Review of the Book “Meeting Kabbalah”

On April 22, 2008 a rather negative review of the book Meeting Kabbalah, published in Hebrew by the Bnei Baruch organization, appeared in Israel’s most elite newspaper, Ha’aretz. Meeting Kabbalah is a collection of my talks with Israeli writers, actors, musicians, singers and social activists.

Meeting Kabbalah

When we asked the newspaper’s editorial staff about the negative review, its reviewer, Tomer Persiko, responded with five questions, in which he disagreed with our statements. Here they are:
1. You assert that all methods besides Kabbalah are based on lowering a person. Have you tried all these methods? If not, then what are you basing your statements on?
2. You insist that Kabbalah has existed since the times of Abraham, but modern researchers say that it was founded in the thirteenth century and their works confirm this. Do you have proof of your opinion?
3. You insist that The Book of Zohar was written by Rashbi in the second century CE, while modern researchers say that it was written by a group of Kabbalists under the guidance of Rabbi Moshe de Leon in the thirteenth century, and they produce proof of their assertions. Do you have proof of your assertions?
4. You assert that Kabbalah is a science, but in what sense is it a science if it is based on metaphysical assumptions (for example, the existence of the Sefirot), whose existence cannot be proven?
5. You insist that “the only way a person can reach a connection with the Creator is through a group,” meaning – a Kabbalistic group under your leadership. But you are not willing to accept homosexuals into your group, and advise them to reach a connection with the Creator on their own. How can you respond to this contradiction?

How would you respond to these five questions?

5 Comments

  1. I would say that nothing of Kabbalah can be proved the way he wants to – logically and objectively. It´s like imprisioning a feeling, an intuition – or even a living force of Nature – into a solid object for study. We can lock a bit of a tornado´s air in a box, but the air in it will be still. There are a lot of analogies that could be created using the forces of Nature as an example – not to mention our feelings. This is a tipical case of how the human mind usually thinks – intelligence without wisdom, reason without faith. Maybe it´s time for the reviewer to accept Bnei Baruch´s challenge of embracing the belief in goodness – cause I´m sure he wants goodness – rather than reasoning why good is good to the point of capturing it for interrogation, as men usually did so far. As I´ve heard in a recent movie, I would say stop arguing and Accept the Good. Thanks.

  2. 4.- Kabbalah deals with attainment, experiment the statesthat the sources talk about, you don’t have to believe blindly (like sometimes with string theory),that`s a science (and the articles I`ve read from the BB library have strong resonances with Physics and Chemistry for example) and I understand that according to kabbalists it explains even the attitude of the author of this questions, I am trained as a Physicist  and to me, when I am able to experiment the states the sources talk about I`ll be able to tell you : I`ts not a science, is THE science.

  3. Well, I tried to find this review at the Ha’aretz site because I would like to read it but I couldn’t find it or anything written by Tomer Persicko.  So if someone can send me the article’s link I’d appreciate it.
    1, In any event, Mr. Persiko states that Rav Laitman “asserts” that all methods besides Kabbalah “lower a person” and asks if the Rav has “tired all these methods” and upon what he is basing his assertions?  It is not necessary to reinvent the wheel every time we want to take a trip.  We generally rely upon trusted sources to inform our selections and go from there.  If Mother tells me not to drink that because it will make me sick, I don’t drink it. So it’s not necessary to try something in order to understand it or how it works.  A familiarity, based on the reliable opinions of others, is sufficient to make an informed position.  Most other philosophical/religious methods empasize the corruption of human nature and the necessity to “eliminate” the self, mortify the flesh, have contempt for the world, “repent” and so avoid suffering in a future world by extinguishing the Ego.  Only Kabbalah asserts that the using Ego and its desires are the very path to meeting the Creator in this Creation.
    2. Mr. Persiko then reports an apparent inaccuracy in Rav Laitman’s “insist(ance) that Kabbalah has existed since the times of Abraham…and that modern researchers say that it was founded in the thirteenth century.”  He misses the point.The point is not the moment in time that this Method was put to paper – codified –  but rather that Abraham received the Light for the Creator so that he and his group were able to study how to apply the maxim, “Love your neighbor as yourself.”  The Idea of what we today call Kabbalah was born, originated, with Abraham developed orally and in writing and was put toegther in the 13th c.In the 13th c. other men further developed and began to collect what had been wirtten and said up to that time doesn’t mean that the moment they did this collectiong was when Kabbalah was “born”.  It only means  that historic moment – the 13th c. – was when the Method began to be codified.  3. The same thing might also be said to Mr. Persiko’s statements about the authorship and history of the Zohar.  The Rashbi wrote it but Rabbi Moshe de Leon and his group brought together what had been written as well as spoken expansions and explanations of the original 2 c. CE text.  The finished product from the 13th c.  is the setting with commentary and additions for the original wirtings of  Rabbi Shimeon Bar Yochai. 4. Mr. Persiko worte,”You assert that Kabbalah is a science, but in what sense is it a science if it is based on metaphysical assumptions (for example, the existence of the Sefirot), whose existence cannot be proven?”  With my limited understanding, Kabbalah represents a scientific approach to Spiritual questions; not in the classical science in the sense of Descartes or Pascal, but closer to Stephen Hawking’s quantum approach.  It opperates from the more intuitive position of “faith above reason”.  The existence of the Sefirot, for example,  may not be classically “proven” but can be known by direct, immediate, personal experience by using the approach of the Kabbalah: faith above reason.  This approach is “scientific” because generations of Kabbalists have had the same direct, immediate, personal experience using the same method – they have replicated the “experiment” and achieved the exact same result.  That is the heart of the scientific approach.5. Fianlly, Mr. Persiko alleges a contradiction by our Rav by stating,”You insist that “the only way a person can reach a connection with the Creator is through a group,” meaning – a Kabbalistic group under your leadership. But you are not willing to accept homosexuals into your group, and advise them to reach a connection with the Creator on their own….”  I have no idea how Rav Laitman might respond to this.   Having not read the article, I do not know if Mr. Persiko’s question is accurate.  He may be trying to  imply that some homophobia might be afoot.It seems to me that a person’s sexual orientation is immaterial to his/her desire to correct the Ego.  A person who has a huge desire needs the  huge Light of the Creator to climb the Ladder.  All aspects of a person’s life are needed to accomplish that work and everything has the ability to remind a person on the Ladder about the purpose of Creation. There is none else besides Him. Mr. Persiko may also be trying to  imply that the Rav is trying to set himself up as a leader.  Anyone who, as a sincere seeker, has read any of Rav Laitman’s work should be able to recognize a man of wisdom and humility whose insight and compassion makes trying to set himself up as a leader, alien. I am only a beginner but that’s how I would respond to those 5 questions.Kenneth M. Kafoed

  4. Hi Kenneth,

    Here’s the link to the original article (it’s originally only in Hebrew): http://www.haaretz.co.il/hasite/spages/977027.html

  5. Molly…

    Arent you supposed to be loving and accepting of all people?  Doesn’t kabbalah teach that?  So, why then, do you say, “I don’t need to waste my time further with them” and talk about “our world” as if you are in a different reality than anyone else.  Sounds exclusionary rather than loving, kind and accepting of others.

Discussion | Share Feedback | Ask a question




Laitman.com Comments RSS Feed