The modern scholarship is possibly Kasher's article in Sinai. See the WP - Zohar. He makes the claim.
Long time no speak -- but that doesn't mean I haven't read the posts.
What they mean by modern scholars are people like the Radal, R. Yitzhak Chaver, Margalios and others (I doubut if they read Sinai, so I don't think they knew Kasher).
Check out my new piece on my new blog!
May be it's R. Arye Kaplan who makes this very statement in his Meditation and Kabbala.
See my post on Kasher, Sinai and the whole issue: http://www.avakesh.com/2007/05/
i...nor_of_lag.html
hmm. and so how did you celebrate lag ba-omer?
Why don't modern scholars find Kasher, Radal et al convincing?
Who says they don't? Kasher et al don't prove that the Zohar is a tannaitic work. That elements of it are indeed very old Jewish teachings doesn't contravene modern scholarship on the Zohar.
I'm quite suprised Artscroll mentioned it but not that it isn't referenced. It fits with their general approach to anything that conflicts with "the party line"
>Rashbyic<
If you get any google hits off this word, let me know! :)
Will do!
Commenting by HaloScan
