All the knowledge in the kabbalah.Where does it come from?
- Is it parts of the talmud?
- From the Torah?
- People who have been in heaven?
- Personal revelation?
Where and how did they receive this knowledge?
-
Related to the history of kabbalah but not to its ultimate source: judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/34302/…, judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/34269/…, judaism.stackexchange.com/q/48084/8775. Regarding the Zohar in particular, and alternatives to certain beliefs of kabbalah in general, see: judaism.stackexchange.com/a/44617/8775.– mevaqeshCommented Sep 11, 2016 at 1:06
-
Related to the status of kabbalah as canonical, or not: judaism.stackexchange.com/q/23303/8775.– mevaqeshCommented Sep 11, 2016 at 3:57
Add a comment
|
1 Answer
According to Aruch Hashulchan seen here siff 8, it was given at sinai to Moshe.
פשיטא שגם אגדה וקבלה ניתנה למשה מסיני ומקרו תורה
My translation: It is obvious that Agadah and Kabbalah were also given to Moshe from Sinai and its source is Torah .
-
-
His focus there is the blessings we make before learning torah. There seems to be two schools of thought on what the need to make the blessings is dependent on. One opinion is anything included in Torah requires the blessings, and having been given at sinai means these ideas are Torah. The other opinion seems to say that only practical halacha requires blessings. So agada and kabala which A.H. asserts were given at sinai would fall into this dispute, since we do not use them for practical halachik purposes.– user6591Commented Sep 11, 2016 at 13:11
-
It's so hard to believe he meant this literally. Certainly many if not most sages greater than he didn't find that claim obvious at all. He hasn't even accounted for machlokot.– Double AA ♦Commented Sep 11, 2016 at 15:27
-
@Double seemed like a big chidush when I saw it too. But it's hard to say he doesn't mean it literally. He presents a machlokes and and never once says safek likula (maybe you can't because it might be dioraisa) and leaves it open that most opinions would say make a bracha but the implications are one opinion would maybe not. So he wants us (it seems to me) to make a bracha on these items. How can we say he wasn't being literal? Where is the michayav of the bracha?– user6591Commented Sep 11, 2016 at 15:38
-
@Double it is possible he means that maaseh merkava and maaseh bereishis were given at sinai and all kabala as we know it is either those ideas themselves or an outgrowth/parallel idea included in that umbrella. As such all these items get brachos just like when we learn rabbinic torah. But then of course any study of natural sciences (or at least astrophysics & the like) might need a bracha assuming the learner is doing it lishem shomayim. That my friend would be way cool.– user6591Commented Sep 11, 2016 at 15:44