REFORM AND SPIRITUALISM

QUESTION:

There has been a considerable increase of interest in spiritualism (seances, mediums, etc.) here in South Africa. What is the attitude of Reform Judaism to these practices? Is it the same as that of Orthodox Halachah? (Asked by Rabbi Paul Liner, Pretoria, South Africa.)

ANSWER:

FIRST OF ALL, it is necessary to understand fully the attitude both of the Halachah and also of Jewish popular tradition as to the question of communication with the dead. The Bible is absolutely clear that evoking the dead in order to communicate with them is considered a sinful practice equivalent to idolatry. See Leviticus 19:31, 20:6 and 27, and especially Deuteronomy 18:10 and 11. As for the incident in the Book of Samuel where the Witch of Endor summons up the spirit of the Prophet Samuel, that act was performed by a witch and certainly was not cited with approval.

The later law maintains this prohibition. The Mishnah in Sanhedrin 1:1 and the Talmud in Sanhedrin 65a state that the medium who summons the dead has committed a capital offense and should be punished by stoning. The inquirer of the medium should receive a warning not to repeat this sin. Maimonides (Hil. Avoda Zara 11:13) says that he who summons the dead to communicate should be punished. So the law stands in the Shulchan Aruch, Yore Deah 179:1, giving the general prohibition against astrology, and in 179:13 the law prohibits any attempt to summon the dead.

However, although the law is clear that to attempt any such communication with the dead is strictly forbidden, nevertheless the popular feeling persisted that it was possible to converse with the dead (even though summoning them to return was forbidden). Thus the Shulchan Aruch, after definitely forbidding the practice of summoning the dead, states that it is permitted to ask a dying person to return to communicate with the living. This permission is given by the Hagahos Maimoniyos to the passage quoted above from the Code of Maimonides. The basis for this permission is found in two incidents in the Talmud (Moed Katan 28a). Rabbi Searin was at the bedside of his dying brother Rava, and he made such a request of him, namely, that he return to him in a dream. The same request had previously been made by Rava when he was at the bedside of the dying Rabbi Nachman. But, of course, asking a dying person to appear to us in a dream is far different from having a medium (presumably) summon the dead, as the Witch of Endor did with the Prophet Samuel.

In Jewish folk feeling, there is an even greater communication with the dead than their appearing in our dreams. The widely established Jewish custom of going to the cemetery and praying at the graveside might appear to be a sort of a summoning of the dead to communicate with us. Therefore Joel Sirkes (the Bach), at the end of Tur, Yore Deah 217, finds it necessary to defend the practice of praying at the graveside. He says it has by now become an established custom and need not be considered as violative of the command “not to inquire of the dead.” As a matter of fact, the custom of praying at the graveside for help from the dead has a Talmudic precedent. The Talmud, commenting on the verse in Numbers 13:22, that the twelve spies came to Hebron, says that Caleb prayed there on the graves of the patriarchs to be saved from the evil machinations of the other spies (excepting, of course, Joshua) (Sota 34b).

As to the prayers recited when visiting the grave, there has developed over the years a fairly large prayer- literature. The best known collection of these prayers is the book Ma’ aney Loshon. A study of the prayers in this book will show that even in these prayers, which appeal to the simple, unsophisticated people, there is a definite restraint in the expression of relationship to the dead. In most of the prayers, the dead are not directly spoken to. The prayers are addressed to God, asking Him that He should listen to the departed when they plead in behalf of the living. The idea that the dead plead with God in behalf of the living has given rise to the phrase often used by pious women, referring to a dead parent,’ ‘May he be a good advocate for us.” The dead would be praying for the welfare of the living (a recurrent theme in these prayers). This is presumed to take place in heaven, a far different idea from mediums summoning the dead to come to us. Whenever the dead are directly addressed, as they are occasionally in these prayers, it is to express the wish that they may rest in peace in their graves. But nearly all the direct petitions are made to God Himself.

To sum up the traditional attitude, the law forbids any attempt to summon the dead. But the feeling of the people—one might say, the folklore—is that the dead may be communicated with at their graveside and prayers addressed to God that the dead may intercede with Him in behalf of the living. That is as far as even Jewish folklore goes as to contact with the dead.

The attitude of Orthodox tradition makes the Reform attitude clear. In general, Reform was the product of the Enlightenment and maintained only such customs as could stand in the light of reason. Therefore in Reform prayer- books the prayers to the dead have undergone a subtle but a definite change. In Reform memorial services, the departed are honored in memory and the hope is expressed that their good example may ennoble our lives, and gratitude also is voiced for their loving-kindness to us in their lifetime.

Thus the small amount of pleading for the help of the departed which remains in Orthodox popular faith, even this has been dropped out in all Reform prayerbooks; so certainly the firm prohibitions of the Halachah against direct mediumistic evocation of the spirits of the dead would be equally honored in Reform.