2010 The Birthing Chair: The Chair of Rabbi Nahman

Ar

s

Ju

da

ic

a

20

10

115

S P E C I A L I T E M

The Birthing Chair:

The Chair of Rabbi Na.hman of Bratslav

A Phenomenological Analysis

Batsheva Goldman Ida

This paper was presented at the World Congress of Jewish Studies (August

2009) and is adapted from Chapter 8, “Dem Rebns Benkl,” of Batsheva

Goldman Ida, “Ha- .hefe .z ha- .hasidi ha-tiksi” (The Hasidic Ritual Object)

(Ph.D. diss., The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 2008), 233–69 (Hebrew).

Translations from the Hebrew are by the author unless otherwise noted.

Biblical sources are from the JPS Tanakh. My special thanks to Prof. Moshe

Idel, who read the first draft and offered valuable suggestions.

1 This tale, no. 11, was told on 14 October 1809, after a discussion

concerning Napoleon’s birth as a servant and subsequent rise to power:

On that day the Treaty of Schönbrun was signed, giving Napoleon

control of Austria’s share of Poland, including the Warsaw area. Before

recounting the tale Rabbi Naftali noted how surprising Napoleon’s

career was since he had been born a simple slave; Rabbi Nachman

rejoined: “Who knows what sort of soul he has? It is possible that it was

exchanged. There is a Chamber of Exchanges (Hekhal Ha-Temuroth),

This essay proposes a new approach to the study of the

ritual object: namely, to define its ontology within the ritual

process. The move from iconography to phenomenology

allows for a more comprehensive view, wherein the

attitude towards the object becomes part of the definition

of the object itself. This paper discusses the changing

contexts of the chair of Rabbi Na.hman of Bratslav – that

of Rabbi Na .hman and the Hasidim in his lifetime, and

of Bratslaver Hasidim today. The ontology of the chair,

when thus defined, is seen to be in a state of flux.

Rabbi Na .hman of Bratslav (1772–1810) was born

in Miedzybó.z, the home of his great-grandfather, the

founder of Hasidism, Rabbi Israel Ba‘al Shem Tov (the

Master of the Divine Name) or, in its abbreviated form,

the Besht.

In the late summer of 1808, Rabbi Na.hman received a

chair with ornately carved and painted animal and floral

decoration. Most Bratslav Hasidim believe that this is

the chair that is presently at the Great Bratslav Yeshivah

in the Me’ah She‘arim quarter of Jerusalem (fig. 1). The

chair stirred the Rebbe’s imagination. After receiving

it, he had a dream in which he saw a chair encircled by

fire. Later that year, in the fall of 1808, he composed a

New Year’s sermon, “Tik‘u Memshalah” (Sound [the

Shofar] of the Regime), the first three sections of which

expound on the chair he saw in his dream. Then, during

the following fall of 1809,1 Rabbi Na .hman recounted

“The Tale of the King’s Son and the Servant Woman’s

Son Who Were Exchanged,” at the close of which he

describes a wondrous chair with cut-out wooden figures of

animals and birds.

Two of these sources – the sermon and the tale – were

approved for publication by Rabbi Na .hman through his

trusted disciple, Rabbi Nathan Sternharz of Nemirov

(1780–1844), along with some explanatory remarks by the

Rebbe.2 The description of the dream has been recounted

where souls are sometimes exchanged”; Rabbi Nachman’s Stories,

translated with notes based on Breslover works by Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan

(Jerusalem and New York, 1983), 231. For the date of the tale, see

H. ayyei Moharan (The Life of Our Teacher and Master Rabbi Na .hman)

(Jerusalem, 1947), “Regarding the Tales,” 30–31, fols. 15b–16a, no.2.

For other dates, including of the dream and sermon, see ibid., 28, fol.

14b, no. 59 (Hebrew).

2 Regarding the sermon, for example, Rabbi Nathan wrote: “I endeavored

greatly until I wrote it out and I showed it to him [to Rabbi Na .hman]

and it found favor in his eyes”; Yemei Maharanat (The Days of Our

Master and Teacher Rabbi Nathan) (Lemberg [Lwow], 1876), fol. 20b

(Hebrew). For information on this book and the other Bratslav sources

noted here, see David Assaf, Braslav: bibliographiah mu‘eret (Bratslav:

An Annotated Bibliography, Rabbi Na .hman of Bratslav, His Life and

Teachings, the Literary Legacy of His Disciples, Bratslav Hasidism in Its

Context) (Jerusalem, 2000) (Hebrew).

Ar

s

Ju

da

ic

a

20

10

116


in several sources.3 Rabbi Na .hman himself urged his

Hasidim to study all three (dream, sermon, and tale) and

to relate one to the other. As Rabbi Na.hman Goldstein of

Chigirin (d. 1894), the disciple of Rabbi Nathan, wrote:

And following this recounting [of the dream],

he presented the Torah sermon Tik‘u Memshalah

on that Rosh Hashanah [Jewish New Year] […]

and said that this [sermon] was a commentary on

the vision [in the dream] […] and [when] once

he spoke of the tale […] he then mentioned this

matter, linking the tale with the sermon […]. And

then he said “If you are not glad, then I do not

know what is the matter with you!” […] As well,

after recounting the tale, he said that “you can

interpret this for all of your lives,” and he berated

us for not being happy and said we should be very,

very happy.4

Studies in the phenomenology of imagination enable us

to gain an insight into Rabbi Na .hman’s teachings. The

phenomenologist Gaston Bachelard (1884–1962) has

investigated the material imagination, that is, imagery

and musings rooted in an object. Initially a physicist, he

then embarked on the study of the four elements and the

poetics of space. For Bachelard, the material imagination

is as fully alive as a real action in the material world:

“Consciousness is in itself an act, the human act. It is a

lively, full act.”5 The associative nature of the thought

stream of Rabbi Na .hman combines dream and reverie,

the difference between which Bachelard defines as

follows: “Reverie is entirely different from the dream by

the very fact that it is always more or less centered on one

object. The dream proceeds in a linear fashion, forgetting

its original path as it hastens along. The reverie returns

to its center to shoot out new beams. One must engage in

reverie on a specific object.”6

Through Bachelard we can better understand how

Rabbi Na.hman was able to combine the dream, the Torah

sermon, and the tale, and relate them all to the chair: “In

the imaginary cosmic life, the different worlds often touch

each other and complement each other. The reverie of

one calls up the reverie of the other […]. The images of

substances are touched by a polemic between imagination

and thought.”7

Chronicle

The use of a “Rebbe’s chair” in the Hasidic community

goes back to the time of Rabbi Na.hman’s great-grandfather,

the Besht. According to the epic hagiography Shiv.hei ha-

Besht (In Praise of the Besht), when the Besht revealed

himself, his followers met him, and in a formative event

spontaneously made him a chair out of tree branches upon

which to sit and expound a Torah sermon.8 A younger

contemporary of Rabbi Na.hman, Rabbi Aharon Twersky

of Chernobyl’ (1787–1872), had a carved wooden chair for

study, but without elaborate floral and animal decoration

(fig. 2).

The reception of Rabbi Na .hman’s chair is described

in several Bratslav sources. Rabbi Nathan of Nemirov

mentions it in his autobiography: “In 1808, after coming

here [to Bratslav] from Lemberg, a man brought him a

wondrous chair that he had made by himself with great

beauty and artistry.”9 An oral tradition recounts it thus:

Someone made a chair for our Master, may the

memory of his merit preserve us, and our Master

asked him: “How long did it take you?” And he

3 According to Rabbi Na .hman of Chigirin, “some is missing or was not

written down completely […]”; Parpera’ot Le-H. okhmah (Anecdotes

of Wisdom), in Likutei Moharan im perush Parpera’ot Le-H. okhmah

(Anthology of Our Teacher and Master Rabbi Na .hman with the

Commentary Anecdotes of Wisdom) (New York, 1983), 91, fol. 46a

(Hebrew). The dream was not heard directly by Rabbi Nathan: “I did

not merit being present when he told the tale and I did not hear it

directly from his holy mouth but from my comrades.” Yemei Maharanat,

fol. 20b.

4 Parpera’ot Le-H. okhmah, 91, fol. 46a, no. 1. See also Yemei Maharanat,

fol. 20b.

5 Gaston Bachelard, The Poetics of Reverie, Childhood, Language and the

Cosmos (Boston, 1971), 5.

6 Idem, The Psychoanalysis of Fire (Boston, 1964), 14–15.

7 Idem, The Poetics of Space (Boston, 1969), 205, 211.

8 Shmuel A. Horodetzky, Shiv.hei ha-Besht (In Praise of the Besht) (Berlin

and Charlottenberg, 1922), 21 (Hebrew).

9 Yemei Maharanat, fol. 20b.

Ar

s

Ju

da

ic

a

20

10

117

The Birthing Chair: The Chair of Rabbi Na.hman of Bratslav

Fig. 1. Chair of Rabbi Na .hman of Bratslav, ca. 1808, linden wood, carved, velvet cushion, 145 x 80 x 45 cm. Jerusalem, the Great Bratslav

Yeshivah, Me’ah She‘arim (photo: Avraham Hay, 2007)

Ar

s

Ju

da

ic

a

20

10

118


answered him: “Half a year.” And our Master asked

him: “Did you work on it all day?” And he replied:

“No, but I worked on it every day for one hour”

(because it was a lovely chair and painted with

pleasing decorations). Our Master said to him:

“So! You thought about me once a day for half a

year!”10

Before discussing the dream in detail, Rabbi Na .hman of

Chigirin introduces the topic in this manner:

And this is what our Master told us at the end of

the summer of 1808 before Rosh Hashanah 5569,

and at this time, the sho.het (ritual slaughterer) of

the Community of Teplik brought him a wondrous

chair (painted in the color of fire) and around

that time he told [us] that he saw in a vision or a

dream that a chair was brought to him and it was

surrounded by fire.11

The “wondrous” chair was apparently saved from a real

fire that took place at Rabbi Na.hman’s home in Bratslav

in 1810, after which he moved to Uman.12 The question

is: Did Rabbi Na .hman take the chair to Uman with the

rest of his belongings?

When in Uman, another chair is mentioned – a tall

one upon which Rabbi Na .hman gave his Torah sermon

in 1810. This chair was dismantled after Rabbi Na.hman’s

death at the request of his disciple, Rabbi Nathan, in order

to be rebuilt as a funeral bier.13 In the Bratslav tradition,

there is also a third chair – a comfortable chair – brought

for Rabbi Na.hman to sit on during his last days.14

Following the funeral, Rabbi Nathan tells of the dis-

tribution of Rabbi Na.hman’s estate: “And also the chest

with the objects of his righteous daughter Miriam, of

blessed memory, who was [then] in Eretz Israel, and of

his daughter, the young girl H. ayah, may she live, we took

with us to Nemirov, for he had appointed me as executor

of his belongings.”15

When Rabbi Na .hman’s study hall was rebuilt in

Bratslav in 1813, there is no mention of placing a chair

there.16 But, as executor of the Rabbi’s possessions, is it

possible that Rabbi Nathan gave the “wondrous” chair

to Rabbi Na .hman’s daughter H. ayah for safekeeping?

According to the Bratslav written records of their oral

tradition, Rabbi Na.hman’s chair, which is presently at the

Great Bratslav Yeshivah in Me’ah She‘arim, Jerusalem,

belonged to his family:

The chair of our Master which is presently with us

today in the holy city of Jerusalem, was housed at

10 Avene’ha Barzel (Abbreviation for the two Rabbis from whom the oral

traditions were recorded: Rabbi Avraham ben Na .hman H. azan and

Rabbi Yisrael HaCohen, whose words were sharp as iron. See Assaf,

Bratslav, 31, no. 57), in Si’a.h Sarfei Kodesh (The Discourse of the Holy

Seraphs) (New York, 1965), 27, no. 20 (Hebrew).

11 Parpera’ot Le-H. okhmah, 89, fol. 45a.

12 H. ayyei Moharan, “Nesi‘ato vi-shivato be-Uman” (His Trip and Stay

in Uman), 84–85, fols. 42b–43a, no. 26 (Hebrew). See also Yemei

Maharanat, fol. 26b.

13 Yemei Maharanat, fol. 37a.

14 Ibid., fols. 37b–41a.

15 Ibid., 91, fol. 46a.

16 Ibid., 65–66, fols. 33a–b.

Fig. 2. Portrait of Rabbi Aharon Twersky of Chernobyl’, photograph of

drawing, private collection (photo: Batsheva Goldman Ida, 2004)

Ar

s

Ju

da

ic

a

20

10

119


the home of Rabbi Hirsch, the son of Zalman, the

son of Na.hman, the son of H. ayah, the daughter of

our Master.17

The chair of our Master which is presently in

Jerusalem, was found in Chigirin at [the home of]

Rabbi Hirsch Leobarsky. And Rabbi Moshe Ber

Rosenfeld brought it to Eretz-Israel, dismantled, in

pieces.18

Another Bratslav tradition relates that during raids against

the Jews in the Ukraine in the early 1920s, the chair was

dismantled by Rabbi .Zvi Aryeh Lippel (d. 1981), who

carried it from Chigirin to Kremenchug (some 70 km),

where it was deposited with the Rosenfeld family of

Kremenchug. In the early 1930s, local authorities became

interested in this valuable object. It was then that the

Bratslaver Hasidim decided to bring the chair to Eretz-

Israel. In 1936 Rabbi Moshe Ber Rosenfeld (d. 1966)

brought the chair to Jerusalem.19

Description

The chair presently at the Great Bratslav Yeshivah in

Jerusalem is made of carved and painted linden wood.

When it was given to the Jerusalem wood artist Catriel

Sugarman for restoration in 1985, it had been painted

repeatedly with a black lacquer. However, underneath the

lacquer remnants of green paint were found, and under

this was yet another level, a layer of buhl, a special kind of

plaster generally used as a preparatory ground for gilding.

And indeed, there remained many small specks of gold

leaf as well (fig. 3). Today, the color of the chair is natural,

varnished wood.

The description of the chair in the Bratslav tradition as

being painted in the color of fire would lead us to assume

that the chair had perhaps been gilt. The empirical

evidence of the buhl and gold leaf corroborates this.

The reflection of gilding under candlelight might well

be compared to the appearance of fire. And one might

imagine how such a sight could lead to an association

with the fiery Throne of Glory:

The fascination with gold can easily be explained

by its radiance and glitter [...] the dazzle of gold,

suggesting the presence of divinity […]. The

spectrum of hues is arranged to perform, to act like

fire […] an iridescent imprint of fire on matter […]

[that] transforms before the viewer as light into

matter, matter into light, the whole dematerialized

by the scintillating glitter of gold.20

The main section of the chair’s back is done in openwork.

The central panel is in the form of a lyre. At its base is a

flower pot with winding tendrils that rise up and intersect

at the top of the lyre with a lily-of-the-valley. At the base

of the lily is a flower in a circle, which could be considered

a rosette. Along either side of the lily is a grape cluster.

These motifs constitute the center axis. The sides of

the lyre, which frame the central back section, are each

decorated with a winding leaf design ending in a rosette.

On the far sides are two griffons, their tongues extended:

the griffon on the right is holding onto the winding

17 Si’a.h Sarfei Kodesh (The Discourse of the Holy Seraphs), 9 vols.

(Jerusalem, 1988–89), 3:47, no. 101 (Hebrew).

18 Ibid., 1:109, no. 335. H. ayah moved to Chigirin after her second

marriage.

19 http://www.breslov.org/aboutbreslov/thechair.html

20 Bissera V. Pentcheva, “The Performative Icon,” AB 88 (2006): 642–43.

Fig. 3. Detail of gilt remnants (seen as white specks) on upper part of chair

back; note rosette decoration (photo: Catriel Sugarman, 1985)

Ar

s

Ju

da

ic

a

20

10

120


Fig. 4. Chair of Rabbi Na .hman of Bratslav, detail (photo: Avraham Hay, 2007)

Ar

s

Ju

da

ic

a

20

10

121


molding and the acanthus foliage. Also popular in this

period were the motifs of the lyre, the griffon, the lion,

the conch shell, and the rosette – all of which are featured

in the chair.22 Thus, the stylistic components of the chair

provide a powerful argument as to its authenticity, dating

it to the height of the Empire period. Indeed, the tale that

21 Based on the author’s interview with Catriel Sugarman, Jerusalem, May

2008.

22 “Beautifully carved decorations […] featured palmettes, egg-and-

dart molding, and acanthus foliage, wreaths of laurel, lions, Egyptian

caryatids, sphinxes, swans, vases and dolphins”; D. Hanikova, “Furniture,”

in Jan Durdík, Dagmar Hejdová et al., The Pictorial Encyclopedia of

Antiques (London, New York, Sydney, and Toronto, 1979), 31.

Figs. 5 a–b. Chair of Rabbi Na.hman of Bratslav, detail: lions on armrests (photo: Avraham Hay, 2007)

tendrils, while the griffon on the left seems to be smelling

a flower (fig. 4).

The upper portion of the chair is done in a low relief.

Two doves are perched among tendrils on either side of

a central axis in the form of a heart and at its apex is a

conch shell. At the front end of each armrest lies a lion,

positioned en face. The right lion was found damaged in

1985, and was restored according to the original lion on

the left (figs. 5 a–b).

According to Sugarman,21 the back panel of the chair

is original but was damaged and needed restructuring.

The long, meandering acanthus leaf decoration along the

upper part of the back panel and on the two armrests of

the chair was used to reproduce missing decoration on the

two front legs. The back legs were left plain. The upper

part of the front skirt underneath the seat is original.

However, an egg-and-dart decoration was restored on the

lower part of the skirt on the basis of similar such original

decorations on each of the side skirts (fig. 6). The seat

received a new red velvet cushion.

Much of the decoration on the chair is typical of

the Empire style (1800–20), especially the egg-and-dart

Fig. 6. Chair of Rabbi Na .hman of Brarslav, with black lacquer and original side

skirt (photo: Catriel Sugarman, 1985)

Ar

s

Ju

da

ic

a

20

10

122


relates to the chair was recounted following a discussion of

Napoleon and his conquest of Austria and the annexing

of Poland in 1809.23

Along with the decorations typical of the Empire

style, however, are flora and fauna, related to local folk

art traditions. Jewish artisans were known to be active in

the painting of wooden chests for the local populace.24

The wood carving resembles the carved wooden

interior decoration in synagogues, including Torah arks

and furniture (fig. 7).25 The chair’s folk motifs are part of

a common Jewish visual language in the Ukraine also

found in symmetrical and carved or cut-out decoration

in stone, metal, and paper (fig. 8). The ornate nature

of Rabbi Na .hman’s chair relates it to carved ivory and

wooden thrones and ceremonial chairs prevalent in Europe

(fig. 9).

23 See n. 1 above.

24 “The making of such chests was carried out in small towns by Jewish

carpenters, the same craftsman doing both the carpentry and the

decorating […]. The motifs were mostly of plants and flowers […]”; Giza

Frankel, “Little Known Handicrafts of Polish Jews in the 19th and 20th

Centuries,” JJA 2 (1975): 42, 48.

25 For discussion of similar carved wooden decoration (with foliage

and animals in pairs) in synagogue furnishings, see Zoya Yargina,

Wooden Synagogues, Masterpieces of Jewish Art, 5 (Moscow, 1993);

Treasures of Jewish Galicia: Judaica from the Museum of Ethnography

and Crafts in Lvov, Ukraine [catalogue, Beth Hatefutsoth, The Nahum

Goldmann Museum of the Jewish Diaspora, Tel Aviv], ed. Sarah

Harel Hoshen (Tel Aviv, 1996); Maria and Kazimierz Piechotka,

Heaven’s Gate: Wooden Synagogues in the Territory of the Former Polish-

Lithuanian Commonwealth (Warsaw, 2004); idem, Wooden Synagogues

(Warsaw, 1959).

Fig. 7. Torah Ark, Janów Sokólski, mid-18th century, Warsaw, IS PAN (photo: Szymon Zajczyk, before 1939)

Ar

s

Ju

da

ic

a

20

10

123


Analysis

The association that arises from the two lions on the

armrests, the doves, and the grape vines on Rabbi

Na .hman’s chair is that of King Solomon’s throne, as

mentioned in the Bible and in the Midrash, the latter

of which also describes animals of metal, such as lions of

gold (to appear later in the tale).26 Solomon’s throne is

featured in the wall painting of a Purim scene in the Dura

Europos synagogue, where Ahasuerus is shown sitting on

Solomon’s throne (fig. 10).27 Depictions of Solomon’s

throne also appear in medieval manuscripts (fig. 11).

In 1 Chronicles, the phrase: “the throne of the Lord”

appears instead of a physical description.28 According to

Rabenu Be.haya (Be.haya ben Asher Ibn Hellwa, 1255–

1340), this alludes to Solomon’s throne being a paradigm

for the divine Throne of Glory: “How could the verse

compare a mundane throne to a holy one? But the matter

is that Solomon’s throne was a model […] achieved with

the wisdom of the Torah […] which is from the upper

spheres.”29 For Rabbi Na .hman, the “wondrous” chair he

received corresponds through association to the throne of

King Solomon, which, in turn, recalls the divine Throne

of Glory. Such an associative device occurs often in Jewish

thought.30

The following is the description of the dream as told by

Rabbi Na.hman to his Hasidim, shortly after he received

the “wondrous” chair:

[Rabbi Na.hman] told [us] that he saw in a vision or

a dream that a chair was brought to him and it was

surrounded by fire, and everyone, men, women,

and children, went to see it. And when they

returned from there, then right away they became

attached to one another and pairing [matchmaking]

was made between them, and all the leaders

of the generation, all of them, went to see it.

And I asked how far away is it and for what reason

the pairing and matchmaking happens so quickly?

I went and encircled them to get there. And I heard

that Rosh Hashanah was approaching and I was

uncertain whether to go back or stay […] and said

“How can I stay here through Rosh Hashanah?”

“Then again, with my weak constitution, why

should I return?” And I remained there, and went

[up] to the chair. And I saw Rosh Hashanah – the

real Rosh Hashanah – and also Yom Kippur – the

real Yom Kippur – and also Sukkot – the real

Sukkot. I also heard a calling-out: “‘Your new

moons and your appointed seasons My soul hateth’

(Isa. 1:14). Why should You judge the world? Rosh

Hashanah will judge it itself.”

And everyone fled with the leaders of the

generation, they all fled. And I saw there, carved

on the chair, all the forms of all of the created

beings of the world and each of them was carved

there with its pair, and this was the reason why the

matchmaking happened so fast, for each and every

one could see his or her mate before them.

And since those days I was studying [the book

of Daniel], it occurred to me that the verse “His

throne was fiery flames” (¯Â È„ ÔÈ·È·˘ ‰ÈÒ¯Î)

(Dan. 7:9) forms the initials shadkhan ( ÔÎ„˘)

(matchmaker), for through the chair matchmaking

is done. And the word for throne – kersayah (‰ÈÒ¯Î)

contains the initials of Rosh Hashanah, Yom

Kippur, and Sukkot (˙ÂÎÂÒ ¨¯ÂÙÈÎ ÌÂÈ ¨‰˘‰ ˘‡¯),

and for this reason the divine mating of the Matron

(‡˙ÈÂ¯ËÓ„ ‡‚ÂÂÊ) occurs on Shemini A.zeret [the last

day of Sukkot].

And I asked “What shall be my livelihood?” And

they told me that I would be a matchmaker […].31

In the dream, Rabbi Na .hman sees “all living creatures of

the world” hewn on the chair in pairs, just like on the

chair he received, and relates this to matchmaking. Rabbi

Na .hman often spoke on the subject of matchmaking, and

26 2 Chr. 9:17–18. On the Midrash (rabbinic homily), see next note.

27 Targum Sheni, Esther 1:2.

28 1 Chr. 29:23.

29 Be .haya ben Asher Ibn Hellwa, Perush al ha-Torah al pi ha-Sod (Mystical

Commentary on the Torah) (Jerusalem, 2001), Genesis, Introduction

(Hebrew).

30 “The blue resembles the sea, the sea resembles the sky, and the sky

resembles the Throne of Glory” (BT Sotah 17a). See also the associative

drift in Ps. 133:1–3.

31 Parpera’ot Le-H. okhmah, 90–91, fols. 45b–46a.

Ar

s

Ju

da

ic

a

20

10

124


claimed that “everyone has many matches, but each of

them has different aspects and wondrous matters.”32

The context of matchmaking along with the paired

created beings and the occurrence of the vision on Rosh

Hashanah – yom harat ‘olam (the day of the birth of the

world) – convert the chair (and the divine Throne of

Glory) into a birthing chair in the eyes of Rabbi Na.hman.

Coming closer to the chair, Rabbi Na.hman sees Rosh

Hashanah as it really is, and Rosh Hashanah itself is

judging the world. This appears to be a mythic concept.

Indeed, the Jewish New Year was very special to Rabbi

Na .hman, and on another occasion he said: “My Rosh

Hashanah takes precedence over all else [because] my

very essence is Rosh Hashanah […]. My Rosh Hashanah

is a great innovation and the Lord knows that this is not

a legacy from my forefathers but I was given the gift of

knowing what Rosh Hashanah truly is.”33

In the dream, Rabbi Na.hman describes a chair encircled

in flames. Fire is one of the key motifs in the description

of the divine Throne of Glory in Ezekiel’s vision.

The heavens were opened, and I saw visions of God

[...] a great cloud, with a fire flashing up, so that

brightness was round about it; and out of the midst

thereof as the color of electrum, out of the midst

of the fire […]. And above the firmament that was

over their heads was the likeness of a throne, as the

appearance of a sapphire stone; and upon the likeness

32 Si.hot Moharan (Discourses of Our Master and Teacher Rabbi Na .hman),

in H. ayyei Moharan, fol. 37a, no. 143 (Hebrew).

33 And the section continues: “And we learned that his desire was to have

us with him in Uman for Rosh Hashanah always, even after his passing,

and that there is nothing greater than this.” See “Si .hot u-remazim,

gdulat .ziyyuni ha-kadosh ve-Rosh Ha-shanah be-Uman” (Discussions

and Hints, the Greatness of My Holy Gravesite, and Rosh Hashanah in

Uman), Si.hot Moharan, fol. 30a.

Fig. 8. Wall tablet for Shavuoth, eastern Europe, 19th century, paper cut,

21 x 17 cm. Gaya Kahdoori Collection, Tel Aviv (photo: Menu .ha Brafman)

Fig. 9. Throne of Ivan IV Vasilyevich (1530–84), western Europe, 16th

century, carved ivory, carved and gilt wood, metal, Moscow, Kremlin Armory

(photo: Stan Chevass, 2003)

Ar

s

Ju

da

ic

a

20

10

125


of the throne was a likeness as the appearance of a

man upon it above. And I saw as the color of electrum,

as the appearance of fire round about enclosing it,

from the appearance of his loins and upward; and

from the appearance of his loins and downward

I saw as it were the appearance of fire, and there

was brightness round about him […]. This was the

appearance of the likeness of the glory of the Lord.34

In Rabbi Na.hman’s sermon, these ideas (relating the chair

to the divine Throne of Glory in a context of birthing)

are further developed. The title of the sermon, Tik‘u

Memshalah, refers to man having dominion over the angels

in the divine realm. The sermon opens with a midrash in

which Moses is asked to respond to the angel’s query as

to why man, born of a woman, should merit the Torah,

rather than the angels. When Moses says that he fears the

angels will singe him, God advises Moses to hold onto the

Throne of Glory, that is to say, to the roots of the souls

hewn under the throne:

One must hold onto the roots of the souls that are

hewn under the Throne of Glory which is an aspect

of [Eve,] the Mother of All Living [Gen. 3:20] [...]

This is what our Rabbis meant when […] the Holy

One Blessed-Be-He said to Moses: “Hold on to

the Throne of Glory” [BT Shabbat 86b]. That is,

the Blessed One advised Moses to attach himself

to the roots of the souls, which are an aspect of

the Throne of Glory, the Mother of All Living, as

mentioned above, and by so doing he will be saved

from the jealousy of the angels.

And this is the aspect of “the rib, which the Lord

God had taken from the man, made a woman, and

brought her unto the man” [Gen. 2:22]. Having

the strength to stand up [to the angels and have

dominion] in the kingdom is due to the rib that the

Lord God had taken from man [Adam], referring

to Adam HaKadmon [the supernal man], as it is

written “and upon the likeness of the throne was a

likeness as the appearance of a man upon it above”

[Ezek. 1:26]. Then the Lord “brought her unto

34 Ezek. 1:1–28.

Fig. 11. The Judgment of Solomon, initial word panel for the Song of Songs,

detail, Tripartite Ma .hzor, 3 vols., south Germany, ca. 1320, Budapest, Library

of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, David Kaufmann Collection, MS A384,

vol. 1, fol. 183r, detail

Fig. 10. Ahasuerus on the Throne of Solomon, detail, Dura Europos Synagogue,

mid-3d century, wall painting, Damascus, The National Museum

Ar

s

Ju

da

ic

a

20

10

126


the man,” that is to say, the lower man [on earth].

This is what Rabbi ‘Amram H. asida referred to

when he said to the angel: “I am flesh and you are

fire, and I am preferable to you” (˘‡ ˙‡Â ‡¯˘· ‡‡

ÍÓ ‡ÙÈ„Ú ‡‡Â) (BT Kiddushin 81a). The Aramaic

word for flesh, ‡¯˘· [basra] forms the initials: ÌÈ˘˘

„Á‡ Ò¯Î· ‡Â·È¯, that is, 600,000 [souls] in a single

protruding abdomen [advanced stage of pregnancy].

In this way man shall have the strength to have

domination over the angels [by holding onto the

Throne of Glory and attaching himself to the

myriad souls].35

In the dream and the sermon, Rabbi Na .hman equates

the “wondrous” chair he received with the fiery Throne

of Glory, bringing the prooftext from the book of Daniel.

The carved pairs of griffons and of doves on the chair

are transposed to the pairs among the 600,000 souls of

all created beings. The realm of reality is transferred to

a heavenly abode where the dominion of man over the

angels is contingent on his holding onto the roots of the

myriad souls that are hewn beneath the divine Throne of

Glory.

According to Rabbi Na.hman, man was born through

Eve, who was formed from a rib taken from the supernal

man (on the Throne of Glory) and given to man on

earth. This is the reason why man is superior to the

angels, as he stems from a higher – perhaps the highest –

echelon.36 By regarding the chair as an aspect of Eve,

Mother of All Living, and discussing the myriad souls

of created beings underneath the chair and as if in her

womb, Rabbi Na.hman further emphasizes the concept of

the chair as a birthing chair.

Yet, in his sermon, Rabbi Na .hman identifies both

feminine and masculine elements in the divine Throne

of Glory. He calls the divine Throne of Glory Eve, the

Mother of All Living. Yet, he also recognizes in the

appearance of the figure of a man on the Throne the

supernal Adam, who is masculine.37

In the third section of the sermon, Rabbi Na .hman

adds a Hasidic context, claiming that since an individual

is generally not equipped to undertake this task of holding

onto the roots of the souls, it is preferable to attach oneself

to a reputable Hasidic master:

In order to attach oneself to the roots of the souls

of Israel, one needs to know the source of all souls

and the source of their lifeline. From where does

each and every soul receive its vitality? The most

important thing is to know the famous leaders of

the generation, for if one does not know how to

attach oneself to each and every soul individually,

one shall need to attach himself to the acclaimed

leaders of the generation, for the souls are taken

and divided among them.38

At the close of “The Tale of the King’s Son and the

Servant Woman’s Son Who Were Exchanged” is a

description of carved pairs of animals and birds near

a chair and a fallen rosette decoration. Two children

switched at birth – the king’s son and the servant woman’s

son – find themselves in a mysterious forest with riotous

beasts whose roaring at midnight is later discerned as

a wondrous song composed to commend the moon

that lights their way at night.39 A man of the forest –

“who is not a man” – befriends the king’s son and gives

35 Likutei Moharan Tanina, 1, nos. 1–3, fol. 1a. This is the second part of

Likutei Moharan im perush Parpera’ot Le-H. okhmah (Hebrew).

36 On the supremacy of man over the angels, see Moshe Idel, Ben: Sonship

and Jewish Mysticism (London, 2007), 117, nn. 42–44. See also idem,

“Henoch, c’est Metatron,” in Le Livre hébreu d’Henoch, ou, Livre des

palais, translated from the Hebrew and annotated by Charles Mopsik

(Lagrasse, 1989), 381–406.

37 For further discussion on the masculine and feminine aspects of the

divine Throne of Glory (or divine Chariot), see Elliot R. Wolfson, Along

the Path: Studies in Kabbalistic Myth, Symbolism and Hermenutics (New

York, 1995); idem, Circle in the Square: Studies in the Use of Gender in

Kabbalistic Symbolism (New York, 1995). See also Moshe Idel, Kabbalah

and Eros (New Haven, CT, 2005).

38 Likutei Moharan Tanina, 1, no. 3, fol. 1a.

39 The idea of being able to discern the harmonious sound of nature recurs

in the thought of Rabbi Na .hman of Bratslav. According to Zvi Mark,

“The ability to hear the melody and the song is the ability to come

in contact with the nonverbal plane of the spirituality and sanctity

inherent in the world”; Zvi Mark, Mysticism and Madness: The Religious

Thought of Rabbi Nachman of Bratslav (London and New York, 2009),

164.

Ar

s

Ju

da

ic

a

20

10

127


him a wooden musical instrument that when placed on

an animal plays the selfsame harmonious song of the forest.

Soon after, the two sons leave the forest and go to

answer the call of a kingdom whose wise king had left a

garden with dangerous metal creatures, a chair, and other

objects in need of re-arranging. The king’s son exchanges

the musical instrument for the gift of better understanding,

and thus is able to subdue the wild creatures in the garden,

after which the elders of the city put him to a second test,

related to the chair:

There is a chair here from the former king, and the

chair is very high, and in close proximity to the chair

are all manner of animals and birds of wood (that

is, the figures are cut-out and made of wood [ÒÈÂ‡

ËˆÈ È‚ oys geshni.zt – Yiddish: “carved”]). In front of

the chair is a bed. Near the bed is a table. On the

table is a lamp. And from the chair extend paved

paths walled with brick. At a certain distance on

the path is a lion of gold, and if a man approaches

closely, the lion swallows him […] and so on with

the rest of the paths which go forth and spread

throughout the entire empire40 [they are occupied

by other dangerous animals made of metal] […].

And he was shown the chair and saw that it was

very high. He approached the chair, and looked

at it, and observed that the chair was made of the

[same] wood as the [musical] instrument (given to

him by the man of the forest). And as he looked

he noticed that a rosette was missing from the top

of the chair, and [understood that] if the chair had

this rosette [in the right place], it would have the

same power as the [musical] instrument (that is, the

power to play [music] when placed on any kind of

wild or domesticated animal or bird). And he looked

further and found that this rosette, which had been

missing from the top of the chair, was lying beneath

the chair, and [understood that it] needed to be

taken from there and placed above for the chair to

have the power of the instrument […]. [Then] he

[also] understood that it was necessary to move the

bed a bit from the place where it stood, and detach

the table from its place and move it a bit, and shift

the lamp slightly. And that the placement of all the

birds and animals should be adjusted – taking a bird

from one place and moving it to another, and so

forth for the rest of them […]. And the lion standing

(on the path) needed to be moved elsewhere, and

so on for all of them [for all of the other metal

animals on the paths extending from the chair]. He

thus instructed to arrange it all appropriately, taking

the rosette from below and securing it above and

arranging all in the proper order. Then the most

marvelous melody sounded and everything worked

properly and they gave him the kingdom. And he

[turned and] said to the servant woman’s son, “Now

I understand that I am really the son of the king

and you are truly the son of the servant woman.”41

One may ask: How does the chair express visually the

motifs of this tale? Or, in phenomenological terms,

how does the viewer experience the chair in his or her

associative thought? Therefore, one should note the

form of the lyre on the chair’s back, which brings forth

an association with the wooden instrument that (when

placed on an animal) emits a beautiful sound.

The winding tendrils climbing upwards from the

flower pot on the chair back recall a garden. In the tale,

the garden can be seen as a parable for the mystical pardes

(literally “garden”). The going in and coming out from

the garden in peace that ends the first test of the king’s

son recalls the well-known Talmudic story of the mystic

inquiry of four rabbis, from which Rabbi ‘Akiva alone

came and went safely.42

Indeed, Rabbi Na .hman explained that the basis for

the leitmotifs of the tale lie in the Kabbalah:

These are the words of Rabbi Na .hman, may his

light shine. After recounting this tale, he said the

following: “In the first generations, when the Rabbis

would discuss Kabbalah, they would use this [kind

40 See Isa. 6:1.

41 Sippurei ma‘asiyyot (Tales) (Ostrog [?], 1815), fols. 67b–69a (Hebrew

and Yiddish). I would like to thank to Prof. Avraham Novershtern for

his assistance in translating the Yiddish text.

42 BT H. agigah 14b.

Ar

s

Ju

da

ic

a

20

10

128


of abstruse] language because, until Rabbi Shim‘on

bar Yo.hai, one did not discuss the Kabbalah openly

[…]. When Talmudic scholars would engage in

Kabbalah, they would couch their terms in this

way […]. And the aspect of the [motifs] of the bed,

table, chair, and lamp is the array of the Shekhinah

(‡˙ÈÎ˘„ ‡‰Â˜È˙).43

The lily-of-the-valley and the rosette motif on the chair

are both used in the Zohar as allegorical descriptions of

the Shekhinah (the feminine aspect of the Godhead, the

lowest heavenly sphere Malkhut).44 The fallen rosette

refers to the exile of the Shekhinah, with the underlying

message of the necessity to restore her to her proper place

on the divine Throne of Glory through tikkun (order, or

restitution). The adjustment of the chair and the other

objects – the bed, the table, and the lamp – refers to this

tikkun, a term in Safed Kabbalah concerning the restoring

of the lost sparks and the raising of the fallen Shekhinah to

the Godhead.45

In the tale, the beasts in the forest join in a harmonious

song to honor the moon, and in the Zohar the moon is

associated with the Shekhinah, which receives light from

the upper spheres and brings it to the world. The light

correlates primarily to H. okhmah, which is associated with

the sun.46 The full moon, then, may be congruous to a

joyous occasion when the Shekhinah reflects fully the light

of H. okhmah.

The pairs of griffons and doves on the chair recall those

pairs of created beings or souls hewn under the divine

Throne of Glory in the dream and in the sermon. In the

tale, the carved wooden animals and birds – detached

from the chair but nearby – may also correspond to those

souls. In Rabbi Na .hman’s experience, they need to be

exchanged – moved from one place to another – in order

to provide restitution, just as the king’s son and the son

of the servant woman ultimately return to their proper

places.47

Some additional remarks of Rabbi Na.hman concerning

the tale are recorded:

And this tale is a great wonder. And all [the parts

of it] form a whole – the animals. and the chair, and

the garden. They are all part of one whole. They

(the aspects hinted at in the story) are called by one

name in one part and by another name in another

part – all according to the subject matter and its

aspects. And these matters are profound marvels

and very, very awe-inspiring (all these are the words

of our Rebbe), and there is more, but it need not

be revealed to you. […] The meaning of the table

is similar to that of the chair […] namely, that the

main wisdom is to know how to arrange things.

Whoever is well-versed and whole-hearted can

understand the explanation. Nevertheless one must

[take care] to arrange the items properly. [For] on

one occasion it is called thus, and at another time

thus, and so forth for the rest of the items. That is

to say […] in the tale, sometimes the man is called

by one name and sometimes by another, and so on

for the rest of the items. Happy is he who merits

comprehending these matters in truth. Blessed be

His Name for Ever and Ever. (All these are the

words of our holy Rebbe.)48

43 Sippurei ma‘asiyyot, 85–101, fols. 38a–46a.

44 Zohar I, fols. 1a, 221a. See The Wisdom of the Zohar: An Anthology of Texts,

systematically arranged and rendered into Hebrew by Fischel Lachover

and Isaiah Tishby, with extensive introductions and explanations by

Isaiah Tishby: English translation by David Goldstein, 3 vols. (Oxford,

1989), I, Section III, “Shekhinah,” no. 2, “A Lily,” p. 391 and no. 3, “A

Rose and A Lily,” p. 391.

45 Wolfson writes “The feminine Malkhut becomes a complete con-

figuration only when she ascends to the chest of the masculine and

receives the aspects of Keter, the divine crown”; Wolfson, Circle in the

Square, 207–9.

46 On the moon as a metaphor of the Shekhinah, see Lachover and Tishby,

The Wisdom of the Zohar, I, Section III, “Shekhinah,” no. 12 “Moon,”

p. 402, and no. 13 “Diminution of the Moon,” p. 403. See also Likutei

Moharan, 1, fol. 1a, “Ashrei tmimei derekh” (Happy Are Those Whose

Way is Blameless). A Talmudic source is BT H. ulin 60b; see Henie G.

Haidenberg and Michal Oron, Me-olamo ha-misti shel rabi Na.hman mi-

Braslav: iyyunim be-shishah mi-sippurei ha-ma‘asiyyot shel rabi Na.hman mi-

Braslav (The Mystical World of Rabbi Na .hman of Bratslav: Six Stories

of Rabbi Na .hman) (Tel Aviv, 1986), 95, n. 8 (Hebrew).

47 See n. 1 above.

48 Sippurei ma‘asiyyot, fol. 69a.

Ar

s

Ju

da

ic

a

20

10

129


Bachelard’s phenomenological insights help us to under-

stand the complex nature of Rabbi Na.hman’s writings:

Imagination eludes the determinations of psycho-

logy – psychoanalysis included – and […] constitutes

an autochthonous, autogenous realm […] rather

than the will, rather than the élan vital, imagination

is the true source of psychic production […]. It is

reverie which delineates the furthest limits of our

mind […] [and] gives a new form to […] experience

[…]. [We need] to set free the lively dialectics

which bestow on reverie its true liberty and its true

function as a creative mental process.49

Bachelard also suggests that the phenomenological

investigation can be enhanced by other methods of

research: “It would be interesting to match the psycho-

logical study of reverie with the objective study of the

images that entrance us.”50 This in effect has been realized

in the present essay.

Yet, while the platform of phenomenological analysis

enabled us to achieve a greater understanding of Rabbi

Na .hman’s experience of the chair and to connect each

of his layers of meaning, this is not sufficient to fully

comprehend his words. Similarly, identifying the folklore

motifs in the tale, while possible, does not reveal its full

significance.51

What Rabbi Na .hman seeks to convey is not merely

a general mystic experience such as that of which Buber

has written: “a breaking forth of the limitless, which now

governs the soul that surrendered itself to it.”52 Rather,

Rabbi Na.hman follows a very particular form of Kabbalistic

interpretation. He combines sources from Heikhalot

literature in the description of the divine Throne of Glory

or Merkavah (chariot) and the tradition of Shi‘ur Komah,

the supernal Adam comprised of myriad souls. In essence,

the tale, as well as the dream and sermon, can be seen as

a discourse on Ma‘aseh Merkavah (Merkavah or chariot

mysticism), one of the two areas of mysticism familiar

from the Talmudic period.53

From Safed Kabbalah he brings the concept of tikkun

and the restitution of the Shekhinah. In fact, throughout

the tale, Rabbi Na.hman transmits a powerful message of

the possibility of redemption by raising the Shekhinah to

the top of the throne, and reordering the other elements

to effect restitution, according to the Safed Kabbalistic

doctrine.

An important background source for understanding

many of the elements of Rabbi Na.hman’s tale is a chapter

in the Zohar concerning the story of Elisha the Prophet and

the Shunammite woman. An explicit reference is found

there to the four objects in the tale and the importance

of their order. The objects are considered in the Zohar to

be symbols of the Shekhinah, called there Kneset Yisra’el

(the Assembly of Israel): “She [the Shunammite woman]

said. […] ‘Let us make a small walled upper chamber and

place a bed, a table, a chair, and a lamp for him’ (2 Kings

4:10). Why these four? Well, because they are the array of

Assembly of Israel.”54 The motif of a bricked path occurs

in the tale and is also found in this section of the Zohar,

49 Bachelard, The Psychoanalysis of Fire (n. 6 above), 14–15.

50 Ibid., 107. Emphasis mine, BGI.

51 For example, Stith Thompson, Motif-index of Folk-literature: A

Classification of Narrative Elements in Folktales, Ballads, Myths, Fables,

Mediaeval Romances, Exempla, Fabliaux, Jest-books, and Local Legends, rev.

and enl. ed., 6 vols. (Bloomington, IN, 1955–58), D20 – “Transformation

to person of different social class,” including, D22 – “Transformation:

common man to exalted personage” and D24.1 – “Transformation: king

to menial”; D1651.7 – Magic musical instrument plays only for owner”

and D1601.18.0.1 – “Magic musical instrument reproduces songs sung in

heaven”; D1151.2 – “Magic chair”; D1153 – “Magic table,” Types 563,

564; D1154.1 – “Magic bed”; and more.

52 Boaz Huss, “The Context of Buber’s Construction,” in “Martin Buber’s

Introduction to the Stories of Rabbi Nachman and the Genealogy

of Jewish Mysticism,” in By the Well: Studies in Jewish Philosophy and

Halakhic Thought Presented to Gerald J. Blidstein, eds. Uri Ehrlich, Howard

Kreisel, and Daniel J. Lasker (Beer Sheva, 2008), 97–113.

53 See M. H. agigah 2:1. The second area is called Ma‘aseh Bereshit (creation

mysticism) and is related to Sefer Ye.zirah (The Book of Creation).

54 The Zohar, Pritzker edition, 5 vols., translation and commentary by

Daniel C. Matt (Stanford, CA, 2004–2009), Exodus, Parashat Be-shalla.h,

vol. 4 (2007), 202–3. In his commentary, Matt explains that “she

[the Shunammite woman] prepares a separate space for him [Elisha

the Prophet] there, furnished with the symbols of Shekhinah (who is

known as Assembly of Israel) […] On these four pieces of furniture as

symbolizing the array of Shekhinah, see Zohar 2:133a–b” (The Zohar,

Pritzker edition, 4:203, n. 8).

Ar

s

Ju

da

ic

a

20

10

130


referring to livnat ha-sappir (the sapphire stone) of the

divine Throne of Glory in Ezekiel’s vision. (The word livnat

can mean “brightness” but also “brick” in Hebrew.)55

Moreover, this section in the Zohar begins by expounding

on the verse “A prayer of Habakkuk the prophet on

shigyonot” (Habakkuk 3:1), where the word shigyonot can

also refer to a musical instrument.56 The advice to Moses to

hold onto the Throne of Glory to withstand the jealousy of

the angels is found at the end of this chapter of the Zohar.

As well, in the same section is a discussion that relates

to the festival of Rosh Hashanah and the concept of

birthing, and to Rabbi Na.hman’s account of the chair in

the dream and the sermon. In the Zohar, Rosh Hashanah

is mentioned as a holiday when barren women are

favorably remembered: “‘One day he came there’ (2 Kings

4:11). Which day was this? Well, as they have established:

This day was the holiday of Rosh Hashanah, on which the

barren of the world were remembered.”57

Thus, although Rabbi Na .hman did not specifically

cite this reference in his comments to his Hasidim, the

issues raised and explored in this section of the Zohar bear

additional study to further elucidate and expand on the

levels of meaning in the exposition of the chair by Rabbi

Na.hman.

The Elijah Chair

For Bratslav Hasidim today, Rabbi Na.hman’s chair, which

they call dem Rebns benkl, is not used as a talisman for

matchmaking or revered as a paradigm for the divine

Throne of Glory. In a recent Bratslav pamphlet Match

Made in Heaven,58 no mention is made of the chair in a

matchmaking context. A small collection of epigrams,

entitled The Empty Chair,59 contains no reference to the

cosmic implications mentioned above. In fact, Rabbi

Na.hman’s conception of the chair differs radically from its

current use among Bratslav Hasidim as an Elijah Chair for

circumcision ceremonies.

The role of the Prophet Elijah as a herald of the

Messiah and his connection to the circumcision ceremony

was established in the Bible. At the time of King Ahav,

the prophet fought to preserve the rite of circumcision,

and in the Book of Malachi, the last book of the Prophets,

the angel of circumcision, who shall bear tidings of the

Messiah, is identified as Elijah.60 According to Pirkei

de-Rabbi Eliezer, in return for his dedication, God promised

that Elijah should be present at every circumcision

ceremony. The text goes on to mention the institution

of an Elijah Chair. “I swear that we shall not hold a

circumcision until you [Elijah] see it with your own eyes.

From this, the Rabbis set down to make a suitable chair

for the angel of the circumcision who is called Elijah, of

blessed memory.”61

This is a noteworthy occurrence of a ritual object

fashioned after a rabbinic homily rather than from a

biblical prooftext, and may well be the only such example.

Generally, the rabbinic homily extrapolates on existing

objects. By the early nineteenth century, there were

many extant examples in central and eastern Europe of

ornately carved full-size Elijah Chairs (fig. 12) and full-size

double chairs, one left empty for Elijah and one for the

sanddak (godfather). There is a parallel tradition among

Jews of Asia and Africa and in southern France of extant

symbolic small Elijah chairs used alongside the chair for

the godfather.62

55 Ibid.

56 The Zohar, Pritzker edition, 4:208, n. 1, see Ps. 7:1.

57 Ibid., 4:203–4. Matt explains: “According to rabbinic tradition, the

barren women Sarah, Rachel, and Hannah were all ‘remembered’

on Rosh Hashanah and made fertile. See Bereshit Rabbah 73:1; BT

Berakhot 29a, Rosh Hashanah 10b–11a; Tan .huma, Vayera 17 […]”

(The Zohar, Pritzker edition, 4:203, n. 10).

58 Match Made in Heaven [compiled by Eliezer Shlomo Schick] (Monsey,

NY, [2001?]).

59 Moshe Mykoff, The Empty Chair (Woodstock, VT, 1996).

60 1 Kings 19:14; Mal. 3:1, 23.

61 Pirkei de-Rabbi Eliezer (Warsaw, 1874), end of chap. 29, 53–54, fols.

27a–b (Hebrew).

62 The earliest visual depiction of a small Elijah Chair is found in an

Ashkenazi manuscript dated 1589 (The Germanisches Nationalmuseum,

Nuremberg, ms. 7058, fol. 36v). See illustration in Ruth Jacoby, “Mah

bein kisse Eliyyahu le-vein kisse ha-sanddak?” (What is the Difference

between the Elijah Chair and the Chair of the Godfather?), Rimonim 5

(1997): 47, ill. 7 (Hebrew) and a reference in idem, “The Small Elijah

Chair,” JA 18 (1992): 77, n. 27. I tend to view the small Elijah Chair in

the manuscript as a real-life depiction.

Ar

s

Ju

da

ic

a

20

10

131


It is as if the last recorded words of Rabbi Na .hman:

“My fire shall burn until the coming of the Messiah,”63

serve as a source for the current perception of the chair.

As Zusia Efron related in 1970: “There is a sign over the

chair saying: the chair of our rabbi, the saintly teacher

Nachman of Braslav of blessed memory, reserved for

Elijah the Prophet, and beware lest you sit on it. Thus, no

one dares to sit on the chair. For we all await Elijah the

Prophet, who, when he comes to announce the Messiah

will take his seat in the chair of Rabbi Nachman in

Jerusalem.”64 (fig. 13)

In conclusion, two divergent but equally powerful sets

of imagery are at work here, both of which express the

yearning for redemption. Rabbi Na.hman’s initial reaction

to receiving an ornate chair as a gift was to designate it

as a birthing chair, relating it to a mythic image of the

divine Throne of Glory and of Rosh Hashanah itself,

in a matchmaking context. Rabbi Na .hman presents an

optimistic view of man as having dominion over the

angels and being, in truth, the king’s son, and so capable

of bringing harmony to the world and – ultimately –

redemption.65

The modern-day Bratslav Hasidim, on the other hand,

choose to convert the Rebbe’s chair into an Elijah Chair.

By so doing, they bind the Rebbe’s promise to keep his

fire alight until the advent of the Messiah in accordance

with the biblical prophecy of Malachi – when Elijah will

herald the long-awaited Day of Redemption.

Yet, one more perception of the chair needs to be

considered: In a singular Jewish depiction in a nineteenth-

century Kopyczynitz community society record book, a

lion places his paw on the seat of an empty throne, as if

about to ascend. The lion symbolizes the tribe of Judah,

63 H. ayyei Moharan (n. 1 above), 90, fol. 45b.

64 Zusia Efron, “A Chair in Jerusalem,” Ariel 27 (Autumn 1970): 58.

65 Only three months prior to the recounting of the tale, on 8 Av, 5569

(1809), Rabbi Na .hman revealed the second part of Megilat Starim

(The Scroll of Secrets), describing the coming of the Messiah. That

account includes a procession with the Messiah seated on a chair.

See Zvi Mark, The Scroll of Secrets: The Hidden Messianic Vision of R.

Nachman of Breslav (Brighton, MA, 2010), 51, lines 30–32; 54, lines

45–48.

Fig. 12. Circumcision Scene, in Mordechai Sofer of Nitra, Sod Adonai

(The Secret of the Lord), Nitra, Hungary, 1819, Hamburg, Staats- und

Universitätsbibliothek, Cod. Levy 45, fol. 11r

Fig. 13. Chair of Rabbi Na .hman of Bratslav, Jerusalem, the Great Bratslav

Yeshivah, Me’ah She‘arim (photo: David Posner, Jerusalem, ca. 1975)

Ar

s

Ju

da

ic

a

20

10

132


from which the Messiah, son of David, is destined to

descend (fig. 14).66 In this context, Rabbi Na .hman’s

Chair, as that throne, is not necessarily an Elijah Chair

but rather the empty throne of the Messiah. The empty

throne has been represented in ancient and medieval art.

It is known from the Byzantine period as etimasia, the

throne prepared for the Judge of the World.67

In Rabbi Na.hman’s Scroll of Secrets, reference is made

to a chair of the Messiah, upon which he is carried aloft

and lowered, and from which he gives a sermon to Israel

and to the nations.68 The question remains: Is Elijah

designated to sit on Rabbi Na.hman’s Chair or is, perhaps,

the Messiah? The close connection between the two

resonates in a mixed metaphor.

66 Gen. 49:9; Genesis Rabbah, Parashat Z. av, no. 9: “Rabbi H. ama the son

of H. anina said: ‘This is the Messiah the son of David […] whose father

was from the tribe of Judah.’ ”

67 Gertrude Schiller, Iconography of Christian Art, 2 vols. (New York and

London, 1971), 2:186. See Ps. 9:5–9.

68 See n. 65 above.

Fig. 14. Minute Book of the Mishnah Society “Truth and Justice,” detail,

Kopyczynitz, 1881. Gross Family Collection, Tel Aviv, MS no. EE.011.010, p. Q

Documents

2010 The Birthing Chair: The Chair of Rabbi Nahman