“And for Those Who Use It to Perform Unifications (Yiḥudim)—It Is Self-Evidently Permitted”: Tobacco in the Shulḥan ha-Ṭahor of the Komarno Rebbe

Abstract

This article offers a renewed, interdisciplinary, and integrative reading of the halakhic rulings concerning tobacco issued by R. Yitzḥak Isaac Yehudah Yechiel Safrin, the Komarno Rebbe (1806–1874), in his work Shulḥan ha-Ṭahor. The article surveys R. Safrin’s various treatments of tobacco, its smoking, and its inhalation. It demonstrates how R. Safrin’s halakhic position on tobacco is connected to his Hasidic-mystical worldview. In this respect, the article continues an existing scholarly trend that points to a systematic relationship between R. Safrin’s halakhic world and his Hasidic-mystical world. His halakhic rulings concerning tobacco are examined against the backdrop of the distinctive status accorded to tobacco in Hasidism as a psychoactive substance possessing spiritual potential. The analysis of the Hasidic and halakhic sources draws on anthropological studies of the spiritual use of tobacco among Indigenous cultures in South America, as well as insights from contemporary psychedelic research.

1. Introduction

Tobacco was introduced to the Old World from America following its discovery by Columbus in 1492. It first became known in Spain and Portugal during the mid-sixteenth century, where it was initially cultivated as an ornamental and medicinal plant. Large-scale tobacco consumption began primarily in the second half of the seventeenth century—first in Asian countries and subsequently in Europe.1 Many Jews engaged in the tobacco trade, one of whose primary hubs was located in Amsterdam.2 Tobacco leaves were consumed in three principal forms: for smoking, inhaling tobacco powder (snuff), and chewing the leaves.

Tobacco occupied a significant place in the Jewish movement of Hasidism, which began to emerge in the second half of the eighteenth century and spread with greater intensity during the nineteenth. In his article on tobacco within the Hasidic world, Louis Jacobs writes:

Although tobacco was brought to Europe from the New World, where it had been used as part of the American Indian religious ceremonies, the hasidim (and Western smokers in general) did not use it in this sense. Rather, the early hasidim smoked tobacco as an aid to concentration. It was only much later that the incense motif and the idea of raising holy sparks were introduced (Jacobs 1998, pp. 29–30).

In other words, while tobacco was utilized by Native Americans for religious ceremonies, the Hasidim—like other smokers in the Western world—did not adopt its use within a ritualistic context. Jacobs argues that at the dawn of the Hasidic movement, smoking served primarily as an aid to concentration, and only at a later stage were mystical meanings attached to this practice, such as the imagery of the incense (ketoret) and the concept of raising holy sparks (haalat nitzotzot).

Recently, Tzvi Luboshitz, in his article on mystical smoking in Kabbalah, Sabbateanism, and Hasidism, sought to dispute Jacobs’s thesis. Luboshitz demonstrated that even in pre-Hasidic Jewish kabbalistic sources, the use of tobacco—functioning as a psychoactive substance—was perceived as a spiritual and mystical practice (Luboshitz 2021).

The later Hasidic view on tobacco finds prominent expression in the writings of Rabbi Yitzḥak Isaac Yehudah Yechiel Safrin of Komarno (Eastern Galicia, 1806–1874), the Komarno Rebbe. Within the framework of an expanding body of research in recent years dedicated to examining the reciprocal relationship between Halakha [Jewish law] and Hasidism, law and spirit, and the persona of the “Halakhic Decisor Rebbe” (Admor Posek),3 a marked position is accorded to the Komarno Rebbe, who distinctly embodies the synthesis of these two domains (see these studies: Meir 2013; Mayse 2019; Sachs-Shmueli 2024; Brown 2024, pp. 50–62; Meitlis 2026, forthcoming). As demonstrated by these studies (see primarily Mayse 2019; Brown 2024; Meitlis 2026), many of the rulings and discussions in his book Shulḥan ha-Ṭahor—a halakhic work arranged according to the structure of the Shulḥan ‘Arukh—are deeply anchored in his rich and intense Hasidic and mystical world, which not only preserved the mystical core of early Hasidism but also deepened and intensified it (Brown 2018, p. 26).

2. Research Objectives

This article seeks to offer the first comprehensive discussion of the Komarno Rebbe’s rulings in his work Shulḥan ha-Ṭahor concerning several issues related to tobacco. Throughout this discussion, we intend to demonstrate that his halakhic decisions must be understood in light of his Hasidic worldview and against the backdrop of the unique status accorded to tobacco in Hasidic tradition as a substance possessing metaphysical vitality and theurgic potential.

With reference to Jacobs’s remarks cited above and following Luboshitz’s challenge of them, we wish to broaden the scope and re-examine the denial of any connection between the attitude toward tobacco in Hasidism and its use among the indigenous peoples of the American continent. We will argue that an examination of the meaning of tobacco among Native Americans may shed new, phenomenological light on the understanding of its role and status in Hasidic contexts.4 Despite significant differences between Amazonian tobacco and its eighteenth- and nineteenth-century Eastern European counterpart in both substance and modes of consumption, the latter nevertheless possessed a genuine pharmacological potential to alter consciousness, particularly when amplified by ritual context and spiritual intention (i.e., ‘set and setting’; see below).

Jonathan Garb, in his study of shamanic trance in modern Kabbalah and Hasidism, has previously noted shamanic contexts in the teachings of the Komarno Rebbe;5 this article thus seeks to add another shamanic context to this tapestry, rooted this time in a psychoactive substance consumed across both cultures. This aligns with a broader scholarly trend that contextualizes Rabbi Safrin’s practices within both mystical and shamanic frameworks.6 We aim to utilize contemporary developments in the field of psychoactive and psychedelic studies for the benefit of researching historical Judaism in previous centuries, employing models arising from these fields to decipher phenomena and texts from the Jewish world.

3. The Attitude of the Founders of Hasidism Toward Tobacco, as Reflected in the Hasidic Writings of the Komarno Rebbe

In his study on the “unification of unifications” (yiḥud ha-yiḥudim) in Kabbalah and Hasidism, Ron Wacks noted that tobacco smoking in the early generations of the Hasidic movement bore a highly polarized significance: for the Hasidim, it served as a vehicle for the service of God and the performance of mystical unifications (yiḥudim), whereas in the eyes of their opponents (Mitnagdim), excessive smoking was perceived as mere idleness and waste of time (batlanut).7 An anthropological study conducted by Bernd Brabec de Mori focused on tobacco use among the indigenous peoples of the Amazon basin in comparison to the Western cultural attitude toward it, pointing to a similar tension characteristic of the substance: the modern Western perspective views tobacco as an addictive and negative substance, whereas the indigenous view treats it spiritually and positively. De Mori writes of the cognitive-spiritual qualities bordering on the psychedelic experience that arise from certain uses of tobacco, and seeks to rectify the negative Western attitude toward it (Brabec de Mori 2015). This anthropological dichotomy parallels, in a fascinating manner, the aforementioned historical tension between the Hasidim and the Mitnagdim. It appears, therefore, that this controversy that developed in Eastern European Judaism around tobacco smoking can be more deeply clarified when examined through this comparative prism, which relies on a scrutiny of cultures in which tobacco functioned as a psychoactive substance with sacred significance.

Studies have found that the effect of a psychoactive substance on human consciousness and functioning depends critically on “Set and Setting.” This term, attributed to Timothy Leary, indicates that the effects of psychedelic substances are highly context-dependent; they are shaped by the individual’s mental state, intention, and expectations (the “set”) and by the physical, social, and cultural environment in which the substance is consumed (the “setting”). Research indicates that the ritual context and the individual’s state are highly relevant even to specific forms of consumption such as tobacco insufflation (Rapé, see below) (Bourscheid et al. 2022), and several researchers have even emphasized the importance of this “set and setting” model and its expansion to other psychoactive substances such as alcohol and psychiatric medications (Hartogsohn 2017; Hartogsohn et al. 2025; Kozak and Miller 2024). Recently, Sam S. B. Shonkoff examined mind-altering substances within Hasidic contexts, offering a critique of ahistorical and essentialist scholarly approaches to psychoactive phenomena. As he demonstrates, ‘set and setting’ does not merely serve as a passive backdrop, but actively shapes and mediates the phenomenology and interpretive framework of substance use itself (Shonkoff 2026).

This principle serves as a theoretical key to understanding the divergence between the two approaches toward tobacco: throughout our study, the importance of set and setting will be constantly present—not only the use of tobacco is judged here, but also the space, the identity of the consumer, their intention, their cultural context, and the belief systems within which they operate. The effect of its use depends on these variables, which can differentiate between a negative, addictive use and a positive, sublime use. These data can, therefore, shape the interpretive approach to use of the psychoactive substance.

In Wacks’s study, the writings of Rabbi Safrin occupy a significant place, and within this framework we will offer additional insights into his attitude toward tobacco. Although Rabbi Safrin did not operate during the foundational generations of Hasidism, he transmitted traditions from the Baal Shem Tov (Besht), viewed himself as his disciple (Brown 2024, p. 50) and, as noted, kept the mystical ember of early Hasidism burning, perhaps even intensifying it.8 Wacks mentions two traditions transmitted by Rabbi Safrin regarding the “awesome unifications” (yiḥudim nora’im) performed by the Besht through the smoking of his pipe:

I was told by reliable persons that his holy disciple, the great cohen, Jacob Joseph [of Polonne], said: I wish I would profit from all my good deeds in this world that which my teacher, the divine master, the Besht, profits when he smokes his pipe. He unites awesome Unifications with every movement. He does not move the smallest limb without Unifications.9

My uncle and teacher, Rabbi Tzvi of Zhiditchov, told me that once a woman came to our master [the Besht] to receive an amulet to cure a certain malady. Our master told her that if she would give him fifty ducats, he would give her the amulet. The woman went home and sold all of her belongings, but she only had thirty ducats. She traveled to our master and told him that she only had thirty ducats. He did not want to give her the amulet. The woman then traveled to the Council of the Four Lands [its head then was the sage, Rabbi David of Ostrog] in order that they should collect another twenty ducats for her, to give to the zaddiq. When they heard the woman’s request, they were filled with anger and rage and sent a message to him that he should immediately appear before the tribunal. The divine master traveled to them. When he arrived there, he stood in the doorway and smoked his pipe until the house was filled with smoke. None of them had the strength to open his mouth from the fright of the Shekhinah that fell heavily upon them. Afterwards, the master went to the above-mentioned sage, Rabbi David, and said to him: David, David, come and I will show you a new Heaven and a new earth that I created in smoking this pipe, with the Unifications that I did during this time. He showed him, and Rabbi David fainted. When he awoke, he said to his colleagues: One does not argue with God Himself. Believe me, this is no ordinary man. The woman, because of her great desire to give the zaddiq what he wanted, became extremely wealthy through a great and wond- rous miracle. This too was his holy intent. May his merit protect us, amen.10

In the first tradition, R. Jacob Joseph of Polonne (1695–1781), one of the greatest disciples of the Besht, presents the transformation of the corporeal act; the smoking of the pipe becomes, for the Besht, a theurgic practice of unifying holy names, wherein even a slight physical movement carries immense spiritual weight. The second tradition originates from Rabbi Safrin’s primary teacher and uncle, R. Tzvi Hirsch, the Rebbe of Zhiditchov (1763–1831). This tradition describes how the pipe smoke becomes a medium for an ecstatic revelation before R. David of Ostrog and the judges. This description—in which the pipe smoke enveloping the space induces an unmediated experience of the ‘dread of the Divine Presence’ and creates a ‘new heaven’—becomes clearer when considering the psychoactive effects of tobacco smoke, which served here as a catalyst for altering consciousness and reaching a higher mystical state. Clearly, the smoking of ordinary Eastern European tobacco could not, on its own, account for such a dramatic vision; rather, this phenomenon depended on a combination of factors, chief among them the unique persona of the smoker. Nevertheless, the inherent psychoactivity of the substance should be recognized as an essential component within this broader interplay.11

In his work Zohar Ḥay, a commentary on the Zohar based on Lurianic Kabbalah and Hasidism, the Komarno Rebbe repeats these traditions to establish a distinction between the smoking of an ordinary person and that of the Tzaddik. This distinction aptly reflects the pivotal role of the tzaddik in the Hasidic world:

And if they saw in the light of our eyes a pure light, a polished light, that he would sometimes sit idly smoking the lyulke [=pipe] and the like, surely concerning him our master the Ari said: “Who is all the desire of Israel, whose engagement in unifications is greater than the engagement in Torah”, but not all day long, for the Torah is the source of life that emerges from the engagement in unifications. And our master was an extraordinarily outstanding Gaon engaged in Torah all his days, and who can utter his praise, who can compare to him? And his holy disciple, our teacher R. Jacob Joseph, said before his passing that he requests from the Blessed Lord that he gain from all the Torah and mitzvot of his entire life what his holy master, the light of Israel, a consuming fire, gained in the unifications he engaged in while smoking a single time from the lyulke. And once he showed his disciple, our teacher R. David, the head of the rabbinical court of the holy community of Ostrog, the new heaven he created through the unifications he engaged in while smoking his lyulke, and the aforementioned R. David fainted from dread and fear (Safrin 1875–1881, Exodus, Vol. II, 62c).

These words faithfully reflect the Hasidic doctrine of “worship through corporeality” (avodah be-gashmiyut) and the raising of sparks from material matter, through which even a new substance like tobacco merits rectification and elevation (tikkun ve-‘iluy).12 Yet, this description clearly betrays an ambivalence toward the corporeal and tobacco: on the one hand, its smoking may be perceived as idle behavior, and on the other—depending on the persona of the smoker, their intentions, and their spiritual rank (“set and setting”)—as a vessel for the service of God and sublime unifications. As appears in de Mori’s research, tobacco always bears a double face—a negative potential (idleness, addiction) versus a positive, spiritual, and sublime potential, the realization of which depends on the persona of the smoker and the purpose of smoking. The passage before us emphasizes that the Besht specifically is capable of elevating the lower aspect of tobacco to the highest place, namely, to realize the potential for holiness hidden within it.

It is demonstrated here, therefore, that smoking is context-dependent, contingent upon the smoking persona and the purpose of the smoking. This is naturally connected to the issue of set and setting in the consumption of psychoactive substances (see above). Tobacco in and of itself is not the entirety of the phenomenon, nor is it the sole and central factor shaping the experience; rather, there are additional cognitive and cultural factors accompanying it. Both the context in which the smoking occurs and the persona of the smoker are critical to constructing the outcome of the encounter between the human being and the mind-altering substance.

From the traditions transmitted by Rabbi Safrin regarding the Besht, it emerges that not only the smoking of tobacco has significance in the service of God (as we have just seen), but also its inhalation through the nose (as we shall immediately see). This is a different modality of tobacco consumption, and below we will discuss why knowing the nature and character of tobacco sniffing, in general, is important for understanding this subject in the Hasidic world. In the story brought below, originating from a tradition Rabbi Safrin received from his father-in-law, R. Avraham Mordechai of Pintchov (1765/6–1824), it is noted how the use of tobacco in the lands where Jews operated was a relatively new phenomenon in his time—and it provides an explanation for the spiritual significance underlying “the matter of the tobacco herb for sniffing and smoking” in recent generations:

I heard from my master, my father-in-law, the divine and holy rabbi, our teacher R. Avraham Mordechai of Pintchov, who told me of the greatness of our divine lord the Baal Shem Tov, and among his words was a story that once the disciples stood on Rosh Hashanah and prayed, the container with the tobacco of one of the disciples fell to the ground and he picked it up. His companion saw this and became angry at him for interrupting his prayer to pick up the tobacco and sniff it according to custom. And our divine master, the Baal Shem Tov, saw through his holy spirit (ruaḥ kodsho) that the resentment of this Tzaddik caused his companion to be decreed upon to die that year, heaven forbid. And [the Besht] ascended in his soul-ascents to the upper realms and argued many arguments against this but to no avail, until on the night of Hoshana Rabbah he ascended again and argued and cried out, and effected through his prayer that if this prosecutor would find merit on his own accord, [the student] would be exempted. And our master entered his study house and found the disciple who had resented, engaged in the rectification (tikkun) of Deuteronomy (Mishneh Torah), and the Baal Shem Tov withdrew the mental faculties (moḥin) from him, so that he could not recite the text with proper devotion (devekut) during the recitation of the tikkun. Consequently, he walked to and fro to contemplate the loftiness of God and His unity and regarding certain matters, and it fell into his thought: Why was this matter of the tobacco herb for sniffing and smoking revealed in the final generation, at the footsteps [of the Messiah]? And he said in his thought that there are several precious souls in the final generation that cannot clothe and materialize themselves except through a subtle medium of fragrance, as is the sense of the verse: “A fire-offering, a pleasing aroma to the Lord.” And from this came to him regret that he should not have resented his companion who sniffed (tobacco) during the prayer, for who knows what precious soul and matter this Tzaddik raised through his unification. And on the day of Hoshana Rabbah it was the custom of our divine master, the Baal Shem Tov, to answer anyone who asked him what was decreed in the upper and lower realms and what occurs throughout the entire world, for he envisioned through his holy spirit from one end of the world to the other, and his mind was exceedingly joyous on that day. Each person would prepare for himself some question, whether in homiletics, Talmud, Halakhic decisors, or other matters, and it was his way to answer them all on this day. And that disciple prepared himself to ask the aforementioned question, and when he asked the Baal Shem Tov, the holy rabbi said: “State your reason.” And he stated his reason […]. And our master said: “Say more, the rest of the things that were in your thoughts then.” And he remembered and told him how he found therein merit for his companion, and then the prosecution and the decree were annulled from his companion. And once it was annulled, our master told him the entire matter he had caused his companion.13

The story describes a dramatic event that occurred on Rosh Hashanah among the disciples of the Besht, wherein a student interrupted his prayer to retrieve a fallen tobacco container to sniff from it. This act provoked the resentment of his companion, a Tzaddik, who viewed it as preferring a low, material act over sublime prayer; this resentment brought a death decree upon the one who had retrieved the tobacco. The Besht unsuccessfully attempted to annul the decree until the night of Hoshana Rabbah, the time when the judgment of Rosh Hashanah reaches its conclusion. To annul the decree, the Besht created psychological conditions on the night of Hoshana Rabbah that led the resentful disciple to an inner inquiry regarding the historical appearance of tobacco in recent generations. The disciple’s conclusion led to a defense of his companion, thereby annulling the decree: tobacco appeared in the world as a tool for the rectification of disembodied, subtle souls that cannot materialize except through a refined medium close to the spirit, which is the sense of smell. If so, the Baal Shem Tov, who recognized the profound meanings of tobacco, revealed through the disciple’s reflection that even an everyday action, such as the use of tobacco, can carry a hidden, valuable spiritual meaning.

In contrast to the previous stories about the Besht that dealt with smoking, this story focuses on snuff tobacco. Among various shamanic groups—both indigenous American groups and other groups influenced by them—the deep inhalation (either self-administered or blown by another person into one’s nostrils) of tobacco powder combined with medicinal plants (Rapé) via a special pipe (applicator) functions as a medicinal and spiritual practice that enables the cleansing of one’s consciousness, focus, and the attainment of higher states of consciousness.14 Although the emphasis in the Hasidic story is on the aroma of the tobacco—with which rectifications and divine service can be performed—the special status accorded to its inhalation should be understood in the context of the immediate transformation it is capable of facilitating within the human soul.15 The psychoactive effect of tobacco can be compared to that of wine (“nikhnas yayin yatza sod”—when wine enters, secrets emerge)—the central psychoactive substance addressed in the Jewish world, initially used millennia before the arrival of tobacco. However, tobacco affects the mind in ways quite different from wine; it does not cloud the senses as wine does, and it may have been perceived as a substance with a greater spiritual impact due to its psychoactive nature and its association with the spiritual sense of smell (Shemesh 2017, pp. 153–55).

The Hasidic aspiration to apply the use of unifications (yiḥudim) to all details of corporeal reality is demonstrated by Wacks through another passage from Zohar Ḥay, wherein Rabbi Safrin relates that he heard from R. Avraham Joshua Heschel of Apt, known as the Apter Rebbe or the Ohev Yisrael (1748–1825), that the Chozeh (seer) of Lublin “does not lift even his eyelids without a unification of the Name, much less speech, and much less action.” (Wacks 2006, p. 67) However, a look at the full passage from Zohar Ḥay reveals that in this very segment—as in the other segments where Wacks quotes Rabbi Safrin—the matters of the pipe and tobacco are intertwined. This is the full passage:

The Messiah said to our holy master, the Besht […]: “I asked the Messiah: ‘When will the master come?’ And he replied to me: ‘By this you shall know: at the time when your teaching becomes publicized and revealed in the world, and your fountains overflow abroad—what I taught you and you attained—and they too will be able to perform unifications (yiḥudim) in every earthly matter and in all the glory in the world, and in every movement.’” Just as my holy master, our teacher R. Avraham Joshua Heschel of Apt, testified concerning our holy master, our teacher R. Yitzḥak Yaakov of Lublin, that he does not lift even his eyelids without a unification of the Name, much less speech, and much less action. And once my holy uncle said: “I went to the house of prayer in exceedingly radiant tefillin, and I heard them calling before me: ‘Ascribe glory to the son…’ and I came from the house of prayer and handled the lyulke tsibukh without intention, and I heard them calling: ‘Woe to so-and-so who rebels against his Master,’ for so it is in the Tosefta: ‘A person should not use his face and feet except for the honor of his Creator,’ purchasing and unifying […], in the sense of: ‘In all your ways acknowledge Him.’”16

In the story appearing in this text, R. Tzvi Hirsch of Zhiditchov presents an event where handling his pipe without mystical intention immediately following prayer was perceived in heaven as a “rebellion” against the Holy One, Blessed be He.17 The fundamental principle expressed in this text is that every action should be performed with sacred intention. However, in light of the clear position expressed in the other traditions cited above regarding the religious significance attributed to smoking a pipe, the episode involving the pipe should not be understood merely as an incidental illustration of this principle. Rather, it reflects the Hasidic view that even acts involving tobacco require proper spiritual orientation. It also acknowledges that such an attitude could not be taken for granted and reveals Hasidic awareness of the criticism directed against the “sanctification” of tobacco practices among Hasidim.

4. From the Realm of Ideas to the Realm of Halakha: Tobacco in the Halakhic Literature of the Komarno Rebbe

In the following lines, we will examine the attitude toward tobacco through the lens of the halakhic rulings (corpus of psika) issued by the Komarno Rebbe. This analysis seeks to investigate whether and how the Hasidic-mystical worldview—which views tobacco consumption as a potential spiritual practice—influenced his normative decisions as a halakhic decisor (posek).

5. Prohibiting and Allowing Tobacco Use in the Synagogue and During Prayer

An issue extensively discussed in halakhic literature is whether it is permissible to light a pipe from a synagogue candle designated for prayer and for the honor of the holy place. In this specific context, Rabbi Safrin initially does not appear to accord the pipe the sublime spiritual status attributed to it in the Hasidic tales. His ruling in Shulḥan ha-Ṭahor determines:

Synagogue candles that are lit for prayer—it is forbidden to light another candle from them for mundane use (holin), and all the more so (mi-kol she-ken) it is forbidden to smoke a pipa [pipe] from them, except for a Torah scholar (talmid ḥakham) who is studying Torah there.18

This stance regarding the lighting of a pipe from a prayer candle—which mitigates the prohibition only restrictively for Torah scholars studying in the synagogue—does not deviate from the accepted norm in halakhic adjudication.19 There is no indication that the potential religious quality he recognized in smoking influenced his legal ruling here.

Conversely, regarding the inhalation of snuff during the prayer service itself, his ruling faithfully reflects the mystical bedrock of his Hasidic thought and the Hasidic stance on tobacco that he articulated in his homiletic-kabbalistic works. While several halakhic authorities strictly forbade the use of snuff in the synagogue and during prayer out of deference to the sanctity of the site and the service (Shemesh 2017, pp. 241–42; Kahana 1973, pp. 327–28), in Shulḥan ha-Ṭahor Rabbi Safrin introduces two directions for permitting this practice.

The first direction addresses the individual whose physical dependency on tobacco is such that abstaining from it would disrupt their concentration (kavanah) during prayer. Since concentration is itself an essential component of the commandment of prayer, he permits the inhalation of tobacco. The second direction is aimed exclusively at kabbalists and Hasidim who perform kabbalistic unifications (yiḥudim) while sniffing the substance. For these individuals, the permission to consume tobacco in the very midst of prayer (provided they pause their recitation while inhaling) is deemed self-evident, given that “they perform the service of the King therewith to sweeten the judgments (le-hamtik ha-dinim).” As he writes:

If one has a need to sniff tobacco and is distracted in his prayer in the manner of those accustomed to it, it is possible that he may sniff; and for those who use it to perform unifications (yiḥudim), it is self-evidently permitted, since they perform the service of the King therewith to sweeten the judgments. However, in any event, he must pause from the recitation of prayer. And for one who does not do so [i.e., does not perform unifications], a blessing shall come upon him (tavo ‘alav berakhah) if he does not sniff at all.20

These two justifications accurately reflect the dual nature of tobacco observed by de Mori in his anthropological research. The first justification acknowledges the corporeal, addictive aspect of tobacco (“those accustomed to it”) and offers a conventional, pragmatic solution. The second justification, however, addresses the spiritual potential inherent in tobacco—its capacity to induce a profound shift in consciousness—and is reserved for those who recognize this dimension and execute yiḥudim during its inhalation.

Viewed through the lens of the “Set and Setting” model, this ruling gains significant analytic clarity: the sacred space of the synagogue and the ritual act of prayer do not clash with the consumption of the substance; rather, they serve as a supportive “setting” (environment) that helps manifest its spiritual dimension. Prayer provides the framework that allows the physical substance to facilitate its proper spiritual effect. Thus, as an attentive halakhic decisor, Rabbi Safrin addresses the lower, corporeal needs of the individual by permitting tobacco use, while as a mystic, he exhibits the elevated, spiritual facet of this action—granting it, too, a valid halakhic standing.

6. The Recitation of Blessings over the Smoking and Sniffing of Tobacco

Another issue that emerged for debate in modern halakhic literature concerns whether one must recite a blessing (berakhah) over the smoking or sniffing of tobacco. According to Jewish tradition, one is obligated to recite a blessing to God when deriving pleasure from the senses of taste and smell. The prevailing custom is to refrain from reciting the blessing for fragrances (birkat ha-rei’aḥ) over tobacco, partly because fragrance is not the primary purpose of tobacco, which is instead consumed for its psychoactive properties.21

In contrast, Rabbi Safrin’s fundamental position is that one should recite a blessing over tobacco consumption. He brings a tradition whereby the Baal Shem Tov routinely recited a blessing over tobacco, having received this ruling through direct mystical channels from the Prophet Elijah and Ahijah the Shilonite, though the exact wording of the Besht’s blessing remains unknown to us. In principle, Rabbi Safrin encourages reciting over tobacco (referring presumably to snuff) the lesser-known blessing, “Who gave a pleasing aroma to herbs” (she-natan rei’aḥ tov ba-‘asavim). Regarding pipe smoking, he advances the bold assertion that an exceptionally outstanding Torah scholar is authorized and capable of instituting a dedicated blessing formula for smoking.

Nonetheless, due to halakhic conservatism and a commitment to communal consensus (“in my days, I never disregarded from the opinion of my colleagues”), he testifies that he personally refrained from reciting such a blessing. This discussion also reflects a keen awareness of Judaism’s late encounter with the American plant. He notes that the reason a blessing over tobacco was not commonly instituted is that the plant was unknown to the Sages of the Talmud when they formalized the liturgical system of blessings; had they known it, they might well have established a blessing for it. In his view, however, an individual theoretically retains the capacity to institute blessings for themselves, and this authority has not been completely blocked in the present era.

In Shulḥan ha-Ṭahor, three distinct and separate paragraphs are dedicated to this issue:

A. Over the smoking of titun [=tobacco] and the sniffing of tabak, it is not customary to recite a blessing. Since this matter did not exist in the days of the Gemara, we do not know how to formulate the proper wording of the blessing. The holy master, the divine Baal Shem Tov, would recite a blessing as he received from Elijah and from his master Ahijah the Shilonite, but the wording is hidden from us, and thus we do not bless.22

B. The Early Authorities (Rishonim) said that it is preferable to increase the number of blessings, and one who always multiplies such blessings will be blessed with one hundred blessings. One who recites a blessing over tabak: “Blessed [are You...], Who gave a pleasing aroma to herbs”, shall be blessed by the God of truth. Even though I, the impoverished one, have never in my days gone against the opinion of my colleagues, and all the more so the opinion of my masters, truth is more beloved than following conjectures and imaginings. For in the days of the Sages of the Gemara, each person formulated blessings for himself according to the matter, even if they were not instituted by the Men of the Great Assembly; for every wise scholar will understand according to his time, and will bless and be blessed with one hundred blessings by multiplying blessings appropriate to his time, for each and every moment, according to his enjoyment and according to his religious obligation.23

C. Our divine master, the Holy of Holies, the holy rabbi R. Israel ben Eliezer, the Baal Shem Tov, would recite a blessing over the smoking of the lyulke and over the sniffing of tabak into the nose. Because I do not know the wording he would recite, but only received a general tradition that he would make a blessing, I am not accustomed to reciting a blessing. Yet, an exceptionally outstanding Torah scholar can institute a blessing for himself over the smoking of a lyulke and the like, and he who blesses shall be blessed.24

In his study of Shulḥan ha-Ṭahor, Ariel Evan Mayse already pointed out several aspects of Rabbi Safrin’s Hasidic-spiritual world reflected in this ruling, which is relatively encouraging of a blessing over tobacco. The first is his flexible, religious attitude toward the institution of blessings, and the second is his adjudication of Halakha based on the personal practices (hanhagot) of the Baal Shem Tov.25

Beyond these points, however, one cannot overlook the connection between Rabbi Safrin’s discussion of the Besht’s tobacco blessing—received mystically from Elijah and Ahijah the Shilonite—and the accounts in his homiletic Hasidic texts regarding the Besht’s unique spiritual relationship with tobacco, which served him as a vehicle for intense mystical work. The tradition concerning the special blessing and the way this issue evidently preoccupies Rabbi Safrin—prompting him to deliberate on it three separate times in his halakhic code—must be understood against the backdrop of his personal spiritual worldview and that of the Besht. Rabbi Safrin appears somewhat self-contradictory on this issue: in one locus (the first paragraph), he rules that “we do not bless” over tobacco, whereas in the other loci (the final two paragraphs), he seems to encourage its recitation. This contradiction likely reflects the inherent tension between his allegiance to the classical halakhic tradition, which distances blessings from tobacco, and his singular attitude toward this mind-altering substance and the liturgical validation it deserved, as modeled by the founder of Hasidism.

7. When and for Whom Is Smoking Permitted?

Rabbi Safrin expresses his views in Shulḥan ha-Ṭahor in two additional halakhic queries regarding tobacco and smoking: the question of lighting a pipe from a tallow (ḥelev) candle and the question of smoking on festivals (Yom Tov). In both questions, which divided halakhic decisors (Kahana 1973, pp. 319–22, 24), Safrin rules strictly toward prohibition. While the question of smoking on the Festivals was widely disputed and the prevailing trend among later halakhic authorities leaned toward leniency, Safrin’s prohibition represents a relative stringency (chumra). The mystical value attributed to tobacco does not grant it meta-halakhic status, nor does it allow it to bypass the boundaries of religious law. Ultimately, the value ascribed to tobacco use is not self-contained but context-dependent (“set and setting”), and improper use can degrade it into the realm of the husks (kelipot).

Rabbi Safrin does not elaborate on the rationale for prohibiting the lighting of a pipe from a tallow candle, but the reason is documented in halakhic literature:26 tallow is an animal fat forbidden for consumption, and when lighting a pipe (“drinking tobacco”), the smoker effectively inhales the flavor and moisture of the forbidden substance.

Regarding the much-debated prohibition of smoking on Festivals, he explains that smoking is not considered a matter “equally shared by all souls” (shaveh le-khol nefesh). The halakhic prerequisite for permitting a labor (melakhah) related to food preparation on Festivals is that the enjoyment derived from it must be universally accessible to all people. In his view, smoking fails this criterion because women, as a rule, do not smoke. The emergence of cigarette-smoking women in his environment is dismissed by him as an unchaste social anomaly identified with gentile culture, which cannot shape Jewish halakhic norms. In this context, he presents the corporeal side of smoking, framing it in terms of the license and vulgarity exhibited by the surrounding gentile populace:

And it is forbidden to light the lyulke from a candle of tallow; and he should be careful not to smoke the lyulke on the first day of a Festival (Yom Tov). It was shown to me in a dream that this is not shaveh le-khol nefesh [equally shared by all souls], for we require shaveh le-khol nefesh for both men and women, and women do not smoke the lyulke, hence it is not shaveh le-khol nefesh. And if you find women who smoke cigarin [cigarettes], they are brazen ones acting in the manner of the gentiles, and it is licentiousness (peritzut). And they told me in a dream that so it was agreed upon in heaven.27

While the rabbinic-scholastic argumentation in the text is standard, the concluding sentence departs from the typical halakhic model: “And they told me in a dream that so it was agreed upon in heaven”. Rabbi Safrin’s rulings thus interweave metaphysical elements. As a mystic and visionary who operated in accordance with his visions, Rabbi Safrin occasionally introduced his dreams into the framework of halakhic adjudication elsewhere as well.28 However, this appears to be a unique instance where he explicitly incorporates a dream into the text of his legal code. Crucially, this halakhic stringency is explicitly anchored in Safrin’s mystical experience: the ultimate validation for his strict ruling is a heavenly revelation received in a dream. In this instance, mystical vision actively operates as the source and catalyst for halakhic stringency.

Furthermore, the rationale that smoking is not “equally shared by all souls” (shaveh le-khol nefesh) can be understood on a deeper level that directly reflects Safrin’s broader typology of smokers. Explicitly, Safrin bases his ruling on the fact that women do not smoke. However, reading between the lines, this claim resonates with the distinct categories of smokers identified throughout his writings: those who smoke out of idleness, those who smoke to aid concentration, and those for whom smoking is a vehicle for mystical unifications (yiḥudim). Because the value and effect of tobacco vary so radically from person to person, smoking is inherently non-universal and cannot be defined as a pleasure equally shared by all souls.

His halakhic dream is likely linked to the writings of R. Hayyim Yosef David Azulai (known as the Ḥida, 1724–1806), a major 18th-century halakhic authority and kabbalist, to whose commentary on the Shulḥan ‘Arukh (Birkei Yosef) Rabbi Safrin frequently refers in Shulḥan ha-Ṭahor. In that commentary, the Ḥida notes that his grandfather, R. Yitzḥak Azulai, likewise experienced a dream based upon which he prohibited smoking on Festivals.29 It is highly possible that this precedent influenced Rabbi Safrin’s parallel dream, which addressed the same subject and arrived at the identical conclusion. In either case, the outcome is that two major strands of Rabbi Safrin’s spiritual-mystical world—the governance of worldly affairs through visions and dreams, and the engagement with tobacco smoking—converged within a single halakhic text.

8. Conclusions

This article has offered an interdisciplinary and integrative re-reading of the halakhic rulings concerning tobacco formulated by Rabbi Yitzḥak Isaac Safrin, the Komarno Rebbe, in his work Shulḥan ha-Ṭahor, cross-referencing them with modern models from psychoactive substance research and indigenous cultures. In contrast to previous scholarly trends that tended to view tobacco consumption in early Hasidism as a purely technical practice and sought to sever it from its ritualistic use among Native Americans, we have demonstrated in this article how the study of the indigenous relationship to tobacco can contribute significantly to the analysis of its status within Hasidism.

This study utilized the anthropological work of Bernd Brabec de Mori, who distinguishes between the Western attitude toward tobacco (as negative and addictive) and the indigenous attitude in the Amazon basin (as positive and spiritual). Scholarship has previously addressed the dispute between Hasidism and its rabbinic opponents (Mitnagdim) in Eastern Europe regarding the significance of tobacco use. In this study, we have demonstrated the utility of applying the distinction between indigenous and Western approaches to tobacco in decoding this historical controversy. Furthermore, we applied this distinction to understand the halakhic adjudication in Shulḥan ha-Ṭahor concerning the permission to use tobacco during prayer. As we have shown, this ruling was distinctively shaped by the Komarno Rebbe’s spiritual view of tobacco.

The “Set and Setting” model, dominant in the psychedelic field—and whose significance research has demonstrated regarding the ritual use of tobacco and psychoactive substances generally—proved to be an effective interpretive tool for deciphering the Hasidic and halakhic-Hasidic texts of the Komarno Rebbe on tobacco use. According to this model, tobacco use must be evaluated not merely on the basis of the substance itself, but according to the context, environment, space, intention, and persona of the user. Acknowledging this approach has illuminated several texts in which Rabbi Safrin addresses tobacco, the Besht’s relationship to it, and the correct halakhic approach toward it. Additionally, drawing on studies of contemporary tobacco inhalation for spiritual purposes (Rapé), we have shed light on the practice of snuff-taking within Hasidism.

We have also observed how two of Rabbi Safrin’s distinct rulings on tobacco were influenced by his Hasidic-mystical world: his spiritual perception of tobacco as modeled by the founder of Hasidism, the Besht, permeated Rabbi Safrin’s halakhic discussion regarding the blessing over tobacco, and Rabbi Safrin’s halakhic ruling regarding tobacco smoking on Festivals was influenced by his visions and dreams. Nonetheless, the article emphasizes that the Komarno Rebbe consistently maintains the boundaries of Halakha: despite the spiritual virtues latent within tobacco, its use remains subject to the boundaries of the halakhic system, which constitutes the ultimate and binding “setting” of the Hasidic religious experience.