New light on the matter of the Ba'al Shem Tov and Shabbetai Ẓevi / חדשות לעניין הבעש"ט ושבתי צבי

Recently the single manuscript of the Shivḥei ha-Besht, a collection of tales in praise of Israel ben Eliezer Ba'al Shem Tov, has been published in facsimile. In the text of the manuscript, the ambivalent relationship of the Ba'al Shem Tov to Shabbetai Ẓevi is exhibited much more clearly than in the earlier printed edition. The manuscript reveals that the Ba'al Shem Tov saw in Shabbetai Ẓevi a "spark of the Messiah," rather than only a "holy spark" as stated in the printed edition. Also according to the manuscript Shabbetai Ẓevi attempted to entice that Ba'al Shem Tov "so that he apostatize," and this reading is also missing in the printed edition. Here is absolute proof that in the Ba'al Shem Tov's dream related in Shivḥei ha-Besht, it was he himself who had been cast into hell — and at the hands of Shabbetai Ẓevi — to land on the rack occupied by Jesus of Nazareth. Shabbetai Ẓevi was definitely not the victim, notwithstanding the contentions of some. The Ba'al Shem Tov's standpoint with respect to the Shabbatean movement was that of one who wished to repair that movement and this derived from a feeling of empathy towards them. This standpoint emerges plainly from the Shivḥei ha-Besht, and it elucidates two parables the Ba'al Shem Tov told about himself. In one he is condemned to view the punishments of sinners after whose path he has strayed. In the other he is likened to a broom that becomes dirty while sweeping the floor. Indeed, such a picture fits well with our prior knowledge of the Ba'al Shem Tov's strong attraction to several Shabbatean works and his followers' involvement with aftergrowths of Shabbateanism. It is impossible to mention the new facsimile edition of Shivḥei ha-Besht without commenting on the offensive, contemptuous personal tone of the editor's introduction in referring to scholarly researchers of Hasidism, especially the late Professor Gershom G. Scholem. In one instance the editor, J. Mondshine, even usurps credit for one of Scholem's discoveries and goes on to use it in attacking the renowned scholar.