The Dispute of 1538 and its Ongoing Repercussions

When the Spanish Jews were forced to either convert or leave in 1492, many found refuge in Portugal. However, five years later the Inquisition took hold in Portugal, and again the choice was Baptism or expulsion. (More often than not, refusal of Baptism lead to slavery in Portuguese colonies). Of those who left, most found refuge in North Africa, or the Turkish Empire. The King of Turkey remarked “the King of Spain has impoverished his kingdom, and enriched mine”. The new refugees prospered in their new homes. Many rose to positions of importance in the Muslim lands. But many were not interested in wealth, but in spirituality, and especially in redemption.

The Holy Land beckoned. It had been a dream for a millennium and a half. But it was a part of the Turkish Empire. A backwater, to be sure. Since the rise of Islam, it had been considered a part of Syria with no special significance. The Turkish authorities had no problem allowing their new subjects to inhabit that backwater! Of those who settled there, the vast majority chose to live in either Jerusalem, or Safed (Tsfat). Both communities were inhabited primarily by those fleeing Spain and Portugal. Many were, in fact, among the former Conversos, those who had converted under duress, but had since succeeded in fleeing the Iberian peninsula, returning to Judaism, finding a welcoming home among their brethren in (most) Muslim lands.

Both Jerusalem and Safed had great scholars and mystics. Each community had a great leader; in the case of Jerusalem, it was Rabbi Levi ben Habib. In Safed it was Rabbi Jacob Berav. Both hailed from Castille, Spain. But that is where the similarity ends.

The tragedy of the destruction of the once glorious Spanish Jewish community was fresh in their minds. Both had experienced it personally, Rabbi Berav had actually converted in Portugal under duress at the age of 17, but managed shortly thereafter to flee. He had gone to North Africa, and was made Chief Rabbi of a major community at age 18! Rabbi Levi ben Habib believed that although he, and thousands of others, were now privileged to be in the Holy Land, our long exile was not yet over.  Return to the Land was in no way part of the Redemption. We had merely gone from the exile of Spain to the exile of Turkey. Perhaps our prayers would hasten the Redemption; our tears at the holy places move G-d to turn history in the desired direction! But there was nothing to do but pray, have faith and wait.

Rabbi Berav, on the other hand, believed that the tragedies of Spain and Portugal were the “birth pangs” of something great; the process of Redemption had begun. The parallels with Rav Kook are unmistakable.  There were many things to do; both spiritually and practically, that would hasten the already imminent redemption. There was an ongoing dispute between the two men on this subject.  But what COULD be done? First of all, many who had not withstood the test of the Inquisition, felt riddled with guilt, which was probably also “blocking” the redemption. They needed acts of penance, even mortification. But in order to have these things administered, they would need a Beit Din with the full authority of the ancient Sanhedrin; now defunct for over 1100 years! The original ordination (Smichha) had also been gone that long. It seemed hopeless! Moreover, a Sanhedrin would be essential as a ruling body for the hoped-for Jewish State, that must certainly arise before the coming of the Messiah (this can be inferred from many statements in the Prophets). Rabbi Berav was determined to see this through. Ordination must be resurrected, a Sanhedrin must arise. But how? And as one of the two greatest leaders in the Holy Land, was it perhaps his historical, nay, Divine destiny to accomplish this? Was he the Man of the Hour, or the victim of a misinterpretation of history? It would have been a great time for a Prophet to appear, but, alas, none did. What should he do?

Rabbi Jacob Berav saw the re-establishment of the ancient chain or ordination (smichah), and the establishment of a Sanhedrin, the great court of Deuteronomy 17:8-13, as essential for the spiritual rehabilitation of the former conversos, himself included, as well as for the Redemption; personal, national, cosmic. But how does one re-establish a broken chain?

Maimonides had ruled nearly four hundred years earlier that it COULD be done. Had not the Biblical Prophets foretold the restoration of our Judges? But how? Maimonides postulates that if all the sages in the Holy Land were to ordain one man, that would restart the chain. To be sure, there were those who opposed this idea, since it lacked sources. However, it became an accepted idea IN THEORY. After all, although there were great sages, no one since Talmudic times commanded UNIVERSAL respect and approval. And what was meant by “all” the sages? Was it really “all”, or most, or many? And who is regarded as a “sage” in this regard? Any learned person? Only recognized authorities? Only those holding official rabbinical positions?

Rabbi Berav decided that “many” was sufficient. He gathered 100 of the greatest scholars in Safed, lecturing them on his idea. He then requested that they all ordain him. Many were enthusiastic. Many were skeptical, but went along out of respect for their beloved leader. Here, Rabbi Berav made a huge miscalculation. There had long been uneasy relations between him and the Rabbi of Jerusalem, Rabbi Levi ben Habib. He hastened to Jerusalem, presenting Rabbi ben Habib with a certificate of ordination. Rabbi Ben Habib, rather than being pleased, was FURIOUS. He berated Rabbi Berav for attempting such a huge step without consulting others. He wrote letters against the smichah, and against Rabbi Berav personally; even raising the taboo issue of Rabbi Berav’s brief apostasy. Someone (we don’t know who) informed the Turkish authorities that Rabbi Berav was planning a revolution, with the goal of setting up a Jewish State in the Holy Land and Syria. Rabbi Berav was forced to flee for his life. Before doing so, he ordained four scholars in Safed. His ordination continued through four generations of scholars, the last being ordained in 1590. That ended the great experiment…for the time being.

But why the bitter antagonism? Couldn’t it have remained a polite dispute between colleagues? Was it purely personal? Or were far bigger issues at stake? Two of the greatest rabbis of the era were engaged in a struggle over a point of law. But it had gone far beyond that with Rabbi Ben Habib’s scathing attacks; not only on Rabbi Berav’s stance on the issue, but on Rabbi Berav himself, ultimately making him a fugitive. But why? Some history books will tell you that it was simply personal jealousy and animosity on Rabbi Ben Habib’s part. A more careful analysis of the facts, however, will show that his intent was far more noble, with an eye on possible danger for Judaism itself.

Rabbi Ben Habib’s concerns, as is evident from his impassioned writings, were as follows:

We don’t know if RAMBAM’s view is correct. He brought no sources for his view. Besides, even if we accept his view as authoritative, how can you be sure that your group of 100 scholars fulfills his requirement of “all” the scholars in the Land of Israel? But it MIGHT BE valid, which is worse than a flat “no”. You will now make a Sanhedrin of DOUBTFUL authority. Once you do, the calendar will no longer be valid, and we will need to go back to the original Torah requirement of the Sanhedrin calculating the calendar monthly. That would be fine if you are sure that it is, in fact, a valid Sanhedrin. But with a doubtful Sanhedrin,you will make a calendar which may or may not be valid. Some will take your new calendar, some won’t. The Jewish People will be divided on which days the holidays are to be observed! We will, in effect, become two religions, two peoples.

Also, if you have a valid Sanhedrin, they can make new ordinances, and repeal ancient ones. This is a major “gamer changer”.  Here, too, half the people will accept the new ways, half won’t. Besides these factors, this is essentially the work of one man with many admirers. How do you presume to impose your will and opinions, no matter how sincerely held, on the entire nation?

Rabbi Ben Habib’s apparent “out of bounds” reference to Rabbi Berav’s brief apostasy should be understood in the same context. His actions threatened to totally divide the people, as the Karaite heresy had done eight hundred years earlier. He felt it necessary to de-legitimize the founder of the possible new-approach before he succeeded in convincing large numbers of people. Desperate situations call for desperate measures.

Beyond all this lurked something even more frightening, with even more far-reaching possible consequences, something which our sages called “Dochek et Haketz” (Pushing the “End”).  Our sages point out that many of the great mistakes of history came about as a result of “jumping the gun”. The Golden Calf, for instance, was made because Moses was late in coming down from Mt. Sinai. How late? Six hours! They supposed him dead, and made a ridiculous substitute. The consequences were disastrous. There are numerous other examples.

Beyond that, one of our central concepts is the coming of Mashiach. Yet, the Talmud records a curse for anyone trying to calculate the time of his arrival. RAMBAM even goes so far as to say not to think about it too much, as it adds neither to our love or awe of G-d, but to believe that when G-d wants, it will happen. (The current folk belief that we are required every moment to beleive he is coming instantaneously, is contradicted by all Talmudic sources).  Yet, we find throughout our history, large numbers of people deciding that someone MUST be Mashiach. Disappointment resulted. Sometimes entire heresies grew up around failed Messiahs. Jewish tradition is clear. “If you are planting a tree, and someone runs up to you saying Mashiach has come, finish planting, and then investigate.” We find NOWHERE in scripture or Jewish tradition that someone is to be BELIEVED to be the Mashiach. If someone seems like he MIGHT be, and he fulfills certain criteria, he may be assumed to be, until proven otherwise. But nothing changes. Only when he has accomplished his task; in-gathering the exiles, building the Temple,, and ushering in an era of peace, may we BELIEVE that he IS the Mashiach. Many have lost their faith, or even their lives, in premature acceptance of a make-believe figure. I have endured much anguish over the years from people claiming that one or another political figure (!!!) is certainly Mashiach, or every time there is a border skirmish in Israel, impassioned cries go up “this is it!! The War of Gog and Magog! Pack your bags!”  Even the great Rabbi Akiva erred in thinking that Bar Kochba, who lead a rebellion against Rome, was Mashiach. He must be! Everything is lining up! A colleague said to him “Akiva, grass will grow from your cheeks, and Mashiach will not yet have come”.

Here we get to Rabbi Ben Habib’s central concern. He saw Rabbi Berav’s real motivation for renewing smichah, and forming a Sanhedrin, as the first steps in preparation for the Redemption. There can be little doubt that this was, in fact, Rabbi Berav’s intention. Everything is lining up! We have witnessed the destruction of Iberian Jewry. That MUST be the pre-Messianic travails spoken of in scripture. Thousands have come back to the Holy Land! Let’s get everything ready! Rabbi Ben Habib also thought the Redemption is likely near. But there is nothing to do but pray, perform righteous deeds, and wait. From his perspective, the premature exultation could only lead to disaster. In fact, similar thinking led to the Sabbatian debacle a little more than a century later; a tragedy which has left terrible scars on our people to this day. We can well sympathize both with Rabbi Berav’s interpretation of history, as well as Rabbi Ben Habib’s fears.

Now, let’s fast forward to the late 19th century. A similar situation arises, with responses remarkably similar to those of 1538.  A wave of attacks against Jews, called pogroms, swept across the Pale of Settlement; those areas of Czarist Russia where Jews were allowed to live. Murder, rape, pillage were daily occurrences well into the early twentieth century. In Western Europe, mobs were running through the streets of Paris crying “Death to the Jews!” As a result of the false accusations against Dreyfus, Jews, largely assimilated, anti-religious Socialists decided that the Jews needed a State in order to be safe. Groups of young people began migrating to the Land Of Israel, then a Turkish province.

The religious Jewish community in Jerusalem and other cities was not happy about this, as it was felt that their secular, even libertine ways would weaken the ways of Torah in the Holy Land. Nearly every rabbi in the world was opposed to the new movement. But as things worsened for European Jewry in the twentieth century, more and more Jews sought refuge in the Holy Land; not only Socialist idealists, but people with simply nowhere else to go. The Revisionist leader, Ze’ev Jabotinsky preached across Europe “Jews, put an end to the Exile, before the Exile puts an end to you!” Few realized how prophetic his words would turn out to be. The end of the first World War saw Great Britain in charge of the Land Of Israel. But when the situation deteriorated in Europe, the British clamped down on Jewish immigration with the infamous “White Paper”. Millions could have been saved from the Nazis had the British allowed them into the Holy Land. One British “statesman” famously quipped “the fewer Jews left after the war, the fewer problems for Great Britain.” Rabbi A.I. Kook had been preaching for decades that the Zionist movement, although secular and even anti-Torah, was subconsciously a response to a religious calling; in fact, he said, it was the beginning of the Redemption foretold in Scripture. Very few rabbis agreed with him. But after World War II, when Jews had nowhere to run (even the American administration refused Hitler’s offer to take the Jews), two short years later, the United Nations voted to found the State of Israel. (November 1947, taking effect May, 1948). Many religious Jews, including many rabbis, felt that this meant something much more than met the eye. The persecution of the nineteenth century, culminating in the Holocaust of the twentieth century, had now reversed itself. The “birth pangs” had largely passed. Hundreds of thousands, soon millions, of Jews had returned to the Holy Land, with the blessing of the Nations that had formerly oppressed us! Could this be the promised redemption? Some thought this a wildly premature notion. Would Israel even last? An uncle of mine was a reporter. He was covering the vote for establishing the State of Israel at the U.N. He interviewed the Israeli diplomat Abba Eben. He asked Eben if he thought Israel would still exist in fifty years. He sighed deeply and said “I hope so.” Many others thought, like Rabbi Ben Habib had thought four hundred years earlier, it might be…it likely is…but lets see how it plays out. Let’s pray, do good works, and wait. But some said “no! Jewish history, the very place of G-d in the world, is in our hands! We must act. We must establish facts on the ground”. But how? Most rabbis were not just skeptical, but frightened at the prospect of interpreting events in a theological way, when there really was no proof. Others, including great rabbis, felt that not to recognize G-d’s working in history was a perverse denial of everything we believe. Each view had, and has, its adherents. What was done? What could, and can be, done is an ongoing question. The parallels with 1538 are unmistakable. The story is still in the midst of working itself out.

What was done by each side? The founding of the State of Israel needed to be interpreted theologically. Like in the case of the 16th century Safed community, different approaches sprang up. Each had sincerely held views; often seeing the opposing views as nothing short of dangerous.

One view was that the founding of the State was actually a rebellion against G-d. It is a secular State in the holy Land. Could there be a greater insult to G-d and Torah? To rebel against the King is bad enough, but to do so right in the King’s palace? This group saw the attempt to end our exile by our own efforts as nothing less than an affront to G-d and His judgments.

A second, much larger group, were not anti-Zionist, but highly skeptical non-Zionists. They chose to live in the Land, abide by its laws, but not to see the state as having any theological basis. This group included the heads and members of the Charedi (Right Wing Orthodox) Yeshivot and most Hassidic groups.

The third group is known as “National Religious”. The first Chief Rabbis of Israel declared the founding of the State to be “Itchalta d’geulah” (the beginning of Redemption). A prayer was composed by the writer and Nobel Laureate S.Y. Agnon, which begins “Our Father in Heaven, Rock of Israel and its Redeemer, bless the State of Israel, the first sprouting of our Redemption.” This prayer is recited weekly in most Israeli synagogues, and many in the diaspora as well. Israel independence day was declared a religious holiday. Religious Jews were to partake fully in all the responsibilities of citizenship. Further stages of redemption would take place in G-d’s time, in accordance with His will. In the mean time, celebrate what we have and realize that something far greater is in the offing. Just be an Israeli, study Torah, keep the mitzvot (commandments) and judge the secular majority in the “Scale of Merit”, they will soon come to G-d. This is the view of the majority of non-Charedi Orthodox in Israel.

A fourth group, by far the most controversial, believes (as Rabbi Berav did) that this is the historical moment to act. The Temple Mount must be liberated, the Temple built. An organization was founded, with international support from both Jews and non-Jews, to study all that is relevant to the Temple. Many of the vessels for a Third temple have already been reconstructed, with more being prepared all the time. Consciousness-raising events are frequently held, in order to popularize the idea of a Temple and all that goes with it. Like with Rabbi Berav, a Sanhedrin has been formed (which has gained little support or recognition beyond this group). This was accomplished by sending a registered letter to every (government authorized) rabbi in Israel, asking to re-start the chain of Smichah, by ordaining a famous Jerusalem rabbi (who was actually a Charedi rabbi, one of the leaders of the first group mentioned above, who nevertheless was sympathetic to this idea). Any who did not reply, would be considered as abstentions. The majority of those who did reply, voted in favor. They saw smichah as having been re-introduced. Others were ordained; some important scholars, others more activists than scholars, but still possessing considerable learning. Many of the members consider this THE Sanhedrin. Others consider it more of a consciousness raising exercise. All members have signed a document that they will step down if a more suitable candidate were to come forward. (One of the heads offered me a place in it, but I declined). This group sees the establishment of “facts on the ground” as essential to the full Redemption, and the appearance of Mashiach.

Tensions between these views exist, and often result in open controversy. The parallels with 1538 are unmistakable.  Is this “dochek et haketz”, the premature push for Redemption, or a natural response to not only the call of history, but the call of G-d? Each view has major rabbis supporting it. Each view has major rabbis opposing it, seeing it as paving the way to disaster. There can be no doubt that each view is sincerely held “L’shem Shamayim” (for the sake of Heaven). We can only hope and pray that G-d will lead is in the right way, in accordance with His will.