4

According to the minhag I follow, one who is not a talmid chacham should not study Jewish mysticism (maase merkavah, heichalot, kabbalah, et c.). Following this, would one be able to read non-Jewish mystical texts (for non-religious purposes, of course), or would the same restrictions apply?

mevaqesh
  • 35,599
  • 2
  • 98
  • 176
Noach MiFrankfurt
  • 12,969
  • 4
  • 25
  • 71
  • 2
    What kind of non-Jewish mystical texts are you referring to? – Scimonster Dec 14 '14 at 20:27
  • 3
    Why would you think that it would be allowed at all? (Vayikra 19:26) – MTL Dec 14 '14 at 20:58
  • @Scimonster, I'm talking about academic type readings, philosophical mainly. As I would think is rather clear by some of my questions here, I put little stock in mysticism, whether our own or not. In particular, I'm interested in the language used, the poeticism, rather than the content. – Noach MiFrankfurt Dec 14 '14 at 21:24
  • @Shokhet, that is talking about practicing, I'm talking about cracking open a book and reading. – Noach MiFrankfurt Dec 14 '14 at 21:25
  • 1
    Minhag? It's Halocho - See הלכות יסודי התורה - פרק שני which says צִוּוּ חֲכָמִים הָרִאשׁוֹנִים שֶׁלֹּא לִדְרשׁ בִּדְבָרִים אֵלּוּ אֶלָּא לְאִישׁ אֶחָד בִּלְבַד וְהוּא שֶׁיִּהְיֶה חָכָם וּמֵבִין מִדַּעְתּוֹ וְאַחַר כָּךְ מוֹסְרִין לוֹ רָאשֵׁי הַפְּרָקִים וּמוֹדִיעִין אוֹתוֹ שֶׁמֶץ מִן הַדָּבָר וְהוּא מֵבִין מִדַּעְתּוֹ וְיֵדַע סוֹף הַדָּבָר וְעָמְקוֹ. his source is the 2nd perek of Chagiga 2:1 וְלֹא בַּמֶּרְכָּבָה בְּיָחִיד, אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן הָיָה חָכָם וּמֵבִין מִדַּעְתּוֹ. – Danny Schoemann Dec 15 '14 at 08:17
  • @DannySchoemann, some Sephardim and Chassidim argue that it isn't halacha. I didn't want to get involved in a machloket, so I purposely avoided using the word "halacha". – Noach MiFrankfurt Dec 15 '14 at 16:21
  • 1
    If only I could find a reliable source to what you wrote, I could post a great question... – Danny Schoemann Dec 16 '14 at 08:11
  • 1
    @DannySchoemann, my source for Chassidim is hearing d'rashot from Chabad rabbanim, who often bring kabbalistic inyanim despite the character of the community (there were women, unmarried men, children, and goyim present). I rely on an opinion of R' Hamburger to permit me to stay there, so as not to offend the rav. – Noach MiFrankfurt Jan 11 '15 at 18:27
  • 2
    @NoachMiFrankfurt - You don't believe in the validity of the Zohar, right? So why would you want to study non-Jewish mystic texts, if you don't even accept the Jewish ones? – ezra Jul 07 '17 at 03:53
  • @ezra, I'm interested in philosophy in general, even if I disagree with its contents. For example, while I'm not a nihilist, I do appreciate Nietzsche. – Noach MiFrankfurt Jul 07 '17 at 03:56
  • 1
    @NoachMiFrankfurt - I believe studying these texts would be a waste of time, at the very least. – ezra Jul 07 '17 at 03:56
  • @ezra, further, I accept the pre-Zoharic mystical school, eg. the Yetzirah, the Bahir, Ma'ase Merkava and heichalot as a part of our tradition. Even R' Sa'adia Gaon, who was opposed to the kabbalistic study of his day wrote a perush on the Yetzirah! – Noach MiFrankfurt Jul 07 '17 at 03:59
  • 1
    Noach, the edit seems to have significantly changed your question. Feel free to roll it back if you disagree with it. – Double AA Jul 07 '17 at 12:21
  • @DoubleAA, done. – Noach MiFrankfurt Jul 07 '17 at 14:07
  • since your post was unclear my answer is now irrelevant (i worked in vain). Please be careful in the future to write as clearly as possible! – Bach Jul 07 '17 at 14:09
  • 4
    @Bach He did write clearly. Someone edited his question against his will and he reverted it. See the edit history of the question https://judaism.stackexchange.com/posts/50395/revisions – Double AA Jul 07 '17 at 14:11
  • 2
    @Yaacov, see the comments above about your edit. Please take care in the future when editing others' posts not to change them accidentally. – MTL Jul 07 '17 at 19:22
  • @Shokhet The question sat for more than two years with no one responding to it. My edit was to remove some of the extra baggage on the question so that someone would offer an answer. His central question is if it is permissible to read from non-Jewish mystical texts in a kind of poetry appreciation sense. From what I see below, that strategy worked. It received its first answer today. – Yaacov Deane Jul 07 '17 at 19:46
  • 2
    Yes, @YaacovDeane, but the answer is *not* what the OP wanted. Did you read the above comments from Double AA, Bach, and Noach (the OP)? – MTL Jul 07 '17 at 19:51
  • @Shoket Noach MiFrankfurt recognizes there is a distinct difference between Jewish mysticism "maase merkavah, heichalot, kabbalah" and what he calls "philosophy", which he also calls non-Jewish mysticism. All the extra information confused the question which is probably why it got no response from anyone for over two years. Bach, at least, is trying to respond to his actual question. No harm or foul was intended. I was just trying to shake the trees for a response. – Yaacov Deane Jul 07 '17 at 20:01
  • 1
    @NoachMiFrankfurt Please see my comment to Shoket above. If I offended you via the edit, please accept my apology. It was meant only with good intentions. Also, Shoket says that the type of answer you received was not what you were looking for. If that is the case, then what exactly are you asking? It isn't coming across in your question. – Yaacov Deane Jul 07 '17 at 20:03
  • @NoachMiFrankfurt "some Sephardim and Chassidim argue that it isn't halacha." No one argues that what DannySchoemann quoted is halacha. Some Sephardim and Chassidim and most Mekubbalim say that halacha is either not applicable in this day (the circumstances have changed) or that it only applies to practical kabbalah, not theoretical kabbalah. Those who follow this view say, for example, that today even children can learn Zohar. Adults are obligated to learn it. – Yaacov Deane Jul 07 '17 at 20:35
  • @NoachMiFrankfurt One last thought, although this may not give you much comfort. The Lubavitcher Rebbe read and was very well acquainted with the writings of Nietzsche and Kant. – Yaacov Deane Jul 07 '17 at 20:46
  • 1
    @YaacovDeane, he was quite worldly in his earlier years, prior to coming to the US. – Noach MiFrankfurt Jul 07 '17 at 20:48
  • @NoachMiFrankfurt He was always worldly. To me, one of the things people miss most concerning the Rebbe is his humanity. If one understands the struggles, hardships & human side of the person, it is even more awesome to see who he became. It shows the truly limitless capacity of the pintele Yid in each of us. – Yaacov Deane Jul 07 '17 at 22:52
  • @NoachMiFrankfurt " I rely on an opinion of R' Hamburger to permit me to stay there, so as not to offend the rav". If that is so, isn't that an answer to your own question in "Leaving the room during a kabbalistic dvar Torah". There, all you say is that "[w]e learn from ... R' Hamburger Shlit"a ... that it is improper for one unlearned in sha"s and halachah to learn kabbalah". – Tamir Evan Dec 05 '17 at 06:00

1 Answers1

1

Non-Jewish mysticism is a very broad subject indeed. Almost every religion has something to teach on this subject, and a big part of this study has been influenced by the eastern religions, so you have to be careful with what you read.

Mysticism within the Abrahamic faiths should be fine as they do not constitute sifrei minus since they all believe in a personal god. However, Mysticism as has been taught by the eastern religions may constitute minus since its conception of god is wholly different than ours and, at least traditionally speaking, their ideas would be considered heretical according to Jewish law. (we can still make a case to allow it, since they do not promote a certain ideology, they merely discuss their mystical experiences and how to attain them, but that would be controversial indeed).

As for the waste of time aspect (which @ezra pointed out) it is not an issue at all, since it is a study of a particular wisdom of the gentiles and is part of the sifrei chachma (ספרי חכמה) which are permitted באקראי just like the study of philosophy and science.

Bach
  • 2,728
  • 14
  • 32
  • Something being permitted doesn't make it not a waste of time. I suspect I can come up with a few good counterexamples to show that – Double AA Jul 07 '17 at 13:57
  • 1
    "they all believe in a personal god" Why is that the relevant factor for determining if a religion's mysticism is "sifrei minus"? – Double AA Jul 07 '17 at 13:57
  • See edits to the question (which were applied while this answer had a non-positive score). You may want to consider revising and/or deleting this answer. – Double AA Jul 07 '17 at 14:09
  • It is simple. since it is a subject/wisdom studied just like any other non-jewish study (philosophy science) it cannot be considered a waste of time, unless you believe every non-jewish study is a waste of time! – Bach Jul 07 '17 at 14:14
  • 1
    That simply doesn't follow. It doesn't follow from believing some non-jewish's studies are a waste of time that all non-jewish studies are a waste of time. This is basic logic. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_by_example – Double AA Jul 07 '17 at 14:21