Mikhaʾel Laiṭman

Bnei Baruch is criticized in Israel by three different groups.

First, some academic scholars of the Kabbalah in the tradition of Gershom Scholem regard Bnei Baruch's "pragmatic" Kabbalah as not philologically correct, nor true to the ancient sources. This criticism is mostly confined to the academic milieu.

Orthodox Jews insist that Kabbalah should be taught to qualified Jews only, and regard Bnei Baruch's dissemination of the Kabbalah to non-Jews as heresy and sacrilege.

Finally, some associated with the anti-cult movement regard Bnei Baruch as a cult, accusing it of a personality cult of its leader, of requiring exaggerated monetary contributions of disciples, and of brainwashing

As noted by Israeli scholars, Marianna Ruah-Midbar and Adam Klin-Oron, a unique feature of the Israeli anti-cult movement is that orthodox Jews and secular critics of religion strictly cooperate in several of its organizations, so that it is difficult to disentangle strictly religious and secular criticism of groups labeled there as "cults." As noted by Israeli scholar Boaz Huss, Bnei Baruch's practical, this-worldly approach to Kabbalah is very different from the academic reconstructions of Scholem and Moshe Idel and from Kabbalah as taught in the orthodox milieu, which explains part of the criticism. On the other hand, Italian scholar Massimo Introvigne has concluded, after a participant observation of the group in various countries, that Bnei Baruch students exhibit a disturbingly intense devotion to their teacher, and on-average devote more time and resources to the movement than followers of other spiritual movements. This attitude is common among cults. Criticism is also explained by the intense debate in Israel over who is "authorized" to define Kabbalah: academic scholars, Orthodox establishment people, or new, independent and unafilliated teachers such as Laitman.