, from
Tikkun,
Amsterdam, 1666
The Emden-Eybeschutz controversy The
Emden-Eybeschutz controversy was a serious rabbinical disputation with wider political ramifications in Europe that followed the accusations by Rabbi
Jacob Emden (1697–1776), a fierce opponent of the Sabbateans, against Rabbi
Jonathan Eybeschutz (1690–1764) whom he accused of being a secret Sabbatean. The Emden-Eybeschutz controversy arose concerning the
amulets 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. 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.
Rabbi Ezekiel Katzenellenbogen, the chief rabbi of the Triple Community and
Rabbi Moses Hagiz 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". 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. 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. 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.
Sabbateans and early Hasidism Some scholars see seeds of the
Hasidic movement within the Sabbatean movement. When Hasidism began to spread its influence, a serious schism evolved between the Hasidic and non-Hasidic Jews. Those who rejected the Hasidic movement dubbed themselves as
misnagdim ("opponents"). 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
false messiahs Sabbatai Zevi (1626–1676) and Jacob Frank (1726–1791) in particular.
Sabbateans and modern secularism Some scholars have claimed that the Sabbatean movement in general fostered and connected well with the principles of modern
secularism. ==Rabbis who opposed the Sabbateans==