hasidic circles became one of the books necessary to the understanding of the secrets of redemption.^"^ According to Hai Ricchi's numeration in Yosher Levav. the process of redemption was to start in p''n (1740) and reach its climax in the eighth month (lyar) of X"?Dpr) (1781), with the coming of the Messiah: 'T also found it explicitly stated in the Chapters of Rabbi Eliezer, chapter 48. Thus six and a half hours of His [God's] day means 541 years and eight months of our years and months. ^^ Consequently, according to the words of RaShBi, in the year 541 (n"Qpn = 1781) and two thirds, the mount of the Lord's house shall be ready. For then shall Israel be relieved from the troubles and wars that accompany the advent of the Messiah. Accordingly, during the period 1740-1781 and two thirds, they [the wars] will gradually disappear, so that by [the end of] that period we shall be joyous and glad. And
Neutralization of the Messianic Element in Early Hasidism," The Messianic Idea in Judaism, New York [1969] 1978, pp. 176-202; Scholem, G., '^Devekut, or Communion with God," in: Hundert G.D (editor), Essential Papers on Hasidism, Origins to Present, New York and London 1991, pp. 275-299. Only Isaiah Tishby pointed out that the Besht aimed to bring redemption using the traditional Kabbalistic means of holy magic, such as ascents of the soul, holy names and 'Yichudim.' See: Tishby, I., "Ha-Rayon ha-Meshihi ve-ha-Megamot ha-Meshihiot be-Zemihat ha-Hasidut," Zion 32 (1967), pp. 32. 45. Now see: Idel, M., Kabbalah - New Perspectives, New Haven and London 1988, pp. 94-95; Idel. M., Hasidism - Between Ecstasy and Magic, New York 1995, pp. 79. Idel defines the Besht's spiritual experience as magical mysticism, pointing out that "the Besht's magical and mystical teachings may be regarded as having messianic impUcations. and the Besht himself may be seen as a moderate redemptive figure whose work included magical components." It should be noted that Rabbi Jakob Emden, a fierce enemy of Sabbateanism, issued a prohibition against praying according to Mishnat Hasidim. Sec: Idel 1995. p. 150. Nevertheless, the Besht probably knew the 'Kavanot of prayer' in Mishnat Hasidim and might even have practiced them as suggested in Shivhei ha-Besht (Rubinstein) 1991, pp.251 252. ^ Yosher Levav is mentioned by Rabbi Meshulam Feibush Heller, a disciple of Rabbi Yechiel Michael, the Maggid of Zlotshov See: Likkutim Yekorim (Lemberg 1792) Jerusalem 1981. p. 131a. It should be noted that Rabbi Meshulam's epistles were titled Yosher Divrei Emet. potentially influenced by Yosher Levav ''' According to the Talmudic Tractate Sanhedrin, 97a. a thousand of years equal one day (12 hours) in the counting of God.

(1999) Messianic Strams in Rabbi Israel Ba'al Shem Tov's 'Holy Epistle' 69 here is the sign - Though it tarry, wait for it, because it will surely come (Habakkuk, 2:3)"^^ This calculation was quoted by Rabbi Samuel Ben Eliezer of Kalwaria, who lived in the Besht's generation. Rabbi Samuel repeated the prophecy in his book Darkhei Noam (Koenigsberg 1764), determining that, ''In the year 1781 and eight months, as slated, our righteous Messiah will not delay in coming."^^ The eighth month of 1781 became a crucial date for an esoteric Kabbahstic circle, led by one of the Besht's disciples. Rabbi Yechiel Michael, the Zlotshover maggid.^^ Apparently, the latter's charismatic personality captivated his disciples and augmented messianic expectations, as the year 1781 drew near. As part of their messianic activities, his followers began to print Kabbalistic material, in accordance with the belief that spreading the secrets of Kabbalah would hurry the coming of the Messiah,^^ The Korez printing house printed a series of Kabbahstic books between 1778-1782."^** Among them were the Zohar (1778), Sefer Yezira'^^ (1779), Tikkunei Zohar (1780), Sefer ha-Kane (1782) and the Lurianic Ez Haim^- printed in 1782 for the first time. The first Hasidic books to be printed were Toledot Yakob Fo^e/(Korez 1780) by Rabbi Jacob Joseph of Polonnoye and Maggid Devarav le-Yaakov (Korez 1781) by Rabbi Dov Ber, the Mezeritch maggid. The second book of Rabbi Jacob Joseph of Polonnoye, Ben Porat Yosef was also printed in 1781, with the second version of the Besht's Holy Epistle included as an appendix.^^ The printers went out of their way to emphasize the date of the printing. As Dr. Aryeh Morgenstern has pointed out,^'* they inserted an unusual addition below the epistle's
^^ Hai Ricchi's numeration was based upon the numerology of three words in Habakkuk, 2:3: 'Though it tarry, wait." n"annn'' a"S = 541, which marks the year 1781. The first letter of'wait' - n"Dn is 'n - 8, which indicates the eighth month of 1781. For the Hebrew source, see: Hai Ricchi, Yosher Levav. Krakow 1890, p. 47. I thank Dr. Aryeh Morgenstern for sharing this information with me. See also: Tishby 1967, p. 17. ^^ See; Tishby 1967, pp. 16-17. ^^ See: Altshuler 1994, pp. 30-51, 83-126. Rabbi Yehiel Mikhal was portrayed by Rabbi Avraham Joshua Heschel of Apt as practicing ascents of the soul to heaven. See: Mayim Rabbim, Brooklyn 1979, p. 140; Idel 1988, p. 95. ^^ For a full bibUography, see: Altshuler 1994, p. 56 note 119. See also: Balaban, M., Le-Toledot ha-Tenuah ha-Frankit, Tel Aviv 1944, pp. 127-135. '^ See: Altshuler 1994, pp. 51-60. The Book of Creation. The Tree of Life. See above. '''^ In his lecture "Messianism in the Beginning of Hasidism," dehvered at the International Congress for Jewish Studies, Jerusalem 1997.


Mor Altshuler


closing salutation; 'And the work has been completed by those who carry out holy work faithfully, on Tuesday, the twentieth of lyar, jygj "75 jj^-^ addition was followed by the six names of the printer and the typesetters. The date was neither accidental nor arbitrary; according to the calculations of Immanuel Hai Ricchi and Samuel Ben Eliezer of Kalvira, it was the projected date of redemption. Printing the Besht's second epistle on this special date exposed the messianic purpose behind the printing. The second epistle lacks the first part of the Messiah's reply, while highlighting the second part of this reply. Apparently, the prophetic expression, "when your teaching becomes famous and manifest in the world, and your springs are dispersed abroad," was understood literally, in the most practical terms. Thus, printing the Besht's epistle and disseminating his teachings through his disciples' books were considered to be a fulfillment of the Messiah's terms for his arrival. The 1781 attempt turned into another disappointment, followed by a series of bans and the death of the circle's leader, Rabbi Yehiel Mikhal. It temporarily brought the messianic chapter in the history of Hasidism to a close, ^^ but enabled the growth of a mass movement on the ruins of the founders' dreams and hopes.

^^ See: The last page of Ben Porat YoseJ. Korez 1781: "n*' Vy HDN'ran n'7^^\^ y:?2b\ ^"3Q*7 U'^^'7r2;^ ntir^an mi3 ^D ^2 VsDinu? Dvn n:iQS3 u^iipn nDxVDn •'p'o^v lax'? 'ro -)n3 DID*?! 170'? CrN-liy •':3." The term "^TK^ir^ ^33 V30'?" refers to the Counting of the Omer. "•'ro "in2" and "~nnK" are the weekly Torah portions that are read m the second and the third weeks of the month lyyar. ^^ See: Altshuler 1994, pp. 51-60, 285-291.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful