IV.
| י | ב | ק | ע | ו | ה | מ | י | ם |
| ה | י | ם | ל | ח | ר | ב | ה | ו |
| י | ל | ה | ו | י | ש | ם | א | ת |
| י | ם | ע | ז | ה | כ | ל | ה | ל |
| ה | י | ם | ב | ר | ו | ח | ק | ד |
| ו | ל | ך | י | ה | ו | ה | א | ת |
| ד | ו | ע | ל | ה | י | ם | ו | י |
| ו | י | ט | מ | ש | ה | א | ת | י |
The three verses which have thus yielded the three Pillars of the Sephiroth, are then joined together in groups of three letters in the order in which they are read in diagrams ii, iii, and iv, and they then yield the seventy-two divine names which the Kabbalah assigns to the Deity,[29] as follows:— [[136]]
| כהת Adorandus. | אכא Longanimis. | ללה Annunciatus. | מהש Quæsitus. | עלם Salus. | סיט Spes. | ילי Auxiliator. | והו Exaltator. |
| הקם Advocatus. | הרי Ens. | מבה Sublevator. | יזל Decantatus. | ההע Opportunus. | לאו Exultabundus. | אלד | הוי Recordabilis. |
| חהו Expetendus. | מלה Custos. | ייי Dexter. | נלך Fortis. | פהל Ervens. | לוו Exauditor. | כלי Justitin. | לאו Dominator. |
| ושר Rector. | לכב Solus. | אום Adolescentia. | ריי Sanator. | שאה Festinus. | ירת Salvator. | האא Invocandus. | נתה Mirabilis. |
| ייז Propulsator. | רהע Adivtor. | חעם Refugium. | אני Facies. | מנד Gloria. | כוק Deprecatio. | להח Expectatio. | יחו Cogitabundus. |
| מיה Revelator. | עשל Magnificus. | ערי Operator. | סאל Compatiens. | ילה Doctor. | וול Matutinus. | מיך Custos. | ההה Liberator. |
| פוי Erector. | מבח Aeternum. | נית Regnator. | ננא Verus. | עמם Altissimus. | החש Lætabundus. | דני Clemens. | והו Maximus. |
| מחי Mercator. | ענו Laudabilis. | יהה Amabilis. | ומב Benedictus. | מצר Justus. | הרח Oriens. | ייל Animus. | נמם Protector. |
| מום Requies. | חיי Multus. | יבם Deus. | ראה Præmium. | חבו Bonus. | איע Dator. | מנק Assisteus. | דמב Deprecabilis. |
6. The letters of words are changed by way of anagram and new words are obtained. This canon is called תמורה or חילוף אותיות, permutation, and the commutation is effected according to fixed rules. Thus the alphabet is bent exactly [[137]]in the middle, and one half is put over the other, and by changing alternately the first letter or the first two letters at the beginning of the second line, twenty-two commutations are produced ex. gr.:—
| 11 | 10 | 9 | 8 | 7 | 6 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 | |||
| [ | כ | י | ט | ח | ז | ו | ה | ד | ג | ב | א | ] | |
| מ | נ | ס | ע | פ | צ | ק | ר | ש | ת | ל | |||
| [ | ל | כ | י | ט | ח | ז | ו | ה | ד | ג | א | ] | or |
| מ | נ | ס | ע | פ | צ | ק | ר | ש | ת | ב |
These anagramic alphabets obtain their respective names from the first two specimen pairs of letter which indicate the interchange. Thus, for instance, the first is called Albath אל״בת from the first words, the second Abgath אב״גת, and so on. The following table exhibits the established rules of the alphabetical permutations.
| כם | ינ | טס | חע | זפ | וצ | הק | דר | גש | בת | אל | 1. | Albath. |
| לם | כנ | יס | טע | חפ | זצ | וק | הר | דש | גת | אב | 2. | Abgath. |
| במ | לנ | כס | יע | טפ | חצ | זק | ור | הש | דת | אג | 3. | Agdath. |
| נמ | לס | כע | יפ | טצ | חק | זר | וש | הת | בג | אד | 4. | Adbag. |
| גנ | מס | לע | כפ | יצ | טק | חר | זש | ות | בד | אה | 5. | Ahbad. |
| נס | מע | לפ | כצ | יק | טר | חש | זת | גד | בה | או | 6. | Avba. |
| דס | נע | מפ | לצ | כק | יר | טש | חת | גה | בו | אז | 7. | Azbav. |
| סע | נפ | מצ | לק | כר | יש | טת | דה | גו | בז | אח | 8. | Achbaz. |
| הע | ספ | נצ | מק | לר | כש | ית | דו | גז | בח | אט | 9. | Atbach. |
| עפ | סצ | נק | מר | לש | כת | הו | דז | גח | בט | אי | 10. | Aibat. |
| ופ | עצ | סק | נר | מש | לת | הז | דח | גט | בי | אכ | 11. | Achbi. |
| פצ | עק | סר | נש | מת | וז | הח | דט | גי | בכ | אל | 12. | Albach. |
| וצ | פק | ער | סש | נת | וח | הט | די | גכ | בל | אמ | 13. | Ambal. |
| צק | פר | עש | סת | זח | וט | הי | דכ | גל | במ | אנ | 14. | Anbam. |
| חק | צר | פש | עת | זט | וי | הכ | דל | גם | בנ | אס | 15. | Asban. |
| קר | צש | פת | חט | זי | וכ | הל | דמ | גנ | בס | אע | 16. | Aabas. |
| טר | קש | טת | חי | זכ | ול | המ | דנ | גס | בע | אפ | 17. | Afba. |
| רש | קת | טי | חכ | זל | ומ | הנ | דס | גע | בפ | אצ | 18. | Azbaf. |
| יש | רת | טכ | חל | זמ | ונ | הס | דע | גפ | בצ | אק | 19. | Akbaz. |
| שת | יכ | טל | חמ | זנ | וס | הע | דפ | גצ | בק | אר | 20. | Arbak. |
| כת | יל | טמ | חנ | זס | וע | הפ | דצ | גכ | בר | אש | 21. | Ashbar. |
| כל | ימ | טנ | חס | זע | ופ | הצ | דק | גר | בש | את | 22. | Athbash. |
| To this list is to be added— | ||||||||||||
| שת | קר | פצ | סע | מנ | כל | טי | זח | הו | גד | אב | 23. | Abgad. |
| כת | יש | טר | חק | זצ | ופ | הע | דס | גנ | בם | אל | 24. | Albam. |
[[138]]
Besides these canons the Kabbalah also sees a recondite sense in the form of the letters, as well as in the ornaments which adorn them.
As to the relation of the Kabbalah to Christianity, it is maintained that this theosophy propounds the doctrine of the trinity and the sufferings of Messiah. How far this is true may be ascertained from the following passages.[30] “We have already remarked in several places that the daily liturgical declaration about the divine unity is that which is indicated in the Bible ( Deut. vi, 43 ), where Jehovah occurs first, then Elohenu, and then again Jehovah, which three together constitute a unity, and for this reason he [i.e., Jehovah] is in the said place called one (אחד), But there are three names, and how can they be one? And although we read one (אחד), are they really one? Now this is revealed by the vision of the Holy Ghost, and when the eyes are closed we get to know that the three are only one. This is also the mystery of the voice. The voice is only one, find yet it consists of three elements, fire [i.e., warmth], air [i.e., breath], and water [i.e., humidity], yet are all these one in the mystery of the voice, and can only be one. Thus also Jehovah, Elohenu, and Jehovah constitute one—three forms which are one. And this is indicated by the voice which man raises [i.e., at prayer], thereby to comprehend spiritually the most perfect unity of the En Soph for the finite, since all the three [i.e., Jehovah, Elohenu, Jehovah] are rend with the same loud voice, which comprises in itself a trinity. And this is the daily confession of the divine unity which, as a mystery, is revealed by the Holy Ghost. This unity has been explained [[139]]in different ways, yet he who understands it in this way is right, and he who understands it in another way is also right. The idea of unity, however formed by us here below, from the mystery of the audible voice which is one, explains the thing.” (Sohar, ii, 43 b.)
On another occasion we are informed that R. Eleazar, whilst sitting with his father R. Simeon, was anxious to know how the two names, Jehovah and Elohim, can be interchanged, seeing that the one denotes mercy and the other judgment. Before giving the discussion between the father and the son, it is necessary to remark that whenever the two divine names, Adonai (אדוני) and Jehovah (יהוה), immediately follow each other, Jehovah is pointed and read (יְהֹוִה) Elohim. The reason of this, as it is generally supposed, is to avoid the repetition of Adonai, Adonai, since the Tetragrammaton is otherwise always pointed and read (יְהֹוָה). The Kabbalah, however, as we shall see, discovers in it a recondite meaning,[31] “R. Eleazar, when sitting before his father R. Simeon, said to him, we have been taught that whenever Elohim (אלהיﬦ) occurs, it denotes Justice. Now how can Elohim sometimes be put for Jehovah, as is the case in those passages wherein Adonai (אדוני) and Jehovah (יהוה) stand together (Comp. Gen. xv, 8 ; Ezek. ii, 4 , &c.), seeing that the latter denotes mercy in all the passages in which it occurs? To which he replied, Thus it is said in the Scripture, ‘Know therefore this day and consider it in thine heart, that Jehovah is Elohim’ ( Deut. iv, 19 ); and again it is written ‘Jehovah is Elohim.’ (Ibid., ver. 35 .) Whereupon he [i.e., the son] said, I know this forsooth, that justice is sometimes tempered with [[140]]mercy and mercy with justice. Quoth he [i.e., the father], Come and see that it is so; Jehovah indeed does signify mercy whenever it occurs, but when through sin mercy is changed into justice, then it is written Jehovah (יהוה), but read Elohim (אלהיﬦ). Now come and see the mystery of the word [i.e., Jehovah]. There are three degrees, and each degree exists by itself [i.e., in the Deity], although the three together constitute one, they are closely united into one and are inseparable from each other.” (Sohar, iii, 65 a.)
We shall only give one more passage bearing on the subject of the Trinity.[32] “He who reads the word (אחד) One [i.e., in the declaration of the divine unity שמע] must pronounce the Aleph (א) quickly, shorten its sound a little, and not pause at all by this letter, and he who obeys this, his life will be lengthened. Whereupon they [i.e., the disciples] said to him [i.e., to R. Ilai], he [i.e., R. Simeon] has said, There are two, and one is connected with them, and they are three; but in being three they are one. He said to them, those two names, Jehovah Jehovah, are in the declaration ‘Hear O Israel’ ( Deut. vi, 4 ), and Elohenu (אלהנו), between them, is united with them as the third, and this is the conclusion which is sealed with the impression of Truth (אמת). But when these three are combined into a unity, they are one in a single unity.” (Sohar, iii, 262 a.) Indeed one Codex of the Sohar had the following remark on the words “Holy, holy, holy is the Lord of hosts” ( Isa. iv, 3 ); קדוש זה אב קדוש זה בן קדוש זה רוח הקדש, the first holy refers to the Holy Father; the second to the Holy Son; and the third to the Holy [[141]]Ghost.[33] This passage, however, is omitted from the present recensions of the Sohar. Some Jewish writers have felt these passages to be so favourable to the doctrine of the Trinity, that they insist upon their being interpolations into the Sohar, whilst others have tried to explain them as referring to the Sephiroth.[34]
As to the atonement of the Messiah for the sins of the people, this is not only propounded in the Sohar, but is given as the explanation of the fifty-third chapter of Isaiah.[35] “When the righteous are visited with sufferings and afflictions to atone for the sins of the world, it is that they might atone for all the sins of this generation. How is this proved? By all the members of the body. When all members suffer, one member is afflicted in order that all may recover. And which of them? The arm. The arm is beaten, the blood is taken from it, and then the recovery of all the members of the body is secured. So it is with the children of the world: they are members one of another. When the Holy One; blessed be he, wishes the recovery of the world, he afflicts one righteous from their midst, and for his sake all are healed. How is this shown? It is written—‘He was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities, … and with his stripes we are healed.’ ( Isa. liii, 5 .) ‘With his stripes,’ i.e., healed, as by the wound of bleeding an arm, and with this wound we are healed, i.e., it was a healing to [[142]]each one of us as members of the body.” (Sohar, iii, 218 a.) To the same effect is the following passage.[36] “Those souls which tarry in the nether garden of Eden hover about the world, and when they see suffering or patient martyrs and those who suffer for the unity of God, they return and mention it to the Messiah. When they tell the Messiah of the afflictions of Israel in exile, and that the sinners among them do not reflect in order to know their Lord, he raises his voice and weeps because of those sinners, as it is written, ‘he is wounded for our transgressions.’ ( Isa. liii, 5 .) Whereupon those souls return and take their place. In the garden of Eden there is one palace which is called the palace of the sick. The Messiah goes into this palace and invokes all the sufferings, pain, and afflictions of Israel to come upon him, and they all come upon him. Now if he did not remove them thus and take them upon himself, no man could endure the sufferings of Israel, due as punishment for transgressing the Law; as it is written—‘Surely he hath borne our griefs and carried our sorrows,’ &c. ( Isa. liii, 4 , with Rom. xii, 3, 4 .) When the children of Israel were in the Holy Land they removed all those sufferings and afflictions from the world by their prayers and sacrifices, but now the Messiah removes them from the world.” (Sohar, ii, 212 b.)
That these opinions favour, to a certain extent, the doctrines of the Trinity and the Atonement, though not in the orthodox sense, is not only admitted by many of the Jewish literati who are adverse to the Kabbalah, but by some of its [[143]]friends. Indeed, the very fact that so large a number of Kabbalists have from time to time embraced the Christian faith would of itself show that there must be some sort of affinity between the tenets of the respective systems. Some of these converts occupied the highest position in the Synagogue, both as pious Jews and literary men. We need only specify Paul Ricci, physician to the Emperor Maximilian I; Julius Conrad Otto, author of The Unveiled Secrets (גלא רזיא), consisting of extracts from the Talmud and the Sohar, to prove the validity of the Christian doctrine (Nürenberg, 1805); John Stephen Rittengal, grandson of the celebrated Don Isaac Abravanel, and translator of The Book Jetzira, or of Creation (ספר יצירה), into Latin (Amsterdam, 1642); and Jacob Frank, the great apostle of the Kabbalah in the eighteenth century, whose example in professing Christianity was followed by several thousands of his disciples.[37] The testimony of these distinguished Kabbalists, which they give in their elaborate works, about the affinity of some of the doctrines of this theosophy with those of Christianity, is by no means to be slighted; and this is fully corroborated by the celebrated Leo di Modena, who, as an orthodox Jew, went so far as to question whether God will ever forgive those who printed the Kabbalistic works.[38]
The use made by some well-meaning Christians of the above-named Kabbalistic canons of interpretation, in controversies with Jews, to prove that the doctrines of Christianity are concealed under the letter of the Old Testament, will now be deprecated by every one who has any regard for the laws of language. As a literary curiosity, however, we shall give one or two specimens. No less a person than the celebrated [[144]]Reuchlin would have it that the doctrine of the Trinity is to be found in the first verse of Genesis. He submits, if the Hebrew word ברא, which is translated created, be examined, and if each of the three letters composing this word be taken as the initial of a separate word, we obtain the expressions בן רוח אב Son, Spirit, Father, according to Rule 2 (p. [131]). Upon the same principle this erudite scholar deduces the first two persons in the Trinity from the words—“the stone which the builders refused is become the head stone of the corner” ( Ps. cxviii, 22 ), by dividing the three letters composing the word אבן stone, into אב בן Father, Son (Comp. De Verbo Mirifico, Basel, 1494). In more recent times we find it maintained that the ‘righteousness’ spoken of in Daniel ix, 24 , means the Anointed of Jehovah, because the original phrase, צדק עלמים is by Gematria, = numerical value, (which is Rule 1, given above, p. [131]), the same as משיח יהוה. So pleased is the author with this discovery, that he takes great care to remark—“It is a proof which I believe has hitherto escaped the notice of interpreters.” Such proofs, however, of the Messiaship of Christ bring no honour to our religion; and in the present day argue badly both against him who adduces them and against him who is convinced by them. [[145]]
[1] דע כי אין סוף לא יכנס בהרהור וכל שכן בדבור אף על פי שיש לו רמז בכל דבר שאין חוץ ממנו ולכך אין אות ואין שם ואין דבר אשר יגבלנו, Commentary of the ten Sephiroth, ed. Berlin, p. 4 a. This doctrine, however, that everything is in the Deity is not peculiar to the Kabbalah, it has been propounded by the Jews from time immemorial, before the Kabbalah came into existence, as may be seen from the following passage in the Midrash. “The Holy One, blessed be he, is the space of the universe, but the universe is not his space (הקב״ה מקומו של עולם ואין העולם מקומו). R. Isaac submitted: from the passage מעונה אלהי קדם ( Deut. xxxiii, 27 ), we do not know whether the Holy One, blessed be he, is the habitation of the universe or the universe his habitation; but from the remark אדני מעון אתה Lord thou art the dwelling place ( Ps. xc, 1 ), it is evident that the Holy One, blessed be he, is the dwelling place of the universe, and not the universe his dwelling place.” (Bereshith Rabba, § lxviii.) To the same effect is the remark of Philo, “God himself is the space of the universe, for it is he who contains all things.” (De Somniis, i.) It is for this reason that God is called מקום or המקום = ὁ τόπος, locus, and that the Septuagint renders ויראו את אלהי ישראל וגו׳ ( Exod. xxiv, 10 ), by καὶ εἶδον τὸν τόπον, οὗ εἱστήκει ὁ θεὸς, which has occasioned so much difficulty to interpreters. [↑]
[2] לא ידע ולא אתידע מה דהוי בראישא דא דלא׳ אתדבק בחכמתא ולא כסוכלתנו ובגן כן אקרי אין (Sohar iii, 283 b.) To the same effect is the ancient expository work on the doctrine of the Emanations which we quoted in the preceding note, comp. מה שאינו מוגבל קרוי אין סוף והוא ההשואה גמורה באחדות השלמח שאין בה שנוי ואם הוא מבלי גבול אין חוץ ממנו, Commentary on the ten Sephiroth, ed. Berlin, p. 2 a. [↑]
[3] דע כי אין סוף אין לומר כי יש לו רצון ולא כונה ולא חפץ ולא מחשבה ולא דבור ומעשה ibid., 4 a. [↑]
[4] אם האמר כי הוא בלבד כיון בבריאח עולמו יש להשיב על זה כי הכונה מורה על הסרון המכון, Commentary on the ten Sephiroth, p. 2 b. Again, says the same authority, ואם תאמר שהגבול הגמצא ממנו תחלה היה העולם הזה שהוא (העולם) חסר מהשלמותו חסרת חכוח שהוא ממנו .… ואם תאמר שלא כיון בבריאחו אם כן היתה הבריאה במקרה, וכל דבר הבא במקרה אין לו סדר, ואנו רואים כי הנבראים יש לחם סדר, ועל סדר הם מתקימים, ועל סדר הם מתכטלים, ועל סדר הם מתחדשים, ibid., p. 2. [↑]
[5] Both the etymology and the exact meaning of the word ספירה (plural ספירות) are matters of dispute. R. Azariel, the first Kabbalist, derives it from ספר to number, whilst the later Kabbalists derive it alternately from ספיר Saphir, from השמים מספרים כבוד אל ( Ps. xix, 1 ), and from the Greek σφαῖραι, and are not at all certain whether to regard the Sephiroth as principles (ἀρχαὶ), or as substances (ὑποστάσεις), or as potencies, powers (δυνάμεις), or as intelligent worlds (κόσμοι νοητικοί), or as attributes, or as entities (עצמות), or as organs of the Deity (כלים). [↑]
[6] The Sohar, like the Talmud, generally renders the words מלך שלמה King Solomon; while verses in the Song of Songs, by מלכא די שלמא דיליה the King to whom peace belongs. [↑]
[7] כי כל בריאה כשנוטלין ממנה תתמעט ותתחסר .… כח האצילות שנוטלין ממנו ואינו חסר, Commentary on the ten Sephiroth, 2 b; 4 a. [↑]
[8] הספירות שהם כח השלם וכח החסר כשהם מקבלים מהשפע הבא מהשלמתו הם כח שלם ובהמנע השפע מהם יש בחם כח חסר לכך יש בהם כח לפעול בהשלמה ובחסרון. [↑]
[9] The notion, however, that worlds were created and destroyed prior to the present creation, was propounded in the Midrash long before the existence of the Kabbalah. Thus on the verse, “And God saw everything that he had made, and behold it was very good” ( Gen. i, 31 ), R. Abahu submits א״ר אבהו מכאן שהקב״ה היה בורא עולמות ומחריבן ובורא עולמות ומחריבן עד שברא את אלו אמר דין הניין לי יתהון לא הניין לי from this we see that the Holy One, blessed be he, had successively created and destroyed sundry worlds before he created the present world, and when he created the present world he said, this pleases me, the previous ones did not please me. (Bereshith Rabba, section or Parsha ix.) [↑]
[10] The question, however, about the doctrine of the Trinity in other passages of the Sohar will be discussed more amply in the sequel, where we shall point out the relation of the Kabbalah to Christianity. [↑]
[11] The Kabbalistic description of Metatron is taken from the Jewish angelology of a much older date than this theosophy. Thus Ben Asai and Ben Soma already regard the divine voice, the λόγος (קול אלהים) as Metatron. (Beresh. Rab., Parsha v.) He is called the Great Teacher, the Teacher of Teachers (ספרא רבא), and it is for this reason that Enoch, who walked in close communion with God, and taught mankind by his holy example, is said by the Chaldee paraphrase of Jonathan b. Uzziel, to ‘have received the name Metatron, the Great Teacher’ after he was transplanted. ( Gen. v, 24 .) Metatron, moreover, is the Presence Angel (שר הפנים), the Angel of the Lord that was sent to go before Israel ( Exod. xxiii, 21 ); he is the visible manifestation of the Deity, for in him is the name of the Lord, i.e., his name and that of the Deity are identical, inasmuch as they are of the same numerical value (viz.:—שדי and מטטרון are the same according to the exegetical rule called Gematria, י 10 + ד 4 + ש 300 = 314; ן 50 + ו 6 + ר 200 + ט 9 + ט 9 + מ 40 = 314. See Rashi on Exod. xxiii, 21 , רבותינו אמרו זה מטטרון ששמו כשם רבו מטטרון בגמטריא שדי and Sanhedrim 38 b). So exalted is Metatron’s position in the ancient Jewish angelology, that we are told that when Elisha b. Abaja, also called Acher, saw this angel who occupies the first position after the Deity, he exclaimed, ‘Peradventure, but far be it, there are two Supreme Powers’ (שמא חס ושלום שתי רשויות הן Talmud, Chagiga, 15 a). The etymology of מטטרון is greatly disputed; but there is no doubt that it is to be derived from Metator, messenger, outrider, way maker, as has been shown by Elias Levita, and is maintained by Cassel (Ersch und Gruber’s Encyklopädie, section ii, vol. xxvii, s.v.; Juden, p. 40, note 84). Sachs (Beiträge zur Sprach- und Alterthumsforschung, vol. i, Berlin 1852, p. 108) rightly remarks that this etymology is fixed by the passage from Siphra, quoted in Kaphter-Va-Pherach, c. x, p. 34 b אצבעו של הקב״ה נעשה מטטרון למשה והראהו כל ארץ ישראל the finger of God was the messenger or guide to Moses, and showed him all the land of Israel. [[110]]The termination ון has been appended to מטטר to obtain the same numerical value, as שדי. The derivation of it from μετὰ θρόνος, because this angel is immediately under the divine throne (כורסייא), which is maintained by Frank (Kabbala, p. 43), Graetz (Gnosticismus, p. 44) and others, has been shown by Frankel (Zeitschrift, 1846. vol. iii, p. 113), and Cassel (Ersch und Gruber’s Encyklop. section ii, vol. xxvii, p. 41), to be both contrary to the form of the word and to the description of Metatron. [↑]
[12] The view that the serpent which seduced the protoplasts is identical with Satan is not peculiar to the Kabbalah. It is stated in the Talmud in almost the same words הוא יצר הרע הוא השטן הוא מלאך המות כמתניחא תנא יורד ומטע עולה ומשטין יורד וממים the evil spirit, Satan, and the angel of death, are the same. It is propounded in the Boraitha that he descends and seduces; he then ascends and accuses, and then comes down again and kills. Baba Bathra, 16 a. [↑]
[13] כיון דנברא אדם אתתקן כלא וכל מה דלעילא ותתא וסלא אתכליל באדם … איהו שלימותא דכלא. זוחר חלק ג׳ דף מ״ח א׳ [↑]
[14] That the righteous are greater than the angels is already propounded in the Talmud (גדולים צדיקים יותר ממלאכי השרת Sanhedrim 93 a); and it is asserted that no one angel can do two things (אין מלאך אחד עושה שתי שליחות Bereshith Rabba, section 1), for which reason three angels had to be sent, one to announce to Sarai the birth of Isaac, the other to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah, and the third to save Lot and his family; whilst a man can perform several duties. The superiority of man over angels is also asserted in the New Testament. ( 1 Cor. vi, 3 .) [↑]
[15] The Karmarthi, who interpreted the precepts of Islamism allegorically, also maintained that the human body represents the letters in the name of God. When standing the human body represents an Elif, when kneeling a Lâm, and when prostrated on the ground a Hê, so that the body is like a book in which may be read the name Allah. De Sacy, Introduction à l’Exposé de la Religion des Druzes, pp. 86, 87. Comp. Frank, Die Kabbala, p. 32. [↑]
[16] The pre-existence of the human souls in the celestial regions was believed by the Jews before the Kabbalah came into vogue. We find this doctrine in the Book of Wisdom (viii, 20); in Josephus, where we are told that the Essenes believed ‘that souls were immortal, and that they descended from the pure air, συμπλέκεσθαι ὥσπερ εἰρκταῖς τοῖς σώμασι, to be chained to bodies’ (de Bell. Jud. ii, 12); by Philo, who says ‘the air was full of them, and that those which were nearest the earth κατίασιν ἐκδεθησομέναι σώμασι θνητοῖς, descending to be tied to mortal bodies, παλινδρομοῦσι αὖθις, return back to bodies, being [[114]]desirous to live in them.’ (De Gignat. p. 222, C.; De Somniis, p. 455, D. Comp. Arnald on the Book of Wisdom, viii, 20 , and Whitby on John ix, 2 ., where these quotations and others are given); and in the Talmud where it is declared that the human souls which are to be born (רוחות ונשמות שעתידין להבראות), have their abode in the seventh heaven (Chagiga, 12 b); that they leave gradually the storehouse of souls to people this earth (עד שיכלו כל הנשמוה שבגוף Jebamoth, 62; Aboda Sara, 5; Nidda, 13); and that the Holy One, blessed be he, took counsel with them when he was about to create the world כנפשתן של צריקין נמלך הקב״ה וברא את העולם (Bereshith Rabba, section viii). [↑]
[17] The notion about the reluctance of the soul to enter into this world is also not peculiar to the Kabbalah. The most ancient tract of the Mishna thus speaks of the soul: “Against thy will thou becomest an embryo, and against thy will thou art born” (על כרחך אתה נוצר ועל כרחך אתה נולד Aboth, iv. 29); on which Bartenora, in his commentary, remarks: “The soul does not wish to quit the pure abode of the curtain which encloses the Holy of Holies.” [↑]
[18] כל אינון רוחין ונשמתין כלהו כלילן דכר ונוקבא דמתחברן כחדא ואתמסרן בידא דההוא ממנא שליהא דאתפקר על עדואיהן [עיבוריהן] דבני נשא ולילה שמיה ובשעהא דנחתין ואתמסרן בידוי מתפדשין ילזמנין דא אקרים מן דא ואחית להו בבני נשא וכד מטא [מחא] עידן דזווגא דלהון קב״ה דידע אינון רוהין ונשמהין מחבר לון כדבקדמיתא ומכרזא עלייהו וכד אתחברן אתעגידו חד גופא חד נשמתא ימינא ישמאלא כדקא חזי ובגין כך אין כל חדש תחת השמש. ואי תימא הא תנינן לית זווגא אלא לפום עוגדוי ואורהוי דבר נש הכי הוא ודאי. דאי זכי ועובדוי אתכשרן זכי לההוא דיליה לאתחברא ביד כמה דנפיק. זוהר חלק א דף צא ב [↑]
[19] בספרא דשלמה מלכא אשכחנא דבשעתא דזווגא אשתכח לתתא שדר קב״ה חד דיוקנא בפרצופא ד״נ רשימה חקיקה בצולמא וקיימא על ההוא זווגא ואלמלי אתיהיב רשו לעינא למחמי חמי ב״נ על רישיה חד צולמא רשימא כפרצופא דבר נש ובההוא צילמא אתברי ב״נ ועד דלא קיימא [ס״א ועד לא קיימא] ההוא צולמא דשדר ליה מאריה על רישיה וישתכח תמן לא אתברי ב״נ הה״ד ויברא אלקים את האדם בצלמו. ההוא צלם אזדמן לקבליה עד דנפיק לעלמא כד נפק בההוא צלם אתרבי בההוא צלם אזיל הה״ד אך בצלם יתהלך איש להאי צלם הוא מלעילא בשעתא דאינון רוחין נפקין מאתרייהו כל רוחא ורוחא אתתקן קמי מלכא קדישא בתקוני יקר בפרצופא דקאי׳ בהאי עלמא. ומההוא דיוקנא תקונא יקר נפיק האי צלם. ודא תליתאה לרוחא ואקדימת בהאי עלמא בשעתא דזווגא אשתכח ולית לך זווגא בעלמא דלא עלם בגווייהו. זוהר חלק ג דף קד א ,ב [↑]
[20] The two kinds of faculties, as well as the two sorts of feelings, are also mentioned in the Talmud. Thus it is said—“All the prophets looked into the Non-Luminous Mirror, whilst our teacher, Moses, looked into the Luminous Mirror.” (כל הנביאים נסהכלו באספקלריא שאינה מאירה משה רבינו נסתכל באספקלריא המאידה Jebamoth, 49 b). And again—“Also the divine service which is engendered by fear and not by love, has its merit.” (Jerusalem Berachoth, 44; Babylon Sota, 22 a.) [↑]
[21] לשם יחוד קב״ה ושכינתה ברחימו ודחילו וברחילו ורחימו ליחרא שם י״ה בו״ה ביחודא שלים בשם כל ישראל [↑]
[22] כל נשמתין עאלין בגלגולא ולא ידעין בני נשא אורחוי דקודשא בריך הוא והיך קיימא טיקלא והיך אתדנו בני נשא בכל יומא ובכל עידן והיך נשמתין עאלין בדינא עד לא ייתון להאי עלמא והיך עאלין בדינא לבתר דנפקי מהאי עלמא. כמה גלגולין וכמה עובדין סתימין עבידן קודשא בריך הוא בהדי כמה נשמתין ערטילאין וכמה רוחין ערטילאין אזלין בההוא עלמא דלא עאלין לפרגודא דמלכא. [[125]]וכמה עלמין אתהפך בהו ועלמא דאתהפך בכמה פליאן סתימין ובני נשא לא ידעין ולא משגיחין וחיך מתגלגלן נשמתין כאבנא בקוספתא כמה דאת אמר ואת נפש אויביך יקלענה בתוך כף הקלע השתא אית לגלאה דהא כל. זוהר חלק ב׳ דף צט ב׳ [↑]
[23] According to Josephus, the doctrine of the transmigration of souls into other bodies (μετεμψύχωσις), was also held by the Pharisees (comp. Antiq. xviii, 1, 3: de Bell. Jud. ii, 8, 14), restricting, however, the metempsychosis to the righteous. And though the Midrashim and the Talmud are silent about it, yet from Saadia’s vituperations against it (אבל אומר שמצאתי אנשים ממי שנקראים יהודים אומרים בהשנות וקוראים אותו ההעתקח Emunoth ve-Deoth, vi, 7; viii, 3) there is no doubt that this doctrine was held among some Jews in the ninth century of the present era. At all events it is perfectly certain that the Karaite Jews firmly believed in it ever since the seventh century. (Comp. Frankel, Monatschrift, x, 177, &c.) St. Jerome assures us that it was also propounded among the early Christians as an esoteric and traditional doctrine which was entrusted to the select few, (abscondite quasi in foveis viperarum versari et quasi haereditario malo serpere in paucis. Comp. epist. ad Demedriadem); and Origen was convinced that it was only by means of this doctrine that certain Scriptural narratives, such as the struggle of Jacob with Esau before their birth, the reference about Jeremiah when still in his mother’s womb, and many others, can possibly be explained. (περὶ ἀρχῶν i, 1, cap. vii; Adver. Celsum, i, 3.) [↑]
[24] The notion that the creation is a blessing, and that this is indicated in the first letter, is already propounded in the Midrash, as may be seen from the following remark. The reason why the Law begins with Beth, the second letter of the Alphabet, and not with Aleph, the first letter, is that the former is the first letter in the word blessing, while the latter is the first letter in the word accursed, למה בבית מפני שהוא לשון ברכה ולא בא״לף שהוא לשון ארירה (Midrash Rabba, sec. i). [↑]
[25] This view that the mere literal narrative is unworthy of inspiration, and that it must contain a spiritual meaning concealed under the garment of the letter, is not peculiar to the Kabbalah. Both the Synagogue and the Church have maintained the same from time immemorial. Thus the Talmud already describes the impious Manasseh, King of Israel, as making himself merry over the narratives of the Pentateuch and ironically asking (מנשוה בן חזקיה שהיה יושב ודורש בהגדות של דופי אמר וכי לא היה לו למשה לכתוב אלא אחות לוטן תמנע והמנע היתה פלגש לאליפז וילך ראובן בימי קציר חטים וימצא דודאים בשדה), whether Moses could not find anything better to relate than that “Loton’s sister was Timna” ( Gen. xxxvi, 22 ); “Timna was the concubine of Eliphaz” (ibid., v. 12 ); that “Reuben went in the days of the wheat harvest, and found mandrakes in the field” (ibid., xxx, 14 ), &c, &c. And it is replied that these narratives contain another sense besides the literal one. (Sanhedrim, 99 b.) Hence the rule (כל מה שאירע לאבות סימן לבנים), what happened to the fathers is typical of the children. [↑]
[26] Origen’s words are almost literally the same—“Si adsideamus litterae et secundum hoc vel quod Judaeis, vel quod vulgo videtur, accipiamus quæ in lege scripta sunt, erubesco dicere et confiteri quia tales leges dederit Deus: videbuntur enim magis elegantes et rationabiles hominum leges, verbi gratia vel Romanorum vel Atheniensium, vel Lacedaemoniorum.” Homil. vii, in Levit. Again, the same erudite father says, “What person in his senses will imagine that the first, second, and third day, in connection with which morning and evening are mentioned, were without sun, moon and stars, nay that there was no sky on the first day? Who is there so foolish and without common sense as to believe that God planted trees in the garden eastward of Eden like a husbandman, and planted therein the tree of life, perceptible to the eyes and senses, which gave life to the eater thereof; and another tree which gave to the eater thereof a knowledge of good and evil? I believe that everybody must regard these as figures, under which a recondite sense is concealed.” Lib. iv, cap. ii, περὶ ἀρχῶν. Huet, Origeniana, p. 167. Comp. Davidson, Sacred Hermeneutics, Edinburgh, 1843, p. 99, &c. It must, however, not be supposed that this sort of interpretation, which defies all rules of sound exegesis and common sense, is confined to the ancient Jewish Rabbins or the Christian fathers. The Commentary on Genesis and Exodus by Chr. Wordsworth, D.D., Canon of Westminster, may fairly compete in this respect with any production of bygone days. Will it be believed that Dr. Wordsworth actually sees it “suggested by the Holy Spirit Himself,” that Noah drunk, exposing his nakedness, and mocked by his own child, Ham, is typical of Christ who drank the cup of God’s wrath, stripped Himself of His heavenly glory, and was mocked by his own children the Jews? But we must give the Canon’s own words. “Noah drank the wine of his vineyard; Christ drank the cup of God’s wrath, which was the fruit of the sin of the cultivators of the vineyard, which he had planted in the world. Noah was made naked to his shame; Christ consented for our sake to strip Himself of His heavenly glory, and took on him the form of a servant. ( Phil. ii, 7 .) He laid aside his garments, and washed his disciples’ feet ( John, xiii, 4 .) He hid not his face from shame and spitting. ( Isa. 1, 6 .) When he was on the Cross, they that passed by reviled Him. ( Matt. xxvii, 39 .) He was mocked by His [[129]]own children, the Jews. He deigned to be exposed to insult for our sakes, in shame and nakedness on the Cross ( Heb. xii, 2 ), in order that we might receive eternal glory from His shame, and be clothed through His weakness with garments of heavenly beauty.” (Commentary on Genesis and Exodus, London, 1864, p. 52.) [↑]
[27] The notion that the Bible is to be explained in this fourfold manner was also propounded by the Jewish doctors generally, long before the existence of the Kabbalah (Comp. Ginsburg, Historical and Critical Commentary on Ecclesiastes, Longman, 1861, p. 30), and has been adopted by some of the fathers and schoolmen. Origen, although only advocating a threefold sense, viz.:—σωματικὸς, ψυχικὸς, πνευματικὸς, to correspond to the Platonic notion of the component parts of man, viz.:—σῶμα, ψυχὴ, πνεῦμα, almost uses the same words as the Kabbalah. “The sentiments of Holy Scriptures must be imprinted upon each one’s soul in a threefold manner, that the more simple may be built up by the flesh (or body) of Scripture, so to speak, by which we mean the obvious explanation; that he who has advanced to a higher state may be edified by the soul of Scripture as it were; but he that is perfect, and like to the individuals spoken of by the Apostle ( 1 Cor. ii, 6 , 7), must be edified by the spiritual law, having a shadow of good things to come. περὶ ἀρχῶν, lib. iv, cap. ii. Comp. Davidson, Sacred Hermeneutics, p. 97. Whilst Nicholas de Lyra, the celebrated commentator and forerunner of the Reformation (born about 1270, died October 23, 1340), distinctly espouses the Jewish four modes of interpretation, which he describes in the following couplet—
“Littera gesta docet, quid credas Allegoria,
Moralis quid agas, quo tendas anagogia.”
Comp. Alexander’s edition of Kitto’s Cyclopædia of Biblical Literature, s. v. Lyra. [↑]
[28] The above-mentioned exegetical canons, however, are not peculiar to the Kabbalah. They have been in vogue among the Jews from time immemorial. Thus the difficult passage in Isa. xxi, 8 , ויקרא אריה which is rendered in the Authorised Version, and he cried, A lion! or ‘as a lion,’ as the margin has it, is explained by the ancient Jewish tradition as a prophecy respecting Habakkuk, who, as Isaiah foresaw, would in coming days use the very words here predicted. (Comp. Isa. xxi, 8, 9 , with Hab. ii, 1 ); and this interpretation is obtained by rule i; inasmuch as אריה lion and חבקוק Habakkuk are numerically the same, viz.:—
| ה | י | ר | א | and | ק | ו | ק | ב | ח | |||||||||
| 5 | + | 10 | + | 200 | + | 1 | = 216 | and | 100 | + | 6 | + | 100 | + | 2 | + | 8 | = 216 |
(See the Commentaries of Rashi, Ibn Ezra, and Kimchi on Isa. xxi, 8 .) Again, in the fact that Jacob made Joseph ‘a coat of many colours’ ( Gen. xxxvii, 3 ), as the Authorised Version has it, or ‘pieces,’ as it is in the margin, the Midrash or the ancient Jewish exposition, sees the sufferings of Joseph indicated; inasmuch as פסים according to rule ii, is composed of the initials of פוטיפר Potiphar, who imprisoned Joseph; סוחרים merchants ישמעאלים Ishmaelites and מדינים Midianites, who bought him and sold him again as a slave. ( Gen. xxxvii, 25–28 ; xxxix, 1; comp. Rashi on Gen. xxxvii, 3 .) For more extensive information on this subject, we must refer to Ginsburg’s Historical and Critical Commentary on Ecclesiastes, Longman, 1861, p. 30, &c. [↑]
[29] The limits of this Essay preclude the possibility of entering into a disquisition on the seventy-two Divine names. Those who wish to examine the subject more extensively we must refer to the Commentaries on the Sohar ( Exod. xiv. 19–31 ), mentioned in the third part of this Essay; and to Bartolocci, Bibliotheca Magna Rabbinica, Pars iv, p. 230 seq., where ample information is given on this and kindred subjects. [↑]
[30] יחודא רכל יוכמא איחו יחודא למנרע ולשואח רעותא. יחודא דא חא אמרן בכמח דוכתי יחודא דכל יומא איחו יחיד דקרא ידו״ד קימאה אלחינו ידו״ד חא כלחו חד וע״ד קרי אחד. חא תלת שמחן חיך אינון חד ואף על גנ דקרינן אחד חיך אינון חד אלא בחויונא דרוח קרשא אתידע ואינון בחיזו דעינא סתימא למנדע דתלתא אלין אחד. ודא איחו רזא דקול, דאשתמע קול איחו וזר ואייחו תלתא גוונין, אשא ורוחא ומיא וכלחו חז ברזא רקול ולאו אינון אלא חד. אוף הכא י״י אכהינו י״י אונון חד, תלתא גוונין ואינון חד. ורא איהו קיל דעביד בר נש ביחודא ולשואח רעותיה ביהודא דכלא מאין טות עד סופא. דכלא באאי קול דקא עביד בחני תלתא דאינון חד, ודא [[139]]איהו יחודא דכל יומא דאתגלי ברזא דרוח קדשא. וכמה גוונין דיחודא אתערו וכלהו קשוט מאן דעביד האי עביד ומאן דעביד האי עביד, אבל האי יחודא דקא אנן מתערי מתתא ברזא דקול דאיהו הד, דא הוא ברירא דמלה. זוהר הלצ ב׳ דף מ״ג ב׳ [↑]
[31] רבי אלעזר הוה יתיב קמיה דר״ש אבוי אמר ליה הא תנינן אלהים בכל אתר דינא הוא, יו״ד ה״א וא״ו ה״א אית אתר דאקרי אלהים כגון אדני יהוה, אמאי אקרי אלהים והא אתוון רחמי אינון בכל אתר אמר ליה הכי הוא כתיב בקרא, דכתיב וידעת היום והשבות אל לבבך כי י״י הוא האלהים, וכתיב י״י הוא האלהים. אמר ליה מלה דא ידענא דבאתר דאית דינא אית רחמי, ולזמנא באתר דאית [[140]]רחמי אית דינא אמר ִיה תא חזי דהכי הוא ידו״ד בכל אתר רחמי ובשעתא דמהפכי חייביא רחמי לדינא כדין כתיב יהוה וכרינן ליה אלהים, אבל תא חזי רזא דמלה ג׳ דרגין אינון וכל דרגא ודרגא בלחודוי ואענ׳ דכלא חד ומתכשרי בחד ולא מתפרשי דא מן דא: זוהר חלק ג׳ דף ס׳ה א׳ [↑]
[32] מאן דאמר אחד אצטריך לחיפא אל״ף ולקצרא קריאה דילה ולא יעכב בהאי אות כלל. ומאן דעביד דא יתארכון חייו אמרו ליה תו אמר תרינאינון וחדא אשתתף בהו ואינון תלתא וכד הוו תלתא אינון חד. אמר לון אלין תרין שמהן דשמע ישראל דאינון יהוה יהוה אלהינו אשתתף בהו ואיהו חותמא דגושפנכא אמת, וכד מתחברן כחדא אינון חד ביחודא חדא: זוהר חלק ג׳ דף קס״ב א׳ [↑]
[33] Comp. Galatinus, De Arcanis Cathol. lib. ii, c. 3, p. 31; who says that some Codices of the Chaldee paraphrase in Isa. vi, 3 , had also קדיש אבא קדיש בריא קדיש רוחא קדישא the Holy Father, the Holy Son, and the Holy Ghost; see also Wolf, Bibliotheca Hebreca i, 1136; Graetz, Geschichte der Juden vii, 249. [↑]
[34] Comp. Joel, Die Religionsphilosophie des Sohar. Leipzig, 1849, p. 240 ff. [↑]
[35] בשעתא דיתפסין צדיקייא במרעין או במכתשין בגין לכפרא על עלמא היו, כדין יתכפרון כל חובי דרא. מנלן מכל שייפי גופא. בשעתא דכל שייפין בעקאו ומרע סגי שרייא עלייהו שייפא חדא אצטריך לאלקאה בגין דיתסון כלהו. ומנו דרועה. דרועא אלקי ואפיקו מניה דמא כדין הא אסוותא לכל שייפי גופא. אוף הכי בני עלמא אינון שייפין דא עם דא. בשעתא דבעי קב.״ה למיהב אסוותא לעלמא אלקי לחד צדיקא בינייהו במרעין ובמכתשין ובגיניה יהיב אסוותא לכלא מנלן דכתיב והוא מחולל מפשעינו מדוכא מעוונותיינו וגו׳ ובחברתי נרפא לנו ובחברתו אקזותא דדמא מכאן דאקיז דרועא, ובההוא חבורה נרפא לנו אסוותא הוא לנו לכל שייפין דגופא: זוהר חלק ג׳ דף רי״ח א׳ [↑]
[36] אנון נשמתין דבגנתא דעדן לתתא .… משטטי ומסתכלן באינון מאריהון דכאבין ובני מרעין ואנון דסבלין על יחודא דמאריהון ותאבין ואמרין ליה למשיהא בשעתא דאמרין ליה למשיחא צערא דישראל בגלותהון ואינון חייביא די בהון דלא מסתכלי למנדע למאריהון׳ ארים קלא ובכי על אינון חייבין דבהו הה״ד והוא מחולל מפשעינו מדוכא מעונותינו. תייבין אינון נשמתין וקיימין באתרייהו. בגנתא דעדן אית היכלא חדא דאקרי היכלא דבני מרעין׳ כדין משיח עאל בההו היכלא וקארי לכל מרעין וכל כאבין כל יסוריהון דישראל דייתון עליה וכלהו אתיין עליה ואלמלא דאיהו אקיל מעלייהו דישראל ונטיל עליה׳ לא הוי בר נש דיכיל למסבל יסוריהון דישראל על עונשי דאוריתא. הה״ד אכן חליינו הוא נשא וגו׳ … כד הוו ישראל בארעא קדישא באינון פולחנין וקרבנין דהוו עבדי הוו מסלקין כל אינין מרעין ויסורין מעלמא. השתא משיח מסלק לון מבני עלמא: זוהר חלק ב׳ דף ריב א׳ [↑]
[37] Comp. Peter Beer, Geschichte der religiösen Secten der Juden. Berlin, 1822–23, vol. ii, p. 309, &c. [↑]
[38] ולא ידעתי אם ימחול יי לאשר הדפיסם אותם הספרים Comp. ארי נוהם ed. Fürst, Leipzig, 1840, p. 7. [↑]