The Zohar (Hebrew: זֹהַר, romanized: Zōhar, meaning "Splendor" or "Radiance") is an important book in Kabbalistic literature. It includes commentaries on the mysterious parts of the Torah, explanations of religious texts, and information about mysticism, the creation of the universe, and the nature of souls. The Zohar also discusses ideas about God, the structure of the universe, the meaning of redemption, and the connection between the human mind and spiritual light.

The Zohar was first shared publicly by Moses de León (about 1240–1305 CE), who said it was written by Shimon ben Yochai (about 100 CE). Most modern scholars do not believe this claim. They think de León, who was also known for copying old texts, created the Zohar himself between 1280 and 1286. Some scholars suggest that the Zohar may have been written by several medieval authors or contains a small amount of very old material. Later additions, such as Tiqqune hazZohar and Ra'ya Meheimna, were written by someone in the 14th century who imitated the style of the original Zohar.

Language

According to scholars like Gershom Scholem, Zoharic Aramaic is a made-up language that combines elements from the Babylonian Talmud and Targum Onkelos. However, the language became confusing because the writer, Moses de León, used simple and incomplete grammar, limited vocabulary, and borrowed words from other languages of the medieval period. He also included strange, unclear Aramaic-like phrases to create the appearance of hidden or secret knowledge. Some scholars note that Zoharic Aramaic did not naturally develop from any earlier dialect. Instead, recent research suggests that Aramaic was chosen for its use in mystical or literary writing, not only to hide the text’s fake origins.

The original version of the Zohar, as recorded by early Kabbalists in the 14th century (such as Isaac b. Samuel of Acre, David b. Judah the Pious, Israel Alnaqua, and Alfonso de Zamora), included both Hebrew and Aramaic. By the time the first printed edition appeared in 1558, the text was mostly in Aramaic, except for the section called Midrash haNe'elam, which still used Hebrew words and phrases similar to those in the Babylonian Talmud. The Hebrew in Midrash haNe'elam resembles the language of older religious writings but includes vocabulary, expressions, and writing styles that reflect medieval Hebrew. Its style of writing clearly imitates later works rather than being from an earlier period.

Authorship

Abraham Zacuto's 1504 book Sefer Yuhasin (first printed in 1566) includes quotes from Isaac ben Samuel of Acre's 13th-century chronicle Divre hayYamim, which is now lost. This chronicle claims that the widow and daughter of Moses de León revealed that he wrote the Zohar himself and only gave it to Shimon ben Yochai as the author for personal reasons.

Isaac ben Samuel said he found mixed evidence about the Zohar's authenticity from other Spanish mystics. However, his writing ends suddenly, without a conclusion. Though Isaac quoted the Zohar in his books Otzar haChayyim and Meirat Einayim, he did so rarely. His testimony was removed from the second edition of Sefer Yuhasin (1580) and not included in later editions until 1857. In 1243, a different Jew reportedly discovered an ancient mystical book in a cave near Toledo, which may have inspired Moses de León.

Within 50 years of the Zohar's appearance in Spain, it was quoted by mystics like Menahem Recanati and Todros ben Joseph Abulafia. However, Joseph ben Waqar strongly criticized the Zohar, calling it fake. Some Jewish groups, such as the Dor Daim from Yemen, Andalusian Jews, and certain Italian communities, never accepted the Zohar as authentic. Other early mystics, like David b. Judah the Pious, Abraham b. Isaac of Granada, and David b. Amram of Aden, imitated the Zohar's style by falsely attributing statements to ancient sages. Manuscripts of the Zohar date from the 14th to 16th centuries.

By the 15th century, the Zohar was so influential in Iberian Jewish communities that Joseph ibn Shem-Tov used it to argue against Maimonides. Even non-mystical Jewish thinkers began treating the Zohar as sacred and used it to decide some religious matters. Scholars like Jacobs and Broyde noted that people were drawn to the Zohar's teachings about human dignity, immortality, and ethics, which they believed aligned better with Talmudic Judaism than the ideas of philosophers like Maimonides. The Zohar taught that humans are the rulers of creation, and their immortality depends on their morality, unlike Maimonides' view that humans are part of the universe and depend on intellectual growth for immortality.

Elia del Medigo (c. 1458–c. 1493) argued in Beḥinat ha-Dat that the Zohar could not have been written by Shimon ben Yochai. He claimed that if it were his work, the Zohar would have been mentioned in the Talmud, as were other works from that time. He also said that if ben Yochai had divine knowledge, his rulings would have been adopted by the Talmud, and the Zohar would not include names of rabbis who lived after ben Yochai. He added that if Kabbalah were a revealed truth, there would be no disagreements among mystics about its teachings.

Supporters of the Zohar argued that its absence from Jewish writings was because ben Yochai taught orally, passing his knowledge to disciples until it was finally written in the Zohar. They believed it was natural for ben Yochai to predict future events or reference later history.

By the late 16th century, the Zohar was in one-tenth of private Jewish libraries in Mantua. Jewish scholars like Joseph Karo and Solomon Luria accepted its authenticity but noted that Jewish law does not follow the Zohar if it conflicts with the Babylonian Talmud. Luria said the Zohar could not override a religious custom (minhag). Moses Isserles claimed he "heard" the Zohar was written by ben Yochai. Elijah Levita and others, like Joseph Scaliger, Louis Cappel, and Johannes Drusius, doubted the Zohar's ancient origins. David ibn abi Zimra said the Zohar could only be followed if it did not conflict with other sources.

Debates continued over time. Del Medigo's arguments were repeated by Leon of Modena, Jean Morin, and Jacob Emden. Emden wrote a book, Mitpachas Sefarim, criticizing the Zohar and arguing it was a forgery used by Sabbatai Zevi, a Jewish apostate, to claim messianic legitimacy. Emden pointed out that the Zohar misquotes Scripture, misunderstands the Talmud, includes rituals from later rabbis, mentions the Crusades (which did not happen in the 2nd century), uses a Portuguese word for synagogue (esnoga), and explains Hebrew vowel points, which were not introduced until after the Talmudic period.

Saul Berlin noted that the Zohar's introduction, unlike Talmudic writing, suggests it was written in the medieval period. In Eastern Europe, religious leaders like Elijah of Vilna and Shneur Zalman of Liadi believed in the Zohar's authenticity, while Ezekiel Landau argued it was unreliable because it was published long after ben Yochai's death and lacked a clear tradition of authenticity.

Isaac Satanow supported Emden's claims and called the Zohar a forgery. By 1813, Samuel David Luzzatto concluded the Zohar and Tiqqunei Zohar were forgeries, partly because they discuss Hebrew cantillation marks, which were not created until the 9th century. Luzzatto published his arguments in 1817 and 1825, later in 1852 after the rise of Hasidism. Moses Isserles' views were also discussed in Divrei Kehilot, a book on liturgical practices.

Contents

Tikunei haZohar was first printed in Mantua in 1557. The main part of the Zohar was printed in Cremona in 1558 (a one-volume edition), in Mantua from 1558 to 1560 (a three-volume edition), and in Salonika in 1597 (a two-volume edition). Each of these editions included slightly different texts. A copy of the second volume from the first Mantua edition, which traveled through Thereisenstadt during World War II, was recently found at the National Library of Israel. When the Zohar was first printed, many partial manuscripts were already in circulation but were not available to the first printers. These were later printed as Zohar Chadash (meaning "New Radiance"), but Zohar Chadash includes parts related to the Zohar, as well as Tikunim (plural of Tikun, "Repair," see also Tikkun olam), which are similar to Tikunei haZohar, as explained below. The term Zohar may refer to just the first Zohar collection, with or without sections from Zohar Chadash, or to the entire Zohar and Tikunim.

Citations about the Zohar usually follow the volume and page numbers from the Mantua edition. Citations about Tikkunei haZohar follow the edition from Ortakoy (Constantinople) in 1719, which became the basis for most later editions. Volumes II and III start their numbering again, so citations can be made by parashah and page number (e.g., Zohar: Nasso 127a) or by volume and page number (e.g., Zohar III:127a).

After the Zohar was printed in Mantua and Cremona (in the Jewish years 5318–5320 or 1558–1560 CE), more manuscripts were found that included parts of the Zohar not included in the printed editions. These manuscripts covered all parts of the Zohar; some were similar to the Zohar on the Torah, others to the inner parts of the Zohar (such as Midrash haNe'elam, Sitrei Otiyot, and others), and some were related to Tikunei haZohar. About thirty years after the first Zohar edition was printed, these manuscripts were collected and organized by the parashiyot of the Torah and the megillot (likely by the Kabbalist Avraham haLevi of Tsfat). They were first printed in Salonika in the Jewish year 5357 (1587 CE), then in Kraków (5363), and later in other editions.

According to Scholem, the Zohar can be divided into 21 types of content. The first 18 (a.–s.) are the work of the original author (probably de Leon), and the final 3 (t.–v.) are the work of a later imitator.

a. Untitled Torah commentary: A large section made up entirely of commentaries on different parts of the Torah.

b. Book of Concealment (ספרא דצניעותא): A short section of six pages that explains the first six chapters of Genesis. It is very mysterious and does not reference other sources.

c. Greater Assembly (אדרא רבא): This section explains the hints in the previous part. Ben Yochai’s friends gather to discuss Kabbalah secrets. After Ben Yochai begins the discussion, the sages speak one after another about the nature of Divinity, and Ben Yochai responds. The sages become increasingly excited until three of them die. Scholem calls this section "architecturally perfect."

d. Lesser Assembly (אדרא זוטא): Ben Yochai dies, and a speech is quoted in which he explains the previous section.

e. Assembly of the Tabernacle (אדרא דמשכנא): This section has the same structure as c. but discusses the mysticism of prayer. Seven palaces of light are described, which are seen by the devout in death. This description appears again in another passage, but with more details.

g. Secretum Secretorum (רזא דרזין): An anonymous discussion about physiognomy (reading faces) and a discussion about chiromancy (reading hands) by Ben Yochai. It includes a detailed story about a speech by an old Kabbalist and a story about a prodigy and his Kabbalistic speech.

k. Head of the Academy (רב מתיבתא): A Pardes narrative in which the head of the celestial academy reveals secrets about the soul’s destiny.

l. Secrets of Torah (סתרי תורה): Allegorical and mystical interpretations of Torah passages. It includes imitations of the Mishnaic style to introduce longer commentaries in the style of the Talmud.

n. Zohar to the Song of Songs: A Kabbalistic commentary on the Song of Songs.

o. Standard of Measure (קו המידה): A deep interpretation of Deuteronomy 6:4.

p. Secrets of Letters (סתרי אותיות): A monologue by Ben Yochai about the letters in God’s names and their role in creation.

q. Commentary to the Merkabah:

r. Mystical Midrash (מדרש הנעלם): A Kabbalistic commentary on the Torah, citing many Talmudic sages. According to Ramaz, it can be called Midrash haNe'elam because it focuses on the soul’s higher level, the neshamah, which comes from Beri'ah (a higher spiritual realm). Unlike the main Zohar, its commentaries are short and cover topics like creation, the soul, the coming of the Messiah, and the world to come.

s. Mystic Midrash on Ruth: A commentary on the Book of Ruth in the same style.

t.

Influence

The Zohar was praised by many rabbis because it challenged strict religious rules, encouraged people to use their imagination and feel deeply, and helped many people rediscover the meaning of prayer. In many places, prayer had become a simple, outward activity, but it was meant to help people move beyond everyday life and connect with God.

According to the Jewish Encyclopedia, the Zohar was also criticized by many rabbis for spreading beliefs that were not based on facts. It led to the rise of people who focused too much on mystical ideas, imagining spirits, demons, and other influences that were not clearly explained. Many classical rabbis, including Maimonides, believed these beliefs went against Jewish religious teachings. The Zohar’s mystical way of explaining religious rules was later used to explain all religious practices, leading to a shift away from traditional Rabbinic Judaism. For example, the Jewish Sabbath, or Shabbat, was seen as a representation of God in the physical world, and rituals performed on that day were thought to affect the spiritual world.

Elements of the Zohar became part of religious rituals in the 16th and 17th centuries. Religious poets used the Zohar’s symbolic language and style, including the use of sensual terms, to describe the relationship between humans and God. In some poetry, the curls of a beloved person were seen as symbols of divine mysteries, and experiences like joy and drunkenness were described as forms of deep spiritual love. The room where wine was kept was thought to represent the process of human qualities becoming like those of God.

The Zohar is also credited with making de Leon’s PaRDeS method of interpreting the Bible more widely known.

According to the Jewish Encyclopedia, many Christian scholars, such as Giovanni Pico della Mirandola, Johann Reuchlin, and Aegidius of Viterbo, were excited about the Zohar. They believed the book provided evidence for the truth of Christianity. They were influenced by similarities between some Zohar teachings and Christian beliefs, such as the idea of human fall and redemption, and the belief in the Trinity. The Zohar seemed to express the Trinity in the following way:

According to the Jewish Encyclopedia, these and other similar ideas in the Zohar are now known to be much older than Christianity. However, Christian scholars who saw these similarities believed it was their duty to promote the Zohar.

Commentaries

• The first known commentary on the book of Zohar, called Ketem Paz, was written by Simeon Lavi of Libya.
• Another important commentary on the Zohar, the 22-volume Or Yakar, was written by Moshe Cordovero of the Tzfat (i.e. Safed) kabbalistic school in the 16th century.
• The Vilna Gaon wrote a commentary on the Zohar.
• Tzvi Hirsch of Zidichov wrote a commentary on the Zohar called Ateres Tzvi.
• A major commentary on the Zohar is the Sulam, written by Yehuda Ashlag.
• A complete translation of the Zohar into Hebrew was done by Daniel Frish of Jerusalem. It was published under the title Masok MiDvash.

English translations

• Berg, Michael, The Zohar (23-volume set). The Kabbalah Centre International Inc., 2003. A full 23-volume English translation of the original Aramaic text, including commentary and notes.
• Matt, Daniel C., Nathan Wolski, and Joel Hecker, translated by, The Zohar: Pritzker Edition (12 volumes). Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2004–2017.
• Matt, Daniel C., Zohar: Annotated and Explained. Woodstock, Vt.: SkyLights Paths Publishing Co., 2002. (Selections)
• Matt, Daniel C., Zohar: The Book of Enlightenment. New York: Paulist Press, 1983. (Selections)
• Scholem, Gershom, edited by, Zohar: The Book of Splendor. New York: Schocken Books, 1963. (Selections)
• Sperling, Harry and Maurice Simon, editors, The Zohar (5 volumes). London: Soncino Press, 1930.
• Tishby, Isaiah, editor, The Wisdom of the Zohar: An Anthology of Texts (3 volumes). Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989. Translated from the Hebrew by David Goldstein.