joined together and redivided. (4) The initials and final letters of several words are formed into separate words. (5) Every letter of a word is reduced to its numerical value, and the word is explained by another of the same quantity. (6) Every letter of a word is taken to be the initial or abbreviation of a word. (7) The twenty-two letters of the alphabet are divided into two halves; one half is placed above the other; and the two letters which thus become associated are interchanged. By this permutation, Aleph, the first letter of the alphabet, becomes Lamed, the twelfth letter; Beth becomes Mem, and so on. This cipher alphabet is called Albam, from the first interchangeable pairs. (8) The commutation of the twenty-two letters is effected by the last letter of the alphabet taking the place of the first, the last but one the place of the second, and so forth. This cipher is called Atbash. These hermeneutical canons are much older than the Kabbalah. They obtained in the synagogue from time immemorial, and were used by the Christian fathers in the interpretation of Scripture.[1] Thus Canon V., according to which a word is reduced to its numerical value and interpreted by another word of the same value, is recognized in the New Testament (cf. Rev. xiii. 18). Canon VI. is adopted by Irenaeus, who tells us that, according to the learned among the Hebrews, the name Jesus contains two letters and a half, and signifies that Lord who contains heaven and earth [יהוה שמים וארץ = ישו] (Against Heresies, ii. xxiv., i. 205, ed. Clark). The cipher Atbash (Canon VIII.) is used in Jeremiah xxv. 26, li. 41, where Sheshach is written for Babel. In Jer. li. 1, לב קמי, Leb-Kamai (“the heart of them that rise up against me”), is written for כשרים, Chaldea, by the same rule.
Exegesis of this sort is not the characteristic of any single circle, people or century; unscientific methods of biblical interpretation have prevailed from Philo’s treatment of the Pentateuch to modern apologetic interpretations of Genesis, ch. i.[2] The Kabbalah itself is but an extreme and remarkable development of certain forms of thought which had never been absent from Judaism; it is bound up with earlier tendencies to mysticism, with man’s inherent striving to enter into communion with the Deity. To seek its sources would be futile. The Pythagorean theory of numbers, Neoplatonic ideas of emanation, the Logos, the personified Wisdom, Gnosticism—these and many other features combine to show the antiquity of tendencies which, clad in other shapes, are already found in the old pre-Christian Oriental religions.[3] In its more mature form the Kabbalah belongs to the period when medieval Christian mysticism was beginning to manifest itself (viz. in Eckhart, towards end of 13th century); it is an age which also produced the rationalism of Maimonides (q.v.). Although some of its foremost exponents were famous Talmudists, it was a protest against excessive intellectualism and Aristotelian scholasticism. It laid stress, not on external authority, as did the Jewish law, but on individual experience and inward meditation. “The mystics accorded the first place to prayer, which was considered as a mystical progress towards God, demanding a state of ecstasy.”[4] As a result, some of the finest specimens of Jewish devotional literature and some of the best types of Jewish individual character have been Kabbalist.[5] On the other hand, the Kabbalah has been condemned, and nowhere more strongly than among the Jews themselves. Jewish orthodoxy found itself attacked by the more revolutionary aspects of mysticism and its tendencies to alter established customs. While the medieval scholasticism denied the possibility of knowing anything unattainable by reason, the spirit of the Kabbalah held that the Deity could be realized, and it sought to bridge the gulf. Thus it encouraged an unrestrained emotionalism, rank superstition, an unhealthy asceticism, and the employment of artificial means to induce the ecstatic state. That this brought moral laxity was a stronger reason for condemning the Kabbalah, and the evil effects of nervous degeneration find a more recent illustration in the mysticism of the Chasidim (Ḥăsīdīm, “saints”), a Jewish sect in eastern Europe which started from a movement in the 18th century against the exaggerated casuistry of contemporary rabbis, and combined much that was spiritual and beautiful with extreme emotionalism and degradation.[6] The appearance of the Kabbalah and of other forms of mysticism in Judaism may seem contrary to ordinary and narrow conceptions of orthodox Jewish legalism. Its interest lies, not in its doctrines, which have often been absurdly over-estimated (particularly among Christians), but in its contribution to the study of human thought. It supplied a want which has always been felt by certain types, and it became a movement which had mischievous effects upon ill-balanced minds. As usual, the excessive self-introspection was not checked by a rational criticism; the individual was guided by his own reason, the limitations of which he did not realize; and in becoming a law unto himself he ignored the accumulated experiences of civilized humanity.[7]
A feature of greater interest is the extraordinary part which this theosophy played in the Christian Church, especially at the time of the Renaissance. We have already seen that the Sephiric decade or the archetypal man, like Christ, is considered to be of a double nature, both infinite and finite, perfect and imperfect. More distinct, however, is the doctrine of the Trinity. In Deut. vi. 43, where Yahweh occurs first, then Ĕlōhēnū, and then again Yahweh, we are told “The voice though one, consists of three elements, fire (i.e. warmth), air (i.e. breath), and water (i.e. humidity), yet all three are one in the mystery of the voice and can only be one. Thus also Yahweh, Ĕlōhēnū, Yahweh, constitute one—three forms which are one” (Zohar, ii. 43; compare iii. 65). Discussing the thrice holy in Isaiah vi. 3, one codex of the Zohar had the following remark: “The first holy denotes the Holy Father, the second the Holy Son, and the third the Holy Ghost” (cf. Galatinus, De arcanis cathol. lib. ii. c. 3, p. 31; Wolf, Bibliotheca hebraica, i. 1136). Still more distinct is the doctrine of the atonement. “The Messiah invokes all the sufferings, pain, and afflictions of Israel to come upon Him. Now if He did not remove them thus and take them upon Himself, no man could endure the sufferings of Israel, due as their punishment for transgressing the law; as it is written (Isa. liii. 4), Surely He hath borne our griefs and carried our sorrows” (Zohar, ii. 12). These and similar statements favouring the doctrines of the New Testament made many Kabbalists of the highest position in the synagogue embrace the Christian faith and write elaborate books to win their Jewish brethren over to Christ. As early as 1450 a company of Jewish converts in Spain, at the head of which were Paul de Heredia, Vidal de Saragossa de Aragon, and Davila, published compilations of Kabbalistic treatises to prove from them the doctrines of Christianity. They were followed by Paul Rici, professor at Pavia, and physician to the emperor Maximilian I. Among the best-known non-Jewish exponents of the Kabbalah were the Italian count Pico di Mirandola (1463–1494), the renowned Johann Reuchlin (1455–1522), Heinrich Cornelius Agrippa of Nettesheim (1487–1535), Theophrastus Paracelsus (1493–1541), and, later, the Englishman Robert Fludd (1574–1637). Prominent among the “nine hundred theses” which Mirandola had placarded in Rome, and which he undertook to defend in the presence of all European scholars, whom he invited to the Eternal City, promising to defray their travelling expenses, was the following: “No science yields greater proof of the divinity of Christ than magic and the Kabbalah.” Mirandola so convinced Pope Sixtus of the paramount importance of the Kabbalah as an auxiliary to Christianity that his holiness exerted himself to have Kabbalistic writings translated into Latin for the use of divinity students. With equal zeal did Reuchlin act as the
- ↑ See F. Weber, Jüdische Theologie (1897), pp. 118 sqq.
- ↑ See C. A. Briggs, Study of Holy Scripture (1899), pp. 427 sqq., 570.
- ↑ Even the “over-Soul” of the mystic Isaac Luria (1534–1572) is a conception known in the 3rd century A.D. (Rabbi Rēsh Lakīsh). For the early stages of Kabbalistic theories, see K. Kohler, Jew. Ency. iii. 457 seq., and L. Ginzberg, ibid. 459 seq.; and for examples of the relationship between old Oriental (especially Babylonian) and Jewish Kabbalistic teaching (early and late), see especially A. Jeremias, Babylonisches in N. Test. (Leipzig, 1905); E. Bischoff, Bab. Astrales im Weltbilde des Thalmud u. Midrasch (1907).
- ↑ L. Ginzberg, Jew. Ency. iii. 465.
- ↑ See, especially, on the mystics of Safed in Upper Galilee, S. Schechter, Studies (1908), pp. 202–285.
- ↑ See the instructive article by S. Schechter, Studies in Judaism (London, 1896), pp. 1–55.
- ↑ See the discriminating estimates by S. A. Hirsch, Jew. Quart. Rev. xx. 50–73; I. Abrahams, Jew. Lit. (1906), ch. xvii.: Judaism (1907), ch. vi.
