INTRODUCTION:





Who wrote the great kabbalistic work known as the Zohar?

The short simple answer is: it was Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai , who lived during the 2nd century.





According to many, he wrote down the Zohar which had hitherto been an oral tradition dating back to the biblical period. Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai thus redacted the Zohar at about the same time as Rabbi Yehudah haNasi redacted the Mishna.

But there are many Torah scholars who take a different view.





THE CONTROVERSY:





The problem is that the first sections of the Zohar only emerged in Spain as late as the 1200’s.

This is significant because it was about 1000 years after Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai. There is also no reference to the Zohar in Talmudic or other writings during this interim period.

At the heart of the debate is Rabbi Moshe de León (1240-1305) who first publicised the book. The controversy hinges around whether he revealed an ancient document or wrote the book himself.

Rabbi Moshe de León himself claimed he had published the Zohar as written by Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai some 1000 years before, based on the ancient and original manuscript.





THE STORY:





kabbalist Rabbi Yitzchak of Akko In 1305 theRabbi Yitzchak of Akko fled persecution in the Holy Land and settled in Spain. On arrival on Spanish soil he heard that Rabbi Moshe de León had recently discovered and published a mystical book called the Zohar. Intrigued by this, and not having heard of the Zohar while previously in Israel, he met with Rabbi Moshe de León, who took an oath that he had in his possession the original copy of the Zohar as written by Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai. He offered to show the original manuscript to Rabbi Yitzchak but unfortunately passed away before he was able to return to his home in Avila, where the alleged document was apparently hidden.





The story then takes on an even more bizarre twist.





Now, more intrigued than ever, Rabbi Yitzchak of Akko located a certain Rabbi David Rafan, who revealed to him that Rabbi Moshe de León’s widow and children admitted that the work was not copied from an ancient document but authored by de León himself:





Shadal: Vikuah Al Chachmat HaKabbalah













“A story tells that after the death of Moshe de Leon, a rich man of Avila...offered Moses’ widow (who had been left without any means of supporting herself) a large sum of money for the original from which her husband had made the copy. She confessed that her husband himself was the author of the work. She had asked him several times, she said, why he had chosen to credit his own teachings to another, and he always answered that doctrines put into the mouth of the miracle-working Shiman bar Yochai would be a rich source of profit.”

“All the money that Rabbi Moshe de León made from the false document was squandered during his lifetime and his wife and children were left with nothing.” According to Shadal’s version;





If this is true, it may explain the motive behind the testimony of de León’s widow and children.

Accordingly, at this point in the saga, Rabbi Yitzchak of Akko had received two conflicting versions of the events:

- One from Rabbi de León himself who claimed the original was concealed at home.

- And the other from a family associate who claimed the widow and children admitted it was a fake.





There appears to be further controversy as to which version of the events Rabbi Yitzchak of Akko considered to be truthful.

SEFER HAYUCHSIN:





Sefer HaYuchsin was written by the great Jewish chronicler Rabbi Avraham Zacuto Two hundred years later, in 1504, a major historical work known aswas written by the great Jewish chronicler Rabbi Avraham Zacuto . One of the documented events in the chronicle was the controversy surrounding the authorship of the then celebrated Zohar.





Rabbi Zacuto recorded the story of Rabbi Yitzchak of Akko as outlined above, and it appeared in the first edition of Sefer HaYuchsin some sixty years later, in 1566.





However this section was censored from all subsequent printings for the next 300 years, until it was restored in the 1857 edition. Some believe this censoring out of the difficulties raised by Rabbi Yitzchak of Akko for as long as three centuries, helped cement the assumed authority of the Zohar.





Either way, when this blatant censorship was revealed, it only added fuel to the fire of intrigue and uncertainty, surrounding the issue of authorship of the Zohar.





RAMBAN (NACHMANIDES 1194-1270):





Adding an extra dimension to the narrative, there is a view that Ramban obtained the original manuscript of Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai and sent it by ship from Israel to Catalonia which was closer to the centre of mysticism at that time. Somehow, due to the ship diverting, the document found its way to Rabbi Moshe de León.

THE ‘ANTI-RATIONALIST’ THEORY:





Guide for the Perplexed. The copy was specially written for ‘the scholar Rabbi Moshe de León’.hakafah (or circling) ceremony on Sukkot. There is another theory to why Rabbi Moshe de León may have authored the Zohar. In 1264 de León commissioned a Hebrew copy of Rambam’s. The copy was specially written for ‘the scholar Rabbi Moshe de León’. With time he became increasingly wary of the growing influence of Rambam and his rationalism, especially among the Spanish wealthy class. On one occasion he apparently accused the rationalists of laughing at and mocking the(or circling) ceremony on Sukkot.





According to this theory, Rabbi Moshe de León began to write a mystical Midrash to counter the developing rationalist trend.





RABBI ELIYAHU DELMEDIGO (1458-1493):





According to Rabbi Delmedigo , the Zohar could not have been written by Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai because it is not mentioned in the Talmud, while other non-Talmudic writings were.





This criticism is particularly relevant to the Zohar which explains the hidden meanings behind the commandments. So a work which dealt with the very material the Talmud was debating and explained the divine nature of the commandments, would most certainly have been referenced by the Talmud. He also points out that the Zohar contains names of Rabbis who lived after Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai.

RABBI YOSEF KARO (1488- 1575):





Shulchan Aruch, Rabbi Yosef Karo did occasionally lean towards kabbalistic rulings.Shulchan Aruch, believed strongly in the authenticity of the Zohar. Although primarily a legal writer, having authored the code of the, Rabbi Yosef Karo did occasionally lean towardsrulings. Both he as well as Rabbi Moshe Isserless who wrote glosses to the, believed strongly in the authenticity of the Zohar.









These are significant views as our legal rulings today are taken primarily from the Shulchan Aruch which supersedes all other halachic writings, even those of Rambam.





Needless to say that the avowed mystics throughout the ages all considered the Zohar to have been written by Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai. The Chassidic Rebbe Pinchas of Koretz is known to have said; “The Zohar has kept me Jewish.”





RABBI LEONE MODENA (1571-1648):





Ari Nohem that the Zohar was not written by Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai and that ‘it was not than 350 years old’.Ari Nohem and it was only printed 200 years later in 1840. In 1639, the Italian Rabbi Modena wrote in histhat the Zohar was not written by Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai and that He did, however acknowledge the inspirational element to the work. Apparently Rabbi Modena was afraid to publish hisand it was only printed 200 years later in 1840.





RABBI YAAKOV EMDEN (1697-1776):





Mitpachat Sefarim which was directed against the followers of the false messiah Shabetai Zvi who used the Zohar to justify their messianic claims. See Rabbi Yaakov Emden was outspoken in his view on the Zohar and considered it an outright forgery. He wrote a book,which was directed against the followers of the false messiah Shabetai Zvi who used the Zohar to justify their messianic claims. See here





Rabbi Emden is rather scathing in his criticism of the Zohar saying that it misquotes the Torah, misunderstands the Talmud, mentions the Muslims (who only came centuries after Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai), and writes about practices that were only introduced much later.





He pointed out that there were 280 additions to the Zohar and that the books Raaya Mehemna and Tikkunim were absolute forgeries. He also mentions that the Zohar refers to a synagogue by the Portuguese designation ‘esnoga’, and references Nikud (vocalization) and Trop (cantilation) which are much latter innovations.





Rabbi Emden wrote that it took him forty years of suppressing these ideas before he mustered up the courage to write them.





CHASSAM SOFER (1762-1839):





Mitpachas Sefarim mentioned above, in a responsum; “.. .The book Mitpachas Sefarim is available in your neighbourhood...and you will find in it a great thing, which will amaze everyone who reads it...enough said!” Although he does not say so directly, The Chassam Sofer references Rabbi Emden’smentioned above, in a responsum;

This way he states his view on the Zohar, seemingly in support of Rabbi Emden, in an indirect manner avoiding harsh criticisms that most certainly would have been levelled against him had he been more direct.





BAAL HATANYA AND VILNA GAON:





While both the Alter Rebbe and the Vilna Gaon were at spiritual loggerheads with each other, they both accepted the authenticity of the Zohar which was absolutely intrinsic to both their very different systems of theology.





BALADI YEMENITES:





Talmidei haRambam (students of Rambam). Some still survive to this day. They too, particularly under Rabbi Yichya Kapach regarded the Zohar to be a forgery. See The original Yemenites were great rationalists and very anti mysticism because they believed it led to superstitious practices. The based their teaching on Rambam and are considered themselves to be(students of Rambam). Some still survive to this day. They too, particularly under Rabbi Yichya Kapach regarded the Zohar to be a forgery. See here.





RABBI ELIYAHU DESSLER AND RABBI GEDALIAH NADEL:





Some modern day authorities declare those who do not accept the authenticity of the Zohar to be heretical. However both Rabbi Dessler (1892-1953) and Rabbi Nadel (1923-2004) maintain that it is perfectly acceptable to take the view that the Zohar was not written by Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai and that its authorship may have been of a later date.





It is recorded that someone approached Rabbi Aryeh Carmel and asked whether there was an obligation be believe Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai wrote the Zohar.





Rabbi Carmel said; “My Rebbe (who was Rabbi Dessler) accepted the possibility that the Zohar was written sometime in the 13th century.”





RABBI MENACHEM MENDEL KASHER (1895-1983):





Rabbi Kasher, author of the encyclopaedic work on the Torah known as Torah Shleimah, wrote a defence of the Zohar. He mentions that Rabbi Yitzchak of Akko was sent by Ramban to investigate the Zohar and cites a document that attests, with witnesses, that Rabbi Yitzchak physically saw the original manuscript of Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai. Rabbi Kasher also points out that Rabbi Moshe de León could not have written the Zohar because its writing style is very different from his other writings. He further points out that there are only a few cases of non-chronological events which could quite conceivably have been additions during the Geonic period (500-1038).

RABBI NACHMAN OF BRESLOV (1772-1810):





“Learning Zohar is capable of bringing good favour (mesugal). By learning Zohar, desire is generated for all other types of study of the holy Torah.” Rabbi Nachman was a fervent follower of the Zohar. He wrote;

ANALYSIS:





The controversy over who wrote the Zohar is not easy to resolve. At the end of the day it is probably a matter of emotion rather than fact that will sway us one way or the other.





- Those with mystical leanings, who today would probably make up the majority of the Torah world (including non-Chassidim), would go with the view that Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai wrote the Zohar about 1800 years ago.





- And those who take a different position would go with the view that it may only have been written about 800 years ago by Rabbi Moshe de León.





Both views have significant bodies of support from within the Torah world.





Whatever side one takes, one thing is certain – there is an astonishing array of vastly divergent views regarding a text considered so primary by so many.





