Thread by @yonibrander

1/I keep writing, deleting, and starting new threads on #Eidlitz and #Sabbateanism.

This is likely annoying to anyone that is following the discussion. I apologize.

But I got it right here.

And I think it is very interesting:

1a/ Disclaimer (again): I'm not a heresy-hunter.

I don't see moderate Sabbateanism as anything more than a belief that didn't pan out. We shouldn't lose an iota of respect for them.

I'm a researcher. I'm not here to pass judgment. I'm being descriptive. That is all.

2/When I talk about Sabbateans, I mean the movement post-apostasy.

Scholem noted Sabbateanism was forged at the conversion.

The apostasy, as Dr. Leiman put it, ended S.Z.'s "legitimate career."

Most Jews went home. Disappointed. Resumed lives.

Others did not. Could not

3. Those that remained hopeful became the groups we know as Sabbateans.

Or, in their words, they were the believers.

Scholem writes in "Redemption Through Sin:"

4. They constructed theologies and myths out of the crisis events of the apostasy and, subsequently, the death of their Messiah.

Scholem:

4a. An aside: Read Scholem. And, in particular, read Scholem's "Redemption Through Sin" which was trans. by Hillel Halkin (who as @EconTalker recently noted is an excellent writer).

It is a transcendent essay.

academia.edu/44555242/Gersh… (I assume this your work @MyShtender)

5. Questions emerged from those events and, in many ways, the character of S.Z. that were the preoccupation of Sabbateans and the Sabbatean movement.

6. Why did the messiah perform "strange acts?"

How could he have converted to Islam? (The strangest of the "strange acts?)

Nathan of Gaza noted the shocking nature of the act. But offered theological rationalizations for it.

7. The most celebrated of these explanations was that the messiah needed to sin (the strange acts) and even apostatize to redeem the final sparks.

This would allow him to infiltrate the world of darkness and sin. And, from the inside, redeem the last sparks stuck there.

8. Then in 1676, S.Z. died.

The Messiah had died before any earthly redemption had been achieved.

Nathan of Gaza and others provided a new set of answers- built on their post-apostasy theologies- to explain the Messiah's death.

Among them that S.Z. had joined the Godhead.

9. Nathan and others also talked about the idea that S.Z.'s "occultation" before bringing the final redemption was because while S.Z. had paid the debts of the past, his generation was not yet worthy of salvation.

The messiah was suffering for the sins of the generation.

10. Sabbateans- even after Nathan died in 1680- intensely occupied themselves with those ideas and questions.

11. They asked:
- Were they actually living in a messianic age?
- What role did S.Z. play in the redemption?
- What role would he play in the future? Would another messianic figure finish his mission?
- What was he doing now? Was he part of God?

11a. - What was the true nature of the Messiah's doctrine of the Godhead? And how vital were faith in him and knowledge of it for the final redemption?
- Why did he have to sin, apostatize, suffer, and die?
- What was the status of the Mitzvot and the Torah?

11b. - What was the status of the fasts?
- What could believers do to bring the final stage of redemption?

12. These questions- and ones like it- are what interested Sabbateans.

Their works reflect the feeling they were living in a hallway to a new era and desperately trying to get to the end of it.

13. I will not focus on radical antinomians here. Because Eidlitz was not one.

14. He was a moderate Sabbatean- like many of the most outstanding scholars and kabbalists of the 17th and 18th centuries- who believed that the final redemption would be finalized through a final dose of communal teshuva and piety.

15. Some were ascetics and pietists that adopted certain regiments of Tikkunei Teshuva to help the cause.

Others preached repentance, theurgic rites, and faith to the masses.

16. Indeed, one can understand why a pious Sabbatean would be attracted to preaching.

A teacher takes pride in changing a heart.

The moderate Sabbatean, who believed that just a bit more repentance would tip the final scales, certainly had the motivation to preach & teach.

17. While it may sound strange at first, pious Sabbateans would naturally have been drawn to the Kloiz, the Yeshiva, the Pulpit, and the writing of popular Seforim.

18. Likewise, they did not care about Jewish Law or Torah learning any less than their non-Sabbatean neighbors did.

They were, of course, far away in practice from the Salonika sect of converts to Islam or even from radical Jewish Sabbateans.

Scholem again:

19. Moderate and radical Sabbateanism had a complex relationship with each other.

Different sub-sects competed not only for followers but for souls.

Indeed, often the fiercest clashes were between moderates and radicals.

20. And there is a logic to it. Moderate believers felt that radicals, united by a shared true faith, were hurting the cause they said they were committed to.

If the Messiah was to be brought by repentance, tikkunim, and study, then rampant violations were counterproductive.

21. Eidlitz, for instance, like his teacher R' Jonathan, had little patience for Frank and his followers.

He appears to have made common cause with R. Ezekiel Landau and R. Elazar Fleckeles in the campaign against them in Bohemia.

leimanlibrary.com/texts_of_publi…

Continued:

https://twitter.com/yonibrander/status/1566485227312226308