Mysticism, Magic and Kabbalah in Ashkenazi Judaism: International Symposium held in Frankfurt a.M. 1991 3110137445, 9783110137446

Table of contents :
Introduction
The Language of the Mystics in Medieval Germany
Between Magic and Religion – Ashkenazi Hasidic Piety
Prayer Gestures in German Hasidism
Metatron and Shi’ur Qomah in the Writings of Haside Ashkenaz
Images of Women in Sefer Hasidim
Social and Mystical Aspects of Sefer Hasidim
Rabbi Judah The Pious’ Will in Halakhic and Kabbalistic Literature
Rabbi Judah the Pious as a Legendary Figure
An Anonymous Kabbalistic Commentary on Shir ha-Yihud
Kabbalisten, Ketzer und Polemiker. Das kulturelle Umfeld des Sefer ha-Nizachon von Lipman Mühlhausen
The Maharal of Prag and the Kabbalah
Zauberei und Zauber in der deutschen Literatur des 16. Jahrhunderts
Pico della Mirandola and the Beginnings of Christian Kabbala
A Profile of R. Naphtali Katz from Frankfurt and His Attitude Towards Sabbateanism
Rabbi Nathan Adler of Frankfurt and the Controversy Surrounding Him
Dr. Samuel Falk and the Eibeschuetz–Emden Controversy
The Mystical Visions of Rabbi Hyle Wechsler in the 19th Century
Meyer Heinrich Hirsch Landauer – Bible Scholar and Kabbalist
Kabbala-Rezeption in der Deutschen Romantik
Kabbala und Liebe. August Beckers Roman ,Des Rabbi Vermächtniß‘ (1866/67)

Citation preview

K A R L E R I C H G R O Z I N G E R · J O S E P H DAN MYSTICISM, MAGIC AND KABBALAH IN A S H K E N A Z I J U D A I S M

w DE

G

STUDIA JUDAICA FORSCHUNGEN ZUR W I S S E N S C H A F T DES JUDENTUMS

H E R A U S G E G E B E N VON E. L. E H R L I C H BASEL

BAND XIII

WALTER DE G R U Y T E R · B E R L I N · NEW YORK 1995

MYSTICISM, MAGIC AND KABBALAH IN ASHKENAZI JUDAISM INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM H E L D IN F R A N K F U R T a. M. 1991

E D I T E D BY

KARL ERICH GRÖZINGER AND

J O S E P H DAN

WALTER DE G R U Y T E R · B E R L I N · NEW YORK 1995

® Printed on acid-free paper which fails within the guidelines of the ANSI to ensure permanence and durability.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication

Data

Mysticism, magic, and kabbalah in Ashkenazi Judaism : international symposium held in Frankfurt a. M. 1991 / edited by Karl Erich Grözinger and Joseph Dan. (Studia Judaica ; Bd. 13) ISBN 3-11-013744-5 (library binding ; alk. paper) 1. Hasidism, Medieval — Congresses. 2. Judaism — Germany — Congresses. 3. Cabala — History — Congresses. 4. Mysticism — Judaism — Congresses. I. Grözinger, Karl-Erich. II. Dan, Joseph, 1935. III. Series: Studia Judaica (Walter de Gruyter & Co.) ; Bd. 13. BM316.M92 1995 296.8'33-dc20 95-12931 CIP

Die Deutsche Bibliothek — Cataloging-in-Publication

Data

Mysticism, magic, and kabbalah in ashkenazi Judaism : international symposium, held in Frankfurt a.M. 1991 / ed. by Karl Erich Grözinger and Joseph Dan. — Berlin ; New York : de Gruyter, 1995 (Studia Judaica ; Bd. 13) ISBN 3-11-013744-5 NE: Grözinger, Karl-Erich [Hrsg.]: GT

© Copyright 1995 by Walter de Gruyter & Co., D-10785 Berlin All rights reserved, including those of translation into foreign languages. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Printed in Germany Printing: Werner Hildebrand, Berlin Binding: Lüderitz & Bauer GmbH, Berlin

Inhalt Introduction

1

Joseph Dan The Language of the Mystics in Medieval Germany

6

Karl Erich Grözinger Between Magic and Religion - Ashkenazi Hasidic Piety . . . .

28

Ivan G. Marcus Prayer Gestures in German Hasidism

44

Elliot R. Wolfson Metatron and Shi'ur Qomah in the Writings of Haside Ashkenaz

60

Judith R. Baskin Images of Women in Sefer Hasidim

93

Ithamar Gruenwald Social and Mystical Aspects of Sefer Hasidim

106

Moshe Hallamish Rabbi Judah The Pious' Will in Halakhic and Kabbalistic Literature

117

Tamar Alexander Rabbi Judah the Pious as a Legendary Figure

123

Moshe Idei An Anonymous Kabbalistic Commentary on Shir ha-Yihud . .

139

Israel Jacob Yuval Kabbalisten, Ketzer und Polemiker Das kulturelle Umfeld des Sefer ha-Nizachon von Lipman Mühlhausen

155

Roland Goetschel The Maharal of Prag and the Kabbalah

172

VI

Inhalt

Barbara Könneker Zauberei und Zauber in der deutschen Literatur des 16. Jahrhunderts

181

Klaus Reichert Pico della Mirandola and the Beginnings of Christian Kabbah

195

Yehuda Liebes A Profile of R. Naphtali Katz from Frankfurt and His Attitude Towards Sabbateanism

208

Rachel Elior Rabbi Nathan Adler of Frankfurt Surrounding Him

223

and the

Controversy

Michal Oron Dr. Samuel Falk and the Eibeschuetz—Emden Controversy . .

243

Rivka Horwitz The Mystical Visions of Rabbi Hyle Wechsler in the 19th Century

257

Eveline Goodman-Thau Meyer Heinrich Hirsch Landauer - Bible Scholar and Kabbalist

275

Christoph Schulte in der Deutschen Romantik Kabbala-Rezeption Hans Otto Horsch Kabbala und Liebe August Beckers Roman ,Des Rabbi Vermächtniß' (1866/67) . .

295

314

Introduction

The Conference on Jewish Mysticism, Magic and Kabbalah in Ashkenazi Judaism, which met in Frankfurt a.M. in December 1991, was the Fifth International Conference on the History of Jewish Mysticism in Memory of Gershom Scholem. It was the first such conference to meet outside of Jerusalem, and the first to be dedicated to a geographical region rather than a historical period. The first four conferences in this series were convened in Jerusalem, in the halls of the Israel Academy of Sciences and the Humanities; Gershom Scholem was president of the Academy for many years. They were dedicated, in a chronological progression, to four key periods in the history of Jewish mysticism: The first concentrated on ancient Jewish mysticism, the Hekhalot and Merkabah literature; the second - to the beginnings of Jewish mysticism in medieval Europe; the third - to the Age of the Zohar, and the fourth - the Kabbalah in Safed and the Lurianic Kabbalah. Proceedings of these four conferences were published in Jerusalem, as volumes in the Jerusalem Studies in Jewish Thought, between 1986 and 1993. All the conferences were convened, in two-years intervals, near the date of Gershom Scholem's death, February 21st (1982). This time, the two-years interval was not observed, and the Fifth Conference met less than a year after the previous one. The Fourth conference, on Safed and Luria, met in Jerusalem in February 1991, during the Gulf War, when Israel was under attack by missiles from Iraq. It was an unusually successful conference - all the participants stayed throughout the lectures and debates, sitting with their gas masks on the table in front of them, and had nowhere else to go - all public activities and institutions having been suspended, and the Conference was the only show in town'. Despite the situation, the participants invited from the United States and Europe arrived safely and took part in the conference. This can be taken as an indication of the continued vitality and meaning of Gershom Scholem's revolutionary scholarly achievements: during the tenth year after his death, three such conferences were convened, in Jerusalem, in Frankfurt and the sixth, in Berlin (February 1992); all of them had well-defined subjects, full schedules, lively debates, and all their Proceedings were published in volumes which include detailed studies of central subjects concerning the history of Jewish mysticism. The Frankfurt Conference, the only one among the six dedicated to a region, expressed the intensification of interest in the history of Jewish

2

Introduction

mysticism in Germany and central Europe, the area known in Hebrew as Ashkenaz'. Some of the major developments which marked the emergence of Jewish mysticism in Europe in its various schools and tendencies occurred in Germany in the late twelfth and during the thirteenth century. After that, this area did not cease to be one of the centers of Jewish mystical creativity. Even when the main centers of Jewish mystical schools were in the Provence and in Spain, in Italy, in the Ottoman Empire and in Erez Yisrael, in Eastern Europe and elsewhere, there were always connections with groups and schools in Germany. Every major development elsewhere had an impact, an echo, or further development, in the German realm. The history of Jewish mysticism, even though its centers moved from sefardí' to ashkenazi' realms and back, was never exclusively sefardí' or ashkenazi'. Scores of important and influential Jewish mystics moved from sefardí' to ashkenazi' cultural realms and vice versa, carrying with them their local traditions, teachings and insights. Thus, the history of Jewish mysticism in Ashkenaz includes all the major themes and all the meaningful phenomena of Jewish mysticism as a whole. Almost half of the lectures delivered on the conference, and the studies presented in this volume, relate fully or in part to one of the most meaningful aspects of Jewish mystical creativity during the Middle Ages: The circles of the Ashkenazi Hasidim, or Jewish pietism in Medieval Germany, which flourished mainly in the second half of the twelfth century and during the thirteenth. This phenomenon, first comprehensively presented in the third chapter of Gershom Scholem's Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism, is different from all other cultural developments in Judaism in the Middle Ages by being centered in Germany, and reflecting the specific circumstances and cultural characteristics of the Jews in central Europe. Its main schools and circles were in the Rhineland, but it spread, on the one hand, east to the German heartland and to Bohemia and further east, and on the other - to northern France. It is the most prominent Ashkenazi' spiritual development in an era in which most of Jewish creativity in the spiritual realms was centered in southern Europe, in the Provence, Spain, Italy, Northern Africa, Egypt, Byzantium and Erez Yisrael. The writings of the circles of these esoterics, mystics and pietists which are grouped, rather inaccurately, under the title of Ashkenazi Hasidism' remain still, to a large extent, in manuscripts. In the last two decades several treatises were published in traditional, inaccurate editions. The Ashkenazi Hasidic heritage had a lasting impact on AshkenaziJewish culture in the following centuries, becoming one of the characteristics of this culture, and some of its ideas, symbols and methodologies were integrated in the Kabbalah and became an integral part of Kabbalistic traditions up to modern times. The Frankfurt conference, and the volume presented here, is especially important, because of the complete absence of this meaningful phenomenon

Introduction

3

from the history of religious cultures in medieval Germany as presented in contemporary scholarship. It seems that most scholars in this field are not aware even of its existence, and no attempt has been made to integrate it within the comprehensive presentations of mysticism and piety in central Europe in the High Middle Ages. The material concerning Ashkenazi Hasidism is extant mainly in Hebrew; almost no text has been translated into German (or English, though a French translation of the Sefer Hasidim has been published recently), and most of the scholarly work in this field has been done in Hebrew. In the last few years a very modest change seems to be occurring, one of its expressions being the inclusion of this subject in the Proceedings of a previous conference in Frankfurt, dedicated to Jewish culture and history in Germany (edited by Κ. E. Grözinger1). There is some reason to believe that today historians of Medieval Germany are more aware of the Jewish aspect of their subject, and are willing to include it in their studies, in contradiction to the prevailing attitude before, during and after the Nazi regime and the Holocaust. There are very few books written in Germany in the High Middle Ages which reflect in such detail and intensity the life and culture of the period, social and economic structures and conventions, popular and intellectual beliefs, customs and relationships, attitudes towards minorities and gender, concepts of education and of property, and many other subjects, like the Sefer Hasidim. Despite the deep gulf separating Jews and Christians in this period, which followed immediately - and reflected - the persecutions and massacres of the period of the crusades - Jews and Christians did live together in dozens of towns in Germany, and even the contradictions reflected historical reality and cultural trends. Any separation between the study of these communities severely cripples historical understanding of both of them. Attempts by scholars in Jewish studies to integrate the study of Jewish culture in Germany in the Middle Ages within the parallel developments in German society as a whole were partial and sporadic, and did not lead to a comprehensive understanding, from the other side, it seems, even such incomplete endeavors are missing. It is hoped that this conference, and this volume, will contribute, however modestly, to increase interest in this subject among the scholarly community in Germany and enhance the possibility of the emergence of truely balanced and correct historical studies of this period and this subject. The studies in this volume survey some chapters of the history of Kabbalah in Germany from the thirteenth century onwards, and several other studies deal with one of the most traumatic, and historically meaningful, off-shoots of Jewish mysticism: the messianic movement of Shabbatianism in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. This cataclysmic event, which was centered in the Ottoman empire, began a century and a half of turmoil and ' Judentum im deutschen Sprachraum, Frankfurt a.M. 1991.

4

Introduction

controversy, which reached and divided Jewish intellectuals and mystics in several Jewish centers in Germany. The intense messianic awakening in this period met and clashed with the increasing interest of Jews in the German culture around them, and in the eighteenth century Germany was the scene in which the most dynamic and vibrant elements of Jewish tradition were in constant conflict with the emerging movement of the Jewish enlightenment. The radical heretic Frankist movement had its center in Germany at the same time that the most important works of Moses Mendelssohn and other enlightenment thinkers were written there. In the nineteenth century, while Eastern Europe was engulfed by the schism between the new Hasidic movement and its opponents, both of them representing new phases in the development of Jewish mysticism, German Jewry began the scholarly study of the Kabbalah. Attitudes towards Jewish mysticism differed categorically: in the 1840s Heinrich Graetz began to publish a series of studies of ancient and medieval Jewish mystical works, motivated by a definite negative attitude towards this phenomenon, and at the same time a young scholar, M. H. Landauer, was so engulfed by the mystical works of Abraham Abulafia and other mystics whose writings he read in the manuscript libraries, that he became a mystic himself. During the next halfcentury, the rationalistic and critical attitude towards the mystical aspect of Judaism increased, and when Gershom Scholem started his scholarly enterprise in the second decade of the twentieth century it was the established attitude, with few exceptions. Gershom Scholem represents, to a very large extent, the combination and fusion of the two conflicting attitudes towards Jewish mysticism which marked nineteenth-century German Jewry: In his rebellious character, he contradicted the norms of the surrounding society and developed a deep empathy towards the Hebrew language and Jewish tradition, including the Kabbalah, attitudes which led him to adopt Zionism and to immigrate to Erez Yisrael. On the other hand, he was completely integrated in the critical, scholarly concepts of the historical-philological schools of the European academic world and the scholarly studies of the Wissenschaft des Judentums school. He criticized their enmity to the mystical aspect of Judaism in the harshest terms, but used their methodologies in order to establish a historical, precise picture of the development of the various traditions of Jewish mystical creativity. This fusion did not develop easily: whem Scholem began his work he was so influenced by the mystical treatises he was studying that he accepted, with reservations, the Kabbalists' own view of the antiquity of their traditions. Only gradually did he adopt a more rigorous historical approach, which enabled him to identify the medieval character of most Kabbalistic traditions. He thus moved from writing based on faith to a reliance on textual and historical analysis, rejecting Kabbalistic orthodoxy, and laying the foundation for modern scholarship in the field of Jewish mysticism.

Introduction

5

The centrality of Ashkenaz both in the history of Jewish mysticism and in the study of the subject in the last century and a half justify the insistance on including Germany in the contemporary map of scholarship in the field of Jewish mysticism. The Frankfurt conference, and the Berlin conference which followed it, should be viewed within this framework. There are, today, several scholars in major universities in Germany, some of whom are represented in this volume, who dedicate their efforts to this subject, in full or part. German universities have awarded advanced degrees in this subject to young scholars, and several scholarly projects concerning Hebrew mystical texts have been carried out or are in preparation. It is hoped that this volume will serve as an encouragement for the continuation of this process. The Frankfurt symposium could not have taken place without the substantial support of the Fritz Thyssen Stiftung in Köln which, moreover, has made this publication possible, thus promoting the study of Jewish mysticism most effectively. The Johann Wolfgang Goethe University of Frankfurt a.M., the partner

university of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, hosted this partnership conference. Since music is an integral element of Jewish mysticism, the conference culminated in a magnificent concert of Hebrew hymns and cantatas originating from the spirit of the Kabbalah, planned by Professor Israel Adler from the Hebrew University and performed by the Junge Kantorei Frankfurt am Main and the Ensemble La Fantasia directed by Joachim Martini. The concert was recorded and broadcast by the Bayerischer Rundfunk in Munich. This moving mystical-musical experience was made possible by the generous help of the Jehoshua and Hanna Bubis-Stiftung, Frankfurt a.M., the City of Frankfurt and the Stiftung Allgemeine Hypothekenbank

in Frankfurt.

The editors of this publication, who organized the symposium, would like to express their thanks to the above mentioned foundations and donators, as well as to the scholars and musicians whose support and work contributed to the instructive and fruitful days at the home of a former Ir we-Em be Yisrael.

Karl Erich Grözinger Frankfurt a.M./ Potsdam

Joseph Dan Jerusalem/Berlin

Joseph Dan The Language of the Mystics in Medieval Germany ι

The emergence of Jewish esoteric and mystical speculation in medieval Germany, especially in the Rhineland, in the middle of the 12th century, signifies a turning-point in the history of the Hebrew language. The authors of the treatises written at that time and in the following century had, in many cases, to develop their own language and linguistic norms, having no precedent in the history of Jewish thought for expressing the contents which they wished to present1 . In many respects, the pietist-mystical circles of that time, known as the Ashkenazi Hasidim, were revolutionaries in their attitude towards language more than in any other aspect of their creativity. Some outlines of this revolution will be discussed in the following presentation, serving as a beginning of the study of this subject, in the framework of a more general investigation of the mystical language of the Jewish spiritualists throughout the ages. It should be stated from the very beginning of this discussion that the ananlysis we present would have been completely ununderstandable to the medieval scholars and writers who participated in this process, for the simple reason that they did not have neither the concept nor a word for "mysticism", 1

The main two avenues of Hebrew expression in the early centuries of the Middle Ages were the

tradition of halakhic discussion, which developed uninterrupted since talmudic times (with a brief interlude in the 10th-l 1th centuries, when many halakhic works were written in Arabic by the Babylonian Gecnim), and the homiletical-aggadic, which also continued structures developed in Late Antiquitiy. These were joined, in a somewhat later development, by the poetical language of the piyyut. Theological discourse in Hebrew began mainly in the 12th century in Spain, under the impact of Arabic and Judeo-Arabic philosophy, hi Germany we do not find writings of this nature until the middle of the 12th century, and the Aáikenaá writers did not have any example to follow, and, so it seems, they did not seek one. The style and structure of their works is highly original, both in the esoteric, theological and mystical works, and in their ethical writings, like the Sefer Hasidim. See concerning this Ch. Rabin, "The Tense and Mood System of the Hebrew Sefer Hasidim", Papers of the Fourth World Congress of Jewish Studies, Π, Jerusalem, 1968, pp. 113-116, and the Ph.D. thesis on the language of Sefer Hasidim by Simha Kogut, The Hebrew University, Jerusalem, 1966.

Language of the Mystics

7

and therefore the subject of "mystical language" would have been extremely mysterious, if not mystical, in their eyes. Mysticism developed in Judaism without any consciousness on the part of its creators as to its meaning and nature. Hebrew, like Arabic, does not have a word equivalent even partially to the Latin-Christian term of "mysticism". Any identification of a certain Jewish religious phenomenon as "mystical" is a modern scholarly decision, which relies on the modern scholar's understanding of the term; there is no intrinsic demand in the texts themselves for such a usage. An arbitrary element is always combined, therefore, with any discussion of "Jewish mysticism": the very existence of such a subject is the result of applying a terminology and concept which developed outside Jewish culture into the realm of Jewish phenomena. The concept of "mysticism" was absent from the world-view of the thinkers and writers in Jewish culture in Middle Ages, but the concept of "language" was very well-known to them; yet, their basic attitude towards language was so different from our modern concepts of this subject, that the gulf separating them from us was even greater than concerning the concept of "mysticism". In order to make an attempt to understand their use of language, it is necessary to forsake our modern notions and to adapt ourselves to the one governing the thoughts of the medieval writers we are studying. The attempt to understand the meaning of human language, especially the relationship between a linguistic expression and the reality represented by it (if any, according to some) has been, in the last three generations, one of the most central and important subject of modern investigation, in philosophy, literary criticism, psychology, and of course, linguistics2. One may even say that this problem united these four fields of scholarship into an inherently unified one. The problem of language often was recast as the problem of a text, and its relationship to an existence outside it. The study of language and the study of text can be described as the paramount concern of many modern schools of thought, not the least among them being the now-notorious Deconstruction3. 2 No attempt Aould be made here to describe this vast and variegated field of inquiry, to which hundreds of sdiolars in dozens of schools and directions had contributed and continue to do so. The basic questions in a contemporary manna· were presented by several schools of linguists and philosophas in France, Germany, England and the United States, whose works are regarded still as relevant in their positioning of the fnigpia of the relation&ip between the sign and the signifier. See, e^ecially, the studies collected by C A Raschke in: Deconstruction Crossroad, 1982; and compare: M.C. Taylor, De-constructing

and Theology, New York:

Theology, New York: Crossroad and

Scholars Press, 1982. Attempts have been going on now for nearly a generation to find a way to employ Derrida s methodology, developed mainly for the purpose of the study of literature and philosophy, to the field of religion and theology.

J. Dan

8

Yet all modern approaches to the problem of language are based on one fundamental assumption: Language is the expression of human wish to communicate, and it evolved together with the evolvement of human race and its culture4. Following some Greek ideas, language can be regarded, sometimes, as the element defining human beings. The concept of language in Judaism in general and in Jewish mysticism and esotericism in particular, is completely different: First and foremost, language is not a human phenomenon. Jewish tradition states this emphatically and clearly: Before the creation of the world, God occupied himself by tying adorning crowns to the letters of the alphabet5. Not only language, but the text existed before the creation: The Torah came into being long before anything else, cosmos or Man, ever existed6. Language and text had their independent, autonomous existence within the divine world before any kind of human communication could be conceived. They had - and have had ever since - a meaning unrelated to human needs. The great discovery of some modern philosophers - the independence of the text and the irrelevance of its context - has been made by the talmudic sages a millenium and a half ago. Language is not an attempt to describe existing things; rather, existing things are the unfolding of powers which lie within language. When language evolved into a means of communication, it did so in a completely different manner than is conceived in the concepts of language as a human tool. It was language which served God as the tool of creation. God pronounced the words - or the text - "let there be light", and "there was light". There is no mistake, no place for hesitation, which came first, language or reality, or concerning the nature of the relationship between language and the subject to which it is related. Language is the source, reality is the outcome. God's pronouncing of several words, collected in the first chapter of Genesis, brought forth all existence. Reality is language-dependent, and it derives its ontology from a force intrinsic to language, a force put into it by God millenia before the actual process of creation. The talmudic sages put this idea into the formula, that God was looking at the Torah when he created the world7; that 4

The most famous school in this field, that of Noam Chomsky, presented the most detailed hypothesis

coocering the relationship between the development of humanity as a species and the development of language; this thesis was the catalyst of intense linguistic, anthropological and philosophical study in the last three decades. However, as much as I could see, the possibility of a super-human origin of language, which will connect these studies with the understanding of scriptural religions has not been explored 5

hayah qosher ketarim la- 'otiyot, B. Menahot 29b, in the description of Moses' vision.

6

See Bereshit Rabba 1,4 (p. 6, Theodor-Albeck edition), and compare Sifrey, 'Ekev, 37.

n

hayah mistakel ba-torah uvore 'et ha'olam, Bereshit Rabba, 1, 1 (p. 2) and many paralells listed by Theodor there, and compare especially Λ voi De Rabbi Nathan version I, di. 31.

Language of the Mystics

9

is, the text served as a blue-print for the emergent reality. When God sought an abode within the created world, he instructed the people of Israel to create for him a tabernacle in the desert. The Talmud explains how this was done: Bezalel, entrusted with the project, "was knowledgeable concerning the letters by which the world was created"8. The tabernacle was a small replica of the cosmos, and in order to build it the secret of creation - the letters of the alphabet - had to be known. The same blue-print was used by Solomon in the building of the Temple in Jerusalem. This concept of the creation was summarized, in a homiletical manner, in one sentence in the Mishnah, Avot ch. 5: "The world was created by ten utterances"9; ten sentences, a brief text, spoken by God, brought forth all existence. This basic concept, common to the Bible10 and the Talmud alike, did not serve as a central element in Jewish religious life during the biblical period. At that time, God was ever-present, to the patriarchs, in the Temple, in the revelation to the people of Israel, the judges, the prophets, and constantly gave direct answers to changing needs. This period is described as one in which a direct approach of God to Man and of Man to God was possible. The central biblical figures are those to whom God spoke, or who were used by God to address the world. The Bible is a record of the many revelations to individuals and groups, directing their religious life. In this period, therefore, the text did not have a paramount meaning and importance; past revelations paled in front of God's constant presence and availability. A radical change in this situation occured when Judaism adopted the notion that the era of prophecy had ended, early in the history of the second temple11. From then on, God did not have a constant presence, living within the people of Israel, guiding and directing them at every stage of history. The only means of knowing God's wishes became the record of the old revelations, the text, the Torah, the scriptures, cast in language. To reach God, one has to study and interpret the old texts and discern from them directions concerning present needs. A revelation originally intended for a specific need at a specific historical juncture became eternal truth, capable of instructing countless generations, if properly exegeted. Exegesis thus became the substitute of revelation; text has become the eternal fountain of divine truth. At first, this transition from revelation to text was not universally accepted within Judaism. The phenomenon of pseudepigraphic literature demonstrates Q yodea ' hayah beza} 'el le-zaref otiyot she-nivre u bahen shamayim wa-arezt see B. Berakhot 55b. 9

be- asarah ma amarot nivra ha- olam, M. Avot 5:1. bi-devar H' shamayim ne'esu uve-ruahpiw

kol zeva'am (Ps. 33:6, and compare Bereshit Rabba

4,6 (p. 30). 11 Concerning this see especially E. E. Urbadi, Halabkah and Prophecy, Tarbiz vol. 18 (1947), pp. 1-27.

J. Dan

10

the adherence of segments of Judaism to the need for constant, direct divine messages. As these could not be contemporary, because of the absence of prophecy in the present, new revelations were ascribed to old, biblical figures like Abraham, Isaiah, Ezra, Adam, Enoch - signifying that inspired people could not present their message directly as coming from God, but had to hide behind the curtain of pseudepigraphy, submerging their own individuality and pretending to present divine revelations given long ago to "legitimate" carriers of such messages12. Another result of the absence of prophecy, this one becoming a constant element in Jewish culture, was the claim that ancient divine revelation was not wholly incorporated in the scriptures; parts of it had been transmitted by God orally, and have been preserved as an oral tradition, passing by God orally, and have been preserved as an oral tradition, passing by word of mouth from generation to generation13. The concept of the Oral Law was added to the Written Law, thus enlarging the body of scriptures, and making the Mishnah - the most important direct presentation of that oral tradition an integral part of scriptures. The Mishnah thus became a text, to be regarded as encompassing eternal truth, subject to hermeneutical exegesis like the written law itself. These developments, mainly occuring during the period of the Second Temple and in the first generations after its destruction, marked the increasing centrality of the concepts of text and language in Jewish religious culture. Similar developments occured in early Christianity: In the first period of its appearance, Christianity represented a direct, revolutionary revelation of God. This, however, was quickly followed by the appearance of scriptures, and besides it - a body of pseudepigraphic literature, and the concept of an oral tradition preserved in the structure of the Church. Soon enough, Christianity came to rely on exegesis of ancient revelation as much as Judaism did, and even the Pope's dicta were supported by exegetical reliance on the old texts. One peculiar aspect of the emergence of early Christianity was the fact that some of the creators of Christian scriptures did not rely on the living word of God alone, but felt the necessity to couple it with an exegetical reliance on the old revelations as well. The gospel of St. Mathew is the clearest example: Witnessing and testifying to the employs of Christ and presenting his message was not enough for Mathew, he had to show that everything that Christ said 12

See P. Schäfer, Synopse zur Hekhalot Literatur, Tübingen J.C.B.Mohr (Paul Siebeck) 1981, par.

16,59; compare the edition of the Hebrew apocalypse of Enoch by Philip Alexander,ed., in: The Old Testament Pseudepigraphia, ed. J.H. Charlesworth, Garden City, New York, Doubleday, vol.1 (1983). The development cf the concept of the Oral Law has been described in detail by E.E. Urbach, Hazal, Jerusalem: Maga es Press, pp. 270-278 et passim.

Language of the Mystics

11

and did had its roots in the ancient revelations to Isaiah, Michah, Hosea and the other Old Testament prophets. The veracity and sanctity of the Christian truth had to be proved not only by the direct appearance of divine presence, but also by proving that it conformed, and, indeed, revealed the true meaning, of older revelations14. This aspect of exegesis became more and more central and dominant in the development of Christianity; the very concept of the Christian scriptures, including the Old and New Testament, signifies this unification of new revelation and the new interpretation of the old one. Those early Christians who refused to accept this unification -namely, the Gnostics15 - were regarded as heretics and were cast out of the structure of the young Church.

II The most important aspect of the concept of a divine language, encompassing eternal truth, is the infinity of meaning of language. As long as language is regarded as a human, communicative tool, it is bound by human abilities in its ranges of meanings. Language cannot go farther than human senses, human emotions, human intellect. There must be, in one way or another, a human counterpart to every aspect revealed or denoted by language. But if language is a divine expression, it must represent the infinity of God. As God's truth is inexhaustible, so is the meaning of language. The very concept of the components of language is radically different when it is conceived as a divine attribute. When language is a human communicative means, it must be directed towards one goal only: communicating meaning. In order to communicate, meaning should be as clear, precise and unambiguous as possible. All the components of which language is constructed - the various sounds, the letters, their shape, their sequence - are all directed towards conveying meaning. But when language is a divine attribute, how can Man declare some aspects of language more important, more meaningful than others? If language was revealed by God first and foremost not as a tool of communication but as a tool of creation, the whole level of meaning cannot be the central one to its essence. From the point of view of meaning, for instance, the form of the letters of the alphabet Christianity differed, however, from Judaism in its treatment of the sacred text because of the specific historical circumstances which brought it to sanctify the divine language in translation, in languages which had vast treasures of human creativity cast in them, namely Greek and Latin. I discussed in detail the meaning of this differmce in my forthcoming book, The Mystical Language. 15

The attitude erf' the Gnostics towards scriptures has been studied by several scholars; see, for

instance, the editor 's detailed notes to the gnostic texts in: Bmtley Layton: The Gnostic Scriptures, A New Translation with Annotations and Introductions, Gardai City, New York: Doubleday, 1987.

12

J. Dan

is immaterial; knowledge can be transmitted using every kind of letters Hebrew, Greek, Latin, Chinese signs or Sumerian cuneiform or ancient Egyptian hieroglyphs. The sounds are also unimportant - the same message can be transmitted if a table is called Tisch or shulhan. In a divine language, however, nothing can be accidental. Divine truth is conveyed by every aspect of the language - all levels and inflections of sound, shapes of letters, number of letters and many others to be discussed below. A language which is used by people for communication purposes does not have to be universal. The Etruscans are entitled to their own language as do the Japanese. But if language is divine, there can be only one language, the true divine one, as there is only one, true und universal God. Other languages, the book of Genesis takes pains to demonstrate, are the result of human impertinence and heresy, and the resulting confusion sent by God to prevent the human enterprise of the Tower of Babylon. No Jew throughout history, and almost no Christian16, ever doubted that the original, divine language was Hebrew. God created the universe by saying yehi or and not by saying "Let there be light". These two statements differ by their sound, shape, length, etc., and only the former can achieve any creative purpose. Another biblical demonstration of the uniqueness of the divine language is the episode in which Adam names the animals. Later interpretations, which do not diverge meaningfully from the literal text, clearly indicate that the animals had their names from the very beginning, Adam only recognizing them and pronouncing them17. Indeed, the names preceeded the actual existence of the animals and are their source of being; Adam understood this and demonstrated his wisdom in front of the angels, but the names themselves were independent of him and of his knowledge. If Hebrew is the divine language, used by God for creative, communicative and other purposes (like amusing himself by adorning them before the creation), then all aspects of the Hebrew language are a part of the divine infinite truth. Hebrew does not have the concept of vowels as Latin languages do, so there are special markings for the sounds, the nequdot. In a communicative language these marks are relatively unimportant: They assist children when learning to read, but are forgotten when a better knowledge of language is acquired. But if the language is divine, there can be no reason to regard these marks as secondary in any way, and they are an integral, equal 16

The exception is anycne who joins the father in Alabama who stated in a PTA meeting considering

the study of a foreign language at school: "If English was good enough for Jesus Christ, it is good enough for me". 17

Compare the analysis of this episode by Walter Benjamin, "Über Sprache übeihaupt und übra· die

Sprache des Menschen", in: Gesammelte Schriften, ed by R. Tiedemann, H. Schweppaihäuser, Frankfurt a.M. 1972, 143-156, who was probably informed about the midrashic treatments of the subject.

Language of the Mystics

13

part of the means by which divine truth may be discerned within language. In a similar way, the musical signs, the te'amim, which denote the melody by which the Torah portions and their accompanying haftarot are to be read in the synagogue, are a part of language equal to any other, the divine message can be found in them like in any other aspect of language. These three elements - the letters, the vowel signs and the melody signs all have specific shapes and forms, which cannot be accidental; they were designed by God together with the totality of the linguistic enterprise. A word may derive its meaning from the combination of all these elements. As Hebrew is the only language, at least the only divine one, the shapes of its letters and other signs are intrinsic to it, being a part of its semiotic message. The fact that the sh has three heads and the segol three dots are principal aspects of the language of God. To these aspects one has to add another, central one in Jewish tradition the crowns, tagin, adorning the letters. This element, postulated as ancient by talmudic tradition, has been employed by many mystics and non-mystics in their analysis of the divine messages. One of the earliest systematic users was the anonymous (third century?) author of the Sefer Yezira, who described the process by which God adorned the letters with these crowns as the mystical transition which enabled the letters to become a creative power; the "crowning " of each letter gave it the power and dominance concerning the aspect of creation to which it is responsible18. Another aspect of the divine character of language is the numerical one, often, mistakenly, understood as "mystical". Hebrew, like Latin, Greek and other ancient languages, did not have a specific system of signs denoting numbers; only in the last two centuries did Hebrew writers adopt the current numerical signs, which were brought to Europe by the Arabs in the Middle Ages. Before this separation, letters were used to denote numbers, as they did in Greek and Latin. This meant that every Hebrew letter had a numerical meaning, a simple, technical fact carrying no more mystical significance than the use of X for ten in Latin. But if language is divine, the fact that a certain letter denotes a certain number, or that a certain word has a certain numerical value, becomes a part of the divine design of language, and carries a meaning as important as any other segment of language. The analysis of the numerical meaning of letters, words and sentences is therefore equal to the analysis of shapes of letters or the crowns adorning them. 1R The author of the Sefer Yezira used the literal meaning of tagin as α-owns to denote not only grandeur and adornment but also power, mastery and government. According to him, whai God "crowned" a letter it also gave it dominion an some aspect of creation and existence. The process of "crowning" is thus conceived as one in whidi the mystical power of creation was inserted into the letters, enabling them to bring forth, and than to nurture and sustain, the various realms of worldly and human existence.

14

J. Dan

A more complicated result of the concept of language as divine is the implication concerning the order of the letters of the alphabet within words and sentences. When God selected a certain order of letters in the Torah to convey his message, that order is not reflected only in the sequence of letters combined into words which represent the literal meaning of the message. The fact that he chose a certain letter to begin the whole Torah, and another to end it, is, of course, meaningful; but this is true also about the beginning of every verse and every word, or the last letter of every verse and every word. Thus, acronyms, creating words from the first letters of a sequence of words, or from the last letters, or from letters in the middle, are part of the divine message as much as the ordinary arrangement of the letters. "The signature of God is Truth", says the Midrash, following the last three letters of the last three words in the description of the creation in Genesis which combine into the Hebrew term for "truth" 19 . Once the placing of letters becomes a subject for the analysis of the divine message incorporated in language, the number of possibilities increases tremendously. It cannot be an accident that 21 letters are used to convey the ten commandments, and one, t, is absent. The number of times a certain letter appears in a certain section of the Bible becomes meaningful, as well as the absence of a letter, or even the final form of one of the letters mnzpk. The Ashkenazi Hasidim wrote complete treatises on such subjects. All these examples refer to the pictures of letters, words and verses as they are presented in the sriptures, and this alone opens, as we have seen, infinite possibilities of interpretation, never to be exhausted. Yet, all these methods take the picture of scriptures as a frozen one, still photographs, to use a modern metaphor. The situation becomes much more complicated once a dynamic element is introduced, the most potent instrument of the interpreter of a sacred text in a divine language: the concept of the transformation of one letter to another, one word to another - temurah. This concept, found already in the Bible 20 , is based on another aspect of the sanctity of language: The sanctity of the order of the 22 letters of the alphabet. The sequence of letters is an inherent, unchangeable characteristic; every letter has its place in the order which reflects its being no less than its shape or sound. Alef is meaningfully the first, as bet is the second and taw the 19

B. Shabat 55a; Yoma 69b; Sanhédrin 64a. The talmudic sources do not give the obvious reason,

which is found in later statements. See below bbl-shshk; it seems that the concept of notarikcn, in its minimal fashion of writing a poem beginning with the letters of the alphabet in sequence, thus denoting the intrinsic meaningfulness of the ordo- of the letters, is also biblical (Psalms 119, etc.). Concerning the numerical value, interestingly enough it is not apparent in the Old Testament, but is present in the New Testament, the famous number of the beast of the apocalypse, whidi is a gematria on the Hebrew value of nrwn qsr, neron qesar, = 666.

Language of the Mystics

15

last (it should be noted that the basic order was preserved in most of the alphabet systems that evolved from the Phenician; the letters yklmn are found in the same order in every language, witness JKLMN, and, of course, the first ones). This order is therefore divine, and contains divine meaning. But if so, the letters may be moved one step, or two, or 11, or 21, and find their equal in another column; that is, one can use the fixed order to substitute another letter for one as long as one retains the correct order. For instance, one can write consistently taw instead of alef, bet instead of shin, gimel instead of resh, and so on, or the reverse, and receive the name of the kingdom of Babylonia, bbl as shshk, which was done in the Bible. One can move just one notch, and write bet instead of alef, gimel instead of bet (or vice versa), and any other change based on the sequence. In fact, this is very similar to coding made out of numbers, when individual numbers, or groups of them, are substituted systematically for others. It can be done with numbers, because their sequence is both fixed and meaningful, it is no accident that 9 follows 8, and therefore the sequence can be tempered with because the fixed order gives it a backbone to return to. Temurah thus enables the Hebrew interpreter, assisted by the ancient examples, to substitute any letter for any other, and therefore every word or sentence for every other. Paradoxically, because of the divine nature of language, Man has acquired complete mastery of its meanings, and anything he does with these letters reflects divine truth. Midrashic interpretation, which in classical Judaism, in the talmudic period, utilized only a small fraction of these possibilities, still included all the principles, enabling the medieval homilist and exegete to reach the fullness of the employment of these enormous possibilities. Language, in this sense, contains the imago dei no less than the human form does. And as the human form has infinite variations, contradicting meanings and deeds, yet all of them are, in one way or another, a reflection of the divine, so does language: Every aspect of it can be presented and analyzed in infinite ways, retaining within it the kernel of divine truth in all its countless metamorphoses. This, it should be emphasized again, has nothing to do with mysticism. It is the nature and the essence of a scriptural religion faced with its own sacred texts in their original, pre-human and pre-cosmic language 21 . It should be noted here that the most important Jewish investigation of religious language in antiquity (and probably, in all of the history of Jewish thought), the Book of Creation (Sefer Yezira), did not utilize most of these possibilities when presenting a system of scientific thought describing the emergence of the cosmos from God, using the letters as instruments. The author of this book did not use one gematria, one acronym nor any other of Ίλ

Concerning the position of the Sefer Yezira on the subject of sacred language and its transformation of the laws of language (that is, grammar), into the laws of nature, engulfing the cosmos, time and Man, seenowmy study in Jerusalem Studies in Jewish Thought vol. 11,1992.

16

J. Dan

the numerous possibilities listed above. He did use, in a most central manner, the temurah, but only one aspect of it -changing the order of letters in the word to acquire another, but without following the system of the sequence of the letters ng to ng ', to explain the existence of good and evil in the cosmos. He did not use the shape of the letters, nor the vocalization marks, nor the tagin, etc. All these systems were offered and remained potential in Jewish thought, to be used, by choice and following personal taste, by anyone who wished and to the extent he wished.

Ill

As stated above, this is not mysticism. The Midrash is a methodology, which can be employed to any purpose. Several great Jewish rationalistic philosophers in the Middle Ages employed such systems for their own purposes, which were scientific and rational. Where is the borderline? When does Midrash transform into a via mystical The key concept in this case is, I believe, the one of freedom. Gershom Scholem characterized mysticism as an explosion of freedom of thought and expression within established religion22. I believe that he would have hesitated somewhat in his formulation had he considered the enormous amount of freedom of thought and expression that the Midrash itself allows, albeit it being an integral, principal part of established, traditional religion. Yet Scholem is right in his postulation that freedom is one of the most important characteristics of mysticism within a scriptural religion. The ambivalence that I shall try to explain and analyze below is the one of the acquisition of mystical freedom in spite of the fact that mysticism required putting limits upon the infinite freedom of the Midrash. The earliest example of Jewish mysticism, Hekhalot visions, should be considered here. There is no deliberate, systematic use in Hekhalot mysticism of midrashic methodology. One may even suspect that there is an attitude of rejection of it, even though this is not clearly stated. There is no use of letter or language mysticism in any way in this ancient circle of Jewish pneumatics. The reason for that is, I believe, the mystical freedom, employed to the utmost by the Hekhalot mystics: They did not feel it necessary to prove in traditional ways the veracity of their mystical experiences. Hekhalot mysticism is one of direct revelation: The mystic ascends to the celestial chariot, travels from one divine palace hekhal to the next until he reaches the seventh, where he faces the Throne of Glory and the figure of the Creator sitting on it. When he 22

G. Scholem. On the Kabbalah and Its Symbolism, New York: Schocken 1965, pp. 5-31;

originally published in German: Religiöse Autorität und Mystik, in: Zur Kabbcda und ihrer Symbolik, Ziiridi 1960,pp. 11-48 mà Eranos Jahrbuch 26(1957), pp. 243-278.

Language of the Mystics

17

returns to this world he recounts his experiences in direct descriptive language, needing no reliance on the old texts of divine revelation; he has seen everything himself, his own experience is the proof of itself, he does not need any exegesis or homiletics to demonstrate that it is indeed divine truth. Implicit here is the rejection of the Midrash and the return to the biblical concept of direct revelation23. The medieval Jewish mystic is characterized by the self-denial of his own experience, by the claim that everything he saw and discovered has been known all along and is hidden within the ancient texts. But that which was hidden in the ancient texts is infinite: the medieval Jewish mystics, especially those in Germany, did more than anyone else in the history of Jewish culture to demonstrate the infinity of the possibilities of meaning inherent in the midrashic system, developing it far beyond the boundaries of the midrashic classical exegesis, though without creating any conflict between themselves and the basic norms of the Midrash. Two main examples of this attitude among the mystics of medieval Germany are clearly illustrated in the works of the Ashkenazi Hasidic circles of the Rhineland in the second half of the 12th century and the beginning of the 13th. One is Rabbi Eleazar of Worms's Commentary on the Creation sod ma 'aseh bereshit, which is the opening treatise of the author's magnum opus in esoteric theology, Sodey Razaya24. In this treatise Rabbi Eleazar analyzes the process of the creation in the format of a commentary on the letters of the alphabet - their shapes, meanings, provenance and many others25. This commentary became very influential in later Jewish mysticism, because it was printed (up to the letter L) as the central part of the popular S'efer Raziel in 1701. The second example is the Ashkenazi Hasidic concept of the 73 "Gates of Wisdom", in which the Ashkenazi Hasidim concentrated and organized

On Hekhalot literature a vast amount of scholarship has been created in the last two decades, but concerning this particular point, it diould be stated that most scholars, beginning with Scholem, did not realize the deep division between talmudic-midrashic Judaism and the basic concepts of Hekhalot mysticism; rather, they tended to view the Hekhalot mystical attitude as the esoteric stratum of mysticism inherent - and integrated - with talmudic Judaism I believe this to be erroneous. See in detail: J. Dan, The Revelation of the Secret of the World, The Beginning of Ancient

Jewish

Mysticism, Brown University, 1992. Sodey Razayya is a five-part work, whidi includes the "Secret of the Chariot" (printed as Sodey Raxayya by I. Kamelhar, Ridia 1930); Hokhmat ha-Nefesh, Sefer ha-Shem and the Commmtary on Sefer Yezira: the commentary on the alphabet, "The Secret of the Creation", is the first part, which is preceded by a áiort introduction con caning Hasidic ethics. See J. Dan, The Esoteric Theology of Ashkenazi Hasidism, Jerusalem, The Bialik Institute, 1968, pp. 62-64. A discussion of the concept of language as revealed in this work is presented in a study of mine to be published in the book "Hebrew in Ashkenaz", Oxford University Press (forthcoming).

18

J. Dan

their methods of interpretation of biblical verses26. Most of these 73 refer to numerical aspects, the occurances of letters, their absence in certain verses, and the forms of the temurah. Others cover all aspects, including the traditional talmudic ones, of interpretation. A special group is one which refers to subjects, some of them literary units - prayer, Sefer Yezira, Talmud; others to theological subjects - the divine glory, the unity of God; still others to ethical concepts - humility, love and fear of God, piety. There is no doubt that these "gates" have been utilized by these esoterics and mystics. We have an extensive, anonymous commentary on the Pentateuch, written by an author of this school, each segment of which carries a title which is one of these "gates"27. In Rabbi Eleazar of Worms' extensive commentary on the prayers there is some use of it. But the main text relating to this system is Rabbi Eleazar of Worms' "Book of Wisdom". The largest part of this book is dedicated to a demonstration of the use of these "gates", exemplified by the interpretation of the first verse of Genesis. Rabbi Eleazar explains in detail how to apply these principles to the actual analysis of one verse. While doing so, he actually declares, and demonstrates, the infinity of meaning to be found in the biblical language. The 73 "gates" are, in fact, just examples; five of them, for instance, relate to the number of times that a letter is mentioned in a certain biblical section sha'ar ahadim, sha'ar ha-mishneh, sha'ar hameshulash, sha'ar ha-meruba', sha'ar ha-mehumash. Of course, one does not have to stop here, and it is possible to continue and increase the number. In the same way, just a small selection of temurah possibilities are included; many others can be added on the same basis. The number 73 is an artificial one (it is the numerical value of the term hokhmah, while the concept itself is clearly one of infinity of meanings. All these methodological discussions do not refer, in any way, to the possibility of contradiction between meanings. The possibility of a clash between "truths" does not emerge; the belief in the infinity of compatible meanings is absolute. Another important example of this attitude is found in Rabbi Eleazar's most important theological work, the Sefer ha-Shem, which includes dozens of analyses, using many different methods, of the Tetragrammaton and other divine names. This work, together with others of the same school, express the peak of the medieval development of the midrashic concept, used to the extreme, but still adhering to the basic theological and methodological framework created by the ancient Midrash. This process continued to develop during the 13 th century among kabbalists, most notably in the works of Abraham Abulafia and the early works of Rabbi Joseph Gikatilla. 26 The list of these gates was publi&ed by me, from Sabbi Eleazar's Sefer ka-Hokhmah, Studies in Ashkenazi Hasidic Literature pp. 52-57 [Hebr.]. 27 See J. Dan, "The Ashkenazi Hasidic »Gates of Wisdom«", Homage a Georges Vajda", ed. par G. Nahen et C. Touati, Editions Peeters, Louvain 1980, pp. 184-189.

Language of the Mystics

19

The problem to be discussed is, when does such a midrashic system, elaborated and developed almost ad absurdum, become a mystical one. The basic concept of the infinity of meanings is not compatible with the basic attitude of mystics, who do believe in a distinction between true and not true, or at least, between the true and the more true. How does mysticism relate to the Midrash? Obviously, one should completely deny those popular - even vulgar tendencies to identify mysticism with any numerical interpretation of verses, or with transmutations of letters, with exegesis of the holy name and similar methodologies. These are external means, their use being dictated by the nonmystical, literal concept of language as divine. Within the framework of such an understanding of language, these methods are actually logical consequences of the basic theology and cosmogony. It is a very poor concept, indeed, which diagnoses mysticism by the use of such methods just because they seem unfamiliar to the reader. The midrashic attitude is inherent in the scriptural concept of cosmogony, and has nothing to do, directly, with mysticism. Mystics may use them like many others, but the methodology itself has no mystical element in it. The problem has some phenomenological similarity to other schools of thought which developed within the framework of the belief in divine language. A traditional Jewish example is that of the law, the Halakhah. The legal aspect of Judaism shares all the theological and linguistic concepts described above, but it cannot sustain the anarchy of infinity of meanings; legal decisions must be clear, unambiguous and literal so that proper actions can follow and legal definitions between right and wrong be made. This is impossible within the midrashic structure itself; another dimension of decision-making, an external criterion, has to be introduced in order to differentiate between right and wrong from the legal point of view. In Judaism, this external criterion is tradition. The laws of the Halakhah are not binding because they represent the true interpretation of a biblical verse. The laws differentiating between dairy and meat in kosher food are not binding because they are the correct interpretation of lo tevashel gedi bahalev immo28. They are binding because they represent the commandments given to Moses on Mount Sinai by God himself, and transmitted from generation to generation not only orally, but, more important, practically. Even an oral tradition can be interpreted in many ways; practical behavior cannot. The tradition of commandments and their performance is the deciding factor concerning law, and not the interpretation of a biblical verse; this is used almost in an ornamental fashion, to prove that the commandments are also imbedded in the Written Torah, but exegesis is not the decisive factor in the creation of the law. 28

Ex. 23:19,34:26, Dt. 14:21.

20

J. Dan

In a similar way, Jewish rationalism in the Middle Ages adopted the external criterion of logic to discern the one, true, logical meaning among the infinite midrashic ones. A religious system which is based on logic is not necessarily a completely anthropocentric one. The laws of logic themselves have been implanted in the human mind by the creator. God, being benevolent and just, will not delude his creatures by making their minds reach untrue conclusions. Strict adherence to human logic, therefore, can be conceived as an adherence to divine truth. The "text of revelation" in such a system can be the rules of logic themselves, as given by God to Man when He constructed his intelligence. Rationalism, therefore, can be regarded as the adherence to one aspect of revealed divine truth, the one implanted in the human mind in the form of reason and logic, in order to discern among the infinite interpretations of linguistic revelation the ones which conform with this "external" yardstick, the laws of logic. These two examples express the possibility to use one kind of revelation in order to overcome the anarchy of midrashic interpretation of ancient revelation: Tradition concerning a legal system or human logic, derived from the divine wisdom, in a rationalistic one. It seems that mysticism reflects a similar phenomenological attitude, though very different in many details of application. The mystic's avenue to divine truth is meta-linguistic. Language, in its sensual and intellectual aspects, reflects, according to him, only the superficial and literal aspects of existence, which are very remote (and sometimes, even contradictory) to divine truth. Even though language is divine, when it is employed for human and earthly purposes it cannot convey the hidden, mystical divine truth. Language can serve as a means to some, remote, partial and imprecise approach to divine truth only when it is reconnected to its supreme divine source. Such a connection creates the mystical symbol, which is an obscure linguistic approximation of the eternally hidden divine truth. Symbols do not derive their potency from their place in language, but from their connection, a mystical undefinable one, to the hidden meta-linguistic meaning. That means that the basis for the mystical symbol, and for a linguistic symbolical expression of mystical truth, is the mystical experience, rather than any linguistic exegetical or homiletical enterprise. The "external" yardstick, by which a mystic discerns between mystical truth and literal, earthly un-truth is therefore a meta-linguistic one of mystical experience. This experience is what enables the mystic to distinguish between the literal, homiletical, logical and midrashic aspects of language on the one hand, and the symbolical aspect of language, denoting mystical truth, on the other. The mystical symbol can be portrayed as the upper ninth of an iceberg protruding above the sea; truth is the iceberg itself, its totality, whereas the linguistic expression, which is inherently tied to it and is an integral part of it,

Language of the Mystics

21

is the symbol. The symbol can reveal a great deal about the hidden truth, but it is a very great mistake, a titanic one, to see the tip of the iceberg as its totality. The non-mystic cannot differentiate between "tips" which are nothing but that, and "tips" to which an iceberg is connected; this is the unique ability of the mystic, in his meta-linguistic experience. This "external" criterion is, on the one hand, very similar to the position of tradition in the quest for legal truth, and of the laws of logic in the quest for rationalistic truth. It differs from them, however, in the fact that while their final achievement is a precise linguistic statement, for the mystic truth will forever be beyond language. Symbolical expression, in language, of mystical truth is anything but precise. The "tip of the iceberg" can be described from various angles and aspects, its characteristics expressed in various linguistic formulations, all of them connected in one way or another to the essence of the hidden truth, but never expressing its entirety. Rationalism and law put limits, forced by their "external criterion", upon midrashic expression. Mysticism does not necessarily do so. It can adopt all the varieties of midrashic exegesis and incorporate them into its continuous quest for the impossible, for the linguistic expression of meta-linguistic truth. There is no inherent contradiction, from a methodological point of view, between midrashic and mystical exegesis. The difference lies much deeper: For the midrashic exegete, midrashic truths are symbols of unknown and unexpressible truth. This is the reason why Jewish mysticism, throughout the Middle Ages and early modern times, seems to be so close to the world of the Midrash, and why the midrashic format is so central to the literary genres of the medieval mystics. The Book Bahir and the Zohar are mystical Midrashim. In every external methodological way, they are Midrashim, in the full sense of the term. They differ from the classical Midrashim in one most meaningful way: their conclusions are not truth expressed by language, but truth expressed by linguistic symbols, intrinsically supported by the mystical meta-linguistic experience of the author. How does one discern among the two? Their appearance may be not only very similar, but actually identical. This, indeed, is the most difficult task facing a scholar who wishes to understand mysticism within the framework of a divine language, with a rich midrashic tradition like the Hebrew one. Ashkenazi Hasidism, I believe, presents in this respect one of the most intriguing and interesting examples. There are several examples in the history of Jewish mysticism in which the "external criterion" is clearly expressed. Shem Τον ben Gaon, in the early 14th century, in a kabbalistic treatise completely concerned with linguistic, midrashic study of the kabbalistic interpretation of biblical verses - some chapters of this work actually read like a mystical-midrashic manual - stops his discussion to declare that he has seen the heavens open and revealing

22

J. Dan

divine secrets in an immediate, direct manner 29 . The early kabbalists in the Provence expressed this external criterion by the statement that the prophet Elijah has been revealed to their sages and disclosed to them the unique secrets that they describe30. Several medieval mystics, in Germany and elsewhere, relied on a "dream question", a practice of divination assisted by scripture, to reveal to them meta-midrashic truths, often related to Halakhah. Isaac Luria was reputed to visit the heavenly academy when he seemed to be sleeping, and studying Kabbalah with the prophet Elijah. The Besht, the founder of modern Hasidism, reported his "ascent of the soul" to the palace of the Messiah, who revealed to him secrets concerning the redemption, and there are many many others. Yet, on the whole, kabbalists preferred to concentrate on the text, not allowing their readers take a glimpse into their innermost experiences, which gave the basis for their commentaries and sermons, midrashic in nature, debating various aspects of the divine world. This fact seemed to create a meaningful difference between Jewish and Christian mysticism. The lingering impression is that while Christian mysticism is experiental, personal, poetic and direct, Jewish mysticism is more of a theosophy than "real" mysticism. This impression, however, is completely wrong, because of several reasons. First, it is wrong to assume that the mystics who described in personal, poetic language their mystical experiences, like St. John of the Cross and Santa Theresa, "the Carmelite school", represent Christian mysticism. They are just one segment, in many respects an exceptional one, in the long history of Christian mysticism. For a long time Christian mysticism could hardly be separated from neo-Platonist philosophical treatises31; there is no personal word in the greatest masterpiece of Christian mysticism, the PseudoDionisian writings32. Eastern Christian mysticism tends very often towards a "theosophic" character, much like many kabbalistic treatises. The fame that the Carmelites acquired should not hide the fact that most Christian mystics Let us make man in our image< (Gen. 1:26).1,26 Metatron thus is the demiurgical-angel in whose image human beings are created and who appears in prophetic revelations. Other examples from thirteenth-century kabbalistic sources could be cited,27 but it is sufficient for our purposes to restrict the analysis to the text of RABaD. In his extended reflections on this text Scholem noted the similarity of this conception with older doctrines of the logos or the enthroned 22 E. R. Wolfson, "God, the Demiurge, and the Intellect: On the Usage of the Word Kol in Abraham ibn Ezra," Revue des études juives 149 (1990): 77-111, esp. 93-101. On the identification of Metatron as the divine image in whose likeness Adam was created, see Zohar 3:307b, and cf. Zohar Hadash, ed. R. Mar gali at, Jerusalem 1978, 120d ( Tiqqunim). 23 See W. Z. Harvey, "The In corporeality of God in Maim am des, Rabad and Spinoza," in Studies in Jewish Thought, ed. S. O. Heller Willensky and M. Idei, Jerusalem 1989, pp. 72-73, n. 29 [Hebrew], I thank Moshe Idei for drawing my attention to this reference. See also M Idei, "The World of Angels in Human Form," Studies in Jewish Mysticism, Philosophy, and Ethical Literature Presented to Isaiah Tishby on his Seventy-fifth Birthday, Jerusalem 1986, pp. 53, n. 198, 57, n. 215 [Hebrew], 24 On the development c i the identification c i Metatron with the Prince erf" the World, see G. Scholem, Jewish Gnosticism, Merkabah Mysticism, and Talmudic Tradition, New York 1965, pp. 44-50. 25 cf. Β. Ta anit 2a. 26 cited in the name of the RABaD in the Kin Y a ac/ov to B. Ta 'anit 2a, already noted by Scholem, Origins, p. 215, n. 26; see also Ch. Mapsik, Le Zohar, vol. 3, Paris, 1991, p. 86, n. 21. See also the commentary to the same talmudic passage in Todros Abulafia, 'Ozar ha-Kavod ha-Shalem, Warsaw 1879, 18a. And cf. Zohar 1:181b where Metatron is identified as the "servant, the messenger of his Master" ( eved sheliha de-mareh). This identification accords with the widely accepted etymology of the name Metatron from the Greek metator, popularized by the talmudic lexicon, Sefer he- Arukh, of Nathan bm Yehiel of Rome. Cf. H. Odeberg, 3 Enoch or the Hebrew Book of Enoch, New York 1973, pp. 127-128 (Introduction); Scholem, Origins, pp. 298-299. 27 See, e.g., the sources cited by Idei, "The World of Angels," pp. 59-60, esp. inn. 228.

66

E R . Wolfson

demiurgical-angel as well as possible connections to speculation in the German Hasidism regarding the enthroned cherub.28 (Scholem's characterization, of course, predated the research of Dan, and therefore does not reflect the more nuanced distinction between the different circles of Pietists.) Idei has added to this discussion that it may be the case that underlying the attribution of the measurements of Shi 'ur Qomah to Metatron in the medieval kabbalistic literature is an echo of an older motif concerning the identification of Metatron and Adam, a tradition that may have itself influenced the better known and well-documented tradition regarding the transformation of Enoch into Metatron.29 At this juncture we may turn our attention to the material of the German Pietists. The attribution of the measurements of Shi ur Qomah to Metatron may be implied in the Ashkenazi commentary on the various names of Metatron: rwh pysqonyt [= 930] is the numerical equivalence of [the expression] yh yh dmwt dmwt [= 930] for he [Metatron] had two images (dmwywt), at first the image of a man and in the end the image of an angel, rwh pysqwnyt is equal numerically to [the expression] krl"w Ίρ ryb"w prs"h [= 930]30 for this is the measure of the stature31 (shi 'ur ha-qomah). This is to inform you that the Holy One, blessed be He, has no measurement, and He has no boundary or limit and no eye has ever seen Him. Thus when He selects a prophet to worship Him, he sees the splendor of His glory (zohar kevodo) on the throne in this measure.32 The first thing to note is that the statement that Metatron has two images, initially that of a man and secondarily that of an angel, is obviously based on the earlier legend, expressed fully in the Hebrew Book of Enoch (3 Enoch ), of the human Enoch being transformed into the angelic Metatron, an idea that is repeated on other occasions in this text.33 Yet, the transformed Enoch still 28 Origini, pp. 213-216. 29 M. Idei, "Enodi is Metatron," Jerusalem Studies in Jewish Thought 6, 1-2 (1987): 151-170, esp. 156-157 [Hebrew], See also Ch. Mopsik, Le Livre hébreu d'Hénoch ou Livre des palais, Paris 1989, pp. 55,210. 30 Here I have followed MS JTSA Mie. 2206, fol. Ila which corresponds to the printed version in Sefer ha-Hesheq, Lemberg 1865, cited in Dan, The Esoteric Theology, p. 223. The reading in the other manuscripts that I consulted (see n. 32) is: 7ρ ryb "wprs"h. 31 MS JTSA Mie. 2206,fol. llahereadds: "which appears to the prophets." 32 MSS Cambridge Heb. Add. 405, fol. 302b; Oxford-Bodleian 2286, fol. 156a; Moscow-Guenzberg 90, fol. 127a. 33 Cf. MSS Cambridge Heb. Add. 405, fol. 299b; Oxford-Bodleian 2286, fol. 154a; MoscowGuenzberg 90, fol. 125a. See M. Idei, "Additional Fragments from the Writings of R. Joseph of Hamadan," Da 'at 21 (1988): 51 [Hebrew], The legend of Enoch's transformation into Metatron is one of the more popular motifs utilized by poets when they mention Metatron. See, e.g., the poems of

Metatron and Shi'ur Qomah

67

retains human characteristics insofar as the measurements of Shi 'ur Qomah are applied to Metatron. The last point is especially highlighted in the printed version of the above passage which concludes: "The Prince of the Countenance who serves Him is as big as this measurement." Commenting on this text Dan noted that "the author does not actually establish that the glory that is revealed to the prophets in the image of the Sh 'iur Qomah is Metatron himself; rather he emphasizes that the image of Metatron, its measure and character, is like the image of the Shekhinah, which is revealed to the prophets in the measure of 236,000 myriad parasangs." 34 There are statements in the Pietistic writings to support this interpretation as will be seen in more detail below. It seems to me, however, that the text is ambiguous enough to maintain an alternative view. In fact, it is entirely possible that underlying this passage is an identification of Metatron with the Shekhinah, referred to at the end of the passage as the splendor of God's glory that appears on the throne in corporeal measurements. Such an identification, as Scholem already noted, is found in other Hasidic writings as well as early kabbalistic documents from Catalonia. 35 Scholem goes on to say that this identification "is clearly a promotion of Metatron, who in the Merkavah gnosis also bears the name Yahoel. The angel himself becomes a figure of the kavod. " 3 6 Metatron, then, is the aspect of the glory that is depicted as the measurable anthropos who sits upon the throne and appears in prophetic visions. It must be noted that Dan too accepted the possibility of such an understanding of Metatron in the German Pietists, although he did not mention in this context the parallels in kabbalistic literature: "For the German Pietists Metatron was already a nearly-divine image, and sometimes actually divine; like his identification with the Shekhinah the German Pietists were Amittai ben Shefatyah published in The Chronicle of Ahimaaz, ed by B. Klar, Jerusalem 1974, pp. 70,81 (cf. TosafottoB.

Yevamot 16b, s.v.,pasuqzeh sar ha-'olam 'amro).

34 Dan, The Esoteric Theology, p. 223. Origins,pp. 187,n. 214,214-215, 299,n. 198. 36 Ibid., p. 187. Related to this notion is the secret of the garment (sod ha-malbush) expounded by several thirteenth-century kabbalists, including, most importantly, Nahmanides. See E. R. Wolfson, "The Secret of the Garment in Nahmanides," Da'al 24 (1990): XXV-XLLX [English section]. See also Scholen s passing remark in Major Trends, p. 38S, n. 112, which I neglected to note in the aforementioned study. On the image of the Shekhinah clothing herself in Metatron, see in particular the texts c i Joseph of Hamadan discussed by Idei, "The World of Angels," pp. 52-53. And cf. Jacob ben Jacob ha-Kohen, Sefer ha- Orah, MS Milano 62, fol. 104a: we ha-shekhinah zehu metatron 'al shem she-shikken hqb"h ruho ha-qadosh

alaw u-qera'o shekhina. See ibid., fol. 105b: hu mar'eh

demut kevodyy* klom'[ar] sekhel ha-nigzar metatron she-shemo ke-shem rabbo shene'femar]

ki

shemi be-qirbo. Cf. the citations at the end of n. 73. The image of Metatron as a chariot for the Shekhinah was employed by various kabbalists, especially Joseph of Hamadan and the author of Tiqqune Zohar ; see references below, n. 145.

68

E R . Wolfson

inclined to draw him close to, and perhaps even identify him with, the divine glory itself."37 A similar conclusion was more recently affirmed by Asi Farber who commented on the passage cited above in the following way: "It is reasonable to assume that before the author of this commentary was a tradition that maintained an identification between Metatron and the Shi ur Qomah... Perhaps this tradition already assumed the twofold nature of Metatron,"38 i.e., as an angel, on the one hand, and as the glory, on the other. Indeed, it is evident from other passages in the aforementioned Pietistic commentary that Metatron fulfills just this function. Thus, for example, the following meaning is attributed to one of Metatron's names: "zrhyh is numerically equivalent to 'yh rwh [where is the spirit?], for the Holy Spirit did not dwell on any other person like on this one [Enoch], for he [Metatron] is revealed to the prophets and he is the angel of God (mal'akh 'elohim)."39 In a second passage the link to Shi ur Qomah is drawn as well: "zrhyhw is numerically equivalent to wrb kh [great in power] for he [Metatron] is 236,000 myriad parasangs, and according to this measurement the Holy One, blessed be He, shines in His glory upon the throne, and He shows His glory to the one to whom He wills."40 Further evidence for such a tradition circulating amongst the German Pietists is found in a passage in the commentary on the forty-two-letter name of God attributed to Hai Gaon and included in Eleazar of Worms' Sefer ha-Hokhmah. While one may doubt that Eleazar is the author of this text, it is evident that reflected here are older Ashkenazi traditions that exerted an influence on the Kalonymide circle.41 Indeed, it seems that the older Ashkenazi idea regarding Metatron and the measurements of the Shi'ur Qomah was somewhat mitigated in Eleazar's later writings, as I will argue at a later stage in this analysis. The pseudo-Hai passage is parallel to the original comment from the commentary on the names of Metatron cited above: sqwzyt [= 906] is numerically equal to dmwt wdmwt [= 906], for "on the semblance of the throne was a semblance of the appearance of a man" ai demut kisse demut ke-mar 'eh 'adam (Ezek. 1:26). Why is the word "semblance" {demut) repeated twice? For [the expression] dmwt wdmwt numerically equals wrl"w 'If wrbw' prsh [this in fact does not 37 The Esoteric Theology,p. 219. 38 "The Concept of the Makabah," p. 559. 39 MSS Cambridge Heb. Add 405, fol. 306b; Oxford-Bodleian 2286, fol. 159b; Moscow-Guenzberg 90, fol. 128b. 40 MSS Cambridge Heb. Add. 405, fol. 309a; Oxford-Bodleian 2286, fol. 161a; Moscow-Guenzberg 90, fol. 130a. 41 See Dan, The Esoteric Theology, pp. 122-129. See, however, Scfaolem's observations in Origins, p. 184, n. 206; and the comments of Färber, "The Concept of the Merkabah," pp. 142-143, 236-237, 254.

69

M e t a t r o n a n d Shi UT Q o m a h

work for the former expression = 906 and the latter = 914], This is the measure of the appearance of the Shekhinah to the prophets, its length and width is as such, and its measure is as such, as it says, "Great is our Lord and full of power" (Ps. 147:5). wrb kh ("full of power") equals 236, which is the number of the measure of the Shekhinah.42 In this text the image (demut) and measure (shi 'ur) are applied directly to the Shekhinah,43 whereas in the anonymous commentary on the names of Metatron they were applied to Metatron who was identified as well as the splendor of God's glory. It seems likely that what facilitates the transference of these dimensions and characterizations is the implicit identification of the Shekhinah and Metatron. An allusion to this may be found in another passage contained in the introduction to Sefer ha-Hokhmah, which again reflects an older Ashkenazi esoteric tradition: The name of the visible Presence {shekhinat ha-nir'et) is WV 44 and thus it is called 'ndpnsr'l [= 716], which numerically equals [the expression, He is 236,000 myriad parasangs] whw' rl"w w'l"p prsh [= 716]. There are some who call [the Shekhinah] nrpnsr'l 4 5 [= 912] 42 MS Oxford-Bodleian 1568, fol. 6b. See Idei, "Additional Fragments," p. 51. See also MS Moscow-Guenzberg 366, fol. 41a. 43 Cf. the Adikaiazi text (reported as a tradition received from Judah the Pious, Joel the Pious, and Qalonymos the Pious) published in S. Mussayef, Merkavah Shelemah, Jerusalem 1921, 30a (an bottomn of page): we ha-shekhinah ha-nir'et 'al hisse nir'et daq daq me'od we-khol mah she-ra'u lo hayah ha-mar'eh shel ha-bore yit'[barakh]

'ella ke'eyn 'adam bara' we-yoshev

al ha-kisse

shel hqb"h we-her'ah lahem demut be-gimatriya rl"w 'elef ribbo parsa'ot we-khakh qomato shel yoshev 'al ha-kisse. By contrast in the Perush Haftarah, the Pietistic commentary on Ezekiel's chariot vision, the anthropomorphic measurements of the Shi 'ur Qomah, applied to the visible glory (qomah shel ha-kavod ha-nir'eh), are related to the immanoice of the divine in all things (see Sdiolem, Major Trends, pp. 108-110) rather than to the manifest form of the glory that appears on the throne of the chariot (see Sdiolem, op. cit., p. 113). Cf. MS Botin Or. 942, fol. 150b: uve-khol d ruhot mar'eh shekhinato la-nevi'im wela-mal'ah we-mal'akhim shi'ur le-hodia' she-hu maqom beli reshit beli takhlityit'fbarakh].

On the tedmical term "visible glory," kavod

be-khol ha-nir'eh,

in Pietistic theology, see Sdiolem, op. cit., pp. 112-113, and M Idei, Golem: Jewish Magical and Mystical Traditions on the Artifical Anthropoid, Albany 1990, pp. 309,312, n. 16. See also citation in the following note and below at n. 60. 44 That is, 236 whidi is shorthand for the measurement of 236,000 myriad parasangs, the standard dimensions according to one Shi'ur Qomah tradition. Cf. Perush Ha/iarah, MS Berlin Or. 942, fol. 151a: "The visions of the stature of His great glory (mar'ot qomat kevodo ha-gadot),

Great is our

Lord etc.' 'and full of power' (we-rav koah) is numerically equal to 236, that is, the stature of the Holy One, blessed be He, is 236,000 myriad parasangs... rl"w is the name of the visible Presence (hakavod

ha-nir'eh).'

45 This alternative reading is recorded as well in Perush Haftjarah, MS Berlin Or. 942, fol. 151a. And cf. the text in Merkavah Shelemah, 30b where the name is given as brpnsr 'l.

70

ER. Wolfson

and it numerically equals wsqwzy"t [= 912], which is also the numerology of wrl"w Ί"p rbw"'prsh [i.e., the dimensions of the Shi'ur Qomah, 236,000 myriad parasangs] for of the Holy One, blessed be He, [it is said] "Great is our Lord and full of power" (Ps. 147:5), but "His wisdom is beyond reckoning" (ibid.).46 The name here given to the Shekhinah in its manifest form, especially in the first formulation, Andepanasarel ( ndpnsr Ί) may be a compound of the Greek anthropos (or, more precisely according to one of its declensions, anthropon) and the Hebrew sar-el, i.e., the archon of God. The meaning implied in this name, therefore, would be that the anthropomorphic manifestation of the Presence is the angelic form. This notion is implied as well in yet another passage from the pseudo-Hai commentary on the fortytwo-letter name (to be discussed more fully below) wherein the Presence is described, inter alia, as the angel of the Lord (mal 'akh ha-shem), which is the size of 236,000 myriad parasangs.47 The Shekhinah, then, is the angelic manifestation of God that assumes the corporeal dimensions specified in the esoteric tradition of the Shi 'ur Qomah 48 Perhaps such a tradition is implied as well in the following passage regarding Metatron as the locus of the Shi ur Qomah measurements in the text named Sefer ha-Kavod in the collection of Ashkenazi material extant in MSS Oxford 1566 and 1567, which has been attributed by Dan to Judah heHasid.49 Part of the relevant text has been copied verbatim in Eleazar's Hokhmat ha-Nefesh (ch. 84), but I am quoting from Dan's published version of the manuscript text: Man is called a microcosmos, for he is similar to the whole world, and he has the wisdom to govern and to know all the creatures by means of his wisdom... Similarly, with respect to Metatron, the Prince of the Countenance, through him is the governance of all the angels and everything they do is by means of his wisdom. Concerning this it is written in the Shi 'ur Qomah, "R. Ishmael said, the one who knows the measure of the Creator is certain to be in the world-to-come; I and R. Aqiva guarantee this." That is, the Creator has no limit, and that which is said in scriptural verses concerning measurement is said with respect to that which is created which requires a measure. And the matter of the glory must be greater than all the created entities. And from this matter the enlightened one can know the One, from the perspective that the All cleaves to the One. It says "the measurement of 46 MS Oxford-Bodleian 1568, fol. 23a; see also MS JTSA Mie. 1786, fol. 43b. See Farbe-, "Hie Concept of the Merkabah," p. 410; Idei, "Additional Fragments," p. 52. 47

MS Oxford-Bodleian 1568, fol. 5a.

48

See Scholem, Origins, p. 185.

49 See Studies in Ashkenazi-Hasidic Literature, pp. 134-187.

Metatron and Shi'ur Qomah

71

the Creator," but He has no limit. Rather it wishes to say the measure of [that which] cleaves [to the One], and not as Rav Saadiah explained. 50 The formulation above is clearly based on the views of Abraham ibn Ezra (especially the twelfth chapter of Yesod Mora' as well as his Standard Commentary on Exod. 33:20) who posited an emanated glory as opposed to the view of Saadiah concerning a created glory.51 Moreover, implicit in ibn Ezra is a distinction between two aspects of the glory, the face and the back. 52 As I have argued elsewhere, the divine back, or lower glory, in ibn Ezra's philosophical system is to be identified as Metatron or the First Intellect, the All that comprises in itself all things. 53 To know the measure of the Creator is thus to have knowledge not only of the cosmos, as some scholars have suggested, but of the All, i.e., the Intellect, that emanated from the One. Utilizing ibn Ezra's views the Pietist author has identified the angelic Metatron as the form of the emanated (and not created) glory, which is both measurable and visible according to the ancient Jewish esoteric text. Support for my interpretation may also be found in the following statement of Eleazar in his extensive commentary on the prayers: "Unless You go in the lead" [en panekha holkhim] (Exod. 33:15) numerically equals [the expression] "That is Metatron" [zehu metatron]54 [i.e., 332] for My name is in Him' (Exod. 23:21). 5 5 Shaddai (sdy) is numerically equal to Metatron (myttrwn) [both =

50 Ibid., pp. 153-154. 51 SeeDan,77ie Esoteric Theology, p. 139. See also Scholon, Major Trends, p. 112. 52 See Dan, The Esoteric Theology, pp. 113-115. The dual glory is alluded to in clearer t o n s in his Short Commentary on Exod. 23:20, where ibn Ezra uses the precise locution, ha-kavod

she-qibbel

ha-kavod. See Wolfson, "God, the Demiurge, and the Intellect," pp. 107-108. The influence of ibn Ezra s terminology is discernible in the fragment extant in MS Munich 22, fol. 226b. 53 See reference in n. 22. 54 This expression occurs in B. Sanhédrin 38b and in a fragment on Metatron in Schäfer, Synapse, 389 (according to MS JTSA Mie. 8128). In another passage from the same unit, 396 (cf. 733), Exod. 33:15 and 23:21 are applied to Metatron. On the other hand, the interpretation ofExod. 33:15 as r d a r i n g to Metatron stands in open contrast to the reading of this verse in B. Sanhédrin 38b. See, however, Nahmanides' commentary to the verse discussed in E. R. Wolfson, "By Way of Truth: Aspects of Nahmanides' Kabbalistic Hermeneutics," AJSR 14(1989): 139-140,171-172. 55 That is, both expressions = 332, if the name Metatron is written without the yod (whidi equals 10), even though in the manuscript it is written here with a yod.

72

ER. Wolfsem

314].·56 The Shi'ur Qomah is 236,000 myriad parasangs. "It is the glory of God to conceal a matter" (Prov. 25:2). 57 Eleazar thus considers the attribution of the Shi 'ur Qomah measurements to Metatron to be a matter that is worthy to conceal. It is plausible that implied here is the identification of Metatron with the Shekhinah of which I spoke above. It should be borne in mind, moreover, that the prooftext with which the passage begins, Exod. 33:15, explicitly mentions the divine countenance; hence the request of Moses that God accompany the people in their journey. Yet, according to Eleazar's interpretation, the reference to God's countenance (panekha) is applied to Metatron. Presumably, underlying this exegetical turn is some identification of the angel and the divine Presence. 58 Elsewhere in his writings Eleazar explicitly attributes these very characteristics to the glory. Thus, for example, in Sha'are ha-Sod ha-Yihud we-ha-'Emunah he states that the resplendent light, which is the glory, appears in various ways, "sometimes without a form, sometimes in human form, and sometimes as the Shi 'ur Qomah, which comprises 236,000 myriad parasangs." 59 In a second passage near the end of this text Eleazar remarks that "what is said in the Sefer ha-Qomah " is said with respect to the "measure of the visible glory" {shi'ur ha-kavod ha-nir'eh).60 It does not seem inconsequential that the measurements applied to Metatron in one place are ascribed to the glory in another. On the contrary, this may be related to a tacit identification of Metatron as an aspect of the glory. It does appear that some such notion is reflected in other texts written or copied by Eleazar, even though the effort to conceal or somewhat obscure this doctrine is also fairly evident. It is necessary to evaluate this phenomenon against a much larger issue that played a significant role in the theosophy of the German Pietists, i.e., the identification, or the blurring of the distinction, between the glory, on the one hand, and an angelic being, on the other, which is the anthropomorphic manifestation of the divine revealed to the prophets

56 Again the numerology only works when the name Metatron is written without the yod, even though in the manuscripts it appears with it. For the use of this numerical equivalence, see Rashi's commentary to Exod. 23:21; and cf. the Pietistic commentary an the names of Metatron, MSS Cambridge Heb. Add. 405, fol. 302b, Oxford-Bodleain 2286, fol. 156b, Moscow-Guenzberg 90, fol. 127b. See also Eleazar's comment in hisPerush ha-Merkavah, MS Paris, BN 850, fol. 83a. 57 MS Paris, BN 772, fol. 110b. 58 My remarks here reflect an observation of Ydiuda Liebes in a discussion we had regarding this text immediately preceding my oral presentation of the paper in Frankfurt. For a kabbalistic parallel, cf. MS Munich 357, fol. 3b. 59 Edited by J. Dan in Temirin, ed. I. Weinstock, Jerusalem 1972, 1:152. 60 Ibid.,p. 155.

Metatron and Shi'ur Qomah

73

and mystics. 61 The idea of an exalted angel who is the representation of the divine is, of course, a very old idea, in fact expressed in various biblical passages, 62 which was hermeneutically recovered and expanded in a wide variety of later sources, including, Jewish apocalyptic,63 Samaritan,64 JewishChristian,65 Patristic polemical writings presumably reflecting the belief of certain Jewish thinkers, 66 Gnosticism 67 and early Jewish mystical texts. 68 In the case of the pre-Christian sect of the Magharians the exalted angel is also identified as the demiurge who is contrasted with the transcendent, non-

61 See Färber, "The Concept of the Merkabah," pp. 246,258,261,559. 62 Cf. Gm. 16:9-13, 18:2,21:17,22:11,31:11,33:11-13; Exod. 3:2ff, 14:19, 32:34; Joái. 5:13-15; Judges 2:1, 4, 5:23, 6:1 Iff., 13:3ff.; Is. 63:9; Ps. 34:8 Sudi a tradition probably underlies Exod. 23:21 as well. See W. Eichrodt, Theology of the Old Testament, Philadelphia 1967,2:24. See also F. Stier, Gott und sein Engel im Alten Testament, Münster 1934. 63 See C. Rowland, The Open Heaven: A Study of Apocalyptic in Judaism and Eariy Christianity, New York 1982, pp. 94-113. 64 See J. Fossum, The Name of God and the Angel of the Lord, Tübingm 1985,pp. 177ff„ 319ff. 65 See J. Daniélou, "Trinité et angelologie dans la théologie judéo-chrétierme," Recherches science religieuse 45 (1957): 5-41; idem, The Origins of Latin Christianity, London 1977, pp. 149-152; C. Rowland, "The Vision of the Risen Christ in Rev. 1:13ff. : The Debt of an Early Christology to an Aspect of Jewish Angelology," Journal of Theological Studies 31 (1980): 1-11; J. Fossum, "Jewish Christian Christology and Jewish Mysticism," Vigiliae Christianae 37 (1983): 260-287. On the possible relation of the Jewidi idea of a mediating angel (the role occupied by Metatron) and the motif of Christos angelos, see Mopsik, Le Livre hébreu d'Hénoch, pp. 23-24, n. 41. On the possible influence of merkavah mysticism en later Syriac Christianity, see Ν. Séd, "Les hymnes sur le Paradis de Saint Ephrem et les traditions juives," LeMuséon 81 (1968): 455-501. 66 See S. Pines, "God, the Divine Glory and the Angels according to a Seccnd-Century Theology," Jerusalem Studies in Jewish Thought 6 (1987): 1-14 [Hebrew] See also statement of Teitullian, de Praescriptione Haerticorum, ch. 34 (The Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 3 (Grand Rapids, 1951], p. 259): "Appelles [one of the followers of Marcion; cf. ibid., ch. 30, p. 257] made the Creator of some non-descript glorious angel, who belonged to the Superior God, the god (according to him) of the law and of Israel, affirming that he wasfire." 67 See G. Quispel, "Gnostician and the New Testament," The Bible and Modern Scholarship, ed. J. P. Hyatt, Nashville 1965, pp. 252-271; idem, "The Origins erf" the Gnostic Demiurge," Kyriakon: Festschrift Johannes Quasten, ed. P. Granfíeld and J. A. Jungman (Münster, 1970), pp. 272-276; idem, "The Demiurge in the Apocrypban of John." in Nag Hammadi and Gnosis, ed. R. Mcl. Wilson, Leiden 1978, pp. 1-33. 68 See G. Scholem, Jewish Gnosticism, Merkabah Mysticism and Talmudic Tradition, New York 1965, pp. 43-55; idem, Kabbalah, p. 19; see also reference to Father given above, n. 61. The attribution of divine characteristics to the highest angel also underlies traditions about Metatron in ancient Jewish esotericism See W. Fauth, "Tatrosjah-Totrosjah und Metatron in der Jüdischen Merkabah-Mystik," Journal for the Study of Judaism 22 (1991): 40-87.

74

E.R. Wolfson

representable deity.69 When we turn to the medieval Pietistic texts, we find evidence for such an idea in the anonymous Sefer ha-Navon, written by someone who apparently had knowledge of the main circle of the German Pietists but was not part of that group70: "The name [YHWH] appears in its letters to the angels and prophets in several forms and radiance, and it appears in the image of the appearance of an anthropos... this refers to the Shekhinah and the angel of the glory (tnal'akh ha-kavod), which is the Tetragrammaton."71 One finds a similar idea in a passage in another anonymous Pietistic work, Sefer ha-Hayyim, where the light of the glory is said to appear in the "likeness of an angel," or, alternatively, "sometimes the angel himself is seen in that very light."72 Such a blurring between the glory and an angel is evident as well in the following Ashkenazi tradition: "Know that [the word] Elohim is numerically equal to 86; if you add the [five] letters [of the word itself] the sum is 91, which is the numerical value of [the word] mal'akh [i.e., angel]. And this [is the import of the verse] An angel of the Lord appeared to him in a blazing fire out of a bush' (Exod. 3:2), [the angel] refers to God Himself."73 An interesting presentation of this Ashkenazi 69 See H. A, Wolfson, "The Préexistent Angel of the Magiari ans and al-Nahawandi," Jewish Quarterly Review 51 (1960-61): 89-106. 70 The Esoteric Theology, p. 60. 71 Dan, Studies in Ashkenazi-Hasidic Literature, pp. 119-120. 72 J. Dan, Teqstim be-Torat ha-Sod she! Hasidut 'Ashhenaz, Jerusalem 1977, p. 10. 73 MS JTSA Mie. 1822, fol. 36a; cf. MS Moscow-Guenzberg 366, fol. 23b. On the identification of Elohim and Metatron, cf. Jacob ben Jacob ha-Kohen, Sefer ha-'Orah, MS Schocken 14, fol. 62b: umosheh alah el ha-'elohim zehu metatjron] she-hissig godei ma'alato. (On the relationship between Moses and Metatron, see below, n. 151). See ibid,fol. 63a: hinneh 'anokhiba 'elekha be'av ha-jman im ha-mal 'akh metatjron] hu 'anan ha-kavodshemo '_"b 'otiyyot. In the case ci Abraham ibn Ezra it seems that the name Elohim likewise can signify Metatron who is identified as the Intellect; see Wolfson, "God, the Demiurge, and the Intellect," p. 99. See also Moses de León, Sefer Or Zaru'a, ed. A. Altmann, Qobez 'al Yad, n.s. 9 (1980): 260: be-reshit bara 'elohim rfozeh] IfomarJ be-reshit bara hu yit'ßarakh] ha-sar ha-niqra 'elohim asher mimmennu hushpe'u shear kol ha-nimza 'im. Cf. Zohar 1:126b (Midrash ha-Ne elam). The demiurgi cal character of Metatron in the aforementioned Hebrew work of de León is expressed further in terms of his being identified as the first of the separate intellects rather than the tenth. See A. Färber, "On the Sources of Rabbi Moses de Lean's Early Kabbalistic System," Studies in Jewish Mysticism, Philosophy and Ethical Literature Presented to Isaiah Tishby on his Seventy-fifth Birthday, pp. 79-87; E. R. Wolfson, "Letter Symbolism and Merkavah Imagery in the Zohar," 'Alei Shefer: Studies in the Literature of Jewish Thought Presented to Rabbi Dr. Alexandre Safran, ed. M Hallamidi, Bar-Ilan 1990, pp. 196-197, η. 5 (Engliái section]. For an echo of this in Abraham Abulafia, see M Idei, The Mystical Experience in Abraham Abulafia, pp. 117, 165, n. 208. Cf. Tiqqune Zohar 67, ed. R. Margaliot, Jerusalem 1978, 98a: bereshit bara 'elohim da metatron. Finally, it Should be noted that Metatron can also be signified by the Tetragrammaton, reflecting therefore the notion that the attribute of judgment

75

M e t a t r o n a n d Shi'iir Q o m a h

tradition is found in the following remark of Ephraim bar Shimshon, commenting on the redeeming angel mentioned in Gen. 48:16, which seems to be a substitute for the word Elohim in the preceding verse: Thus it is [established] in the secret of the chariot (sod ha-merkavah) that the Holy One, blessed be He, mentioned the angel in the secret of the angels, the (sphere) in the secret of the spheres, and this is the throne. And all of them are emanations ( 'aziluyot ) that emanate from the splendor of His great light that is unfathomable and limitless. Thus it is written in Exodus, "An angel of the Lord appeared to him in a blazing fire out of a bush" (Exod. 3:2), and immediately afterwards it is written, "the Lord called to him out of the bush" (ibid., 4), and it is written, "for he was afraid to look at God" (ibid., 6). Therefore [the word] mal'akh (angel) numerically equals Elohim,74 The identification of the Shekhinah with the angel of the Lord (mal'akh ha-shem), who assumes the corporeal dimensions of the Shi ur Qomah, is also found in the following passage from the pseudo-Hai commentary on the fortytwo-letter name contained in Eleazar's Sefer ha-Hokhmah: On every side of the Shekhinah are crowns of royalty, and this one itself75 is the size of 236,000 myriad parasangs. Concerning this David said, "Great is our Lord and full of power" (Ps. 147:5), [the expression "full of power," wrb kh] numerically equals 236. "His wisdom is beyond reckoning" (ibid.). Jeremiah said concerning it: "But the Lord is truly God: He is a living God, the everlasting King" (Jer. 10:10), (symbolized by Elohim) can act by means of or be transformed into mercy ( YHWH). See in particular the tradition attributed to Jacob ha-Kahai published by G. Scholen, Le-Heqer Qabbalat R. Yizhaq ben Ya'aqov ha-Kohen, Jerusalem 1934, p. 209 [=Tarbiz 5 (1934): 319]. See also the formulation in a text from the circle that produced Sefer ha-Temunah (for the identification of the provenance erf" this material, see M. Idei, "Types of Redemptive Activity in the Middle Ages," in Messianism

and

Eschatology, ed. Ζ. Baras, Jerusalem 1983, p. 266, n. 51 [Hebrew]), MS Vatican 194, fol. 9b: koho shel hb"h she-hu metatron hu ha-koah 'asher shalah lifol be-mizrayim le-moshe be-'azmo uvikhevodo. And see the marginal note ad loc. rfozeh] ¡[ornar] ba le-hodia' lanu she-hu

we-khoho

davar 'ehad. See ibid, fol. 15a: sekhel ha-po'el metatron qera'o ha-shem dodiyaradle-gano

ha-

shafel we-'im b' 'otiyyot more h s hete hcrwwayot ... hupat ha-kallah be-samehi r"l romezim laatarah she-bah mashpi'im hokhmah u-vinah we-na 'asim bah davar 'ehad we-khoah 'ehad we'oto ha-koah ka-asher ba la-taftíonim hu ha-niqra sekhel ha-po 'el hu metatron hu dawid we-rea ' laelyon she-hu ha-shem barukh hu. 74 Perush Rabbenu

Efrayim 'al ha-Torah, ed. E. Koradi and Ζ. Leitner, with consultation of Ch.

Konyevsky, Jerusalem 1992,1: 154. The text here reads we-zeh

azmo, utilizing the masculine pronoun. While the refermce

undoubtedly is to the divine Presmce, which is characterized in this text in feminine terms, it is not entirely accurate to translate here "die herself1 as Scholen did; cf. Origins, p. 185. A more precise rendering is given by Idei, Golem, p. 307.

76

ER. Wolfson

this [i.e., the expression "everlasting King," mlk jvlm76] numerically equals 236. She governs the world according to her, and she is called the angel of the Lord (malakh ha-shem) on account of [her] mission,77 but in her there is no separation. Thus the verse said, "I am sending an angel before you" (Exod. 23:20). This refers to the Shekhinah, for the word mal'akhi ["My angel"]78 is [spelled out as] m"m lm"d Tp k"p yw"d, which numerically equals Shekhinah [= 385],79 The author of the text utilizes numerology (specified at the end of the translated passage) in order to support the identification of the Shekhinah with the mal'akh ha-shem, the highest of the angels. In fact, however, in this passage the Shekhinah is characterized in a twofold way: on the one hand, the corporeal dimensions of the Shi 'ur Qomah, which characterize the theophany of the glory on the throne, are assigned to the Shekhinah·, on the other hand, the Shekhinah exercises providential care over the world, and in this capacity assumes the form of an angel. It is this twofold nature that underlies the statement that "she governs the world according to her," with both aspects curiously being referred to in the feminine.80 Even though the Shekhinah has two dimensions, ultimately she is one ontic entity, as the author emphasizes with his claim that "she is called the angel of the Lord on account of [her] mission, but in her there is no separation." Given the fact that Exod. 23:20 is cited as a prooftext, it is likely, as Scholem already observed, that the angel spoken of here is none other than Metatron (linked exegetically to this verse, e.g., in B. Sanhédrin 38b) who is further identified with the Shekhinah herself in her capacity as ruler of the world.81 The idea found in Pietistic literature concerning the attribution of the corporeal measurements of Shi 'ur Qomah to both the Shekhinah and Metatron is related to this other motif according to which the divine glory is manifest as an angelic being. It may be of relevance 76 For discussion of this part of the text, and an interesting parallel in the anonymous Sefer haNavon, see Idei, Golem, pp. 307-309. 77 As Idei remarks, Golem, p. 311, n. 5, this is based on a midrashic principle to the effect that angels are named in accordance with their mission. 78

Cf. Exod, 23:23: fáyelekh mal'akhi lefanekha. The expression mal'akhi is applied to Metatron in

the anonymous commentary on the names of Metatron; cf. MSS Camb. Heb. Add. 405, fol. 313a, Guenzberg 90, fol. 132a, Oxford-Bodleian 2256, fol. 163b. 79 MS Oxford-Bodleian 1568, fols. 5a-b. The text is printed in Dan, The Esoteric Theology, γ. 121, and rendered in a différait translation in Sdiolem, Origins, p. 185. See also reference to Idei in η. 75. 80 See Idei, Golem, p. 311, n. 4. I think my reading provides a partial answer to Idel's query. It should also be bome in mind, as Idei himself has shown, that Metatron is sometimes depleted in feminine images; see M Idei, "Additional Fragments from the Writings of R. Joseph of Hamadan," Da 'at 21 (1988):47-55 [Hebrew], esp. 51-52 where Adikmaá material is discussed 81 Origins, p. 187.

Metatron and Shi'ur Qomah

77

to note here as well that the blurring of the distinction between the glory and the highest angel, Metatron, may also be implied in the etymology of the name Metatron given by Eleazar in one place as derived from the Latin metator, i.e., messenger, leader, or one who marks out 82 and the suffix ron (rwri) from the root rnn, i.e., song or praise: He is called Metatron, which is [derived from] metator in a foreign language, which means one who leads (manhig), as [it says] in Bereshit Rabbah83, the Holy One became a metatron for them and a leader'. Therefore [the angel] is called Metatron because he governs the world. And it says ron [i.e., to utter praise] each day. Concerning him it is said "do not defy him for My name is in him" (Exod. 23:21). Shaddai is numerically equal to Metatron. The great name is inscribed upon his heart, "for My name is in him." 84 In the continuation of this text Eleazar emphasizes in a number of ways that Metatron should not be confused with the divine, refuting the earlier tradition that emphatically states that Metatron sits upon a throne 85 : "He stands and he has no throne upon which to sit, but when he writes there is something like sitting, but not in actuality. Rather it seems as if he is sitting, for he is judge over them all." 86 Despite the fact that Eleazar attempts to avoid treating Metatron as a full-fledged divine being, 87 it is evident that he reflects, as do other Pietistic authors, older traditions wherein the line is somewhat obscured. This no doubt underlies Eleazar's own statement that Metatron governs the world, a task that one would expect to be attributed to the Creator. Already in one of the passages in the older Shi 'ur Qomah fragments there is an echo of the demiurgical characterization of Metatron in 82 For the sources of this etymology, see above, n. 26. 83 Cf. Genesis Rabbah 5:4. 84 MS Paris, BN 850, fols. 83a-b. Cf. Sode Razzaya', ed. I. Kamelhar, Bilgoraj 1936, p. 26. See, by contrast, 'Arugat ha-Bosem, ed E. E. Urbach, Jerusalem 1962, 3: 77-78. 85

Cf. Odeberg, 3 Enoch, pp. 84-86. 136-138 (Introduction); appendix of S. Lieberman to I.

Gruenwald, Apocalyptic and Merkavah Mysticism, Leiden 1980,pp. 235-241. 86 MS Paris, BN 850, fol. 83b. See also the interesting variant description of Metatron in Jacob ben Jacob ha-Kohen, Sefer ha-'Orah. MS Sdiocken 14, fol. 56b: metjajronj s"p fsar-panimj

omed 'al

kes kavod. 87 A similar tendency is evident in other writers as well who characterize Metatron in demiurgica] terms. See, e.g., Jacob ben Jacob ha-Kohen, Sefer ha- Orah, MS Sdiocken 14, fol. 61a: harey lekha sod metatjron] asher hu sod olam qat_an ... we-'eyn memshalto ella meet ha-shem yit fbarakhj we-yit'[barakh] shemo. On the demiurgical character assigned to Metatron, cf. the passage of Sefer ha-'Orah preserved in MS Milano 62, fol. 104b: ki min metatron nigzeru kol zeva ha-shamayyim we-khol toledot ha- arez we-ze 'eza eha. Cf. Abraham Abulafia, Sitre Torah, MS Paris, BN 774, fol. 164a: she-mispar metatron me'id we-'omer ani nivra, i.e., Metatrai numerically equals 314, whidi is also the numerical value of the expression ani nivra, "I am created"

78

E R. Wolfson

the description of him being written "with the letter by which heaven and earth were created."88 Such a tradition survived and continued to be influential in medieval authors as I have argued specifically in the case of ibn Ezra who identified Metatron as the yozer bereshit in whose image the human is created.89 The providential role accorded Metatron by Eleazar is affirmed as well in a passage included in Sefer ha-Hokhmah that may very well have been an important source for his own formulation: The Prince of the Countenance is called Metatron, he is all-powerful (ha-kol yakhot). Thus, the numerical value of Metatron [314] is [equal to the expression] "he who governs the whole world" (ha-manhyg kol ha-'olam = 314). This is the numerical value of Shaddai (sdy = 314), for he said "enough" to everything (she-'amar day la-koT) and he is omnipotent (kolyakhot).90 It is evident from this passage that Metatron is the demiurgical-angel in whose power is invested providential care of the cosmos. The force of this characterization is underscored by the fact that the author of the above text applies the talmudic etymology of the divine name, Shaddai, "I am the one who said to the world enough" ( 'arti hu she-'amarti le-'olam day), to Metatron. The same tradition is expressed in the anonymous Pietistic commentary on the names of Metatron referred to above, but in this case there is an effort to qualify the boldness of the claim by making the demiurgicalangel subservient to God: "Metatron numerically equals Shaddai for he said to his world enough and it was decreed, and Metatron bears the entire world by his great power, and he hangs on to the finger of the Holy One, blessed be He."91 In a second passage from the same work the role of world-sustainer is applied to Metatron as well: "[The name] ttry'l is numerically equal to nivre'u (were created) [both equal 259] for everything that was created in heaven and earth and its fullness is borne by him."92. One of the strongest proofs that 88 cf. Synopse, 389, 396, 733. On the demiurgical character of the angel Metatron as the hypostatic form of God, see the wide-ranging study of G. G. Stroumsa, "Form(s) of God: Some Notes on Metatron and Christ," Harvard Theological Review 76 (1983): 269-288. See also J. Dan, "Anafiel, Metatron, and the Creator," Tarbiz 52 (1982-83): 447^57 [Hebrew], 89 See reference above, n. 22. 90 MS Oxford-Bodleian 1568, fol. 21a. Cf. Perush Haftarah, MS Berlin Or. 942, fol. 154a: ofan ehadyesh le-ma 'lah u-zeroa ' shel metatron qashur ba- 'ofan we-tofes 'et ha- 'olam ...id amud shetofes ha-'olam zaddiq shemo we-hu tofeso bi-zeroa' ha-yamin she-ne'emfar] zaddiqyesod

'olam.

It would appear from this text that Metatron is identified as the zaddiq, the righteous one or the axis mundi. See ibid,fol. 155b: 'amudshel 'olam ha-niqra zaddiqyesod

'olam qashur ba-keruv.

91 MSS Cambridge Heb. Add. 405, fol. 302b; Guenzberg 90, fol. 127b; Oxford-Bodleian 2286, fol. 156b. 92 MSS Cambridge Heb. Add. 405, fol. 301a; Guenzberg 90, fol. 126a; Oxford-Bodleian 2286, fol. 155a.

79

Metatron and Shi'ur Qomah

Metatron and the Shekhinah were identified by certain Pietistic authors is found in the critique of this view found in the commentary on Sefer haQomah of Moses ha-Darshan of Erfurt. The relevant comment occurs in the context of explicating some of the names of Metatron in the spirit and language of the commentary on these names published as Sefer ha-Hesheq : rwh pysqwnyt is numerically equal to brl"w Ίρ rybw prsh93 and this is the measure of the Prince of the Countenance. If someone were to ask, is it not written "Great is our Lord and full of power (Ps. 147:5)? The response is that the glory reveals himself to the prophet in that measure, but the Cause of Causes has no measure... hygrwn is numerically equal to 'zr [i.e., help or assistance] for he cannot do anything if the Holy One, blessed be He, does not assist him. This is to exclude those who say that the Prince of the Countenance is the Shekhinah and the Shekhinah is called the Prince of the Countenance. It is not so but rather the Prince of the Countenance is from the power of the Shekhinah. He is appointed as ruler and judge over the whole world, but Heaven forbid should one say concerning the Prince of the Countenance that he is the Shekhinah or that the Shekhinah is the Prince of the Countenance. If, however, you find that somone calls the Shekhinah by [the name] Metatron, this is not a mistake. This is another secret that is explained in the name of R. Tam, may the memory of the righteous be for a blessing, which he found in this book. Thus all of them [i.e., the names of Metatron] are explained in the book of Nehemiah the son of R. [Solomon],94 may the memory of the righteous be for a blessing.95 On the one hand, R. Moses categorically rejects the identification of the angelic Metatron and the divine Presence.96 This is implied as well in other 93 In fact the numerical equivalence is off here for ruah pisqonit = 930 and brl"w Ip rybw prsh 912; the mistake is due to a scribal error in the first word of the second phrase, i.e., bri''w should be krl"w, and this would make the total of the whole expression 930. 94 Here I have followed the suggested emendation of Sdiolaa, Reshit ha-Qabbalah, p. 201, n. 2. See the tradition transmitted in this name in Abraham ben Azriel, Sefer Arugat ha-Bosem, ed. E. E. Urbach, Jerusalem 1939,1: 33,50, and esp. 198. See Dan, The Esoteric Theology, pp. 40, 66. 95 MS Rome-Angelica 46, fol. 8a, partially transcribed in Scholen, Reshit ha-Qabbalah, p. 201. 96 Cf. Sefer ha- Orah, MS Sdiocken 14, fol. 63a, where the sin of Nadab and Abihu is specified as thinking that Metatron was God. The antic distinction between God and Metatron is also emphasized in the following poem of Moses ben Samuel ben Absalom, in E. D. Goldsdunidt, Mahazor

Sukkol,

Shemini 'Azeret, we-Simhat Torah, Jerusalem 1981, p. 366: meqom 'adiriron/ alam mitatron/ sheshemo rasham patron/ raq qore be-garon/ barukh kevodyy mimeqomo. The traditional rejection of the identification of Metatron and the divine Presence (cf. the reading of Exod. 23:31 in B. Sanhédrin 38b) is reiterated by other medieval commentaries, e.g., R. Solomon ben Isaac of Troyes and R. Meir ha-Levi Abulafia. SeeB. Septimus, Hispano-Jewish Culture in Transition, Cambridge 1982, p. 167,

E R. Wolfson

80

passages of the same work, e.g., we read in a section wherein an explanation is offered for the attribution of the name YHWH ha-Qatan [the lesser Tetragrammaton97] to Metatron: "the Prince of the Countenance knows that very name [i.e., YHWH] and, consequently, the Shekhinah governs him by way of mercy. Therefore he is called YHWH ha-Qatan to indicate that he is governed by means of mercy. And since he knows this name he is called a limb of the Shekhinah."98 In a third context the polemical stance vis-à-vis those who identified Metatron as the Shekhinah is evident: The tenth sefirah is the yod and she overflows to the youth (na'ar), 99 as it is said 100 "the hand of the Holy One, blessed be He, rests upon the head of His servant Metatron, and the youth comes and bows down to the Holy One." From here there is a proof and response to those who say that the youth is the Shekhinah, for if one says that the Shekhinah bows down to the Holy One, blessed be He, then, God forbid, this amounts to cutting the shoots.101 On the other hand, R. Moses does allow for the attribution of the name Metatron to the Shekhinah, an aspect of the tradition that he considers to be esoteric (sod). The precise nature of that secret is not revealed, but it seems to me plausible to suggest that it involved some tradition, as one finds in kabbalistic sources,102 which distinguished an upper and lower Metatron, one angelic and the other divine, and hence the name can be ascribed to the Shekhinah. It appears that in one context R. Moses utilizes the orthographic distinction, already attested in the Shi'ur Qomah fragments, 103 between writing Metatron with seven (myttrwn) or six (mttrwri) letters to make this very point, a strategy used by various Spanish kabbalists for this purpose as

n. 18. 97 Cf. Odeberg, 3 Enoch, pp. 188-192 of Introduction, and 33-34 of the commentary; Scholem, Major Trends, p. 68. 98

MS Rome-Angelica 46, fol. 2a. Scholen, On the Mystical Shape of the Godhead, New York,

1991,p. 297,n. 63, maintains that the German Pietists were the source of the image of the limb of the Presence. 99 Concerning this title of Metatron, see Scholem, Jewish Gnosticism, p. 50, who suggests that the term in this context should be rendered as servant rathe· than youth. See also D. Halperin, The Faces of the Chariot: Early Jewish Responses to Ezekiel 's Vision, Tübingen 1988, pp. 421 -427. 100 cf. Synopse 384. 101 MS Rome-Angelica 46, fol. 1 lb, transcribed by Scholem, Reshit ha-Qabbalah, p. 202. See ibid, fol. 3a: u-vishvil zeh nittan le-sar ha-pani'[m] kol ha-kavod ha-zeh ki yad ha-shekhin'fah] 'al ro sho. 102 See references above, rm. 27-28. 103 Cf. Synopse, 389; Cchen, The Shi'ur Qomah: Texts and Recensions, pp. 105, 159, 208. See Scholem, Major Trends, p. 70; Cchen, The Shi 'ur Qomah: Liturgy and Theurgy, p. 128.

Metatron and Shi'ur Qomah

81

well. 104 It may be concluded, therefore, that attested in the Pietistic writings is the tradition that the glory is identified with an angelic being that is at the same time described as the anthropomorphic figuration of the deity, even if it is the case, as it surely is, that the Pietists themselves tried to distinguish the glory and the angel and some of them even openly criticized those who failed to uphold such a distinction. I would like to conclude with one final motif that appears to have been another esoteric tradition connected with Metatron, which circulated in the various Pietistic circles including that of Judah and Eleazar, and which may also have some bearing on the identification of the angelic Metatron and an aspect of the divine glory. The motif to which I refer concerns the older aggadic notion of the image of Jacob engraved upon the throne of glory . 105 In a lengthy study I have discussed some of the themes related to this image in the writings of the German Pietists, tracing them back through piyyut literature, older mystical texts, and the standard targumim and midrashim. 106 My remarks here are limited to the question of the possible identification of Metatron as Jacob's image. It will be recalled that in an article published in 1970 Jonathan Z. Smith showed that in a Jewish apocryphal text, the Prayer of Joseph, cited by Origen, the archangel Israel is described in terms applied 104 Cf. MS Rome-Angelica 46, fol. l i b . Cf. G. Scholen, Le-Heqer, pp. 15, 28-29. un. 97-98 [= Tarbiz 2 (1931): 202, 214-215, tm. 97-98], 182-183, n. 3 [= Tarbiz 5 (1934): 186-187, n. 3], See also "The Commentary on Ezekiel's Chariot by R. Jacob ben Jacob ha-KoheE of Castile," ed Α. Farber, NLA. thesis, Hebrew University, 1978, pp. 27, 124-125, n. 16 [Hebrew]; Idei, The Mystical Experience, p. 165, n. 209. Other relevant kabbalistic sources are cited by R. Margaliot, Mal'akhe Elyon, Jerusalem 1988, pp. 88-89. 105 cf. Targum Yeruáialmi ad Gen 28:12; Genesis Rabbah 68:12, 82:2; B. Hullin 91b; Numbers Rabbah 4:1; Lamentations Rabbah 2:2. The motif has been discussed by various scholars of whom I will here mention only some representative examples. See L. Ginzberg, The Legends of the Jews, Hiila. 1968, 5:290, n. 134; J. Z. Smith, "The Prayer of Joseph," Religions in Antiquity: Essays in Memory of Erwin Ramsdell Goodenough, ed. J. Neusier, Leiden 1970, pp. 284-286; A. Ahmami, Essays in Jewish Intellectual History, Hannover 1981, p. 18; Haperin, Faces of the Chariot, p. 121. Two of the more recent discussions of this aggadic molif can be found in J. L. Kugel, In Potiphar s House: The Interpretive Life of Biblical Texts, San Francisco 1990, pp. 112-120, and D. Stem, Parables in Midrash: Narrative and Exegesis in Rabbinic Literature, Cambridge and London 1991, pp. 110-113. According to another tradition, the images of all three patriarchs were engraved on the throne; cf. Perush Hafiarah, MS Berlin Or. 942, fol. 154b: ha-'avot haquqi'fm]

be-khisse ha-

kavod; and the poem attributed to Johanan ha-Kohan, published in E. D. Goldschmidt, Mahazor laYamim ha-Nora'im, vol. 2: Yom Kippur, Jerusalem 1970, p. 406: we-tavnit harerey qedem bakisse. See also Zohar 1:115b (Midrash ha-Ne 'elam) where there is a tradition that the icon of each righteous person is engraved on the heavenly throne. 106 See E. R. Wolfson, "The Image of Jacob Engraved on the Throne" (cited in full at the ead erf" n. I)·

82

E R . Wolfson

elsewhere to the Logos or Metatron (or, in some cases, Gabriel or Michael). 107 Such a tradition, perhaps through the intermediary of Philo who refers to the Logos as Israel, the first-born of God, 108 passed into Christian sources wherein the celestial Jacob or Israel was identified with Jesus who is depicted as the Logos and Son of God. 109 There is no reason to assume any direct transmission of this tradition to the medieval Pietists, 110 for contained in the targumic, aggadic, midrashic, payyetanic and mystical sources are allusions to the angelic or even divine nature of Israel and/or Jacob. It is entirely plausible that the Pietists reconstructed the identification of Jacob's image as the demiurgical-angel on the basis of hints to this idea in the traditional sources, although one should not rule out the possibility that older texts did circulate in their midst that made this identification more explicitly. Evidence for such a text can be found, for example, in a fragment copied by Aaron ben Yehiel in his Qorban Aharon from a manuscript of the commentary of Eliezer ben Natan of Mainz (the RaBaN) to piyyutim that was 107 See reference to Smith's article in n. 104. See also J. H. Charlesworth, "The Portrayal of the Righteous as an Angel," in Ideal Figures in Ancient Judaism, ed G. W. E. Nickelsburg and J. J. Collins, Chico, Ca. 1980, pp. 135-151, esp. 140. 108 See reference to I t i l o in following note; and cf. J. Drummond, Philo Judaeus; or, the JewishAlexandrian Philosophy in Its Development and Completion, London 1888, 2: 206-207. 109 See, e.g., Hippolytus, Against the Heresy of One Noetus, in The Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 5 (Grand Rapids, 1951), p. 225: "For who is Jacob His servant, Israel His beloved, but He of whom He crieth, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye Him?' (Mat. 17:5). Having received, then, all knowledge from the Father, the perfect Israel, the true Jacob, afterward did show Himself upon earth, and conversed with men. And who, again, is meant by Israel but a man who sees God? and there is no one who sees God except the Son alone (cf. John 1:18, 6:46), the perfect man who alone declares the will of the Father." On the etymology of Israel as "cue who sees God," see Smith, "The Prayer of Joseph," p. 266, n. 2. Particularly relevant for the passage from Hippolytus is Philo who identifies the Logos as the divine image, God's first-bom, also named Israel, for it is he who sees God; cf. De Confusione Linguarum, 146. Cf. the comprehensive study of G. Delling, "The One Who Sees God' in Itilo," Nourished With Peace: Studies in Hellenistic Judaism in Memory of Samuel Sandmel, ed. F. E. Greœspahn, E. Hilgert, and Β. L. Mack, Chico Ca. 1984, pp. 27-42. See also C. H. Dodd, The Interpretation of the Fourth Gospel, Cambridge 1953, pp. 70-72. Finally, mention should be made of some scholars' observation that John 1:50-52 may already presuppose a transference of a midrashic reading of Gen. 28:12 from Jacob to Jesus. See Kugel, In

Potiphar's

House, p. 115, and other references given on p. 124, n. 39. The resemblance of the mctif of the angehe Jacob to traditions about the incarnation of Jesus in Christian sources has been noted by M Smith, "The Account of Simon Magus in Acts 8," in Harry Austryn Wolfson Jubilee

Volume,

Jerusalem 1965, 2; pp. 748-749. 110 On the other hand, Liebes has argued that an older Jewidi-Ghristian motif, which identified the figure of Metatron, or the Prince of the Countenance, with Yesfaua (i.e., Jesus), is reflected in the Rodi ha-Shanah liturgy as transmitted by the Goman Pietists. See reference above, n. 2.

83

Metatron and Shi'ur Qomah

in the hands of Ephraim Zalman Margaliot.111 In this text Metatron, the Prince of the Countenance, is explicitly identified with Jacob whose image is engraved upon the throne and upon the heart of Metatron. 112 One of the clearest indications that the Pietists were recipients of some such tradition is found in the commentary of the names of Metatron to which I have already referred on several occasions. Commenting on one of the names of Metatron the anonymous Pietist writes: "hsyh is numerically equal to upon the throne' (ba-kisse\ i.e., both expressions = 83), for he [Metatron] is engraved above on the throne of glory." 113 While the aggadic notion of Jacob's image engraved upon the throne is not mentioned here, it is obvious that precisely this theme has been appropriated by the author of this text and applied to Metatron. It is likely that such an appropriation was made possible by the fact that in the older merkavah sources the name Israel is associated

111 Cf. Arugat ha-Bosem, ed. Urbach, 4: 36-38, es*>. 38, η. 81. 112 Cited in E. D. Goldschmidt, Mahazor la-Yamim ha-Nora'im, vol. 1 : Roefa ha-Shanah, Jerusalem 1970, p. 84, n. 44. According to another Ashkenaà tradition extant in MS JTSA Mie. 1878, fol. 44a, which describes the ascent of prayer as the crown through various levels, Metatron is clearly distinguished from the image of Jacob: sandalfon ... meqabbelet be-hoftiey esh u-metaqqenet keeyti keter u-malbisha ba- 'esh mazheret u-mazkir ha-shem aleha we- olah ke-neged metatron sar ha-gadol sar ha-panim u-malbishah hod mezaher esh we- 'olah ke-neged demut ya aqov az haketer melubbash ba- esh tiferei she· eyn jayin yekholah lehistakkel bah me-rov zihhur miyad kol ha-hayyot weha-'ofannim we-hashmalim u-serafim we-khisse ha-kavod notenim shevah

mefo'ar

le-melekh ha-kavod 'az ha-keter mitrahev le- 'eyn sof. From this text one may conclude that the moment that the crown reaches Jacob's image it results in the liturgical praising of the glory. Cf. the Ashkenazi commentary on the hymn, Ha- Äderet we-ha- 'Emunah, MS Vatican 228, fol. 107b, which also describes the ascent of the crown made from the prayers of Israel: we-kheshe-hu maggia ' lidemut ya'aqov

avinu she-haquq be-khisse ha-kavod 'az mitrahev lifhe ha-kavod

legamrey bi-zekhut ya'aqov

u-mitpa'er

'avinu. Concerning this text, see J. Dan, "Aáikenazi Hasidic

Commentaries in the Hymn Ha-Äderet we-ha-'EmunahTarbiz

50 (1981): 396-404 [Hebrew]. Cf.

the formulation in the yozer of the early Palestinian payyetan, Joseph b. Nissan, cited in E. Eleisdier, The Yozer Its Emergence and Development (Jerusalem, 1984), p. 727 [Hebrew]: ya 'aqov nehqaq bi-meromey ma'lah/yiddodun

saqro mar ito vi-tehillah/natenu

shevah le-melekh nora

alila

qafdosh]. Several lines before these the aggadic motif of Jacob's image engraved upon the throne is mentioned in slightly different terms: demuto u-mahawito muhqaq hu ' be-khisse demuto/ gam hamal'akh la-mal'akhim redu hazu mar'it. 113 MSS Camb. Heb. Add. 405, fol. 307b, Guenzberg 90, fol. 129a, Oxford-Bodleian 2256, fol. 160a. The attribution of the aggadic motif erf' Jacob 's image engraved an the throne to Metatron may also underlie a second passage in this text. Cf. MSS Camb. Heb. Add 405, fol. 313a, Guenzberg 90, fol. 132a, Oxford-Bodleian 2256,fols. 163b-164a: g'ytyh be-gi[matria) we-khiss'akha ki hu omed le-malah

'ezel kisse ha-kavod... g'ytyh be-gi'fmatriaj

kisse yhw"h left she-hu' haquq we-'omed

'ezel ha-kisse we-ha-kisse haquq mimmennu we-hu azmo hazuv be-tokho.

84

ER. Wolfson

with Metatron, specifically his crown. 114 It is also possible that at some stage in the transmission of these ideas the angel Metatron was identified with the celestial beast named Israel and upon whose forehead the name Israel was inscribed,115 as indeed the description of the latter often comes very close to the description of the former. In later kabbalistic sources, e.g., Jacob ben Jacob ha-Kohen116 and Abraham Abulafia,117 both of whom were substantially influenced by the German Pietists, the beast named Israel is linked to Metatron and/or the image of Jacob.118 114 cf Synopse, 398. It should be noted as well that in these older sources the crown upon the head of the divine glory is likewise givm the name Israel. For references see Ceben, The Sh 'iur Qomah: Texts and Recensions, pp. 36, n. 38, 128, 149. On the association of the name Israel with Metatron, see also Sefer ha- Orah, MS Milano 62, fol. 108b, and the text publiáied by Scholem, Madda 'e haYahadut 2 (1927): 242. See below, n. 116. U 5 Cf. Synopse, 406; Scholem,Major Τrends, p. 62; Ginzberg, Legends, 5: 307, n. 253. 116 See Färber, "The Commentary on Ezdciel's Chariot," pp. 42, 86, n. 10, 98, n. 7; G. Scholem, "The Traditions of R. Jacob and R. Isaac, the sons of R. Jacob ha-Kchen," Madda 'e ha-Yahadut 2 (1927): 208, 210 [Hebrew]. See also Moses ben Simon of Burgos, Sefer ha-Orah, MS JTSA Mie. 1806, fol. 18b. 117 On the identification of Metatron as Israel, see M Idei, "The Writings of Abraham Abulafia and His Teadiing," Ph.D., Hebrew University, 1976, pp. 89-90 [Hebrew]; idem, Language, Torah, and Hermeneutics, pp. 36, 38, 40. On the identification of Metatron as the Active Intellect in Abulafia, see also idem, The Mystical Experience, pp. 116-119. For the identification of Metatron as the image of Jacob engraved on the throne, cf. Or ha-Sekhel, MS Munich 92, fol. 59b; Sefer ha-Melammed, MS Oxford-Bodleian 1649, fol. 204b; Sefer ha-Mqftehot, MS JTSA Mie. 1686, fol. 127a; Gan Na'ul, MS Munich 58, fol. 324b; Ozar Eden Ganuz, MS Oxford-Bodleian 1580, fol. 9b; Νer 'Elohim, MS Munich 10, fol. 133b. I have discussed these passages in the article rtferred to above, n. 106. See also MS Cambridge 405, fols. 155b-160a. This tradition may also be implied in the following passage in Hayye 'Olam ha-Ba', MS Oxford-Bodleian 1582, fol. 20b: 'omnam b'[et] shemot k"w [yhw"h] s"h f'adonayj sodam mal'akh 'elohim u-shemo 'el gana we-sodo ya aqov. Cf. Eleazar of Worms, Sefer ha-Shem, MS British Museum 737, fol. 184a: yhw"h be-gim'[atria] k"w we-niqra 'adonay be-gim '[atria] s"h harey z"' harey b '[et] shemot be-gim '[atria] ya 'aqov. US The linkage of the celestial beast named Israel and the image of Jacob can be traced to earlier sources as well. Cf. Men ahem b. Solomon, Midrash Sekhel Τον, ed. S. Buber, New York 1959, p. 141. Commenting on the Statement in Genesis Rabbah 68:12 describing Jacob, "you are the one whose icon is engraved above," this author writes: "They [the angels] ascœd and see the fourth beast in the throne of glory whose name like his is Israel." See also Judah ben Barali ai, Perush Sefer Yezirah, ed. S. J. Halberstam, Berlin 1895, p. 43: "It is explained in the aggadah that the countenance of Jacob is engraved on the throne, and it also explained in the dream of Jacob regarding the matter of [the verse] 'Behold the angels of God were ascending and descending upon it,' that the ones above descended to see the countenance of Jacob our father that is similar to the beast underneath the thrcne of glory." For the image of Jacob situated beneath the throne rather than on it, see the formulation in the collection of Pietistic traditions edited by Simhah bar Shem Τον (see above, n. 5), MS JTSA Mie.

M e t a t r o n and S h i ' u r Q o m a h

85

In the writings of the Kalonymide circle, especially Eleazar, there are numerous references to the image of Jacob engraved on the throne, including most significantly an adaptation of the passage in Hekhalot Rabbati that describes God crouching over, caressing, hugging and kissing the splendor of the countenance of Jacob engraved on the throne.119 In my opinion, as I have argued in detail in the aforementioned study, there is no doubt that this image functions hypostatically for Eleazar based on earlier teachings that viewed Israel or Jacob as a divine or angelic power. According to the evidence of some other texts in Eleazar's writings, again following older sources,120 the image of Jacob engraved on the throne was linked either to the human form of the glory enthroned upon the chariot seen by Ezekiel or the human form of the celestial beast that comprised four faces. 121 Additionally, in Eleazar's case the image of Jacob is compared, following a passage in Lamentations Rabbah,122 to the crown called Israel or the splendor of Israel, sometimes designated the head phylacteries of God, 123 as well as the throne124 or the 2430, fol. 68b: we-zurat ya akov tahat kisse ha-kavod. See also the version erf" Eleazar of Worms' commentary to Song of Songs 6:2 cited in J. Gellis, Sefer Tosafot ha-Shalem, vol. 8, Jerusalem1989, p. 121: ha-kavod mehabbeq demuto shel ya'aqov be-khisse ha-kavod mah she-nehqaq tahat kisse ha-kavod we-zehu tahat le-roshi otiyyot yisra 'el. See also a related tradition preserved in MS JTSA Mie. 1851, fol. lb: we-hu' sod 'am"en we-hu' sod 'adonay we-yhw"h we-khakha mal'akh... hu'sod 'am"en uva-'ellu ha-g'fimmel]

olim kemo

'otiyyot ata ohez ma'alot kullam ha'elohut we-

zehu sod mal akh she-mal akh 'elohim miyyad yarad al ha-qore ellu ha-shemot hu ' sod shadday we-hu sod metatron we-hu ' sod mal akh we-hu ' sod amen we-khakha 'oleh ha-kol. 119 cf. Synopse, 164. 120 cf. the ancient targumic rendering discussed by Halperin, Faces of the Chariot, p. 121. Evidmce for sudi interpretations of Ezekiel is found in a variety of sources that influenced the German Pietists, to wit, Eleazar Kaffir's poem, we-hayyot 'asher hennah merubba'ot kisse, in Goldsdurudt, Mahazor la-Yamim ha-Nora'im, vol. 1: R«& ha-Shanah, p. 217; cf. I. Goldaher, "Neuplatonisdie und gaostische Elanente im Hadit," Gesammelte Schriften, Hildedieim 1970, p. 328, n. 2; Pirqe R. Eli'ezer, dj. 35; Otiyyot de-R, Aqiva', in BatteMidrashot,

ed. S. Wertheimer, Jerusalem 1980, 1:

383; the commentary of Rasili to Ezek. 1:5, s.v. demut 'adam hennah, as well as his commentary to B. Hullin 91b, s.v. u-mistakkelim be-diyoqano shel ma'lah. 121 Cf. Eleazar of Worms, Perush ha-Merkavah, MS Paris, BN 850, fol. 57a; Sode Razayya,

ed S.

Weiss, Jerusalem 1991, p. 148. Cf. MSS Oxford-Bodleian 1638, fol. 56a and Munich 61, fol. 65b. And see Färber, "The Concept of the Merkabah," p. 611. The influence of Eleazar is discernible in the Castilian circle of Jacob ben Jacob ha-Kohen; see references in n. 116. 122 Lamentations Rabbah 2:2 (ed S. Buba-, Vilna 1899, p. 96). 123 For the historical background erf" these images, see M Bar-Dan, "The Idea of Crowning God in Hekhalot Mysticism and the Karaitic Polemic," Jerusalem Studies in Jewish Thought 6, 1-2 (1987): 221-234 [Hebrew], 124 it is of interest to note that in the Sefer ha-Bahir one likewise finds a convergence of three symbols to refer to the last of the divine gradations, viz., crown, phylacteries, and throne. For a

86

ER. Wolfson

cherub.125 Eleazar goes so far as to say that the verse we-ra'ita 'et ahoray numerically equals ki-demut ya'aqov she-haquqah ba-kisse,126 implying therefore that the vision of the divine back involved the seeing of Jacob's image. 127 In one passage in his commentary on the prayers Eleazar elaborates discussion of the relevant sources, see E. R. Wolfson, "Images of God's Feet: Some Observations an the Divine Body in Judaism," in People of the Book: Jews and Judaism in Embodied Perspective, ed. H. Eilberg-Sdiwartz, Albany 1992, pp. 160-161 (see below, n. 126). For discussion of one of the key passages in the Bahir, see also Stem, Parables in Midrash, pp. 220-221. 125 Cf. Eleazar of Worms, Perush ha-Merkavah, MS Paris, BN 850, fols. 56b-57a; MS Mussayef 145, fol. 35b; Sode Razayya , ed. Weiss, pp. 4-5, cf. Sefer Razi 'el, Amsterdam 1701, 8a-b, 147-148. I have discussed these and other passages at length in my study referred to above, n. 106. 126 See references in preceding note. See also Eleazar's Perush ha-Tefillot, MS Oxford-Bodleian 1204, fol. 97a. The correct numerology, however, may be supplied from Jacob ha-Kohen's Perush Mirkevet Yehezqel, ed. Farber, p.8, where he reports that the expression we-ra'aita 'et 'ahoray equals bi-demutya'aqov she-haquq ba-kisse, i.e. both are 1237. 127 See, however, the tradition reported in the name of Eleazar of Worms in MS JTSA Mie. 2430, fol. 74a, corresponding to 'Arugat ha-Bosem, ed. Urbach, 1: 198, according to which the divine back is interpreted as referring to the angehe images (demuyot) behind the glory that are visible (an interpretation based in paît on Targum Pseudo-Jonathan to ExodL 33:23). See Färber, "The Concept of the Merkabah," p. 407. It is possible that the above referai ce alludes to another idea expressed by Eleazar concerning nine visions or appearances through which the glory is seen (cf. Leviticus Rabbah 1:14, mittokh tesha' 'ispaqlariyot hayu ha-nevi'im ro'im\ see the interesting reference to the "nine pure, inner miiros," tesha' 'ispaqlariyot penimiyyot tehorot, set between God and the poet in The Poems ofRabbi Isaac Ibn Ghiyyat, ed. Y. David, Jerusalem 1987, p. 67 [Hebrew], Seethe extensive analysis in Färber, op. cit., pp. 402-404; and the brider discussion in A. Funkenstein, "Nahmanides' Symbolical Reading of History," in Studies in Jewish Mysticism, ed. J. Dan and F. Talmage, Cambridge, Mass. 1982, p. 138. See also Scholem, Major Trends, pp. 117-118. In some cases the idea of the nine forms is even connected with the motif of the image of Jacob engraved on the throne. See, e.g., Sode Razzaya', ed. Kamelhar, p. 29: ba-kisse demut ya'aqov lakhen t'fesha'] pe'amim ba-qeriyyah 'avdey ya'aqov ke-neged t'fesha] miney zohar ... nimza t'fesha'] mahazot la-kavod we-nir'eh al demut ya 'aqov. Cf. MSS Oxford-Bodleian 1566, fols. 37b, 41b, 226b; Paris 772, fol. 48b; Munich 232, fol. 7b; see Färber, op. cit., p. 412. For another A&kenazi interpretation erf'the divine back seœ by Moses, cf. J. Dan, "The Book of Angels of R. Judah the Pious," Da 'at 2-3 (197879): 115 [Hebrew], See also the text incoporated in Eleazar's Sefer ha-Hokhmah, MS OxfordBodleian 1812, fol. 63a (= MS Oxford-Bodleian 1568, fol. 6a): keshe-biqqesh mosheh rabbenu lifhey hqb"h har'eni 'et kevodekha 'amar lo ki lo yir'ani ha- 'adam wa-hay mikkol maqom mazata hen be-'eynay lakhen 'agalleh lekha pazmaqey sheli mah she-lo her'eti le-shum navi. Regarding this passage, see Scholem, Origins, p. 125, n. 129; Wolfson, "Images of God's Feet," p. 160. It would appear that, according to this text, the back of the divine is identified with the lowest gradation symbolically depicted as the shoe of God. On the other hand, in the continuation of the text we read: she-her'ah lo derekh 'ispaqlarya mezuhzahat pazmaqey shelo we-hi' ha-keter 'elyon ha-niqret malkhut 'asirit we-zeh ra'ah m"r[mosheh rabbenu] kemo s'"l[she-'amarlo] hqb"h we-hasiroti 'et

87

Metatron and S h i ' u r Q o m a h

on a motif employed by several payyetanim, including Kallir, which involves God's transforming His anger into compassion by looking upon the form of Jacob when the shofar is blown on Rosh ha-Shanah.128 In Eleazar's own words: "Blow the horn on the new moon"129 has 13 words corresponding to the 13 attributes [of mercy] for the Holy One, blessed be He, is filled with mercy through [the blowing of] the shofar on account of the merit of the 13 letters in [the names of] the patriarchs of the world130. The ten commandments [comprise] 172 (¿qb) and the ten (y) shofarot131 are kappay we-ra'ita 'et 'ahoray we-'az ra'ah mah she ra'ah. Here again we see a convergence of symbolism such that the lowest (the áloe) is the highest (the supernal crown); see reference to my study above, n. 124. For discussion of a second passage in Sefer ha-Hokhmah

(MSS Oxford-

Bodleian 1812, fol. 60a; 1568, fol. 5a) that employs similar symbols, see Scholem, Origins, pp. 184185; Dan, The Esoteric Theology, pp. 119-127; Färber, "The Concept of the Meikabah," pp. 231244; Idei, Kabbalah: New Perspectives, p. 195. 128 The examples of this in the liturgical poetry are numerous; hence, I will cite here only a few sources that likely would have influmced Eleazar c i Worms. Cf. the silluq of Eleazar Kallir, melekh mishpatya'amid

'erez, in Goldsdimidt, Mahazor la-Yamim ha-Nora'im, vol. 1: Rodi ha-Shanah, p.

83. See also the passage in Kallir's we-hayyot asher hennah merubba'ot kisse in Goldsdimidt, op. cit., p. 217. And cf. the selihah of Simeon bar Isaac bar Abun cited in E. Fleische·, Hebrew Liturgical Poetry in the Middle Ages, Jerusalem 1975, p. 435 [Hebrew], For the reverberation of this motif in kabbalistic literature, cf. G. Scholem, "A New Section from the Midrash ha-Ne 'elam in the Zohar," Festschrift for L. Ginzberg, New York 1946, p. 431 [Hebrew]; Zohar 1:168a Eleazar of Worms returns repeatedly in his writings to the thane of God activating His mercy by gazing upon the image of Jacob on the throne. See, e.g., Sefer ha-Roqeah, Jerusalem 1967, p. 214; Sefer ha-Shem, MS British Museum 737, fol. 184b; Perush ha-Merkavah, MS Paris, BN 850, fol. 59a and cf. Jacob ha-Kohen's Perush Mirkevet Yehezqel, ed Färber, p. 29. This idea ultimately is derived from the passage in Hekhalot Rabbati (see above, n. 119), for the act of God embracing and kissing the image of Jacob is activated by the community of Israel saying the sanctus below. The liturgical act is thus endowed with theurgical power to activate God's love or mercy, symbolized in these overtly erotic terms Cf. the ofan for Simhat Torah, in Goldsdimidt, Mahazor Sukkot, p. 361: ashrekha qadosh be-haqdishkha

om

ha-shem/ yisra 'el nosheq hatum be-khiss 'o be-leshem. By extension for

some poets the image of Jacob itself was transformed into the recipient of Israel's prayers. See, e.g., the formulation of Eleazar Kallir in the qerovah, 'erez matah we-ra 'ashah, in Mahazor (Venice, 1599), 244b: qaru le-ya'aqov ha-nehtam bi-shemey 'arez. 129 That is, the two verses, Ps. 81:4-5 (which ends with the word Jacob), comprises 13 words. These words are said as part of the shofarot section of the musaf service; cf. Goldsdimidt, Mahazor laYamim ha-Nora'im, vol. 1: Rodi ha-Shanah, p. 153. This is the immediate context of Eleazar's comments. 130 That is, the Hebrew names of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob comprise 13 letters. That is, the tea biblical verses dealing with the blowing of the shofar that are recited in the shofarot section of the musaf service.

E R. Wolfson

88

recited to recall the merit of Jacob (ya'aqov)132.... Thus He kisses the image of Jacob when the sound of the shofar [is heard]. The image of Jacob is on the throne, as it is witten, "They saw the God of Israel and under His feet" (Exod. 24:10), like the appearance, i.e., Israel. "Under His feet ," that is, "He did not remember His footstool on His day of wrath" (Lam. 2:1). Therefore, when the shofar is blown He sees the image of Jacob and changes to His mercy. God the king sits on the throne of mercy. "He mounted a cherub" (2 Sam. 22:11, Ps. 18:11), from upon Jacob.133 "A ruling of the God of Jacob" (Ps. 81:5). Gloiy above the glory ( k a v o d le-ma'lah mi-kavod). It cannot be explained further ( en lef [aresh]

yoter).134

The significance of this text is underscored by the concluding remark that is obviously meant to communicate some secret teaching that Eleazar was not willing to elaborate in writing. 135 Whatever the nature of that mystery, for the purposes of this study it is important to note that in this passage the motif of the glory kissing the image of Jacob engraved upon the throne is set within a larger context of the double doctrine of the glory, expressed in terms of Nathan ben Yehiel of Rome's oft-cited phrase, "glory above the glory." 136 That is, the relationship between the enthroned glory and Jacob's image is an expression of the dynamic of the upper and lower glory that is also depicted as God sitting on the throne of mercy or mounting a cherub. These symbols are interchangeable for, as I have indicated above, in the writings of Eleazar

132 According to other Pietistic sources, the name Jacob symbolizes the Torah that is said to be comprised within the Decalogue, for the first letter of this name, y, represents the tm commandments, and the remaining three letters, qb, correspond to the 172 words contained in the Decalogue. Cf. MS Oxford-Bodleian 1566, fol. 168a; Perush ha-Tefillot, MS Paris, BN 772, fols. 28a-b, 84a; MS Cambridge Add. 644, fol. 19a. 133 The spelling is in the defective, mylqb, but the piene fona, myjjwb, equals 228, which is the numerical value of the word krwb, dierub. 134 m s Paris, BN 111, fol. 159b. 135 In another text Eleazar treats the theme of Jacob's image co the thrcne as a secret that can only be divulged orally to the one who fears God, i.e., the Pietist. Cf. MS Munich 232, fol. 7b. See also Eleazar's Perush ha-Tefillot, MS Paris, BN 772, fol. 132b. I have attempted to explain the nature of the secret in terms of a dynamic between the upper, masculine glory and the lower, feminine glory; see my study on "The Image of Jacob". 136 See Aruch Completum, ed. A. Kohut (Vienna, 1926), 6: 110, s.v. spqlr. Cf. Dan, The Esoteric Theology, pp. 111-112. Eleazar employs this phrase in other writings as well. See, e.g., the text publidiedby Dan, Studies in Ashkenazi-Hasidic Literature, p. 86; Sha'are ha-Sod ha-Yihud we-ha'Emunah,p. 148.

Metatron and Shi'ur Qomah

89

the image of Jacob can be portrayed as the throne as well as a cherub upon which the upper glory rests. To date, however, I have found no explicit indication in Eleazar's writings that Jacob's image is to be identified either as Metatron or the divine back, as one finds explicitly in the anonymous Pietistic commentary on the names of Metatron.137 Interestingly enough, in his kabbalistic reworking of Eleazar's commentary on Ezekiel's chariot Jacob ben Jacob ha-Kohen does in fact take this step: the image of Jacob, identified as Metatron or the celestial beast Israel, is the lower glory in the angelic realm that corresponds to the glory in the sefirotic realm, viz., the sixth emanation, Tiferei138. The same approach is to be found in an anonymous commentary on the tenth chapter of Ezekiel that was apparently composed by someone in the circle of Jacob and Isaac haKohen, perhaps Todros Abulafia.139 It is not entirely clear to what extent this identification is implied in Eleazar's references to the image of Jacob, although many of these comments seem to imply some such identification. Yet, it is of interest to note the following statement in a fragment of Eleazar 's disciple, Shem Τον ben Simhah: "I have received from the mouth of the Rabbi that Metatron is a messenger and he is a special chariot, for his name is such for every messenger is called metatron, and in Greek it is metator", umequbbal 'ani mi-pi ha-rav ki metatron hu ' shaliah we- 'ihu rekhev meyuhad she-shemo kakh ki kol shaliah niqra metatron we-lashon yewani hu' metator,140 The rabbi referred to here is Eleazar of Worms who thus orally transmitted this tradition that designates Metatron as the rekhev meyuhad, a

137 For the explicit identification of Metatron as the divine bade. cf. MSS Cambridge Heb. Add. 405, fol. 306b; Moscow-Guenzberg 90, fol. 128b, Oxford-Bodleian 2286, fol. 159a-b (printed in Sefer haHesheq, 6a): zrkyh begi'[matria] qwdqwdy lefi she-biqqesh moshe lifrey hqb"h she-hayah lo etkevodo

mar'eh

'am'far] lo ki lo yir'ani ha-'adam wa-hay m"m [mi-kol maqom] 'aharey she-biqqesh

lhqb"h kol kakh 'amar we-hasiroti 'et kappay we-ra'ita 'et 'ahoray zeh aharey ha-bore'

we-her'ah lo le-mosheh qesher tefillin be-qadqod

metatron

she-hayah

hqb"h. The passage is

obviously based on the aggadic interrelation of Exod. 33:23 in B. Berakhot 7a to the effect that the back of the divine seen by Moses consisted of a vision of the knot of the phylacteries. In the Pietistic text it is Metatron who shows the knot of the phylacteries to Moses for he is positioned behind God and is therefore referred to as the bade of God. Cf. Sefer ha-'Orah, MS Shocken 14, fol. 67a: wera'ita 'et ahoray ufanay loyir'u ... r'7 'ahoray zeh metatjron] she-shemo 'oleh le-heshbon

'ahoray

u-fanay u-feney kevodi dawqa. 138 cf. "The Commentary on Ezekiel's Chariot by R. Jacob ben Jacob ha-Kohen of Castile," ed. Färber, pp. 8, 28. 139 cf. MS Musayef 145, fol. 48b. On the provenance of this text, see Färber's introduction to "The Commentary on Ezekiel's Chariot by R. Jacob ben Jacob ha-Kohei of Castile," p. 6, n. 6; and idem, "The Concept of the Merkabah," pp. 560,626,631. 140 m s JTSA Mie. 2430, fol. 70a.

90

E R . Wolfson

curious term for which I have as of yet found no precise parallel in the Pietistic literature.141 One is tempted to suggest, as Dan already proposed,142 that the word rekhev is a scribal metathesis that should be emended to krb, thereby attributing to Eleazar the idiom, keruv meyuhad, which was used by an independent circle of Pietists to name the visible and measurable form of the divine power that sits upon the throne of glory. Such an emendation, however, engenders a major terminological problem insofar as this expression is not employed elsewhere by Judah, Eleazar or other members of the Kalonymide circle, a point made emphatically by Dan himself. 143 It seems, therefore, that the reading rekhev meyuhad should be left intact, the word rekhev having the connotation of chariot, a usage widely attested in the Bible.144 The force of this tradition transmitted in the name of Eleazar, then, would be that Metatron is the special or distinctive chariot, and thus functions like the throne (or cherub) upon which the glory sits. 145 From other comments in the text of Shem Τον ben Simhah it is obvious that this author, certainly influenced by more overtly kabbalistic sources, identified the "great Metatron" (metatron ha-gadot) as the Shekhinah or Atarah, the tenth of the sefirot, which is also designated as the Cherub to whom prayers are directed.146 One is reminded here of the description of the keruv ha-meyuhad in the pseudepigraphic Baratía of Joseph ben Uziel where the enthroned form is characterized in terms akin to the description of Metatron in older texts, as has been noted by Dan. Indeed, as Dan has further remarked, in this text some of the names given to the Cherub are either similar to or identical with 141 in the anonymous Pietistic commentary an the names of Metatron one finds the phrase "fecial angel, maïakh ha-meyuhad, applied to Metatron. Cf. MSS Camb. Heb. Add 405, fol. 313a, Guenzberg 90, fol. 132a, Oxford-Bodleian 2256, fol. 163b. 142 "The Vicissitudes of the Esotericism of the German Hasidim." p. 91, n. 17. 143 Studies in Ashkhenazi-Hasidic Literature, pp. 92, 109; idem, The Esoteric Theology, p. 157. Although it is the case that Shem Τον bea Simhah did combine traditions derived from Judah the Pious and Eleazar of Worms with those from the writings of the Special Cherub Circle (see Dan, The Esoteric Theology, p. 255), the fact is that in this particular case one cannot assume that the term rekhev meyuhad is based on the phrase keruv ha-meyuhad as employed in those cither works, for the tradition is transmitted directly in the name of the Rabbi, i.e., Eleazar of Worms. 144 Of the many examples perhaps the most important for this context is Ps. 68:18. 145 On the image of Metatron as a throne or chariot, cf. Farber, "On the Sources of Rabbi Moses de León's Early Kabbalistic System," p. 83, n. 35; Idei, "Additional Fragments," p. 49, n. 21. For the identification of Metatron, or the angel of the glory (mal akh ha-kavod ), as the cherub as well as the Shekhinah or the attribute of judgment, see I. Tisfaby, Commentary on Talmudic Aggadoth by Rabbi Azriel of Gerona, Jerusalem 1945, p. 11 [Hebrew], See also Färber, "The Concept of the Merkabah," pp. 311-312. 146 See Scholen, Reshit ha-Qabbalah, p. 78, n. 1; idem, Origins, pp. 215-216; Dan, The Esoteric Theology, p. 255.

Metatron and Shi'ur Qomah

91

the names of Metatron found in the lists that circulated amongst the Pietists, indicating therefore that there is an effort on the part of these anonymous authors to merge the ancient esoteric teachings regarding Metatron and the contemporary theology concerning the Special Cherub. 147 It is likely, therefore, that there were earlier traditions regarding the identification of Metatron, the demiurgical angel, and the Cherub that influenced the Pietists. In his account in Major Trends of Jewish Mysticism of the doctrine of the Cherub in the literature of the German Pietists, Scholem suggested that these speculations were an adaptation of a much older conception of the Cherub as the demiurge or Logos analogous to the descriptions of Metatron. 148 Basically following this approach, but indebted to the more nuanced analysis of this material by Dan, Färber raised the possibility that there may have been an esoteric tradition associated with the Shi 'ur Qomah regarding the Cherub as the highest angel that is the anthropomorphic image of God, a role generally applied to Metatron. 149 Such a tradition, in turn, may have influenced the medieval Pietists for whom the Cherub (or "Special Cherub" according to the locution of one circle) is the demut or anthropomorphic manifestation of the Shekhinah upon the throne. 150 It seems to me, moreover, that part of this esoteric tradition involved the identification of the Cherub or Metatron with the image of Jacob engraved upon the throne. I suspect, although further research is required, that alongside the ancient identification of Metatron as Adam, Enoch, or Moses, 151 there was another idea that involved the identification of Metatron as Jacob. 152 This indeed may be the underlying significance of the aggadic 147 j. Dan, Huge ha-Mequbbalim ha-Rishonim, ed. I. Aggasi (Jerusalem, 1984), p. 101. 148 Major Trends, pp. 114-115. 149 "The Concept of the Merkabah," pp. 309-313. 150 cf the words of Moses ha-Daráian in Scholem, Reshit ha-Qabbalah, ρ 213. 151 On the relaticndiip of Moses and Metatron, see O deberg, 3 Enoch, pp. 106-108; Sdiolem, Origins, p. 120; Cohen, The Shi'ur Qomah, pp. 135-136; Halperin, Faces of the Chariot, pp. 417427; and Mop ok, Le Livre hébreu d'Hénoch, pp. 65-71. 152 This is part erf' a larger motif regarding the revelation of Metatron, the Primal Man, in the figures of various righteous individuals. See Odeberg, 3 Enoch, p. 123, n. 1; Mopsik, Le Livre hébreu d'Hénoch, p. 54. Conversely, a widespread idea in Jewish writings of Late Antiquity involved the transformation of a human saint into an angehe being. See article cf Charlesworth referred to above, n. 107, and the summary account given by F. W. van der Horst, "Some Notes on the Exagoge of Ezekiel," in Essays on the Jewish World of Early Christianity, Göttmgen 1990, p. 82: "In early postbiblical Judaism there was, in some circles, a tradition in which the highest angel, called 'the angel of the Lord' in the Old Testament, was seen as God's primary or sole helper and allowed to share in God's divinity. It was part of this tradition that a human being, as the hero or exemplar of a particular group, could ascend to become one with this figure, as Enoch or Moses. So these angelic mediators often began as humans and later achieved a kind of divine status in some communities. They had

92

ER. Wolfson

passages that treat Jacob as a divine or angelic being, a motif that is well attested in Gnostic and Manichean sources as well. 153 I would also suggest that some such tradition is behind the notion of the image of Jacob engraved upon the throne, one of the richest mythical symbols to inform the spiritual imagination of Jewish poets and mystics from Late Antiquity through the Middle Ages.

charge over the world and became close to being anthropomorphic hypostases of God himself. " '•53 gee Bchlig, "Jakob als Engel Gnosträsnus und Manichäismus", Erkenntnisse und Meinungen, ed. G. Wiessner, Wiesbaden 1978, pp. 1-14. [Engliái translation: "Jacob as Angel in Gnosticism and Maaidieism", Nag Ηammodi and Gnosis, ed. R. Mei. Wilson, Leiden 1978, pp. 122130.]

Judith R. Baskin Images of Women in Sefer Hasidim

A gender analysis of some of the representations of women in Sefer Hasidim and related texts finds that in their mystical yearning to transcend the physical temptations of the material world the Ashkenazic Hasidim of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries go beyond rabbinic norms in their displacement of women in favor of devotion to the divine. Moreover, by situating this fervor and the resulting objectification of women within the larger context of medieval social history, we may be able to expand and enhance our knowledge of Jewish spirituality, social norms, and family life in medieval Ashkenaz. Consideration of the consequences of gender as a category of historical analysis is an exciting development in recent historiography. While historians of previous eras had tended to assume that social circumstances or historical change affected the two sexes similarly, gender analysis has shown that this is often far from the case. Indeed, gender studies have shown that historical transformations in many eras affect men and woman quite differently.1 In addition, introducing gender as a factor in the study of Jewish societies, endeavors, and achievements, has revealed a persistent pattern of limiting women's access to public activities and the status they confer, and has highlighted the ways in which women have been excluded from the education and empowerment which would allow them to function and achieve in the male cultural sphere of learning and communal prayer and leadership, even as it has directed attention to areas in which women have constructed their own, usually uncelebrated, cultures and cultural achievements.2 1

A classic exploration of this phenomenon is Joan Kelly, "Did Womm have a Renaissance?",

reprinted in idem, Women, History and Theory, Chicago 1984, 19-50. Explorations of the varying effects of historical events on Jewish men and Jewish women include Paula Hyman, "Gender and Jewish History," TikJatn 3:1 (Jan./Feb. 1988); idem, "Gender and the Immigrant Experience in America", and Marian Kaplan, "Tradition and Transition: Jewish Women in Imperial Germany," both in Jewish Women in Historical Perspective, ed. Judith R. Baskin, Detroit 1991, pp. 222-242; 202221. On medieval Jewidt women's activities see Judith R. Baskin, "Jewiíh Women in the Middle Ages", Jewish Women in Historical Perspective, pp. 101-102,104-107.

94

J.R. Baskin

Such an approach has profound implications in studying the ways women are portrayed in a body of medieval Jewish literature which was written by men and intended for a male audience. We cannot find women's voices in Sefer Hasidim nor in the other writings of the Hasidey Ashkenar, we cannot know what any individual woman of that circle thought or felt, although occasionally we may know how they acted. Rather, we are left with one male elite's perceptions of a wide range of females and female behaviors, both approved and disapproved. Women are represented both positively and negatively in Sefer Hasidim. Generally, the Ashkenazic Hasidim view the specific women who are part of their pietistic circle favorably. Pietists are advised to marry women who share their values;3 a woman may certainly be "hasidatr," indeed, some such women are portrayed as more energetic in giving charitable contributions than their husbands.4 An exemplary woman of this circle, like Dolce of Worms, not only plays religious roles such as leading women's prayers in the synagogue, but devotes much of her energy to supporting her household so that her husband may devote himself to study, and sacrifices her life to summon help when her family is attacked, leaving behind a truly bereft and desolate spouse.5 Yet women, even the most pious, simply by virtue of their sex, have the potential, however unwittingly, to tempt a man to sin or sinful thoughts, and for this reason Sefer Hasidim advises extremely limited social converse with women, including one's own wife.6 In such a view of the world, gender is a crucial societal determinant. Ivan Marcus has suggested that for Sefer Concerning the importance of marrying within the pietistic circle, see Judah b. Samuel the Pious, Sefer Hasidim, ed. Judah Wistinetzki, Frankfurt a.M. 1924, Parma version (henceforward SHP), pars. 1094, 1097, 1100, 1112, 1113, 1132, 1879-1881; and Ivan Marcus, Piety and Society: The Jewish Piestists of Medieval Germany, Leiden, 1981, pp. 95-97. 4

Disputes between husband and wife over giving charity must have beai frequent. For several

examples see SHP, pars. 669, 670 and 1715. These are translated and discussed in Abraham Cronbadi, "Social Thinking in the Sefer Hasidim" Jlebrew Union College Annual 22 (1949). 5

Dolce, the wife of Rabbi Eleazar of Worms, the Roqeah, was attacked with the rest of her household

by two armed intruders in December, 1196. The Roqeah wrote a prose account of the murder of his wife as well as a poetic eulogy for her and his two murdered daughters, Bellette and Hannah. The Hebrew texts are in A. M. Haberman, Sefer Gezerot Ashkenaz ve-Zarfat Jerusalem 1945, pp. 16467. ^ Judah ben Samuel the Pious, Sefer Hasidim, ed. Reuven Margoliot, Jerusalem 1964, Bologna version (henceforward SHB), par. 29: "Eadi one who widies to return in repentance and achieve a status of piety.. . let him forsake . . . converse with his wife except while making love . . . and let this not be a burdtn upon him because of his love for his Creator". Also see SHP, pars. 984, 989. The precept that one should refrain as much as possible from converse with one's wife except during sexual inta'course is based on Babylonian Talmud Hagigah 5b.

Images of Women

95

Hasidim the social world divides into three groups: Pietist Jews, non-Pietist Jews, and Christians, and he notes that qualities of wealth or poverty, learning or ignorance, or differences in societal position are all insignificant compared to these major divisions.7 The women encountered in Sefer Hasidim also fall into these three major categories (with several subcategories for each group, as well, based on age, marital status, and occupation). But, I would argue that their gender unites all women in the eyes of the Hasidey Ashkenaz far more than they are separated by differences in religion, level of piety, or social status, since any woman may lead a man into sexual transgression. Indeed, significant portions of Sefer Hasidim focus on such violations, how atonement may be undertaken by male transgressors, and repentance achieved.8 How females might do penance for their sexual indiscretions, however, is not a subject which is considered. The consequent reification of women as objects of desire, or causes of sin, but not as sinners themselves in need of redemption, has not been much noticed nor has it prompted scholarly explanation. Certainly, from the perspective of rabbinic Judaism, there is little new in Sefer Hasidim's admonitions to avoid women. Rabbinic Judaism, with its acute consciousness of the potential of human sexuality for causing societal disorder if strict controls are lacking, particularly as regards marital infidelity and consequent uncertain lineage of children, ordains distinct separations between men and women, the roles they can play, and the status which pertains to each sex. In this patriarchal system women as a group are fundamentally "other", constituting a separate category of human creature, and their activities are ideally confined to the private sphere of husband, children, and family endeavors where the possibilities of falling into unsanctioned sexual liaisons are less likely.9 Certainly the Ashkenazic Hasidim continue in this tradition: they painstakingly erect as many barriers as possible against encounters between men and women, encounters which were probably far more common in their constricted urban milieu than in the late antique environments reflected in rabbinic literature. A statement like the following, which advises that the pious should not look at the countenances or forms of women, and which, incidently, reveals some of the occasions upon which a man might do so, and the varieties of women he might observe, reflects the tension between rabbinic teachings and •7 Marcus, Piety and Society, p. 15. Q See Marcus, Piety and Society, pp. 41-52. 9On women in rabbinic Judaism, see Judith R. Baskin, "The Separation of Women in Rabbinic Judaism", "Women, Religion and Social Change", eds. Yvonne Yazbeck Haddad and Ellison Banks Findly, Albany 1985; Judith Romney Wegner, Chattel or Person? The Status of Women in the Mishnah, New York and Oxford 1988 and ibid., "The Image and Status of Women in Classical Rabbinic Judaism," Baskin, Jewish Women in Historical Perspective.

96

J.R. Baskin

a medieval social reality quite different form anything imagined in the Talmud: The main strength of the Hasid from beginning to end is that although they scoff at him he does not forsake his piety, his intent is for heaven's sake and he does not look at the countenances of women: especially so among other men where women are customarily seen, for example, if he has been in the wedding hall where the women were garbed in choicest ornaments and all were gazing but he did not stare, for that he will merit the great good that is laid up, as it is written, "which thou hast laid up for those that fear thee" (Ps 31:20). And his eye will be satiated with the Divine Glory : "thine eyes shall see the king in his beauty" (Isa. 33:17). For this reason it is best for the individual when he meets a woman, whether single or married, whether a gentile woman or Jewish, whether she be of age or a minor, to turn his face aside from looking at her. Thus do we find in Job (3:1), "I have made a covenant with mine eyes; how then should I look upon a maid." And thus it is written in the book of Ben Sira, "Avert your eyes from a beautiful woman, lest you stumble and incur penalties for her." So Isaiah 33:15, "And shuts his eyes from looking upon evil," refers to him who gazes not upon women at the time when they stand by their wash. When they wash their garments and lift their skirts so as not to soil them, they uncover their legs, and we know a woman's leg is a sexual incitement and so said the sage, "nothing interposes better before desire, than closing one's eyes".10 The connection of Isaiah 33:15 with women washing garments is first made in the Babylonian

Talmud Baba Bathra 57b; the statement that "a

woman's leg is a sexual incitement" is from the Babylonian Talmud Berakhot 24a. It is Sefer Hasidim, however, which makes the connection between these two passages, providing in the process not only a vivid glimpse of how medieval women went about washing their clothes, but of its author's conviction of the ubiquity of sexual provocation. Thus, if there is nothing novel in Sefer Hasidim's negative attitudes towards women as potential snares to the righteous, I believe the Ashkenazic Hasidim were far more anxious about the perils of uncontrolled sexuality than the rabbis, and consequently the concern to minimize male-female contacts as much as possible became a central focus of their endeavor. As Marcus has noted, "No temptation was more alluring for the pietist as sexual relations with a woman other than his wife."11 This concern is, in fact, universalized to all men, and SHB, par. 9 (some of this passage is also found in SHP, par. 978); translation is from Sholom Al chalan Singer, Medieval Jewish Mysticism. Book of the Pious, Noithbrook IL 1971,p. 9. 11

Ivan Marcus, "Narrative Fantasies from Sefer Hasidim", Rabbinic Fantasies:

Imaginative

Narratives from Classical Hebrew Literature, eds. David Stem and Mark Jay Mirsky, p. 236, note

Images of Women

97

the pietist not only must limit himself from unlicensed sexual activity, but has the added obligation to protect others as well. One such tradition, found in manuscript, relates that a pietist who was teaching his daughters to write justified his actions as follows: If they do not know how to write, they will be forced to request men to write their receipts for pledges when they lend money. They will be alone with those men who write for them and they may sin, and this will be my fault, for whenever it is in one's ability to construct a fence for sin and one does not do it, it is as if one has caused it, as it is written in Hosea 4:13: "I will not punish your daughters when they commit harlotry, nor your daughters-in-law when they commit adultery" because it is the fathers who have been the cause. And even if they do not sin, they may think about it. Moreover, he did not want them to acquire a bad reputation, and thus, he taught them to write receipts for pledges, and he taught them that whenever it was time for their immersion that they should not delay, for when her husband desires her she should be ready so that he will not engage in bad thoughts and so that she will preserve him from all such fantasies.12 This passage is fascinating on a number of levels, not least in the window it opens into the social reality of women's moneylending activities, and in its allusion to apparent debates over appropriate levels of female education.13 Teaching one's daughters to write is reported here as something unusual which requires justification. And the justification, while based on women's business needs, is not directly related to them, but to fears of sexual indiscretions, whether actual or imagined, which may follow from a woman who cannot write asking a male neighbor for secretarial aid. It is the duty of the father to construct barriers to sin, and in this instance, the dangers connected with female literacy, well recognized and documented in many medieval literatures, both Jewish and Christian, as leading to inchastity, are outweighed by the more immediate hazards of frequent female-male propinquity. It is assumed, of course, that it will be the father and not some other man, who will be the daughters' instructor. Moreover, while it may appear at first that the writer is concerned with his daughters' spiritual wellbeing, it is no accident that he immediately goes on to stress a woman's duty to make herself accessible to her husband's sexual needs as expeditiously as she can, so that he will not succumb to inappropriate thoughts possibly 37. 1Î Oxford Hebrew Ms. 1566, p. 178a, publi&ed in Yosef Dan, Iyunim be-sifrut Hasidut

Ashkenaz,

Ramat-Gan 1975, p. 140. 1Ì For medieval Jewiái thinking an the education of women, see Judith R. Baskin, "Some Parallels in the Education of Medieval Jewi& and Christian Women", Jewish History 5:1 (Spring, 1991): pp. 4152.

98

J.R. Baskin

prompted by encounters with other women. Clearly, the driving need here is with preserving men from sin, whether the father, who would otherwise be to blame for not educating his daughters, or the husband, who might be led to indiscretion because his sexual needs had not been satisfied at home, or indeed, the helpful male scribes to whom illiterate women might have recourse. The daughters, literate or not, are essentially seen as the objects which can occasion sin in men. Indeed, women appear in virtually all the passages related to sexual indiscretion as totally susceptible, willing, and indeed enthusiastic participants who sometimes initiate the activities.14 Thus, we find in Sefer Hasidim the confession of a man who loved another man's wife. His affection is returned, and during her husband's extended absence on a business trip the couple, who live in the same house, engage in all manner of sexual foreplay, stopping short only of intercourse. Still, the man confesses, he did not enjoy doing these things because "my heart was intent on having intercourse. For several years I acted this way [ie: refrained from intercourse] in order to receive a reward." He goes on to say, "My father did the same thing. The single difference between us was that in his case the woman was married as well as a minor. My father also did the same thing with his mother-in-law and with his wife's sister during his wife's lifetime." The young man concluded, "I am asking you the following question: Must I repent and do penance for this? Does my father, even if he acted for the sake of Heaven [ie: by not having intercourse]? Or will we receive a reward since we were saved from sinning?"15 The result of consultation with the Sage is that the man and his father are criticized for the rather venial sin of being alone with married women. Since sexual intercourse, which could lead to an illicit pregnancy with all of its dangerous consequences for social disorder and confusion of lineage, did not take place, the offence is apparently minor. That such pregnancies were not improbable events is implicit in a passage which discusses the extremes to which people will go for the sake of personal honor: "For example, knights go into the thick of battle and even sacrifice themselves to enhance their own reputation and to avoid being humiliated. Moreover, consider how many strategems respectable women adopt in order to avoid being discovered after they become pregnant as the result of an affair. Not to speak of thieves! If these people work so hard only for minimal benefits, how much the more should [a pietist] be resourceful for the sake of his Creator all day and all night."16 In all these instances, whether illicit liaisons really occurred, or whether such stories simply reflect the overactive

14

See Marcus, Piety and Society, pp. 42,46.

15

SHP,pars. 52-53.

16

SHP, par. 2, translated by Marcus, Piety and Society, p.28.

99

Images of Women

imagination of its teller, as some scholars have held, 17 there is no thought given to any spiritual concerns women may have had about their participation in such indiscretions. I will return to the question of social reality presently, but for now will say that certainly Judah the Pious, the compiler of Sefer Hasidim, believed these accounts of sexual impropriety to be true. As Josef Dan has written in connection with Judah the Pious's use of stories of the supernatural, "Rabbi Judah the Pious wrote many stories, but did not invent - nor even edit or change - a single one of them. He wrote them as he heard them or read them, and had reason to believe, whether correctly or not, that what they described really had happened at some time and some place". 18 Presumably the same holds true for these tales of sexual license, although we may have grounds to be suspicious of the enthusiastic roles women, particularly minors and maidservants, who were generally powerless vis-à-vis male authority, are said to play in them. Rabbi Judah believed that such illicit encounters, which on the testimony of Sefer Hasidim might include Jewish men having sexual contact with single Jewish women and married Jewish women (of both minor and adult status), maidservants, whether Jewish or Christian, and even Christian women who were not employees of Jews, could be a part of everyday life, and his response was to set up as many barriers as possible to men's contacts with women, even with women of their own families. At this point we must consider the Hasidey Ashkenaz in what the philosopher Hans-Georg Gadamer would describe as their "historical situation".19 Increasingly, scholars are recognizing that the small Jewish communities of Ashkenaz were not significantly isolated, socially or intellectually, from the people among whom they lived in such close physical contact. Robert Chazan, for instance, in his study of European Jewry and the first Crusade, writes that "close analysis of the events of 1096 has revealed a set of Jewish communities socially integrated into the environment around them", and demonstrates that zealous Jewish attitudes towards martyrdom must be seen in the larger context of the intense spiritual ethos of Christianity of the late eleventh and twelfth centuries which very much esteemed death in

17 Kometh R. Stow, "The Jewish Family in the Rhineland in the Higji Middle Ages: Form and Function", American Historical Review 92 (1987), writes of Judah's "vivid imagination," and comments, p. 1105, "More important than whether Judah believed sudi things occurred is his ability to imagine them. Neither he nor his contemporaries suffered from underdeveloped libidos. " 1 ft Josef Dan, "Rabbi Judah the Pious and Caesarius of Heistelbach - Common Motifs in their Stories", Scripta Hierosolymitana

22: Studies in Aggadah

and Folk-Literature,

eds. Joseph

Heinemann and Dov Noy, Jerusalem 1971, p. 19. ^Hans-Georg Gadamer, Truth and Method, trans. Garrett Barden and John Cumming, New York 1975, particularly pp. 270-271.

100

J.R. Baskin

defence of one's faith. 20 Similarly, medieval Christian convictions of the inherently carnal nature of human beings, the special role of woman in man's fall, and the preferable option of celibacy for those who were capable of it, would have been known to Jews. I would contend that the special intensity of the Ashkenazic Hasidim's uneasiness with women, the tendency to move from separation towards displacement, owes much to their exposure to these attitudes. The issue of celibacy is of particular interest. While Yitzhak Baer pointed out that the "Jewish mystic-ascetic may never go beyond a certain point in self-denial because of legal prohibitions,"21 Sholom Alchanan Singer has noted that this does not set him apart from the non-Jewish mystic-ascetic in their common striving and spiritual personality: "In a manner of speaking, both Christian and Jewish mystics strive and achieve the extreme within their respective faiths that is permissable."22 I would suggest that while the celibacy which Christian spirituality celebrated was not an option for Jewish men, who were enjoined to procreate, this does not mean that celibacy was always unattractive. For the Ashkenazic Hasidim, to constantly temper desire by channeling it to fulfil legal obligations was already to practice a sort of celibacy within marriage. This displacement of women from a central role in marital relations was furthered by pietistic traditions throughout Jewish history which have sought to transform human sexuality into erotic theology. But perhaps more than for a Christian celibate, the power of sexuality, because it was part of everyday life, could threaten to distract a Jewish pietist from his duty to the Divine: it could color, invade, and infect the very experience of his eroticized spirituality. As vessels of sexuality, therefore, women had to be objectified, made strangers even when they were at home. This point needs to be emphasized: what is at stake in the Ashkenazic hasidic attitude toward women is the nature of their own devotion to the divine. As Josef Dan has written, "God expects the hasid to break the laws of nature, of the human body and soul, and of human history and society"23 in the almost impossible effort to achieve the miracle of full adherence to divine wishes. As Dan describes it, through this intense mystical love, which is presented in erotic terms, the righteous may hope to achieve a closer 20

Robert Chazan, European Jewry and the First Crusade, Berkeley/ Los Angeles 1987, pp. 195-

196. 21

Yitzhak Baer, "Religious Social Tendency of the Sefer Hasidim", Zion 3 (1938), p. 12, cited in

Singer, Medieval Jewish Mysticism, p. xix. 22

Singer, Medieval Jewish Mysticism, p. xix.

23

Josef Dan, Jewish Mysticism and Jewish Ethics (Seattle, 1986), p.75.

Images of Women

101

relationship with the revealed divine glory.24 Such spiritual and, indeed, erotic concentration must not be directed elsewhere, and as Sefer Hasidim itself demands: The root of loving God is loving God with all your heart (Deut. 6:4). . . . And the joy of this love is of such intensity and so overpowers the heart of those who love God, that even after many days of not being with his wife and having a great desire for her, in the hour that a man ejaculates he does not find it as satisfying as the intensity and power of loving God and finding joy in his Creator. . . . He must love the Creator with a great and strong love until he becomes sick because of his love, as the man who is love-sick for the affections of a woman and reels constantly because of his love, when he sits, rises, goes and comes, also when he eats and drinks. He neither sleeps nor slumbers because of this love. Greater than this should love of the Creator be in the hearts of those who love Him and they should be absorbed in it constantly, as we were commanded, "with all thy heart, with all thy soul. . " (Deut. 6:4).25 Given this exaltation of divine over human love, the following excerpt from Sefer Hasidim seems less social commentary than an allegory of suppressed desire. This passage, which begins, "A man should not invite women into his house lest he have sinful thoughts about them," enumerates all of the temptations to undesirable behavior which can befall a man who is not fastidious as to his companions, profession, and dwelling place, and offers this parable: Go and learn from a gentile prince. Once there was a ruler in whose territory people gathered at a large fair. They came from everywhere, and all on the same day. Many prostitutes also flocked there, and the prostitutes had a madam. The ruler said to his servant, "Take a large sum of money and hire all the prostitutes because tomorrow people will come to the fair. After you have hired all of them and given them everything they want, put them all in a house, prepare a comfortable bed for each, give them food, drink, and wool to work, and guard them until the fair is over. Then send them home." The servant went and spoke to the madam, "I will give your women everything you wish above and beyond what you would normally earn." And he gave her everything she stipulated. He brought the prostitutes to a house and guarded them there. When the fair was over, he brought them back to town. He did this every time there was a fair that attracted prostitutes. And how much more so should a Jew, who must keep his distance from those who sin! Therefore God commanded: "There shall be no 24

D a a , Mysticism and Ethics, p. 75.

25

SHB,par. 14.

102

J.R. Baskin

harlot of the daughters of Israel" (Deut. 23:18). And it is written, "Visit your neighbor sparingly" (Prov. 25:17). Consider: If there are two friends in business together, and one of them has a beautiful wife, better that he should go to your house [than you to his]. 26 On one level, this story reads as a wistful pietist's meditation on contructing barriers against a complex urban phenomenon which affected his community: if only prostitutes were not driven by financial necessity to entice susceptible men into illicit sexual behavior, a major cause of sin would be eliminated. Yet the prince, who is also driven by financial necessity, finds a way to eliminate prostitution while preserving the fair and sustaining the women. Perhaps this encourages us to read this stoiy as an allegory, in which we may substitute all women for the prostitutes. How much simpler and less confused male existence would be if some powerful force would house and support all the women somewhere else, so that men could be saved from the temptations and complications the other sex engenders. Thus, the conclusion of the stoiy which does not deal with prostitutes but simply with the everyday occurrence of finding another man's wife attractive. Commerce, like marriage, is necessary. But is it to stretch too far to say that the approbation of a gentile prince who cloisters prostitutes during a fair masks a pietistic appreciation of those Christian monasteries and convents which so efficiently eliminate the distractions of women and sex? Again, this urge for separation from the anxieties and confusions inherent in male-female relations, disorders which are seen as attributable to women, was not unique to this epoch in Jewish history. We find from late antiquity that some men would leave their wives and family for lengthy periods of study in rabbinic academies.27 But in the Christian environment this pietistic trend toward separation from women and all that contact with them entails becomes intensified, as in the writings of the Hasidey Ashkenaz, and reaches an apogee in the withdrawal from family tensions and the threats of modernity offered by the sexual ascetisim of the Hasidic courts and rabbinic yeshivot of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, with all their attendant negative feelings about women.28 26

SHP,par. 179; translated by Ivan Marcus m Rabbinic Fantasies,^. in

226-227.

See, for example, Babylonian Talmud Ketubot 62b for several such accounts. 28

See David Biale, "Ejaculatory Prayer: The Displacement of Sexuality in Chasidisn," Tikkun 6:4

(My/August, 1991): p.1-25, 87-89; and Ada Rapaport-Albert, "On Women in Hasidism, S. A Horodecky and the Maid of Ludmir Tradition", Jewish History: Essays in Honour of Chimen Abramsky, eds. by Ada Rapaport-Albert and Steven J. Zipp erst ein, London 1988, 495-525. Biale writes, p. 21, that "the Chasidic movement introduced the most extreme anti-antic values ever to appear in any Jewish texts, values that resemble, in some respects, the renunciations of sexuality preached by Christian monastics. Still more paradoxically, we find on the thrediold of modernity one of the most widespread movements of sexual asceticism in Jewish history. "

Images of Women

103

It therefore seems to me that what David Biale has written of the displacement of human sexuality in favor of asceticism in eighteenth and nineteenth century Eastern European Hasidism applies in almost equal measure to the Ashkenazic Hasidim: "Even permitted sexual acts must be divorced from desire; or, to put it differently, the fantasies and emotions connected with sexual arousal must be transformed into a spiritual love of God." And, as Biale further notes, "this negative attitude toward [human] sexuality was often bound up with frank expressions of misogyny incorporating many of the demonic images of women that ran throughout rabbinic, kabbalistic, and folk traditions". 29 As Ada Rapoport-Albert has written on the same subject, the association of women with witchcraft in eighteenth century Hasidism "was not novel but constituted a direct continuation of classical rabbinic and philosophical conceptions of women as more inclined to sorcery and witchcraft, more susceptible to ritual impurity, exhibiting a more intense and untamed sexuality and altogether representing the material-physical element of creation rather than the element of form or spirit." 30 Certainly, the Ashkenazic Hasidim, who take for granted the association of women with necromancy, who find sorceresses even within their own community of the pious, 31 are one with other male ascetic movements in seeing women as representing impediments to mystical ascent. The pietist's desire for separation from the corruption of the material world, and his wish to transcend human sexuality through his devotion to the divine, is built upon the denigration and demonization of women. That such spiritual options were simply not available or even imagined for Jewish women is, perhaps, the other side of the same coin. The concerns raised by these Ashkenazic hasidic texts may also be approached from the perspective of social history. Are there some realistic bases for the Ashkenazic Hasidim's virtual obsession with sexual transgressions? Has a misogynistic trend in traditional Jewish literature been exacerbated, not only by pervasive Christian attitudes, but by social conditions which allowed for an atmosphere of frequent male-female social contacts that sometimes led to sexual promiscuity? In opposition to scholars who have preferred not to take Sefer Hasidim's portrait of social life at face value, Ivan Marcus has written convincingly that in regard to sexual promiscuity, as with numerous other topics, "Sefer Hasidim is a speculum of the society in which it originated"; moreover, "it is unwarranted to dismiss the reality of the 29

Biale, "Ejaculatory Prayer, p. 24.

30

Rappaport-Albert, "On Women in Hasidim", p. 523, n. 80. -5 1 See Joáiua Trachtenberg, Jewish Magic and Superstition: A Study in Folk Religion, New Yoik 1939 (rep. 1970) on the connection of women with witchcraft in Jewish tradition in general and in Sefer Hasidim in particular. The passage on sorceresses who regularly attend synagogue services is found in SHP, par. 1369.

104

J.R. Baskin

sectarian description of the Pietists in Sefer Hasidim as the result more of Judah's fantasy than of reality."32 Certainly, there is corroborating evidence for this position from other medieval sources. Studies of medieval Christian private life describe aristocratic and bourgeois households which attempted to keep women "under lock and key in the most isolated part of the house" because they were viewed as the weaker sex and prone to sin. 33 Despite these precautions, according to Georges Duby, even in the aristocratic household "innumerable signs attest to the irrepressibility of private sexuality, which flourished in secrecy and obscurity, in the shadows of the orchards, cellars, and palace nooks and during the small hours of darkness, unrelieved even by the light of small candles. No door was secure, and it was easy for a man to slip into a woman's bed." 34 With so many people living in close proximity, promiscuity appears to have been common, and adultery was an obsession.35 In the urban bourgeois household, to which medieval Jewish family life would most closely conform, where men would undertake extended business trips, and members of extended families, including mothers-in-law, sisters-inlaw, cousins, and nieces, would live in close quarters, illicit behavior might be even more possible. Where women were engaged in commerce, trades, or moneylending, as we have seen, opportunities for improper behavior multiplied with increased male-female contacts, while Jewish social gatherings of this period, as witnessed by our earlier text about the varieties of enticing women to be met at a wedding reception, and other sources, as well, apparently sanctioned mixing of the sexes. Thus, in his ethical will of ca. 1357, Eleazar of Mainz advises his sons to behave "continently" in their relations to women, "avoiding mixed bathing and mixed dancing and all frivolous conversation, while my daughters ought not to speak much with strangers, nor jest nor dance with them," 36 and Israel Abrahams comments that "Many Jews, especially young men and maidens, with some married couples, disobeyed the Rabbinical rule, and not only danced together, but did so in the communal dancing-hall on the Sabbath and festivals." 37 Historians of general medieval social history note that the addition to the household of maidservants, many of whom were quite young, added sexual spice to the 32

Marcus, Piety and Society, pp. 130-131. Georges Duby, "The Aristocratic Households of Feudal France," A History of Private Life 2:

Revelations of the Medieval World, ed. Georges Duby, Cambridge 1988, p. 78. 34

Duby, "Aristocratic Households," p. 80.

35

Duby,p. 82.

36

For Eleazar of Mainz, see Hebrew Ethical Wills, ed. Israel Abrahams, Philadelphia 1926 (rep.

1976), p. 211. 37

Israel Abrahams, Jewish Life in the Middle Ages, London 1896 (repr. New York 1969), pp. 380-

381.

Images of Women

105

family configuration, and this is evident in Sefer Hasidim'& comments about sexual liasions with domestic employees.38 Moreover, the omnipresence of prostitutes in the German urban setting beginning in the twelfth century, apparently one result of a significant surplus of women in cities, heightened the impression of readily available sexual opportunities.39 Certainly, centuries of Church rulings attempting to legislate against casual Christian-Jewish contacts, and Jewish employment of Christian servants, were based as much on concern about sexual connections as fear of Jewish efforts at conversion. Taking Sefer Hasidim somewhat more seriously in some of its accounts of Jewish social life sind sexual activity in the context of serious comparisons with other medieval social and literary documents could certainly lead to a more accurate assessment on this matter, albeit a discomfiting one. 40 Considering gender as a category of analysis demonstrates that the Ashkenazic Hasidim go beyond rabbinic Judaism in the negative images of women they promulgate, often displacing women altogether in their quest for total devotion to the divine. This is, in part, a consequence of their situation in a misogynistic Christian milieu which preached the evils of carnality and the virtues of celibacy, while countenancing frequent encounters of all kinds between men and women. It is a reflection, equally, of the entire quality of Ashkenazic Hasidic spirituality which saw quite clearly the correspondence between the desire evoked by women and the love demanded by God, and recognized the critical need to distinguish decisively between them.

See SHP, par. 19, on penance for sexual intercourse with a Christian maid servant. For a study of similar extended urban families in which father, mother, brothers, sisters, daugbters-in-law, and domestic servants lived under the same roof, see Charles de La Rancière, "Tuscan Notables an the Eve of the Renaissance", A History ofPrivate Life 2, pp. 157-309. De La Roncière notes, p. 294,that in this crowded urban setting, "Servants and slaves, many of them radiant young girls, offered the men of the house a distraction that discouraged outside escapades. Bourgeois memoirs are filled with the names of bastard offspring;" and goes on to say that "The presence of cousins and nieces could also be disturbing, particularly uhm they shared the same bedroom." •^Prostitutes were a medieval social reality. The suggestion of a surplus ci woman in German cities as a contributory factor was first made by Karl Bücher, Die Frauenfrage im Mittelalter, Tübingen 1910, cited and discussed in Martha Howell, "A Documented Presence: Medieval Women in Germanic Historiography," Women in Medieval History and Historiography, ed. Susan Mo&er Stuard, Philadelphia 1987, pp. 116-119. As Kenneth St owe, "Jewiái Family in the Rhineland", p. 1110, has suggested, Jewiái scholarship has tended to extrapolate backwards from our knowledge of the ideals governing the institutions and leadership ci eastern European Jewidi society in the early modem period to the medieval Jewish communities ci the Rhineland. It may be, as he says, that the medieval Jewidi family, and, I would add, its social setting, was something quite distinct.

Ithamar Gnienwald Social and Mystical Aspects of Sefer Hasidim

In his important monograph, The Esoteric Theology of Ashkenazi Hasidism1, Joseph Dan mentions seven factors that contributed to the rise of the Hasidic movement in Germany in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. The factors, in their order of enumeration in Dan's book, were: 1) Elements of an early esoteric tradition which was introduced into Germany, probably from Italy. 2) The clear influence of the Babylonian Torah-Centre as well as that of the Jewish sages in Italy and North Africa. 3) The revival of an Eastern esoteric literature, that is, the Hekhalot literature, within the German Hasidic circles. 4) The contacts between the intellectual centres in Germany and the Jewish centres in Provence. Of particular interest here are the socalled lyyun-CirclQS which marks one of the earliest phases of the Qabbalah in Europe. 5) Certain inner social and ideological developments in German Jewry, as well as in the Jewry of Northern France and England. 6) Cultural and social contacts with Christian society of that time. 7) Personal motivations which are typical of the founders of German Hasidism2. The seven points raised by Joseph Dan still embrace the spectrum of explanatory factors in understanding the rise of German Hasidism. Scholars may vary in the emphasis they put on one factor over another. They may even differ in assessing the content and meaning of each factor. But, roughly speaking, the model suggested by Dan is still generally accepted. In recent years, though, the studies of Ivan Marcus have refined our way of looking at, and of understanding, the pietistic ideals of those Hasidim3. Haym 1 « Published in Jerusalem, 1968 [Hebrew], See, ibid., pp. 13-14. See further J. Dan, "Das Entstehen der jüdischen Mystik im mittelalterlichen

Deutschland", Judentum im deutschen Sprachraum, herausgegeben von K.E. Grözinger, Suhrkamp Verlag Frankfurt am Main, 1991, pp. 127-172. ι See I.G. Marcus, "Die politisdien Entwickilmgen im mittelalterlichen deutschen Judentum, ihre Ursachen und Wirkungen", Judentum im deutschen Sprachraum (see previous note), pp. 60-88. This article contains a comprehensive survey of the studies that Marcus finds relevant to his discussion of

I. G r u e n w a l d

107

Soloveitchik published a highly controversial, if not somewhat speculative, paper which called attention to the tones of inner Jewish polemic that can be detected in the pietistic doctrines of the Hasidim.4 More recently, Joseph Dan published a Course-Book within the framework of the Open University of Israel, Ashkenazi Hasidism in the History of Jewish Thought, (2 volumes), in which detailed attention was given to the intellectual, mystical and folkloristic issues in Hasidic writings5. This short list of studies is far from doing full justice to the wealth of scholarly output published in recent years, discussing the works and theology of German Hasidism. However, it is rather astonishing that so far no detailed study has been published in which the Ashkenazic type of Hasidism is examined in the light of other Hasidic movements and trends in Judaism6. Hasidism, or the Jewish type of piety, is a unique form of religiosity which appears on the historical stage in a variety of forms and ideologies. As a historical experience it is more often than not viewed as a crystallization in a sociological and ideological matrix, signalling some kind of opposition to prevailing religious forms or norms of life. In this respect, Ivan Marcus' attempts at defining the nature of the sectarian threads from which the German type of Hasidism in the Middle Ages is woven deserves our full attention. However, we believe that, if studied in the general context of Jewish Piety as a whole, our understanding of the German type of Piety will significantly improve. As indicated above, a comparative study of types and trends in Jewish Piety is still one of the desiderata in Jewish Studies. Such a study will certainly render interesting results, in light of which German Hasidism will also come to be viewed in the subject as well as rrferences to previous studies by Marcus himself. - It should be noted that in his lecture given at the Berlin conference marking the 50th anniversary of the publication of G. Scholem's Major Trends in jewiái Mysticism, February 1992, Ivan Marcus reconsidered his own position on the subject and took issue with some of the points raised in the present article. The reader is kindly requested to take note of Marcus' new article in the Proceedings of that Conference. Gershom Scholem 's »Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism« 50 Years after, ed. by P. Schäfer and J. Dan, Tübingen 1993. 4

See H. Soloveitchik, "Three Themes in the Sefer Hasidim", AJSReview, vol. I (1976), pp. 311-357.

^Published Tel Aviv, 1990 [Hebrew] ^This observation seems to me to be true even when Y.F. Baer's studies of second Temple and Medieval Hasidism are taken into consideration. Baer points out a few similarities between these two types of Piety, but the real or alleged ties and bridges between them are not thorougjily examined Baer's comments co Second Temple Pietism are incorporated in Chapter two of his Israel Among the Nations, Jerusalem, 1955 [Hebrew], The articles dealing with German Pietism are included in his Studies on the History of the Jewish People, vol. H, The Historical Society of Israel, vol. Π, Jerusalem 1985, pp. 175-248 [Hebrew], - P. Schäfer's article, "The Ideal of Piety of the Ashkmazi Hasidim and Its Roots in Jewidi Tradition", Jewish History, vol. IV, (1990), pp. 9-23, is basically limited to a comparison with the Hekhalot tradition.

108

Social and Mystical Aspects

clearer perspectives than is hitherto the case. One of the central issues in this respect will be the relationship between Piety as such and Mysticism. There can be no doubt that the claim that German Hasidism is one of the most important phases of the pietistic element in Judaism is a valid one. However, there is a perplexing lack of symmetry between, on the one hand, the amount of material that is at our disposal for carrying out a reasonably comprehensive evaluation of the ideology of the German Hasidism, and the information we possess about the actual life and workings of German Hasidim, on the other. In fact, it may be argued that German Hasidism is more of a "bookish" type of piety than anything else. It is confined to its ideology, as contained in books (or manuscripts), reflecting what may be called a literary situation, rather than a real social situation. Recently, Joseph Dan and myself argued individually, that so little is actually known about those Hasidim that the notion of virtual groups or communities of Hasidim, that is, of people who lived the communal life of Hasidim, may be viewed as bordering on historical fiction7. In any event, the theory, as advanced by Ivan Marcus, namely that those Hasidim constituted a full-blown type of sectarian organization, still deserves some additional consideration. One may argue, though, in favour of Marcus' theory that on the ideological level a significant trait in the writings of those Hasidim reflects a sectarian direction. However, it still remains an open question whether or not the handful of Hasidim about whom we do have some information really formed a sectarian organization, or whether the whole Hasidic ideology remained more in bookform rather than in real communitarian enactments. Admittedly, sectarian organizations did all that they could to hide their real identity. The apocalyptic visionaries of the Second Temple Period, the Dead Sea sectarians, and even the group of people who were behind the composition of the Book of Zohar are striking examples of esoteric groups who hid behind pseudepigraphic names or vague titles and identities8. But this is not the case with the Ashkenazi Pietists; the names of their leaders are officially stated. What is missing is an impressively substantial list of names that will convincingly show that the leaders had real communities to lead. The study of Jewish piety is more often than not oriented by Christian notions of piety. Accordingly, piety is almost by definition viewed in 7

See J. Dan, Ashkenazi Hasidism in the History of Jewish Thought, The Open University of Israel,

Tel Aviv 1990, vol. I, pp. 109, 128 [Hebrew]; I. Gruenwald, "Normative und volkstümlidie Religiosität im Sefer Chasnáim", Judentum im deutschen Sprachraum, pp. 125-126. 8

An attempt to identify the group of people who were behind the composition of the Zohar was made

by Y. Liebes, "How the Zohar was written", Proceedings of the Third International Conference on the History of Jewish Mysticism: The Age of the Zohar = Jerusalem Studies in Jewish Thought, vol. Vm (1989), [Hebrew Section],pp. 1 ff.

I. G r u e n w a l d

109

opposition to common forms of religious practice and legalism. Even in the case of the modern Hasidic movement of Eastern Europe, views have been expressed to the effect that this movement aimed at withstanding the rigoristic tendencies of Jewish legalism9. However, Sh. Safrai has convincingly shown that in contradistinction to the more popular theory of the nature of Jewish piety, the Jewish Hasidim of pre-Mishnaic and Mishnaic times were in fact individuals who held a more rigoristic view of the Jewish law than was normally the case10. Safrai succeeded in showing that the pietists in Mishnaic times were people who put great emphasis on a strict and conscientious performance of the Law. Reading through Sefer Hasidim, which is the major printed source for acquainting oneself with the religious ideas of the Hasidey Ashkenaz, one gets the clear impression that a similar spirit prevails in almost every paragraph of that book. The religious performance of those Hasidim is characterized by its attentiveness to detail, even punctiliousness, in almost every issue that is brought under consideration. Special attention is given to the moral standing, attitudes and standards that should be expressed in and through the religious act. In a sense, the religious ideals of German Hasidim are expressive of the desire to bring every aspect of life into the pietistic frame of mind. If we view Sefer Hasidim as an attempt at codifying Jewish Law, then it is a highly ideological type at that. This still holds true notwithstanding its highly idosyncratic nature. In comparison to Maimonides' Mishneh Torah, which was composed a short time before Sefer Hasidim and about which the principle version of the latter seems to know nothing, Sefer Hasidim carries a well-structured and clearly-directed type of ideology11. This is not to say that Mishneh Torah lacks structure and an overall sense of purpose, to say nothing of its philosophical links; but its universal appeal pulls it out of the "privativistic" type of framework that strikes the eye of every reader of Sefer Hasidim. It is worth noting that part and parcel of that framework is the positive attitude shown in Sefer Hasidim to matters reflecting the common and popular beliefs of a medieval person living in a Christian and folkloristic environment12. ^Various aspects of East-European pietistic attitudes towards the Jewidi legal law are discussed by M Piekarz, The Beginning of Hasidism, Jerusalem 1978 [Hebrew]. Piekarz discusses previous scholarly views on the subject. '®See Sh. Safrai, "Teaching if Pietists in Miámaic Literature", The Journal of Jewish Studies, vol. XVI (1965), pp. 15-33. Readers of Hebrew are kindly referred to the enlarged Hebrew version of the same article in Sh. Safrai, Eretz Yisrael Va-Hakhameyha bi-Tequfat ha-Mishnah

we-ha-Talmud,

Jerusalem 1983. 11 See, I. Twersky, Introduction to the Code of Maimonides {Mishneh Torah), New Haven of London, Yale University Press, 1980, p. 530. Twersky does not present a phenomaiological comparison between Sefer Hasidim and Mishneh Torah. 11See, though somewhat indirectly connected to this subject, T. Alexander-Frizer, The Pious Sinner,

110

Social and Mystical Aspects

Does this fact entitle us to refer to that type of Hasidism as "popular Hasidism"? If we adapt Safrai's characterization of piety, the term "popular Hasidism" would be a contradiction in terms. II A natural place to look for, and examine, the various forms which the religious attitudes of the Ashkenazic pietists take is in those long sections in Sefer Hasidim which discuss the various aspects of prayer. Generally speaking, among the various other forms of religious practice and attitude, prayer is one of the most intensive of its kind. No wonder, then, that Sefer Hasidim devotes long sections to prayer, including those rulings which concern the synagogal service13. Of particular interest for our purpose, though, are those passages in Sefer Hasidim that take up the matter of the person who prays on behalf of others and the community14. These passages, more than anything else in the book, point in the direction of the charismatic leadership of the Hasidim. We may argue that behind those individuals stand the very writers of the book, Rabbi Shmuel Hasid and Rabbi Yehudah heHasid. In other words, from a form-critical point of view, those particular passages are not necessarily general rulings, but the attempts of the writers to establish their own charismatic hegemony and leadership! Naturally, charismatic leadership and socal hegemony make sense only when and where there is a real community over which they can be enacted. Admittedly, it is in the very nature of Jewish Halakhah to bring up issues which have a small chance of being virtually enacted. There is always this Utopian dimension in Jewish Halakhah 15 . And exactly this may be the case in quite a number of the issues raised by Sefer Hasidim, not least among them being the charismatic strivings of its composers. It will not be out of context in this connection to mention that in Safrai's above-mentionend article attention is drawn to the fact that the Hasidim of Tannaitic times were famous for their special praying practices, among which the prayers said on behalf of other people, mostly sick people, occupy a J.C.B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), Tübingen 1991. 13

See particularly paragraphs 39 Iff. in the Parma-version of Sefer Hasidim, ed. J. Wistinetzki. See

also paragraphs 1573ff. 1

''"These are mainly contained in §§ 39 Iff.

15

The so-called Utopian nature of certain halakhic rulings still requires a comprehensive study and

analysis. A preliminary collection erf' rabbinic rulings that may be enacted in messianic times may be found in Talmudic Encyclopedia [Hebrew], vol. DC, pp. 388-390, s.v. hilkheta le-meshiha. This is a completely différait question than the one relating to the potarti al abolition of the Law in messianic times. See P. Schäfer, "Die Torah der messianisdien Zeit", Zeitschrift fitr die Wissenschaft, 65 (1974), pp. 27-42.

neutestamentliche

I. Gruenwald

111

central position. And it is once again Safrai who notes about those Hasidim: "... we cannot determine in relation to every passage whether we are faced with a term [i.e. Hasid, (I.G.)] applying to a defined group, or with a general term applied to a man who performs an act of kindness or has attained divine grace" (p. 15). Whatever the case may be, being and acting in the capacity of praying on behalf of other people underlines charismatic aspirations and standing. Even more important is the fact that such praying activities presuppose the application of special techniques: magical and mystical alike. Speaking of Hasidim and prayer, it would be in context to note the fact that in the study of Jewish Prayer, in general, two major subjects are usually placed at the centre of discussion: 1) The history of prayer and the development of the prayer-texts; 2) The various praying-institutions, such as synagogues and the praying habits of different communities. For rather strange reasons the essence, that is, the contents, of Jewish prayer is usually ignored in scholarly consideration. Prayer is a central religious activity, and as such it is also a way of enacting special techniques and gestures. In many ways, prayer is an art: one has to learn how to pray in a compelling and effective manner. In this respect, we consider it to be of crucial importance to devote some attention to those sections of Sefer Hasidim that have prayer as their central subject-matter. In recent years a number of studies have been published in which the subject of prayer in German Hasidism was taken up. We shall refer to one or two of them later on. It is worth noting as well as praising, that in some of them attention is given to matters other than just the formalities of praying conditions. In his monograph Piety and Society, Ivan Marcus devotes three intensive pages to the subject16. He shrewdly highlights those passages in Sefer Hasidim that emphasize a pietistic tendency towards elitistic exclusiveness. In the examples Marcus gives, he emphasizes the reluctance shown on the part of the pietists to share with non-pietists the same bench in the synagogue. Almost any kind of nuisance caused by a non-pietist was sufficient reason for the Hasid to abstain from saying his prayer in the synagogue! Instead, he would say it at home. In addition, attention is drawn to the special, esoteric, praying-techniques of the pietists. A similar line is taken by Marcus in his article "The Politics and Ethics of Pietism in Judaism: The Hasidim of Medieval Germany"17. Here, as was the case in his book, Marcus points to the tendency towards exclusiveness as manifested in the decrees and religious practices of the Hasidim. Prayer is also the subject of Marcus' article "The Devotional Ideals of Ashkenazic Pietism"18, as it is the subject of Joseph 16 17

pp. 98-100.

Publisfaedin: The Journal of Religious Ethics, vol. Vm (1980),pp. 227-258.

18

Published in: Jewish Spirituality from the Bible Through the Middle Ages, ed. by A. Green, Routledge of Kegan Paul, London 1986, pp. 356-366.

112

Social and Mystical Aspects

Dan's paper, "The Emergence of Mystical Prayer"19. Ε. E. Urbach, too, studied the Hasidic type of prayer, with special emphasis on the aspects of the angelological sections in those prayers20. All in all, those who wish to get a good overview of the Hasidic idea of prayer can do so with the help of these studies. In the context of the present discussion it would seem fitting to attach particular importance to the remarks made by Ivan Marcus regarding the prayers of the individual Hasid over against the prayers of the lay person in the community. This distinction may indeed point in the direction of an inner class-struggle in which the leaders of the Hasidim try to establish themselves over against the rest of the rabbinical authorities of their time. It should, however, be pointed out that the weight of the actual historical evidence that can be inferred from Sefer Hasidim varies according to our evaluation of the actual historicity that can be attached to the various components of the material in that book. It should be pointed out, too, that although the book tells many anecdotes and stories about sages and pietists, their actual names are almost never given. Joseph Dan has already drawn attention to the fact that many of the sources to which the writings of the Ashkenazi Pietists allude are of an enigmatic nature21. We may add that the same holds true in regard to the Hasidim themselves. Apart from a very few names, among whom those of Rabbi Shmuel and Rabbi Yehudah rank high, there are almost no names given in the book. There is, therefore, no exaggeration in the conclusion that can be drawn, namely, that the book enjoys an almost totally enigmatic biographical anonymity. Although guesses can always be made, historical certainty is something that the book does not supply in satisfying quantities. It really is guesswork that has to be applied in identifying who is who in the book! The air of social superciliousness or exclusive class-consciousness that is so pervasive in the book could hardly be considered the conducive factor in the propaganda made for its acceptance and circulation in the alleged communites in which it could be read, studied, and even followed. Those who are acquainted with books written in the Middle Ages know that not a few of them preached a separatist type of exclusiveness. Such was the case with Maimonides' Guide to the Perplexed and Rabbi Moshe de-Leon's Zohar. But the last two books were proclaimedly written as esoteric treatises, at least in the common sense in which esotericism is usually understood, while Sefer Hasidim has explicit public claims. It has an explicit exoteric orientation. If this is the case, then the question of its concrete and actual historic setting 19

Published in: Studies in Jewish Mysticism, eds. J. Dan & F. Talmage, Association for Jewish

Studies, Cambridge Mass. 1982, pp. 85-120. 20

21

E.E. Urbach, Sefer Arugat ha-Bosem, vol. IV, Mekize Nirdamim, Jerusalem 1963, pp.73 ff. See above fn. 7.

I. Gruenwald

113

becomes all the more urgent. It sometimes appears as if its realism is only a fictional one, a halakhic and moral fiction. It appears to be addressing a nonexistent public, or at best a very small group. Obviously, the way the book is read today very much depends on what we make of historionic obscurity. Is that obscurity just a manner of speech which can be deciphered, though at the risk of indulging in speculation? Or does it just reflect the genre of an Utopian halachic and moral pamphlet? The answers to these questions depends on many things that are not known to us today; but they may become clear through future studies. Trying to apply form-criticism when studying this book assumes that a real group of people were actually behind it or expected to be able to enact it in real life. This is clearly not the case with Sefer Hasidim, and thus form-criticism has to be suspended until more can be assumed in relation to its actual environment. Ill What can be avered in a more positive manner, is the fact that the book displays a unique type of spirituality. It assumes that the Hasidim possess special qualities that turn every religious act into a means of fulfilling a Hasidic ideal. It is very important to realize that according to Sefer Hasidim, religious laws should reflect, and even substantially contribute to, the fulfillment of the ethical ideals of the H asid. Religious law is not practised for its own sake, as a token of obedience to God, but as a means to an end in the Hasidic goal. Obviously, this is a unique religious position that has to be viewed in comparison to other, rabbinic, models of religious behaviour. Practising the Hasidic Law means adapting an inner spiritual orientation that transforms the Law into a Pietistic act. Allegedly, that Pietistic act has a number of personal and cosmic reverberations. It affects the personality of the performer himself and imbues him with a true realization of what the Pietists call by such terms as Yir'at ha-Shem and Hasidut. But it also affects the environment of the performer in which ghosts, demons and - on another scale of values - non-Jews play an important role. In other words, the Mizwot (religious laws) have an inherent power that the Hasid has to learn how to discover and how to enact. Lack of space prevents us from giving detailed examples. However, we may claim that on the ideal level, the Hasidim turn every religious act into something that other people, who do not belong or fit into their ranks, are incapable of achieving. Their idea of piety transforms every religious act into a Hasidic reality. This is also at the heart of their concept of prayer and of their performance of ritual rites. The secret layers of meaning which they attribute to the texts of their prayers are realized in the domains that are beyond the reach and comprehension of the ordinary people. Of particular importance for those pietists were - as many scholars have already noticed -

114

Social and Mystical Aspects

the secrets connected with the numerical values of words, letters and other elements in the texts of prayers. But numbers, as also names of angels and certain magical concepts, are not the only asset in the Hasidic concept of prayer, and in their spirituality. Special attention should be given in this connection to the role played by the performing person. The impact prayer has on celestial powers depends by and largely on the special spiritual capabilities of the praying person. Those capabilities consist of a number of qualities chief among them being moral integrity and holiness, which the Hasidic writers viewed as the ideal of the Fear of God. But there is also something that emerges from out of the very knowledge of the secrets incorporated in prayers. Those secrets are the inner dynamics that turns the words into active spiritual entities. As in magic, the power of the word lies in its (secret) dynamic knowledge. The Hasids claimed that only they could properly perform the various services connected with the praying-ritual in the synagogue. They were best equipped for receiving the inner power of the words of the prayers, and of theurgically working on heavenly domains and consequently in earthly matters. In this respect, the Hasidim return to pre-Mishnaic times, before the process of the democratization of prayer set in 22 . In other words, according to those pietists, praying is a special art that not everybody can properly perform. In this respect, we must also remember such tannaitic figures as Hani nah ben Dosa, Honi the Circlemaker, and even Rabbi Aqiva who showed special praying capabilities. Their prayers particlularly effected sick people, reinfall, and the fate of their entire community 23 . Jesus allegedly had the same qualities or gifts. This is charisma as functional mainly in a social context. We are now justified in suggesting that the German pietists professed a kind of charisma that may be viewed as detached from a concrete social environment. It is charisma for its own religious sake, and basically, it has a mere ideological fiinction. We would remind those who need to be reminded that Sefer Hasidim moves in almost total anonymity, and this in spite of the fact that so many stories and anecdotes are told in the paradigmatic setting of the book. This is very unlike the common practice in the Talmud. There, names are almost always given, particularly those of the sages involved. Legal books need not mention names; but books that build on actual communal life are expected to adopt another type of literary procedure. However, if Sefer Hasidim does not mention names, even in cases where no 22

Compare L. Jacobs, Hasidic Prayer, Routledge & Kegan Paul, London 1972, who discusses later

Hasidic forms and ideas of prayer as manifested in East-European Hasidism from the Eightteenth Century onwards. See also I. Tidiby, The Wisdom of the Zohar, Oxford University Press, vol. ΙΠ, Oxford 1991, pp. 941ff., who describes and analyses the Kabbalistic notions of prayer. 23

See, A. Biichler, Types of Jewish-Palestinian Piety, Ktav Publishing House, New York 1968,

Particularly chapters 2 and 4.

I. Gruenwald

115

personal defamation is involved, there may be good reasons for not doing so. One of them certainly is that the people mentioned there were legal examples, not real actors in a concrete social drama. IV Let me, by way of summing up, make a few comments on the subject of Sefer Hasidim and the nature of Jewish mysticism. Needless to say, Sefer Hasidim is no mystical book, in the explicit sense of the term. It does not contain any mystical doctrines. Moreover, it bears hardly any resemblance to the mystical material contained in the famous commentaries to the prayers of Israel, as known to us from so many of the other writings of the German Hasidim. The great interest the book has for the study of Jewish mysticism may therefore appear as being of an indirect, and not too significant, nature. We have already mentioned the fact that Sefer Hasidim is a unique specimen of what we call Jewish Spirituality'. The subject of Spirituality' has, in recent years, won increasing interest in scholarly circles. Spirituality' may be a term that houses many trends and inclinations of the religious mind. We have already suggested that Sefer Hasidim constitutes a unique, and for that matter also a paradigmatic, type of Jewish Spirituality. Its two major components in that respect are: 1) Everything done by way of fulfilling a religious law or commitment should either reflect or enhance Hasidic ideals or norms of behaviour; and 2) Religious practice as such is not independent of the existence of all kinds of supernatural beings and powers which either interfere with, or enhance, it. This is not the time and the place to dwell on the many implications of these two subjects. But one thing must be made clear at this point, and it concerns the whole question of the relationship between spirituality and mysticism. Those who are used to viewing the nature of Jewish mysticism from the point of view of the Qabbalah, are inclined to emphasize the doctrinal aspects of Jewish mysticism, particularly its paradigmatic Sephirot-doctrine. In this respect, the study of Qabbalah is all too often connected with the understanding of the symbolic nature of the language used in it. To a somewhat lesser extent questions that relate to the mystical experience itself receive scholarly attention. Questions such as the nature of the divine world, the human influence on the constitution of the divine world, and the symbolic reflection of that world in the world of Scripture, also, occupy a major place in the understanding of the nature of Jewish mysticism. All this so happens, because Jewish mysticism is viewed as a separate, if not isolated, entity in the general framework of religion. However, if, as we have shown elsewhere24, Jewish mysticism is not viewed as such, but as an See, I. Groemvald, "Reflections oo the Nature and Origins of Jewish Mysticism", in P. Schäfer and

116

Social and Mystical Aspects

integral part of the religious sensibility at large, then Sefer Hasidim may come under a completely new frame of references. Its particular form of religiosity may indeed be viewed as having no real consequence in inducing ecstatic types of experience, but its overall aim and purpose can still be taken as pointing in a mystical direction. That mystical direction, as we have already indicated above, involves spiritual goals that transcend ordinary forms of religious practice and orientation. In this respect, Sefer Hasidim may well come under discussion in the framework of Jewish spirituality and mysticism. This is particularly true, if mysticism - even in its narrow Jewish context - is taken to designate larger areas of religiosity than it usually does in the scholarly parlance adopted for the purpose of discussing Jewish mysticism. Here the scholar studying forms of mysticism in Judaism should listen with great attention to the ways in which mysticism is discussed in a much less technical sense than it is when specifically Jewish forms of mysticism are brought to scholarly attention. In Christianity, a great variety of religious experiences are brought to the centre of scholarly discussion of mysticism 25 . With a Christian perspective in mind, no difficulty would arise, if Sefer Hasidim was viewed in a mystical context. The gaps between piety and mysticism are not so wide and essential as they are often viewed thought, from a Jewish perspective. But this leads us into a discussion that can only be covered in a separate study. 26

J. Dan (eds.), Scholem's Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism: Fifty Years After. J. C. B. Möhr: Tübingen 1994. See above fn.3 and also next footnote. 25 For a discussion of the general characteristics of Christian mysticism see, B. McGinn, The Foundations of Mysticism, Crossroad, New York, 1991, pp. XI-XX. It is significant that McGinn does not see mysticism as a seperate, delimited, phenomenon within Christianity. He writes: "No mystics(at least before the present century) believed in or practiced 'mysticism'. They believed in and practiced Christianity (or Judaism, or Islam, or Hinduism), that is, religions that contained mystical elements as parts of a wider historical whole ... mysticism is inseparable from the larger whole." (p. XVI). 26 See my article, "Major Issues in the Study and Understanding of Jewish Mysticism", in: J. Neusier (ed.), Judaism in Late Antiquity, E. J. Brill: Leiden [forthcoming].

Moshe Hallatnish Rabbi Judah The Pious' Will in Halakhic and Kabbalistic Literature

The exact nature of the literature produced by Hasidey Ashkenaz, in particular those writings that display mystical tendencies, has not yet been fully grasped. Adding to this incertitude is the fact that some of the works were uncovered only in this century, while even Sefer Hasidim, the major achievement of this literature and its best known book, still oscillates between diverse and conflicting research positions. Now, just as with this book, of which a large portion is rightly ascribed to Rabbi Judah the Pious, there is another work, much shorter, which is also ascribed to Rabbi Judah. I refer to the pamphlet called Rabbi Judah the Pious' Will (Zawa'at Rabbi Yehuda he-Hasid). This will is in fact a collection of instructions on how one should conduct oneself in various spheres of life. These instructions are often followed by grave warnings of the retribution entailed in the violation of these instructions. The loose structure of the work, as implied by the use of the word "collection", manifests itself in the fact that there are several versions of this Will, which differ from each other not merely in the wording, but, more importantly, in the omission, or addition, of whole paragraphs. Some printed editions even make cross references to other versions or inform that different versions of the Will exist. The question also arises as to the relation between the Will and Sefer ha-Kavod - is it mere coincidence that the Will appears at the end of this book, or is it a matter of great significance, deserving careiul study. Some of the great rabbinic authorities, when discussing this or that paragraph of the Will, explicitly stated that Rabbi Judah "is not signed" on the Will, thus suggesting that they doubt his authorship, and perhaps even question the validity of this work. This is the attitude displayed by Hatam Sofer in the 19th century and, before him, Rabbi Moshe Provinzallo in the 17th century, in Italy. The Will poses an additional problem. Some of its paragraphs actually repeated what had already been said in the Talmud1. Yet, more seriously, other paragraphs are different from, or even contrary to what the Talmud says2.This induced some rabbis not to accept the will's authority. In grappling with this problem, several answers were offered. With respect to the paragraphs that are identical to the Talmud, it was explained that the intent of Rabbi Judah the Pious, or the author of the Will, was to strengthen awareness of these issues. As to the paragraphs that go against the Talmud, two kinds of answers were given. One such answer ascribes the deviation from the Talmud 'E.g. paragraphs 15, 18, 37 etc. The edition of Rabbi Margoliouth, Jerusalem 1960, is used here. Λ

E.g. paragraph 22.

118

M. Hallamish

to the basic changes occurring in the course of time in diverse natural phenomena. As a matter of fact, this sort of reasoning is not uncommon in halakhic literature during the last 8-9 centuries3. In this case, it served to legitimize the work by reconciling the differences between the rules of conduct formulated by Rabbi Judah and those postulated in the Talmud. Another answer does acknowledge these differences, but argues that the Will is addressed exclusively to the family members and offspring of Rabbi Judah. Thus, either Rabbi Judah tended to impose stricter rules of conduct on his family than those prescribed as the norm in the Talmud, or that, inspired by the Holy Spirit, he anticipated a certain state of affairs which might be pernicious and dangerous to his offspring, and postulated those rules precisely to counteract its effect. Thus, for instance, according to Rabbi Ezekiel Landau (1713-1793), Rabbi Judah wrote his will, "as a temporary measure", or strictly for his own family. This view is in line with the subtitle of the work, as it appears in some of the manuscripts and printed editions of the Will. This subtitle indicates that while some of the prescriptions apply to Israel as a whole - and some even, as added in some editions, to the nations of the world - others are meant solely for his descendants. In this connection, it is worth noting that in some cases, even the descendants of Rabbi Judah had reservations about the Will. For example, during a discussion on a certain paragraph according to which, none of his descendants are to be named Samuel or Yehuda, the MaHaRShA (d. 1573) announced defiantly that he is a descendant of Rabbi Judah, that his name is Samuel Eliezer and his father's name is Yehudah. In checking whether the prescriptions of the Will are accepted in practice among the Jewish communities, we come across many different responses. Firstly, we must point out that, generally speaking, the Will was not perceived as binding in its entirety. Attention was drawn, perhaps on account of some actual need, to certain contents within it. An attempt to assess the influence exerted by the Will according to a geographic distribution, is doomed to failure. There is some evidence that the Will was accepted in Provence around 1300. R. Yerhuham copies a whole section in his halakhic book4. On the other hand, there are some indications that within the boundaries of Ashkenaz, the Will was not accepted even in the 15 th century. This is testified by R. Israel Isserlin in Austria and by his disciple MaHaRaM Minz (moved to Würzburg and Poland). Also, his disciple, (the author of Leqet Yosher), while describing some of his rules, we can see that part of them are contrary to the Will. It also emerges that the Will provoked differences of opinion and led to serious questionings. At the time of the famous MaHaRIL (1360-1427), Rabbi 3 See e.g. Shimon bea Zemah_Duran, Response, part 2, No. 143, in the end. 4

Toledoth Adam we-Hawa, Nativ 28, end of part 1

Rabbi Judah The Pious' Will

119

Abraham Klausner of Vienna was asked why the Will approves of slaughtering a hen producing the cock-crow of the rooster, which was common practice among non-Jews. As to other countries, our information about the attitude to the Will is limited to later periods. In Italy we can detect conflicting attitudes. Besides Rabbi Moshe Provinzallo, whom we have mentioned above, we learn about the influence of the Will from stories contained in the encyclopedical book Pahad Yizhak. For example, we are told that in 1685, a cemetery was inaugurated in Reggio and the ceremony was marked by the slaughtering of a rooster. This is in accordance with the ruling of the Will. Moreover, in 1722, a grave which was dug in Ferrara was covered with planks. This too conformed with the Will. As to the practices among the Sephardic Jews, (the RIBaSh, 15th century, Algiers), we are reminded that it is a mizwa to marry one's niece, which is contrary to the Will. Also, the RaDBaZ, (16th century, Egypt), did not refrain from having a haircut in Rosh Hodesh, "the first of the month", and neither did Rabbi Joseph Karo. This is contrary to the Will. Nonetheless, it emerges that even the Sephardic rabbis were influenced by the Will. As far as hair cutting was concerned, Rabbi Hayyim J. D. Azulay, the HI DA, tells us in the name of his father that Rabbi Israel Zeevi and Rabbi Abraham Yizhaqi, two famous halakhic personalities, always abided by the rule. Let us now turn to the Kabbalists. It turns out that they accepted some of the things prescribed in the Will, (but without acknowledging their indebtedness to it). First and foremost I would like to mention Rabbi Joseph Ashkenazi, a 14th century Sephardic Kabbalist who came from Ashkenaz. He tells us, that there was an old woman who used to harm the poor during her lifetime, and when she died, her mouth was left open - which is an ominous sign. Indeed, around the time of her death, he continues, 200 people were injured because of her [evil spirit]. Ashkenazi goes on to say that the same thing happened in the days of Rabbi Judah the pious, "one of our ancestors", with respect to the death of Yizhaq the mazziq, the "mischief-maker". It is noteworthy that Ashkenazi does not speak of the Will per se, he does not mention it, as this case is mentioned here, but brings historical evidence of a particular phenomenon. Hence we may infer from this ancient Kabbalistic source, that the Will was not composed by Rabbi Judah, or that it was unknown to his descendant who lived one century later. In discussing the position of the Kabbalah in regard to the Will, we must dwell on the role played by R. Isaac Luria, the ARI. He must have read and absorbed the Will, whether in part or as a whole, following which he authorized the putting into practice of some of its instructions, though without mentioning their source. It is interesting, for example, that Rabbi Abraham Gombiner (1632-1683), a talmudic scholar of great halakhic authority, the author of Magen Avraham, who lived in 17th century Poland, wrote in the name of Ketavim [=writings = the Lurianic writings] that one must not visit

120

M. Hallamish

the same grave twice on the same day. This prohibition is found in Ta'amey ha-Mizwot, the portion of wa-yehi, and it is also the first paragraph of the Will. It is worth noting that Magen Avraham does not mention the Will. In Italy, the kabbalist Ricci wrote a famous book, entitled Mishnat Hasidim, where he states that one must make sure that "her [the bride's] name is not the same as his mother's because this is not good for him". Ricci does not mention the ARI, but later-masters of the halakhah (rightly) concluded that this instruction is based on the teaching of the ARI and this is why it was taken seriously. Moreover, another example of indirect influence of the Will through kabbalistic channels is found in the works of Rabbi Jacob Zemah: "Rabbi Hayyim Vital said that it is not good to raise doves and turtle-doves at home; and he who does so, either his sons will die, or he will have no offspring". This is similar to what is said in the Will. We can sum up by saying that the contents of the Will were known to the ARI and it is through him, and on account of his authority which was accepted by the masters of the Halakhah, that certain parts of the Will permeated to other Jewish circles. This indirect influence of the Will is particularly manifest among the Sephardic rabbis and their congregants. Another paragraph of the Will that is mentioned in a Kabbalistic book without giving credit to the Will is the prohibition of digging a grave and leaving it open, unless a rooster is buried in it first, so that the grave will not be left empty. This is to be found in Ma'avar Yaboq, (a work concerned with the sick and mourning practices), whose influence in the Jewish world was quite extensive. We may remind ourselves5 that it is in this period that we are told about what happened in Ferrara in 1722. This point brings us to a crucial aspect of the Will, of which the masters of the Halakhah were well aware. By this I am referring to that part of the Will which instructs how one ought to conduct oneself, or what one must cease doing, in order to avert danger. Some of the dangers discussed in the Will are related to the prevalent practice of magic among the non-Jews, which had a large impact on the environment of Rabbi Judah the pious (see, for instance, the works of Güdeman, Bear etc.). Indeed, Rabbi Jonathan Eybeschuetz, in Germany, explicitly stated, in reference to the custom of slaughtering a goose in the month of Shevat, that geese are no longer associated with the practice of magic. His words to this effect were cited by the HIDA. As to the apprehension of danger, it seems that the prominence of the Will in the eyes of the public has a lot to do with this fear. The masters of the Halakhah were able to give a halakhic authority to these instructions because of the important talmudic principle postulating that "danger has more weight than prohibition" (hamira sakanta me-issura). But even in this respect there was a sage who questioned the applicability of this principle to the Will. He put forward an ^.See above p. 186.

Rabbi Judah The Pious' Will

121

interesting argument: the Talmud refers to things that by their very nature involve danger, such as the poison of a snake. On the other hand, that which is not dangerous by nature, and is only established as such by the holy spirit of Rabbi Judah, does not fall under the category of danger, and therefore is not to be feared. Rabbi Ezekiel Landau, in Prague, also referred to the issue of danger. He ruled that (bi-meqom mizwah) "where a good deed (or a commandment) is done", one should not fear the consequences forewarned in the Will, because (shomer mizwah lo yeda' ra*) "He who keeps the commandments shall feel no evil thing" (Ecc. 8:5). And since marrying one's daughter to a talmudic scholar is considered a mizwah (this was the case discussed), this must necessarily counteract any potential danger that is inherent in violating the instruction of the Will. It is in this connection that I would like to point out that one of the best known paragraphs of the Will is that which forbids a man to marry a woman who bears his mother's name or a woman to marry anyone whose name is like her father's. Apparently, the preoccupation with marriage issues focused attention on this prohibition more than on the ones related to other issues. Opinions, however, widely differed. Generally speaking, some limited this prohibition to the case of a bride and her mother-in-law, and did not apply it to the groom and his father-in-law, others restricted it to cases where this identity of names was maintained throughout three successive generations (as a matter of fact, this has its roots in Sefer Hasidim). Still others narrowed it down to those cases where both the first and the middle names of the persons concerned were identical. There was also the possibility of adding another name 30 days before the wedding. One of the masters in Galicia even ruled that marriage was allowed upon the approval of three rabbis serving as a court. One of the greatest deciders of our days has written: "It is a great thing about the Will, that anything which the Hasid did not discuss must be allowed". A similar position was expressed 200 years before by the HIDA. In connection with felling a fruit-bearing tree, which the Will strongly forbids, the HIDA rules that most paragraphs of the Will are contrary to the Jewish law, and some of the precautions therein relate to matters that pose no threat at all. This is how a way was found to bypass the prohibition. It seems that the various restrictions we mentioned here in connection with marriage, some of which apply to other paragraphs in the Will, suggest the great awareness of the public to potential dangers, an awareness which was aroused by the things written in the Will. The masters of the Halakhah sought ways to bypass the severe prohibitions so as to calm down the public and dismiss its fears. Evidently, some of the rabbis and the leaders of Hasidism took things at their face value, because Rabbi Judah was considered an authority, being one of the Rishonim. Yet it is difficult to shake off the impression that many things in the Will were not realistic at that time, and their actual occurrence was rather rare. Other paragraphs warning about

122

M. Hallamish

danger had a strong impact. Once again, we witness a familiar phenomenon: the great power exerted by the "public", in shaping the Halakhah. As we know, there is a discussion about whether the custom (Minhag) is valid because the public used to do so, or whether the halakhic authorities still have to legitimize the case. Both opinions are discussed in the famous work of Menahem Elon (Ha-Mishpat ha-Ivry). According to some of the abovementioned examples, I think that we may agree with the first opinion, it means that there is a kind of a power of legislation in the public's behaviour. Additionally, this also shows how great the power of the ARI was: since his followers specified the prohibition to marry (on account of identical names) only in reference to the bride and her mother-in-law and not in reference to the groom and father-in-law, the public, too, in almost all Jewish congregations, had no misgivings about the latter case. This serves as an example of what I have illustrated elsewhere concerning another matter, namely that what the ARI did not say was halakhically meaningful. His silence was as eloquent and influential as his speech. To sum up, it was not possible to deal with a variety of problems concerning the Will. On occasion I only hinted at the question of authorship. Our main aim was to check whether the Will had been accepted by Jewish congregations in the diaspora, and if not - what were the reasons for rejecting it. We learned that there are various reasons for either rejection or acceptance. However, the influence of the public and that of the ARI was remarkable.

Tamar Alexander Rabbi Judah the Pious as a Legendary Figure

Hebrew hagiographie literature came to fruition only in the sixteenth century, as complete biographic cycles crystallized around figures of medieval Jewry such as Rashi, Abraham ibn Ezra, Nahmanides and R. Isaac Luria. This literary genre is perceived by Joseph Dan as the line of demarcation separating Hebrew prose prior to the sixteenth entury from the course of its subsequent development.1 Biblical figures such as Abraham, Moses and Elijah were the subject of isolated hagiographie stories, as were the Amoraic and Tannaitic personalities of R. Akiba, R. Yishmael and R. Eliezer. But it was only at the beginning of the seventeenth century that complete hagiographie cycles were first published, ones focusing on the figure of R. Isaac Luria, Ha-Ari. Known as Shivhey Ha-Ari and Toldot Ha-Ari2. The Hebrew name of this first cycle launched the generic term for the literature that sprang up in its wake3. The culmination of this literature is embodied in the cycle In Praise of the Ba al Shem Τον4 from the early nineteenth century and the ensuing corpus of Hasidic tales. The first hagiographie cycle in Hebrew literature is without doubt that about R. Judah the Pious and his father, R. Samuel. Unpublished and preserved in only two manuscripts, Ms. Frankfurt Heb 35 oct. and Ms. Jerusalem oct. 3182 (the latter subsequently brought to press by Bruill)5, the 'J. Dan, "Sifrut Ha-Shevahim": Mizrah u-Ma'arav (Hagiographie Literature: East and West). Pe amim, Studies in the Cultural Heritage of Oriental Jewry (1986) 77-86. ^M. Benayahu, Sefer Toldot ha-Ari. Jerusalem, 1967; ibid., "Shivhey ha-Ari", Areshet 3, Jerusalem 1961,pp. 144-165. 3

For example: Shivhey Rabbi Hayyim Vital. Ostaha 1828; Shivhey ha-Rav (about R.Shenor Zalman from Ladi), Lvov 1864; Shivhey ha-Rav Hida, Livorno 1879. 4

S. M Horodetzky, Shivhey ha-Besht, Tel Aviv 1968. FngliA edition. Dan Ben-Amos and Jerome R. Mintz (eds.) In Praise of the Baal Shem Τον, Bloomingtcn, Lenden 1970. N. Brüll, "Beiträge zu Jüdischen Sagen und Spruchkunde im Mittelalter" in: Jahrbücher für Jüdische Geschichte und Literatur 9 (1889), pp. 1-71. For description of the ms. see: J. Dan, "Ketav Yad Beit Sefanm -Oct. 3182 u-Ma'aseh haYerushalmi" ("Ma'aseh Yerudialmi and ms. Oct. 3182"); in: Kiriat Sefer: Bibliographical Quarterly of the Jewish National and University Library 51 (1976), pp. 192-198. The ms. was copied by J. Dan and partly publidied in: T. Alexander (ed.), Ha-Sippur ha-Hasidi Ashkenazi,

124

Rabbi Judah the Pious as a Legendary Figure

stories were published in a Yiddish adaptation known as the Ma'ayse Buch6. Comparative studies conducted by Sarah Zfatman7 amply demonstrate the relation of the Yiddish version to the original kernel of Hebrew stories. The stories may have first been related in the spoken parlance of Yiddish and then cast into written Hebrew, before being published in Yiddish on the basis of the written Hebrew form. Dating from the sixteenth century, Ms. Jerusalem no. oct. 3182 contains ninety-nine stories, and this is the only principle of organization, though they do reveal an editorial hand. Joseph Dan sees this as an important fact, evincing a new attitude towards the genre of the story itself. No longer does a story have to seek justification in external factors, as was the case with other medieval collections. So, for example, Midrash 'Aseret Ha-Dvarot piously staked its raison d'etre on its connection with the Ten Commandments. Or consider Hibbur Yafe Mi-ha-Yeshu'a by R. Nissim of Kairouan. It too provided an ideological and functional justification, that of comforting the bereaved and is integral to a theodiotional perspective. Of the ninety-nine stories in the Jerusalem Manuscript, forty of them focus on HasidicAshkenazic figures, twenty-two on R. Judah the Pious, and seven on his father, R. Samuel the Pious. The Frankfurt Manuscript contains ten stories about the latter figure, and none at all about R. Judah. II R. Judah was the primary founder and guiding spirit of the HasidicAshkenaz movement that flourished in Germany around the turn of the twelfth century8. Neither a formal nor a consolidated movement, its adherents tended to work alone as individuals, or in small clusters along the margins of Jerusalem Akademon 1983 (The Folktales of German Hasidism). ® Maitlis, J., Das Ma'assebuch: Seine Entstehung und Quellengeschidite, Berlin 1933. Fnglidi translation by M. Gast er, The Ma'aseh Bode. Philadelphia 1934. n S. Zfatman, "Ma'assebudi: Qawwim li-Demuto sfael Genre be Si&ut Yiddidi ba-Yeshana. (The Mayse-Bukh. An Old Yiddish Literary Genre)." Ha Sifrut 28 (April 1979), pp. 126-152. o On the HasidioAdikenaa movement see for example: Y. Baer, Ha-Megammah ha-Datit haHevratit diel Sefer Hasidim. (The Religious Social Tendency of Srfer Hasidim), Zion 3, no. 1 (1937), pp. 1-50. Reprinted in: I. G. Marcus (ed.) Dat we-Hevra be-Mishnatam shel Hasidey Ashkenaz (The Religious and Social Ideas of the Jewiái Pietists in Medieval Germany). Jerusalem 1986, pp. 81-131; H. H. Ben-Sasson, Peraqim be-Toldot ha-Yehudim bi-Yemey ha-Beinayim (On Jewidi History in the Middle Ages). Tel Aviv 1969; J. Dan, Torat ha-Sod shel Hasidut Ashkenaz (The Esoteric Theology of Ashkanazi Hasidim). Jerusalem, 1968; I.G. Marcus, Piety and Society: the Jewish Pietists of Medieval Germany, Leiden 1981;G. Scholem, Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism, New York 1954, pp. 80-118; T. Alexander, The Pious Sinner, Ethics and Aestetics in the Medieval Narrative, Tübingen 1991.

Hasidic

T. Alexander

125

society. They did not attain positions of leadership, and any hopes for recognition by the Jewish establishment went unfulfilled 9 . Accordingly, they might best be described by the term "Communitas", as defined by the anthropologist Victor Turner 10 . Very little is known about the life of R. Judah the Pious 11 . Though the date of his birth is unknown, he was most probably born in Speyer, the town where he spent the greater part of his life. In 1195 he moved to Regensburg for reasons that remain unclear. According to tradition, it was the sin of his wife that brought about this move; a sin incurred by touching the Holy Scroll while in a state of ritual impurity12. As the son of R. Samuel, R. Judah belonged to the Kalonymos family from northern Italy, a family that had immigrated to Germany apparently towards the close of the tenth century. He was also related to the family of R. Abun, émigrés from northern France who had settled in Mainz at about the same time. R. Abraham, brother of R. Judah, presided over a rabbinic academy in Speyer. R. Judah composed a biblical commentary set down in writing by his son R. Moses Zeltman 13 , as well as commentaries on the prayer liturgy14. In addition to this he is the composer of the Book of the Pious, the tome so fundamental to HasideyAshkenaz 15 . Yet R. Judah's name went unmentioned throughout the entire book. Recording the author's name, he believed, would cause the heart to

9

H. H. Ben-Sasson, "Hasidey Aähkenaz Al Haluqat Qinyanim Homnyyim u-Nekhasim Ruhaniyyim

bein Beney ha-Adam" (The Distribution of Wealth and of Intellectual Abilities According to Adikenaa Hasidim), Zion 35 (1970), pp. 61-79. Reprinted in: I. G. Marcus (ed.) Dal we-Hevra (above note 8), pp. 217-237. 10 11

V. Turner, Dramas, Fields and Metaphors: Symbolic Action in Human Society, London 1974. J. A. Kammelhar, Hasidim ha-Rishonim I (The First Jewiái Pietists). Waizen 1917. Sefer

Hasidim, photocopy of the original Parma ms. ed. I. G. Marcus, Jerusalem 1985. Introduction pp. 931. J. Dan, "Li-Demuto ha Historit sfael R. Yehudah he Hasid" (On the Historical Personality of R. Judah Hasid); in: M Ben-Sasson, R. Bonfil and J. R. Hacker (eds.). Tarbut we-Hevra be-Toldot Yisra el bi-Yemei ha-Beinayim Qovez Ma 'amarim le-Zikhro shel H aim Hillel Ben-Sasson (Culture and Society in Medieval Jewry: Studies Dedicated to the Memory of Haim Hillel Ben-Sasson). Jerusalem 1989, pp. 389-399. ]1 A. Aptowitzer, Mavo le-Sefer Rabia (Introduction to the bode ci" R. Eliezer ben Yoel Ha'levy). Jerusalem 1938, p. 346. E. Epstein, "R. Shmuel he-Hasid bai R. Qalanimos ha-Zaqm" (R. Samuel the Pious, son of R. Qalonimos). Kitvey R. Avraham Epstein (Writings of R. Abraham Epstein), vol. 1, ed. A. M. Haberman, Jerusalem 1950, p. 449, note 5. 13

TÎe interpretation is found in 3 ms., see: Y. Langa, Perushey ha Torah le-Rabbi Yehudah he-

Hasid (Interpretation to the Torah by R. Juda the Pietist). Jerusalem 1975. 14

J. Dan, Torat ha-Sod (above, note 8).

15

Sefer Hasidim ed. Y. Wistinetzky, Berlin 1891. Photocopy ed. by I. Marcus (above note 8); Sefer

Hasidim, Bologna 1538, ed. R. Margaliot, Jerusalem 1959.

126

Rabbi Judah the Pious as a Legendary Figure

become proud 16 . R. Judah the Pious is also the creator of the seceret doctrine of Hasidey-Askenaz and its unique socio-religious code. An innovator and extremist in his way of life no less than his way of thought, both his own writings and those of his contemporaries reveal that his was an ascetic life, one marked by a constant struggle against the impulses of the flesh. R. Judah defined the true Hasid as one who strives to discover the "will of God" and to live accordingly17. The meaning of life is found in the unrelenting fight against the trials that beset mankind; trials that demand equanimity in face of insult and shame, and that threaten sexual temptation. And above all, life's meaning is expressed through martyrdom. R. Judah passed away in the year 1217. Looming through Jewish history as the creator of an ideological and theosophical movement, he is further graced with the aura of a uniquely charismatic figure. His penchant for stories is revealed by the fact that of the two thousand entries to be found in the Book of the Pious, some four hundred of them are stories. Altogether, these were the main factors that transformed this historical figure into a hero of hagiography; a role that totally contradicts his own inclination for anonymity. Stronger than any unassuming personal tendencies, therefore, is the mechanism by which legends are created, and the eagerness for stories about a personality so primary to one's culture. Whereas the stories about R. Isaac Luria already circulated during his own lifetime, receiving written form close to the time of his death, the stories about R. Judah the Pious were first inscribed only some three hundred years after his demise. Perhaps we may attribute this fact to R. Judah's ideal of anonymity; an ideal that effectively prevented the generation of laudatory stories close to his own lifetime. One important impetus in the creation of R. Judah's imaginary biography is the fact that so few historical details of his life are actually known. Ill

Hagiographie stories 18 revolve around a particular figure, usually one elevated above the common run of mankind - whether a saint, rabbi, king or

16 17

Compare Num. 1528,1620.

On "the Will of God", see: H. Soloveit chick, "Three Thanes in Sefer Hasidim",

Jewish Studies 18

Association for

1 (1976), pp. 311-357.

J. Dan, "Be'ayat Qiddush ha-Shem be-Toratha ha-lyyunit áiel hasidut Ai&kenaz" (The Problem

Milhemet Qodesh u-Martirologiyya: Qovez Harza'ot she-Hushme'u ba-Kenes ha-11 le-'Iyyun be-Historiya. 1966. (Proceedings of the of Martyrdom in the ideology of Goman Hasidism).

Annual History Conference, 1966). Jerusalem 1968, pp. 121-131.

11

T. Alexander

127

hero. The function of these stories is to sing their praises. In generic terms these stories are considered legends, because they deal with real historical figures anchored in a given time and place, relate to a specific reality, and are considered by the reference group as being actual events19. Stories praising saints, righteous men and rabbis imbibe their content from the religious perspective of the normative concept of holiness 20 . These legends are frought with the fear of God; they are attuned to the ways of miracles. It is by virtue of miracles that the hero acts and grapples with problems threatening the social order. The function of these stories is to promote and strengthen religious values, and the structure is well suited to channel its message: Punishment to he who deviates from normative values; reward to he who maintains them. These are propaganda stories of a specific group that come to praise a particular figure. At times, such stories may be levelled by one group as a means of confronting opposition. Such, for example, are the Hasidic tales about the Ba al Shem Τον employed against the Mitnagdim. For the audience of listeners or readers, these stories function as the wish fulfilment for a strong personality of wondrous ability; one who champions the poor and sick and rescues the entire community from the brink of disaster. Such a figure stands for the nation or group as a whole, enabling a persecuted and suffering minority to bask in the glory of their indomitable representative. In Judaism, such an individual prevails over the non-Jew, thereby proving the greatness of the Jewish people and their God, so that each victory is inevitably a triumph for the people as a whole. The marvelous abilities demonstrated by their hero satisfy the human need to believe in miracles, and kindle the unflagging hope that a cure will be found for evils of all kind. No wonder, therefore, that these stories tend to flourish during times of stress and uncertainty. The stories function on another level by satisfying the need of the simple individual for a mediator with an abstract and distant God. They also serve to bolster a group's ethnic and national-religious identity as they collectively identify with "Our Saint". Group stories about local religious heroes can diffuse into the national heritage, as indeed happened with the

19 W. Grimm, Deutsche Sagen. Berlin 1891; ibid., Kinder und Hausmärchen. Berlin 1816. M. Leach 20h (ed), Dictionary of Folklore, s.v. Legends, Fairytale. . Jason, Genre, Essay in Oral Literature, Tel Aviv 1971; ibid., Sifrut 'Amamit Yehudit (Jewish Folk Literature), Tel Aviv 1973.

128

Rabbi Judah the Pious as a Legendary Figure

stories about the Ba al Shem Τον. Revolving around such dominant figures are concentric cycles of hagiography that pace alongside the hero from the day of his birth till the time of his death and even after. For the impact of the religious hero does not cease upon his demise. Appearing in dreams and visions, his grave or synagogue provide the stage for miracles. IV The scholars of folk-lore who dealt with the generic issue of hagiographie tales attempted to delineate a biographical pattern common to heroes across a broad spectrum of cultures. For now, it will suffice to mention only the important studies of Von-Hann, Otto Rank, Lord Raglan and Joseph Campbell21. Working separately, each of these scholars dealt with the same heroes: Oedipus, Sargon, Moses, Buddha and Krishna. A recent study by Alan Dundes shows that the life of Jesus also conforms to the universal pattern of the life of the hero. In the realm of Jewish culture, Dov Noy offers a model for the Jewish saints based on the legends about the Yemenite rabbi, Shalem Shabazi 22 . Employing previous models and the corpus of stories about Maimonides and R. Isaac Luna, I have elsewhere suggested a biographical pattern for a Jewish hero in general, and not merely for saints 23 . The model progresses in four stages, in accord with the human life-cycle: (1) Exposition: Parentage, prebirth, birth, childhood. (2) Preparatory Stage: Leaving home, term of study, isolation. (3) Actualization: The return, recognition by the community miracles, healing, supernatural displays of knowledge, conflict with Jews and gentiles, circle of colleagues, disciples, friends, immigration to the Land of Israel or the attempt to do so. (4) Death: Corpse, burial, apparition following death, the sanctification of particular sites, descendants and personal relics. The model comprises twenty-two points; the stories about Maimonides 21

J. Campbell, The Hero with a Thousand Faces, New York 1936. L. Raglan, The Hero, New York 1936. O. Rank, The Myth of the Birth of the Hero, New York 1923. Von-Hann, Arische Aussetzungs und Rückkehr Formel. 1876. Α. Dundes, The Hero Pattern and the Life of Jesus. Essays in Folkloristics, Merut 1978. 22 D. Noy, "Rabbi Shalem Shabazi be-Agadat 'Am diel Yehudey Teiman" (Rabbi Shalem Shabazi in the legends of Yemanaits Jews) Bo i Teiman 1967, pp. 106-131; ibid., "Ptirat Rabbi Shalem Shabazi be-Agadat ha-'Am ha-Teimanit" (The Death if Rabbi Shalem Shabazi in the Jewish Yamanite Legend). Moreshet Yahadut Teiman - 'lyyunim u-Mehqarim. Jerusalem 1977,pp. 132-149. 23 T. Alexander, "Qadosh ve-Hakham: Ha-Ari ve ha-Rambam be-Sippurey 'Am (A Sage and a Saint: Rabbi Luna and Maimcnides in Folk Literature), Jerusalem Studies in Hebrew Literature 13 (1992), pp. 29-64.

T. Alexander

129

and R. Isaac Luria conform to all twenty-two. The twenty-three legends about R. Judah the Pious is a modest number when compared to the approximately 100 legends about Isaac Luria, or the some 150 which portray Maimonides. Yet even these few legends about R. Judah can be constructed as a biographical cycle from birth to death. The conformity of numerous Jewish heroes of legend to the model shows that this heroic pattern spans Jewish culture in general. (1) Exposition: A. Parents: The parents of a hero or saint are inherently unique or endowed with greatness; traits that justify their having been chosen to beget so marvellous a child. According to the general universal pattern the parents are usually a king and a queen; the Jewish pattern features parents (usually the father) of pedigreed lineage and great prowess in the study of the Torah. R. Judah the Pious is the scion of two distinguished families: The Kalonymos family of Italy and the Abun family of France. His father, R. Samuel - known variously as "the Pious", a "saint" and a "prophet" - is the author of the Book of the Fear of God and Book of Repentance24. Tradition maintains that he was the bearer of an esoteric lore that spanned generations; a doctrine that he bequeathed to his son. R. Samuel became a legendary figure himself; a hagiographie hero in his own right25. Legend finds him creating a Golem, riding a lion, triumphing over Christian priests in a contest of sorcery and rescuing a doomed Jewish community from an evil decree. His wife, mother of R. Judah, is mentioned only once when, at her husband's behest, she prepares a special chicken dinner to celebrate the cancellation of an ominous decree. And in as much as the reason for the celebration was kept secret by R. Samuel, this chicken dinner at least teaches us that R. Samuel was wont to confide his secrets in his wife! B. Pre-Birth: Not for the saint or hero the mundane birth attending ordinary mortals. Instead, this is a birth foretold by signs and portents: a dream, an encounter with a divine messenger. It happened once that R. Samuel was strolling down the road with two friends. Peering upwards and seeing that the heavens were open, he asked for a son, a "seed in his own likeness". Upon returning home, his wife underwent her ritual ablutions and conceived forthwith, giving birth first to R. Abraham and then to R. Judah himself (Tale 23). R. Samuel was endowed with a supernatural knowledge that permitted him alone to see the opened heavens. That he should request a son "in his own likeness" is a measure of his personal self-esteem and confidence. 24

Sefer ha-Yir'ah (Book of the Fear of God), paragraphs 1-16 in Sefer Hasidim, Panna edition. T.

Alexander and E. Romero, Erase una vez Maimonides. Cuentos tradicionales hebreos, Cordoba 1 9 8 8 . I n t r o d u c t i o n p p . 15-44. 25

MS. Frankfurt oct. 35; andms. Heb. oct. 3182.

130

Rabbi Judah the Pious as a Legendary Figure

C. Birth: The birth of the hero is generally very difficult, attended by much travail and danger to the mother, and often preceded by many barren years of fruitless marriage. Such stories recounting the birth of Maimonides, Isaac Luria and the Ba 'al Shem Τον consciously draw from the biblical model offered by the stories of the birth of Isaac, Samuel and Samson 26 . We do not have a story about the birth of R. Judah, nor is his mother re-mentioned, her role having ended on giving birth. D. Childhood: Whereas the universal pattern reveals nothing about the hero's childhood, we do find Jewish legends offering quite detailed information concerning this period. Such stories can be divided into two basically polar types. One type presents a veritable "wonder kid" whose destiny is apparent from the very beginning; such a "wonder kid" is personified by Isaac Luria. Then again, there is the ignoramous who rises to genius, either in a miraculous windfall (as happened to Maimonides), or slowly and gradually by the force of sheer effort and study, as was the case of R. Akiba. Both types fulfil, each in their own way, the wistful yearnings of the listener or reader. The "wonder kid" of the first type satisfies the human need to adore, to admire. The second type fulfills the wish for a Cinderella-like transformation, for achievement without effort in which it is never too late. It also holds out the promise of rewarded diligence and toil. R. Judah the Pious belongs to the second category. Tale no. 35 describes the transformation. Already more than eighteen years of age, R. Judah was totally ignorant even of the basic prayers for morning and evening, adept only in the ways of the bow and arrow. Once, having run inside his father's academy to retrieve some arrows, the outraged students rebuked R. Samuel. "You are raising your son to be a wild man," they warned him, and added that the arts of R. Judah were the arts of the lawless ruffian. After the students had left, R. Samuel called his son over, and offered to make a trial effort to teach him. Having obtained Judah's consent, the father placed his two sons on either side. And R. Samuel pronounced one Holy Name and the entire academy was flooded with light. R. Abraham cast his eyes down to the ground, but R. Judah neither rose nor moved. And when R. Samuel saw that his son R. Judah was seated and not in the least shaken he pronounced another Name. R. Abraham did not have the strength to bear the light and huddled under his father's mantle. And R. Judah cast down his eyes and did not have the strength to look upwards. Then his father said: "Abraham, my son, this is a propitious hour for your brother Judah; know that you will be the Head of a rabbinic academy all the days of your life, but that your brother Judah will know that which is 1f\ See for example: Y. Zakovitch, Hayey Shimshon (The Life of Samson, A Critical Literary Analysis). Jerusalem 1982.

T. Alexander

131

in the upper spheres and that which is in the lower, and that nothing will be invisible to him. And he shall be Master of the secret lore more than you, yet not much of one to frequent the rabbinic academy, and will be the Master of wondrous deeds". And Our Master Samuel was telling his students religious law. And R. Judah began to contend with his father and contended more than all the other students. And the students were much astonished and said to each other, "This one neither studied nor served under sages - neither in Bible nor in Mishna and he is contending more than all of us." And very wondrous was it in their eyes. Unlike Maimonides, the ignorance of R. Judah did not cause his banishment from home. Whether out of despair, or due to the assurance that the right moment would yet arrive, R. Samuel permitted his son to wander around brandishing his bow and arrows. (Banishing his son, of course, would have tarnished the venerated figure of R. Samuel himself.) The motivation for change was ultimately effected by the students, angered as they were by the wayward son's encroachment on the territory of the father and the Torah - the rabbinic academy. Goaded by his students, R. Samuel beckoned his two sons and tested them by uttering the Ineffable Name, though not before inquiring of Judah if he indeed wished to change. The answer was an unqualified "Yes". Upon hearing the first name Judah did not move; upon hearing the second, he only cast down his eyes. Yet the pronouncement of the Holy Names was not merely a way of testing his sons - at least not for Judah. For with his first words he had exceeded all others in learning. Just as Maimonides had acquired wisdom by the kiss of the Angel Gabriel27, so was R. Judah granted a miraculous erudition; a learning that normally could only be the fruit of endless toil and study. Here, the father himself is the mediator between the Divine Knowledge and his son. The hierarchy of the two sons is now firmly established: Abraham, as historical fact bears out, was to preside over a rabbinic academy, a socially legitimate position of honor and esteem. R. Judah, on the other hand, was destined for profundity in mystical doctrine, as well as Jewish religious law. The story more than hints at competition between the two brothers; their diverging paths coincide well with R. Judah's socio-ideological concepts as expressed in the Book of the Pious. Hasidic Ashkenazic leaders went unrecognized by the communal establishment, nor

27

Gedalia ita Yahia, Shalshelet ha-Qabbala, (1. ed. Venice 1598). Zulkiev 1802, p. 21a, I. F. A.

(Israeli Folklore Archives) no. 4962.

132

Rabbi Judah the Pious as a Legendary Figure

did they preside over rabbinic academies of learning, despite their own claims of superiority. R. Judah severely criticized the Rabbinic institutions of his own day and the circle of Talmudic scholars known as the "Tosafists". The HasideyAshkenaz, for their part, consoled themselves with thoughts of a better distribution of spiritual resources and material goods in the world to come28. (2) Preparatory Stage: No sooner does R. Judah open his mouth to pose a question than the community (in this case, the students) recognizes his undeniable greatness. The return here is not a return from foreign countries, as, for example, in the legends about Maimonides, but the return from the field to the rabbinic academy. A saint-hero generally undergoes a period of isolation and selfpreparation before his re-entry into society. He acts individually, unaided and unabetted by society and its institutions. Alone he gathers his strength; alone and isolated from human company he dedicates himself to study, subjecting himself to hunger and cold. Unlike the Ba 'al Shem Τον in the Carpathian mountains, or Isaac Luria in the islands of the Nile, R. Judah did not spend his time in the field studying. Yet it might be that he devoted himself to the spiritual contemplation of God's works, as this period constituted his stage of preparation. Wandering alone in the fields, an outcast of Jewish scholastic society, R. Judah nevertheless diverges from the pattern of the Baal Shem Τον, whose ignorance is only an outward pretense. As far as the reader knows (and on this point the reader has no omniscient information unknown to the community), R. Judah is indeed completely unlearned and ignorant. Bursting into his father's academy signals his readiness to be integrated into society. Thus does R. Samuel become convinced that the time has finally come, or that there is more to his son than his exterior would suggest. Endowed now with the recognition of the community, the next stage begins to unfold. (3) Actualization: This is the stage in which the hero begins to act on behalf of the community. The universal model depicts a king founding a city and formulating laws; the Jewish model portrays a hero who rescues individuals from distress or an entire community from the clutches of some evil decree. Most of the stories about R. Judah deal with various kinds of confrontation, whether between a Jew and a non-Jew, a Jew and a convert, or one who is contemplating conversion. This emphasized motif of confrontation accords 2 8

Ben-Sasson (above note 8).

T. Alexander

133

with the actual course of R. Judah's life, paved as it was with struggle. The major portion of his conflicts were waged against non-Hasidic Jews, whom he considered - and indeed openly termed - to be "wicked" ( R e s h a 'im). The historical contingencies of the Crusades provide a backdrop of deep and bitter enmity between Jew and Christian; a period when baptism or martyrdom was the only available option. Of the fifteen stories dealing with the stage of actualization in the hagiography of R. Judah, four of them deal with conversion. Tale no. 27 describes the machinations of the Bishop of Salzburg against R. Judah. Yet not only does the rabbi know ahead of time all about the Bishop's arrival and his malicious intentions, but he maneuvers it so that a window "shrunk up so tightly around the neck of the Bishop that scarcely a breath remained in his body". And it was only after the laboured promise of the Bishop never to lift a finger against the Jews that R. Judah releases his head. Another tale, no. 87, recounts the story of an escaped thief. The Jews having been accused of murdering this thief, and threatened with the harshest of decrees in retaliation, R. Judah revives the corpse long enough to bear witness and vindicate the Jews. This story parallels stories of blood-libel29 in which the Jews are accused of ritual murder for the preparation of Passover bread. In these stories, the hero - whether R. Loew of Prague, the prophet Elijah or Maimonides - also revives the dead and saves the community from disaster. One tale, (no. 32) describes a musician captured by a host of demons and R. Judah's part in his conversion to Judaism. Stronger than demons is R. Judah. In intra-Jewish confrontations, R. Judah can foretell when a certain person will wish to undergo baptism, and by dispatching his students to detain the scurrying Jew by means foul or fair, successfully routs the convert (Tale no. 30). Another time (Tale no. 29), R. Judah foils a baptism destined to occur in one particular year by locking up the potential convert for the duration. And in the circumcision ceremony of one infant, R. Judah refuses to stay, knowing even at this stage that the boy would eventually mature and undergo baptism (Tale no. 33). This wonderful foreknowledge enables R. Judah to help people cope with their individual problems. When the Duke's treasure was stolen after having been deposited in the trust of R. Efraim of Regensburg, R. Judah raises the rabbinic academy from its foundation and discovers the thieves' hidden cache (Tale 85). Healing is yet another of his capabilities. The advice offered to his grand-daughter facilitated her conception (Tale 99), and he cures the wife of R. Issac so that she might continue to bear children (Tale no. 4). In another tale, R. Judah restores the voice of a mute boy. ΛΟ

T. Alexander, "Ha-Agada ha-Sefaradit Yehudit al Rabbenu Qalonimos bi-Yeruáialayim" (The Judeo-Spamdi Legend about Rabbi Kalonimos in Jerusalem: A Study of Process of Folk tale Adaption), Jerusalem Studies in Jewish Folklore 5-6 ( 1984), pp. 85-122. D. Noy," 'Alilot Dam beSippurey ha-Έdot" (Blood libeles m Jewiíh Folktales), Mahanayim 106 (1967), pp. 32-51.

134

Rabbi Judah the Pious as a Legendary Figure

The healing process involves strange and difficult deeds. By undergoing such tasks a person proves his unflinching confidence in R. Judah. The wife of R. Isaac has to lie in a grave, and only after she is considered dead is her womb restored to fertility. The mute boy is tossed into a river, his cure being effected only after he floats upon the water (a kind of shock treatment). R. Judah converses with the ghost of Mrs. Yuta and learns that her death was caused by falling and injuring her hip. He is also versed in the language of animals. It was from a lamb that R. Judah learns of the unfaithful conduct of a certain gentile's wife. Duly warned by R. Judah, the man rushes home and discovers that the rabbi was indeed correct (Tale 92). The miraculous foreknowledge and ability of R. Judah is also appreciated by the gentiles, simple and high-ranking alike. The Duke does nothing without first consulting the rabbi. It is on his advice that the Duke defies the King and refuses to march off to war. Much angered, the King threatens to execute the rabbi upon his return from battle, but just as R. Judah had predicted - the King himself is killed (Tale 28). (4) Death: The death of R. Judah, like the death of every hagiographie saint and hero, is marked by the extraordinary. The saint foretells his own death and the destiny that awaits him (Maimonides, Baal Shem Τον). When R. Judah fell ill he said, "Should I have a share in the world to come, know that this very gate will tumble down". And having brought R. Judah to the cemetery the gate did collapse, killing the gatekeeper on the spot. And all the Gentiles proclaimed "Now we know that he was a saint in his lifetime and in his death". And they said, "Blessed be he who chose the words of the wise, for righteous men are greater in death than in life" (Tale 93). One thing, however, R. Judah was unable to do - namely, to disclose the Messianic end of days. Lying on his deathbed, surrounded by the town burghers he said, " Fetch me ink and a quill and paper, I want to write down the end of the days and reveal it to you'. And no sooner had they given him the quill than the pious man died" (Tale no. 95). It would appear, therefore, that R. Judah did know the secret. This motif parallels the story recounting the death of R. Luria (or, according to another version, the son of R. Luria); a death caused by having revealed the secret to his disciples. The attempt to reveal the advent of the Messianic era is an attempt at encroaching on God's domain and tampering with His Divine judgement. This is the dividing line separating the human from the Divine, elevated and exalted though that human may be. In the hagiographie model of the hero, the son does not usually inherit his father's position. Both R. Luria and the Ba al Shem Τον were perpetuated by disciples: R. Hayyim Vital and Ha-Maggid mi-Mezeritsh, and not by their sons. The heir to R. Judah's spiritual legacy was his relative and student, R.

T. Alexander

135

Eleazar of Worms. Legend informs us that R. Judah passed on his secret doctrine to R. Eleazar in a way no less ingenous than it was miraculous: inscribing names in the sand, and then magically transporting R. Eleazar back home (Tale no. 34). Legendary tradition finds the son of R. Judah, R. Zeltman, studying with R. Efraim of Regensburg30. R. Judah, naturally, was able to solve a knotty issue that had stumped his son's teacher. V

The unique quality of these stories is that they are anchored in the world of Hasidey-Ashkenaz and in the tales of the Book of the Pious, even though three hundred years had lapsed since the death of R. Judah. Moreover, the HasideyAshkenaz movement was unable to sustain its viability in the flow of living Jewish culture. Most of its concepts were absorbed by Kabbalah, the Jewish mysticism that began to flourish in thirteenth century Spain. Kabbalah provided more satisfying answers to those same questions posed by HasideyAshkenaz31. R. Eleazar was not the charismatic innovator that his master R. Judah had been. He toned down many of R. Judah's ideas, denying for example that confession before a sage was incumbent upon a Jew. Nor did he obligate punctilious conformity to the wording of the prayers. He moderated the concept of repentance and the biting social criticism of R. Judah. The connection between R. Eleazar and stories is tenuous at best. Only two or three stories exist about him; nor did he incorporate them into his own writings 32 . The hagiographie legends about R. Judah mention specific times and places: Regensburg, Lanzhut, Rizburg, Speyer. Some stories found in the Book of the Pious, either told or written by R. Judah, later came to be hagiographie tales in which R. Judah himself is the hero. Joseph Dan has given us the following example: It happened once, that the clothes of a rabbinic student were swiped, and his master came and saw the maid-servant who had stolen 30

Abovenote 13.

-5 1

J. Dan, Goraláh ha-History diel Torat ha-Sod diel H asi dei Ashkeoaz (The Vicissitudes of the Esoterism if German Hasidian), in: E. E. Urbadi et al. (eds.): Mehqarim be-Qabbalah

u-we-ToIdot

ha-Datot Muggashim ie-Gershom Shalom (Studies in Mysticism and Religious presented to genbom Scholem), Jerusalem 1967, pp. 47-62. The first Hasidic Ashkenazi hagiographie story is about R. Eleazar of Worms, in: Rabbi Yizhak ha-Kohen, Ma'amar

al ha-Azilut ha-Smalit, written in Spain around 1265.

136

Rabbi Judah the Pious as a Legendary Figure

them. And all the paths by which she carried the stolen goods and the place in which she set down the stolen goods - I saw it all" (Oxford Ms. 1567).33 This short anecdote developed into a long and very elaborate hagiographie tale. For then it was not a few stolen garments at stake but all the treasures of the Duke himself. The theft of a treasure left with R. Efraim threatens the life of the entire Jewish community. From being one gentile maid-servant the thief has swollen into nine local dignitaries. The hero is no longer just "a rabbi", but R. Judah himself. This illustrates the suggestion by Eli Yassif34, that all the stories of the anonymous sage ("Ha-Hakham") in the Book of the Pious are in reality about R. Judah. These stories relate cases brought before the "Hakham" for judgement. According to this point of view, such tales are transitional to the hagiographie stories in which R. Judah is transformed from latent hero into one openly recognized and acclaimed. In the story, R. Judah knew by his miraculous foreknowledge that the master of his son, R. Efraim, was struggling with a particular religious law. R. Judah proceeded to teach his son, employing the method "by the hook and the eye" ( B i - q r a s i m u-ve-lula'ot) (Tale no. 36). This is a central term in Hasidic-Askenazic mysticism, imbibed from the ancient rabbinic legends that the building of the Holy Temple in Jerusalem parallels the formation of the entire world. The term refers to the Hasidic-Ashkenazic method of revealing the inner structural relationship between parts of reality, Holy Scripture, rabbinic wisdom and prayer. By unveiling the "Hooks and the Eyes", numbers and words linked together in a numerical analogy expose the inner structural harmony between various components of reality, as created by God35. R. Efraim of Regensburg, a learned scholar and a famous "Tosafist", cannot explain a certain religious law because he does not employ this unique method. With this in mind, the story about the son can be seen as closing a biographical cycle commencing with the revelation of R. Judah and the paternal prophecy. R. Samuel's prophecy, it will be recalled, foresaw superiority by means of esoteric knowledge, though not the leadership of a rabbinic academy. The function of this story is obvious: R. Judah outshines his rival, a Tosafist member of the Jewish establishment. Only a person familiar with the special terminology of Hasidey-Ashkenaz could have told this story. «

J. Dan, "Sippurim Demonologiyyim mi-Kitvey R. Yehudah he-Hasid" (Demonological stories in the writings of R. Yehuda he-Hasid), Tarbiz 30 (1961), pp. 273-289. Reprinted in: I. Marcus (ed.), Dot we-Hevra (above note 8),pp. 165-183. Yassif, "Ha-Sippur ha-Exemplari be-Sefer Hasidim" (The exemplary story in Sefer Hasidim), Tarbiz 57 (1988), pp. 217-255. 35

J. Dan, Torat ha-Sod (above note 8).

T. Alexander

137

VI The importance of this cycle of stories about R. Judah is that they comprise the first complete written hagiographie cycle in Hebrew literature. The stories conform with the Jewish and universal pattern of a legendary hero. Despite the relatively small number of stories (23), they do not skip over a single biographical stage in the life of the hero. Furthermore, they incorporate content and motifs typical to the genre. As previously mentioned, this collection was published not in the Hebrew language but in Yiddish, finding a place in the largest and most popular Yiddish collection of stories, the Ma 'ayse Buch. If the stories about R. Judah did exert any lasting influence, it was due, therefore, to the Yiddish intermediary. Not long after, a Hebrew compilation of hagiographie stories was published about R. Isaac Luria. The influence of this collection resounded strongly on hagiographie legends in general, and Hasidic stories of the Ba al Shem Τον in particular. From a theological point of view, it would seem that Kabbalah absorbed not only Ashkenazi-Hasidism but the hagiographie Hebrew stories as well. Legends about R. Isaac Luria were published and widely diffused; those featuring R. Judah the Pious remained confined to manuscript form. The Israel Folktale Archives (20.000 stories) have documented approximately 120 stories about Maimonides, 100 about the Ba al Shem Τον and 40 about R. Isaac Luria. Not a single story, however, focuses on R. Judah and from this we learn that his character is not alive in the oral tradition. The creation of stories around a certain figure is a cyclic process. The more stories there are about one figure, the more other stories tend to cling to him as well. And the more exalted that figure is, the more stories surrounding other personalities tend to swirl and settle around his venerable person. Stories about R. Isaac Luria, for example, were knowingly transferred to the Ba al Shem Τον. Lauri Henko calls this phenomenon a "dominant factor in tradition36". Traditions tend to attach themselves to a dominant historical figure in the folk traditions of a particular group or region. The creation of stories about a character demonstrates the vitality of that character in a given culture. A character figuring in a large number of stories is also more rounded and complex in its literary realization. The importance of a character can alternately dwindle or grow, according to the demands of time and place. Whereas one character might only flourish on a local level, or during a specific period, another character, such as the prophet Elijah, always commands centrality. R. Judah the Pious was not a major figure of general 36

L. Honko, "Four Forms of Adaptation of Tradition", Studia Fermica 26 (1981), pp. 19-33.

Reprinted in Hebrew in: Jerusalem Studies of Jewish Folklore 3 (1982), pp. 139-156.

138

Rabbi Judah the Pious as a Legendary Figure

Jewish culture in his lifetime, and his death has not altered this picture. The composer of these stories was most likely on close terms with Hasidic Ashkenazic concepts. Since the collection remained unpublished, it had no continuity in the Hebrew oral tradition, that relies on reciprocal relations to the written one. The uniqueness of the collection is constituted by its reliance on medieval sources rather than Biblical or rabbinic material. It is this very factor which permitted the author to relate to medieval figures without the encumbrance of obligatory conventions from earlier periods. There is no doubt that the stories were dictated by veneration of R. Judah and - more importantly for us - by an intimate knowledge of the unique world of Hasidey-Ashkenaz. This can be seen by the very use of the mystical term "Bi-qrasim u-ve lula'of by which R. Samuel instructed his son. Moreover, the hagiographie character of R. Judah is not all that far from his historical personality. Compare, for example, the abyss separating the Maimonides of historical biography from the one depicted in hagiographie tales. The rational and philosophic Maimonides of history is found in legend as to be a Kabbalistic figure gliding through walls and being transformed into a lion. In light of the fact that our manuscript is from the sixteenth century, and that Ashkenazi-Hasidism did not survive after the thirteenth, we cannot help but wonder just what happened during those three hundred years. Did the author create his stories based on manuscripts of mystical lore and the Book of the Pious? Or were the stories composed much earlier, transferred orally from generation to generation, this being our only extant manuscript? Was it the creation of one person? Or, despite their formal structure as folk legends and the parallels with other figures, were they perhaps popular oral stories? Other questions arise from the literary perspective. In as much as these first hagiographie tales in Hebrew literature conform to the traditional folkloristic structure, where did the author find his model? Was it taken ready-made from the immediate environment, or is the biographical pattern a product of the natural thought process, by virtue of its correspondence to the human biography? Which of the motifs infusing the structure are taken from the world of Hasidey-Ashkenaz and from the contemporary historical reality? These are only a few of the fascinating questions awaiting further research.

Moshe Idei An Anonymous Kabbalistic Commentary on Shir ha-Yihud* I

The relations between the Spanish Kabbalah and Ashkenazi culture have already attracted the attention of modern scholars. The existence of theosophical views in the writings of Eleazar of Worms has been noted by Gershom Scholem and Joseph Dan,1 and additional material of the same type was recently printed and discussed.2 The general assumption regarding the influence of esoteric traditions arriving from Germany at the inceptive stage of Provencal and Geronese Kabbalah can be strengthened by other evidence to be discussed elsewhere.3 More recently, affinities between views found in Castilian Kabbalah, and even the book of the Zohar itself,4 and Ashkenazi material, were disclosed in several studies.5 Conversely, the transition of theosophical-theurgical views from Provence and Gerone to Ashkenaz was also pointed out by scholars; the writings of Rabbi Moshe ben Eleazar ha-Darshan,6 and the material found in several I am currently preparing a critical edition of this commentary, ubere a more detailed version of the following topics, including analyses of other issues in this text, will be included. 1

See Gershom Scholen, Origins of the Kabbalah tr. A. Aikuái, ed. R. J. Zwi Werblowsky

[Princeton University Press, Princeton - Philadelphia 1987] pp. 184-187; Joseph Dan, The Esoteric Theology of As hkenazi Hasidism, Bialik Institute, Jerusalem 1968,pp. 119-129; [Hebrew], M. Idei, Kabbalah: New Perspectives, Yale University Press, New Haven, London 1988], pp. 193196; Elliot R. Wolfson, "Demut Ya'aqov Haquqah be-kisse' ha-kavod" in: M Oran - A Goldreich (eds.), Massu 'ot. Studies in Kabbalistic Literature and Jewish Philosophy in Memory of Prof Ephraim Gottlieb [Jerusalem 1994],pp. 131-185 [Hebrew] •5 See M. Idei, "The Mystical Intention in Prayer at the Beginning erf" Kabbalah: Between A&kenaz and Provence" in B. Safran - E. Safran (eds.), Porat Yosef Studies Presented to Rabbi Dr. Joseph Safran, [Ktav Publishing House, Hoboktn, New Jersey 1992], pp. 8-14 [Hebrew], 4

See e. g Israel Ta-Shma, "Be'erah shel Miriam", Jerusalem Studies in Jewish Thought, vol. IV

[1985] pp. 267-270; [Hebrew], ^Joseph Dan, "Samael, Lilith, and the Concept of Evil in Early Kabbalah" Association of Jewidi Studies Review, vol. 5 [1980] pp. 25^t0. 6

Printed by Gerdiom Sdiolem, Reshit ha-Qabbalah,

238;[Hebrew],

Tel Aviv, Jerusalem 1948, pp. 195-

140

M. Idei

manuscripts, all of them probably related to Rabbi Shem Τον ben Simhah haKohen 7 , where material belonging to the Circle of Special Cherubin was combined with theosophical issues found in Sefer ha-Bahir and Sefer ha'Iyyun as well as in other theosophical writings, are significant proof of the existence of a directionally oppsite flow of mystical traditions. We may assume, therefore, that there is no simple answer to the question of what centre of Jewish learning has influenced the other one; a dynamic that has to be documented by painful textual analyses will probably produce a picture replete with cross-currents; this seems to me to be the best description of the flow of esoteric information between Jews in Northern and Southern Europe. In the second half of the 13th century there is conclusive evidence for the arrival of some Ashkenazi figures in Spain, in both Catalonia and Castile.8 Moreover, according to the testimonies of Abraham Abulafia, several Ashkenazi writings were studied by him in the early seventies, apparently in Barcelona.9 It is very reasonable to assume that these studies were very formative for the emergence of his mystical techniques, which bear evidence of Ashkenazi combinatory devices.10 Apparently it was not later than the end of the 13th century, that we learn of the possibility that an Ashkenazi Kabbalist, Rabbi Joseph ben Shalom Ashkenazi, arrived in Barcelona. 11 There are some doubts as to the identification of the Hebrew spelling of the name as the capital of Catalonia. 12 Moreover, as far as I am acquainted with the Kabbalistic sources in Spain, this Kabbalist was not quoted by other Spanish colleagues, with one possible exception, which was in itself also problematic as we shall see below, that of R. David ben Yehudah he-Hasid. 13 The first scholar who paid special attention to this Kabbalist asserted that he was an Ashkenazi figure14; however, though there is no good reason to doubt the Spanish origin of this person, 15 his whereabouts are very vague, 7

Yoseph Dan, " The Vicissitudes of the Esoterism ofthe German Hasidim" Studies in Mysticism and

Religion presented to Gerdiom G. Sdiolem, Magnes Press, Jerusalem 1967, pp. 91-92; [Hebrew]. 8

See I. Ta-Shma, note 4 above.

9

Cf. Adolph Jellinek, Bet Ha-Midrasch, Jerusalem 1967, vol. ΙΠ,ρρ. XLH-XLffl.

10

MosheIdel, The Mystical Experience in Abraham Abulctfia, SUNY, Albany 1988, pp. 22-23.

11

On this Kabbalist see Gershom Sdiolem, Peraqim le-Toldot Sifrut ha-Qabbalah, Jerusalem 1931,

pp. 2-17, 44^7; Georges Vajda, "Un chapitre de l'histoire du conflit entre la Kabbalah et la philosophie, La polémiqué anti-intellectualiste de Joseph ben Slalom Ashkenazi de Catalogpe", Archives d'histoire doctrinale et littéraire du Moyen Age vol. 23 [1956] pp. 45-127. 12

See Modie Hallanush, Kabbalistic Commentary of Rabbi Yoseph ben Shalom Ashkenazi on

Genesis RabbahMagpes Press, Jerusalem 1984, p. 12 n. 7; [Hebrew]. 13 See Scholem, Peraqim, pp. 18^3. 1

^Arthur Marmorstein "David ben Jehuda 11asid', MGWJ, vol. 71 [1927] pp. 39^»8.

15

See Daniel H. Matt, The Book of Mirrors: Sefer Mar'ot ha-Zoveot by R. David ben Yehudah he-

Hasid, Brown Judaic Studies, Scholar Press, Atlanta, GA 1982, pp. 1-2; Sdiolem, Peraqim, pp. 20-

An Anonymous Kabbalistic Commentary

141

and it is very difficult to pinpoint when and where he was active. Again, though posing as a grandson of the famous Nahmanides,16 the name of his father, Yehudah he-Hasid recalls the name of the famous master of Ashkenazi Hasidism. It is possible that Nahmanides had a son named Yehudah.17 However, even so, how many Spanish masters visited Ashkenaz during the 13th century? We may attribute this visit to the tendency of Rabbi David to roam, as we may extrapolate from the possibility that he was present in Acre in 1291.18 Nevertheless, his character is still a quandary for a variety of reasons, and I am also confident that his affinities to Germany, beyond his visit there, have still to be investigated, since their contribution to the history of Kabbalah could be greater than we realize today. After all, Rabbi David is the closest Kabbalist to the book of the Zohar, - a book influenced by Ashkenazi customs - who has visited Ashkenaz. It should also be mentioned that Rabbi Joseph was a descendant of Rabbi Yehudah he-Hasid, as he himself testifies.19 However, it is quite obvious, as has already been indicated by G. Scholem, that the Kabbalistic systems of the two Kabbalists are deeply interrelated, including instances where Rabbi David simply copied texts from the Ashkenazi Kabbalist.20 What is, however, very pertinent to our discussion here is the fact that Rabbi David testifies that he had visited Regensburg, and he even mentioned some Ashkenazi customs in his commentary on the prayerbook, Sefer Or Zaru'aV Was it coincidence, that none of the Kabbalists in Spain was aware of the writings of Rabbi Joseph Ashkenazi, while the only one well-acquainted with his writings had visited Germany? This question is even more poignant given the fact which seems to have escaped the attention of modern scholars, that the Kabbalah of the Ashkenazi Kabbalist displayed some particular conceptual and terminological traits which cannot be found, as far as I am aware of the Spanish Kabbalah in Spain. Though apparently a relative of some Ashkenazi figures who were themselves related to the family of R. Yehudah he-Hasid and were interested 21. 16

Matt, ibidem, p. 2.

17

ibidem, n. 12. issue will be discussed elsewhere. On R. David and Adikenaz see Scholen, Peraqim, pp. 20-

22. 19

See Perush le-Parashat Bereshit, p. 259; Scholem, Peraqim, p. 20; It may be significant that R.

Joseph uses in this context the phrase Beit av le-mishpahtenu, while R. David describes R. Yehudah he-Hasid as Beit av shelanu\ see his Sefer Or Zaru a, Ms. British Library 771, fol. 98ab, Matt, The Book of the Mirrors,γ. 20

Peraqim,

1.

pp. 29, 36, 38^0; Matt, ibidem, p. 4; M. Idei, "R. David ben YAudah he-Hasid's

Commentaries on the Alphabet" A lei Sefer, vol. 10 [ 1982] pp. 25-35; [Hebrew], 71

Sefer Or Zaru a, Ms. British Library, 771, fol. 47a.

142

M. Idei

in Kabbalah and Northern European esotericism, R. Joseph's thoughts do not betray any influence of the synthesis between these two systems of thought.22 Some of these special terms and concepts are deeply related in theosophical views, such as the concepts of the Sefirot and topics such as transmigration of souls and the cosmic cycles, known as the Shemittah. Should we assume that the meeting between the two Kabbalists, or only their concepts or texts, took place in Catalonia, but escaped the attention, or the interest, of all their contemporaries; or may we assume that they may have met in Germany. If so, another question arises: what are the sources of the theosophical views expressed in Rabbi Joseph Ashkenazi s books. Assuming that these views are not to be detected in previous Spanish texts, are they an expression of another sort of Kabbalistic tradition, both similar to the Provencal-Geronese theosophy, and perhaps to some Ashkenazi esoteric traditions, but nevertheless an independent trend whose sources are for the moment unknown to us. The absence of these terms and concepts in the first half of the 13th century, either in Spain or in Germany, does not allow a firm speculation as to the area where they first appeared. However, their absence in 14th and 15th century Spain serves as eloquent evidence that Spain was not originally centre which generated these views. An inspection of later material in other centres of Kabbalah may serve as an indication that must continue to preoccupy us. However, let me start with the observation that at least the views of Rabbi Joseph Ashkenazi were influential in the Byzantine empire in the 14th century, as we learn from their influence on the anonymous author of Sefer ha-Peli'ahP However, the fact that I was unable to locate a similar impact by the writings of Rabbi David ben Yehudah he-Hasid in this area, advocates, at least for the time being, against designating Byzantium as the place of their encounter. There is an important geographical area where the writings of the two Kabbalists were well-known, though only relatively late, in the 16th century: Northern Africa. However, before turning to these later manuscripts, we may perhaps examine to a much earlier source. II I would like to introduce here the possible relevance of a text that was, apparently, written in an Ashkenazi area, sometime during the first half of the 14th century and which contributes some pieces of evidence towards a tentative solution of the above quandary. An anonymous Kabbalistic II This is bizarre, especially because during his lifetime, other members of his family did combine these two trends, see note 6 above. 23

S e e Michal Oran, The Sefer Ha-Peliah and the Sefer Ha-Kanah, Their Kabbalistic Principles

Social and Religious Criticism and Literary Composition [Ph. D. Thesis, Jerusalem 1980], pp. 187193; [Hebrew],

An Anonymous Kabbalistic Commentary

143

Commentary on Shir ha-Yihud, preserved only in manuscripts, which has escaped the attention of recent scholars. Described briefly in 1930 by Gershom Scholem, on the basis of two incomplete manuscripts, it is now the subject of a more detailed study, whose first findings I shall now present. The anonymous commentary is extant in three manuscripts: one in Jerusalem24; a second one can be found in the Vatican library25 and, last but not least, one in Frankfurt.26 The fullest, and the best of these manuscripts, is the Vatican one, for reasons I cannot enter into here, but the Frankfurt manuscript supplies material related to the customs of reciting Shir ha-Yihud, that are unknown elsewhere. 27 I should mention that a design of the ten Sefirot, called the Tree of the Sefirot, is only to be found in the Vatican manuscript.28 As Gershom Scholem has already indicated, the commentary seems to be an Ashkenazi writing; 29 this is corroborated by three things: a] there are some German words in the text. 30 b] the fact that the commented text is Shir ha-Yihud, a classic poem of Ashkenazi esotericism that was not recited in Spain, points to a Kabbalistic author who was acquainted and concerned with Ashkenazi material. c] the existence in Frankfurt of the manuscript which contains the earliest 24

Heb. qu. 19, fols. 257a-262b; This is an eightemth-cmtury Ashkenazi manuscript which was

described by Scholem, Kitvei Yad be-Kabbalah, Jerusalem 1930, pp. 65-66; [Hebrew] who pointed also out the existence of the Frankfurt manuscript. This is an incomplete manuscript of the commentary. 25

Heb. 274, fols. 167a-184b.

26

MS. Merzebach 105, Frankfurt a.M. Public Library Heb. oct 121, fols. 1-26. Considerable parts of

R. Yom Τον Lippman Milhausen's Commentary on Shir ha-Yihud are copied on the margins of this manuscript. I hope to elaborate elsewhere on the possible links between this commentator and the type of Kabbalah we are examining here. 27 The interesting testimony related to the history and the customs related to Shir ha-Yihud, which occurs at the beginning of this manuscript, was printed by Israel Y. Yuval, "Jews, Hussists and Germans" Tarbiz, vol. 54 [1989] p. 300 note 71; [Hebrew], On Shir ha-Yihud in general and the questions of its authorship see Geráiom Scholem, Reshit ha-Qabbalah [note 6 above] p. 215 note 14 and Joseph Dan's different solution proposed in his preface to the Thiengen, 1560 edition erf" Shir haYihud with Muelhausen's commentary, printed in Jerusalem 1981, pp. 7-26.; [Hebrew], Apparently, Dan was not aware of Sdiolem's view or of manuscripts of Muelhausen's commentary. 28

This Sefirotic tree should be compared with Ms. Zurich 177, fol. 16b [which contains material

from Prague, related to Rabbi Avigdor Kara] and Ms. Paris BN, 843, fol. 79a, though they are not identical. 29

Kitvei Yad be-Qabbalah, p. 65.

30

See e. g Ms. Vatican 274, fol. 179b. The presence of these words is reminiscent of the presence of

Goman words in the writings of R. Joseph ben Shalom Adikaiazi; into-estingly enough in both these Kabbalists there are instances of uses of Arabic material. I shall discuss this issue in my edition of the text.

144

M. Idei

datation of the commentary is not a matter of coincidence. The affinity between the design of the tree of the Sefírot, which is an integral part of the commentary and is only to be found in the Vatican manuscript, and the similar design found in a manuscript in Zurich, together with Kabbalistic material which can be traced back to Prague31 at the turn of the 15 th centurys, appears to corroborate the commentary is Ashkenazi extraction. Let me focus now on the affinities between the Kabbalistic material in the anonymous commentary and the school of Rabbi Joseph Ashkenazi and David ben Yehudah he-Hasid: there are three recurring topics in these documents, that can be successfully compared: a] In both types of documents, we find numerous deciferings of the symbolic meaning of the interpreted material by the writing of the names of the Sefirot and of other metaphysical entities above the interpreted terms. A special trait of the school of Kabbalists connected to Rabbi Joseph and Rabbi David is the recurrence of the names of the Sefirot above the words to be interpreted. This device was unknown in Spain before the 1380s, but is a constant feature of the writings of these two Kabbalists. So, for example, not only are classical texts interpreted in this manner: like Midrash Bereshit Rabba,32 Se fer Yezirah,33 Ma aseh Bereshit34 and Ma'aseh Merkavah,35 but also significant parts of the book of the Zohar,36 Indeed later on, we can find this practice also in other manuscripts, but these were also evidently influenced by the conceptual views of the two Kabbalists. An inspection of the manuscripts' anonymous commentary reveals that these techniques of decoding are used in them all, though to different degrees: the most complete recurrence of these symbolic signifiers is to be found in the Vatican manuscript which should be considered as preserving a relatively early form of the commentary. By using these types of signifiers, which can, from time to time, be some few letters or even a single

31

See notes 26, 28 above. Seenöte 12 above. This text was described at length by Sdiolem, Peraqim, pp. 2-6; the text will be quoted below from

the Sefer Yezirah edition, Jerusalem 1965. See also Sdiolem, ibidem, pp. 38-39. 34

Sdiolem, ibidem, p. 26. Ibidem, p. 27. It seems that R. Joseph has also commented on Sefer ha-Bahir, see Sdiolem,

ibidem, pp. 45-47 and compare Ze'ev Galili, "On the Question of the Authordiip of the Commentary Or ha-Ganuz Attributed to Rabbi Meir ben Solomon Abi Sahula" Jerusalem Studies in Jewish Thought, vol. 4 [1985] pp. 83-95; [Hebrew], 36

See M. Idei, "R. David ben Yehudah he-Hasid's Translation of the Zohar" Alei Sefer, vol. 8 [ 1980]

pp. 60-73; vol. 9 [1981] pp. 84-97; [Hebrew],

An Anonymous Kabbalistic Commentary

145

letter, the Kabbalists could offer an interpretation which could be understood by the initiated, without resorting to a cursive and much more explicit commentary. This systematic use of these signifiers may have something to do with another trait of these writings: their insistence on the importance of esotericism, but this issue will be dealt with immediately below. Another conspicuous aspect of the anonymous commentary is its recurring mentioning that there are Kabbalistic topics that are to be transmitted orally, or that he has transmitted them orally. This insistence on esotericism is far more consistent than that which is known to me from any other Kabbalistic writing. The oral tradition is mentioned frequently, sometimes more than once per page. I cannot enter into the details of these kinds of allusions here, so I shall do it elsewhere, in a larger context. Nevertheless, let me cite some examples: a] Dealing with the esoteric meaning of the verb BL ' the Kabbalist writes: "it is totally impossible to hint at it in a written manner".37 Later, in the same folio, he refers to the same topic "I wonder very much about it because this is what I have received, but I did not transmit it to you so"38. Once it is said that the Kabbalist was not free to transmit a certain issue, even orally.39 b] In several instances the author mentions that he has transmitted the Kabbalah orally,40 or he promises to teach a certain issue orally:41 In some cases, it is said that a certain topic can only be understood by oral transmission.42 c] In one instance, the Kabbalist indicates that he does not understand two words of Shir ha-Yihud, by way of his Kabbalah.43 This phrase is very significant since it may reveal the awareness of a form of esoteric tradition that is not comprehensive or detailed enough in order to do justice to all the expressions of a certain religious tradition. d] A very interesting phrase occurs once, when it is said that "the Kabbalists who [transmit] from mouth to mouth", Ba'aley ha-Mequbbalim mi-peh el peh.44 This generic term may indicate that the author distinguishes between an oral Kabbalah and a written one. e] In one case, the anonymous Kabbalist indicates that he has received a Ms. Vatican, fol. 169b. See also ibidem, fol. 170a, where the Kabbalist mentions that there are secrets that cannot be explicated orally a fortiori in a written form. 38

Ibidem.

39

Ms. Vatican, fol. 177a.

40

Ms. Vatican, fol. 171b, 172b, 173a, 176a.

41

Ms. Vatican, fol. 170b, 172a.

42

Ms. Vatican, fol. 176a, 176b.

43

Ms. Vatican, fol. 174b.

44

Ms. Vatican, fol. 171a.

146

M. Idei

tradition concerning the attributes, Te'arim,45 a term which apparently points to Maimonides' thought. Indeed, Maimonides is mentioned two lines before. If this conjuncture is correct, and I see no better alternative to this proposal, than that this passage should be compared with R. Joseph Ashkenazi's statements in his Commentary on Sefer Yezirah:46 "God forbid that Maimonides has intended this 47 . Who has stood up among the geonim, who is like him? But his words are [to be understood] according to notes [Rashey peraqim] which are understood by someone who has received his secrets orally." These two attempts to interpret Maimonides more Kabbalistico, which are exposed by two Ashkenazi masters, may reflect a common stand. f] Several times the phrase "Ha-maskil yiddom"4S and the phrase "Hamaskil yavin" appears 49 . These two phrases occur numerous times in R. David ben Yehudah he-Hasid's writings. 50 Let me address the question of the possible significance of these esoteric phrases: are they only rhetorical indications intended to increase the value of a certain writing? Are they the attempts of a Kabbalist who would like to pose as the inheritor of an esoteric tradition, especially in Ashkenaz, where the Kabbalists were very few? Or is the expression mi-peh el peh, not to be taken seriously, but better understood as being a mere metaphor? I am inclined to doubt such attempts to attenuate in principle the oral nature of the traditions transmitted in certain Kabbalistic schools, but this is an issue that transcends our limited framework here. In support of our case, let me therefore adduce one more phrase: when dealing with the vocalization of the Tetragrammaton, the author said that it can be found in Sefer Shem Τον, "because it seems to me that it is so that I have heard by my ears, from mouth to mouth." 51 In my opinion, it is difficult to interpret such a phrase metaphorically. Therefore, a written text is compared to an oral tradition and the authority of the text is enforced by its consonance with the oral tradition. A proclivity to secrecy is also evident in the writings of R. Joseph and R. David, more than in any other Kabbalistic school with the exception of Nahmanides and his followers. However, while quoting Nahmanides twice on 45

Ms. Vatican, fol. 174b. On the attitude to Maimonides in this circle of Kabbalist, I hope to devote

a separate study. Fol. 31 d; the second text, ibidem, fol. 55c will be addressed immediately below. 47

The conventionality of language. On this issue see Georges Vajda, "Un chapitre" pp. 49-56, 130-

133; Moshe Idei, Language, Torah andHermeneutics in Abraham Abulafia, SUNY, Albany 1989, pp. 1-29. 48

Ms. Vatican, fol. 170a, 172a, 177b.

49

Ms. Vatican, fol. 169b, 176b, 177b, 179b.

50

Idei, "The Image of Man above the Seflrot" p. 43 note 25, p. 44 note 29,46.

51

Ms. Vatican, fol. 176b.

An Anonymous Kabbalistic Commentary

147

various topics, the anonymous Kabbalist does not invoke the famous preface to his Commentary on the Torah, where the topic of oral tradition is mentioned.52 However, R. Joseph Ashkenazi indicates that he has received a certain tradition orally: Qibbalti mi-peh el peh.5i Elsewhere, the same Kabbalist alludes to an explanation he has transmitted orally: Kemo sheperashti lekha mi-peh el peh.54 Elsewhere, the correct interpretation of the attributes related by the Bible to God is a matter to be transmitted orally: Hamequbbal mi-peh elpeh.55 Indications of secrecy can be found in the writings of R. David, especially in some of his Kabbalistic epistles.56 Therefore, the anonymous commentary not only displays a politics of transmission that is shared by the two Kabbalists, but also uses the same phrases in order to convey it. The theory of the existence of aspects of all the ten sefírot in each of them is alluded to in the Geronese Kabbalah.57 However, I am not acquainted with the explicit usage of terms like Binah she-be-keter or similar phrases, except in the texts by the two Kabbalists.58 However, just such a theory and the occurence of the German phrases is to be found in the anonymous commentary.59 The Kabbalistic school that has cultivated this type of theosophy is that of R. Joseph and R. David.60 One of the most fascinating, and at the same time most neglected, aspects of some trends of theosophical Kabbalah, is the technical use of colors as being helpful in the contemplation of the sefirot. This technical use is very characteristic of the school of the two Kabbalists, as I have attempted to demonstrate elsewhere.61 This topic recurs several times in the commentary; I would like to cite only one of the discussions: "as it said in Sefer Yezirah: "if your heart runs [too speedily], return to the si Introduction to the Commentary on the Pentateuch, ed C. D. Chavel, Jerusalem 1959, pp. 8-9; [Hebrew]. Commentary on Parashat Bereshit, p. 78. Other expressions of secrecy can be found ibidem, pp. 58,148. Commentary on Sefer Yezirah, fol. 15d. 55 56

Ibidem, fol. 55c.

See Scholen, Peraqim, p. 36; M Idei, "The Image of Man above the Sefírot" Da at, vol. 4 [ 1980]

pp. 41-55; [Hebrew]; idem, Kabbalah: New Perspectives pp. 104, 109; idem, "Kabbalistic Material from the Circle of R. David ben Yehudah he-Hasid", Jerusalem Studies in Jewish Thought, vol. Π [1983] p. 196; [Hebrew], 57

Gershom Scholen, Kabbalah, Jerusalem 1974,p. 113.

58

See e. g. Perush Parashat Bereshit, pp. 176, 210; Idei, "The Image of Man" p. 42, etc.

59

SeeMs. Vatican 274, fols. 169b, 170b, 171b, 179a, 184a etc.

60 61

Perush Parashat Bereshit, p. 215.

Kabbalah:

New Perspectives, pp. 104-108; M Idei, "Kabbalistic Prayer and

to Judaism in Medieval Times, ed. D. Blumenthal, vol. ΠΙ [1988] pp. 17-27.

ColorApproaches

148

M. Idei

place"62 [namely from Hokhmah to Binah,]6* namely when a man starts to unify 64 the sefirot of 'Illat ha- 'Mot,65 by its letters, by its colors [bi-gewanaw] as I have received66 in relation to the name of the 12 [letters] of Ivarkhekha·, [the Kabbalist] should no move from each and every word and from the special letter until he will imagine and intelligize its appearance67 namely that by these hints concerning the [letters of] the Tetragrammaton, by the vocalization of Yehavekha,68 written by that color and likewise the vowels and it is as if it [the color] surrounds it [the name]69 and as if it and the whole world sits in its centre. Do not think that this can be effective only by the dint of the words alone because the thought,70 the imagination71 and the intellect are essential in this instance. I am not allowed to expatiate and to explicate so much because it is known to me that the name of Ivarkhekha and the colors, are known to you."72 Most of the motifs appearing in this passage are paralleled in the writings of the two Kabbalists, as mentioned in the footnotes. However, I should like to point out that as well as the precise correspondences between the various 62

Sefer Yezirah, I, 8. Le-yahed. On the act of unifying related to the sefirot and colors see R. Joseph Aáikenazi, Commentary on Sefer Yezirah, fol. 27a; Idei, Kabbalah: New Perspectives, p. 106. 64 The bracketed phrase does not appear in Ms. Vatican, but thenames of the sefirot appear above the words raz and shuv. Interestingly, R. Joseph A&kenazi interprets the verbs Razo va-Shov, in Sefer Yezirah, I, 6 as pointing to Hokhmah and Binah. See his Commœtaiy on Sefer Yezirah, fols. 27a, 27cd. 63

66

On this topic see here below n. 74. ka'asherqibbalti.

67 she-idmmeh Mare hu. In medieval Hebrew it may also mean color, as happens from time to time in the writings of R. Joseph and R. David in similar instances: See Idei, Kabbalah: New Perspectives, p. 326 nn. 224, 230. 68 Cf. Psalms 55,23. 69 On the colors as surrounding the divine names see Idei, Kabbalah: New Perspectives, pp. 104105. 70 Mahashavah, a term that is also connected in medieval terminology to moral virtues. The three terms: Mahashavah, Dimyion and Sekhei, are reminiscent of a similar triad in R. Joseph Ashkenazi, Commentary on Parashat Bereshit, p. 221. 71 For the role of imagination in the process of visualization of colors see Idei, Kabbalah: New Perspectives, pp. 104ff. It Aould be mentioned that the anonymous Kabbalist equates the imagmation, dimyion, with the last sefirah, cf. Ms. Vatican, fol. 181b, a view shared also by R. Joseph Asbkenazi in his Commentary on Parashat Bereshit, p. 220. On the status of imagmation in R. Joseph see also Vajda, "Un chapitre" pp. 88ff. 72 M S . Vatican, fol. 174a, Ms. Frankfurt, fol. 12b. On another tradition related to letters of the divine names, colors and an Adikenazi mystical-magical practice see R. David ben Yehudah he-Hasid, quoted by Scholem, Peraqim, p. 33.

An Anonymous Kabbalistic Commentary

149

details,the anonymous Kabbalist mentions that he has received a tradition related to the colors and the divine name. As R. David has indicated in one of his Kabbalistic responsa, the mysticism of visualizing colors was transmitted by oral tradition.73 Another important indication as to which school inspired the above discussion is the phrase "the Sefirot of lllat ha-'Illot." The easiest way to understand the phrase is that there are ten sefirot that belong to the Causa causarum, that are different from the regular ten sefirot. Such an interpretation is corroborated by another statement by the same author: "even the ten sefirot are in [or within] 'lllat ha- 'lllot"74 Though I cannot find the particular term that is used in R. David ben Yehudah he-Hasid for these supernal sefirot, namely Zahzahot, in the anonymous commentary, it seems that at least the concept reflected by this term was known by the anonymous Kabbalist. Indeed, at least in one case, R. David mentions the sefirot of lllat ha- 'lllot, in a manner that is reminiscent of the above quote.75 Moreover, it seems that in one more case, the anonymous Kabbalist uses the term "the intellect of the 'lllat ha-'lllot" which may imply a certain multiplicity within 'lllat ha-'lllot.16 Ill

On the grounds of the above correspondences, I am convinced that the anonymous commentary was deeply related to concepts found in the school of R. Joseph and R. David. However, it should be noted that this school's most characteristic terms do not appear in the anonymous commentary: we do not find terms such as niddah, din beney halof, sod ha-Shelah, temurot,77 Zahzahot. This remarkable absence demands a certain explanation: either the anonymous Kabbalist in Ashkenaz knew them but decided to erase them from his Kabbalistic vocabulary, or he was not acquainted with them at all and they reflect a certain development which took place later in the school of the two Kabbalists. Both alternatives are possible but I am inclined to prefer the second one, for one prominent reason. The assumption that the missing terminology is the result of a deliberate activity by the Kabbalist is not explained in any way; in some cases he accepts the concepts without using the 73

Idei, Kabbalah: New Perspectives, p. 104. 74

Ms. Vatican, fol. 182b.

75

See Matt, The Book of the Mirrors, p. 252, Idei, " The Jmage of Man above the Sefirot" pp. 42-

43. 76

77

Ms. Vatican, fol. 181b. The anonymous Kabbalist uses the term Hizonim instead ci temurot. This use is conspicuous in the

Cordovoi an and Lurianic Kabalah: see e. g. C or dovero's Commentary on Sefer Yezirah, Jerusalem 1989, p. 172; [Hebrew] orR. Shimeon La vi's Ketem Paz.

150

M. Idei

terms. Moreover, the first assumption means that the anonymous Kabbalist represents, in the Kabbalah he has preserved, a relatively later stage of the developement of the school: the terms were at first used, then they were deleted. However, insofar as R. David is concerned, this sequel involves a certain problem: this Kabbalist was deeply influenced by the book of the Zohar,78 However, I am unable to find any direct influence by this book on the anonymous commentary, not even a substantial hint to Zoharic thought. This also seems to be the case also in the writings of R. Joseph Ashkenazi. There is only one brief sentence which can be related to the Zohar, though more recent studies are inclined to reject the assumption that the Ashkenazi Kabbalist had in mind the Zohar itself. 79 Therefore, if we assume that the anonymous Kabbalist has purged his Kabbalistic traditions of certain technical terms, we must assume that he also did something similar in the case of Zoharic thought, and he arrived at a type of non-Zoharic language that is similar to that of R. Joseph Ashkenazi. Though I cannot reject such a possibility out of hand, in my opinion it is extremely far-fetched. Let us elaborate on the second hypothesis and its implications: We may surmise the following historical development: a group of Kabbalists, including R. Joseph Ashkenazi and some other Ashkenazi figure, or figures, and perhaps also R. David ben Yehudah he-Hasid, shared some Kabbalistic ideas related to the existence of the ten sefirot within 'Illat ha- 'Illot, the importance of the colors as a mystical practice, personal tree of sefirot, etcetera. The two Kabbalists left the group, apparently for Spain, where they became acquainted with Spanish Kabbalah, and in the case of R. David, also with the book of the Zohar.90 However, an hypothetically Ashkenazi Kabbalist, who apparently remained somewhere in his motherland, or one of his disciples, became acquainted with some of the Kabbalistic books written in late 13th century Spain 81 and at some point in the first half of the 14th century he interpreted Shir ha-Yihud„ using the views he shared with the two Kabbalists. If this reconstruction is correct, then the anonymous commentary, or its sources, reflects an earlier phase of Kabbalistic thought than those of R. 78

See Sdnolem, Peraqim pp. 22-23; Matt, The Book of the Mirror, pp. 13-17; Idei, "Λ. David ben

Yehudah he-Hasid's 79

Translation".

See Hallamish, Perush Parashat Bereshit, p. 259 n. 34. [Howeva·, ibidem, p. 13 he counts the

Zohar between the sources of the Ashkenazi Kabbalist]; Yehudah Liebes, "How the Zohar was Written", The Age of the Zohar, ed. J. Dan, Jerusalem 1989, pp. 12-15; [Hebrew]. 8

(

W are good reasons to assume the presence of these two Kabbalists also outside Spain, but this

issue should not concern us here. 81

Like, for example, one of the books of R. Joseph Gikatilla, quoted in Ms. Vatican, fol. 177b.

Because of the scribe errors in both the Jerusalem and Frankfurt manuscripts as to the spelling of the name of Gikatilla, Sdiolem did not recognize the name of this Kabbalist; see Kitvey Yad beQabbalah, p. 65.

An Anonymous Kabbalistic Commentary

151

Joseph and R. David. This assumption, which is tentative, can be maintained even if further studies reveal that the commentary was written as late as 1351, the date mentioned by Ms. Frankfurt, and not earlier, for the writings of the two Kabbalists had already been composed already one generation before. IV The above historical and terminological analyses show affinities between the commentary on Shir ha-Yihud and the views of the school of the two Kabbalists. However, the importance of the commentary seems to transcend the contribution it may make to the history of a particular type of Kabbalah. Let me address two views which may have some impact on both the history of ideas and phenomenology of Kabbalah in general. The anonymous Kabbalist envisions the sefìrot not only as existing in the Causa causarum, outside it as the sefirot of the unity, Sefìrot ha-Yihud, but also as existing in the human soul. This psychological understanding of the sefirot, which is rare in the theosophical Kabbalah, has some theurgical implications in our commentary. The author mentions the contemplation of "the Binah in my soul": Ba-binah etbonen she-be-nafshi,82 This phrase is interpreted as pointing, by way of the secret, to the meaning of the divine image, Zelem Elohim, which is to be understood as koah nafshekha. However, the details of this view are, unfortunately, described as part of a topic to be transmitted orally: Ka asher tishma ' mi-peh el peh. During prayer, the Kabbalist is supposed to ascend to, or into, the tree of myself, Ilari shel 'Azmi, a conspicuous reference to a personal tree of sefirot. After arriving at Keter, apparently the inner, individual Keter, the Kabbalist is supposed to draw influx from the Ketarim, apparently Hesed and Gevurah. This drawing is conceived in terms of the filling of the personal tree: Nitmala' ha-'ilan shell min ha-shefa'. The author mentions the pipes, or the channels, ha-zinorot, stemming from the "head of my Keter" to the channels of "my throat" zinorey geroni. Later on "my diadem" atarah sheli. Therefore we may assume that according to this Kabbalist there is a complete sefirotic system, starting with the highest sefirah, Keter, down to the last one, Atarah, which constitute the personal, spiritual, sefirotic tree, which is filled by the dint of the theurgical activity of the Kabbalist. This understanding of the tree of sefirot is, as mentioned above, quite exceptional: nevertheless, it would appear that it occurs, implicitly, in the Kabbalah of R. Joseph Ashkenazi. He indicates that "the soul of the tree of [nishmat ilano] each of the sons of Israel, is planted in Paradise"83 I propose 82

Ms. Vatican, fol. 170b.

O-l

Commentary on Parashat Bereshit, p. 151 ; For a comparison between the human soul and a tree see ibidem, p. 150. Compare also to his Commentary to Sefer Yezirah, fol. 24d.

M. Idei

152

that the phrase Nishmat ilano points to the supernatural soul that provides the the personal tree of sefirot with power. It would seem that in one case this Kabbalist speaks of the "channels" Zinorot, that are emanating onto "the spirit of God that is in him [namely in man]" 84 . The second topic has to do with a very famous concept that became famous when it was adopted by Lurianic Kabbalah under the term of Shevirat ha-Kelim, the breaking of the vessels. The Sefirot were envisioned as unable to stand the great pressure of the emanative process coming from above, and their breaking caused the dispersion of the divine sparks into this world. Let me introduce the passage of the anonymous Kabbalist:85 "Before Adam's sin, each and every day was together with its night united [altogether]. The nights did not come together to one place but day and night were functioning while mixed. But now, because of our sins, after Adam's sin, all the days come together to one place and likewise do all the nights. And the vessel is higher 86 than the [place of the] nights. This is why Kelfi1 means Yesod. This is called Keli because of all the emanation descending onto the nights, does not come [there] but by the mediation of the attribute of Yesod. This is the reason that the [ritual] washing of the hands has to be performed with a vessel that is not broken. And water symbolizes the [attribute of] mercy in order to hallow the ten fingers of his hands, which symbolize the ten sefirot. But when the vessel is broken and damaged, it symbolizes that the water, namely [the attribuite of] mercy is going out through the defect of the vessel to the external [powers]88. Consequently the water will not purify the hands and the fingers." The broken vessel, namely the defect related to the sefirah of Yesod, causes the leak of the water outside the divine system, and thus the emanation reaches the evil powers. The use of the image of the broken vessel in order to point to a defect in the divine system is reminiscent of the Lurianic image.89 84

Commentary

on Parashat Bereshit, p. 152, to be compared to ibidem, p. 150. See also

C or dovero's Ρ ardes Rimmonim Gate XXXI Α. 11, where the term Zinor nishmat o occurs. As I have shown in my article "Sefirot and Colors: A Neglected Respcnsum" in eds. D. Dimant, M Idei, S. Rosenberg, Minhah le-Sarah, Tribute to Sarah, Studies in Jewish Philosophy and

Kabbalah

Presented to Professor Sara O. Heller Wilensky, Jerusalem 1994; pp. 12-14 [Hebrew], Cordovero was deeply influenced by the theories on colors from the circle of R. David ben Yehudah he-Hasid See also my study maitioned in note 61 above. For more on this issue, see my monograph an Vizualization of Colors. 85

MS. Vatican, fol. 183a, Ms. Frankfurt, fol. 24a.

86

MS. Vatican, Le-ma 'alah\ Ms. Frankfurt le-Ma 'aseh.

87

According to Ms. Vatican; Ms. Frankfurt, Kol. 88

Hizonim. This is a tedinical term for the evil powers. See note 77 above.

89

On this concept see Gerdiom Scholem. Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism, New York 1967, pp.

265-266; Isaiah Tidiby, The Doctrine of Evil and the 'Kelippah ' in Lurianic Kabbalism, Jerusalem

An Anonymous Kabbalistic Commentary

153

There are, no doubt, differences between Luria's use of the image and the way the anonymous Kabbalist used it. Nevertheless, the similarity between the above quote and the later use of the image should not be negated, or disregarded, even if an historical affinity between the 14th century text and the Safedian Kabbalah cannot, for the time being, be established. In any case, the above quote reinforces the recent observations that the concept of the break of the vessels is not a new one used by R. Isaac Luria 9 0 as seems to be the case in many other important instances as well. 91 The two topics discussed here show that the contribution of the school of Kabbalah that generated the thoughts of R. Joseph Ashkenazi and R. David ben Yehudah he-Hasid, to the general history of Kabbalah is greater than modern scholars imagined. 92 If the above suggestion that the source of some esoteric views of R. Joseph and R. David is to be located in Ashkenaz, as the Kabbalistic commentary on Shir ha-Yihud may help us to assume, then it is reasonable to see in the school of these two Kabbalists one of the most decisive developments in Kabbalistic thought. This school of Kabbalists deeply affected the history of Kabbalah; its explicit influence can be found in Ashkenaz, Spain, Byzantine Kabbalah, 93 North Africa and in Safed. 94 As to the depth of its influence, we are merely at the very beginning of understanding that alongside the Zoharic, the ecstatic and the Nahmanidean Kabbalah, the school that emerged in Ashkenaz produced the deepest impact on the later Kabbalistic thought. What is commonly conceived of as the innovation of a later phase of Kabbalah can turn, if the manuscript material is properly studied, into the continuation, interpretation, appropriation or distortion of already existing

1942, pp. 17-18; [Hebrew], The implicit assumption of the two scholars is that this concept is novel with Luria. 9

®See Yehudah Liebes, "The Kabbalistic Myth of Orpheus" Sholomo Pines Jubilee Volume, eds. M

Idei, W. Ζ. Harvey, E. Schweid, Jerusalem 1988, vol. I p. 451 [Hebrew]; Havivah Pedayah, The Crisis in the Divinity and Theurgy in the Kabbala of Rabbi Isaac the Blind and his Disciples [Ph. D. Thesis] Jerusalem 1989, p. 292; [Hebrew], 9

' See Idei, "The Image of Man", pp. 48-53 and idem, "'Ta'amei ha-'Ofot ha-Teme'im' by R. David

ben Yehudah he-Hasid and Their Significance", Alei Shefer, Studies in the Literature of Jewish Thought Presented to Rabbi Dr. Alexandre Safran, ed. M. Hall amidi, Bar Ilan University Press 1990, pp. 26-27; [Hebrew], 92 See Liebes' remark in "How was the Zohar Written", pp. 63-64. 93

Cf. note 23 above.

94

As is well-known, R. David b m Avi Zimra, R. Modie Cordovero and R. Isaac Luria wore

acquainted with the writings of the two earlier Kabbalists. See Hallamish, Perush Parashat

Bereshit,

pp. 15, andn. 27, 223; Idei, "The Image of Man" pp. 48-49, idem, "Kabbalistic Material', pp. 171173.

154

M. Idei

ideas.95 The exaggerated emphasis on the distinctness of the diverse phases of Jewish mysticism, which prevails among some modern scholars, should be substantially attenuated96 if scholarship is to take in account all the extant material. Repetitions of the same theories based on an unqualified distinctness, without supportive material from manuscripts or printed matter can hardly convince scholars acquainted with the pertinent material.

95

See e. g. the assumpticn of Joseph Dan, Hebrew Ethical and Homiletical Literature, Keter Publishing House, Jerusalem 1975, p. 222; [Hebrew] that a text of R. Hayyim Vital has an important novel concept, namely that all the supernal theosophical structures are also present in every mtity at the mundane level. However, this concept can be detected in some discussions by R. Joseph Adikenazi and his younger contemporary, the well-known R. Isaac of Acre. On this issue I shall elaborate elsewhere. 96 See also Yehudah Liebes, "New Trmds in the Study of Kabbalah" Pe amim vol. 50 [1992] pp. 154-156; [Hebrew],

Israel Jacob Yuval Kabbalisten, Ketzer und Polemiker Das kulturelle Umfeld des Sefer ha-Nizachon von Lipman Mühlhausen I

In der zweiten Hälfte des 14. Jahrhunderts blühte im Osten Deutschlands die Beschäftigung mit dem Schreiben der Buchstaben des hebräischen Alphabets. Diese Tätigkeit hatte drei unterschiedliche Aspekte: einen technischen, einen halachischen und einen mystischen - um den letzteren geht es uns hier. Unter den diesem Thema gewidmeten Schriften ist Baruch sehe- amar von Samson b. Elieser, verfaßt um das Jahr 1380, eines der markanten Werke.1 Es basiert ausschließlich auf der aschkenasischen Mystik, und der Verfasser beruft sich häufig auf Juda den Frommen und auf Elasar von Worms. Etwa 35 Jahre später, um das Jahr 1415, schrieb Lipman Mühlhausen in Prag sein Werk Alfa-Beta, das vier verschiedene Erklärungen zum hebräischen Alphabet enthält.2 In der ersten erläutert er die Grundregeln des Niederschreibens der Buchstaben für "alle der Heiligen Sprache Kundigen".3 Die zweite, halachische Erklärung ist bestimmt für "die Weisen, Gelehrten, Kenner der Halacha".4 In der dritten Erklärung bringt er Geheimwissen aus dem Sefer ha-Temuna, einem kabbalistischen Werk, dessen Entstehung Moshe Idei um die Mitte des 14. Jahrhunderts in Byzanz ansetzt.5 Im vierten 1

Baruch Sdieamar, in: Kovez Sifrey Stam, hg. von Menadi em M. Mescfai-Sahav, Jerusalem 1970,

S. 13-194. Werter aber dieses Buch siehe: Israel J. Yuval, Magie und Kabbala unter den Juden im Deutschland des ausgehenden Mittelalters, in: Judentum im deutschen Sprachraum, hg. von Karl E. Grözinger, Frankfurt 1991, S. 176 und Anm. 12. Ober andere mystische Kommentare zum Alphabet siehe: Moshe Idei, The Commentary en the Alpha Beta by R. David ben Yehuda he-Hasid, in: Aley Sefer 10,1982, S. 25-35; [Hebr.] In: Baruch Sche'amar (Anm. 1), S. 195-257. Weiter über dieses Werk siehe: Judah Kaufmann, Rabbi Jörn Τον Lipmann Mühlhausen, New York 1927, S. 73; [Hebr.]. ^Baruch Sdieamar (Anm. 1), S. 199. 4

Ibid.

~*Mosfae Idei, An Anonymous Commentary on the Pœtateuch from the Circle of R. Solomon Ibn Adret (Hebräisch), in:Michael 11,1989,S. 19; [Hebr.].

156

J. Yuval

Teil enthüllt er Geheimnisse aus dem Bereich der Sefirot-Lehre. Demnach waren zwei von den vier Kommentaren mystischer Natur und beide gründeten auf außer-aschkenasischen Überlieferungen. Dadurch wurde das von Grund auf aschkenasische Substrat von Baruch sehe'-amar nicht verdrängt; es wurde nur durch zwei kabbalistische Innovationen bereichert: durch die Vorstellungen aus dem Sefer ha-Temuna und durch die Lehre von den Sefirot. Für welchen Leser schrieb Lipman dieses Buch? Welche Rolle sollte die Kabbala nach seiner Meinung bei seinem Zielpublikum spielen? Für die Beantwortung dieser Fragen finden sich einige Anhaltspunkte in seinem Werk. Im Anschluß an ein Zitat aus den Schaare Ora des Josef Gikatilla schreibt Lipman:6 Daß ich dies niedergeschrieben habe, war vielleicht nicht ganz rechtens, aber ich wollte denjenigen das Maul stopfen, die klein beigeben und nicht mehr darauf achten. Und Gott, sein Name sei gepriesen, möge es mir verzeihen und nicht übel anrechnen, daß ich diese Dinge hier schriftlich festgehalten habe. Und nach einem Zitat aus dem Ozar ha-Kavod des Todros Abulafia fahrt er fort: Ich enthülle hier durch behutsame Andeutungen geheimes Wissen fur Kundige, so viel ich eben davon verstehe, obgleich ich sündiger Mensch gar nicht wert bin, solch hohe Dinge selbst andeutungsweise zu behandeln, denn mein Wissen ist gering, ich und meinesgleichen dürften sich damit eigentlich überhaupt nicht befassen - aber weil es hohe Zeit ist, habe ich es doch getan, um denjenigen das Maul zu stopfen, die klein beigeben. Und Gott, sein Name sei gepriesen, möge mir verzeihen.7 An zwei Stellen also entschuldigt sich Lipman für die Enthüllung von Geheimwissen, und beide Male führt er zu seiner Rechtfertigung an, er müsse Leuten entgegentreten, die "klein beigeben" und auf die korrekte Schreibung ihrer Tefillin, Mesusot und Tora-Rollen nicht sorgfaltig genug achteten. Solche Leute klagten wohl, angesichts der Vielfalt von halachischen Bestimmungen bei der korrekten Schreibung hebräischer Buchstaben sei überhaupt keine sichere Halacha mehr zu eruiren. Gegen dieses Verzagen

6

Ed. Mesdii-Sahav (Anm. 1), S. 89. Die folgenden beide Zitate sind aus Lipmatm's Glossen zu

Baruch Sche'amar genommen. Die Zugehörigkeit diesa- Glossai zu Lipmann hat Kaufmann (Anm. 2), S. 74-75 bewiesen. 7

Ed. Meschi-Sahav (Anm. 1), S. 118.

Kabbalisten, Ketzer und Polemiker

157

erstellte Lipman ein einheitliches System auf kabbalistischer Grundlage. Daraus darf man schließen, daß Lipmans Ziel ein Publikum von Halachisten war. Eine weitere Eigenschaft seines Zielpublikums ist aus seiner Einleitung zum vierten, dem im höchten Maße esoterischen Kommentar des Alfa-Beta zu entnehmen: Ich habe sehr viele Leute gesehen, die sich für Kabbalisten hielten, es war aber bloßes Gerede; sie verfügten weder über Kenntnisse in der wahren Kabbala noch waren sie weise genug, um aus sich selbst zur Erkenntnis zu gelangen, vielmehr waren sie vom Wege abgewichen. Und im Sefer ha-Eschkol habe ich in Andeutungen versucht, sie auf den Weg des Lebens zurück zu leiten.8 Demnach war seine Schrift an Kabbalisten gerichtet, die aus Unwissenheit von dem abgewichen waren, was er "den Weg des Lebens" nennt. Und in seinem kabbalistischen Hauptwerk, dem genannten Sefer haEschkol hatte er versucht, sie auf den rechten Weg zurück zu fuhren. Ähnlich äußerte er sich in seiner Deutung des Einheitsgesangs: "Seit nunmehr dreißig Jahren habe ich keine rechten Kabbalisten mehr angetroffen, deshalb muß ich mich mit bloßen Hinweisen und Deutungen begnügen."9 Auch im Sefer ha-Nizzahon schilderte Lipman Kabbalisten, deren Niveau seinen Ansprüchen nicht genügte, und hier wird er etwas deutlicher, worin der Irrweg bestehe, dem sie sich zugewandt hatten:10 "Ich habe kenntnisreiche Vertreter der Geheimlehre gesehen, die doch nicht genug Verstand hatten, müßige Gedanken zu verhüten, und ihr Wissen neigt zur Ketzerei." Lipmans Einstellung zur Ketzerei soll uns in der zweiten Hälfte unserer Ausführungen beschäftigen. Zuvor will ich noch eine bislang unbekannte Gruppe von Gelehrten, Halachisten und Anhängern der Geheimlehre, vorstellen, die ihren Wirkungskreis in Eger und Erfurt hatte, d.h. in der näheren Umgebung von Lipman. Möglicherweise gehörten diese Leute nämlich zu denen, gegen die sein zuerst angeführter Vorwurf gerichtet war. Zu diesem Zweck müssen wir noch einmal auf Lipmans vier Kommentare des Alfa-Beta zurückkommen. Ein Blick auf die Druckausgaben lehrt, daß es sich genau genommen um fünf verschiedene Deutungen handelt. J. Kaufmann hat die Vermutung geäußert, daß Lipman die fünfte Deutung 8

Ibid., S. 250.

9

Shir Hayihud·. The Hymn of Divine Unity with the Kabbalistic Commentary of R. Yom-Tov

Lipmann Mühlhausen (Faksimile: Thiengen 1560), mit Einleitung von Joseph Dan, Jerusalem 1981, S. 35. 10

Sefer ha-Nizzahon, Ed. Theodor Hackspan, Nürnberg 1644, S. 79 Nr. 124.

158

J. Yuval

nachträglich hinzugefügt habe.11 Dagegen spricht die markante Abschlußformel am Ende der vierten Deutung: "hiermit endet das Buch AlfaBeta, zu dem mein Onkel, Meister L., lang möge er leben, den Grund legte".12 Die fünfte Deutung ist ebenfalls mystischer Natur, doch im Unterschied zu den beiden vorangehenden enthält sie keinerlei Hinweis auf Sefìrot, vielmehr beruht sie ganz und gar auf der aschkenasischen Mystik. Von daher besteht wenig Wahrscheinlichkeit, daß dieser Text von Lipman stammt. Es läßt sich zeigen, daß diese Deutung von einem anderen Verfasser stammt, dessen Namen wir nicht kennen, und daß sie um das Jahr 1430 in Eger nahe der böhmischen Grenze verfaßt wurde. Diese und andere Folgerungen ergeben sich aus der autobiographischen Einleitung des Verfassers, die in einem unlängst aufgetauchten handschriftlichen Exemplar des Textes (MS Bar-Ilan 844) erhalten ist. 13 Auf dieser Grundlage können wir sozusagen das kulturelle und biographische Profil des Verfassers und seines gesellschaftlichen Kreises bestimmen. Die Einleitung beginnt mit der Versicherung des Verfassers, wie teuer ihm die Kalligraphie sei, und zwar seit er im Alter von fünf Jahren die Kunst des Schreibens erlernt habe. Aus dieser Neigung heraus habe er "allerlei Formen gezeichnet und die verschiedensten Bilder und Zeichen, Tiere, Vögel, Blatt- und Blütenwerk in Holz geschnitten".14 Hier haben wir ein (vielleicht das älteste) Zeugnis eines jüdischen Holzschneiders vor uns. Im Alter von 17 Jahren wurde ihm jedoch klar - wie bei einem aschkenasischen Juden kaum anders zu erwarten - daß dies eine "törichte Kunst" sei; daraufhin lenkte er seine künstlerischen Begabungen und Interessen auf das, was er "Himmelswerk" nennt, nämlich auf das Schreiben von Tefillin. Und aufgrund dieser seiner neuen Tätigkeit erwachte sein Interesse an den Geheimnissen der hebräischen Buchstaben. Ob die jüdische Kunst an ihm einen bedeutenden Miniaturisten verloren hat, können wir nicht beurteilen; die Kabbala hat jedenfalls keinen großen Mystiker an ihm gewonnen. In jenen Jahren - gemeint ist offenbar die Zeit um das Jahr 1380 - lebte in Erfurt der schon erwähnte Samson b. Elieser, der Verfasser von Baruch sehe'amar. Bevor dieser sich auf seine geplante Reise ins Heilige Land begab, teilte er auf allgemeines Drängen einiges von den Geheimnissen seines Berufes mit. So entstand in Erfurt eine Lerngemeinschaft, die sich mit den Geheimnissen der hebräischen Buchstaben und deren korrekter Niederschrift befaßte. Daran nahm auch der Lehrer und Onkel unseres Verfassers teil, von dem nur der Anfangsbuchstabe seines Namens bekannt ist: J. Vielleicht war es Jeckel von 11

Kaufmann (Anm. 2), S. 73.

12

Baruch Sdie'amar (Anm. 1), S. 257.

13

Wegen unkorrekter Bindung ist die Reihefolge der Blätter falsch. Nach Fol. 56 folgt Fol. 63.

14

Fol. 63r. Über die Anfange dieser Kunst am Ende des 14. Jhs. siehe: Lucien Febre u. Henri J.

Martin, The Coming of the Book, London-New York 1990, S. 45-49.

Kabbalisten, Ketzer und Polemiker

159

Eger, Rabbiner in Eger, Krems und Wien. 15 Von ihm lernte unser Verfasser die Berufsgeheimnisse des Samson b. Elieser. Außerdem studierte er bei weiteren vier Gelehrten in Eger: bei seinem Vater Akiva, bei Josef Zummers, Meir Zummers und bei Hiskia dem Frommen. Die drei letztgenannten sind uns bekannt. Im Jahre 1386 wurden sie vom Stadtrat von Eger in ihrer Eigenschaft als Judenmeister bestätigt, 16 demnach handelte es sich um die Vorsteher der Judengemeinde zu Eger. In besonderem Maße gilt dies für Meir Zummers. Er wurde anscheinend Jeckels Nachfolger im Rabbinat und versuchte, wenn auch erfolglos, den Maharil als Schüler zu gewinnen. 17 Unser Verfasser berichtet auch von Kontakten zu Lipman im zweiten Jahrzehnt des 15. Jahrhunderts. Lipman schickte ihm ein Exemplar seines Alfa-Beta und bat dafür um Mitteilung der ihm bekannten Überlieferungen bezüglich der Schreibung hebräischer Buchstaben. Im Zuge der Hussitenfeldzüge, anscheinend um das Jahr 1421, gingen seine Bücher verloren, darunter sowohl Baruch sehe amar als auch Alfa-Beta. Daraufhin machte er sich an die Niederschrift der Überlieferungen, die er aus seiner Jugend in Erinnerung hatte, und diese Zusammenfassung seiner Kenntnisse ist jene fünfte Deutung, die in den gedruckten Ausgaben des Alfa-Beta steht. Soweit über die autobiographischen Aufzeichnungen des Verfassers. Das späteste Datum, das in diesen Aufzeichnungen angedeutet wird, ist das Jahr 1421. In seinem Werk behauptet der Verfasser immer wieder, daß die Erlösung und die Ankuft des Messias im Jahr 1430 stattfinden werde. 18 An 15

Über seine Biographie siehe: Germania Judaica, Bd. ΙΠ, 2. Teilband, hg. von Arye Mannen und

Yacov Guggenheim (im Druck), Artikel: Wim, # 13b: Jeckel von Eger. 16

Gottlieb Bondy und Franz Dworsky, Geschichte der Juden in Böhmen, Mähren und Schlesien

von 906-1620, Bd. 1, Prag 1906, Nr. 168. Laut einer späteren Oberlieferung sollte eine auf Hirschleder geschriebene Tora-Rolle in der Synagoge zu Worms aus Eger stammen und von einem gewissen Meir angefertigt worden sein ( A Epstein, Die Woimser Thora-Rolle auf Hirschpergament, in: Monatsschrift für Geschichte und Wissenschaft des Judentums 48, 1904, S. 604-609). Manche bezogen diese Angabe auf dea berühmten Meir von Rothenburg, aber es dürfte sich eher um Meir Zummers gehandelt haben. Sein Ehgagemoit im Bereich der Geheimnisse der Schrift fugt sich gut in diese Überlieferung. 17 The Book of Maharil - Customs by Rabbi Yaacov Mulin, h g von Shlomo Spitzer, Jerusalem 1989, S. 394. 18 Yuval (Anm. 1). Das ist der einzige bekannte Fall einer messi ansehen Erwartung, die an die Hussitenkriege anknüpft. Eine Erwartung fur das Jahr 1430 ist ebenfalls in dem R. Elazar van Worms zugeschrieben Kommentar zu Cant. Cantioorum angedeutet. Darnach wurden diesen Kommentar einige pàtere Glossenhmzugefiigt: Rokeach - A Commentary on the Bible by Rabbi Elazar of Worms: Esther - Shir Hashirim - Ruth, h g von Chaim Konyevsky, Bnei Brak 1985, S. 113, 116117. Weiter über dieses Buch siehe: Schmuel Aschkenaä, Zu Zwei Büchern der frühen Chassidim, in: Kowez Siftey Zaditim 4, 1992, S. 105-115; [Hebr.].

160

J. Yuval

einer Stelle schreibt er sogar, das einzige Hindernis, das die Ankunft des Messias verzögere, sei das Ausbleiben der Bekehrung ( Teschuva). Demnach verfasste er sein Werk im Jahr 1430 oder kurz danach. Aus diesen autobiographischen Aufzeichnungen ersteht vor unseren Augen ein Kreis von aschkenasischen Gelehrten, die sich mit dem Schreiben von Tora-Rollen, Tefillin und Mesusot abgaben und in diesem Zusammenhang nicht nur mit den technischen und halachischen Aspekten des Schreibens konfrontiert wurden, sondern auch mit den Geheimnissen der hebräischen Buchstaben. Diese Tätigkeit ist ein Ausdruck jener Neigung zu versachlichter Religiosität und zur Professionalisierung der religiösen Praxis, wie sie damals für die jüdische wie für die christliche Gesellschaft charakteristisch war. Daß die esoterischen Geheimnisse des Alphabets nach der aschkenasischen Überlieferung studiert wurden, ist ein Zeugnis für die große Bedeutung, die der aschkenasischen Mystik noch im 15. Jahrhundert zukam. Wahrscheinlich waren es Kabbalisten dieses Schlages, gegen die Lipman seine Kritik richtete. Diese Gelehrten waren von den Neuerungen des Prager Kreises mit seinen Bemühungen um eine Integration von sefardischer und aschkenasischer Kabbala ziemlich weit entfernt. Allerdings bildeten vielleicht gerade diese Kreise von esoterisch Interessierten eine Art Bindeglied zwischen der Welt der traditionellen aschkenasischen Halacha und den Erneuerungsbestrebungen von Kabbalisten vom Schlage Lipmans. II Wie die übrigen Gelehrten des Prager Kreises beschränkte sich Lipman nicht auf die mystischen Interpretationen der hebräischen Buchstaben, ihm ging es um die Entwicklung eines Systems, das die Kabbala, die Philosophie und die aschkenasische Tradition harmonisch vereinigen sollte. Wie kam er dazu? Auf welchen kulturellen Horizont richtete er seinen Blick? Und worin unterschied er sich von den aschkenasischen Gelehrten seiner Zeit, die sich nur für den Buchstaben des Gesetzes interessierten? Zur Beantwortung dieser Fragen wenden wir uns noch einmal dem Mann und seiner kulturellen Visitenkarte zu. 19 Sein Name ist mit Prag verbunden, dem politischen und kulturellen Zentrum des deutschen Reiches zu jener Zeit; der früheste Beleg für seinen Aufenthalt in Prag stammt allerdings erst aus dem Jahre 1407.20 In den 80er Jahren des 14. Jahrhunderts lebte er in Erfurt. Wo er die 90er Jahre und die Zeit bis 1407 verbrachte, wissen wir nicht. Im Sefer ha-Nizzahon berichtet Lipman über eine öffentliche ZwangsDisputation vom Jahre 1399 mit einem Konvertiten, der mit jüdischem

19

Über seine Biographie siehe: Germania Judaica ΠΙ, 2. Teilband (Anm. 15), Artikel Prag, M 13b.

^ Adolf Stein, Geschichte der Juden in Böhmen, Brünn 1904, S. 16.

Kabbalisten, Ketzer und Polemiker

161

Namen Pessach hieß, mit christlichem Peter.21 Auf diese Disputation hin seien am 22. August 1400, dem Tag, als Wenzel der Königs würde entsetzt wurde,22 achtzig Juden verbrannt worden. Darüber haben wir sonst keinerlei Nachrichten, nicht einmal der Schauplatz ist bekannt. Prag dürfte es nicht gewesen sein, denn dort hätte die Verbrennung von achtzig Juden doch sicherlich eine Spur hinterlassen.23 Die Prager Episode in Lipmans Leben, die spätestens mit dem Jahre 1407 einsetzte, endete zehn Jahre später, als Lipman nach Thüringen zog, wo er sich erst in Jena, dann in Erfurt niederließ. Außerdem gibt es eine Nachricht über einen kurzen Aufenthalt in Krakau, bevor er im Sommer 1421 in Erfurt starb. Das Sefer ha-Nizzahon ist die Zusammenfassung seines theologischen Systems, niedergeschrieben in den Jahren 1401/2, unmittelbar nach der Disputation mit Peter und der darauffolgenden Judenverbrennung. Diese chronologische Nähe ist sicher kein Zufall; die Ausarbeitung seines Systems war Lipmans Reaktion auf das vorangegangene Ereignis. Dieses Werk ist ein Versuch, die Grundprinzipien des jüdischen Glaubens zu bestimmen und für ein breiteres Publikum darzulegen. Schon der Name läßt auf eine Streitschrift schließen ('nizzahon' hier: Polemik), und zwar nicht nur gegen christliche Theologie, sondern auch gegen jüdisches Ketzertum. Sein Zielpublikum gliederte Lipman in vier Gruppen, nach dem Muster der vier Menschentypen der vier Söhne aus der Pessach-Haggada.24 Der Weise - das sind die Gelehrten, die in der Halacha wohlbewandert, aber nicht imstande sind, "unseren Glauben verständig zu betrachten". Der Bösewicht - das sind die "Ketzer (Apikorsim) - beschnittene und unbeschnittene - die den von Gott 21 Sefer ha-Nizzahon (Anm. 10), S. 191-195. Eine deutsche Ubersetzung des Textes bei E. Schwarz, Zur Geschichte der Juden von Prag unter Köllig Wenzel IV, in: Jahrbuch der Gesellschaft

für

Geschichte der Juden in der Cechoslovakischen Republik 5, 1933, S. 429-437. 22

Einm Zusammenhang zwisdien den beiden Ereignissen vermutete schon Salo Baron, A Social and Religious History of the Jews, Bd. DC, New York-London 1965, S. 336 Anm. 9. Kaufmann (Anm. 2), S. 15-25 nahm an, daß Prag gemeint sei. Dagegen hat sdion Schwarz (Anm. 21), S. 430 Zweifel erhoben. Die Vermutung von Kaufmann, S. 19, 21-22, daß die Festnahme der Juden nicht 1399 sondern 1389 stattgefunden hat, und zwar in Zusammenhang mit dem bekannten Prager Pogrom dieses Jahres, ist falsch. Kaufmann stützt sich auf eine einzige Überlieferung in einer Handschrift des Sefer ha-Nizzahon, in der das Jahr 1389 genannt ist. Außerdem argumentiert er, daß "wir von einer Verfolgung im Jahr 1399 nichts wissen". Doch in allen anderen, älteren Überlieferungen ist immer das Jahr 1399 genannt. 1389 ist sicher eine Korrektur des Kopistm oder seiner Vorlage. Die Hinrichtung der Juden fand auch nach Kaufmanns Meinung im Jahr 1400 statt. Demnach dauerte die Verfolgung 11 Jahre(!) und hat ihren Höhepunkt erst im Jahr 1400 erreicht. Durch diese Rekonstruktion der Ereigiisse hätten wir erneut eine Verfolgung in Prag, die aus andereil Quellen unbekannt ist! 24

Einleitung zum Sefer ha-Nizzahon (Anm 10), unpaginiert.

162

J. Yuval

verhängten Strafen und den Worten seiner Propheten und Frommen nachsinnen", d.h. diese Gruppe umfaßt Juden und Nicht-Juden. Der Einfaltige - das sind die schlichten Leute, welche die göttlichen Gebote halten, ohne ihren Sinn zu verstehen, und die rabbinischen Erzählungen (Aggadot) wörtlich nehmen. Und die vierte Gruppe - wer nicht zu fragen versteht - das sind die Christen. Wir müssen unterscheiden zwischen dem tatsächlichen Zielpublikum, den Zeitgenossen, die ein hebräisches Buch lesen konnten, und den literarischen Adressaten - Christen, Karäern und Ketzern gegen die der Verfasser seine polemischen Angriffe und seine Kritik richtete. Auch aus dem Aufbau des Werks geht hervor, daß die Polemik nach außen und innen zugleich gerichtet war. Die literarische Form des Buches ist ein laufender Kommentar zur Bibel. Zusätzlich gliederte der Verfasser seine Argumente in sieben Themen, für jeden Schöpfungstag eines. Bei jedem dieser sieben Themen polemisiert er gegen eine andere Zielgruppe: Sonntag widerlegt die Argumente der Christen; Montag richtet sich gegen die Sadduzäer; Dienstag erläutert anstößige biblische Texte, richtet sich also gegen inneijüdische Zweifler; Mittwoch handelt vom Sinn der Gebote; Donnerstag befaßt sich mit Leuten, welche die Bibel und die rabbinischen Erzählungen in Frage stellen; Freitag widerlegt ketzerische und sadduzäische Thesen; und zum Abschluß der Woche, am Sabbat, stellt Lipman die dreizehn Glaubenssätze vor. 25 Somit kämpft Sefer ha-Nizzahon auf zwei Fronten: gegen Gegner von außen und gegen Andersdenkende von innen. Es handelt sich um den ersten und in seiner Art einzigen systematischen aschkenasischen Versuch, die Grundprinzipien der jüdischen "Orthodoxie" gegen ketzerische Angriffe von verschiedenen Seiten zu verteidigen, gewissermaßen ein aschkenasisches Gegenstück zum Führer der Verirrten' des Maimonides. Die Wirkung des Werks muß überwältigend gewesen sein; nicht weniger als 45 Handschriften sind davon erhalten, weit mehr als von jeder anderen aschkenasischen Schrift des Mittelalters.26 Es handelte sich also um einen Bestseller, nach dem große Nachfrage bestand. Aus dem Werk selbst sind nur wenig Anhaltspunkte zu gewinnen, wer die jüdischen Ketzer waren, gegen die Lipman zu Felde zog. In seinem Sefer haNizzahon spricht er von "Vertretern der Geheimlehre", deren "Wissen zur Ketzerei neige".27 Eine ganz andere Definition von Ketzern findet sich im Protokoll der Disputation mit dem Konvertiten Peter. Dieser hatte den Juden vorgeworfen, sie wünschten den Untergang des Christentums, denn der sogenannte Ketzersegen des Achtzehngebets enthalte den Satz "mögen 25 26

Index zum Sefer ha-Nizzahon (Anni. 10), impagmiert (nach der Einleitung). Selbst von einem so populären Werk wie den Minhage Maharil sind nur 30 Handschriften

erhalten. 27

Oben, Anm. 10.

Kabbalisten, Ketzer und Polemiker

163

sämtliche Minim augenblicklich vergehen". In seiner Erwiderung behauptete Lipman, mit diesen Minim seien nicht die Christen gemeint, sondern:28 Leute, die zwischen dem jüdischen und dem nicht-jüdischen Glauben schwanken, sozusagen auf beiden Beinen hinken, die werden "vergehen", denn sie gehören weder zu den Noachiden (d.h. den Christen) noch zu den Juden - die heißen auf deutsch verzweifelnde Ketzer (in anderen Handschriften: Zweifler und Ketzer).29 Diese Ausführungen sollten nicht nur den Vorwurf der Christenfeindlichkeit dieses Gebetstextes abwehren, sondern zugleich die gemeinsame Basis der jüdischen Existenz mit der christlichen Umwelt verbreitern. Diese Koexistenz beruhte auf der Voraussetzung, daß Christen und Juden, die an der Religion ihrer Väter festhalten, nicht zu vernichten seien. Dagegen seien die Ketzer, in deren Herzen kein Glaube, sondern nur Zweifel wohnten, mit Recht zu vernichten. Hier macht sich Lipman die Kriterien der Inquisition und deren Intoleranz gegenüber Ketzern zu eigen. Aufgrund seiner Verwendung eines deutschen terminus technicus im hebräischen Text ist zu vermuten, daß er eine konkrete Gruppe von Ketzern im Auge hatte. Nun war die Ketzerei in der 2. Hälfte des 14. Jahrhunderts in allen Teilen Deutschlands und besonders in Ostdeutschland ein Problem, mit dem sich Kirche und Öffentlichkeit befaßte. Die wichtigste Ketzerbewegung war in jenen Tagen die der Waldenser, eine andere Sekte waren die Flagellanten zur Zeit des Schwarzen Todes; sie wurden danach vom Papst zu Ketzern erklärt. Um diese häretischen Strömungen mit Stumpf und Stiel auszurotten, wurde die Inquisition eingesetzt. Ihren Höhepunkt erreichten die Verfolgungen in den neunziger Jahren des 14. Jahrhunderts, als Hunderte von Ketzern verbrannt wurden. Aus jener Zeit wissen wir von Inquisitionsprozessen in den verschiedensten Gegenden Deutschlands, von Straßburg im Westen bis Wien im Osten, darunter auch Augsburg, Mainz, Bern, Böhmen und Franken, sogar Erfurt. Einer der Inquisitoren war Peter Zwicker, der seine Laufbahn 1391 in Erfurt begann, wohin er von Prag versetzt worden war. In den 90er Jahren dehnte er seine Tätigkeit nach Norden bis Brandenburg und Pommern aus, nach Süden bis Österreich und sogar nach Ungarn - bis er 1403 in Wien starb.30 28

Sefer ha-Nizzahon (Anm. 10), S. 193. Die Übersetzung bei Schwarz (Anm. 21), S. 433: "Diese

Bezeichnung gilt von einer Maisdiengattung, die zwischen dem Glauben der Juden und dem der Völker hin- und herschwankt. Diese Maisch en gattung karm ruhig verschwinden, sie gehört ni dit zu dai Judai und nicht zu dea Noachidai. Solche Maischen namt man zu deutsch: Zweifler, Ketzer". 29 Etwa 100 Jahre später ut Johannes Reucfalin dieser apologetischen Interpretati CD gefolgt. Er erklärte den Begriff "Minim ' als "alle die so kamen glauben haben" (Augenspiegel, [Tübingen 1511], Fol. 5a). Richard Kieckhefer, Repression of Heresy in Medieval Germany, Pamsylvania 1979, S. 55 beschreibt die Verfolgungen zwischen 1389-1401 in Ost- und Süddeutschland als "one of the most

164

J. Yuval

Nicht nur Ketzer wurden damals verfolgt. In Süddeutschland und in der Schweiz wurden um das Jahr 1400 auch Hexenprozesse gefuhrt. 31 Auch von Judenverfolgungen wird um die Jahrhundertwende berichtet. In Rappoltsweiler in Elsaß ließ im Frühsommer 1397 der Stadtherr Bruno von Rappoltstein Juden, darunter einen aus Aschaffenburg, wegen angeblicher Brunnenvergiftung inhaftieren, foltern und hinrichten. Auch Juden aus Breisach, Colmar und von Türkheim waren in der selben Sache angeklagt, und die Juden von Basel flüchteten aus ihrer Stadt, weil sie um ihr Leben bangten. 1401 wurde ein Jude in Diessenhofen bei Konstanz beschuldigt, einen Ritualmord initiiert zu haben. Seine "Mittäter" in Schaffhausen und Winterthur, einige Duzend, wurden verbrannt, die Juden in Freiburg im Breisgau vertrieben und in Zürich festgenommen und gegen eine hohes Lösegeld freigelassen. Zur selben Zeit wurden die Juden in Dinkelsbühl und in Rothenburg aus unbekanntem Anlaß gefangen genommen und erst gegen ein hohes Lösegeld wieder freigelassen32. Einen Hinweis auf die bedrohliche Lage um die Jahrhundertwende finden wir in der kabbalistischen Schrift Hadrat Kodesk, dort wird die Befürchtung geäußert, das Jubeljahr 1400 werde besonders schwere Heimsuchungen bringen. Der Verfasser stellt sogar die Behauptung auf, die ich sonst bisher nirgends gefunden habe: "in den christlichen Verordnungen ist vorgesehen, alle fünzig Jahre die Juden umzubringen".33 Da erhebt sich die Frage, ob important repressive endeavors of fourteenth-century Europe, and surely one of the most vigorous antiheretical campaigns of all medieval Germany". Siehe auch: idem, S. 53-73; Paul P. Bernard, Heresy in Fourteenth Century Austria, in: Medievalia et Humanística 110, 1956, S. 50-63; Siegfried Hover, Die thiiringisdie Kryptoflagellantenbewegung im 15. Jahrhundert, in: Jahrbuch fur Regionalgeschichte 2, 1967, S. 148-174; Dietrich Kurze, Zur Ketzxrgeschichte der Mark Brandenburg und Pommau vernehmlich im 14. Jahrhundert, in: Jahrbuch fiir die Geschichte Mittelund Ostdeutschlands 16/17, 1968, S. 50-94; Martin Erbstösser, Sozialreligiöse Strömungen im späten Mittelalter: Geißler, Freigeister und Waldenser im 14. Jahrhundert, Berlin 1970, S. 70-84; Alexander Patschovsky, Quellen zur böhmisch e» Inquisition im 14. Jahrhundert. MGH Quellen zur Geistesgeschichte des Mittelalters 11, Weimar 1979; Idem, Ketzer und Ketzerverfolgung in Böhmen im Jahrhundert vor Hus, in: Geschichte in Wissenschaft und Unterricht 32, 1982, S. 70-77. 31 Andreas Blaueit, Frühe Hexenvetfolgungen: Ketzer-, Zauberei- und Hexenprozesse des 15. Jahrhundert, Hamburg 1989, S. 17-24. Siehe: Germania Judaica ΠΙ, 2. Teilband (Anm. 15), die einschlägigen Artikel. Yuval (Anm. 1), S. 182. Ebenso: Hs. Moscau, Staatsbibliothek, Ms. Günzburg 482, Fol. 25v. Laut dieser Quelle waren es Geißler, die den Juden besonders bedrohlich waren. Nach Martin Erbstösser (Anm. 30), S. 82 erlebte die Geiiilerbewegung einen grossen Aufschwung um 1400, allerdings nicht in Deutschland, sondan in Italien und in den Niederlanden. Do- Verfasser von Hadrat Kodesh war aber ein Regensburger Über das Jubeljahr 1400 siehe: Jürgen Petersdm, Jubiläumsfrömmigkeit vor dem Jubelablaß, in: Deutsches Archiv 45, 1989, S. 32 Anm. 4. Frantisele Graus, Epochenbewusstsein im Spätmittelalter und Probleme der Periodisierung, in: 33

Kabbalisten, Ketzer und Polemiker

165

nicht auch die Disputation mit Peter und die darauf folgende Judenverbrennung in diesen Zusammenhang gehören. Könnte es sich um eine Art Inquisitionsprozeß gegen Juden gehandelt haben? Als Begründung, weshalb die Juden festgenommen wurden und jene achtzig Juden verbrannt worden seien, gibt Lipman nur an, "wir wurden unter Anschuldigung der Ketzerei festgenommen".34 Peters Anschuldigungen lassen sich aus Lipmans Erwiderungen erschließen. Anscheinend hatte er den Vorwurf erhoben, in der jüdischen Liturgie werde die Rechtmäßigkeit des Christentums bestritten bis hin zum Wunsch nach seinem Untergang. Diesen Vorwurf stützte er nicht nur auf den bereits erwähnten Ketzersegen des Achtzehngebets, sondern auf Verwünschungen der Christen in den liturgischen Dichtungen zum Neujahrsfest und zum Versöhnungstag.35 Auch talmudische Erzählungen enthielten abschätzige Äußerungen über das Christentum. Jüdische Gebote wie die Absonderung der Teighebe {Halla) und die Wegschaffung alles Sauerteigs vor Pessach (Biur Hamez) interpretierte Peter als Verunglimpfung der Hostie. Solche Vorwürfe hatten christliche Disputationsgegner auch früher schon erhoben.36 Das Besondere an der Epochenschwelle und Epochenbewusstsein,

hg. von Reinhart Herzog e.a., München 1987, S. 158

meint, daß das Jahr 1400 keine besondere Aufmerksamkeit erweckte. Der angebliche Zusammenhang zwischen Jubeljahr und Judenverfolgung ist wahrscheinlich eine jüdische Interprétation zu den grossen Verfolgungen, die kurz vor einem "Jubeljahr" stattfanden: 1100 (I. Kreuzzug, 1096), 1150 (H. Kreuzzug, 1147), 1200 (ΙΠ. Kreuzzug 1188-1191), 1300 (Rindfleisch, 1298), 1350 (der Schwarze Tod, 1348/9). 34 35

Sefer ha-Nizzahon (Anm. 10), S. 191. 3 5 Abraham Freimann, Titnem Le-Hopa (Hebr.), in: Tarbiz 12, 1941, S. 70-74; Daniel

Goldschmidt, Restoration of Missing Piyyutim to the Mahzor for the Day of Atonement, in: Qirjat Sefer 31, 1956, S. 146-151 [Hebr.]; Chœ Mahavia, The Caustic Poetic "Rebuke" (Siamta) of Abraham b. Jacob, in: Tar biz 39, 1970, S. 277-284; [Hebr.]. Auf die Verwünschungen und Verfluchungen der Christen in der jüdischen Liturgie komme ich anderwärts zurück. 36

Der Vorwurf gegen den Ketzersegen des Achtzehngebets wurde schon in der Antike erhoben. Siehe

dazu zuletzt: Peto" Schäfer, Die sogennante Synode von Jabne. Zur Trennung von Juden und Christen im 1./2. Jh. n. Chr., in: Judaica (Zürich) 31, 1975, S. 54-64, 116-124; Reuven Kimelman, Birkat Ha-Mmim and the Lack of Evidence for an Anti-Christian Jewish Prayer in Late Antiquity, in: Jewish and Christian Self-Definition, Vol. Π, ed. by E.P. Slanders e.a., London 1981, S. 226-244, 391^03; William Horbury, The Benediction of Minim and the Early Jewish-Christian Controversy, in: Journal of Theological Studies 33, 1982, S. 19-61; Ben-Zion Binyamin, Biricat Ha-Minim and the Ein Gedi Inscription, in: Immanuel 20, 1986/7, S. 68-79. Im Mittelalter taucht dieser Vorwurf eraríais 1240 bei der Disputation von Paris auf: Isidore Loeb, La controverse de 1240 sur le talmud, in: Revue des Etudes Juives 3, 1881, S. 51; Chen Mer diavia. The Church versus Talmudic and

Midrashic

Literature [500-1248], Jerusalem 1970, S. 278-280; [Hebr.]. Vorwürfe gegen die jüdische Liturgie, darunter auch gegen den Ketzersegen und gegm die Verfluchung von Christen, sind auch im Manual des Inquisitors Bernard Gui (gest. 1331) zu finden: Yosrf H. Yeruihalmi, The Inquisition and the

166

J. Yuval

Disputation mit Peter besteht dann, daß dies die einzigen Vorwürfe gewesen zu sein scheinen; die sonst von Christen gegen Juden und Judentum vorgebrachten Argumente fehlen völlig. So entsteht der Eindruck, daß es Peter einzig und allein darum zu tun war, den Nachweis zu erbringen, daß die jüdische Religion eine gefahrliche Ketzerei sei, die ausgerottet werden müsse.37 Daher wird der tragische Ausgang des Prozesses verständlich. Aus dem ganzen Mittelalter ist keine andere Disputation bekannt, in deren Folge Juden hingerichtet wurden. Die Annahme, daß die christliche Seite versucht hatte, das Judentum als Ketzerei darzustellen, erklärt auch Lipmans entschiedene Stellungnahme gegen die Ketzer. Wie häufig in solchen Situationen vollzieht sich hier bei den Opfern eine Art Projektion: sie übernehmen die Kriterien des Verfolgers und versuchen, sich dadurch zu retten. So übernahm Lipman die Einstellung der Inquisition zu den Ketzern und suchte aufgrund ihrer eigenen Voraussetzungen zu beweisen, daß die Juden keine Ketzer seien und nichts mit Ketzerei zu tun hätten. Unter diesen Umständen wird verständlich, wieso Lipman es so eilig hatte, sogleich nach dem tragischen Ausgang jener Disputation ein Buch zu schreiben, in dem er ein völlig "orthodoxes" Judentum ohne jeglichen Anflug von Ketzerei präsentierte. Deshalb kämpfte er sozusagen auf zwei Fronten: nach außen gegen christlische Anfechtungen und nach innen gegen jüdische Häresien. Ihm war daran gelegen, ein geschlossenes System zu schaffen, in Jews of France in the Time of Bernard Gui, in: Harvard Theological Review 63, 1970, S. 354-363. Zum Ketzersegen im IS. und 16. Jahrhundert siehe: Kaufmann (Anm. 2), S. 22-23; Hans-Martin Kim, Das Bild vom Juden im Deutschland des frühen 16. Jahrhunderts, Tübingen 1989, S. 114118. 37 Die Tendenz, das Judmtum als Ketzertum darzustellen, entsprach allerdings nicht der offiziellen Einstellung der Kirche, die weiter an der Augustmischen Lehre bezüglich der Duldung der Juden festhielt. Dazu: Amos Funkenstein, Changes in the Pattems of Christian Anti-Jewish Polemics in the 12th Century, in: Zion 33, 1968, S. 140, Anm. *55; [Hebr.]; Alexander Patsdiovsky, Der "Talmudjude". Vom mittelalterlichen Ursprung eines neuzeitlichen Themas, in: Zeitschrift Historische

Forschung,

für

Beiheft 13 (Juden in der christlichen Unweit während des späten

Mittelalters, h g von Alfred Haverkamp und Franz-Josef Ziwes), 1992, S. 22-23. Ober die Identifizierung von Juden und Ketzern siehe: Louis I. Neuman, Jewish Influence on

Christian

Reform Movements, New York 1925 (ungenau); Joshua Traditenberg, The Devil and the Jews, 1943, S. 170-187,207-216; Anna-Dorothee ν. den Brincken, Das Rechtfeitigungsschreiben der Stadt Köln wegen Ausweisung der Juden im Jahre 1424, in: Mitteilungen aus dem Stadtarchiv von Köln 60, 1971, S. 323-329; Dietrich Kurze, Häresie und Minderiieit im Mittelalter, in:

Historische

Zeitschrift 229, 1979, S. 552-553; Kim (Anm. 36), S. 98-100. Zur Dämonisierang der Ketzer siehe auch: Alexander Patsdiovsky, Der Ketzer als Teufelsdiener, in: Papstum, Kirche und Recht im Mittelalter - Festschrift für Horst Fuhrmann zum 65. Geburtstag, h g von Hubert Mordek, Tübingen 1991, S. 317-334.

Kabbalisten, Ketzer und Polemiker

167

dem so verschiedenartige Komponenten wie die aschkenasische Mystik, die Kabbala und die Philosophie ein harmonisches Ganzes bildeten. Ist aus diesen Angriffen Lipmans gegen jüdische Ketzerei auf häretische Strömungen in der aschkenasischen Judenheit zu schließen? Ich glaube nein. Sie scheinen mir eher aus Lipmans Sorge vor den Folgen einer Ketzerbeschuldigung von christlicher Seite hervorgegangen zu sein. Und seine Sorge war nicht unbegründet. Am 4. September 1409 sandte Papst Alexander V. eine Bulle an Ponce Fougeyron, den Inquisitor über weite Gebiete von Norditalien und den Osten Frankreichs; erwähnt werden die Diözesen Genf, Aosta, Tarantaise, Dauphine, Venaissin, Avignon.38 In dieser Bulle schreibt der Papst, christliche und jüdische Gruppen hätten ketzerische Sekten gebildet, die in geheimen Zusammenkünften Rituale zelebrierten, die gegen die christliche Religion verstießen. Seine Information hatte er von eben diesem Inquisitor bezogen. Nur nebenbei möchte ich bemerken, daß dieser Umstand insofern bedeutsam sein könnte, als derselbe Mann auch für die Talmudverbrennung von 1416 in Savoyen verantwortlich war - und die Hintergründe dieses Ereignisses sind bis heute nicht hinreichend geklärt. Den Vorwurf einer Kooperation von Ketzern und Juden erhob im Jahre 1419 auch die theologische Fakultät der Universität Wien; daraufhin ließ Herzog Albrecht 1420 sämtliche Juden Österreichs festnehmen, die Armen unter ihnen ausweisen, die Gefangenen zwangsweise zum Christentum bekehren; 1421 wurden Hunderte von Juden hingerichtet, weil sie sich nicht taufen lassen wollten.39 Daß in Deutschland die Tendenz dahin ging, die Juden nicht mehr als "infideles" zu betrachten, sondern als "heretici", geht auch aus einer Äußerung des Maharil hervor: er schreibt, ein getaufter Jude habe "nicht am jüdischen Glauben festhalten wollen, weil dies Ketzerei -ÏO Shlomo Simonsohn, The Apostolic Seat and the Jews, BA Π: Documents 1394-1464, Toronto 1989, S. 658-660 Nr 583. Siehe weite·: Carlo Gmzburg, Ecstasies - Deciphering

the Witches'

Sabbath, New York 1990, S. 68-69. in Israel J. Yuval, Juden, Hussiten und Deutsche, in: Zeitschrifl für Historische Forschung, Beiheft 13 (Anm. 37), 1992, S. 65-66 Anm 25. Über ähnliche Befürchtungen vor einer eventuellen Kollaboration der deutschen Bevölkerung in den Städten nahe der böhmischen Grenze mit den Hussiten berichtet Kieckhefer (Anm. 30), S. 88. 40

Responso of Rabbi Yaacov Molin (Maharil),hg. von Yitzchok Satz, Jerusalem 1979, S. 322 Nr

205. In Zurich initiierte das Ratsgeridit 1378 einen Nadigang, eine offizielle Untersuchung gegen einen Christen, der "den Juden" als Ketzer beschimpfte. Doch ist nicht ganz sicher, ob der Beschimpfte ein Jude oder ein Christ mit dem Familiennamen "Jud" war, siehe: Suzanne Burgjiartz, Leib, Ehre und Gut. Deliquenz in Zürich am Ende des 14. Jahrhunderts, Zürich 1990, S. 186, 296 Anm. 34. Über die umfangreiche "Häresie der Judaisierenden" in Rußland im 15. Jahrhundert siehe: Haim Borodianski, Die altrussischen Handschriften der Logik und ihre jüdischen Quellen, in: Monatsschrift für Geschichte und Wissenschaft des Judentums

81, 1937, S. 120-131; Shmuel

168

J. Yuval

Wir werden Lipmans Befürchtungen noch besser verstehen, wenn wir einen Blick darauf werfen, was sich zu jener Zeit in der Provence und in Spanien abspielte. Eine ganz ähnliche Einstellung zu Ketzern äußerte Lipmans Zeitgenosse, Isaak Nathan aus Arles, der Verfasser der ersten hebräischen Bibelkonkordanz. Er berichtet, zahlreiche Juden hätten sich auf die Disputation zu Tortosa 1414 hin taufen lassen.41 Er verurteilte sie deshalb nicht, vielmehr tadelte er mit harten Worten die christliche Propaganda, besonders den Prediger Vincenz Ferrer, der die Blutlüge gegen die Juden verbreitete. Diese Unwahrheit habe die Neugetauften verunsichert; sie seien zunächst aus Überzeugung zum Christentum übergetreten, und dann mußten sie feststellen, daß zumindest die christliche Propaganda unehrlich war. Daraufhin hätten viele von ihnen ihrer neuen Religion den Rücken gekehrt und etwas entwickelt, was der Verfasser den "Aussatz der Ketzerei" nennt, 42 wohl eine Art christlich-jüdischen Synkretismus. Nathan beschuldigte Vicente Ferrer, er habe diese Ketzerei ausgelöst: "statt ihnen die neue Religion, der sie sich zugewandt hatten, ans Herz zu legen, brachte er sie dazu, auch noch das Wahre und Richtige darin zu leugnen oder zu bezweifeln". Diese Äußerung ist erstaunlich, denn hier scheint ein Jude bereit, der christlichen Lehre "Wahres und Richtiges" zuzugestehen, gepaart mit dem Vorwurf, die Anhänger jener Sekte glaubten selbst daran nicht. Somit waren Christen und Juden sich einig in der Verdammung jenes "Aussatzes der Ketzerei" - ein in der christlichen Literatur geläufiger Ausdruck, den der Jude hier übernommen hat. Seine kritische Einstellung zur Ketzerei wird verständlich auf dem Hintergrund der Befürchtung, das Judentum als ganzes könnte von der Kirche als "Ketzerei" gebrandmarkt werden. Daraufhin hätten Juden, die des Unglaubens bezichtigt wurden, vor das Inquisitionsgericht gestellt werden können. Schon Innocenz IV. schrieb in seinem Kommentar zu den Decretales, der Papst dürfe auch Juden richten,

Ettinger, The Muscovite State and Its Attitude towards the Jews, in: Zion 18, 1953, S. 159-168; [Hebr.]; Idem, Jewish Influence OD the Religious Foment in Eastern Europe at the End of the Fifteenth Century, in: Yitzhak F. Baer Jubilee Volume, h g von Salo W. Baron e.a., Jerusalem 1960, S. 228-247; [Hebr ] 41

Den Bsicht hat Ram Ben-Shalom, The Disputation of Tortosa. Vicente Ferrer and the Problem of

the Conversos According to the Testimony of Isaac Nathan, in: Zion 56, 1991, S. 20-45 veröffentlicht; [Hebr.]. Meine Interpretation dieses Textes geht allerdings in andere Richtungen. 42

Über diese Bezeichnung: R.I. Moore, Heresy as Disease, in: The Concept of the Heresy in the

Middle Ages (11th-!3th C.J, h g von W. Lourdaux und D. Verfielst, Leuven-The Hague 1976, S. 111.

Kabbalisten, Ketzer und Polemiker

169

sofern sie Häresien verbreiteten, die gegen ihre eigenen Gesetze verstießen.43 Die Bezeichnung der Juden als Ketzer drohte ihren Status als "Glaubenszeugen" zu untergraben, dem sie seit Augustinus ihr Existenzrecht in den Augen der katholischen Kirche zu verdanken hatten. Mit diesem Problem sahen sich Juden in Spanien und in der Provence im 13. und 14. Jahrhundert konfrontiert. Joseph Shatzmiller sieht darin den Grund dafür, daß Juden der Sekte der Katharer keine Sympathie bezeugt hätten.44 Er meint, dieselbe Sorge stehe hinter der scharfen Kritik, die Meir ben Simon aus Narbonne an der Kabbala übte und die er ausgerechnet in seinem anti-christlichen Werk Milhemet Mizwa zum Ausdruck brachte. Er habe befürchtet, der Dualismus der Kabbala könne den Christen als Vorwand dienen, das Judentum als Ketzerei zu verdammen. Im Jahre 1354 beschlossen Vertreter der Gemeinden von Aragon, sich an den Papst zu wenden mit der Bitte, die Inquisition möge Juden nur dann vorladen, wenn sich ihr Unglaube gegen die von allen Religionen anerkannten Wahrheiten richte, nicht aber im Falle von Glaubenssätzen, über die unter den Religionen Uneinigkeit herrsche. Sie forderten, "wenn ein Jude mit einem Christen gemeinsame Sache mache, der nach den Regeln seiner Religion ein Ketzer sei, so dürfe doch der Jude nicht als vom Aussatz der Ketzerei befallen gelten, denn einem Juden dürfe nicht als Ketzerei angerechnet werden, was nach den Regeln seiner Religion rechtens sei".45 Ich möchte annehmen, daß Lipman von ganz ähnlichen Befürchtungen geleitet war. Er verstand die Zeichen der Zeit zu lesen und erkannte, was für entsetzliche Folgen die Deklarierung der Juden als Ketzer in der christlichen öffentlichen Meinung nach sich ziehen mußte. Daß er Bescheid wußte, was die christliche Intelligenz seiner Zeit bewegte, ist aufgrund der Gespräche zu vermuten, die er mit dem "Oberhaupt der Priester in Lindau" führte. 46 Er nennt seinen Partner nicht mit Namen, aber es ist recht wahrscheinlich, daß es sich um Marquard von Lindau handelt, der im Jahre 1389 zum Provinzial der oberdeutschen Provinz avanciert war.47 Dieses Amt bekleidete er bis zum 43

Jeremy Cohen, The Friars and the Jews, Ithaca-London 1980, S. 97-98.

44

Joseph Shatzmiller, The Albigeosian Heresy as Reflected in the Eyes of Cantonporary Jewry, in:

Culture and Society in Medieval Jewry - Studies Dedicated to the Memory of Haim Hillel BenSasson, hg. von Menahem Ben-Sasson e.a., Jerusalem 1989, S. 333-352; [Hebr.]. Weiter zu dea Verhältnissen zwischen Juden und Ketzern im Hochmitlelalter siehe: David Berger, Christian Heresy and Jewish Polemic in the Twelfth and Thirteenth Centuries, in: Harvard Theological Review 68, 1975, S. 287-303. 45

Fritz Baer, Die Juden im christlichen Spanien, Bd I, Berlin 1929, S. 352-353.

46

Sefer ha-Nizzahon (Anm. 10), S. 107 Nr. 179; S. 123 Nr. 225; S. 159 Nr. 290.

47

Nigel F. Palmer, Marquard von Lindau, in: Verfasserlexikon, Bd. 6, Berlin-New York 1987, S.

81-125; ders., in: Neue Deutsche Biographie, Bd 16. Berlin 1990, S. 244. Diese Identifizierung hat mir Yacov Guggenheim vorgeschlagen.

170

J. Yuval

seinem Tode 1392, und in dieser seiner Eigenschaft dürfte auch Lipman ihm begegnet sein. Er war ein Geistlicher ersten Ranges und ein überaus fruchtbarer Schriftsteller: er hinterließ 11 deutsche und 17 lateinische Abhandlungen und noch etliche Fragmente, deren Zuschreibung nicht sicher ist. Sein Schaffen umfaßt sowohl scholastische Schriften in lateinischer als auch mystisch-allegorische Schriften in deutscher Sprache. Er hatte einen ausgeprägten Hang zur Bibelexegese. Außerdem schrieb er ein Werk mit dem Titel de fide, in dem er unter anderem an ketzerischen Strömungen aus der Frühzeit des Christentums Kritik übt - eine gewisse Analogie zu Lipmans Kritik an den Sadduzäern. Marquards Wirkungskreis war Süddeutschland, aber auch Aufenthalte in Würzburg und Nürnberg sind belegt. Im Kolophon in einer Handschrift mit einer seiner Schriften wird er als "meyster marquardus funke, ein parfixß bruder aus saxen" bezeichnet; demnach stammte er aus Sachsen, das wiederum Lipmans Herkunftsland Thüringen benachbart ist. Zusammenfassend bleibt festzuhalten, daß das Sefer ha-Nizzahon unter räumlich und zeitlich fest umrissenen politischen und kulturellen Bedingungen entstanden ist. Die Wende zum 15. Jahrhundert war ein Zeitalter starker religiöser Spannungen, mit dem Anwachsen der Verfolgung der Waldenser durch die Inquisition in Deutschland. Die heftige Bekämpfung der Ketzer innerhalb der christlichen Kirche erweckte in gewissen Kreisen den Wunsch, auch das Judentum als eine Art Ketzerei zu betrachten. Die Disputation des Jubeljahres 1399/1400 und ihre tragischen Folgen führten Lipman schmerzlich vor Augen, was für verderbliche Auswirkungen eine solche Einstellung auf christlicher Seite für die Juden haben mußte. Daher machte er sich an die Niederschrift eines theologischen Systems und bemühte sich, solche Unterstellungen als gegenstandslos zu erweisen. Sefer haNizzahon bringt die drei theologischen Systeme - Kabbala, Philosophie und aschkenasische Mystik - unter ein Dach und grenzt sie gegen häretische Anschauungen ab, welche die Prinzipien der jüdischen "Orthodoxie" zu erschüttern drohten. Auf diese Weise hoffte Lipman, den theologischen Consensus zu verbreitern und das, was außerhalb dieses Consensus stand, in die Schranken zu weisen. Seine Abgrenzung gegenüber ketzerischem Gedankengut im Judentum führte ihn zur Ablehnung der ketzerischen Bewegungen im christlichen Bereich, im Gegensatz zur Sympathie, welche die Juden kaum zwanzig Jahre später der hussitischen Bewegung entgegenbrachten. Der authentischere Ausdruck der jüdischen Gefühle jener Zeit war wohl die Sympathie für die Ketzer, nicht ihre Verurteilung. Von daher ist Sefer ha-Nizzahon wenigstens ein ebenso apologetisches wie ein polemisches Buch. Die Entfernung der Juden aus der europäischen Gesellschaft nahm vielfaltige Formen an. Der Versuch sie als Ketzer hinzustellen, war nur eine von vielen Möglichkeiten. Eine andere, die im Spätmittelalter populär wurde,

Kabbalisten, Ketzer und Polemiker

171

identifizierte den Juden als Verräter, der mit den Feinden der Christenheit gemeinsame Sache machte. Ein Beispiel dafür ist das imaginäre Bündnis zwischen Arabern und Juden, das erstmals zur Zeit des Vorwurfes der Brunnenvergiftung in Frankreich 1320 und erneut zur Zeit des Schwarzen Todes verbreitet wurde, ein weiteres die Anklage, daß die Juden mit den Hussiten oder mit den Türken unter einer Decke stecken.48 Die Vertreibung der Juden aus den Städten und den Territorien Deutschlands findet ihre Parallele in der Kulturgeschichte. Im Spätmittelalter entledigte sich die christliche Kultur West- und Mitteleuropas nicht nur der Juden sondern auch der Synagoga. Wolfgang Seiferth hat gezeigt, daß die Vorstellung von der Synagoga und der Ecclesia als Symbol der Koncordanz der beiden Religionen im Laufe des 15. Jahrhunderts verschwindet. Die großen Religionsdisputationen des 13. Jahrhunderts, die aus der Hoffnung auf Konversion der Juden erwuchsen, wurden im Spätmittelalter zu Generalangriffen gegen das Judentum; es ging nicht mehr darum, die Juden von der Richtigkeit der christlichen Religion zu überzeugen, sondern sie loszuwerden. An die Stelle der Juden trat in der bildenden Kunst und in der Literatur der Renaissance das römische und das griechische Vorbild, die heidnische Alternative, die die westliche Kultur der jüdisch- biblischen Allegorie entfremdete und an ihre Stelle die Natur und die Wissenschaft setzte.

48

Ein Titelholzschnitt einer lateinischer Disputation vom Jahr 1508 zeigt die Ecclesia auf ihrem

Thron. Vier Frauen mit gebrochenen Fahnenschäften sitzm demütig um dea Thron: Saracena, Sinagoga, Gentilitas, Tartarica. Auf dem Banner der Saracena findet ach der jüdische SpitAut, auf dem der Sinagoga der Name Machometus (Wolfgang S. Seifeith, Synagoge und Kirche im Mittelalter, München 1964, S. 203-204 und Abb. 60). Dazu: Heiko A Oberman. The Stubborn Jews. Timing the Escalation of Antisemitism in Late Medieval Europe, in: Leo Back Institute Year Book 34, 1989, S. XI-XXV.

Roland Goetschel The Maharal of Prague and the Kabbalah

In the minds of many people it is beyond doubt that the Maharal of Prague was a great Kabbalist. This opinion is of course supported by the bond established between R. Yehudah ben Bezalel Loew (1512-1609 ) and the creation of the Golem after the publication, in 1909, of a book by the polish Rabbi Judel Rosenberg which was summarized and translated into German by Hayyim Bloch under the title of Der Prager Golem, edited in Berlin in 19201. But, if we are to suppose that this link is no more than a recent legend, itself borrowed from a tradition connected with R. Eliyahu, the Ba al Shem of Helm, we must examine the original writings of the Maharal in order to elucidate what exactly his genuine connexion to Kabbalah was2. In regard to this connexion, we must consider G. Sholem's view in his Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism : "Too little attention is given to the fact that popularization of certain mystical ideas had begun long before the rise of Hasidism and that, at about the time of his first appearance, it had already found its most magnficent litterary incarnation, I am thinking here of the now almost forgotten writings of Jehudah Loewe Bezalel of Prague... Some of his more violuminous tracts, such as the the great book Gevuroth Adonai, "the Mighty Deeds of God", seem to have no other purpose than to express Kabbalistic ideas without making too much use of kabbalistic terminology. In this he succeeded so well that not a few modern students have failed to perceive the kabbalistic character of his writings. Some have gone so far as to deny that he occupied himself with kabbalistic thought at all"3. Scholem's opinion in regard to the Maharal was acknowledged by many, for example André Neher in his two books on the Maharal4. This notwithstanding, it seems that some still meet reserve judgement in seeing the Maharal as a Kabbalist. For example in the following statement by my friend Binyamin Gross. He writes: 1 On the global issue of the Golem, the most recent and complete work is that of Moshe Idei, Golem, Jewish Magical and Mystical Traditions on the Artificial Anthropoid, New-York 1990; on the Maharal, see in the subject index under Loew, Yehudah Bezalel p. 321. 2

See M. Idei, above pp. 207-212.

4

See André Neher, Le puit de l 'Exil, Paris 1991 2 ) and Faust et le Maharal de Prague, Paris 1987.

G. Scholem, Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism, New-York 1941 pp. 339.

The Maharal of Prague

173

"In spite of the names of his books borrowed from the names of the six first sefirot, it is advisable to notice that they do not relate to Kabbalah but to talmudic and midrashic sources. On the contrary, in all his work outside of our quotation, there is not in that an echo of the doctrin of the sefirot or of the theory of the emanation, not of the sitra ahara or of the four worlds of the Kabbalah. The lexicon is not borrowed from the kabbalistic lexicon but is received from the aristotelian classical lexicon. It seems that the field of his interest was concentred on the problems of ethics and of the history."5 It would appear that this remark does not do justice to the place of the Kabbalah in the writings of the Maharal. If we examine all of his writings, we can not fail to observe that there are two aspects to his thinking, often intermingled, which relate to the mystics: the first is his arithmology, partially inspired by Abraham ibn Ezra, which required a special examination; the second aspect is the kabbalist aspect "stricto sensu". We do not hesitate to say that there are indeed many places in most of his books where the Maharal deals with kabbalistic teachings. I have already demonstrated elswhere, how the Maharal made use of the Kabbalah in his supercommentary GurAryeh, on the commentary of Rashi on the Pentateuch6. The first example I shall bring, which demonstrates with evidence that the Maharal does not conceal to be a Mequbbal and propagates kabbalistic teachings, is extracted from the Derekh Hayyim, his commentary on the Mishnah Pirqey Avot, 5,5. It begins: "Ten miracles were wrought for our forefathers in the Temple. " The Maharal begins his commentary with the affirmation that it was not possible that the ten miracles could not be present in the Temple. Indeed, the Temple is holy and set apart from nature, qadosh we-nivdal min ha-teva » and the holy name of God is present in the Temple. It is that which differentiates between the Temple and all the other places in the world. There are ten miracles because this number especially teaches us on the degree of distance from the world of nature7. This world is the world of generation and corruption, but the Temple is above all generation and corruption. Intelligible realities, such as miracles, are not subject to matter. Therefore, the common element in all of the miracles that were wrought in that place, was the absence of all corruption. After this introduction, formulated in the language Gross, ' Kabbalah and Philosophy in the Doctrine of Maharal of Prague, in: Revelation Faith Reason (ed. M Hallamish/M. Schwarcz) Ramat-Gan,1976, p. 88. (in Hebrew). exégèse de Rashi à la lumière du Maharal de Prague, in: Rashi ¡040-1990, Paris 1993, pp. 46573. 7

See in Maharal, Derekh Hayyim, (ed. Hornig) London, 1961, m , 6 pp.124-125 and V,1 pp. 215-

216, all the cansí derations on the number ten and his relation to God or to the holiness. The referai ce to Scripture is Lv. 27,32; "Every tenth creature... is holy to the Lord"

174

R. Goetschel

of the thought of his time, R. Yehudah firstly explains each miracle literally. He concludes by emphasizing that the given order of these miracles is intentional as the first miracle, "no woman miscarried from the odour of the holy flesh", is the most extreme way of corruption whereas the last miracle, i.e. "the place is too narrow for me", is merely a lack of space. However, after these preliminaries, the Maharal passes comment on the ten miracles, as he says: al pi ha-hokhmah, according to the way of wisdom, that is to say according to esoteric wisdom. He adds that these miracles begin with the lowest degree and conclude with the highest, in that place, as he says, which is global, which includes all, be-maqom sheHu kollel maqifhakol. Then the Maharal declares: "These ten miracles correspond to the ten sefirot belimah"s. It is from this point of view that he comments on each miracle. "No woman miscarried from the odor of the holy flesh," he explains as follows: The woman is the lowest because she receives from another one. In spite of this, she had strength and did not miscarry. You do not have to be an expert in Kabbalah to understand that he speaks of the sefira Malkhut, the last of the ten sefirot which is the only one among the system of the ten entities of the emanation to be entirely receptive, whilst the other sefirot are both givers and receivers. Neverthless, it has strenghtened her, for she gives life to the worlds that come below her 9 . The second miracle: "The holy flesh never turn putrid." This means that the flesh did not decompose, it had been preserved in the Temple. And he adds : "The things that were in the Temple are not subject to corruption but are receptive to preservation and foundation; raq hayu meqablim ha-qiyyum we ha-yesod. And understand this: "It is evident that the kabbalist, by using the term Yesod, wanted to draw our attention to the function of the sefirah Yesod in the economy of the theosophic kabbalah. The third: "No fly was seen in the slaughterhouse. " Our author is very concise on this point but remains perfectly clear and coherent. He declares that the fly is nauseating and disgracefiil, the very antithesis the radiance and beauty, hod we-yofl, of the Temple. We are at the same level as the eighth sefirah, named Hod. The fourth: "No pollution ever befell the Hight Priest on the Day of Atonement." Pollution is uncleanness. That no pollution befell the High Priest on the day of Atonement means that he always remained pure, lanezah. We have now reached the seventh sefirah denominated Hod. But here the Maharal is even more explicit. He says that there is nothing more nauseating " Maharal, Derekh Hayyîm, V, 5 p. 230: fe' elu 'asara nisim neged eser sefirot beli mah. 9

See in the Ma'arekhet

ha-'Elohut (eA of Mantua) p. 76 ; we-'Atarah hi reshit la-mah she-

nimshakh mimenah ule-mattah meqabbelet mil-ma'alah u-mashpi'ah le-mattah

le- ha'amid ha-

tahtonim. The book is explicitely quoted by the Maharal in Derekh Hayyîm, V, 6 p. 235.

The Maharal of Prague

175

than the fly and nothing more impure than pollution. The mishnah teaches, therefore, that the dignity of the Temple does not turn aside, neither to the right, nor to the left, out of a degree of holiness. And he writes more precisely: "For in reality, the nauseating and the uncleanliness is the removal of the holiness towards the right and the left, as it is known by him who has deepened the wisdom." The insistance on the right and the left refers of course to the respective places that Nezah and Hod occupy in the sefirotic tree. And that is why he puts forward: "Because in this place is the beginning of the inclination to the left and to the right."10 As we were situated on the level of Malkhut and Yesod, we were situated along the median line. With Nezah and Hod, we are at the ends of the pillars of right and left. No. five: "Neither did the wind prevail over the column of smoke." The column of smoke stretches equally, rises up and stands as a staff along a line which extends itself straightly and in the middle, ke-maqel be-qaw ha-holekh be-yosher u-ve-'emza'i, as shown in the Hebrew terms, is an allusion to Tiferei, and the wind, which can not prevail over the column, is the symbol of the forces of evil, the sitra ahara of the Zohar which can not prevail against the middle column11. No. six: "And rains never quenched the fire of the wood -pile. " Here, the Maharal limits himself to showing that the strength of the fire is a large and great strength which proceeds from the highest fire and that is why rains never quenched the fire. The highest fire is, of course, an allusion to the entity Gevurah as can be deduced from all kabbalistic commentaries of the Sefer Yezirah12. No. seven: "And never was there found a disqualifying defect in the omer, or in the two loaves or in the shew-bread." The omer is the beginning, reshit, of the harvesting of barley as the two loaves are the beginning, reshit, of the harvest of wheat. That is why, after that the mishnah has mentioned the fire of the wood-pile which corresponds to the upper fire, it speaks of the omer and the two loaves which correspond to the beginning and the start of the world, in Hebrew, neged reshit we-hathalat ha- 'olam. The Maharal himself refers to his commentary on b. Berakhot 1 Ob with regard to Elidía (2 Κ. 4, 9 where Rab speaks of fly and Shemuel of pollution. 11

See on this theme: J. Giqatilia, Sha'arey

Orah, Sha'ar hamishi (ed. Ben Shlomo ) vol. 1,

Jerusalem,1961,pp.253-258. See also Zohar 1,21 a .

11 Seethe Commentary of the Sefer Yesirah of R. Isaac the Blind on I, 13: "esh mi-mayim, Pahad mi-Hesed". See also Ma arekhet ha-Elohut 61 a and 164b- 165a.

176

R. Goetschel

beginning of the world, for the Maharal alludes to the sefirah Hesed, the first of the seven sefirot which make up what the kabbalists usually denominate as the upper world 13 . No. eight: "Though the people stood pressed closely together, they yet found ample space to prostrate." The commentary furthers that which is understoood from the verse (Ps 118, 5): "When in distress I called Yah, he answered me in the ample space of Yah." The Maharal says that it is from this verse that we learn that God is open to the distress and that the prostration appeals to the name Yah, as we find in the Talmud: "we prostrate to Yah, we show gratitude to Yah."u" He concludes here that it is from the place denominated Rehovot that those who prostrate found an ample space. Here again, the Maharal uses the classical vocabulary of the kabbalah to point to the sefirah Binah15. No. nine: "Never did serpent or scorpion cause injury in Jerusalem. " God again provides a space in order that the harmful beasts may not penetrate the human space and cause injury; we have arrived to the level of Hokhmah. No. ten: "And no man ever said to his fellow, (Is. 49,20) the place is too narrow for me that I should lodge over night in Jerusalem. " The explication is that nobody who lodged in Jerusalem was cramped for space. For the place, according to its degree, was enough to encompass him, le-haqif as necessary. And this reality is the highest degree which includes all others. The sefira Keter can be easily recognized from this description 16 . The Maharal rightly concludes: " He begins with the minor and ends with the major which includes the whole. All is mentioned according to the order, if you understand." 17 We will produce other examples of the interest of the Maharal in Kabbalah and of his concern in spreading its ideas with his book Gevurot 'Adonay. In connection with the verse (Ex. 13,16): "You must have a record of it as a sign on your hand, and as a phylactery on your forehead." Maharal dwells on the precept of the phylacteries. Those of the head refer to the 13

SeeMa'arekhet ha-Elohut, 86 a: "uba'abur hiyot ki ha-tehilat ha-'olam ha'elyon ba-Hesed."

The Maharal gives another esoteric explanation with regard to a variant of the same mishnah which is in b. Yoma 21b. 14 15 1

b. Sukkah, 53b. See Sha'arey Orah, vol. 2 p. 81.

^ The Maharal adds that the three last miracles all consisted in the removal of a pain that originated

in a contact between two beings potentially or actually opposed such as two men or man and beast. For the two last miracles, they were not actually only in the Temple, but also in all of Jerusalem, because they depmd on the two highest sefirot. 17

Maharal, Derekh Hayyim, V, 5 ρ. 231.

177

The Maharal of Prague

particular name of God, ha-shem ha-meyuhad, which instigated the miracles of the exodus of Egypt. Those of the hand refer to the adhesion, devequt, between the Holy One, blessed be He and Israel18. Then he explains the contents of the four sections which are in the phylacteries worn on the forehead. In the first, we find a passage from Ex. 13,1-10, which teaches how God removed the Israelites from Egypt with grace and kindness, mi-zad ha-hesed

we-hatov

she-hetiv

hu Yitborakh

le-

Yisrael. The second section taken from Ex 13,11-16 speaks of the death of the Egyptian first-borns and is intended to show that the choice and the liberation of Israel originated not only in the God's grace, but also in the necessity of the harsh trial, harey she-gam

hakarat

ha-din

we-ha-hiyyuv

mi-zad

ha-shem

Yitborakh noten ze. In the third section, which contains Dt 6,4-9, the main theme is that the Lord is denominated as Israel's God and that he unificated his name on them, Hu Yitborakh niqra' 'Elohey Yisrael u-meyyahed

shemo

aleyhem. The fourth and last section, Dt 11,13- 14, teaches us that the Shekhinah, the divine presence, is always present in Israel, that it governs them for the best if they are obedient, for the worse if they disobey. There is no doubt that the Maharal ascribes the four sections contained in the phylacteries of the forehead respectively to the sefirot Hesed, Gevurah, Tiferei Yisrael a n d M a l k h u t respectively 19 .

We see again the same exegesis in another chapter of the same book where he gives us his interpretation of the sacrifices20. He had previously demonstrated that the result of the exodus from Egypt was that the Lord became their God and that the Shekhinah resided amongst them. And so, to use the terms of the Maharal, the first cause of all (God) has specificai bond and adhesion, devequt, to his effects, that is, Israel21. And so sacrifice is the response of his creatures which leads to the adhesion between the cause and his effects. It suited that the effect to turn towards its cause. And so, after God had commanded the edification of the tabernacle in order that the Shekhinah ι ft Maharal, Gevurot Adonay, dl. XXXIX, Jerusalem 1961, p. 144. For the relation between the phylacteries of the forehead and the name of God, the Maharal refere to the interpretation of Dt. 28, 10: "All people en earth seeing that the name of the Lord has ben proclaimed on you will go in fear of you." Given by R. Eliezer who says in b. Berakhot 6a; elu tefilin she be-rosh. 19

On this point, the Maharal differs from the usual interpretation of other kabbalists who identified

the four sections with Hokhmah, Binah, Hesed, Gevurah. See Perush Aggadot le Κ Azriel, (ed. Y. Tisälby), Jerusalem 1982, 2a-2bp. 4,Ma arekhet ha- Elohut ,p. 154a-155 a and Zohar ΙΠ, 262 a-b. 20

Maharal, Gevurot Adônay, ch. LXIX, p. 316-319.

21

Idem, cf. ch. LXVI-LXVUL In A. LXVm, p. 315, he cites the book 'Abodat ha-Qodesh from

Meir ibn Gabbay under the name Marot Elohim concerning the differmce between Israel and the anges in their proximity to God. And before ch. ΧΧΙΠ where he cites as an argument to the specificic bond between Israel and God, the commentary of Nahmanides on Gn.24,1 a place where Nahmanides refers himself to Sefer ha-Bahir § LXHI.

178

R. Goetschel

could reside between them, God commanded the offering of sacrifices and with this, the effect turned towards its cause. By means of sacrifice the effect returns to its cause, shav 'el 'illato. The effects cannot survive without the cause and so they must link themselves to the cause. This is the meaning of the sacrifice offered to God because, as said with a Neo-Platonic accent, God is the cause of all and all returns to him, she-hu Yitborakh illat ha-kol we'elaw yashuv ha-kol. Although it is written (Nb. 28,2) "the food for the foodoffering" it is evident that God does not need food like man. But the fact that the creations turn toward their cause, means that there is none beside him 22 . Because in his degree of splendor God is all and nothing lacks for him, Hu Yitborakh ha-kol we-eyno haser davar. This statement and others in the same chapter are similar to that by Abraham ibn Ezra on Gn.1,26: "God is the One and he is the creator of All and He is all, a thought I cannot explain23". On several occasions the Maharal repeats the expression: "All beings are nothing outside of him, we-kol ha-nimza im efes zulato, which is reminiscent of similar expressions which we later find among hassidic authors in Eastern Europe24. God no more needs sacrifice than the sea water. As the sea is the element of all waters, God is the whole of all that exists. The sacrifice must be conceived in view of the value of man by his actions, because it is God's will that all beings return to God. And he concludes: "The meaning of the sacrifices is to teach that God is the only being in his world and that there is none beside him.25" The Maharal then adds that it is for this reason that we find neither the name 'El, nor the name 'Eloheykha relating to sacrifices but only the Shem ha-meyuhad, the specific name, because the sacrifices teach of his unity and that all beings, in respect to his eminence, must be deemed as nothing. All must return to him, for nothing exists outside of God's grace. An analysis of the discourse of the Maharal reveals three elements: firstly, an assertion which is at the same time both, ethical and ontological. Emphasis is put on man's finitude on the one hand, and on the other, on the affirmation that the unique reality is the one and only God. Secondly the definition of sacrifice as an act by which man returns all beings to the unique God. We could say that sacrifice is a small apocastasis, a mini-return of all 22 23

Reminiscence of Is. 45,6 : ki efes bil 'adi ani YHWH we-eyn 'od. Cf. also Is. 44,6.

In Hebrew: "Weha-Shem hu ha-Ehadyozer ha-kol we-hu ha-kol welo ukhal le-faresh. See Elliot

R. Wolfscn, God, The Demiurge and the Intellect: On the Usage of the Word Kol in Abraham ibn Ezra, REJ, t. CXLIX, JANVIER-JUIN 1990, pp. 77-111. 24

See R. Dov Baa·, Zawa'at ha-Rybash, New-York 1975 § 137. Maggid Devaraw le-Ya'aqov (ed

R. Shatz-Uffenheimer) Jerusalem 1961, § 25 et § 191. 25

Maharal, Gevurot Adonay, p.317: "ko 'inyan ha-qorbanot le-horot ki ha-Shem yitborakh yahid

ba- olam we-efes zulato. "

The Maharal of Prague

179

things to their origin, hie and nunc. On this point, the rabbi of Prague has here transcribed, in philosophical language the classical definition of the sacrifice in Kabbalah since the Sefer ha-Bahir, in expressions which most probably date back to Isaac of Acre and to Gerona. 26 Thirdly, we have an assertion that no other name of God outside the Tetragrammaton is used in connection with the sacrifice which is borrowed from Nahmanides' commentary on Lv. 1,9. In this passage, Nahmanides explains the esoterical sense of the sacrifices. He underlines that the intention, kawwanah, must be directed towards the name YHWH and not to the other names, in order to unificate in him all the divine forces 27 . The Maharal then explains the reason why the Torah deals with the matter of sacrifices in its third book. He affirms that the first four books of correspond with the four things of which the Torah is always reminiscent and which are identical with the four sections of the phylacteries.The first book corresponds to the great God, keneged ha-El ha-gadol, who is the God that created the whole28. Genesis describes all the great actions of God from the creation of the world to the patriarchs who stabilize the world and to Israel in Egypt who is the completion of the world. We understand that the book Bereshit is attributed to the sefirah Gedullah. Exodus corresponds to haGibbor God as the Almighty. In the same way that God created the world, He can, according to his will, affect his creatures, using his might as He did in Egypt for the liberation of Israel in order to reside amongst them. Clearly, we are at the level of the sefirah Gevurah. Leviticus corresponds to we-ha-Norah , and terrible. Because God is the one and only being in his world, this results in the feeling of fear. For, He is one, none can oppose him and all is nothing beside him. And that is why we offer sacrifices, in order to teach the unity of God. This corresponds to the sefirah Tiferet. The book of Numbers affects the form of goveraement of Israel at the time of their being in the wilderness. 26

Sefer ha-Bahir, § CDC; " We-amay iqrey qorban? Eia mipney she meqarev ha-zurot ha-

qedushot. " See also § CXXHL In the Me'irat 'Enayim by Isaac of Acre (ed. A. Goldreidi) Jerusalem 1981, p. 141, we find in connection with the offering of Adam a formulation very near erf'that of the Maharal ; "lefikhakh huzrakh lehaqriv mehen qorban la-Shem yitborakh le-hodii am she-Hu Adon yahid we-eyn lo sheni u-mimenu ha-kol... ha-kol kawwanato le-hakir li-beru'im yihudo shel ha-Shem yitborakh.she-eyn 11

la-El zorekh la-qorbanot eia kedey le-hodot lo yihudo she ha-kol mimeno. "

See also the supercommantanes on the Nahmanides in loci. R.Shem Tob ibn Gaon, Keter Shem Τον iaMa'or

wa-Shemesh, Leghor, 1839, 41a- 41b. Be'ur le-Perush ha-Ramban meyuhas le-R.

Meir bar Shelomoh Abusahala, Varsaw 1875, 14a-14b. See also Me irai 'Enayim p. 149: "shelo yomru

'aleynu 'obdey 'avodah zarah gam hem 'ovedim be-qorbanot

lezulate ha-Shem

ha-

meyuhad... kol kawwanat ha-Rab le-qareb ha- Atarah el ha-Tiferet." expression ha-El ha gadol, ha-gibbor we-ha-norah appears in Dt 10,17. It is taken up again in the first of the eighteen benedictions of the daily liturgy. See also b. Yomah 69 b.

180

R. Goetschel

This corresponds to (2 S. 8, 15) 'oseh zedeq u-mishpat, maintaining law and justice and alluding to the government of all beings by his wisdom. The divine regime of the government of the sefirah Malkhut. The Maharal leads us to understand that the four first books correspond to the four letters of the tetragrammic name. Therefore, it is not surprising when he says that Deuteronomy, the Mishneh Torah, is something which is separate. It means that God completes all things until the whole is perfect as he led Israel to the perfection at the end of the forty years of wilderness. In other words, the Maharal sees in the fifth book of the Thorah the expression of the name 'Adonay, which is a reduplication of the proper name of God. But hereveals this only in the enigmatic expression: "It is known that there is a reduplication for each end."29 We find the same parallelism between the five books of the Pentateuch and the names of God in the commentary by R. Bahya ben Asher, who was probably the Maharal's source in this case30. We can now draw conclusions from our examination of these three texts by the Maharal. Beyond all doubt, the Maharal cares about ethics and history. Beyond all doubt, he relates to midrashic and talmudic sources. But he interprets and reinterprets these sources in the light of Kabbalah. Our analysis confirms the place that the kabbalah takes in the Maharal's thoughts. Systematic research must be undertaken in the whole corpus of his writings in order to establish their extent and also their sources. Another point which seems to me to be indispensable, is the establishment of the role played by the Neo-Platonic thinking, much more than that of Aristotle, in the formulation of his ideas. The final point would be to disclose why and for which audience the Maharal was induced to formulate kabbalistic thinking in such a form. These are points which seem to me, requisite further examination in the field of the maharalian studies. This paper was no more than a preliminary exploration in that direction.

^Maharal, Gevurot Adonay, p.317: "We-davar zehyadu 'a fa kol sofyesh lo kefilut." 30

S e e the commentary of R. Bahya ben Asher on Dt 1,1.

Barbara Könneker Zauberei und Zauberer in der deutschen Literatur des 16. Jahrhunderts

Daß ich aufgefordert wurde, mich als Germanistin hier über ein Thema zu äußern, das sich mit der Kabbala nur am Rande berührt, verdanke ich einem Umstand, den ich auch zum Anknüpfungspunkt meiner Ausführungen machen möchte. Vor einer Reihe von Jahren lernte ich in einem Seminar über die Shivhe-ha-Besht die Geschichten von Rabbi Adam kennen, die in jiddischer Sprache im 17. Jh.. gedruckt worden sind. In den Shivhe-ha-Besht verdankt der Besht diesem Rabbi, der angeblich aus Bingen stammte und in der 2. Hälfte des 16. Jh.s in Prag gelebt haben soll, seine Kenntnisse von den verborgenen Geheimnissen der Tora, die ihn befähigen, im Namen Gottes Wundertaten zu wirken.1 In dem Büchlein des 17. Jh.s.2 wird Rabbi Adam seinerseits als mächtiger Baal-Shem gefeiert, dessen Ruhm so groß ist, daß sogar der Kaiser, Maximilian II., auf ihn aufmerksam wird. An dessen Hof fuhrt der Rabbi mehrfach Proben seines wunderbaren Könnens vor, wobei er sich, wie es ausdrücklich heißt, der Hilfe der Gottesnamen bedient. Und zwar sind es - und das ist der in diesem Zusammenhang entscheidende Punkt Zauberkunststücke, wie sie in ähnlicher Form im 16. Jh. auch von dem Schwarzkünstler und Teufelsbündler Faust erzählt worden sind. Zu ihnen gehört, um nur die beiden wichtigsten zu nennen, die Beschwörung berühmter Toter vor der kaiserlichen Hofgesellschaft - bei Rabbi Adam ist es Joab, bei Faust Alexander der Große -, sowie die Bereitung einer üppigen Mahlzeit anscheinend aus dem Nichts, mit der Rabbi Adam bzw. Faust illustre Gäste bewirten. Die Geschichten sind ihrerseits schon älter als die Fausttradition; d.h. sie wurden ebenso wie auf Rabbi Adam auch auf Faust erst nachträglich übertragen und haben z.T. in die erste deutsche Faustdichtung, die "Historia" von 1587, Eingang gefunden.3 Was mich seinerzeit daran frappierte, war, daß Faust nur mit Hilfe des Teufels gelingt 1

Vgl. dazu Karl-Erich Grözinger:

Baal-Shem oder

Ba'al-Hazon. Wunderdoktor oder

Charismatiker. Zur frühen Legendenbildung um den Stifter des Hassidismus. In:

Frankfurter

Judaistische Beiträge 6 (1978) S.71-90, insbes. S.85 ff. fy Der Text wurde wiederveröffmtlidit von Chone Shmeruk: Ha-sippurim al R. Adam Ba al Shem. 1h: Zion 28 (1963) S.86-105. Vgl. dazu Barbara Könneker: Die Gesdiiditea von Rabbi Adam und der Fauststoff. In: Frankfurter Judaistische Beiträge 6 (1978), S.91-106.

182

Β. Könneker

und die Strafe der ewigen Verdammnis einträgt, was Rabbi Adam kraft besonderer Frömmigkeit und von Gott verliehener Fähigkeiten vollbringt. Die gleichen Geschichten also - einmal als "gröste vnnd schwereste Sünde" der "Zauberey" gebrandmarkt und dem "verfluchten Lügen- vnd Mordtgeist" zugeschrieben,4 und zum anderen im Namen und Auftrag des Höchsten geübte und ausdrücklich bewunderte göttliche Kunst. Weiße Magie hier, im jüdischen, und schwarze Magie dort, im christlichen Umfeld. Über die Parallelen zwischen Faust und Rabbi Adam hatte ich damals in einem kurzen Aufsatz berichtet.5 Auf die Frage nach den Gründen ihrer unterschiedlichen Bewertung aber war ich nicht eingegangen. Wenn ich mich jetzt um eine Antwort darauf zumindest bemühe, geschieht dies in dem Bewußtsein, daß sie, aus meiner Perspektive als Germanistin und in der knappen Form eines Vortrage, nur unvollkommen und unvollständig ausfallen kann, zumal der Versuch, eine solche Antwort zu finden, einige Umwege erforderlich macht. Daß Magie keineswegs eine von Gott verbotene Kunst zu sein braucht, sondern, recht verstanden und praktiziert, zur Erkenntnis Gottes führt und aus ihr ihre Kraft bezieht, war eine Auffassung, die zu Beginn des 16. Jh. s auch in gelehrten christlichen Kreisen des deutschen Kulturraums vertreten wurde. Am entschiedensten von Agrippa von Nettesheim, der 1533 sein Werk "De occulta philosophia" veröffentlichte.6 In ihm wollte Agrippa "die wahre Magie, jene uralte Wissenschaft aller Weisen, nach vorheriger 4 Historia von D. Johann Fausten. Kritische Ausgabe, hg. v. Stephan Füssel u. Hans Joadbim Kreutzer. Stuttgart (Reclam) 1988, S.8. 5 s. Anm.3 6 Agrippa von Nette&eim: De occulta philosophia. Reprograph. Nachdr. d. Ausgabe Köln 1533. Hg. u. erläutert v. Karl Anton Nowotny. GTaz 1967. Vollständige deutsche Obersetzung v. Friedrich Barth ( 1835). Nachdr. Nördlingen 1987. Nach dieso- Übersetzung wird im folgenden mit Angabe der Seitenzahlen, der in Klammem Buch u. Kapitel sowie die Seitenzahl der lat. Ausgabe beigefügt sind, zitiert. Zum Problemkreis von weißer und schwarzer Magie im Zeitalter der Renaissance vgl.: WillErich Peuckert, Pansophie. Ein Versuch zur Geschichte der weißen und schwarzen Magie, 2. überarbeitete u. erweiterte Aufl. Berlin 1956; Wayne Shumaker, The Occult Sciences in the Renaissance. A Study in Intellectual Patterns. Berkeley, Los Angeles, London 1972. Zu Agrippa speziell vgl. Francis R. le P. Wamer, "Das Gedankengebäude des Agrippa van Nettesheim". In: Antaios V, Stuttgart 1964, S.122-142; George H. Daniels: "Knowledge and Faith in the Thougit of Cornelius Agrippa". In: Bibliothèque d'Humanisme et Renaissance. T. XXVI, Genève 1964, S.326340; Charles G. Naucrt, Agrippa and the Crisis of Renaissance Thought,Urbana 1965; Wolf-Dieter Müller-Jahncke: "Von Ficino zu Agrippa. Der Magia-Begriff des Renaissance-Humanismus im Überblick". In: Epochen der Naturmystik. Hg. v. Antoine Faivre u. Rolf Christian Zimmermann, Berlin 1979, S.24-51; ders: Agrippa von Netteáieim: "De Occulta Philosophia". Ein "Magisches System". In: Magia Naturalis und die Entstehung der modernen Naturwissenschaßen. Leibnitiana, Sondedi. 7. Wiesbaden 1978, S.19-29.

Studia

183

Zauberei und Zauberer

Reinigung von gewissenlosen Verfälschungen und unter sorgfältiger Entwicklung ihrer Prinzipien, wiederherstellen und gegen ihre Verleumder in Schutz nehmen."7 So schrieb er schon 1510 an den Abt Johannes Trithemius, der ihn, selbst ein Fachmann auf diesem Gebiet, ausdrücklich in seinem Vorhaben unterstützte.8 Was Agrippa in der "Occulta philosophia" über die Magie, ihre Ursachen, Wirkungsmöglichkeiten, Anwendungsgebiete usw. zu sagen hatte, war im einzelnen keineswegs neu. Weltbild und Kosmologie des Neuplatonismus, wie sie die italienische Renaissancephilosophie und die hermetischen SchriAen tradierten, bilden die theoretische Grundlage, und das Material stammt gleicherweise aus dem Fundus antiker und mittelalterlicher Wissenschaft und Naturspekulation, christlichen und jüdischen Zauberbüchern, Berichten aus Bibel, Sage und Dichtung und nicht zuletzt aus der Kabbala.9 Neu war dagegen sein Versuch, sämtliche Erscheinungsformen der Magie auf eine einheitliche Wirkursache zurückzufuhren; neu auch war die Emphase, mit der er betonte, daß es sich in all ihren Verästelungen um eine zwar geheime, aber dennoch natürliche Wissenschaft handle, weil sie auf Kenntnis der wahren Beschaffenheit der göttlichen Schöpfung beruhe; und bemerkenswert war schließlich, wie selbstverständlich er sich dabei unterschiedslos auf heidnische, christliche und jüdische Autoritäten berief. Bereits die Einleitungssätze enthalten im Grunde schon alles, worum es Agrippa ging. 7 (s.Anm.6) S.9 f. (S.6). 8

Zu Trithemius vgl. Klaus Arnold: Johannes Trithemius (1462-1516), Würzburg 1971. Über seine

Auffassung der "weißen" Magie, die über die Erkenntnis der inn eren Zusammenhänge des Kosmos stufmweise bis zur Erkenntnis Gottes vordringt, hat er sich u.a. aiuföhrlidi geäußert in einen Brief an den späteren Bisdiof von Orléans Gemianus de Ganayvom 24.8. 1505, in dem es heißt: "Studium general cogniti onem, cognitio autem parit amorem, amor similitudman, similitudo commimicnem, communio virtutem, virtus dignitatem, dignitas potentiam, & potentia facit miraculum. Hoc iter vnicum ad finem magicarum perfectionum L'ini diuinarum quam η at uralium, à quibus arcetur & ccnfunditur procul omne superstitiosum, praestigiosum atque diabolicum." (Johannis Trithemii Abbatis Spanheimensis Epistolarum Familiarium Libri Duo. In: Johannes

Trithemius:

Opera

Histórica. Hg. v. Marg. Freherus. 2 Bde (1601), Nachdruck Frankfuit/M 1966, S.472, Z.41 ff. 9 Zu Agrippas Vorläufon vgl. Wolfram Schmitt: "Zur Literatur der Geheimwissenschaften im späten Mittelalter". In: Fachprosaforschung.

Acht Vorträge zur mittelalterlichen Artesliteratur.

Hg. v.

Gundolf Keil u. Peter Assion, Berlin, 1974, S. 167-182. Zu seinen Quellen vgl. Nauert (s. Anm.6), S. 116 ff.; zuseinoi Kenntnissen der Kabbala ebd., S.129 ff. u. Wolf-Dieter Müll er-Jahn cke: "Agrippa von Nettesheim et la Kabbale." In: Kabbalistes chrétiens, Paris 1979, S.195-209 (Cahiers de l'Hermétisme, Ed. Albin Michel). 1509 hatte Agrippa an der Universität von Dôle Vorlesungen über Reuchlins "De verbo mirifico" gehalten; zu seinm engsten Freunden gehörte Agostino Ricci, dessen Bruder Paolo, ein konvertierter Jude und Leibarzt Kaiser Maximilians I., die Sha'are Orah des Joseph Gikatilla ins Lateinische übersetzt hatten.

184

Β. Könneker

"Da die Welt dreifach ist, elementarisch, himmlisch und geistig, und da immer die niedrigere von der höheren regiert wird und den Einfluß ihrer Kräfte aufnimmt, so daß das Vorbild des Weltalls (der Archetypus) selbst und der Schöpfer aller Dinge durch die Engel, die Himmel, die Gestirne, die Elemente, die Tiere, die Pflanzen, die Metalle und die Steine die Kräfte seiner Allmacht auf uns Menschen ausströmt, zu deren Dienst er dies alles erschaffen hat, so halten die Magier es für keine unvernünftige Sache, daß wir auf denselben Stufen, durch die einzelnen Welten, zu der urbildlichen Welt selbst, dem Schöpfer aller Dinge und der ersten Ursache, von welcher alles ist und alles ausgeht, hinaufsteigen, und daß wir nicht nur die in den edleren Naturgegenständen schon vorhandenen Kräfte benützen, sondern noch überdies von oben herab neue an uns ziehen können."10 Der Dreiteilung der Welt entsprechend - elementarisch, himmlisch und geistig - hat auch Agrippa sein Werk in drei Bücher geteilt. Das erste befaßt sich mit der "magia naturalis", den verborgenen Kräften der natürlichen Dinge. Das zweite handelt von der "magia coelestis", dem Einfluß der Gestirne und Zahlen auf die natürliche Welt, und das dritte von der "magia ceremonialis". Das ist die Lehre von den beschwörenden Worten und Zeichen, mit deren Hilfe die Wirkungskraft der geistigen, d.h. göttlichen Welt, in die irdische hineingeholt werden kann. Da Magie als Fähigkeit, die den drei Welten innewohnenden Kräfte in Bewegung setzen zu können, die Kenntnis von der Beschaffenheit dieser Kräfte voraussetzt und diese Kenntnis ihr wiederum durch die den drei Welten zugeordneten Wissenschaften der Physik, Mathematik und Theologie vermittelt wird, versteht sich Magie also, so Agrippa, als Kunst, welche diese "drei mächtigsten Zweige der Gelehrsamkeit miteinander verbindet und in Ausübung bringt, weshalb dieselbe von den Alten mit Recht für die höchste und heiligste Wissenschaft gehalten wurde."11 Von besonderem Interesse in unserem Zusammenhang ist das dritte Buch der "Occulta philosophia", das sich mit der "magia ceremonialis" befaßt. Sie lehrt, so Agrippa, "wie wir durch die göttliche Religion zur Wahrheit gelangen",12 bzw. wie "die menschliche Seele", getragen von Glaube, Hoffnung und Liebe, "zur göttlichen Natur emporsteigt und eine Wundertäterin wird".13 Konkret geht es vor allem darum, auf welche Weise der Magier nach Meinung heidnischer Philosophen, jüdischer Kabbalisten und christlicher Theologen durch Teilhabe an der göttlichen Macht Geister und Tote beschwören, Zukünftiges erschauen und Wunder tun kann, die nach christlicher Lehre nur Gott und durch ihn den Heiligen kraft Aufhebung der 10 (s.Anm.6) S.16 (1,1, S.13). 11 (s.Anm.6) S.19 (1,2, S.15). 12 (s.Anm.6) S.363 (ΠΙ,Ι, S.223). 13 (s.Anm.6) S.375 (ΙΠ,6, S.230).

Zauberei und Zauberer

185

Naturgesetze zu tun möglich sind. Und zwar geschieht dies nach Agrippa vor allem durch jene Worte und Zeichen, mit deren Hilfe die Frommen aller Zeiten die Kräfte der oberen Welt in die untere hinabzuziehen versuchten. In diesem Zusammenhang geht er ausfuhrlich auf die kabbalistische Lehre von der Gewinnung der Gottesnamen, des Shem-ha-mephorash ein, 14 durch deren Nennung der Eingeweihte Teilhabe an ihrer göttlichen Kraft erhält, und entwirft weiterhin eine Art Magie des Christengebets, das ebenso wie die Zauberformeln der Heiden seine volle Kraft erst entfalte, wenn es, gewissen Regeln zufolge, "der Zahl, dem Gewicht und Maße nach richtig zusammengesetzt" ist.15 Die gleiche Neigung zum Synkretismus zeigt sich, wenn er sich zum Beweis für die vielfältigen Anwendungsmöglichkeiten der "magia ceremonialis" unterschiedslos auf heidnische, jüdische und christliche Riten beruft, da sich deren magische Kraft seiner Auffassung nach nicht durch die Art, sondern nur durch den Grad ihrer Wirksamkeit unterscheidet. Denn da die heidnischen Götter als Emanationen der prima causa unter dem Schöpfergott stehen, den die Juden und Christen verehren,16 kann man durch ihre Anrufung entsprechend weniger ausrichten. Die höchste Wirkung aber geht von der Anrufüng Jesu aus; denn, so Agrippa, "das Tetragrammaton, d.h. der Vater, hat ihm alles übergeben ... und seine ganze Kraft auf den Namen Jesu übertragen".17 Agrippa hätte also nicht nur dem jüdischen Rabbi ohne weiteres zugestanden, daß er aufgrund seines Wissens mit Hilfe und Zustimmung Gottes Wunderbares vollbringen kann, sondern hätte dies, unter den gleichen Voraussetzungen, erst recht im Fall eines christlichen Magiers getan. Zu diesen Voraussetzungen zählte für ihn neben persönlicher Frömmigkeit vor allem die absolute Reinheit der Intention, die jedem Mißbrauch der erworbenen Gaben den Riegel vorschob. Von der Möglichkeit dieses Mißbrauchs ist in der "Occulta philosophia" an einigen Stellen die Rede.18 Insgesamt aber ist Agrippa mehr um den Nachweis bemüht, daß vieles, was in den Künsten der Magier nach Auffassung vieler Christen als Teufelswerk verschrieen wurde und wird, auf der Kenntnis zwar geheimer, aber in der göttlichen Schöpfung existenter Wirkungszusammenhänge beruht und die Vorstellung, man könne sie nur mit Hilfe des Teufels ausüben, ihrerseits ein auf Unwissenheit oder Bosheit beruhender Aberglaube sei . 19 14 (s.Anm.6) S.436 ff. (111,25, S.268 f.); vgl. das 3. Buch von Johannes Reuchlin: De arte cabalistica von 1517. (Faksimile-Neudruck Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt 1964, S.222 ff ). 15 (s.Anm.6) S.560 (111,23, S.348). 16 (s.Anm.6) S.384 (ΙΠ,ΙΟ, S.236). 17 (s.Anm.6) S.398 (111,12, S.245). Vgl. das 3. Buch von Johannes Reuchlin: De verbo mirifico von 1494 (Faksimile-Neudruck Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt 1964), S.88 ff. 18 (s. Anm.6). Vgl. u.a. S.92 (1,39, S.57), S.415 ff. (111,18, S.256 ff.) u. S.423 ff.(m,2o, S.260 ff). 19 (s.Anm.6). Vgl. u.a. S.5 (Von., S 3), S.190 (Π.1, S.112), S.244 (Π,16, S.150) u. S.356 (11,60,

186

Β. Könneker

Agrippas Versuch einer Ehrenrettung der Magie blieb in der christlichen Welt ohne Erfolg. Zwar galt sein Werk bis weit ins 17. Jh. hinein als Autorität. Aber doch nur in Kreisen, die außerhalb bzw. am Rande des Christentums standen oder darauf hofften, sich seiner zur praktischen Ausübung von Zauberei bedienen zu können. So erschien drei Jahrzehnte nach Agrippas Tod, als angeblich 4. Buch der "Occulta philosophia" eine Schrift, die detaillierte Anweisungen zur Geisterbeschwörung enthielt20 und ihrerseits Zauberbücher beeinflußt hat, die später unter so zugkräftigen Titeln wie "Dr. Fausti Dreifacher Höllenzwang"21 kursierten. In diesem beschwört Faust die Höllengeister durch Anrufung der Gottes- und Engelsnamen nach einer ähnlichen Ordnung der Kabbala, wie Agrippa sie im 10. Kapitel des III. Buches beschrieben hatte und die nunmehr de facto zu einer "cabbala nigra" geworden war. 22 Aber das war es nicht allein, was Agrippa in Mißkredit brachte. Daß sein Werk zu Höllenzwängen mißbraucht wurde, zeigt vielmehr, daß man seiner Versicherung, er schreibe von einer "heiligen" Wissenschaft, von Anfang an wenig Glauben schenkte. Obwohl er in der "Occulta philosophia" ein feierliches Bekenntnis zum Christentum abgelegt hatte,23 verdächtigte man ihn bald schon, im Bund mit dem Teufel zu stehen, und verbreitete alle möglichen Geschichten über seinen Umgang mit bösen Geistern.24 Ähnlich erging es Johannes Trithemius, der immerhin zu den Würdenträgern der Kirche gehörte, und Paracelsus, in dessen Weltbild die

S.219). 20 1565 zusammen mit dm drei editen Büchern erstmals gedruckt; ein stark verkleinertes Faksimile findet ách im Anhang der Ausgabe von Nowotny (s.Anm.6); zum Text vgl. Peuckert, Pansophie (s.Anm.6), S. 127 ff. 21 Dazu Peuckert, Pansophie (s.Anm.6), S.135 ff. u. Carl Kiesewetter: Faust in der Geschichte und Tradition.

Mit

besonderer

Berücksichtigung

des

occulten

Phänomenalismus

und

des

mittelalterlichen Zauberwesens (1893). Nadidr. Hildesheim 1963, S. 260 ff., insbes. S. 270 ff. 22 Vgl. Peuckert, Pansophie (s.Anm.6), S.136f. 23 (s.Anm.6), S.383 f. (ΙΠ,9, S.235 f.). 24 Vgl. Nauert (s.Anm.6), S.112 ff. u. Wolf-Dieter Müller-Jahncke, Magie als Wissenschaft im frühen 16. Jahrhundert. Die Beziehungen zwischen Magie, Medizin und Pharmazie im Werk des Agrippa

von Nettesheim

(1486-1535),

Marburg 1973, S.l f. In Deutschland fanden diese

Gesdiichten u.a. Verbreitung durdi Augustin Lercheimer: Christlich bedencken vnd erjnnerung von Zauberey, Heidelberg 1585. Dagegen hatte ihn Johann Weira- (Wiraus), ein Schüler Agrippas, schon 1563 in semer Schrift De praestigiis daemonum gegen derartige Verdächtigungen ausdrücklich in Schutz genommal u. auch seine Autorschaft am IV. Buch der Occulta philosophia bestritt m; s. dazu Peuckert, Pansophie (s. Anm.6), S.l08 f. Zur Nachwirkung der Gerüchte um Agrippa vgl. Gerhard Ritter, "Ein historisches Urbild zu Goethes Faust. (Agrippa von Nettesheym)." In: Preußische Jahrbücher 141, 1910, S.300-324.

Zauberei und Zauberer

187

Magie ebenfalls eine zentrale Rolle spielte.25 Die Unterscheidung von weißer und schwarzer Magie wurde also von den offiziellen Hütern der christlichen Religion nicht akzeptiert; weder von den Vertretern der alten römischen und erst recht nicht von denen der protestantischen Kirche. Und zwar ließ man diese Unterscheidung umso weniger gelten, je mehr die Magie im Spannungsfeld von traditioneller Naturerklärung und empirischer Naturwissenschaft in der frühen Neuzeit an Bedeutung gewann. 26 Die Gründe dafür sehe ich einmal im Hexenwahn, der ja in der Ausprägung, die er seit dem 15. Jh. erhielt, ein spezifisch christliches Phänomen war, und zum anderen in der zentralen Stellung, die der Teufel in der Theologie Martin Luthers einnahm. Über die Ursachen der Entstehung des Hexenwahns kann ich mich hier nicht äußern, zumal sie trotz intensiver Bemühungen immer noch nicht ausreichend geklärt sind. Faktum ist, daß er sich seit dem 15. Jh. überall im christlichen Europa ausbreitete und es bis zu Friedrich v. Spee kaum jemanden gab, der die Existenz von Hexen öffentlich in Zweifel zog oder zu ziehen wagte.27 Hexerei aber galt per definitionem als Teufelsdienst. D.h. sie setzte ganz konkret einen Pakt mit dem Teufel voraus, der in der Abschwörung der Glaubensartikel und der förmlichen Unterwerfung unter die Macht des Bösen bestand. "Aus allen Prämissen ist zu schließen, daß die Behauptung gut katholisch und sehr wahr ist, daß es Hexen gibt, welche mit Hilfe der Dämonen, kraft ihres mit diesen geschlossenen Paktes, mit Zulassung Gottes wirkliche Hexenkünste vollbringen können."28 25 Zu Trithemius vgl. Arnold (s.Anm.8), S.180 if.; zur Bedeutung der Magie im Weltbild von Paracelsus vgl. Walter Pagel, Das medizinische Weltbild des Paracelsus. Seine Zusammenhänge mit Neuplatonismus

und Gnosis. Wiesbadm 1962; ders., Paracelsus.

Philosophical Medicine in the Era of the Renaissance,

An Introduction

to

Basel u.a. 1982; hier auch S.311 ff. u.

S.319 einiges zu den Teufelspaktgerüchten, die über Paracelsus in Umlauf waren. 26 Vgl. dazu Nauert (s.Anm.6), S.222 ff. u. Charles Webster, From Paracelsus to Newton. Magic and the Making of Modern Science, Cambridge 1982. 27 Zur Frühzeit der Hexanverfolgung vgl. Wolfgang Ziegeler, Möglichkeiten der Kritik am Hexenund Zauberwesen im ausgehenden Mittelalter, Köln, Wim 1973. Die Untersuchung handelt im letzten Kapitel von Agrippa von Nettedieim, dem es 1519 in Metz gelang, eine Angeklagte erfolgreich gegen den Vorwurf der Hexerei zu verteidigen. Ein entschiedener Gegper des Hexenwahns im 16. Jh. war vor alian Johannes Weier (s.Anm.24), der in De praestigiis daemonum den Glauben an Hexen und Hexerei seinerseits als einen Unheil stiftenden, vom Teufel inspirierten Aberglauben attackierte. Vgl. dazu Carl Binz, Doctor Johann Weyer, ein rheinischer Arzt, der erste Bekämpf er des Hexenwahns,

Berlin 1896.

28 Jakob Sprenger, Heinrich Institoris: Der Hexenhammer (Malleus maleficarum). Aus dem Lateinischen übertragen u. eingeleitet von J.W.R. Schmidt (1906). Nachdr. München 1982, S.10. (I.Sp., H.I.: Malleus maleficarum...Ed. novissima, Lugdum (Lyon) 1699. Nadidr. Brüssel 1969,

188

Β. Könneker

So steht es im "Hexenhammer" von 1487, der Grundlage der zahlreichen seitdem stattfindenden Hexenprozesse, in denen den Betroffenen das Geständnis der "Wahrheit" dieser Behauptung wieder und wieder durch Folter abgepreßt und dadurch zum selbstverständlich geglaubten Faktum wurde. Was die Hexen nach Meinung der Christen auf diese Weise mit Hilfe des Teufels betrieben, war selbstredend schwarze Magie, Zauberei zum Schaden des Nächsten und der Gemeinschaft verübt. Aufgrund der raschen Verbreitung, die der Hexenwahn fand, und der durch die Prozesse immer von Neuem geschürten Angst vor ihren schändlichen Künsten aber blieb es nicht aus, daß die Möglichkeit einer "weißen" Magie mehr und mehr aus dem Blickfeld geriet und zumindest der christliche Laie Magie überhaupt mit Teufelswerk gleichsetzte. Aber auch bei den Gebildeten galt das Interesse an der Magie vor allem ihrer dunklen, verbotenen Seite. Das lag u.a. daran, daß die Definition der Hexerei, wie sie der "Hexenhammer" gegeben hatte, eine Reihe theologischer Probleme aufwarf, deren wichtigstes war, daß sie dem Teufel eine Macht einräumte, die eigentlich nur Gott und den von ihm bevollmächtigten Engeln und Heiligen zustand. Nämlich Taten zu vollbringen, die gegen die Ordnung der Natur verstießen, also die Fähigkeit zur Aufhebung dieser Ordnung voraussetzten. Auf dieses Problem eine Antwort zu suchen, die sich sowohl mit dem Glauben an Gottes Allmacht als auch mit dem "Faktum" der Hexerei vereinbaren ließ, konzentrierte sich daher das Bemühen derjenigen, die sich damals offiziell mit diesem Phänomen auseinandersetzten. Die Lösungen, die man fand, liefen entweder darauf hinaus, daß vieles, was die Hexen mit Hilfe des Teufels bewirken, nur Blendwerk sei, d.h. auf Sinnestäuschung beruhe, oder daß der Teufel als gefallener Engel über Einblicke in die Wirkungszusammenhänge der Schöpfung verfüge, die dem Menschen verborgen sind, so daß die angeblichen Wunder, die er vollbringe, in Wirklichkeit auf natürliche Weise Zustandekommen.29 Das mutet teilweise Pars I, Quaestio 1, S. 5, Sp.l). Zur Geschichte des Hexenwahns und der Hexenprozesse vgl. Soldan/Heppe, Geschichte der Hexenprozesse. 3. Aufl. 1911 bearti, v. Max Bauer. 2 Bde Nachdr. Darmstadt 1972; Joseph Hansen, Zauberwahn, Inquisition und Hexenprozeß im Mittelalter und die Entstehung der großen Hexenverfolgung (1900). Nadidr. Aalen 1964; Gerhard Schormaim, Hexenprozesse in Deutschland, Göttingen 1981; Frank Donovan, Zauberglaube und Hexenkult. Ein historischer Abriß, München 1973; Kurt Baschwitz, Hexen und Hexenprozesse.

Die

Geschichte eines Massenwahns und seiner Bekämpfung, München 1963; Georg Schwaiger (Hg.): Teufelsglaube und Hexenprozesse, München 1987. 29 Ausführlich wird darüber bereits diskutiert in Johannes Hartliebs 1456 entstandenem Buch aller verbotenen Künste, in dem er, an die Adresse des Markgrafen Johann v. Brandenburg gerichtet, einerseits eindringlich vor den Gefahren des Umgangs mit der teuflischen Kunst der Zauberei warnt, andererseits aber darum bemüht ist, viele ihrer Erscheinungs- und Wirkungsfarmen als "tiüffels gespenst" (teuflische Trugbilder) und das Vertrauen auf sie als "ungelauben" (Aberglauben) zu

189

Zauberei und Zauberer

aufklärerisch an oder berührt sich mit Erklärungsversuchen, mit denen man die "weiße" Magie gegen Verdächtigungen verteidigte. De facto aber war die Intention, die hinter solchen Antworten stand, weder aufklärerisch, noch ging es erst recht darum, die Abscheulichkeit der Hexerei in irgendeiner Weise abzumildern. Sie blieb, ob Blendwerk oder "natürliche" Kunst, Teufelsdienst, der zeitliche und ewige Strafe verdiente, und da dies so war, waren auch derartige Erklärungsversuche eher geeignet, die Grenzen zwischen weißer und schwarzer Magie zu verwischen als strenger zu ziehen. Denn da man in diesen Schriften ausschließlich die Fähigkeit des Teufels diskutierte, sich verborgenes Wissen über die Schöpfung anzueignen - was lag näher, als auch den Magier des Bundes mit ihm zu verdächtigen, der sich rühmte, dieses Wissen kraft eigener Erkenntnis erwerben zu können? Blieb jedoch ein Unterschied, auf den sich die Verteidiger der weißen Magie stets beriefen, daß sie im Gegensatz zur Hexerei nicht zum Schaden, sondern zum Nutzen der Menschen ausgeübt werde. Daß auch dieser Unterschied für einen gläubigen Christen keine Geltung besitze, wurde, so weit ich sehe, im 16. Jh. am entschiedensten in protestantischen Kreisen betont. So u.a. im "Zauber Teuffei" des lutherischen Pfarrers Ludovicus Milichius, der 1563 erstmals gedruckt wurde.30 In ihm wird die Zauberei wie folgt definiert: "Eigentlich aber ist diß Zauberey/ wenn die menschen ein Creatur unnd geschöpff Gottes anders brauchen unnd ein ander wirckung darinn suchen denn Gott verordnet hat/ man thu solches zu helffen oder zu schaden. Unnd diß kan oder mag die Creatur von ihrer wirckung und eygenschafft nicht außrichten/ so darff man auch nicht sagen/ daß es Gott thu/ dieweil es wider sein wort/ Ordnung/ unnd willen geschieht/ Sonder was darmit außgericht wird/ das geschieht durch eitel wirckung des Teuffels. 31 Zauberei - die von dem Autor selbstverständlich mit Magie gleichgesetzt wird32 - ist also nach dieser Definition, unabhängig von dem Gebrauch, den entlarven. (Hg., übersetzt u. kommentiert v. Falk Eisermann u. Eckhard GTaf. Ahlerstedt 1989, S. 16). Vgl. audi die eingehende Erörterung m Kap. 11-14 von Milichius' Zauber Teuffei (s.AnirL30). 30 1569 aufgenommen in das Theatrum Diabolorum, eine Sammlung von Teufelstraktaten, in denen auf der Grundlage von Luthers Theologie das Wirk™ des Teufels als "Fürst dieser Weh" unter allen möglichen Aspekten beschrieben wurde. Zitiert wird im folgenden nach da- Ausgabe von Ria Stambaugji, Teufelsbücher

in Auswahl.

(Ausgaben

deutscher Literatur

des XV. bis XVIII.

Jahrhunderts) Bd.1, Barlin 1970, S.l ff. 31 (s.Anm.30), S.15. In Sachsen wurde 1572 ein Gesetz erlassen, das jede Person, welche "mit dem Teufel Verbündnis aufrichtet", mit dem Feuertod bestrafte, "ob sie gleidi mit Zauberei niemand Sdiaden zugefugt." (Zit. nach: Frank Baron, "Ein Einblatt druck Lucas Cranachs d.J. als Quelle der Hexen Verfolgung in Luthers Wittenberg". In: Poesis et pictura. Fs. f. Dieter Wuttke. Hg. v. Stephan Füssel u. Joachim Knape. Baden Baden 1989, S.277-294, hier S.288f. 32 Vgl. die Worterklärung S.14 (s.Anm.30): "Zauberey ..wird zu Latein Magia und die Zauberer

190

Β. K ö n n e k e r

man von ihr macht, ein Eingriff in die von Gott gesetzte natürliche (d.h. jedermann sichtbare) Ordnung der Dinge und damit ein Verstoß gegen Gottes Willen. Daß ein solcher Eingriff prinzipiell möglich sei, wird vom Autor mit gewissen Einschränkungen ausdrücklich eingeräumt. Daß aber hinter einem solchen Eingriff für ihn allemal der Teufel steht - "man thu solches zu helffen oder zu schaden"33 -, findet seine Erklärung in der Teufelslehre Luthers, die ihrerseits mit dem Neuansatz seiner Theologie aufs engste zusammenhängt.34 Luther hatte durch den Kernsatz seiner Theologie - der Mensch wird gerecht allein durch den Glauben - de facto die bis dahin bestehende Kirche aus den Angeln gehoben. Denn dieser Kernsatz besagt, daß es weder einer irdischen Vermittlungsinstanz noch bestimmter Leistungen seitens des Menschen bedarf, um das Heil zu erwerben. Worauf es ankommt, ist einzig der Glaube, d.h. das bedingungslose Vertrauen auf die in der Schrift geoffenbarte Zusage Gottes, daß der Mensch durch Christus erlöst worden sei. Positiv bedeutete das "sola fide" die Befreiung des Christen aus der Vormundschaft der Kirche. Negativ aber verlangte es von ihm die vollständige Unterwerfung unter den Willen Gottes, d.h. das Eingeständnis, daß Gott alles und der Mensch nichts kann. "Nichts" hieß zunächst, daß er unfähig ist, sich aus eigener Kraft, und wenn er das Leben eines Heiligen führte, Verdienste vor Gott zu erwerben, da schon der Versuch, dies zu tun, Leugnung der Erlösung "allein" durch Christus bedeutet. "Nichts" hieß aber auch, daß es ihm verboten ist, die von Gott gesetzte Ordnung in Gesellschaft, Staat oder Natur zu verändern, da er sich damit eine Machtvollkommenheit anmaßt, die einzig Gott zusteht. Wo immer aber der Mensch Gott diese Machtvollkommenheit streitig macht, sei es im Pochen auf das eigene Magi genannt." 33 Vgl. Kap.6 "Daß alle Zauberey durch den Teuffei werde ausgerichtet." (s.Anm.30, S.39 ff.). Tn Kap.3 "Wie manidifaltig die Zauberey sey" verweist Milidiius zwar unto- Punkt VI audi auf die Existenz der "Magia Naturalis" oder "natürliche[n] Zauberey/ das ist von dm wunderbarlichen unnd verborgmen wirckungen etlicher Creaturen" (S.22), verzichtet aber ausdrücklich darauf, sich näher mit ihr zu befassm, so daß unklar bleibt, was er darunter versteht. Neben don "mißbrauch der Creaturen" liegt das Verbotene der Zauberei für ihn vor allem darin, daß "auch der Nam Gottes [in ihr] mißbraucht" wird (S. 18). Im übrigen teilt er die Zauberei ein in "Magicam, das ist/ vereynigung und bundniß mit dem teuffei/ in Weissagung unnd Verkündigung verborgener dingen/ unnd in Aberglauben/ die von Gott nicht geordnet seind/ unnd keyne natürliche Ursachen haben." (S.21). 34 Vgl. Harmamius Obendiek, Der Teufel bei Martin Luther. Eine theologische

Untersuchung,

Berlin 1931; Hans-Martin Barth, Der Teufel und Jesus Christus in der Theologie Martin

Luthers,

Göttingen 1967, u. den programmatischen Titel der Monographie von Heiko A. Oberman, Luther. Mensch zwischen Gott und Teufel, Berlin 1981.

Zauberei und Zauberer

191

Verdienst, sei es im Eingriff in seine Ordnung, ist der Teufel am Werk. Denn dieser ist immer bestrebt, den Menschen in seine Knechtschaft zu zwingen, indem er ihn dazu verführt, statt auf Gott auf sich selbst zu vertrauen, d.h., wie es Luther sah, Gottes Alleinherrschaft zu leugnen. Für den politisch-sozialen Bereich ergab sich daraus als praktische Konsequenz, von Luther unter Berufung auf Römer 13 ausdrücklich formuliert, die Forderung unbedingten Gehorsams gegenüber der Obrigkeit, da sie, ob gut oder schlecht, von Gott selbst eingesetzt und somit Teil der göttlichen Weltordnung ist.35 Die zahlreichen Äußerungen, die von Luther über Zauberei und Teufelspakt überliefert sind, lassen darüberhinaus keinen Zweifel, daß auch Magie für ihn eo ipso identisch mit Teufelsdienst war, ein "Majestätsverbrechen an Gott", wie er sie einmal genannt hat. 36 Und zwar gerade auch in der Art, wie sie Agrippa verstand. Denn dieser hatte nie geleugnet, daß der Magier, auch wenn es eine "natürliche" Wissenschaft ist, die er betreibt, in die Natur eingreift, sie manipuliert und so eine Macht ausübt, die dem Menschen normalerweise nicht zu Gebote steht. Ja mehr noch, er hatte behauptet, daß der Magier aus der untersten Welt bis hinauf in die höchste emporsteigen und an deren Kraft teilhaben könne, so daß "notwendig jede Kreatur uns gehorchen [muß] und ... der ganze himmlische Chor."37 Nicht nur für Luther, aber erst recht für ihn roch das nach dem Schwefelgestank der Hölle. War doch für ihn bereits die bloße Vorstellung des "Aufsteigens" belastet mit dem Odium des "eritis sicut Deus", und hatte er selbst doch die Grenzlinie zwischen Immanenz und Transzendenz so streng gezogen, daß selbst viele Zeremonien der alten Kirche in seinen Augen teuflisch inspirierte Versuche zur Manipulierung von Gottes Willen waren. Sie werden daher auch im "Zauber Teuffel" des Milichius wiederholt zu den

Vgl. dazu Luthers Schrift Von weltlicher Obrigkeit, wie weit man ihr Gehorsam schuldig sei von 1523 (WA 11, S.245-280). 36 Ein "crimen laesae Maiestatis divinae", und zwar eben deshalb, weil "Zauberei ein schändlicher, gräulicher Abfall ist, da einer sich von Gott, d a n er gelobt und geschworen ist, zum Teufel, der Gottes Feind ist, begibt." (WA Tischreden, Bd.6 Nr. XXV S.222.) Vgl. Jörg Haustein, Martin

Luthers

Stellung zum Zauber- und Hexenwesen, Stuttgart, Berlin, Köln 1990. Zu Luthers "Kriminalisierung der weißen Magie" insbes. S. 175 ff. 37 (s.Anm.6), S.361 (Vorrede zu Buch HI, S.221). Zum Zusammenhang von Magie und renaissancistisdier "tendency, to exalt the powers and significance of man" u. der religiösen Problematik, die sich daraus ergab, vgl. Nauert (s.Anm.6), S.232 ff.

192

Β. K ö n n e k e r

magischen

Künsten

gerechnet

und wie jede

Art von

Magie

zur

"Teufflische[n] Abgötterey" erklärt, "damit die hohe Majestet Gottes gespottet und geunehret wird/ denn hilff in den Creatoren suchen anders denn Gott verordnet hat/ und des rechten helffers vergessen/ was ist das anders denn Abgötterey?"38 Es ist - und damit komme ich auf den Anfang meiner Ausführungen zurück - diese in der Sache selbst begründete Gleichsetzung von Magie und Abgötterei, die der streng lutherische Autor der "Historia von D. Johann Faust" übernommen hat.39 Dies und nicht etwa der Gebrauch, den Faust von ihr macht, ist der Grund, warum er sie zur "gröste[n] vnnd schwereste[n]" aller Sünden erklärt.40 Denn im Gegensatz zu dem, was man damals von den Hexen zu sagen wußte, ist es bis auf wenige Fälle keineswegs Schadenszauber, den Faust betreibt. Mit einer Ausnahme, in der er geradezu als Anwalt höherer Gerechtigkeit auftritt, ist selbst in diesen wenigen Fällen der Schaden, den er anrichtet, harmloser Art, d.h. ohne böse Folgen für die Betroffenen.41 An einer Stelle heißt es sogar, daß er sich als "Astrologus" bei •50 (s.Anm.30), S.18. Vgl. S.45 f. zum papistischen Mißbrauch des Kreuzzeichais u. S.53 f. zur "Abgottischefn] und zauberisdie[n] lehr", daß die Einsetzungsworte des Priesters in der Eucharistie die Verwandlung von Brot und Wein in Leib und Blut Christi bewirken. In ähnlichem Zusammenhang erwähnt er auch den Mißbrauch, welchen die Juden mit den "namen des allerhöchstai" oder die Papisten mit denen der "heylige[n] dreifaitigkeyt" usw. getrieben haben, und bezeichnet ihn ausdrücklich als "sünd/ grewel und Zauberey" (S.49 f.). Diese Parallelsetzung geht offenbar auf Luthers Pamphlet Vom Schern Hamphoras und vom Geschlecht Christi zurück (1543; WA Bd.53, S.573-648), in dan er S.593 bestimmte Zeremonien der Papstkirche als deren "sonderlich Schern Hamphoras" bezeichnet, wobei audi für ihn das tertium comparatioms im Mißbrauch des Namens Gottes und der Affinität zur Zauberei besteht (vgl. u.a. S.594). 39 Vgl. zum folgen dm: Barbara Könneker, "Faust-Konzeption und Teufelspakt im Volksbuch von 1587". In: Fs. f . Gottfried Weber (Frankfurter Beiträge zur Germanistik 1), Bad Honiburg v.d.H., Berlin, Zürich 1967, S. 159-213, sowie, unter anderer Perspektive, Maria E. Müller: Der andere Faust. Melancholie und Individualität in der "Historia von D. Johann Fausten." In: DVJ 60, 1986, S.572-608. 40

(s. Anm.4) S.8.

41

Von dm 23 Zaubergesdiichten in der Erstausgabe von 1587 sind es de facto nur 4, in denen Faust,

ohne selbst herausgefordert zu sein, materiellen Schaden anrichtet. Aber er trifft nur Personal, die diesen Schaden in den Augen des protestantischm Autors verdient haben oder verdient haben könntm. So betrügt er in Kap.38 einen Juden, der ausdrücklich als "Christen feind" bezeichnet wird, prellt in Kap.39 u. 40 zwei Roßtäuscher, die nhnehtn als Betrüger gelten, und stiehlt in Kap.45 einem Bischof Wein aus dem Keller. Die einzige Ausiahme bildet Kap.51, in dem Faust einen Zauberer tötet. Aber er tut dies, weil ihm dessen "Büberey in die Augen stach" (s.Anm.4, S. 100), und der Autor kommentiert seine Tat mit dai Worten: "Muste also der böß Mensch in Sünden sterben vnd verderben/ wie dann der Teuffei allen seinen Dienern letztlich solchen Lohn gibt" (S. 101 ). Im übrigen

Zauberei und Zauberer

193

den Fürsten verdient gemacht habe, weil er sie besser als andere vor "Theuwrung", "Krieg" und "Sterben" zu warnen verstand.42 Daß er trotzdem verdammt wird, und zwar notwendigerweise nach Darstellung des Autors, ist daher nicht Strafe für das, was er getan hat, sondern Folge seiner inneren Verstrickung in die Knechtschaft des Teufels, in die er sich durch die Hinwendung zur Magie begeben hat. Denn diese hindert ihn trotz intensiver Anstrengungen bis zuletzt daran, das einzige zu tun, was zu seiner Rettung notwendig wäre, nämlich im Vertrauen auf seine Gnade zu Gott zu beten und ihn um Verzeihung zu bitten. Da Faust dies nicht kann, weil ihm der Teufel den Blick nach oben verstellt, stirbt er in Verzweiflung, der einzigen Sünde, die unvergebbar ist43. Nicht weil er Magie betreibt, sondern weil das Streben nach Macht, das dahinter steht, eo ipso Teufelsdienst ist, wird also dieser erste literarische Faust zwangsläufig ein Opfer der Hölle. Was daher in der "Historia von D. Johann Faust" zur Debatte steht und am Negativbeispiel des Magiers durchexerziert wird, ist letztlich das Problem menschlicher Autonomie, deren Möglichkeit von dem streng lutherischen Autor strikt verneint wurde. Es stellte sich als Problem, da zu Beginn der Neuzeit überall in Europa der Mensch daran ging, Grenzen zu überschreiten, die bis dahin für unüberschreitbar gegolten hatten, und sich insbesondere eine Herrschaft über die Natur anzueignen, die nach mittelalterlicher Auffassung konzentriert sich das Interesse des Erzählers ganz auf die Darstellung der Verheerungen, die der Teufelspakt in FausLs Seele anrichtet, während das Phänomen der Zauberei in seinen Möglichkeit an u. Erscheinungsformen selbst überhaupt nicht diskutiert wird Das einzige, was der Leser darüber erfahrt, ist, daß "jhme [dh. Faust] sein Geist bald ein grosses Buch/ von allerley Zauberey vund Nigromantia [übergab]/ darinnen er sich...erlustigte" (S.29). Ausfuhrlich wird dagegen über dieses Thema in der Fortsetzung der "Historia", den Geschichten von Fausts Famulus Christoph Wagner, gehandelt (Ander theil D. Johann Fausti Historien/ von seinem Famulo Christoff Wagner 1593. Hg. u. eingel. v. Josef Fritz, Halle 1910). Zwar hielt auch deren Autor an der Verdammnis seines Protagonistai, der wie Faust als Schwarzkünstler einen Teufelspakt schließt, fest. Aber sie war ihm offenbar kein echtes Anliegen mehr, sondan eher ein frommer Vorwand, um sich viele Seiten lang, z.T. unter Benutzung Agrippas, über das Verhältnis von weißer und schwarzer Magie, ihre Wirkungsund Anwendunganöglichkeiten usw. verbreiten zu könnai. Trotz aller Warnungen war dies offenbar ein Gegenstand, der vor allem das Interesse der zeitgenössisch en Leser erregte, die sich in dieser Hinsicht in ihren Erwartungen von der "Historia" betrogen sahen. Zum Wagnerbudi vgl. Gerhild Scholz Wilhams, "Magie und Moral. Faust und Wagner." In: Daphnis 19, 1990, S.3-23; Barbara Könneker, "Faust und Wagner. Zum literarischen Phänomen des Außenseiters in der deutschen Literatur des 16. Jahrhunderts". 1h: Akten des VIII. Internationalen Germanistenkongresses

Tokyo

1990. Bd 11, München 1991, S.31-39. 42

(s. Anm. 4), S.44.

43

Vgl. das letzte Kapitel, in dem die Studenten Faust auffordern, Gott um Verzeihung zu bitten,

worauf es von ihm heißt: "er wohe beten/ es wolte jhme aba- nit eingehen/ wie dem Cain/ der auch sagte: Seine Sünde wer en grösser/ derm daß sie jhme möchten verziehen werden" (s. Anm. 4, S. 122).

194

Β. Könneker

Gott allein voibehalten war. In der Magie, dem Grenzbereich von Wissen und Wissensmißbrauch, Naturerkenntnis und Manipulation der Natur, fand dieses Streben für die Zeitgenossen seinen spektakulärsten Ausdruck. In der Verteufelung, die sie im Christentum jener Zeit durchweg erfuhr, sehe ich daher primär eine Abwehrreaktion, deren wichtigste Quelle die Angst war. Daß diese Abwehrreaktion bei den Protestanten noch sehr viel entschiedener ausfiel als im Umfeld der alten Kirche, dürfte nicht zuletzt darin begründet sein, daß diese sich, um beim Thema zu bleiben, gewissermaßen in der Rolle des Zauberlehrlings befanden, dem die von ihm entfesselten Geister außer Kontrolle gerieten. Denn indem Luther den Christen aus der Vormundschaft der alten Kirche entließ, hatte er selbst den entscheidenden Schritt getan, der ihm den Weg in die Autonomie bahnte. Die Konsequenzen aber, die sich in der Folgezeit daraus ergeben mußten, hatte Luther weder wahrhaben wollen noch können. Kehrseite der von ihm postulierten "Freiheit des Christen" waren und blieben daher noch lange in Abwehr derartiger Konsequenzen Teufel und Teufelsknechtschaft; und zwar immer dort, wo man versuchte, außerhalb der von Luther streng gezogenen Grenzen von dieser Freiheit Gebrauch zu machen.

Klaus Reichert Pico della Mirandola and the Beginnings of Christian Kabbala

Giovanni Pico della Mirandola was born in 1463 near Modena and died at the early age of 31 in 1494 near Florence. Within his short life span he came to be the most vastly read scholar of his time and one of its most prolific writers - the phoenix of his age, as he was termed. He studied canon law at Bologna; philosophy, in particular Averroes (the one so-called free-thinker of the middle ages), at Padua; Plato and the hermetic writings at the Florentine Academy with their translator Marsilio Ficino; Aristotle, Thomas and orthodox scholasticism at Paris - all this within about eight years, having taken up his studies at the age of fourteen. In 1485/86, after Paris, again in Florence, he must have made the acquaintance of the Sicilian Jewish convert who called himself Flavius Mithridates1 who taught him Hebrew and who translated a number of kabbalist tracts into Latin for him which might have helped him in pursuing the great project he had in mind - nothing less than a reconciliation of the various strands of philosophical and theological thinking that had been handed down in history, on the assumption that there was only one truth which had, however, found expression under multifarious disguises. Apart from the renegate Flavius who spiced his translations with deprecating and slanderous commentaries against Judaism and paved Pico's way for a Christian reading of the texts, Pico had also contact with believing Jews such as the Kabbalist Yohanan Alemanno whom he encouraged to finish his commentary on the Song of Songs. With Alemanno there seems to have ensued a genuine scholarly intercourse resulting in astonishing crossinfluences2. Pico's great teacher, Ficino, had attempted in his "Theologia Platonica" to reconcile Platonic, Neoplatonic, and Hermetic thinking with Christian dogma. But Pico's own synthesis aimed at something much larger. Firstly, he wanted to harmonize the contending, mutually exclusive, schools of Plato and Aristotle (in the latter case including his Arabic and scholastic followers), assigning to the Aristotelians things sublunary or the elementary world, ^Chaim Wirszubski, Pico della Mirándolo s Encounter with Jewish Mysticism, Cambridge, Mass., and London: Harvard University Press, 1989, passim. Moshe Idei, "The Anthropology of Yohanan Alemanno: Sources and Influences", in: Annali di Storia dell'Esegesi, Bolonia, 7/1,1990, Antropologia biblica e pensiero moderno, 93-112, esp. on the t a p i n g of some basic concepts in Pico 's Oratio.

196

Κ. Reichert

which had been transcended to reach out into the celestial and intellectual worlds by the Platonists. But since all three worlds were connected by the great chain of being, you could ascend and descend from one philosophy to the other, and where there were contradictions they could be explained away by resorting to the principle of 'coincidentia oppositorum' as expounded by Cusanus. The reconciliation was all the more justified in that both rival philosophies were held to be late descendente of a much earlier wisdom, and the search for a 'prisca theologia, which was synonymous with a prisca philosophia', was one of the major concerns of Renaissance thinking, remaining a dominant subject throughout the next century all the way down to Bruno and Bacon. This is why Pico brings in the pre-Socratic philosophers - as Bacon was to do more than a century later -, the school of Pythagoras, the mysteries of Orpheus and Zoroaster, the books of Hermes Trismegistos which allegedly contained the ancient wisdom of the Egyptians, all held to be prior to the academic and peripatetic schools of thinking. And this is where the teachings of Moses come in, as revealed to him by the Kabbalists. For he believed, as they maintained, that their writings were nothing less than the secret revelations made to Moses on Mount Sinai - part of the Oral Torah -, which had been passed on by word of mouth and only at a later date been confined to writing. (Jewish authorities would, however, never equate the Oral Law - Mishna, the Talmuds - with the mysteries of the Law.) Thus, the idea of including kabbalist writings is part of the large project - to have them contribute to the finding of the one truth. The driving force behind this conciliatory concept may be seen in two ways. According to Cassirer it was peace Pico ('Princeps Concordiae', as he had been dubbed) was aiming at 3 a concern very much in the air, engaging many minds of the period and which might have been at the back of the humanist interests in matters Jewish and Islamic - a concern to be furnished with a sound philosophical basis by Pico. And it is true, Pico sifted all the existing systems of thinking that came to his knowledge - with insatiable curiosity, worthy of the spirit of Bacon's 'sapere aude', and surprisingly unprejudiced - in order to resolve apparent discrepancies. Yet on the other hand it is quite obvious that the various contributors all added up to and converged in the confirmation of the one truth: the Christian faith. As he stated in his famous oration' which was intended to be the introductory speech in defence of his 900 theses - the compilation of the material for his project - before the pope in 1486: "I come now to those things that I have dug up from the ancient mysteries of the Hebrews and have brought forward in order to confirm the holy and Catholic faith. And lest by chance they be thought by those to whom they are unknown to be fictitious nonsense •^Emst Cassirer, "Giovanni Pico della Mirandola. A Study in the History of Renaissance Ideas", in: Journal of the History of Ideas, ΙΠ, 1942,123-144 and 319-346, esp. 325 ff.

Pico della Mirandola

197

or tales about rumours, I wish everyone to understand what and of what sort they are, whence sought, by which and how famous authors they are guaranteed, and how they were stored away, how divinely inspired they are, and how necessary to us for defending religion against the rude slanders of the Hebrews."4 These are astonishing sentences. They maintain that Jewish writings are to be taken seriously, not to be sneered upon, as was the custom (except in some audacious Florentine circles), as gibberish by those who did not know them due to their ignorance of the language - a charge still virulent half a generation later in the Dominican affair that brought Reuchlin to their defence. Secondly, he maintains that the ancient mysteries of the Hebrewsi.e. the kabbalist explication of the Torah - bear testimony not to the Jewish but to the Christian faith. He does not see the Pentateuch as being a typological foreshadowing, a kind of prehistory of the coming of Christ and the true faith - in fact, he does not for that matter need the New Testament -, as Paul, Augustine and the Church Father had done, but he sees in it, not allegorically, but in its very wording, in its letters, if properly read, the revelation of the Christian doctrine that had been handed down to Moses and had by him been concealed under or sealed with the letter of the law. Thus, by making use of kabbalist tools, he forges them into an instrument to turn against the Jews - it is they who do not read the Torah in the proper way or else they would have abjured their faith and become Christians, as indeed some Jews did under the impact of Christian Kabbala when it had been fully developed by Reuchlin and his successors. For the Jews, this Christian interest in their mystical teachings was at best double-edged: it was important that they began to be taken seriously as an intellectual force in their own right in the context of the Renaissance, at the same time it might prove dangerous in that it enabled Christians to turn their teachings against them. What did Pico know about Kabbala? What were his sources and what use did he make of them? Thanks to the posthumously published work by Chaim Wirszubski we are well informed on the sources. Thus, Pico certainly knew the Bahir', the 'Book of Creation', the 'Book of Roots', the writings of Abraham Abulafia, Recanati s 'Commentary on the Pentateuch', Gicatilla's Doors of Justice' and various others; he probably only knew the Zohar' from extensive quotations. All of these he read in the Latin translations made for him by Flavius Mithridates, at the same time pursuing Hebrew studies seriously, for he knew from the explanations that Flavius' texts were interspersed with that the meanings of many words were lost or became unintelligible in translation, that is, when separated from the Hebrew letters and their numerical equivalents, their graphic form, and the possibility of ^Pico della Mirandola, On the Dignity of Man, On Being and the One, Heptaplus, with an introduction by Paul J.W. Miller, Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1977 (1965), 29.

198

Κ. Reichert

their lettristic transposition, all of which depended upon the magic use of letters which of course evaporated in translation. Leaving out numerical values for the moment, let me give examples of the second and third points. In one of his theses (conclusio I.33)5, he states - and this is a direct quotation from Ricanati as Wirszubski has shown: "Now all the letters of the Torah - in their forms, and their conjunctions, and their separations, and in inclined letters, and in twisted letters, in missing and superfluous, small and large, crowns of letters, closed letters, open letters, and their order - are indicative of the ordination of the ten sefirot." In a culture that had just begun to grasp the necessity of translating verbatim from the original without intermediary steps, wrestling with the lexical meaning of the words, as testified, for example, by the endeavours of Luther a generation later, it must have come as a shock that translation might be impossible because it depended upon a variety of parameters, even those held to be accidental ones in Western civilization, such as the shapes of written characters. Was it magic Pico was referring to with its meticulous insistance on paying attention to a correct execution? But the real importance in the reorientation of the statement must be sought in the linguistic shift it indicates: from allegorical meanings above and beyond the text, to their distribution and confinement on the written page. And furthermore: that the Sefirot have their literal Shekhinah in written characters on the page; the signs do not just point to their referent as if to some transcendental category, they represent it in its essence. Thus, when translation as appropriation into a convenient mean - by way of Latin, by way of the vernacular - became a matter of course, Pico showed a different paradigm, insisting upon the uniqueness of Hebrew, in spite of his attempts at reconciliation. In the last resort this would lead to a postulation of Hebrew as the sacred language of the Christians, and one senses the challenge this entailed to a culture that took the Vulgate to be a holy text. As for the substitution of letters so pertinent to Kabbalist procedure, Pico states in one of his theses (1.29) that the name of God, the Tetragrammaton, consisted of the elements mem, zade, pe and zade, which only made sense if the method of so-called atbash' is applied, that is the method of substituting the last letter for the first (tav for alej) or vice versa, the penultimate for the second (shin for beth) or vice versa etc. Thus, by substituting yod, he, waw, he in this manner one arrives at mem, zade, pe, zade, a vox mystica or magica. -'The édition of the Conclusiones Sive Theses DCCCC here used is that by Bohdan Kieszkowski, Genève: Droz, 1973, together with Wiiszubski 's correcticns, in his Pico della Mirandola, op. cit. The Conclusio quoted is from the first set of Kabbalist Conclusiones, Kieszkowski, p. 53. Wirszubski's translation, or rather paraphrase, is on p. 45 of his book. See also Joseph Leon Blau, The Christian Interpretation of the Cabala in the Renaissance, New York: Columbia University Press, 1944,21.

Pico della Mirandola

199

There are various similar methods of letter substitution, and one may well surmise what innumerable possibilities at speculation are opened up in this way. If we bear in mind that the methods of concealing the secrets are not due to human efforts but have been preordained by God, just as the hidden laws of nature, then man is fully justified in extending the field of research beyond the scope of those who first hit upon the methods. Pico stopped short of what he had aimed at, the confirmation of Christianity. But the methods were large enough to gyrate in ever widening circles and to generate the secrets of Bruno's innumerable worlds by way of his 'ars combinatoria' - beyond the limits of the heliocentric system, beyond the confines of Christianity. Pico drew up his kabbalist findings in two sets of theses or conclusions as part of the 900 theses. The first set consists of 47 conclusions according to the wise doctrine of Hebrew Kabbalists' 6 , the second set consists of 71 conclusions drawn according to the proper, i.e. his own, opinion, in order to demonstrate from the fundaments of Hebrew wisdom the best confirmation of the Christian religion' 7 . The first set is more definitory in kind, states the premises, the second is speculative. When Pico submitted the 900 conclusions to the papal court for examination, 13 of them were condemned as heretical or dubious, none of which were taken from the 118 kabbalist theses. The clergy was probably aware what invaluable tool had been placed in their hands. There is just one among the thirteen, taken from the set of magical theses, that borders on our subject. Here Pico stated: There is no science that better certifies (magis certificet) the divinity of Christ than magic and Kabbala.' 8 In a long Apology' Pico set out to defend the condemned theses and resorted - trained as he was in the schools of scholastic sophistry - to subtle distinctions: there was a difference between revealed and non-revealed science.9 In one sense, Kabbala as an interpretation of the Law was not a revealed science in the way the gospels were, but in another sense (as an unfolding of the mysteries of the Law with Moses as the princeps cabalistarum ) and it was precisely this secretly revealed science that Pico claimed to be the best confirmation of Christ. Perhaps there was too much sophistry and subtlety in all this for the pope to be convinced, and after all, the shift of attention from the teachings of Jesus to those of Moses seemed to be outrageous, so that after perusal of the Apology' all of the 900 conclusions were condemned and Pico was forced to flee the country. Again, if we ask how much Pico knew about Kabbala, the answer must be: quite a lot. If what meets the eye in the pages of the Conclusions' seems to be haphazard, eclectically lifted from various sources, Wirszubski could, at least ^Kiesdcowski, 50-53. η

Id., 83-90. Kieszkowski counts 72, which has been corrected by Wirszubski. o Conclusiones Magice, No. 9, Kieszkowski, 79.

'Wirszubski, esp. 123ff.

200

Κ. Reichert

for the first set, demonstrate that they were almost exclusively drawn from Recanati's Commentary on the Pentateuch' and if put back into context would follow quite closely the sequence of his arguments. The first set offers definitions which are all concerned with the 'Sefirot', numerationes' in Latin, the divine emanations. They repeat commonplace things known to every Kabbalist but probably incomprehensible to a Christian audience. For example, that it was with the tree of knowledge of good and bad that God created the world (I.5)10, the tree referring to one of the commonest visualizations of the ten 'Sefirot'·, that Adam's sin consisted in the cutting off of the kingdom (I.4)11, that is, the tenth or lowest 'Sefirah', where God emanates into the world of nature, from the other plants, or what is termed the severance of the plants', i.e. the separation of the 'Sefirot'·, that the rivers of paradise refer to the streaming forth from one 'Sefirah' to the next (1.11)12; that God placed the great Adam' in the middle of paradise and that he was 'Tipheret' (I.10)13, i.e. the sixth 'Sefirah', i.e. Glory or Beauty - this Superior or Primordial Man is also called Adam Kadmon and was identified by Pico with Christ; that, to conclude, 'bereshit', in the beginning', was to be understood as Wisdom' (I.25)14, that is the second 'Sefirah', hokhmah, which is also identified with Christ, and that Wisdom consisted of 32 ways, the ten 'Sefirot' plus the 22 letters of the alphabet etc. All this, as I said, is common knowledge, but intended as a first introduction to Kabbalist assumptions for Christians. Much more important for our purpose is the second set of conclusions where Pico states his proper opinion'. He begins by making the fundamental distinction of Kabbala between the science of 'Sefirot' and the science of Names' Çshemot'), which he also says are practical and speculative sciences15. Then he goes on to differentiate further between speculative science which may be abbreviated to the distinction between 'alphabetaria revolutio', also called ars combinandi', and a 'triplex Merchiava' or merkabah', the Divine Chariot', which he believed corresponded to the three parts of philosophy, those concerned with the divine, the middle, i.e. the celestial, and the sensible natures. Here we already see how he tries to link Kabbalist concepts to the conventional patterns of Platonic and Neoplatonic thinking, yet we also see that there is no clear line to be drawn between the 10

Kieskowski, 51. Id. Id. l3Id 14 Id.,52. 15 n.l,id.,83.

Pico della Mirandola

201

Divine Chariot and the art of combining letters, as would be customary with Kabbalists. On the contrary, there seems to be a connection established, as Wirszubski has shown, 16 by gematria , the substitution of one word by another on the grounds of their numerical equivalents. The science of triplex merchiava' is then seen to correspond to the tripartite structure of the 'Sefirot' and their descending and ascending direction, which must, on the former assumption, also be reached by gematria', since names, letters, and numbers square with each other. All of this sounds, and probably is, rather confusing and certainly does not lend itself to be presented in a short paper. Let us bear in mind that transitions are possible from one allegedly distinct system to another - and if this is possible, why not to other systems of thought? We shall see and proceed to what Pico did with these assumptions. There is, e.g., his trinitarian explanation of the names of God. Thus, he states in the sixth conclusion that the three great names of God consisting of four letters are to be attributed to the three persons of the trinity, so that the name alef, he, yod, he, "Ehyeh", is the father, yod, he, waw, he, the usual Tetragrammaton, is the son, and the name alef, dalet, nun, yod, "Adonai", is the holy spirit 17 . Since in Pico's understanding of the Kabbala the names of God and the 'Sefirot' are inseparably linked, Ehyeh would be equated with Keter, the Supreme Crown, i.e. the first Sefirah, the Tetragrammaton with Tiferei, Glory, the sixth Sefirah, and Adonai with Malkhut Kingdom, or Shekinah, the tenth Sefirah. The equation of Jesus and Tiferei links up with Pico's identification of Jesus with Adam Kadmon, Primordial Man. A different way of extracting the trinity from the Sefirot is hinted at in the twentieth conclusion: 'If the Kabbalists would focus their interpretation upon the expression alef zain (az), which means tunc, they would be much illuminated about the mystery of the trinity.' 18 Wirszubski found the key to this enigmatic statement in the corresponding source. In the Book of Roots it says: "AZ, which means then' or suddenly', as in the text (Exod. 15:1) AZ Moses sang, and in the text (Num. 21:17) AZ Israel sang, and in the other text (Isa. 60:5)AZ shall you see and be illuminated, indicates all the ten Sefirot according to the representation of their letters. Alef indicates the [trinity] of the three superior ones, Crown, Wisdom and Intelligence, [united in the unity of their essence]. But Zain, according to its numerical value, which is seven, indicates the

16

Wiiszubski, 134 ff. 17 Id., 166. Kieszkowski gives erroneous Hebrew names. 18 Kieszkowski, 85.

202

Κ. Reichert

others from pietas' to 'Kingdom'"19. But what looks like a straightforward translation has actually been interfered with: Wirszubski could show that trinitatem' and unitam in unitate essende' were interpolations made by Flavius Mithridates, as occurred in numerous other cases. Thus, in many instances the translator paved the way for Pico's symbolic Christian interpretation which he held to be strictly along Kabbalistic lines. Since the names of God have unique importance for one branch of Kabbala, it is to be expected that a similar prominence is attributed by Pico to the name of Jesus. The name would in Hebrew characters be written as yod, shin, waw, i.e. two letters of the Tetragrammaton with shin as intermediary. In the fourteenth conclusion Pico states: By the letter shin, which is in the middle of the name of Jesus, it is signified to us Kabbalistically, that the world rests perfectly in its perfection, when yod is combined with waw, which has happened (actum est) in Christ, who was the true son of God and man. 2 0 Various explanations have been offered. Scholem took yod to stand for the father, shin for the logos, waw for the holy ghost.21 Another explanation would run that yod is 10, hence the totality of God's manifestations in the Sefirot, waw is 6, which is Tiferei or Adam Kadmon but can also stand for the mundane world, and shin is to be read as the relative pronoun she, so that this Triagrammaton would read: Jesus is the total manifestation of God by which, at the same time, he is the world.22 Yet another explanation reads the letters according to the method of notarikon, whereby only the initial letter of a word is given, thus yod would be the first letter of the Tetragrammaton, shin the first letter of shamajim, heaven, waw the first letter of wa-ha-arez, and the earth, i.e. The Lord of Heaven and Earth. The position of shin and its symbolic meaning as shamajim is important for Pico because in this way he could Kabbalistically denote him to be the intermediary between above and below, God and the mundane world, which are united and come to perfect rest in his name. Pico also resorts to the ars combinandi to demonstrate the magic presence of Christ. In the 59th conclusion he claims that the fourfold state of things union in God, procession from God, return and reunion in beatitude - will be seen when combining the letter beth, the first letter of the Law, with the first, the middle, and the final letters of the alphabet (beginning, middle and end 19

For the Latin text see Wirszubski, 107. The words in brackets were the cues added by the translator. 20 Kieszkowski, 84. 21 Gerdiom Scholem, 'Zur Gesdiichte do- Anfange der Christlichen Kabbala', in: Essays Presented toLeoBaeck, London, 1954,187. 22 Herman Greive, 'Die christliche Kabbala des Giovanni Pico della Mirandola', in: Archiv fikr Kulturgeschichte, Bd. 57,1975,152 f.

Pico della Mirandola

203

being of course highly symbolic).23 After some manipulation - we have to add the five in the final position differently written characters to the twentytwo in order to arrive at the middle he wants - we get av, the father, ben, the son, and finally, cum ultimis, shabbat}4 What he meant by shabbat he had stated earlier (11.16): From the mystery of the three letters which are in the word Sciabat, i.e. shin, beth, tav, we can interpret Kabbalistically that the world celebrates shabbat when the son of God becomes man, and lastly its future shabbat when men will be reborn in the son of God. 2 5 Thus shabbat is the great day of Jubilee, but in the sense of the coming of Christ (which has already taken place), and in the sense of the final return to, and reunification with God. To shabbat in this sense, eschatological beatitude, Pico devoted the final book of his Heptaplus. If we remember the general intention of the conclusions, to demonstrate the compatibility or even unity of competing systems of thought, it was to be expected that Pico would also try to harmonize Kabbalist concepts with systems familiar to his Christian audience, perhaps with the purpose of making his Kabbalist deductions all the more convincing by amalgamating them with received modes of thinking. Thus, he joins the seven planets to the seven lower Sefirot and the three supracelestial or intelligible worlds to the three upper ones, the Empyreum (prima) being Keter, the primum mobile (secunda) Hokhmah, the firmamentum (tercia) Binah (II.48) 26 . There is some manipulation about the sequence of the planets, Sol being placed in the sixth position, Tiferei, Beauty or Glory, to tie in with his usual equation of this Sefirah with Christ who at the same time was equated by the Christians with the sun. Another example for the coupling of systems would be his equating of the parts of the soul with the Sefirot (11.66). Adhering to the conventional three-partite structure of the soul he goes on to differenciate. Thus, the three highest Sefirot, corresponding to the rational soul, are distinguished as uni tas", intellectus' and racio', and so on, all the way down to the tenth Sefirah which he calls the habitaculum' of the soul, i.e. the body. 27 Of particular interest is, as always, the sixth, Tiferei, Beauty, Glory, which represents in the soul liberum arbitrium', free will. I have not so far mentioned it, but Pico's emphasis on man's will being free is the one great concept for which he became and is still famous. It was the great trumpet 23

Kieszkowski, 89. Wirsznbski, 164 f. 25 Kies2kowski, 85. 24

26

I d , 88.

27

Id, 90.

204

Κ. Reichert

blow, the ignition of the Renaissance28. To all the other beings a fixed place in creation was assigned, but man was created as a composite being, moulded from every creative matter. He was given a free will in order to decide for himself where he wanted to belong, either to descend and become one with his animal and vegetative parts, reducing himself to the sheer creature comforts, or to ascend and unite with the intellectual and angelic worlds in which he has a share. He can do this of his own accord as he is free to choose. This is man's dignity, as Pico calls it, his glory, his Tiferet. The ascendency of the soul is of course a Platonic and Neo-Platonic theme, but it also plays an important role in Talmudic and Kabbalist writings. Here the concept is called 'binsica', the death of or by or through the kiss, mors osculi'29. In one of his conclusions (11.13) Pico states: "He who operates Kabbala (qui operator in Cabala) without extraneous admixture, shall die, if he sticks long enough to this work (in opere), by 'binsica'"30. This does not necessarily mean physical death - it can mean this too, as in the cases of Moses, Ahron, Miijam, Maria and others -, it means the final step of ascendence when the soul is severed from the body, is enraptured and united with God or, in a less stricly theological context, with the heavenly Venus.31 It is the ultimate mystical experience. Here no intermediary, no grace descending is necessary, as in Christian concepts. If we remember that Tiferet had also been equated with Christ and Adam Kadmon, we begin to realize that the role assigned to Christ may be an ambiguous one: not the sole redemptor but a model. As Christ had 28of course he also had in this his predecessors, notably Giamiozzo Manetti. See the new German edition of his De dignitate et excellentia hominis: Über die Würde und Erhabenheit des Menschen, ed. August Buck, Hamburg: Meiner 1990. Cf. Paul Oskar Kristeller, 'The Dignity of Man', in his Renaissance Concepts of Man, New York: Harper Torchbook edition, 1972. But Pico was also influenced in his concept of free choice by Alemanno, as has been shown recœtly by Moshe Idei, op. cit. ^ S e e Wirszubski's chapter 13 in his book, 153 ff. Edgar Wind has tracked down the importance of this Jewish notion for Renaissance concepts of love in his Pagan Mysteries in the Renaissance, Harmandsworth: Penguin, 1967 (1958), esp. 154 £f. 30 3

Kieszkowski, 84.

r

'pico had already enlarged upon this concept in his Commento sopra una canzona d'amore di

Girolamo Benivieni, written about the same time as the Conclusiones, where he also pointed to its origin in the Song of Songs ("Let him kiss me with the kisses of his mouth") and connected it with Platonic concepts. Wirszubski, 153 ff., Wind, 155. For a recent translation see Commentary on a Canzone of Benivieni, trans. Sears Jayne, New York- Berne-Frankfurt: Lang, 1984, 150 f.: " ... binsica ... occurs when the soul, in an intellectual rapture, unites so completely with incorporeal things that it rises above the body and leaves it altogether."

Pico della Mirandola

205

descended into a human body and then ascended again to unify with the father, so man, whose soul has been sent down passing the Sefirot and comprising them all, may do the same: by virtue of his own free will and by operating Kabbala. On the other hand, deeply embued by the Christian faith as he was, Pico leaves no doubt that redemption, that is reunification with God, is only possible through Christ. This is the great contradiction that runs through his work. What we see in the Conclusions are eclectic one-phrase statements lifted from various sources to be substantiated and probably to be worked out into a system in a public defence that never took place, and one may well wonder how he would have justified one or the other of his theses before a Christian audience. There is however one text, written three years later, in 1489, in which he offers a close reading of a Torah passage according to the rules of Talmudic, Midrashic and Kabbalist exegesis in order to unravel its secret truths. This is the Heptaplns, an interpretation of Genesis 1, 1-27, in seven books or expositions. This work may truly be called a stroke of genius. Basing interpretation upon different layers of meaning, usually four, had been a common procedure in the Middle Ages. What is new with Pico is that he based his expositions on the literal phrasing of the original, sticking as it were to the very signifiers which he made refer, again literally, to a variety of signifieds. And he did not pay heed to the customary order and denomination of historical, allegorical, moral and anagogical meaning but extended their number to seven and extended their range to include the concepts of antique philosphy and its descendents, with one important addition: he did not rest with the usual three worlds - the angelic, the celestial, the corruptible - but added a fourth by assigning to man a world of his own, as is required by his system, which at the same time is characterized as the bond and union of the previous ones, since man is created in the image of God and God includes them all. All of this can be discovered by reading the first 27 verses of Moses.This "prophet's" writing is seen as analoguous to the arrangement of nature by God, wherein everything is contained in the other and can be deciphered layer by layer as to its various meanings within the overall plan. With this analogy, "the scripture of Moses is the exact image of the world", as Pico states in the Second Proem: "whatever is in any of the worlds is contained in each. As the imitator of nature, Moses had to treat of each of these worlds in such a way that in the same words and in the same context he could treat equally of all." 32 Hence the text of Moses is a model of the world(s) in its very construction. Only rarely does Pico resort to the scholastic method of supposition (of the type Isaak stands for Jesus), instead he focuses on the laterality of the letters, disregarding word boundaries, reshuffling the 32

Heptaplus, op. cit. 79 f.

206

Κ. Reichert

letters, applying their numerical values in order to find correspondences between words semantically apparently fiar apart, etc. Customary as these practices were in Kabbalist reading procedures, for Christian readers it meant something quite unheard of and opened up entirely different ways of reaching new continents of meaning. The simplest way of how this works is shown in an example - familiar to Jewish exegesis long before Kabbala - he gives in the Second Proem: when it is stated "In the beginning God created the heavens", "the heavens" refers to the highest of the three worlds, the ultramundane, which is compounded of light and darkness. The word itself, however, Hashamajim, is a literal compound of the two other worlds: the celestial world or world of light which is present as "esW, fire, and the sublunary or world of darkness and instability, which comes next as majim water. Thus in one single Hebrew word were contained all the three worlds that had been postulated throughout antiquity and Christianity. The assumption that the three worlds are one world ("a fact on which our purpose almost wholly depends") 33 is literally instanced by their contraction into one word. Pico unveils the hidden truths of the 27 verses by establishing different reading models, each one pertaining to one of the worlds and then to the world of man which corresponds to each of them and contains them at the same time, is their "bond and union". 34 Throughout, Pico is at great pains to make his reading tie in with the systems of Western and Eastern thought whilst never losing sight of his great project of unification. Yet the other intention is equally strong: to prove not only the superiority of Christianity, but also the equal age of Judaism and Christianity, whereby the latter was only more deeply hidden in the words of the "prophet", hence more profound, more true, than the former. Therefore all the expositions, as was to be expected, head towards the seventh, the one on Sabbath and Christian laws: Here we shall disclose what in the present scripture Moses clearly hid about these, so that this explicit prophecy of the advent of Christ, of the increase of the Church, and of the calling of the gentiles, may be read plainly. Thus indeed this book of Moses, if any such, is a book marked with the seven seals and full of all wisdom and all mysteries. 35 Having gone through his seven expositions at some length, twisting and stretching the words to mean what he intends them to mean, he offers, as an appendix to the last book, the reading of the first word of Genesis which proves him a master of ars combinandi, by the help of which he discovers "the whole plan of the creation of the world and of all things in it disclosed and

33

Id., 77. Id., 134. 35 Id.,81. 34

Pico della Mirandola

207

explained in that one phrase."36 From the 6 letters of Bereshit (bet, resh, alef, shin, yod, tav) he draws 12 different combinations, seven of which he had, however, already found in an anonymous Liber Combinationum*1. Thus he gets words like av, father, bebar, in or through the son, shabat, rest and end (quies), rosh, head, esh, fire, rav, great, 'ish, man, berit, with a pack, etc. "If we fit the whole passage together following this order", he says, "it will read like this: The father, in the Son and through the Son, the beginning and end or rest, created the head, the fire, and the foundation of the great man with a good pact'." 38 The first part of the sentence is evident; for head, fire and foundation he drew again on the three worlds which, as he had shown in the previous expositions, converged in Christ, Adam Kadmon and in man himself, since he had been created in His image. These are not optional readings but decisive ones, and Christian Kabbalists to come knew how to proceed. The intention is obvious: "Against the stony heads of the Hebrews it [sc. Pico's reading] will furnish you with powerful weapons drawn from their own arsenals."39 And: "If the Jews continue impudently and stubbornly to deny this, let them listen to their own Talmudists, who strongly support our opinion."40 There were indeed many Jews who felt convinced and gave up the old faith. Thus the entrance of Jewish thinking into the ken of Christianity was a double-edged affair: it opened up new continents of meaning and at the same time it was taken out of the hands of their originators in an act of appropriation and supersession.

36

Id., 171. Wiiszubski, 258.

37 3S

Heptaplus, 172.

39

Id, 158.

40

I d , 161.

Yehuda Liebes A Profile of R. Naphtali Katz From Frankfurt and His Attitude Towards Sabbateanism English Translation: Batya Stein

R. Naphtali b. Isaac Ha-Cohen Kaz (1645-1719) was one of the most interesting figures of the eighteenth century and, as such, much has been written about him.1 The twists and turns of his life have captivated historians and biographers - from his childhood imprisonment by the Tatars, through his polemics and exile, and up to his death in Constantinople, on the way to the Holy Land. His colorful personality supplied an additional dimension - he was famous as a miracle man who once even set Frankfurt on fire or, at least, let it burn without alerting the firemen in order to test the power of his amulets, which eventually proved to be less than perfect. R. Naphtali was then head of the Frankfurt beth-din and, following this event, was imprisoned and expelled from the city by the Christian authorities. The Jews of the city, whose quarter it was that had burnt down, were not party to this accusation or failed to take it seriously, since the rabbi's holiness and his amulets were more important to them than the wood and stones used to build their city.2 J

See M A. Ha-Cohen Rapcpoit-Hartstein, Shalshelet Zahav, Pietrkov 1931. This biography, together with other stories about R. Naphtali, was reprinted in Naphtali Katz's book of homilies Semikhat Hakhamim, Kedusha U-Vrakha, Jerusalem 1991, pp. 448-491. All quotations are from this edition. The first edition of this work appeared in Frankfíiit am Main in 1704-1706 - see note 89ff. There are several mistakes in this biography, and examples appear in notes 4, 25. Another biography - "Toledot R. Naphtali Katz" - appears in A. S. Ha-Cohen, We-Ziva Ha-Kohen, Jerusalem 1953, pp. 23-31. The author was one ci R. Naphtali's descendants, and he also cites many of R. Naphtali's ideas. See also M M. Biber, Mazkeret li-Gdoley Ostraha, Berdichev 1907, pp. 63-69, 8485. G. Nigal. "On R. Naphtali Katz of Posen", Sinai 92 (1983), pp. 91-94 [Hebr.]. P. Ha-Cohen Peli, "R. Naphtali Ha-Cohen, a Harbinger of Hasidism", Sinai 39 (1956), pp. 242-260 [Hebr.]. A. BarLevav, Death in the World of the Kabbalist R. Naphtali Ha-Cohen Katz, M.A. dissertation, adv. Ze'ev Gris, Hebrew University of Jerusalem 1990 [Hebr.]. The first two chapters (pp. 1-29) are devoted to a review of the life and writings of R. Naphtali. 2

See Johann Jacob Sdiudt, Jüdischen Merckwürdigkeiten, Part 2, Book 4, C3i. 6, Frankfurt am Main-Leipzig 1714, pp. 70-131; Karl E. Grözinger, "Jiidisdie Wundermänner in Deutschland", in: Κ. E. Grözinger, ed., Judentum im Deutschen Sprachraum, Frankfurt am Main 1990, pp. 191-192. See also Shalshelet Zahav - note 1 - pp. 451-457. A. Yaari, "Set to Bum: The Burning of Frankfurt on

209

A Profile of R. Naphtali Katz

Beside practical Kabbala, R. Naphtali also was interested in many other areas. He was concerned with the ethics of terminal cases and death customs and was also a halakhist. Scholars have not neglected these endeavors either an excellent study by Avri Bar Levav 3 has recently become available on the former, while his halakhic writings have been lost4. However, most of R. Naphtali s creative work was in two other fields - poetry and midrash - and these have merited only bibliographical attention.5 I believe that R. Naphtali has imprinted these areas with a unique and personal stamp, and that they contain important clues for understanding his personality as well as his spiritual world. They might also shed new light on the period in which he lived and worked, which was one of the most astounding eras in Jewish thought. It may be worth mentioning in passing that, since its first appearance almost three hundred years ago, R. Naphtali s main book of homilies has never been reprinted and only photostated copies have been available. But several months ago, as if in preparation for this conference (of 1992), a new, deluxe edition6 appeared. I shall rely on R. Naphtali s attitude to Sabbateanism as a convenient angle from which to examine his personality. This issue has also been researched and, as is often mentioned in historical accounts, this aspect of R. Naphtali s figure was already controversial during his lifetime. 7 At first Main and Hebrew Literature", in his book Mehkarey Sefer, Jerusalem 1958, pp. 55-61 [Hebr.]. 3 4

See note 1. R . Naphtali attached a page of ziyyunim [contents] to his book Semikhat Hakhamim - note 1 - which

appears m p. 15 of the introduction to the new edition and at the end of the book in the first edition. In this book, R. Naphtali mentioned that he had writtoi several other books but never publiáied them, among them Yam Kinneret, a supplement to the book of response Perot Ginnosar written by his own grandfather, R. Naphtali of Lublin. The grandson had wanted to publish this bode with all the additions. (Aocording to Shalshelet Zahav - [note 1 - p. 477), in Ozar Ha-Sefarim,

Ben-Yaakov

claims that Perot Ginnosar had appeared in Frankfurt am Main in 1553, [5313 - almost one hundred years before R. Naphtali was bom ! ] But this claim reflects a gross misunderstanding of Ben Yaakov 's statement - he had not claimed that this was the publication date of the book Rather, Ben Yaakov indicated that R. Naphtali had been a rabbi in Frankfurt, and that the letters following the mention of Frankfurt do not stand for a date; instead, they are an acronym of the source from which Ben-Yaakov had obtained information about the book, as is clear from the list of abbreviations attached to Ozar Ha-Sefarim). Incidentally, R. Naphtali quotes his grandfather on several issues. See, for instance, Semikhat Hakhamim - note 1 - pp. 69, 188, Pi Yesharim - note 97 - 5a. Another bode mentioned by R. Naphtali in the ziyyunim as one he had failed to p u b l ü is Et Musefeihen, a study of all the cases in which the Hebrew word et is used as grounds for amplifying the scope of a rule. It is possible that this book too was halakhic and not only homiletical. 5

See note 1. The best bibliographical review is found in Bar-Levav 's work.

6

See note 1.

7

SeenotelO.

210

Y. Liebes

glance, R. Naphtali would appear to have been one of Sabbateanism's most tenacious adversaries, and his fierce attacks on Sabbateanism are an important historical source for the history of the movement. The fact that R. Naphtali married his granddaughter to R. Jacob Emden, Sabbateanism's foremost opponent, could strengthen this impression.8 On the other hand, the circumstances leading to R. Naphtali's struggle against Sabbateanism might cast doubts on his unequivocal attitude towards it. I am referring to the affair known in history as "the Hayon controversy." R. Nehemia Hayon s book on Sabbatean Kabbala, Oz Le-Elohim, was published with R. Naphtali's approbation. In the wake of the controversy surrounding the book,9 R. Naphtali apologized for this approbation and alleged that Hayon had obtained it from him under false pretences. R. Naphtali's claims are hardly acceptable on several counts, but the facts of this affair are well documented and have been exposed several times;10 those interested may wish to reconsider R. Naphtali's claims and judge their credibility by themselves. I shall therefore not refer to these familiar issues again in this lecture, concentrating instead on R. Naphtali's attitude towards Sabbateanism as it emerges from his other writings and from other evidence not dealing directly and openly with this issue. It is to be hoped that these sources, as yet untouched, will help us solve the riddle of R. Naphtali's figure in general, and his attitude to Sabbateanism in particular. A search for clues to R. Naphtali's attitude to Sabbateanism uncovers his special relationship to the symbol of the deer ζevi, and his use of a deer head as a charm against fire.11 We may suppose that this symbol was related to Sabbetai Zevi's name, though it could simply hint at R. Naphtali's own name, in line with the verse12 "Naphtali is a hind let loose." It was after this verse that the name Hirsch was attached to almost every Naphtali in the lands of Ashkenaz. Let us turn to more concrete evidence. It is now clear that R. Naphtali gave approbations to other Sabbatean books printed in his time, as well as the

8 9

See J. Emden, Megillat Sefer, ed. D. Kahana, Warsaw 1897, p. 39. For the ideological background of this controversy see Y. Liebes, "The Ideological Basis of the

Hayon Controversy", Proceedings of the Eighth World Congress of Jewish Studies, Division C, 1982, pp. 129-134 [Hebr.]. 10

Qn this issue see D. Kahana, A History of the Kabbalists, the Sabbateans and the Hasidim,Tel-

Aviv 1926, pp. 126-137 [Hebr.]. The lettere of apology about Hayon were printed by D. Kaufmann in 'La Lutte de R. Naphtali Cohen contre Hayoun," REJ36 (1898), pp. 256-286; 37 (1899), pp. 274283 and reprinted in Shalshelet Zahav -note 1. Avri Bar-Levav discussed this issue in a public lecture. 11

SeeNigal -note 1-p. 91.

12

Gmesis 49:21.

A Profile of R. Naphtali Katz

211

one written by Hayon: Or Yisrael by R. Israel Jaffe from Shklov13, and Hemdat Zevi by Zevi Chotsh.14 It is hard to believe that R. Naphtali, himself a profound kabbalist thinker, failed to notice the Sabbatean bent of these books. On the other hand, it could be claimed that R. Naphtali gave approbations to many other books,15 and that others, such as R. David Oppenheim, had also found the above mentioned Sabbatean books to be acceptable. R. David Oppenheim was a famous bibliophile and a close friend of R. Naphtali, and it was in his house that he found shelter when forced to leave Frankfurt after the unfortunate incident of the burning of the city mentioned above.16 However, R. David's own credentials on this score are not exactly impeccable, and his own attitude to Sabbateanism is yet to be determined.17 But R. Naphtali gave his approval to yet another Sabbatean book, of whose mysteries he must have certainly been aware. I am referring to Avaq Soferim by R. Abraham Cuenque,18 who was R. Naphtali's closest friend. In his approbation, R. Naphtali wrote: "And all who know me know that I have loved him with a love as strong as death19 since 1688. For almost two and a half years my hand never left his. When he was far I treasured his words in my heart, and when he was close he drank from my cup and laid in my bosom close to my heart."20 R. Abraham Cuenque was indeed a minor Sabbatean figure but, speaking of his friendship with R. Naphtali, he innocently reveals R. Naphtali's connections with other important leaders of the movement. One was the 13 Frankfurt on Oder 1703. R. Naphtali's approbation was not printed with the others at the head of the book but in page 7, after the author's introduction, since it was only received after the book was in print. On the Sabbatean character of this book see Kahana -note 10 -part 2,pp. 126-129. 14 Amsterdam 1706. On the Sabbatean character of this book see Kahana - note 10 - part 2, pp. 123126. 15

SeeL. Loewenstem, Index Approbationum, Berlin, 1923,pp. 113-114. R. David gave his approbation to Hayon s book as well as to Or Yisrael, and even to A vag Soferim -nate 18. See also Y. Z. Kahana, "R. David Oppenheim 's Respcnsum", Sinai 19 (1947), pp. 16

327-334 [Hehr.]. 17 The raimants of R. Judah he-Hasid's group in Jerusalem appointed him as their rabbi. See M Benayahu, "An Exchange of Letters between the A&keaaá Community in Jerusalem and R. David Oppenheim", Jerusalem 3 (1951), pp. 108-129 [Hebr.]. 18 Amsterdam 1704. 19 See Song of Songs 8:6. 20 According to Niddah 20b. The rest of the passage includes further tarns of love and friendship. See also M Benayahu, The Sabbatean Movement in Greece, Jerusalem 1971-1978 (=Sefitnot 14, Sefer Ycrwan), p. 166 [Hebr.]. See also M. Benayahu "The Letters of R. Abraham Cuenque to R. Judah Bariel", Sinai 32 (1953),p. 307 [Hebr.].

212

Y. Liebes

kabbalist R. Efraim Ha-Cohen21 and, above all (or, if you prefer, below all) Ismael Zevi, Sabbetai Zevi's own son! Concluding his memoirs on Sabbetai Zevi, published by R. Jacob Emden, Abraham Cuenque attests:22 "And with my own eyes, and not those of a stranger, I saw during my exile in Austria, at the house of our learned teacher Naphtali who is today a teacher in Posen [i.e. our Naphtali], that there was an important scholar there and his name was Efraim... And he showed him a question by Ismael Zevi and his distinguished answer,23 a very profound one. This I saw with my own eyes many times."24 It is hard to imagine that R. Naphtali discussed Ismael Zevi's profound reflections with these two Sabbatean kabbalists in his own home while, at the same time, harboring a totally negative attitude towards Sabbateanism. But all this is still not the main issue. If we wish to understand the spiritual world of a Jewish scholar, we should deal primarily with his work. And indeed, in the course of considering R. Naphtali's homiletical writings, which do not explicitly relate to Sabbateanism, we shall find many ideas typical of Sabbatean literature. Let us look at the following examples. In the introduction to R. Naphtali's unfinished book,25 there is a long homily on the secret of "Leah," Jacob's wife. Leah symbolizes the highest Sefira of divinity and is inapprehensible in our world because "she has fallen into Esau's realm," where she will remain until the Messiah comes. The Messiah, also called "the true Redeemer," will release her from Esau and return her to holiness. R. Naphtali relies here on "the writings of the holy man, our teacher R. Hayyim Vital, of blessed memory, who said that Leah was unworthy of holiness and belonged in Esau's realm." Indeed, Lurianic Kabbala does mention that kelippot [evil forces] had adhered to Leah and that she had to be purified before mating with Jacob,26 in accord with the famous midrash

"21

On Efraim Cohen see M. Bmayáhu, The Sabbatean Movement in Greece - note 21 - pp. 107122. 22

J. Emden, Toral Ha-Kena oí, Altana 1752,21b. In the Hebrew original, this sentence is a play on words on a metaphor from Samuel Π 7:17.

24

On Ismael Zevi see M. Benayahu, The Sabbatean Movement in Greece - note 21 - pp. 163-178.

This passage is quoted in p. 166, but there is no attempt to reach conclusions regarding R. Naphtali. The author of Shalshelet Zahav - note 1 - mistakenly attributed this testimony to R. Jacob Emden rather than to Cuenque. See ibid, p. 450. On the relations between R. Naphtali and Emden see above, note 8. 25

Sefer Bereshit U-Ferush Pi-Yesharim 9d-10c. On this book see note 97. It is possible that the

homily below was behind the printers' decision to abandon publication of the book and to destroy most of the copies. 26

SeferHa-Gilgulim, Premidila 1875 (offset, in Torat Ha-Gilgul, Jerusalem 1982) 65a-b, ch. 50.

A Profile of R. Naphtali Katz

213

stating that Leah had originally been meant to be Esau's wife. 27 However, it is nowhere said that Leah did indeed become part of Esau's realm and was to remain there until messianic times! R. Naphtali relies for this statement on the Sefer Asara Ma 'amarot by R. Menahem Azaria from Fanno, but I could not find it there. Nonetheless, this formulation strongly matches the spirit of Sabbatean syncretism28 and, more particularly, the specific garb it donned in Jacob Frank's times, one generation after R. Naphtali. As we know, Frank converted to Esau's religion - Christianity - and viewed conversion as a step that had been postponed from Jacob's times until his own messianic era, when the religion of Israel would reach completeness.29 Although the Sabbatean literature prior to Frank does not exhort conversion, it too refers to the supreme divine entity as "Esau" or "Edom" such as, for instance, the noted Sabbatean book Wa-Avo Ha-Yom el Ha-Ayitt,30 It is obvious that R. Naphtali did not contemplate conversion to Christianity. I am not able to point to a Sabbatean source for his words because Judeo-Christian syncretism, though present at the inception of the Sabbatean movement31, attained final crystallization only after R. Naphtali's death. But there are definite parallels and resemblances, which also come to the fore in the portrayal of the Messiah in this homily as chiefly concerned with apprehending the highest aspect of divinity. Indeed, in the Zohar, as well as in other earlier sources, it is already claimed that the Messiah will grasp the highest aspect of divinity unattainable in our own times,32 but Sabbateanism brought this issue to a climax and turned apprehension into messianism's central concern.33 The links with Sabbatean terminology are also revealed here in the use of the term "the true Redeemer," common among Sabbateans when alluding to their Messiah.34 27

Genesis Rabba 70:16. On this syncretism see Y. Liebes, "A Crypto Judaeo-Chnstian Sect of Sabbatean Origin" , Tarbiz

47 (1988),pp. 349-384, [Hebr.]. See G. Sdiolem, Studies and Texts Concerning

the History of Sabbateanism

ans its

Metamorphoses, Jerusalem 1974, p. 132 [Hebr.]. 3

® This book is inedited. The relevant passage is quoted by M. A Perlmuter, Rabbi

Jonathan

Eybeschuetz and His Attitude Towards Sabbateanism, Jerusalem and Tel-Aviv 1947, pp. 90-91 [Hebr. ]. R. Jonathan Eybeschuetz writes of Esau s holy head in his book Ya 'arot Devash, Jerusalem 1965, part 2,75b. 31

As in the theories of Nathan of Gaza. See G. Sdiolem, Sabbetai Zevi, Princeton 1973, pp. 282-

286. 32

See Y. Liebes, Studies in the Zohar, Albany 1993, pp. 48-55. See Y. Liebes, "Sabbatean Messianism", in: Y. Liebes, Studies in Jewish Mysticism and Jewish

Messianism, Albany 1993, pp. 93-106. 34

See Y. Liebes, "New Writings in Sabbatean Kabbala from the Circle of Rabbi Jchathan

Eybesdiuetz", Jerusalem Studies in Jewish Thought, 5 (1986), pp. 321-322 [Hebr.].

214

Y. Liebes

The links between this homily and Sabbateanism are not only founded on these broad conceptual resemblances but also on the details of the kabbalistic symbolism. The specific reference to the supreme kabbalistic entity as "Leah" is only to be found here, in the above mentioned kabbalistic treatise Wa-Avo Ha-Yom el Ha Ayin,35 and in another work of the same circle, which is only found in manuscript form and which I have named Forty Nine Rules on the Style of Wa-Avo Ha-Yom el Ha-Ayin,36 These other books point to the homiletical basis of interpreting the name "Leah" as Ein-Sof 3 7 The name "Leah" is interpreted as derived from Leut [weariness], indicating that this sefira is placed beyond grasp, and I believe that this interpretation is also suggested in R. Naphtali s homily. In a statement attempting to soften his explicit claim about Leah's fall into Esau's realm, R. Naphtali argues that Esau - the evil force created out of human iniquity and ruling this world prevents man from apprehending the supreme divine aspect named "Leah." In support of my thesis on the Sabbatean nature of this identity between "Leah" and the supreme divine aspect, it should be mentioned that the book Wa-Avo Ha-Yom el Ha-Ayin was vehemently attacked by R. Ezekiel Landau (known as ha-Noda' bi-Yehuda, seemingly for this very reason. R. Ezekiel claimed that the author of Wa-Avo Ha-Yom el Ha-Ayin denies the providence of the Ein-Sof in an act of heresy worse than that of Aristotle and his colleagues, in that the latter denied His providence because of His majesty, but the author of this pamphlet disclaims His providence by claiming that His powers were weakened, a heresy never suggested even by ancient [pagan] nations.38 This allusion to the weakened powers of the Ein-Sof could be related to the presumed identity between Leah, who is a woman, and the Ein-Sof, hinting at the rabbinical statement: "Now the nations of the world will say He has been weakened like a woman."39 In Wa-Avo Ha-Yom el Ha-Ayin this rabbinical statement indeed appears in the same context. Daring sexual homilies are also suggested in Forty Nine Rules, in which the supreme divine entity at times fulfills the female role.40 Moreover, Leah's name is here associated with weariness, and a similar association is found in Wa-Avo HaYom el Ha-Ayin, which explicitly alludes to the weakening powers of the EinSof and not only to our inability to grasp it. These allusions seem to fit the The relevant passage is quoted in Perlmuter - note 31 - p. 74. It was reprinted, after corrections from other manuscripts, in my article - note 35 - pp. 197-198. 36

Ibid,pp. 197-199.

37

Ibid Although R. Naphtali does not refer to Leah as Ein-Sof but rather as the sefira of Keter, the

idea is identical. 38

This passage appears in two of Emden 's books, and is quoted by Perlmuter-ncte 31 -p. 50.

39

Berakhot 32a

40

See Y. Liebes -note 34 -p.200.

A Profile of R. Naphtali Katz

215

well-known Sabbatean motif of the "reversed Gnosis," denying the supreme divine entity providence over the nether worlds,41 as was indeed understood by the Nöda' bi-Yehuda42 Again, I am not claiming that R. Naphtali was necessarily influenced by these Sabbatean works. We do not know when the book Forty Nine Rules was written, but VJa-Avo Ha-Yom el Ha-Ayin was apparently written in the second decade of the eighteenth century,43 about twenty years after R. Naphtali wrote on this subject. Nevertheless, it seems that R. Naphtali's views were then current among many Sabbateans, and his writings might help us trace the development of Sabbatean views. Nor should R. Naphtali be conclusively labeled a "Sabbatean" in the narrow sense of the term, since there is no evidence that he thought of Sabbetai Zevi as the Messiah. It is even questionable whether such a definition is at all important for our understanding of R. Naphtali's spiritual world. Unlike a lawyer, an historian of ideas is concerned with explanations rather than with rubrics, and establishing the name of the Messiah cannot be regarded as the focus of a kabbalist's spiritual world. This homily about "Leah" is only one illustration of a messianic, quasiSabbatean state of mind. Others could be cited, such as the notion of the death of the Messiah (who is identified with king David), as merely "a departure and a temporary eclipse; like the moon, he is bound to be renewed and revealed, speedily in our times." 44 This statement appears in R. Naphtali's book Semikhat Hakhamim published in 1706, the year in which Sabbateans awaited their Messiah's second coming, forty years after the Sabbatean messianic eruption of 1666.45 Another notion developed in this book 46 claims that Adam and Bve "ranked with God" before their sin. R. Naphtali understands the verse "And 41

SeeG. Scholem, Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism, New Yoik, 1941, p. 322. See also Y. Liebes, "Sabbetai Zevi's Altitude Towards his Own Conversion", Sefitnot (New Series) 2 (1983), pp. 282283 [Hebr.]. 42

See Perlmuter - note 31 - p. 74. He was the first to note that the statement of the Nöda ' bi-Yehuda relates to this passage in Wa-Avo Ha-Yom el Ha-Ayin. 43 I believe that this book was the product of a joint effort by R. Leibele Prossnitz and R. Jonathan Eybeschuetz They wrote the book either in Vienna or in Prague, after R. Leibele was expelled from Prossiitz and R. Jonathan, his disciple in Sabbatearnsm, followed him See Y. Liebes, "A Messianic Treatise by R. Wolf the Son of R. Jonathan Eybeschuetz", Kiryat Sefer 57 (1982), p. 162, note 85 [Hebr.]. See also Y. Liebes, "The Author of the Book Tsaddik Yesod Olam', The Sabbatean Prophet R. Leib Prossnitz", Da at 2-3 (1978-79), pp. 165-166 [Hebr.]. 44

Semikhat Hakhamim - note 1 -p. 68. See Z. Shazar, Awaiting 1666, Jerusalem 1970, pp. 10-12 [Hebr ], and my article on R. Leib note 43-pp. 160,163. 46 Semikhat Hakhamim - naie 1 - p. 68. 45

216

Y. Liebes

God blessed them" [literally: "and blessed them God"]47 as "And He blessed them to be God (or gods)." Hence, R. Naphtali is puzzled by the punishment inflicted on Adam and Eve, since prohibitions "are not incumbent on divinity." He also interprets in this vein Jacob's marriage to two sisters, claiming that Jacob amended Adam's sin and "like Adam, shared in the mystery of the unity called God."48 This issue should perhaps be related to the notion of the Messiah as the amendment of Adam, pervasive in both Christianity and Kabbala, which R. Naphtali stressed and developed in this book.49 It is hard not to link this messianic figure, portrayed as God and released from all prohibitions, to the Sabbatean Messiah. R. Naphtali develops another puzzling notion in this book: the Torah was a priori meant as a divorce writ which God gives to Israel, thinking ahead to the generation "heralding the Messiah."50 This surprising notion seems closely linked to Sabbetai Zevi's claim that Israel and the Torah would be replaced by Islam and the Koran which, in his eyes, were as a "new ketuba" [marriage contract].51 A further example: R. Naphtali quotes the rabbinical dictum that all holidays shall be abolished except for Purim.52 He then adds that the Ninth of Ab, after turning into a day of happiness and merriment, will never be abolished either. The transformation of the Ninth of Ab into a joyful holiday has been an established notion in Judaism since the prophet Zechariah,53 but earlier sources had not suggested that this day might become an official holiday and its value exaggerated to the point where, together with Purim, it would remain as the only holiday after all others were cancelled.54 Sabbetai Zevi was the one who did this, when he proclaimed the Ninth of Ab as his birthday: "And this day shall be for you a day to remember, a high holiday throughout the generations, a sign forever between me and the children of Israel."55.

47

Genesis 1:22.

48

Semikhat Hakhamim,p. 62.

49

Semikhat Hakhamim, p. 89.

50

Semikhat Hakhamim, pp. 79-80.

51

Seemy article-note41 -p. 300. Midrash on Proverbs 9:2.

53

Zekharia 8:19.

54

For the view that the Day of Atonement will not be abolidied see Midrash on Proverbs, 9:2; far a

similar view regarding Hamiukah see Jerusalem Talmud, Megilla 1:7,70d 55

This letter by Sabbetai Zevi appears in Y. Sasportas Zizat Novel Zevi, ed Y. Tidibi, Jerusalem

1954, p. 130. The letter on A. Amarillo relies on another source - "Sabbatean Documents from the Saul Amarillo Collection", Sefiinot 5 (1961), p. 251 [Hebr.]

A Profile of R. Naphtali Katz

217

The verse "a sign forever between me and the children of Israel" 56 does not originally refer to a holiday but rather to the Sabbath, and there is a rabbinical homily on it: " a sign forever - tells us that the Sabbath is never abolished in Israel." 57 R. Naphtali mentions several views concerning the presence of the Shekhina during Exile, referring to one which is not known by me as deriving from any other source: during Exile, the Shekhina dwells only abroad, and it is precisely in the land of Israel that it cannot be found. 5 8 I believe that this paradoxical outlook reflects the turmoil prevalent in the Sabbatean movement on the question of immigration to the holy Land, particularly since R. Naphtali was writing at the time when R. Judah he-Hasid and his group departed for the land of Israel. 59 R. Naphtali was apparently very troubled by this question and he attempted to reach the Holy Land at the end of his life, but he failed to accomplish this aim and died on his way in Constantinople. 60 Generally, in line with the Zeitgeist, R. Naphtali was fond of paradoxes. For instance: though God's sleep is commonly assumed to symbolize hard times for the people of Israel, 61 R. Naphtali disagrees and claims: "Why should it be so? When Israel is at peace and sleeping undisturbed, then the Holy One, blessed be He, also appears to be asleep." 62 Rather than choosing safe, familiar paths on issues of good and evil, truth, or faith, R. Naphtali constantly resembles a man walking on the edge of an abyss. It is in this light that we might look at the "confession" he composed and carefully recited, declaring that he repents a priori for any heretical thoughts which might befall him before his death. 63 This wording elaborated on a previous one, which I have published elsewhere, attributed to R. Samson Ostropoler 64 and inspired by the book Shelah.65 While this prayer had been 56

Exodus 31:17.

57

Mekhilta de-Rabbi Yishmael, Masekhta de-Shabbeta, Ki Tisa. CO He seems to rely on a homily from Sanhédrin 96b on Proverbs 7:19-20. eg See my article - note 33. It is possible that Cardozo's opposition to R. Judah He-Hasid also

touched on the issue of immigration. 60

See Shalshelet Zahav, pp. 474-475.

61

See for instance Zohar ΠΙ: 136b, Idra Rabba.

62

Semikhat Hakhamim - note 1 -p. 27.

63

The wording of the confession was printed in R. Naphtali's book Sha'ar

Ha-Hakhana,

Constantinople 1734, 16a-21a, as part of Ha-Widduy Ha-Gadol [The Great Confession], For a detailed discussion on the subject and its sources see Bar-Levav - note 1 - pp. 146-151. See also R. Naphtali s testament, reprinted at the end of the new edition of Semikhat Hakhamim - note 1 - p. 444. 64

See Y. Liebes, "Mysticism and Reality: Towards a Portrait of the Martyr and Kabbalist R. Samson

Ostropoler" in I. Twerski and B. Septimus, eds., Jewish Thought in the Seventeenth

Century,

Harvard 1987, pp. 246-248. 65

See. Y. Katz, "The Historical Portrait of R. Samson Ostropoler", Tarbiz 52 (1983), pp. 661-662

218

Y. Liebes

intended to be used against the threats and temptations of forced conversion,66 R. Naphtali aimed his at the evil impulse inside the soul. About the time of R. Naphtali 's writings, this version of the confession was quoted by a Sabbatean convert to Christianity in an attempt to show that, in their hearts, Jews would tend to convert, but their rabbis struggle against this inclination with all their might. 67 And I have found it said that, on his deathbed, R. Jonathan Eybeschuetz declared his faith in the Christian Trinity. 68 R. Naphtali tended to glean from Jewish literature the bluntest and most paradoxical statements. Thus, he deals at length69 with the midrashic claim that Adam was not sentenced to die for his sin, though God had said so explicitly, but rather that God had "slandered" man arbitrarily.70 Nor was R. Naphtali too meticulous in his choice of sources. Thus, for instance, he claims to rely on a popular saying, though I have not myself seen it, claiming as follows: "All his days David was pained until he began studying the chapter A virgin marries on the fourth day' ( K e t u b o t h 2a) and then he was satisfied."71 I believe that this saying, on which R. Naphtali relies for expounding awesome mysteries - such as the one mentioned above72 on the dissapearance of the Messiah - began as a popular joke bordering on obscenity. This saying is already cited in homiletic literature of the 17th century73. [Hebr.]. 66

Although this might not be the context of the Shelah, in whose regard Katz's claim is correct. See

last note. 67 I refer to Johannes Kemper who, at the time, wrote many Hebrew books at the University of Insala, all still inedited. Showing quite a high level of competence and depth in regard to the sources, Kemper tried to prove the truth of Christianity by relying an kabbalistic and Sabbatean evidence. Kemper, who had beai a follower of the Sabbatean prophet R. Zaddok of Gorodno in his youth, áiifted the attribution of Sabbatean sayings from Sabbetai Zevi to Jesus Christ. These issues, including a detailed discussion on the "confession," were the subject of an outstanding and comprehensive seminar paper by Shifra Assulin, a student at the Department of History at the Hebrew University: Johannes Kemper - The Metamorphoses of a Sabbatean Convert in the Seventeenth Century, eds. Y. Kaplan andM. Hed, 1991 [Hebr.]. I hope that this paper will soon be published. 68

See my article - note 28 - pp. 372-374. For additional information on this issue see Y. Liebes, "On

the Borders of Kabbala", Tarbiz 60(1991), p. 138, note 20. Bar-Levav assumed that the confession was related to the turmoil surrounding Sabbateanism in R. Naphtali's generation, which made it impossible to know a man's true faith before the time of his death. See Bar-Levav, note 1, p. 150. 69

Semikhal Hakhamim - note 1 -pp. 85-90,200-203.

70

Tanhuma, Wa-Yeshev, 4.

71

Semikhal Hakhamim - notel - p. 67. 72

Seep. 14.

73

See: Y. S. Spiegel, "Midrash Peli'a - The Homiletic Method in the 16th-17th century" (Hebrew).

A Profile of R. Naphtali Katz

219

R. Naphtali uses existent midrashim too but, through slight changes in their wording, he totally changes their meaning and inadvertently creates new midrashim. Thus, for instance, R. Naphtali quotes as follows: "It is said in the Midrash that of all the things the Holy One, blessed be He, created in His world, he created two. The Sabbath said to the Holy One, blessed be He: To all you gave a partner but not to me.' Said the Holy One, blessed be He: I am your partner.'" 74 However, in the rabbinical midrash75 it is the people of Israel and not God that are said to be the Sabbath's partner. Even more puzzling is the next passage, quoted as a "midrash": "When Joseph lusted after Potiphar's wife, Jacob took the foundation stone in order to throw it at him, and Joseph withdrew".76 The closest source I have found on this appears in the Midrash on Psalms: "Said Rabbi: He listened to her [Joseph to Potiphar's wife] but the Holy One, blessed be He, showed him an image of his father, hence he was ashamed and fled. He then tried a second time and the Holy One, blessed be He, took the foundation stone and told him: If you touch her, I shall throw it and destroy the world. " 77 A new and blunt biblical verse was even created in this fashion. R. Naphtali comments at length on the verse: "And on that day God will smite his hands together."78 This verse, which is not found in the Bible as we know it, seems to combine two verses from Ezekiel: the first is "Thou therefore, son of man, prophesy, and smite thy hands together..."79 while, three verses later, God says: "I will also smite my hands together..."80 There are indeed no grounds for viewing this approach as specifically Sabbatean. Nevertheless, it is interesting that one of the classic and most famous Sabbatean manuscripts, exclusively concerned with Nathan of Gaza and his disciples,81 copied the homily related to this "verse" ("And on that day God will smite his hands together") from Semikhat Hakhamim. Sabbateans may have been captivated not only by the beauty of the verse but also by R. Naphtali s expounding homily. Though it cannot be defined as Mahanaim 4 (1992), p. 260. And see also: Midrash Peli'ah, Warsaw 1895, 81a, 189. Midrash Peli'ah He-Hadash, Pietikov 1910, 22b, 50. Both volumes appeared in one offset edition, Jerusalem 1976.. 74

Semikhat Hakhamim - note 1 -p. 32

75

Genesis Rabba Π.8.

76

Semikhat Hakhamim - note 1 -p. 19.

77

no

Yalqut Shm'oni I: 145. Semikhat Hakhamim - note 1 -pp. 56-57.

19

Ezekiel 21:19. KO Ezekiel 21:22.1 am grateful to Aharon Osdval who helped me reach this solution. 81

MS New York, Columbia X893 Z8 (Photostate 72 in the Scholem Collection) last page (44b).

220

Y. Liebes

explicitly Sabbatean, this homily does hint to the perfect world of the future, when God's name shall be complete - y-h-y-h The allusion to this name is in the mention of the smiting hands: in mediaeval Hebrew, smiting also means arithmetical duplication and, through a certain numerological calculation, the value of the letters y-h-y-h is made to equal that of kaf [palm] multiplied (namely 10 χ 5 + 5 χ 10 =10 = k f). Here, according to R. Naphtali, is the source for the practice of clapping hands during mourning, through which the bereaved display their faith in a perfect world awaiting us in the future - a world without death or even without this world at all, because the people of Israel will be clinging to their source and will become as God and "they shall see eye to eye, the Lord returning to Zion."82 Although the homily on the smiting of hands is original and although the verse itself is invented, this idea is not really new. The motif of changing God's name to y-h-y-h can already be found in classical Jewish literature,83 as is the notion of mystical wholeness and inclusion in the divinity at the time of redemption. The uniqueness of R. Naphtali is not in the abstract ideas, but rather in the Utopian fervor characterising his life and writings, which led him to the radical conclusion that the next world must be realised in the present one. So man must overlook the requirements of livelihood and only study Torah or, in his words: "For man is born to the toil of Torah 84 and he must leave everything else behind, and the Holy One, blessed be He, will work miracles for him... And it [the Torah] was given in the desert to tell us that man should only be concerned with Torah and he should rely on miracles."85 I mentioned above that R. Naphtali was accused of burning his city in order to test the power of his amulets. 86 1 am not sure that this accusation was factually accurate, but burning the city for this purpose would be consonant with the spiritual world of R. Naftali, as it emerges from the passage above. Life in this type of utopia was not uncommon at the beginning of the eighteenth century, but it was a plight best suited to the Sabbateans. Rather than the concrete reality of exile, the world of the Sabbateans was a world of redemption hidden behind the husks of reality, one they could not show themselves as even believing in for fear of the communal establishment. Indeed, scholars have already pointed out that many wandering preachers, the poor idealists of the early eighteenth century, were secret Sabbateans.87 Dealing in practical Kabbala was then a typical, though obviously not an 82

Isaiah 52:8.

83

See, for instance, J. Gikatila, Sha arey Orah, Warsaw 1883 (offset, Jerusalem 1960), 91a, di.9.

84

Job 5:7: "...but man is born to trouble."

85

Semikhat Hakhamim - note 1 -pp. 155-156.

86

See note 2fif

87

See S&olem - note 30 - pp. 116-177.

A Profile of R. Naphtali Katz

221

exclusively Sabbatean pursuit. They favored the supernatural over mere reality, particularly on issues of fire and pyrotechnics, for which the Sabbatean prophet R. Leibele Prossnitz was also expelled from his city at this time. 88 True, R. Naphtali aspired to perfection. This aspiration is also embodied in the structure of his homilies, where he attempts to analyze every midrashic view exhaustively and infer comprehensive systems from every single issue. Thus, if someone is said to have expounded a particular verse in a certain way, R. Naphtali will not attribute to him another homily on the same issue. 89 It would be beyond the scope of this paper to discuss this question more extensively, but R. Naphtali's hope for perfection is at the source of both the conceptual basis of his writings as well as of their structure (and Bar-Levav has indeed confirmed this). In Semikhat Hakhamim,90 his main book of homilies, R. Naphtali explains the rationale behind the order of the talmudic tractates and the spiritual essence of each one. This genre is quite exceptional in Jewish literature, and I know of only one other book belonging to this category - Zofiiat Pa'aneah, by the Spanish exile Joseph Alashkar. 91 R. Naphtali claims at the outset that he was moved to write this book in a search for perfection itself.92 He concluded that man must go through the whole Talmud every single day, particularly on the day before his death, and it was in order to enable this feat that he wrote this book as a kind of abstract of the complete Talmud. Semikhat Hakhamim is viewed as a preface to R. Naphtali's commentary on Berakhot, the first talmudic tractate. 93 R. Naphtali wrote an additional section of this book, which was never published and has not survived - a commentary on the rest of Zera'im, the first order of the Talmud. 94 Had he succeeded in accomplishing his intention, this book would 00 See my article on R. Leibele - note 42 - pp. 161-161. It is worth mentioning that the very same Schudt who told of the fire started by R. Naphtali - see note 2 - is also one of the main sources for R. Leibele's deed. R. Naphtali also mentions R. Leibele's deed in his letters. See Shalshelet Zahav - note 1 -p. 464. OÛ See for instance Semikhat Hakhamim - note 1 - p. 62. ÛQ See note 1. A larger áiare is indeed taken up by Kedusha U-Vrakha. See note 93. A facsimile edition of a good, legible manuscript, was publiáied by Misgav Yeruähalayim, including an introduction by M. Idei and indexes by A. Bar-Levav, Jerusalem 1991. This is a very important book for the understanding of early Kabbala as well as of the Zohar and its patterns of diffusion. 92 Semikhat Hakhamim - note 1 -p. 5. 93

The commentary on Berakhot, called Kedusha U-Vrakha, is combined with Hakdamat [preface]

Semikhat Hakhamim to make φ a volume entitled Birkat Ha-Shem, hinting at the name Naphtali according to Deuteronomy 33:23. 94 The name of the bode is Meshekh Ha-Zera

and it is mentioned in Semikhat Hakhamim as well

as at the head of the ζiyyunim - note 4 - and also in Pi Yesharim - note 96 - 5a. This book, as well as

222

Y. Liebes

also have served as the introduction to an homiletical commentary on the whole Talmud. The ideal of perfection embodied in this book, as well as its spiritual importance, could explain why R. Naphtali requested that Semikhat Hakhamim be placed on his grave after his death.95 R. Naphtali adopted a similar approach in the writing of his other book - in the preface he tried to show the connection between all the biblical portions while in the book itself, which has been lost, he attempted to show how the Written and Oral Law are wholly included in the letters of the word Bereshit.96 This ideal of perfection could also explain the structure of R. Naphtali's poem Ha-Widduy Ha-Gadol [The Great Confession],97 in which the author admits he might be offensive to basic texts of Jewish religion. Thus, for instance, he mentions all the talmudic tractates and all human limbs, and requests their forgiveness.98

the commentary to Berakhot, were apparently written before Semikhat Hakhamim - see note 96. 95 Thus in his testament. The testament was reprinted in the new edition of Semikhat HakhamimKedusha U- Vrakha - note 1 - p. 445. On the issue of the ideal of perfection as the basis of Semikhat Hakhamim see the detailed discussion by Avri Bar-Levav - note 1 - pp. 30-47. 96

Sefer Bereshit U-Fi Yesharim, Frankort an Oder 1704. The introduction to the book is called "Homat Anakh." On the subject and the fate of this book see details in Αντί Bar-Levav - note 1 - pp. 19-21. Printing of the book was interrupted afta· the introduction was completed; evm of this introduction only two copies have survived, which have recently served as the source for producing a limited offset edition. The introduction to Sefer Bereshit U-Fi Yesharim was apparently written after the commentary on Berakhot and on Zera'im but before Semikhat Hakhamim since, in the latter, R. Naphtali writes as follows: "And in the introduction to Birkat Ha-Shem, which I have written, I áiall, God willing, link all the tractates together" (Pi Yesharim 4d) and elsewhere (Pi Yesharim 5a) he mentions an issue "that I wrote in my book en the ordo· of Zera irti in tractate Berakhot. " 97 Included in his book of poems .STia 'ar Naphtali, Bruenn 1756,2a-13b. 98 For a detailed description of the confession see Bar Levav - note 1 - pp. 40-48. R. Naphtali had already explained it as based on an ideal of perfection and related it to Semikhat Hakhamim.

Rachel Elior Rabbi Nathan Adler of Frankfurt and • the Controversy Surrounding Him

In the late 1770s and throughout the 1780s, while Hasidism was spreading through Eastern Europe, and while the Frankist-Sabbatian movement was establishing its center in Bruenn, Moravia, and in Offenbach, Germany, a distinct group of pietists arose in Frankfurt. The master of this fraternity was Rabbi Nathan ben Simon Adler Katz, who had been born in Frankfurt in 1741 and lived there until his death in 1800.1 During his lifetime Rabbi Nathan Adler was highly esteemed, greatly admired, and much beloved. He was regarded as a man of singular genius, a Halakhic authority, and a keen scholar, as a charismatic figure, as a fascinating religious innovator, a profound Kabbalist, an ethical model, and as the leader of a pietistic congregation.2 At the same time he aroused controversy and opposition and was persecuted and ultimately excommunicated. The Jewish community of Frankfurt promulgated bans against him and writs of excommunication in 1779 and 1789, and it permitted the composition and publication of a disparaging pamphlet against him in 1790.3 In the following I shall attempt to analyze the background of these excommunications and the influence of contemporary circumstances on the condemnation of Rabbi Nathan and also to show the common denominator between the pietists of Frankfurt and the Hasidic fellowships of Eastern Europe as it appeared from the standpoint of the controversialists. * An Elaborated Hebrew versi an of this article was published in Zion 59 (1994), pp. 31-64. ' For biographical information about Rabbi Nathan Adler and his family see Z. B. Auerbach, Mishnat Rabbi Nathan, Frankfurt am Main, 1862, in the introduction [henceforth: "Auerbach"). See also A. Y. Ha-Cohen Schwartz, Derekh ha-Nesher we-Torat Emet, Salomara 1928, p. 4 [henceforth: "Derekh ha-Nesher"]. See M H. Horowitz, Rabaney Frankfurt, Jerusalem, 1972 [translation of the German edition of M. Horovitz, Frankfurter Rabbin en 1885 (Reprint Jerasalan 1969)], pp. 151-154, 156 Appendix ΙΠ, p. 293 [henceforth: "Horowitz"]. See also S. Sofa, Hut ha-Meshullash, (Pecs 1886) Muncacz 1894, pp. 16-24,27-33, 55-56 [henceforth: "Sofer"]; M Sofer, Stfer Hatam Sofer, Jerusalem 1974, Π pp. 371373; see Frankfurt am Main, Memorbuch, Heb. quart 1092a, ΙΠ 536-804 (1780-1802), p. 762. For details see Horowitz, p. 155.

224

R. Elior

Rabbi Nathan Adler was the child of an old and illustrious family which had dwelled in Frankfurt for generations.4 He stood out because of his conspicuous intellectual abilities and because of his extremely captivating charismatic personality. Likewise he was known for his extremely pious and ascetic ways. Along with his intellectual vigor, Rabbi Nathan expressed a deep concern with mysticism and had a tendency towards ecstatic prayer, and an abiding interest in the study of the Kabbalistic tradition, as well as in the creation of new ritual inspired by it.5 He was renowned for his dreams and was known to live in the constant tension of divine revelation and prophetic visions as a result of his study of all aspects of the Kabbalah.6 In the early 1770s he founded a House of Study for students of various ages7, established a synagogue with his own prayer quorum, and gathered a small congregation of Hasidim around him who were influenced by his piety and erudition, his charismatic personality, his Kabbalistic expertise, his divergence from the accepted norms, and his religious originality.8 Under his inspiration they 4

See Derekh ha-Nesher, pp. 4-5, Horowitz, pp. 151,234-236. On his greatness as a Kabbalist see Sofer, pp. 16-17,20; Horowitz, p. 153; Derekh ha-Nesher, p. 6. His teacher in Kabbalah was Rabbi Abraham Avush, the chief rabbinic justice of Frankfurt, who had previously served as a rabbi in many communities in the Lublin district and was known as a "master of the name. " The book, Ohel Avraham, sings his praises, saying that whm he was in the community of Lukabi, in the Lublin district, "his good name became more and more famous and thousands of Jews came to him to be cured in spirit and body, and there his book, Po "el Yeshu ot about amulets and charms was writtai." See Simhah Bunim Mjchelsohn, Ohel Avraham, Pieterkov 1901, p. 16a. The authors who wrote about Adler's biography did not take note of the influmce of Rabbi Abraham upon the formation of his disciple's spiritual conduct. 5

6

See Horowitz, p. 154, n. 12; Derekh ha-Nesher, p. 15, and rf. the testimony of his disciple: "in a moment I shall speak, for the holy names have true powers, from what I have seen with my eyes from that marvelous man, R[abbi] NJathan] AJdler], Shw"t Hatom Sofer, Orah Hayim, sig. 197. •7 At the same time that R. Nathan Adler was teaching, a great spiritual awakening was taking place in Frankfurt. This pietistic movement for revival of piety in the Lutheran church was founded in Frankfurt at the end of the 17th century and was active in the first half of the 18th century. Its founder was J. P. Spener (1635-1705) who was inspired by Jakob Brehme and Angelus Silesius. He preached for repentence as a condition for profound spiritual revival and religious rmovatian. The movement cultivated religious piousness, mystical inclination and ascetic virtues. Spener's students headed by Friedrich Christoph O etinger (1702-1787) were active in the same time and plaoe that Nathan Adler was active. It was not improbable that the spiritual pietistic climate that was prevailing in Frankfurt at that o time influenced indirectly to some extent the spiritual awakening in the Jewiái community. See Horowitz, pp. 154-156. Among his students were Rabbi Moses Sofer, known as the Hatam Sofer, who called his rabbi, "My teacher the genius and most pious of priests." On the meaning of his special relation with his teacher see the instructive article by J. Katz, "Kawim le-Biographia diel HaHatam Sofer"), in Mehkarim ba-Qabbalah u-be-Toldot ha-Datot Mugashim le-Gershom Scholem, Jerusalem 1968, pp. 115-145 [Hebr.]. The article has also been included in idem, Halakhah ve-

Rabbi Nathan Adler

225

engaged in Kabbalah, established extreme customs of asceticism and purity, and attributed primary significance to heavenly signs, miracles, dreams and visions. Members of the group prayed in a separate quorum and adopted a particular ritual and separatist religious practice which was conspicuously different from that which had been common practice in synagogues for generations.9 Rabbi Nathan Adler did not leave written evidence nor did he publish books during his lifetime. Therefore in drawing his portrait and in shedding light on the circumstances of his life we must depend upon the words of his disciples and associates, who testify to the weight of his personality and to his spiritual authority, as well as upon the testimony of his opponents and excommunicators, which reflects the public significance of his fame and authority. In the attempt to decipher the content of these testimonies in the light of the historical meaning which they inherently contain, both implicitly and explicitly, we would like to suggest that the events concerning Rabbi Nathan far surpass the local congregational level in importance and, in fact, reflect a much more widespread phenomenon which exerted great religious and social impact. The hostile testimony was collected in an anonymous tract entitled Kabbalah, Jerusalem 1984, pp. 353-386. R Eliezer W aliase later became the head of the yediivah of Frankfurt. His grandson Abraham Geiger recounted his life in Ha-Mazkir V, pp. 77-79,1862, and see Horowitz, pp. 156, 236. Rabbi Abraham Bing, the author of Zikkaron Avraham was the head of the rabbinical court of Wurzburg between 1796 -1838 and had a great influence in southern Germany; Rabbi Menahem Mendel Kargov who lived in Fiorda, the author of Giduley Tahara al Mikvaot, Rabbi Abraham Auerbadi, the father of the author of Mishnaf Rabbi Nathan, Rabbi Hayim Deitschmann, the chief of the rabbinical court of Kalin; Moses Helisdiau, mentioned with his rabbi in the excommunication of 1789, and see Geiger op. cit. for information about him; Rabbi Isaac Ari eh Wormser, known as the Ba'al Shem of Michelstadt, whose biography is givœ in Toldot

Ba'al-Shem

mi-Michelstadt, cf. The Baal Shem of Michelstadt, trsl. M F. Kuttner, Jerusalem - New York 1973; German edn. Der Baalschem von Michelstadt, repr. Basel 1982; Rabbi Joseph Meir Sdmeetudi, who was the chief rabbinical judge of Friedaotal, author of Shw"t Rib "am Schneetuch, Wolf Shatin who was the diief rabbinical judge at Dyhemftirth; Leib Karlburg and Leib Emrich, who was a mohel, and was excommunicated together with his teacher. In the Yizkor Register of the synagogue of the Hekdedi of Frankfurt, MS Jerusalem National library 8*1465, fol. 169, it states regarding him "May the Lord remember the soul of the famous, holy, and abstinent Hasid ... our teacher and Rabbi Leib the sen of Gumpel Emrich ... because in his youth he dragged his legs ... to learned scholars ... and all of his deeds were for the sake of heaven and most of his days he was occupied with Torah and good deeds.... He castigated himself and fasted for thirty-five and a half years from sabbath to sabbath ... and the man who was pure and holy always went from place to place ... serving as a mohel. " After the death of R. Nathan most of his studœts left Frankfurt. Many of them officiated as heads of rabbinical courts in Southern Germany and were deeply inspired by their Master. 9

See Horowitz, pp. 153-154,236.

226

R. Elior

Ma'aseh Ta'atu'im ( Act of Deception), published in 1790.10 This volume comprises the tracts and writs of excommunication issued by the Frankfurt community against Rabbi Nathan and his group. It presents a condemnation of the intentions and actions of the members of the circle, and a one-sided description by a contemporary of the circumstances that led to the exceptional steps taken by the community.11 The main significance of the book lies in the date of its publication, soon after the events under discussion, when those concerned could read, protest, and respond to it. The material presented in the tract reflects the attitude of the community towards the controversy and an assessment of the figure of Rabbi Nathan according to the concepts and criteria which were accepted by contemporary opponents. The favorable testimony, reflecting the viewpoint of his congregation, was published later and is found in the writings of his followers, primarily in the works of his closest disciple, the Hatam Sofer (Rabbi Moses Sofer of Frankfurt 1762-1840) and in the biographical traditions which were collected in the book by his grandson, Solomon Sofer, Hut ha-Meshullash (The Triple Thread, Pecs 1887). The enthusiastic assessment, presented from the viewpoint of members of succeeding generations, is found in two books: one by Zvi Benjamin Auerbach, the son of Rabbi Adler s disciple Abraham Auerbach, Mishnat Rabbi Nathan (The Teaching of Rabbi Nathan, Frankfurt 1862); and the other by Abraham Judah ha-Cohen Schwartz, Derekh ha-Nesher we-Torat Emet (The Path of the Eagle [wordplay on the name Adler] and the Torah of Truth, Satomara, 1928). On the basis of these works, Abraham Geiger and Mordecai Horowitz, Simon Dubnow and Yekutiel Gruenwald, Jacob Katz and Mordecai Wilenski 10

See Steinschneider, Ha-MazkirV,1862,

p. 27, and Geiger, ibid., p. 78. Steinschneider determined

that the author of Ma 'aseh Ta atu 'im was Leib Wetzlar, one of the enlightened Jews of Frankfurt, and he disagreed with the earlier view of W. Zeitlin, which attributed the work to Wolf Heidenheim. See also Yeshurun, vol. X, p. I l l and the bibliography there. In the introduction to the second edition of Ma'aseh Ta'atu'im, Budapest 1822, Yekutiel Judah Greenwald reviewed the various surmises regarding the author's identity. See also S. Dubnow, Toldot ha-Hasidut, Tel Aviv [1931], 1975, p. 440, and M. Wilenski, Hasidim u-Mitnagdim, Jerusalem 1970, pt. I, p. 324. See further G. Scholem, "Die letzten Kabbalistœ in Deutschland", Jut/a/ca ///, Frankfurt 1973, p. 224. 11

The wording of the second writ of excommunication is also presented in the collection Shever-

Posh'im, edited by Rabbi David of Makov and printed in the book by M. Wilenski, pt. Π,ρ. 96 and in S. Dubnov, Toldot ha-Hasidut, 1975 (3rd edn.) p. 438; cf. the German edn. Geschichte

des

Chassidismus, Jerusalem 1969, Π, p. 315. The wording of the first excommunication was printed in Horowitz, in: Dubnov,p. 436, German edn., Π,ρ. 316f., and in: Wilenski according to the version in Ma'aseh Ta'atu'im, and see there, pt. I, pp. 324-326. See below for the wording according to the community register. The community of Frankfurt was not hasty in using excommunications and actually it used them very rarely, preferring to exile those who did not conform to the community order, rather than declare writs of excommunication against thon.

Rabbi Nathan Adler

227

all described Rabbi Nathan, the background to the controversy, and the matter of the tracts and excommunications issued against him. 12 However, these scholars disagreed about the connection between the events leading to the excommunication of the pietist sect in Frankfurt and other events which occurred close in time and place, such as the anti-Hasidic excommunications published in Eastern Europe. Most of these scholars doubted that there was any direct connection between the formation of Adler's group and the growth of the Hasidic movement13. Nevertheless one cannot disregard the closeness in time between the awakening of Jewish pietism in Frankfurt and the formation of Hasidic circles in Eastern Europe: neither the feet that the group in Frankfurt also called themselves "Hasidim," nor the analogous ways in which both groups deviated from the common practices of the community, or the similarity of the charges raised both in the excommunications of Frankfurt and in Eastern Europe- all of which begs for interpretation. Both the hostile and favorable testimonies show that Rabbi Nathan's aberration from common practice in the name of charismatic authority was largely similar with respect to its spiritual motivations and social significance to the deviations instituted by the Hasidim of the BESHT from the traditional patterns and accepted frameworks of the communities in which they were active. Moreover, the persecution in both instances was bound up with fear both of the assertion of the unrestricted authority of men inspired by the holy spirit and of the spiritual separatism which, in the opinion of the opponents, was derived from it, as we shall see below. Perusal of the tracts and excommunications issued in 1779 and 1789 along with an examination of the hostile testimony and a comparison with the parallel tradition of favorable testimony, which confirms the facts mentioned but evaluates their meaning differently, elicits five substantial arguments against Rabbi Nathan and his followers. 1. Substantial alterations in the ritual and in the manner of prayer which led to the creation of a separate prayer quorum and to seclusion from the community. The most prominent arguments related to use of the prayerbook of the ARI according to the Sephardic rite, to recitation of the prayers both in the Sephardic pronunciation and in a deviant manner, as well as to concluding the Eighteen Benedictions of the afternoon and evening services with the benediction normally recited only in the morning in the Ashkenazic rite, "Grant peace ...," rather than the one beginning "Great peace ..."14 11 13 14

See notes above for detailed references to the works of the sdiolars cited. SeeDubnow,p. 441, Wilaiski.pt. I,p. 25. See Horowitz, p. 154 and also Rabbi Abraham Loewenstam, Zror ha-Hayim, Amsterdam 1820,

Kuntres we-Neginotai Yenagetr, see also Abraham Simhah Bunim Michelsohn, Shemen ha-Tov,

228

R. Elior

2. Notable excess in asceticism and fasts, in abstinence, and in severity regarding undue insistence on the laws of purity and impurity. This led to the prohibition of eating and drinking with those not belonging to the group for fear of violation of kashrut, to separation from it for fear of impurity, and to condemnation by the community which continued to follow the common practices.15 3. Change in religious practice with respect to prevalent custom. This included a different circumcision ceremony, the wearing of two sets of phylacteries, the attachment of ritual fringes to women's garments, and the recitation of the priestly blessing every day.16 4. Change in the standard patterns of sacred and secular times, independent determination of the times that holidays and festivals begin, and the assertion of freedom to determine the calendar. 5. Study of the Kabbalah, concern with dreams, secrets, and prophetic visions while claiming an immediate relationship with the upper worlds and knowledge of hidden things. These preoccupations aroused dread within the community.17 Most of the charges levelled against Rabbi Nathan and his group were similar to those raised seven years previously in polemical writings and excommunications issued against the Hasidim of Eastern Europe18. The similarity in the polemical description of the idiosyncratic practice derives from the negative assessment of features stemming from a common tradition, the Kabbalistic tradition, which draws upon the mystical inspiration and charismatic leadership prevalent among both the Hasidim and other pietists throughout Europe. The position represented by Rabbi Nathan Adler was essentially individualistic, as opposed to that of the traditional community, where there was generally no opportunity for non-conformist individuals and groups to exist and act in freedom without depending upon the traditional socioreligious frameworks. Accordingly, the Kabbalistic Hasid does not need supportive confirmation from the congregation for his stance before God. Nor is he required to observe the details of the tradition in the prevalent fashion. Pieterkov 1905, p. 92, par. 78, and see Sofer.p. 20. 15

See Ma aseh Ta atu im, pp. 9-10 and cf. ed. Greaiwald introduction, p. 8, and see Derekh ha-

Nesher, p. 25. 16

See Derekh ha-Nesher,p. 24, and the reference notes there, and cf. Horowitz, p. 154.

17 See Ma aseh Ta atu i'm,pp. 17-21 and Horowitz, p. 153. See Horowitz, pp. 154, 157, n. 25, and Wilenski, I, pp. 44-49. The excommunication of Brody condemns the Hasidim for praying in separate quorums, for praying in the Sephardic rite from the prayerbook of the ARI, for making alterations in the order of prayers, and for tardiness in reciting them, for wearing white garments, for m a i n t a i n i n g separate ritual slaughtering with polished knives, and for studying only Kabbalah.

Rabbi Nathan Adler

229

But rather, he is permitted to inaugurate new religious ritual, drawing upon his religious inspiration and the Kabbalistic tradition or based on the authority of a renewed revelation granted in a vision, dream, or spiritual ecstasy ['aliyat ha-neshamah]. Rabbi Nathan and his group, like the Hasidim in Eastern Europe, did not perceive themselves as deviants or sinners. Rather, they viewed themselves as exponents of the Kabbalistic tradition, not subject to the authority of the community in spiritual matters. These men advocated a structure of values which drew upon Kabbalistic literature and was based on the authority of vision or renewed revelation. Hence they did not acknowledge the authority of the rabbis who excommunicated them. They ignored the excommunications, continuing to act in their own way. From their point of view the alterations they instituted had been made in the spirit of the Kabbalistic ethos with the force of charismatic inspiration, and they did not require the agreement of the community or of its leadership. However, it was not only the force of the charismatic personality or the outcome of mystical ecstasy which stood behind these changes. They derived primarily from penetrating scrutiny of the Kabbalistic mythos, from the adoption of its conceptual system and from the assertion of freedom of ritual creativity in its name. The structure common to all of the changes in the prayer ritual, in the severity of the asceticism, in the insistence on the laws of purity, and in the innovations which were made in customs and in the order of time were all anchored in a Kabbalistic ethos which attributed mystical intentions to the prayers and to the performance of commandments in a manner which bound the total structure of divine service with the concepts of the Kabbalah and its hidden dimensions. Profound meditation upon the meanings of the Kabbalistic tradition shaped the idiosyncratic practices of the pietistic Hasidim, wrought their charismatic inspiration, and sustained their contents. The Kabbalistic ethos which was crystallized in Safed during the sixteenth century among the "Holy Fellowships"19, is expressed in Kabbalistic ethical works and in the literature of the Lurianic Tiqqunim. It was disseminated from the late sixteenth century, throughout the seventeenth century, until the mid-eighteenth century among groups of Kabbalists and ascetes and also among societies of Sabbatians and Hasidim.20 These circles delved deeply See Ben-Zicn Dinur, Be-Mifheh ha-Dorot, pp. 161-163, and the detailed referen oes of notes 16 and 17. See also S. Z. Shazar, "Zofayikh Zfat", OreyDorot, Jerusalem 1971, pp. 11-30. 20 See Dinur, pp. 159-181. The publication of Sefer ha-Kawanot of the ARI in 1620 had a decisive influence on the creation of the Kabbalistic ethos. Books such as Sha arey Kedushah by Rabbi Hayim Vital, Naggid u-Mezaweh by Jaoob Zemah, Sefer-Haredim by Eliezer Azfori, and MaggidMesharim by Joseph Karo also had a great influence on consolidating the details of Kabbalistic customs.

230

R. Elior

into the intention which binds the performance of a commandment and the underlying reason for it with Kabbalistic concepts and dimensions, which are connected to the higher realm. For that reason they were punctilious about the minutest details of religious practice, and they tended towards separatism and isolation and insisted on separate prayer and ritual slaughter and on pietistic and ascetic practices inspired by the Lurianic doctrine of intentions, the Kabbalistic doctrine of reincarnation, and other mystical teachings. All of these customs and teachings, which initially pertained to theurgic intentions concerning Ge 'ulat ha-Shekhinah, were also means to prepare the way for mystical exaltation and the attainment of the holy spirit on its various levels of dreams, visions, revelations, celestial voices, and prophecies.21 The new customs which they inaugurated and the instructions which they committed to writing were a matter for an elite and did not obligate the entire community22. On the contrary, the esotericism which characterized these circles of ascetes, saints, and pietists and the spiritual and moral height that characterized their adepts created a set pattern of relations of distance and sanctity, of separatism and seclusion, which were accepted and honored by the community, so long as the changes in religious ritual and customs of prayer which were directed towards achieving mystical elevation remained outside the public realm. However, in the second half of the eighteenth century a change began to take place in the status of esotericism following the extensive printing of Kabbalistic literature, on the one hand, and under the influence of the Hasidic, Sabbatian-Frankist, and Kabbalistic societies, on the other.23 The spread of the influence of these ecstatic and ascetic mystical ideas into constantly enlarging circles caused social ferment and undermined the communal hierarchy, for the exceptional influence of the bearers of spiritualistic views upon community life and the circle of their influence was far greater than their actual numbers. The feeling of instability and the precariousness of the accepted tradition, which contributed to the weakening of the status of the congregation in the matters of spiritual leadership, led the community into conflict. Viewing itself as representing the values of the Halakhah and the religious tradition and as responsible for preserving the

21 22

See R. Werblowsky, Joseph Karo: Lawyer and Mystic, Philadelphia 1980 (2nd. edn.), pp. 38-83.

The concepts hesger, bney 'aliya (choscn few), yehidey seguía, perushim and hevrah qedoshah all indicate seclusion and elitism. 23 On the printing and circulation erf' the literature of Lurianic Tiqqunim in the late seventeenth century and throughout the eighteenth century and an the flourishing of the Kabbalistic liturgy and its influence see Z. Gris, Sifrut ha-Hanhagot, Jerusalem 1990, intro., pp. xiv-xxi, 41-102.

231

Rabbi Nathan Adler

traditional structure, the community fought against the broad expansion of the pietistic conduct. For as long as these had been the customs of an elite which derived legitimization from the community, they were viewed with approval. However, when idiosyncratic particularity became widespread, the community took a dim view of it. 24 The alterations, non-conformism, and deviations which were condemned by the authors of the anti-Hasidic excommunications were not generally recent innovations of the 1770s and 1780s. Rather, almost all of them were founded upon the Kabbalistic tradition and the pietistic, ascetic customs which had long been prevalent among circles of Kabbalists and holy societies. That is to say, the change did not hinge upon the content of the innovations or upon alteration of religious practice, but rather upon the widespread application and dissemination of these changes. Innovations such as holding a separate prayer quorum, use of the ARI rite, wearing white clothing, special customs of ritual slaughter, a tendency towards asceticism and insistence upon abstinence in sanctity and purity, along with intensive study of the Kabbalah and the assertion of freedom to innovate rituals are mentioned explicitly in connection with members of the Kloyz of Brody and also those in other holy fraternities in other places in Europe, which acted with the permission and agreement of the various communities.25 As noted, as long as these changes took place within the closed realm of an elite and did not spread to the community beyond its confines, the community did not intervene. However, from the moment when the esoteric barriers were removed and the idiosyncratic customs of the holy societies became widely known, and some of the separatist circles began to appeal to a broad public, a change also occurred in the position taken by the communal leadership. The deepened contemplation of religious worship and renewed illumination of the tradition, which led to the establishment of original religious patterns and to innovation in customs were grasped as a threatening divergence from the accepted order, a deviation which demanded an appropriate response. The new norms were viewed as a threat to existing practice and to accepted authority and as a blow to the values of the congregation. In Ma'aseh Ta'atu'im, which, as noted, was written in Frankfurt in 1790, η Λ

The criticism of Rabbi Moses of Satnov, author of Mishmeret-ha-Qodesh,

Zolkwo 1746 and of

Rabbi Solomon Heimo, the author of Merkevet-Mishneh, from the first half of the eighteenth century reflect this tension. See G. Scholem, "Shtey ha-Eduyot ha-Qedumot cd Havurot ha-Hasidim we-haBESHT [Hebr.], TarbizXX,pp.

228-240, and see Dmur, Bemifneh ha-Dorot, pp. 87, 135-139, 161,

170-180. Cf. Piekarz, Bi-Yemey Zemihat ha-Hasidut, Jerusalem 1978, pp. 338-346. 25

See Ν. M. Gelber, "Toldot Yehudey Brody" in: Άrim we-Imahot be-Yisrael, Jerusalem 1956, vol.

VI, pp. 62-73. 332, and see Β. Z. Dinur, Bemifneh ha-Dorot, pp. 161-162; S. Dubnow, p. 121. J. Katz, Masoret u-Masfaber, Jerusalem 1978, pp. 254-261. 204.

232

R. Elior

the author interprets the separatism entailed by changes in custom and the freedom expressed in ritual innovations as rebellion against the accepted authority and as impugning the ways of the community: For they have invented new laws for themselves and intend to rebel against the Rabbis. ... They slandered the Jewish people, their brothers, and ruled against our bread and wine, not to eat of our food and not to drink of our wine, and not to use our vessels, and never to mingle with us, for fear lest they be contaminated by our bread or by the wine of our libations, for we are regarded as Samaritans by them and as Karaites we appear in their eyes. The excessive scrupulousness regarding purity and impurity, the exaggerated piety, and the resultant abstinence which is derived from these were viewed as arrogance and separatism, as an insult and criticism. Separatism in the prayer ritual, in its place and time, as well as the insistence upon separate food, on different manners of dress and behavior - all these practices, which were initiated for the purpose of sanctification, mystical elevation, and attaining the holy spirit, were interpreted as a threat to the prevalent hierarchy of values and as a challenge to the Halakhah and to the tradition represented by the community. An interesting expression of the opposite point of view, that of the members of the separate prayer quorums, is found in the writings of Rabbi Nathan Adler s contemporary, published about the same time as the group's first excommunication in response to the arguments of those who were offended by separatism: It emerges from this, that in the same manner Israel was separate and secluded from the multitude in two ways: when eating, they would not eat the same food with them; and also that they would not be mingled with them, only that they should be secluded in the clouds of Israel and not mingle with the mixed multitude. ... "Why should you make a seclusion from us and pray and study by yourselves, and also not eat our food?" I myself, my eyes and not a stranger's, have seen this war that is always waged against him who wishes to be sanctified and to seclude himself and pray in a quorum of his own, since it is impossible to pray in a public where they pray out of routine habit, and for several similar reasons. In the matter of eating, this generatioan cannot be trusted, since anyone may slaughter, even someone who is not expert in the laws of slaughtering and does not fear heaven ... and certainly anyone who withdraws from the food of the world must be considered holy, because there are not many people expert in the laws of salting ... and certainly someone who wishes to be sanctified will not sit at their table. ... and it is a sign for all generations that the pre-eminent worshiper should form a separate quorum with particular people

Rabbi Nathan Adler

233

and also not eat with the masses at the same table at all. ... and the sign for all generations is that they should make a House of Study for select individual Jews, who will be separate from the masses of the people, for it is impossible that they should be together. 26 The writer is Rabbi Jacob Joseph ha-Cohen of Polonnoye, who published this work in 1780 after his effort to maintain simultaneously both the Kabbalistic ethos of withdrawal and separation and the status of the rabbi of a congregation, an effort which met with failure and ended with his discharge from the rabbinate of the community of Shargorod. 27 He interprets the Biblical story of the children of Israel and the multitude as an allegory of the relation between the groups of Hasidim and recluses who pray separately among themselves, on the one hand, as against the whole community, which argues against them and disputes them, on the other hand. Sanctification and elevation are made conditional upon isolation and seclusion from the surrounding world, for the religious norms prevailing in the traditional community were insufficient in the view of the circles of pietistic Hasidim, who viewed the prayer, ritual slaughter, and conduct of the congregation, at least according to the testimony of Rabbi Jacob Joseph, as the practices of the rabble. On the strength of independent and unlimited spiritual authority, the pietistic Hasidic circles instituted alterations in matters of ritual purity, ritual slaughter, circumcision, and phylacteries, and they asserted autonomy in determining the calendar and setting the hour when sabbaths and festivals began and ended. These changes were viewed as a manifestation of sectarianism and were interpreted as rebellion against the authority of the community. The community leadership set out to block spiritual separatism and used excommunication to re-establish and strengthen its authority. It defined those who rejected its authority as a sect and demanded their excommunication. The Community Register of Frankfurt 28 records the wording of the proclamation issued in the synagogue in the month of Elul, 1779: [In Hebrew:] Behold, [in Yiddish:] listen gentlemen, I have been ordered [in Hebrew:] to proclaim in the name of [in Aramaic:] the holy congregation, may the Lord bless it and keep it, [in Hebrew.] in conjunction with the Lord wardens, may the Lord bless and keep them, that it is forbidden to the master of Torah, his honor the Rabbi, Rabbi Nathan the son of our Rabbi Simon Adler Katz, and to the master of Torah, Rabbi Lizer Wali to form a quorum 1ft (Toldot Ya 'aqov Yosef, pareil. Naso) 27

See Dinur, p. 154; M. Piekarz,p. 391, and cf. Y. Hasdaipp. 150. The Community Register of Frankfurt is in the National Library in Jerusalem in the manuscript

department, no. 4*662. For a detailed description of the regista', including a valuable index, see M Nadav,

"Pinqas Kahal Franfyurt de-Main," Kiryat Sefer, vol. 31 (1957), pp. 507-516.

234

R. Elior

of ten and to pray in their home, and any member of our congregation who goes to their house to pray in their house in a quorum whether a householder or other member of our community, he is excommunicated and banned. 29 The congregation's power of coercion and ability to exert authority over its members was ineffective, as we see from the following document in the register: Inasmuch as the aforementioned Torah scholar Rabbi Nathan ben Simon Adler Katz did not heed the ruling of the congregation and the wardens, may God bless and keep them, and did not obey the proclamation which was publicly proclaimed in the synagogue and once again gathered a quorum in his home to pray, against the ruling of the congregation and the wardens, may God bless and keep them, in conjunction with the Chief Justice, long may he live, and two courts, may God bless and keep them, it was agreed to send [instructions] to the aforementioned Rabbi Nathan not to pray with any quorum at all except in synagogues which have permission from our congregation, excommunication is proclaimed in the following wording, which we sent to him ... The aforementioned Rabbi Nathan is proclaimed excommunicated and no one is to pray in a quorum of ten with him. Today is the eleventh of Elul 1779.30 The Community Register reflects ferment and dissent regarding the multiplicity of synagogues and private prayer quorums. In 1783 nine private quorums are mentioned in the register.31 And in 1790 the author of Ma 'aseh Ta 'atu 'im condemns some of them in harsh language, calling Adler s quorum a sect: "When that sect began to do evil and sin" 32 . The changes and alterations in religious customs which took place among the Kabbalists and Hasidim because of spiritual and mystical motivations, giving rise to their spiritual separatism, prove retrospectively to have been of weighty social significance. The pietistic Hasidic circles were viewed as sects both in Eastern and Western Europe because they saw themselves as fellowships of pious persons whose ways demanded social segregation, and because they were viewed as rejecting the community from which they had emerged. The remarks of the author of Ma aseh Ta atu im describing the group around Rabbi Nathan are consistent with this conception. Since the Hasidim viewed the customs of the community as unsuitable, according to the testimony of this group's opponents, the self-imposed social separation was perceived as a barrier between the members of the group and the rest of the community. From the point of view of those members of the community who condemned Rabbi 29 Register of the Frankfurt Community, fol. 250a. 30

Ibid, fol, 250a.

31

Doc. 488-490. See Nadav, p. 513.

32

p. 25.

Rabbi Nathan Adler

235

Nathan, the meaning of the claim that the manners of the community were unacceptable to him and his group was that they attributed absolute validity to their own manner of serving God, thereby challenging the validity of the traditional ways of the community; however, from their own point of view, the members of the group regarded themselves as the bearers of the Kabbalistic tradition. Thus they were not subject to the rule of the community in spiritual matters, and they were obliged to raise a barrier between the congregation and themselves in order to conserve the Kabbalistic ethos in proper fashion. 33 The great tension between the members of the separate prayer quorums and the community leadership grew stronger against the background of the prevailing view, which saw their exaggerated piety as a distinct sign of the Sabbatian movement. 34 That is to say, the opponents suspected that, behind the facade of sanctity and abstemiousness of the separatist prayer quorums were deceptions, lies, and trickery intended to undermine the foundations of the existing order. For that reason the opponents of Hasidism in Eastern Europe tended to accuse the Hasidic circles of belonging to the Sabbatian movement in its various guises, to define them as a sect, and to persecute them ruthlessly.33 On the economical significance of the spiritual segregation and on the implication entailed in it see Nadav, p. 513. 34

See G. Scholem, "Tenu'at ha-Shabta'ut be-Polin," in Mehqarim

Shabta'ut

ve-Gilguleyha,

u-Meqorot le-Toldot

ha-

Jerusalem 1974, p. 80; cf. M. Balaban, Le-Toledot ha-Tenn'ah

ha-

Frankit, Tel Aviv 1934, Ipp. 53-66. One iiould note the remarks of the scribe of the community of Brody, who copied the writ