Product Code Database
The Sabbateans (or Sabbatians) are a variety of Jews followers, disciples, and believers in Sabbatai Zevi (1626–1676), an Ottoman Jewish rabbi and Kabbalah who was proclaimed to be the Jewish Messiah in 1666 by Nathan of Gaza.
Vast numbers of Jews in the Jewish diaspora accepted his claims, even after he outwardly became an apostate due to his forced conversion to Islam in the same year. Sabbatai Zevi's followers, both during his proclaimed messiahship and after his forced conversion to Islam, are known as Sabbateans.
In the late 17th century, northern Italy experienced a surge of Sabbatean activity, driven by the missionary efforts of Abraham Miguel Cardoso. Around 1700, a radical faction within the Dönmeh movement, led by Baruchiah Russo, emerged, which sought to abolish many biblical prohibitions. During the same period, Sabbatean groups from Poland migrated to the Land of Israel. The Sabbatean movement continued to disseminate throughout central Europe and northern Italy during the 18th century, propelled by "prophets" and "believers." Concurrently, anti-Sabbatean literature emerged, leading to a notable dispute between Rabbi Jacob Emden (Ya'avetz) and Jonathan Eybeschuetz. Additionally, a successor movement known as Frankism, led by Jacob Frank, began in Eastern Europe during this century. (1992). 9780091775933, Hutchinson. ISBN 9780091775933 Part of the Sabbateans lived on until well into 21st-century Turkey as descendants of the Dönmeh.
Sabbatai's conversion to Islam was extremely disheartening for the world's Jewish communities. In addition to the misery and disappointment from within, Muslims and Christians jeered at and scorned the credulous and duped Jews.
In spite of Sabbatai's apostasy, many of his adherents still tenaciously clung to him, claiming that his conversion was a part of the Messianic scheme. This belief was further upheld and strengthened by the likes of Nathan of Gaza and Samuel Primo, who were interested in maintaining the movement.
Many within Zevi's inner circle followed him into Islam, including his wife Sarah and most of his closest relatives and friends. Nathan of Gaza, the scholar closest to Zevi, who had caused Zevi to reveal his Messiahship and in turn became his prophet, never followed his master into Islam but remained a Jew, albeit excommunicated by his Jewish brethren.
After Sabbatai Zevi's apostasy, many Jews, although horrified, clung to the belief that Zevi could still be regarded as the true Jewish Messiah. They constituted the largest number of Sabbateans during the 17th and 18th centuries. By the 19th century, Jewish Sabbateans had been reduced to small groups of hidden followers who feared being discovered for their beliefs, that were deemed to be entirely heretical and antithetical to Rabbinic Judaism. These very Jews fell under the category of "sectarian" Sabbateans, which originated when many Sabbateans refused to accept that Zevi's feigned apostasy might have been indicative of the fact that their faith was genuinely an illusion.
Another large group of Sabbateans after Zevi's apostasy began to view Islam in an extremely negative light. Polemics against Islam erupted directly after Zevi's forced conversion. Some of these attacks were considered part of a largely anti-Sabbatean agenda. Accusations coming from anti-Sabbatean Jews revolved around the idea that Sabbatai Zevi's feigned conversion to Islam was rightfully an indicator of a false claim of Messianship.
Inside the Ottoman Empire, those followers of Zevi who had converted to Islam but who secretly continued Jewish observances and brit milah became known as the Dönmeh ( "convert"). There were some internal sub-divisions within the sect, according to the geographical locations of the group, and according to who the leaders of these groups were after the death of Sabbatai Zevi.
The Emden-Eybeschutz controversy arose concerning the which Emden suspected Eybeschutz of issuing. It was alleged that these amulets recognized the messianic claims of Sabbatai Zevi. Emden then accused Eybeschutz of heresy. Emden was known for his attacks directed against the adherents, or those he supposed to be adherents, of Sabbatai Zevi. In Emden's eyes, Eybeschutz was a convicted Sabbatean. The controversy lasted several years, continuing even after Eybeschutz's death.
Emden's assertion of heresy was chiefly based on the interpretation of some amulets prepared by Eybeschutz, in which Emden professed to see Sabbatean allusions. Hostilities began before Eybeschutz left Prague; when Eybeschutz was named chief rabbi of the three communities of Altona, Hamburg, and Wandsbek in 1751, the controversy reached the stage of intense and bitter antagonism. Emden maintained that he was at first prevented by threats from publishing anything against Eybeschutz. He solemnly declared in his synagogue the writer of the amulets to be a Sabbatean heretic and deserving of ḥerem (excommunication).
The majority of the rabbis in Poland, Moravia, and Bohemia, as well as the leaders of the Three Communities, supported Eybeschutz: the accusation was "utterly incredible".
In July 1725, the Ashkenazic beth din of Amsterdam had issued a ban of excommunication on the entire Sabbatian sect (). Writings of Sabbatian nature found by the beit Din at that time were attributed to Eybeschutz.Emden, Beit Yehonatan ha-Sofer, fol. 4. In early September, similar proclamations were issued by the batei din of Frankfurt and the triple community of Altona, Hamburg, and Wandsbeck. The three bans were printed and circulated in other Jewish communities throughout Europe.Excerpts from the testimonies were printed by Emden in his Beit Yehonatan ha-Sofer, Altona 1762, fol. 4v; the full text of the testimonies, letters, and proclamations pertaining to the investigation can be found in Josef, Gahalei Esh, Oxford, Bodleian Library. Ms. 2186, Vol. I, fols. 70r -129 Rabbi Ezekiel Katzenellenbogen, the chief rabbi of the Triple Community and Moses HagizGahalei Esh, Vol. I, fol. 54 were unwilling to attack Eybeschütz publicly, mentioning that "greater than him have fallen and crumbled" and that "there is nothing we can do to him". However, Rabbi Katzenelenbogen stated that one of the texts found by the Amsterdam beit din Va'avo Hayom el Ha'Ayin "And I Came This Day into the Fountain" was authored by Jonathan Eybeschütz and declared that the all copies of the work that were in circulation should be immediately burned.Prager, Gahalei Esh, Vol. I, fol. 54v. Emden later suggested that the rabbis decided against attacking Eybeschutz out of a reluctance to offend his powerful family and a fear of rich supporters of his living in their communities.Emden, Sefer Hitabbkut, fos. 1v-2r As a result of Eybeschutz and other rabbis in Prague formulating a new (and different) ban against Sabbatianism in September of that year his reputation was restored and Eybeschutz was regarded as having been totally vindicated.Prager, Gahalei Esh, fol.112r The issue was to arise again, albeit tangentially, in the 1751 dispute between Emden and Eybeschutz.
The controversy was a momentous incident in Jewish history of the period, involving both Yechezkel Landau and the Vilna Gaon, and may be credited with having crushed the lingering belief in Sabbatai current even in some Orthodox circles. In 1760 the quarrel broke out once more when some Sabbatean elements were discovered among the students of Eybeschutz' yeshiva. At the same time his younger son, Wolf, presented himself as a Sabbatean prophet, with the result that the yeshiva was closed.
Critics of Hasidic Judaism expressed concern that Hasidism might become a messianic sect as had occurred among the followers of both Sabbatai Zevi and Jacob Frank. However the Baal Shem Tov, the founder of Hasidism, came at a time when the Jewish masses of Eastern Europe were reeling in bewilderment and disappointment engendered by the two Jewish Sabbatai Zevi (1626–1676) and Jacob Frank (1726–1791) in particular.
|
|
