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

wDE

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 : inter-

national 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. Jahr-
hunderts 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 and the Controversy
Surrounding Him 223

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 295
Hans Otto Horsch
Kabbala und Liebe
August Beckers Roman ,Des Rabbi Vermächtniß' (1866/67) . . 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 Ashkenazi-
Jewish 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 half-
century, 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 Joseph Dan

Frankfurt a.M./ Potsdam Jerusalem/Berlin
 Joseph Dan

The Language of the Mystics

in Medieval Germany

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 Baby-
lonian 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 ele-
ment 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 Decon-
struction3.

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 and Theology, New York:
Crossroad, 1982; and compare: M.C. Taylor, De-constructing 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.
8 J. Dan

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, so-
metimes, 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 in-
dependence 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 sum-
marized, 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.
10 J. Dan

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 im-
portant, 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 dis-
cussed 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 Egyp-
tian 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, inter-
estingly 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 hesita-
ted 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 re-
fers 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 ha-
meshulash, 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 frame-
work created by the ancient Midrash. This process continued to develop
during the 13 th century among kabbalists, most notably in the works of Abra-
ham 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 non-
mystical, 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 deci-
sion-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 al-
most 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 my-
stics. 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 Pseudo-
Dionisian 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

<2Q
See my study of the subject "The Worms Epistle and the Probien of Pseudepigraphy in Early
Kabbalah, Studies in Kabbalah and Ethical Literature Presented to Isaiah Tishby, eds., J. Dan and
J. Hacker, vol. 3, part 1 Jerusalem 1984 (Jerusalem Studies in Jewish Thought), pp. 111-138.
30
G. Sdiolem, Origins of the Kabbalah, translated by Allan Arkush, ed., R. I. Zwi Werblowsky,
Princeton, Princeton University Press and the JewiA Publication Society 1987, pp. 35-39,238-243.
The clearest exposition of this attitude is to be found in the classical study of William R. Inge,
Christian Mysticism, London: Methuen, 1899, and was followed by many scholars in the present
cœtury. See a detailed analysis of this school, Bernard McGinn, The Foundations of Mysticism, New
York, Crossroads, 1991,273-278 et passim.
See the recent essay by Jaroslav Pelikan, "The Odyssey of Dionysdan Spirituality", in: Pseudo-
Dionisius, The Complete Works, Translated by C. Luibheid, New York, Paulist Press, 1987, pp. 11-
25.
 Language of the Mystics 23

were as reluctant to deal with their personal, direct experiences as were

Jewish ones.
The second misconception is to equate mysticism with a particular literary
genre, dictating to mystics the means of their expression. The fact is that
mystics used (and, sometimes, abused), all literary genres, up to and inclu-
ding the scholarly multinoted "study", as well as many non-verbal ways of
expression. There is no inherent reason why mysticism should be expressed
more in a poetic, personal, experiental language, than by a pseudo-neo-
Platonic treatise or a "scholarly" study. Several well-known biographical
studies of central mystical figures are, to a very large extent, expressions of
the "Scholar" s sharing of the mystical experience of his hero, actually
representing a spiritual experience rather than the results of scholarly
research. When we approach the works of the medieval mystics, therefore, the
literary presentation should be regarded as an expression of the mystic's rela-
tionship to his social and cultural environment, which influenced his choice
of means, rather than defining his mystical or non-mystical attitude.
The third element, the most difficult to grasp and utilize in the study of
mysticism, is the question of where is God to be found. We tend to assume
that God awaits the mystic in visual, extra-cosmic circumstances, that
meeting God means forsaking the earth and the body and being uplifted
outside of the material realm in order to approach the pure spirituality of His
essence.
This concept, so deeply ingrained in our culture, is one more result of our
existence in the realm dominated by the notion that language is a human
phenomenon. As such, it is not in language, while divinity transcends
language. This is true concerning secular, Christian-based culture; it is
completely untrue when we try to understand the creativeness of mystics who
reside in a centuries-old culture which believes that language is divine in
origin, it is employed by God for various purposes far beyond communication,
the essence of creativity resides in it, and the secrets of God are incorporated
within it. In such a culture, the tendency to seek God within a book will be at
least as natural as to seek Him in heaven.
The immersion in a text, having it as inspiration and as a revelation, is a
basic experience within a religion based on divine revelation in and by
language. Psychologically, there is an added dimension of directness when
the spiritual qualities of the text meet and merge with the spirituality of the
mystic. The mystic, by his basic nature, believes in God's presence within
language no less, and in a more fundamental way, in the text than in heaven.
Such a meeting is actually skipping the visual stage, the pictures of the ascent
and the surroundings of the divine essence, and going directly to the spiritual
essence without sensual imagery intervening.
There are, in Jewish medieval mysticism, several types of such a mystical
experience through the text. One group, which will not be discussed here
24 J. Dan

despite its centrality to the mystical world of the Ashkenazi Hasidim, is the
meeting by means of the text of the prayers. This is an aspect of mystical
unity with all existence developed in the school of Rabbi Judah the Pious,
which should be studied extensively in a separate study33.
Sometimes the text serves just as a slight, marginal excuse of mystical
expression. A classic example of that may be found, for instance, in the
Zohars description of the beginning of the creation, when the biblical text
which is interpreted serves in a most minor role; the author, in almost a
mystical ecstasy, creates his own terminology, and the enormous vision
unfolded is a unique expression of a supreme mystical experience, a mystic
actually being present in the moment that everything - including God himself
- was just beginning to unfold, as if in the presence, or even the participation,
of the mystic himself. It seems that this is one of the clearest examples of the
irrelevance of the homiletical literary framework, and a demonstration of the
mystic's ability to express intense, deeply personal, mystical experience in
any literary format he may be dealing with.
In other cases it is the biblical verse, or the talmudic saying, or a
paragraph from the Sefer Yezira, which serve as the trigger as well as the
external structure of the mystical experience. This, probably, is the most
common way of expressing mystical experience in kabbalistic literature. The
writers of these kabbalistic treatises had deep within themselves the glimpse
of supernal mystical truth, and then found a way to integrate a symbolical re-
flection of this truth within their exegetical works. It seems that one should
not be surprised by the fact that mystics, so deeply immersed in the language
of divine revelation, will interpret their own mystical experience as a
direction towards a new understanding of the words of ancient texts. The
divine spark which they have envisioned (not necessarily in any visual way),
was transformed within their personality into a symbolical statement of a new
aspect of meaning in the old, traditional words spoken by God to Man in
Antiquity.
Sometimes this process is even more obvious, especially when the mystic
himself feels, from the very beginning of his mystical experience, that his
contact with the divine is verbal in nature; God, he feels, speaks to him, or
even directs his hand when writing. In such cases, the line between old
textual revelation and new mystical experience is really very hard to draw,
because God speaking to the mystic in words is bound to use the same linguis-
tic formulations He had used in early revelations. Taken to the extreme, this
will be a phenomenon in which the mystic believes that God Himself is
presenting him with a new exegesis of His own ancient words. Many Jewish

33
A few remarks on this subject can be found in my study: "The Emergence of the Mystical Prayer,
Studies in Jewish Mysticism eds., J. Dan and F. Talmage, Cambridge, Association of Jewish Studies,
1981, pp. 85-120; a more detailed study on this subject is forthcoming
 Language of the Mystics 25

mystics (and non-mystics) had the very powerful image of divine activity as
being modelled after the textual deliberations of an earthly talmudic academy.
God, like everybody else, spends his time studying the Torah, together with
the great sages and saints of earlier times. Mystical experience is therefore
often clothed in the garb of participation in the deliberations of the heavenly
academies. In such cases there is no wonder that the mystical expression will
be presented, from the very beginning, in the format of commentaries and
homiletics. Sometimes one may surmise that this, indeed, was the intrinsic
nature of the mystical experience itself.
A case in point, exemplifying and emphasizing this tendency, is the
widespread late-medieval and early-modern kabbalistic phenomenon of the
celestial maggid, a divine power revealed to mystics and dictating them
divine secrets. Many detailed descriptions survive of this phenomenon, and it
seems that in most cases the experience was entirely an audio-textual one 34 . It
may appear to be a paradoxical phenomenon, but it actually expresses the
thesis we are trying to establish here: mystical kabbalistic experience is very
often the mystical revelation of the old text of revelation itself. Old theophany
is transformed into contemporary mystical revelation. In this way, the gulf
between the very essence of the mystical experience and its literary expression
in the form of commentaries, exegesis, homiletics and hermeneutics has
become a minimal one 35 .
The century between 1170-1270, approximately, is the one in which all the
phenomena described above came to a head among the Jewish esoterics and
mystics in Germany, especially in the Ashkenazi Hasidic circles. Three
processes converged together in this period to create one of the most intense
and variegated spiritual development in medieval Judaism. The first process
was the development of the midrashic methods to their extreme expression of
the infinity of meanings of the scriptural verse, especially in the system of the
"73 gates of wisdom". The second was the intrusion of a mystical element into
this structure, the appearance of an "external criterion" which transformed
midrashic anarchic deliberations into the discovery of mystical symbolism36.

One of the most detailed ones is that of Rabbi Moses Hayyim Luzzato, early in the 18th century.
« M. Benayahu, The Maggid of Ramhal, Sefunot vol. 5, Jerusalem 1961, pp. 297-336.
See:
A special example erf' this process can be found in the case of mystics ubo tend to express
themselves by numerical analyses of texts; some of the Ashkenazi Hasidim had this tendency. We
may surmise that mystical experience, for them, also carried a numerical character. A similar
phenomenon may possibly be apparent even in scholarship, as Scholem has hinted in the famous case
of the Weinstock-Adiriron identification; see his note in Tarbiz, vol. 32,1963,p. 258, note 15.
36
This subject cannot be explored in this paper, yet it should be emphasized that concerning
Ashkenazi Hasidim, and especially concealing Rabbi Judah the Pious, who was undoubtedly the most
mystically-inclined among these esoterical thinkers, this criterion can be identified rather clearly. The
mystical element in Rabbi Jiidah s thought is concerned with the discovery of an intrinsic harmony,
26 J. Dan

The third was the appearance of the Kabbalah, and especially kabbalistic
texts, which opened new vistas of mystical symbolic expression for the
mystics of medieval Germany. The writings of Rabbi Moses, the great-
grandson of Rabbi Judah the Pious, probably around 1270, express the
convergence of these three processes into one meaningful mystical
experience37.
The "external criterion" of mystical truth which characterizes Ashkenazi
Hasidism is, I believe, a mystical awareness of the intrinsic unity of all sacred
phenomena, and their distance from all earthly, material ones. Unlike the
Kabbalah, Ashkenazi Hasidism does not introduce a dynamic element, a
mythical diversity, into the divine world. Therefore, their theological
discussions of the celestial realms are not intended to distinguish and sepa-
rate, as do the kabbalists, but to unite and identify, to show the intrinsic
harmony and identity in everything. In demonstrating that mystical truth,
midrashic methodology became their main instrument, and therefore the
character of their mysticism is intensely linguistic, probably more than that of
any other mystical movement in Jewish history.
The phrase which most expresses the Ashkenazi Hasidic mystical attitude
is a simple one: be qerasim uve-lula 'ot, "with hooks and loops", denoting the
way that all religious texts and all divine phenomena in the world, past and
present, are connected together.
Rabbi Moses was familiar with all the methods of the Ashkenazi Hasidic
exegesis, and used them in his works. But the distinctive, new element in his
works is the intrusion of two texts into this world, one an ancient work of
Hekhalot tradition, the Sod ha-Gadol, "the Great Secret", and the other - the
kabbalistic text of the Bahir. When reading Rabbi Moses' comentary on some
prayers of the Shi ur Qomah text 38 , one easily observes the enormous spiritual

structural and numerical, between all parts erf' the sacred texts, biblical and prayers, and the divine and
earthly world. This seems to have been the subject of Rabbi Judah's now lost vast Commentary on the
Prayers. Rabbi Judah set out in this work to demonstrate the comprehensiveness of this harmony,
insisting that its veracity is attested by ancient tradition, yet its formulation is obviously a new
discovery, probably the result of Rabbi Judah's own mystical inclination. The "external criterion" in
this case is this deep confidence that evoything in existence, spiritual, textual and physical, has the
same "print" of the divine toudi, identified by the numerical-structural harmony. I have pointed out
this element briefly in the paper: "The Emergence of the Mystical Prayer" (above note 33), and it is a
subject of a much more detailed analysis in a forthcoming study.
Rabbi Moses' position in the history of Adikenazi Hasidism and the Kabbalah, and the nature of
his works were first presented and analyzed by G. Scholem in an appendix to his Reshit ha-
Qabbatah, Tel Aviv and Jerusalem. 1948, Schocken, 1948, pp. 195-238.
38
Parts of this commentary were printed by Scholem, ibid., pp. 212-238. There are, however, several
manuscripts of this work which were not used by Scholem which considerably assist in establifhing
the text and the structure of the work. In the Hebrew version erf"this study, to be publidied elsewhere, I
 Language of the Mystics 27

impact that these two texts had upon the German-Jewish mystic.
These two works, the Bahir and the "Great Secret", are closely connected,
and Scholem dedicated much effort to the understanding of this connection.
The Sod was undoubtedly one of the sources of the Bahir, and a serious pro-
blem, still unsolved, is to what extent the concept of the pleroma in the Bahir
is derived from the ancient work39. The quotations from the Sod by Rabbi
Moses are the only ones we have; earlier references include only its title, and
later writers did not preserve its text. One of the haunting enigmas of this
chapter in the history of Jewish mysticism is this almost unbelievable
accident, that the first German Jewish mystic to quote the Book Bahir is the
only Jewish writer to preserve portions of this source of the Bahir, the Sod ha-
Gadol·, actually, Rabbi Moses quotes the two sources almost as if they were
one, usually attaching a quote from one to the other, creating a textual
structure which is often rather difficult to comprehend and to point out, with
any certainty, which quotations belong to the Bahir and which to the Sod.
This is an important philological and historical problem, but our concern
here is with Rabbi Moses himself, as an independent mystic, and not in his
role in preserving ancient texts. In this respect, the interesting aspect is the
treatment of these sources by Rabbi Moses. It seems evident that for him,
these two texts represented divine, mystical revelation. They were, for him,
this "external criterion", clothed in linguistic, symbolical garb, which
expresses mystical divine truth and transcends the anarchy of midrashic-
Ashkenazi-Hasidic expression. The unification of Kabbalah and Ashkenazi
Hasidism, evident in the use of the Bahir, Sod ha-Sodot and Hekhalot
mystical texts, reflects a deeper unity of mystical perception, imposing a new
structure of divine truth and harmonizing around it his diverse sources. This
is, I believe, a rather typical process, identifying the development of mystical
awareness among Jewish scholars in the High Middle Ages.

diali include a textual analysis of the work, its recensions and the conclusions concerning the
relationship between the various sources as a result of the comp arisen between the various texts.
Some hesitation can be discerned in Scholem's analysis of this problem. Answering it conclusively
is impossible before much more textual work is done in collecting the manuscripts of this work and
editing them with a philological analysis. At this moment, however, it seems to me that there is no
clear indication here that the concept of the ten sefirot, and the symbols of the Bahir describing them,
is to be found in the "Great Secret", and it still seems that the Bahir is the first expression in our
possession of this kabbalistic symbolisn.
 Karl Erich Grözinger

Between Magic and Religion -

Ashkenazi Hasidic Piety

Hasidic Ashkenazi literature is known to scholars of Jewish religion as one of

the most prolific sources of medieval Jewish magic or magical beliefs. This is
all the more astonishing as the non esoteric writings of the Hasidey Ashkenaz
represent a rather traditional Jewish piety as known to us from talmudic
sources. Considering this duality of an almost traditional Jewish piety on the
one hand and very distinct magic tenets on the other, we may ask whether the
Hasidey Ashkenaz themselves perceived any difference between magic and
religion. There are indeed a number of modern historians of religion who
completely deny the validity of such a distinction, for in most historical
religions magic and religion are in fact intertwined to a certain degree, thus
permitting almost no differentiation between the two.
It was Erwin R. Goodenough in his monumental opus on "Jewish Symbols
in the Greco-Roman Period"1 who rigidly denied any justification of a
distinction between magic and religion, as in his view this distinction was a
subjective value judgment, not an objective criterion. He formulated his
opinion in the following drastic manner:
"Thus the contrast between religion and magic appears to be
the reflection of a personal value judgement, not an objectively
observable distinction."2
" »Magic« seems to me then to be a term of judgment, not of
classification. It is used subjectively, not objectively [...]".3
Should one conclude from Goodenough's statement that it would be better
to refrain altogether from all attempts to assess of any differences between
magic and religion ? My answer would be no! ' Instead, I believe we have to
put the question of the relation between magic and religion in a different
manner. Instead of asking whether there is a difference between magic and
religion, we should inquire, to what degree is the element we usually call ma-
gic integrated into the religious beliefs of the religion under discussion? That
is, we should clarify whether the magical element is an integral part of the

' Jewish Symbols in the Greco-Roman Period, NY-Toronto 1953, Vol. Π.

2
op.cit. vol. 2, p. 156.
3
op.cit. p. 159.
 Between Magic and Religion 29

central religious thought itself or ail extraneous element added to the main
line of the religious thought in question.
Aiming to find an answer to this question, we should investigate each
religion individually according to its own intrinsic standards and ideas and
thus establish what the actual inherent relation between magic and religion in
each individual religion is before offering overall statements which claim
validity for religion in general. Our first question should be, therefore: are
there criteria which might help us to arrive at a sound judgment on this pro-
blem regarding Jewish religion?
Is there any common denominator for all phases of Judaism which could
serve as a touchstone in this matter? Can we find any basic idea in Judaism
through all phases of its development defining the essence of the relationship
between man and God, defining the fundamental religious issue?
In the first chapter of the Bible we do indeed find a statement describing
this relationship between man and his Creator in a way which was seemingly
fundamental to all phases of Judaism. A. Jellinek, when publishing Shabtai
Donolos Perush na'ase adam be-zalmenu, declared this statement to be the
most important and most fruitful of the Mosaic religion.4 I refer to the well
known words of the Creator saying that man will be created in the image of
God:
"And God said, let us make man in our image, after our like-
ness" (Gen. 1,26).
This basic Jewish tenet expresses a pattern of dual relationship between
God and man. On the one hand God as the creator is superior to man, and on
the other hand man is supposed to be the image of the Lord. Since Talmudic
times, Jewish teachers have usually interpreted and defined this contradictory
relationship in the following way: Man is not the image of God by nature or
from birth. On the contrary, he has the duty to struggle all his life to become
the image of God trough his religious efforts.
This fundamental interpretation of the image-problem in terms of a merit-
system is common to nearly all phases of Jewish religion. According to this
pattern of interpretation man has to bridge the existing gap between God and
man by his own efforts, thus finally becoming the image of God. Whereas this
meritorial pattern of interpretation is common to nearly all Jewish thinkers,
the actual realization of this goal, however, is seen quite differently by them
as it is related to the various major trends of Jewish thought. The realization
of this aim depends, within the various systems of Jewish thought, on two
changing factors: namely, on theology on the one side and on anthropology
on the other. In other words, in a philosophy conceiving man as the image of

4
A. Jellinek, Girne Hokhmat ha-Qabbala, Leipzig 1854 (Reprint Jerusalem 1969), p. VII; and cf.
S. Belkin, In His Image, 1960; K.E. (jTÖanger, Da' Mensch als Ebenbild Gottes - im Wandel der jü-
dischen Tradition, in; NordiskJudaistik, X,2, p. 63-74.
30 Κ. Ε. Grözinger

God, both, -theology and anthropology-, are closely related to each other.
Every change in theology demands a respective change in anthropology and
vice versa.
In order to arrive at a sound judgement on the initial question of this
essay, that regarding the piety of the Hasidey Ashkenaz, I shall first compare
some differing Jewish realizations of both theology and anthropology and ask
by what means according to them man might achieve his goal of becoming
the image of the Lord. Only then will we be able to answer the question,
whether magic is an essential religious means in Hasidut Ashkenaz or only an
additional or even alien element within this conception of Judaism.

a) Man as the image of God in early talmudic interpretation.

In Talmudic-Midrashic literature, God is depicted in a distinct
anthropomorphical manner and this in spite of the Rabbis' awareness of an
essential difference between God and man. The Talmudic God acts like a
human being: He loves, He punishes, He rescues men with His mighty hand
and even dons tefillin5. From this, we may conclude that there is a common
denominator between God and man, a realm where they can be compared
with each other, and which can serve man as a link and a means in his goal of
becoming the image of God. This common denominator is ethics! That is to
say, the Talmudic sages believed that man may become the image of God by
acting morally like God. The Midrash Tanhuma puts this in the following
way:
"The Holy One, blessed be He, is called »Just« and »True«.
Therefore He has created man in His image (zelem), that man might
be just and true like God himself! " 6
In a similar way the Talmud 7 describes desired human behaviour as an
imitation of God's own deeds. In the same manner as God clothes the naked,
man should clothe the naked, as God visits the sick, man should visit the sick
and so forth. That is, man becomes the image of God by imitatio dei. By
acting like God, man is in the likeness of his Creator. This traditional ethical
version of man becoming the image of God by observing the biblical com-
mandments is still to be found in the Sefer Hasidim:
" »And God said: Let us make man in our image« (Gen. 1,2).
Why [did Scripture use the words] »let us make man in our image«
in the plural form and did not say »I will make«? In order to imply
to man that he himself should make man in the image and likeness
namely, whenever man studies Torah, which was given from

5
bBerakhot 6a.
^ Tanhuma Bereshit § 7, ed. Jerusalem 1973, p. 8a.
7
bSot a 14a.
 Between Magic and Religion 31

Heaven, for its own sake. And about him who fears Heaven it is said:
»and that this fear may be before your faces, that ye sin not« (Ex.
20,20). And further it is written about them: »I have said ye are
gods; and all of you are children of the most High« (Ps. 83(2),6). But
if they do not observe the Torah it is written: »when thou awakest,
thou shalt despise their image« (Ps. 73,20) and [Scripture] says: »he
is like the beasts that perish« (Ps. 49,12)." 8
For the Talmudic sages as for the author of Sefer Hasidim, therefore, it is
primarily the ethical behaviour which enables man to become the image of
God.

b) Man as the image of God in early Hekhalot literature

In early Hekhalot literature, God is still portrayed in anthropomorphical
terms. But here it is not ethical behaviour which makes God anthropomorph.
Here it is His huge stature, His Shi 'ur Qoma.
"R. Akiva said: He is like us, so to speak, but He is bigger than
everything. And this is His glory that He has hidden from us."9
In the writings of Hekhalot literature God is depicted as a huge an-
thropomorphical mystical corpus sitting on His throne surrounded by the
celestial hosts. God himself and all His hosts represent a pure and holy world
of mystical fire and of singing entities.
In contrast to this pure and saintly divine world the terrestrial
anthropomorph, that is man, lives in the impure material realm of flesh and
blood, in complete contrast to the absolute purity of the divine world.
Here, if man wants to become the image of the Divine he has to purify
himself, has to learn the celestial hymns, has to know all the celestial pass-
words or write them on his limbs 10 and, finally, has to mount the celestial
world. In a possibly later text related to Hekhalot literature, this basic idea
that man has to adjust himself to the quality of the celestial world and has to
undergo a total transformation of his terrestrial body is applied to Moses: His
limbs have to be transformed into torches of fire, his strength must become
like the strength of the celestial beings, his eyes like the wheels of the
Merkava and his tongue like the tongues of the celestial singers. Only after
this transformation, when he has become an image of the celestial beings,
may he approach the divine throne and communicate with God. 11 Henoch's

8
Sefer Hasidim, Panna, J. Wistinetzki, Frankfurt a.M. 1924, §656, p. 191.
9
Sdiäfer, P. (ed.), Synopse zurHekhalot-Literatur, Tübingen 1981, § 352.
10
Synopse, §§ 566. 569.
11
Cf. K.E. Grözinger, Musik und Gesang in der Theologie der frühen jüdischen Literatur,
Tübingen 1982, pp. 308-314 and 315-318; id. Singen und ekstatische Sprache in da- frühen
jüdischen Mystik, JSJ 11(1980), p. 66-77. Similarly Moses is cleansed before mounting heaven that
32 Κ. Ε. Grözinger

transformation into the highest angel is similarly depicted in the so-called

third Book of Enoch.12
However, not only Moses and Henoch had to undergo some kind of ad-
aptation to the heavenly realms. Every ordinary Yored Merkava has to prove
himself capable of singing the celestial songs13, using the divine names in
theurgy and magic14, thus applying the means by which man gains divine
power15. The transfer of divine power to man is most evident in the magical
practice of writing divine names on all kinds of edible and potable substances.
Man thereby incorporates them and wins divine power16 with all it's
wonderful results, transforming him into a new being. 17 Regarding the
transformation of Henoch-Metatron P. Schäfer arrives at the same conclusion:
"But this Metatron is not an angel like the other angels at all. It is Henoch,
the human being, who has been transformed into an angel. Henoch-Metatron
is a prototype yored merkava. His example shows how close man can come to
God, so close that he almost resembles him, that Aher-Elisha ben Abuya
could mistake him for God, that only a missing letter distinguishes his name
from God's name."18
Besides this antropomorphical conception of God as a Shi 'ur Qoma there
is a layer of an onomatological conception of God in Hekhalot literature as I
have shown elsewhere.19 According to this conception, God himself is His
name, God and His name are identical. In the name of God lies divine power.
By transfering this name or parts of it or permutations of it into the hands of
angels and men, they can participate in the divine power. When man uses

he may be equal to the angels, bYoma 4a.b; Pesikta Rabbati Par. 20, cf. K.E. Gröanger, Ich bin der
Herr dein Gott, Bem-Frankfurt a.M 1976, pp. 143^4; and cf. P. Schäfer, Geniza-Fragmente zur
Hekhalot-Literatur, Tübingen 1984, pp. 171 -81.
12
3 Enoch, H. Odeberg, NY 1973, ch. 15, p. 20 (hebr.sect.); P. Sdiäfer, Synopse, Tübingen 1981, §
19.
13
Schäfer, Synopse, § 591; Grözinger, Musik, pp. 310-315; Schäfer, Der verborgene und offenbare
Gott, Tübingen 1991, S.85.
14
Sdiäfer, op.cit. p. 35MO; 85-90.
15
Schäfer, op.cit. p.67 f.
16
Schäfer, op.cit.,p. 88-91. 104-105.
17
Schäfer, op. dt., p. 108-110.
18
op.cit. p. 144 f.: "Aber dieser Metatron ist gerade kein Engel wie alle anderen Engel, sondern der
in einen Engel verwandelte Mensch Henoch. Henoch-Metatron als der Prototyp des yored merkava
zeigt, daß der Mensch Gott sehr nahe kommen kann, so nahe, daß er ihm beinahe ähnlich ist, daß
Aher-Elisha' ben Avuya ihn versehentlich für Gott halten konnte, daß nur ein fehlender Buchstabe
seinai Namen von dem Namen Gottes unterscheidet."
19
The names of God and the Celestial Powers: Their Function and Meaning in the Hekhalot
Literature, in: Proceedings of the First International Conference of the History of Jewish
Mysticism, ed J. Dan, Jerusalem 1987, pp. 53-69; German in: FJB 13(1985).
 Between Magic and Religion 33

these divine names and incorporates them by eating or drinking them he, like
Metatron, becomes similar to God and thus is the imago dei. Man then resem-
bles Metatron, though he is, to a lesser degree, a »Minor YHWH«. This ono-
matological stratum of Hekhalot literature is, as we shall see later, the
forerunner of Eleazar of Worms' doctrine of language. But Eleazar of Worms
created a system and a full blown doctrine, of what is not yet explicit in
Hekhalot literature, but mere practice.
Even if Hekhalot texts do not dwell expressly on the "imago terminology"
and its basic biblical proof, and in spite of the fact that their theology and
anthropology differ from Talmudic literature, both concepts of Hekhalot li-
terature, -the anthropomorphical as well as the onomatological one-, again
present the same structure of man becoming the image of God, namely, by
imitatio dei. There is a common denominator between God and man, and
man has the religious duty to come close to God, to become his image by
imitating the divine world.

c) Man as the image of God in medieval thought

In medieval Judaism, this basic structure of the relation between man and
God was retained, but only by a thoroughgoing reinterpretation of theology
and anthropology. This total reinterpretation of the image-doctrine was neces-
sary because of an absolute crisis the doctrine began to suffer in the 9/10th
century. This crisis was brought about by the philosophical rationalism of Rav
Sa'adya Gaon. Like the later Jewish Platonists and Aristotelians, Rav Sa'adya
removed every, even the slightest trace of anthropomorphism from his theolo-
gy. Sa'adya formulated a totally abstract theology, leaving nothing in com-
mon between man and God. Sa'adya thus very vehemently negated the notion
that man could be the image or likeness of God in even the slightest respect,
as there can be no image and likeness with God whatsoever. The central
Jewish dogma that man was created in the image of God was herewith
abolished:20
"All such expressions as refer to God in terms of substance and
accident, or, for that matter, in terms of attributes of substance and
accident do not really apply to Him in any degree, be it large or
small. For it is established that the Creator (be He blessed and
exalted) is the Creator of everything. Hence there is left nothing, be
it substance or accident, or any of their attributes, which could be
applied to Him, it being recognized and clearly established that He,
the Creator, has made everything. Obviously, it is impossible and

20
cf. Emunot we-De'ot, Π,8.9, ed. Yosef Qafih, Jerusalem 1970, p.96-98; trsl. Ibn Tibbon, Josefuw
1878, p.48a. 48b; ed. D. Slucki, Leipzig (Reprint Jerusalem) pp. 48-9; German translation J. Fürst,
Leipzig 1845, p. 160.164.; cf. Grözinger, Der Mœsdi als Ebenbild Gottes, above η.4
34 Κ. Ε. Grözinger

absurd to speak of Him in terms of the thing which He created"

"the verse »And God created man in His own image, in the
image of God created He him« (Gen. 1,27). I explain it in the sense
of bestowing dignity and honour upon man; i.e. in the same way as
all lands belong unto Him, and yet He honoured one land in
particularly calling it »My Land«, [...] This phrase must, therefore,
be taken in the sense of special distinction, not as
anthropomorphic.'"21
Yet, the philosophical and mystical thinkers following Sa'adya did not
comply with this abrogation of the biblical ¡mago-doctrine. While they all
basically accepted the new formulation of the theology, they tried to fill up the
gap thus created on the divine side by substituting mediating instances which
could form the divine side of the i/wago-partnership. And at the same time
they reformulated anthropology in such a way that it fitted into the new divine
substitute in the ¿mago-relationship.
I shall outline just one medieval example of this new approach towards the
imago-doctrine before progressing to the Hasidey Ashkenaz themselves, that
is, to the solution Eleazar of Worms offered. The most impressive and at the
same time typically philosophical solution to the imago-problem in the
Middle Ages was the one given by the Aristotelian Maimonides.
At the very beginning of More Nevukhim, Maimonides discusses the
image-doctrine. Following Sa'adya, he stresses that God is not definable in
corporeal categories, but as opposed to Sa'adya he nonetheless wants to retain
the imago-doctrine and therefore reformulates anthropology so that it will
comply with the new theology. Since God himself and the mediating
instances between Him and His world are not bodies, Maimonides
reformulates anthropology in a corresponding manner. It is no longer the
human body that is the essence of the human being and which could enable
him to be the image of the Divine. According to Maimonides, there is now an
uncorporeal "category" which makes up the essence of man and enables him
to be the image of the Divine. This new essential of humanity is, in
Maimonides' view, the human intellect.
"As man's distinction consists in a property which no other
creature on earth possesses, viz., intellectual perception, in the
exercise of which he does not employ his senses, nor move his hand
or his foot, this perception has been compared -though apparently,
not in truth - to the Divine perception, which requires no corporeal
organ. On this account, i.e., on account of the Divine intellect with

Translation of A. Altmann, Three Jewish Philosophers, ed by H. Lewy, A. Altmann and I.

Heinemann, NY 1969, pp. 84-86.
 Between Magic and Religion 35

which man has been endowed, he is said to have been made in the
form and likeness of the Almighty, but far from it be the notion that
the Supreme Being is corporeal, having material form." 22
It is intellect that makes man a human being and makes him different
from animals. Thus, only if man has a developed intellect is he Zelem Elohim,
the image of God. In the words of Maimonides:
"Some have been of the opinion that by the Hebrew zelem, the
shape and figure of a thing is to be understood, and this explanation
led men to believe in the corporeality [of the Divine Being]: for they
thought that the words »Let us make man in our zelem« (Gen 1,26)
implied that God had the form of a human being, i.e., that He had a
figure and shape, and that, consequently, He was corporeal. [...]
The term zelem [...] signifies the specific form, viz., that which
constitutes the essence of a thing, whereby the thing is what it is; the
reality of a thing in so far as it is a particular being. In man the
»form« is that constituent which gives him human perception: and
on account of this intellectual perception the term zelem is employed
in the sentences »In the zelem of God he created him« " (Gen.
1,27)23.
When man in his intellectual development has achieved the highest per-
fection, this being the state of prophecy, he is entitled to be called image'.
But as there is no possibility of direct contact between man and God, it is the
mediating Aristotelian Active Intellect who will represent the divine side in
this imago-partnership as Maimonides states:
"I have shown you that the intellect which emanates from God
unto us is the link that joins us to God. You have it in your power to
strengthen that bond, if you choose to do so, or weaken it [...]."24
That is to say, man has to imitate this celestial entity in his own
intellection, which mediates between him and the Godhead. The imitatio dei
is, so to speak, the imitation of the celestial divine intellect, which is the
Aristotelian Active Intellect. Maimonides' mystically inclined follower,
Abraham Abulafia, even perceived the human and the divine intellect as
being unified and identical:
" »image« in this context is a name which designates the natural
form, which is [the form of] the species, and it is the soul, which is
the human rational intellection, which is similar to the divine
[rational intellection] with which it is united and from which its
existence [stems] and from It is its being, providence and perpetuity.
This is why it is written that [man] was created in God's »image«,
11
More Nevukhim, 1,1 ; transi. M. Friedländer, The Guide for the Perplexed, London 1925, p. 14.
Λ-»

More Nevukhim, 1,1; transi. Friedländer, p. 13.

24
More, ΙΠ, 51; transi. Friedländer, p. 386; and. cf. Π, 12 and 37.
36 Κ. Ε. Grözinger

which is the name of the soul which survives after the death, the
perpetuity of its survival depends upon its likeness to its Creator,
concerning the intellection, the existence and the eternity and the
dominion, until this image's name will be like the name of its
Master, and it [image] is the special name of the Intellectus Agens,
an image like His image, as it is written on it »and God created man
in his Image, in the image of God He created him« . The duplication
of these words hints to the Creator and to the creature, which is
called with the name of the Creator; this fact hints that they [the
Creator and the creature] are one entity, inseparable."25
In Maimonides' philosophy, the doctrines of imago dei and of imitatio dei
were thus transformed in such a way that it is now the human intellect which
has to imitate the divine intellect in order to become Zelem Elohim.

d) Man as the image of God in Eleazar of Worms' writings

Eleazar of Worms also proposed a reformulation of anthropology, comparable
to the one undertaken by Maimonides, but a specific difference exists between
the two. Whereas in the philosophy of Maimonides intellect is the constituent
of humanity, in Eleazar's system it is language. In Eleazar's view, it is
language which is the essential distinction between animals and man, not
intellect, as according to Maimonides. Thus, it is language that gives man the
ability to become Zelem Elohim.
Discussing the fact that the two grammatical forms of the Hebrew word
for mouth, i.e. peh and pi, are formed by means of the two letters »yud« and
»he«, which themselves make up God's own name »yah«, Eleazar puts the
following question:
"Who has given man his mouth? It was the mouth of the Lord, pi
adonay, who has given a mouth to the human being as it is written:
»out of His mouth cometh knowledge and understanding« (Prov.
2,6), »the answer of the tongue is from the Lord« (Prov. 16,1)
»[must I not take heed to speak] that which the Lord hath put in my
mouth?« (Num. 23,12), »and the Lord put a word in Balaam's
mouth« (Num. 23,5), and it is written »I cannot go beyond the word
of the Lord my God« (Num. 22,18)(24,13).

From here it follows: Regarding this that he has put a word into
the mouth of Balaam, he calls this »the mouth of the Lord«.
Conclude from this: man got his mouth from the mouth of the Lord
and this is YH and the name [i.e. God] is thus totally mouth pyhw
[pihu]. He is mouth.

25
Or ha-Sekhel, quoted from M. Idei, Studies in Ecstatic Kabbalah, Albany 1988, p. 7.
 Between Magic and Religion 37

And why did [Scripture] point to the mouth? As man is like the
animals in all respects - only regarding his mouth he is like the
celestial beings. Therefore [Scripture] says: »Let us make man in our
image«, by means of the Holy Language which is with the celestial
beings.26

Eleazar comes back to this point again when he states27 that the five
vowels of the Hebrew language were delivered only to the one creature which
had been created as a Zelem.2S

We may conclude from this: In Eleazar's view it is the ability of man to

speak that makes him a human being. But it is not simply the ability to use a
language; more precisely, we should say it is the ability to use the Hebrew
language which turns man into the image of God, and it is this language
which enables man to attain the likeness of God. Elsewhere, Eleazar cites two
verses from Psalm 8 to demonstrate to which high degree man may achieve
the state of Zelem Elohim. In the Biblical text the angels ask the Lord:
"What is man, that thou art mindful of him? [...]" (v. 4).
"For thou hast made him a little lower than God {Elohim)" (v.5).
By this, according to Eleazar, Scripture wants to teach us the following
lesson:
"There is no creature that has not a spirit. But the most elevated
and most capable spirit was bestowed only on man, this is the middle
part [of the three parts of the soul which is the tongue29], to speak in
clear cut words, as it is written in [Scripture]: »For thou hast made
him a little lower than God«, for he is image and likeness, Zelem and
Demut [...]".3°
Like Maimonides, Eleazar is not speaking here in metaphors. The use of
the Hebrew language, especially when studying the Torah, brings man closer
to the celestial world. When man sits and utters the words of the Torah, the
fire-like words from heaven will fall down upon him and will enfiarne the
words coming forth from his mouth.31 The prototypical situation of such a
mystical event was of course the revelation on Mt. Sinai. At that time, God's
own language, his own words, came down and were heard in the world

26
MS Munich 81, p. 139a.
27
MS Munich 81,p.250b.
28
a. cf. p. 261.
29
cf. p. 10a.
30
Raziel, Amsterdam 1702, p. 10b.
31
For this motif cf. K.E. Grozmger, Die Gegenwart des Sinai. Erzählungen und kabbalistische
Lehrstücke zur Vergegenwärtigung der Sinaioffmbarung, in: Frankfurter Judaistische Beiträge
16(1988), p. 134-183.
38 Κ. Ε. Grözinger

through the mouth of Moses. Eleazar expresses the opinion that the words of
man studying the Torah are nothing less than the words of God Himself, as in
the hour when Moses delivered the Torah at Mount Sinai from the Mouth of
the Lord unto Israel:
" »For the commandment is a candle and the Torah is light«
(Prov. 6,23). Behold, the words of Torah are like a wick which is
extinguished by somebody. And regarding the wick it is as follows: It
touches the flame which is above it and the flame will descend on the
wick via the smoke.
And so the words of Torah are compared to Afalsemon-oii and
the fire jumps unto the oil. Similarly the fire of Torah which is in
heaven jumps on the words which come forth from the mouth of
Jonathan Ben Uzziel and on the Torah which comes forth from the
mouth ofREliezer and R.Yehoshua and of Ben Azzay. [That is the
intention of what is written:] And »Moses spake« (Ex. 19,19). From
this one may conclude that He gave unto Moses might and strength
and He helped him with His voice and melody, so that Moses heard
it and in the same way he announced it to Israel."32
According to Eleazar, the celestial angels thereupon exclaimed:
"He speaks like ourselves and is still alive.33 And this is [the true
sense of the biblical words]: »Let us make man in our image, after
our likeness«."
I repeat, it is language, the Hebrew language, which enables man to be the
image of God. Man is Zelem Elohim inasmuch as he is able to speak the same
language through which God revealed the Torah on Mt. Sinai and by means
of which He created the world. Speaking in the divine language means,
therefore, using the creative divine language.
I shall come back to this point shortly. Before that, we should, however,
look at the divine counterpart of the imago-doctrine in Eleazar's writings.
The doctrine saying that man is the image of God was, as we have seen,
not conceived in reference to the essence of God himself. Man cannot be the
image of God's essence, he can only be the image of the revealed side of the
Godhead. According to Talmudic literature, man can be the image of God as
far as he is an ethically acting person, as is God when He deals with His

32
MS Munich 81, p. 218b.
33
cf. Dta 5,23 and Sode Razayya, I. Kamelhar, Bilgoraj 1936, p. 46.
 Between Magic and Religion 39

creation. In Maimonides' view, it is human intellect imitating the celestial

Active Intellect which is the mediator between God and man. For Eleazar, it
is the voice of the Lord which mediates between the Godhead and His crea-
tion. This voice, descending from above, is gradually differentiated into
categories of creative words, into language and into words heard by the pro-
phets. 34 In Maimonides' system it is intellect that has this function.
We may thus fairly conclude that the voice of the Lord in Eleazar's system
has a similar function to the intellect in the system of Maimonides. That is to
say, here we have to regard the voice of God as the adequate divine
counterpart to man as the image of "God". It seems, therefore, that according
to Eleazar, besides the Kavod35, the language of God is one of the highest
connecting links between God and man; therefore it is language which makes
man an imago dei.
Having arrived at these conclusions, we may proceed to our final point,
that is, the place of magic in Eleazar's system. I have already pointed to the
fact that in all the Jewish views mentioned, i.e. Talmud, Hekhalot-Mysticism
and Maimonides, man becomes the image of God by means of imitatio dei.
Let us once more refer to Maimonides' intellectual concept. For him, imitatio
dei means the developement of human intellect, by which means man will
become the image of God.
In support of this idea, Maimonides adduces the example of the sons of
Adam whom he begot before his son Seth. In the first book of More Nevukhim
Maimonides explains this as follows:
"Those sons [of Adam] who were born before [Seth] had not the
human form in the true sense of the word, that is the image of man
and his likeness about which it is written »in the image of God and
in His likeness«. But with reference to Seth whom he had instructed
and enlightened and who thus arrived at human perfection, it could
rightly be said, »Adam begat [a son] in his likeness, in his image«
(Gen 5,3). It is acknowledged that everyone who does not possess
this form' is not human, but a mere animal in human shape [...]."36
In Maimonides' view, man without a developed intellect is not a human

34
cf. Sode Razayya, Kamelhar, p. 42-43.
cf. J. Dan, Torat ha-Sod shel Hasidut Ashkenaz, Jerusalem 1968; and E.Wolfsscn in this volume.
It seems, therefore, that Eleazar continued the dual tradition of the Hekhalot literature, depicting the
Godhead in an anthrop omorphical way on the one hand and in a linguistic-ooomatological one on the
other. Both are, however, transferred here from God himself to a mediating instance.
36
1,7; transi. Friedlände·, p. 20.
40 Κ. Ε. Grözinger

being and therefore not in the »image and the likeness« of God. This is
formulated even more clearly in the above quoted text by Abraham Abulafia,
where he stresses that it is only »human rational intellection« which turns
man into the image of God.
The human aim, according to Maimonides, should therefore be as follows:
"When you have arrived by way of intellectual research at a
knowledge of God and His works, then commence to devote yourself
to Him, try to approach Him and strengthen the intellect, which is
the link that joins you to him." 37
Returning to Eleazar of Worms, we should expect that in his doctrine
imitatio dei and becoming the image of God would mean using the creative
divine language, performing miracles and creating creatures. I believe that we
must indeed affirm this expectation. In his Commentary on Sefer Yezira
Eleazar demands that man should not confine himself to merely studying the
Sefer Yezira, but he should use it to create:
"On these the world is founded - be it for construction or for
destruction. And for their sake this book was revealed to our father
Abraham, that he may get knowledge of the work of the Lord and
that he may bring forth every creation out of its root so that he may
erect every work on its principle.
That is why the Lord has instructed him in the secret of
everything, that he may bring forth out of them every creation and
may bequeath it to his sons; 22 aspects (panim) in the mysterious
work."38
By saying this, Eleazar did not merely want to express his belief that man
should bring forth only minor miraculous acts with the help of the holy
letters. The creative activity of man should even be extended to the most
precious creation God himself had produced, that is, to human beings.
In the Hebrew versions of the medieval Ma ase Buch we are told that R.
Shemuel he-Hasid, the founding father of the Hasidic movement, had created
a human being. This creation was a nearly perfect man. It had only one defect
- it could not speak.
"R. Shemuel Hasid c[r]eated a human being and wrote the word
EMeT (truth) on his forehead.

37
More ΙΠ, ch. 51.
38
MS Munidi 81, p. 278a.
 Between Magic and Religion 41

But this man which he had created could not speak, as speech is
[the domain] of the Eternal Living (Hey-'OIamim).
And all the time when R.Shemuel Hasid made his exile-wande-
rings this man which he had created was with him and he wandered
with him and served him like a servant who is serving his master." 39
The statement in this tale, that only God himself may bestow speech on a
creature, is in perfect accordance with Eleazar's commentary on the prayers
of the Synagogue. There, in his commentary on the "Ha-Aderet we-ha-
Emunah"-litany, he maintains: 40
"He placed together [in the hymn commented upon there]
»speech« and »knowledge«, for man has the knowledge to create a
new creature according to the prescriptions of Sefer Yezira. But he
cannot endow him with speech by means of the S h em ha-meforash ,
as only the Holy one blessed be He is able to do."
A descendant of Yehuda he-Hasid and author of the Commentary on Sefer
ha-Qoma published by Gershom Scholem in his Hebrew book Reshit ha-Qab-
balah, stresses this opinion even more pointedly.
"The Holy one, may He be blessed, wanted to open all 50 gates of
wisdom to Solomon. But the angels gathered and protested: »What is
man, that Thou art mindful of him and the son of man, that Thou
visitest him?« (Ps. 8,5).
Therefore the Holy One, may He be blessed, went and delivered
to him [only] 49 gates but the 50th gate He did not reveal unto him,
thus fulfilling the biblical saying: »Thou hast made him a little lower
than God« (Ps. 8,6).
Therefore, behold, when a man is using Sefer Yezira to create a
creature he has the might to create everything except one thing." 41
We may safely conclude that this one thing is speech.
Finally, we may ask if Eleazar of Worms believed that man is merely al-
lowed to create such a human being or whether he believed this to be a

39
MS Frankfurt a.M. hebr.oct. 35, p. 95a; MS Brüll = Jerusalem oct. 3182; and. cf. S. Zfatman,
Ma ase Bukh. Kawwim le-Demuto shel Goare be-Sifrut, in: Ha-Sifrut 27(1978), p. 140.
40
MS München 346, p. 98; and Siddur R. Naftoli Hirz Treves, Thingen 1560, Aeet 28, fol. 2b,
quoted from G. Scholem, Reshit ha-Qabbalah, Tel Aviv 1948, p. 231; id., Origins ci the Kabbalah,
Princeton 1987, p.l22, n.125 (German edn. Ursprung und Anfänge der Kabbalah, Berlin 1962, p.
109, η. 116).
41
G. Sdaolem, Reshit ha-Qabbalah, p. 132; a. cf. the statement of R. Josef Ashkenazi a Safed
Kabbalist from the 16th century: "Man can make a Golem which possesses a living soul by the power
of his speech, but the higher soul (nediama) cannot be conferred by man because it is from the divine
speech", M Idei, Golem, p.71. A. Abula&a has made the same link between the imago-doctrine and
imitatio dei, but in his view man does not create bodies but souls, cf. Idei, Golem, p. 102.
42 Κ. Ε. Grözinger

desirable step on the way to human perfection? That is to say: Was it his
opinion that the creation of a homunculus is the final step towards religious
perfection for the pious Hasid, which everybody should aim for, this step
being an essential act of religion?
At the end of his commentary on Sefer Yezira Eleazar discusses the
creation of a human being by man, as if it were compulsory for everybody to
undertake this act of creation. There he demands:
"whoever studies Sefer Yezira has to purify himself [and] don
white clothes. It is forbidden to study [Sefer Yezira] alone, but only
[in groups of] two or three, as it is written: »and the souls they made
in Haran« (Gen 12,5). And it is written: »Two are better than one
[alone]« (Eccles 4,9), and it is written: »It is not good for man to be
alone. I will make a fitting helper for him« (Gen 2,18). Therefore
[Scripture] begins with a bet [that is two] bereshit bara, »He
created«.
It is incumbent upon him to take virgin soil from a place in the
mountains where no one has digged. And he shall knead the dust
with living water, and he shall make a Golem and shall begin to per-
mutate the alphabets of 221 [gates] each limb separately, each limb
with the corresponding letter mentioned in Sefer Yezira.
And .the alphabets will be permutated at the beginning, and after-
wards he shall permutate with the vowels o a i e (o) (e)42. And
always the letter of the [divine] name with them, and all the al-
phabet. Therafter the permutation of y and then 'w then h in its
entirety. After them he shall appoint b and similarly g. Each limb
with the letter with which it was created. He shall do this when he is
pure."43
It seems that Eleazar did, indeed, believe that, on his way to human per-
fection, man has to undertake this final step and create a human being in
order to become the Zelem Elohim himself by this most elevated act of
imitatio dei. In this act of creation, he is in the likeness of his Creator.
Nevertheless, he is still a little lower than the Creator himself. Because he is
not able to bestow unto this creation the ability which enables man himself to
be in the image of God: He may not bestow upon it the ability of speech. Man
can become the image of God in creating a Golem, but he is lesser than God
insofar as he cannot create a man who is Zelem Elohim himself, for this man,
the Golem, cannot speak.
Arriving at these findings, I shall try, in conclusion, to give an answer to
this paper's opening question regarding the relation between religion and
magic. In the case of Eleazar of Worms, it seems compulsory to conclude that

42
That is, with the vowels Holem, Patah, Hirek, Zere, Halef-Qamez, Shwa-mobile.
43
MS Munich 81,p.278; cf. M Idei, Golem, Albany 1990,p.56.
 Between Magic and Religion 43

in his version of Jewish religion, magic is neither an extraneous nor an

additional element, only slightly connected to religion. On the contrary. In his
thought, magic is an intrinsic element of religion itself, or even, for Eleazar,
magic is the climax of Jewish religion. For in using the creative Hebrew
language, man is imitating his Creator. In this way, he becomes the true
image of God, this being, as we have seen, the foremost duty of man
according to all the interpretations of Judaism which we have reviewed -
except Sa'adya.
In defining the position of Eleazar of Worms, therefore, we cannot say
that his religion possesses extensive magic elements. Rather, we must say that
according to Eleazar, magic is religion and the highest form of religion is
magic. The reason for this development of thought is the apotheosis of
language as a divine and creative power and the corresponding
anthropological definition that the ability to use this divine language is the
essence of humanity itself.
Finally, these findings may demand a certain reconsideration regarding
the relationship between the esoteric and the non-esoteric writings of the
Haside Ashkenaz. It seems that the ascetic way of life called for in their ethi-
cal writings, as in Sefer Hasidim, is nothing more than a preparatory step to
the absolute purity man needs when he proceeds to create his Golem. To
illustrate this connection we might cite the opening section of the above
mentioned Perush Sefer ha-Qoma.
"One verse says: »The secret of the Lord is with them that fear
Him« (Ps. 25,14), and another verse says »but His secret is with the
righteous« (Prov 3,32). And it is written »but He revealeth His secret
unto His servants the prophets« (Am 3,7). How is this to be
understood? To teach you that in the same manner as there is no
righteousness without fear, there is no prophecy without both of
them."44

44
Scholem, Reshit ha-Qabbalah, p. 212.
 Ivan G. Marcus

Prayer Gestures in German Hasidism

This essay is dedicated to the memoiy of

Professor Louis Finkelstein and Professor Gerson D. Cohen

The Jewish Pietists of medieval Germany, hasidey ashkenaz, are known to us

for the most part only from the texts that a few members of the Kalonimide
family transmitted or wrote down, especially R. Judah the Pietist (d. 1217)
and his relative, R. Eleazar of Worms (d. ca. 1230)1. Despite decades of
debate, still far from over, the social and historical background behind the
Pietists and their writings is far from clear. While there are signs of a popular
audience in the exempla of works like Sefer Hasidim (The Book of the
Pietists)2, a work like Sefer ha-Shem (The Book of the Name <of God>)3 is
filled with permutations of the Hebrew alphabet presented as variations of the
divine names and is clearly written for a small elite. Apart from the
probability that different types of writings are addressed to different au-
diences, little else is clear about the elite or popular character of the historical
phenomenon itself. While I think that the time has come to entertain a new,
more nuanced approach to the historical question, "What were the Hasidim?"
that will appear elsewhere4.

1 For the authors and their major writings, see Joseph Dan, Torat ha-Sod shel Hasidut Ashkenaz,
Jerusalem: Mosad Bialik, 1968; and Ivan G. Marcus, Piety and Society: The Jewish Pietists of
Medieval Germany, Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1981. The major research articles were publidied in Ivan G.
Marcus, ed., Dat ve-Hevrah be-Mishnatam shel Hasidey Ashkenaz, Jerusalem: Merkaz Zalman
Shazar, 1986.
The editions are ed. princ., Bologna, 1538, from which is descended Reuven Margaliot, ed.
Jerusalem: Mosad ha-Rav Kook, 1957, and Jehuda Wistinetzky, ed Berlin, 1891, reprinted with an
introduction by Jacob Freimann, Frankfurt am Main: Wahrmann, 1924. A fascinole edition of MS
Parma H 3280, the basis of the Wistinetzky edition, was publidied by Ivan G. Marcus, ed. Jerusalem:
Merkaz Dinur, 1985. The present author is completing a new oitical edition of MS Parma and a full
Fnglidi translation.
"'"The text ispart of R. Eleazar of Worms' Sodey Razayya and is found in Hebrew MSS, e.g., London,
Bntidi Library 737; Oxford, Bodleian Library Neubauerno. 1572,1638, among others.
4
For a reassessment, see Ivan G. Marcus, "The Historical Meaning of Hasidey Adikeaaz: Facts,
Fiction or Cultural Self- Image?" Gershom Scholem's Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism: Fifty
 Prayer Gestures 45

I would like to focus here on another major issue about the Hasidim that is
still far from clear and suggest a new approach for seeking a satisfying
answer to that question. The question to which I refer is, what is the
relationship between two of the types of writings that the Pietist authors
apparently transmitted, namely the more exoteric or pietistic ones, on the one
hand, and the more esoteric or speculative ones, on the other? The distinction
that I have just drawn between "pietistic" and "speculative" corresponds
somewhat to the generally used distinction which Joseph Dan has proposed
between the Pietists' "ethical" writings and those containing an "esoteric
theology"5. I use all of these terms provisionally. It is not clear that they
characterize what the Pietist authors wrote or transmitted. Much work still
needs to be done in studying the Pietist authors' entire corpus before we can
say with any degree of confidence what kinds of texts we have or, in some
cases, what the compositions themselves are. I hope that a global survey and
descriptive catalogue of all pertinent German Hasidic texts in manuscript,
printed versions, testimonia, soon to begin, will enable us to see better what
the entire corpus looks like.
For now, it is generally accepted, that there are two types of texts and that
the difference between them is one of function. Works such as Sefer Hasidim
are "ethical" in the sense that they were written to teach the Jew or would-be
Pietist how to behave, what to do. The practical character of these works is
reflected in the didactic tone of the text and in the use of exempla that
illustrate religious lessons to be followed.
In contrast, the speculative or theological texts involve ideas about the
universe and express this more theoretical subject in a complex, less
accessible style. Such texts consist of obscure literary references - often
supported by numerology - or are made up nearly entirely, as in Sefer
ha-Shem, by letter-number permutations.
How is it that the same group or groups of religious thinkers developed
such divergent types of writings and what do they have in common? Put
another way: What is the relationship between the way the authors told others
how to act and their own picture of the deity and of the world?
It may be worthwhile to compare specific topics as found in both types of
texts and consider if there is a relationship between them. One such area is
the descriptions of prescribed gestures and the direction of concentration
(kawanah) during prayer and the descriptions of the deity to which prayer is
supposed to be addressed6. How are the prescriptive or "ethical" or pietistic

Years After, ed. Peter Schäfer and Joseph Dan. Tübingen: J.C.B. Mehr [Paul Siebeck] 1993, pp. 103-
114.
5
See Dan, Torat ha-Sod and idem, "Ethical Literature", Encyclopedia Judaica 1971,6:926-932.
6
On the importance in historical analysis of gestures, see Jean-Claude Schmitt, La raison des gestes
dans l'occident médiéval, Paris: Gallimard, 1990, and for gestures and prayer, see Richard C.
46 I. G. Marcus

sources related to the Pietists' assumptions about God and man and their
relationship as discussed in their speculative or theological texts? When a
hasid is told to concentrate during prayer, he is to do certain acts with parts of
his body - gestures7. When the aspect of the deity is described during a
hasid's prayer, the deity is pictured in a specific physical way. How is the
human body in action or gesture related to the divinely imaged presence?
Prayer played an especially important role in pietistic Judaism8. Sefer
Hasidim, for example, contains entire sections on prayer and many references
to aspects of it are scattered throughout the book and in other "pietistic" or
"ethical" texts. Prayer is also discussed in some of the texts that are generally
regarded as theological or specualtive. Is it possible to trace the way that
gestures are described in the pietistic texts and compare them to metaphoric
uses in the speculative texts so that their relationship can be understood?
We should not be surprised that images of the human body may suggest a
way to correlate pietistic behavior with speculations about the divine. After
all, Shi'ur Komah traditions were transmitted to and by the German Hasidim 9
and the very essence of Shi ur Qomah is some body divine and its enormous
dimensions. It is the human body that serves as the image of some aspect of
the divine. Moreover, we know that speculations on Song of Songs 5:10-16,
the physical description of the male lover, lie at the heart of this tradition and
generated an enormous literature in Jewish mysticism10. One of these
examples is the "Shir ha-Kavod" ("The Song of Glory") that is associated
with the German Hasid authors and which dwells on the body of the divine
who is figured as a young and attractive male 11 .
I would like to consider three specific points of comparison, beyond the
very idea that the human body is used in prayer and in figuring the divine.
One is the way the use of the eyes is prescribed during prayer - looking up or
down or shutting them. Another is how concentration by the one who prays is

Trexler, "The Christian Prayer", Medieval & Renaissance Texts and Studies, Vol. 44, Binghamton,
N.Y., 1987.
7
See the pioneering study of Eric Zimmer, "Tikkuney ha-Gufbi-Sheat ha-Tefillah", Sidra 5, 1989,
pp. 89-130.
ο
See Joseph Dan, "The Emergence of Mystical Prayer", eds. Joseph Dan and Frank Talmage, Studies
in Jewish Mysticism, N.Y.: KTAV, 1982; Ivan G. Marcus, "The Devotional Ideals of Asbkenazic
Pietism", Arthur Green, Jewish Spirituality From the Bible Through the Middle Ages, Vol. I, New
York: Crossroad, 1986, pp. 356-366, and Moáie Idei, Kabbalah: New Perspectives, New Haven:
Yale University Press, 1988, Index, s.v. "prayer", and "ritual".
9
See Dan, Torat ha-Sod, p. 25, n. 3.
10
See Saul Lieberman, "Mishnat Shir ha-Shirim", Gerdiom Scholem, Jewish Gnosticism, Merkabah
Mysticism, and Talmudic Tradition, New York: Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1960, pp.
118-126.
1
' For the text, see A M Habermann, ed., Shirey ha-Yihud we-ha-Kavod, Jerusalem 1948, pp. 47-51.
 Prayer Gestures 47

described. Finally, how are these prayer requirements related to how the deity
is pictured?
Although the German Pietists always projected an impossibly demanding
religious goal for the h asid, they were paradoxically also aware of the
importance of allowing for individual intellectual and religious differences,
and they adjusted their requirements in accordance with them. Thus, Pietists
are to debate with non-Pietists about religious matters if they can win but not
if they are not talented enough to defeat the non-Pietist. Similarly, a child's
ability is to be taken into account when a pietist father determines his son's
curriculum. He should study Talmud only if he is capable of so doing;
otherwise, biblical studies are all he need do. Again, when it comes to giving
atoning penances to sinning Pietists and others, a remarkable new features of
Judah the Pietist's socio-religious formulation of pietism, the sage-penencer is
to give the repentent sinner a penance he is likely to do and not one that is too
dfficult for him 12 .
One feature of German Hasidism that indicates especially well how the
high demands of German Pietism were adjusted to the individual capacities of
the God-fearing is their devotional ideal. Here, as in the Kalonimide authors'
pietistic writings as a whole, almost impossible demands were modified in
accordance with the capacities of different people. Not everyone is a religious
virtuoso, and for this reason the devotional ideal is in actuality a range of
demands from extremes of intellectual and spiritual rigor to the minimal one
of praying with correct motivation alone13.
The Kalonimides' remarks about prayer vary from elaborate commentaries
designed for the special initiates like themselves, to instructions for more
limited Pietists about how to pray with "concentrated attention"14 (kawanah),
to the parable of an illiterate and inarticulate Jewish cattle herder who cannot
recall even the minimum required Jewish prayers but chooses to pray
spontaneously anyway.
Regardless of the individual's religious and intellectual abilities, prayers
would not be effective without concentrated attention on the words15, and
Judah the Pietist compares praying to a house built on the foundation of con-
centrated attention: remove the latter and the former collapses16. And so, he
required kawanah at all times, not just at specified times, in order to fulfill the
religious obligation of reciting the fixed prayers17.

12
See Marcus, Piety and Society,pp. 21.36 and especially pp 87-88,97,104.
13
See Marcus, "The Devotional Ideal", pp. 359-364.
e phrase is borrowed from Mircea Eliade, No Souvenirs, New York: Harper and Row, 1977, p.
230.
1
^Sefer Hastdim, ed Wistinetzky (hereafter: SHP),par. 446.
16
Ibid,par. 441.
17
See Mishna Berakhot 5:1; Tosefta Berakhofi:6 and 2:2; Sifrey Devarim, sec. 41; B. Ta'anit 2a
48 I. G. Marcus

The Pietists had to learn many skills in order to pray properly.

Anticipating the eighteenth-centuiy Polish Hasidic movement, the Pietists
called for prayer with melodies as much as possible. As Eleazar of Worms put
it in his poetical introduction to Hilekhot Hasidut (Laws of Pietism), "A bless-
ing deserves a pleasant melody / the glory of song is in much rejoicing / a
supplicating voice (requires) drawing out (the prayers) with concentrated
attention" (hemshekh be-khiwun)ls.
To pray with concentrated attention, the Pietists were supposed to pray
slowly, in a drawn out fashion (be-meshekh), and they were told how to
increase their concentration and avoid distractions. In addition to criticizing
rapid, mechanical praying19 the Pietist authors insist that discipline is needed
to keep distracting thoughts (hirhurim) at bay. Even thoughts about Torah
study during prayer are to be avoided, though they are better than ones related
to the banalities of everyday existence20. To concentrate properly when one is
sad, wine may help lift one's spirits21. At all times, one needs silence all
around, not people who talk or who are emotionally unstable22.
In addition, specific gestures are prescribed, some involving the eyes.
Those who go in and out of the synagogue must be ignored23: the Pietist
should shut his eyes so as not to see them and "break his concentration"24.
Another technique for avoiding visual distractions is for the Pietist to wear his
talit (prayershawl) over his eyes so that it blocks his view on all sides25. In
the evening, when the talit is not ordinarily worn, he should look down
towards the floor. A sudden urge to laugh is to be checked with specific
remedies: he should shut his eyes tight, pull in his stomach, and grind his
teeth together26.
A balance had to be struck between ways of avoiding distractions and
inadvertently calling attention to himself that might make others laugh at him
and disturb him even more27. To be sure, scorn would earn the Pietist who
suffered it a reward in the next world28, but it was even more desirable to
avoid losing one's concentration. And so, if a Pietist finds himself

and cf. Β. Rosh Hashanah 28a and B. Pesahim 114b.

1X
R. Eleazar ben Judah of Worms, Sefer ha-Roqeah ha-Gadol.
19
SHP,pars. 11. 418,421,450,479, 1577, etc.
20
Ibid.,pars. 445, 1581, 1602; cf. par. 38.
21
Ibid,par. 61.
22
Ibid,par. 456 (silence), 1602 (not talkers), 458 (unstable).
23
Ibid,par. 1582.
24
Ibid
25
Ibid.,par. 1584; cf. I Kings 19:13.
26
SHP,par. 1584.
27
Ibid.,par. 1587.
28
Ibid.,par 1589, etc.
 Prayer Gestures 49

unavoidably sitting next to a non-Pietist, a practice to be avoided since the

latter's evil thoughts will chase away the divine presence (shekhinah)29, the
Pietist should close his eyes at various times, such as when reciting the daily
penitential prayers (tahanun) 30 . The practice of looking down or shutting the
eyes especially during prayers is also recommended in the Zohar 31 . But since,
Sefer Hasidim continues, one is likely to be able to sustain this kind of
concentration only for short prayers, he should generally pray looking down
and his mind should be directed towards Heaven 32 . One exception is that
when he recites the special morning and evening benedictions that refer to the
celestial regularity of the day and night, he is to look up towards the
heavens 33 .
The issue of the direction in which to look or to concentrate when one
prays is dealt with in the classical Jewish sources and in medieval texts as
well. From the biblical Psalms, one knows that lifting up the eyes was one
way to pray, as in:
A song for ascents I lift up my eyes to the mountains; from where
will my help come? (Psalm 121:1); or,
A song of ascents. To You, enthroned in heaven, I lift up my
eyes (Ps. 123:1).
Although it is difficult to know how Israelites actually prayed, a reference
in Tertullian (d. 225?) suggests that some Jews in his day were still known to
look up 34 , whereas Christians were told to pray looking down. This
disagreement may provide the background for a dispute among Tannaim
mentioned in a barayta recorded in B. Yevamot 105b:
R. Hiyya and R. Shim on b. Rabbi: One said, One who prays
should look towards (the Temple) below, for it is said, "And My eyes
and My heart shall ever be there (I Kings 9:3). The other said, The
eyes of one who prays shall be directed towards (the heavens) above,
for it is said, "Let us lift up our heart with our hands (to God in
heaven)" (Lam 3:41).
In the meanwhile they were joined by R. Yishmael b. R. Yose.
"What are you discussing?" he asked. "The Prayer", they replied.

29
Ibid.,par. 403.
30
Ibid.,par. 1586.
3
' Waethanan, 260b. This proscription in the Zohar, in contrast to the opposite emphasis in Gemían
Hasidian to look or think up, is sigiificant. As my colleague Professor M o i e Idei has informed me,
the prohibition in the Zohar correlates with its explicitly sexual mythology "above" towards which the
one who prays ought not look up and search, as it were, for the face of the hidden God, the Creator
(borey). See below.
32
SHP, par. 1583; cf. Β. Yevamot 105b.
33
SHP, par. 1582.
34
See Zimmer, "Tiqqune ha-Guf, p. 90, n. 7.
50 I. G. Marcus

"My father", he said to them, "rules as follows: A man who says the
Prayer must direct his eyes to the (sanctuary) below and his heart
towards (the heavens) above so that the two Scriptural texts may both
be complied with.
R. Jose's conclusion seems to mandate that one who prays should look
down but concentrate upwards, and it is quoted to mean just that in the ninth-
century Gaonic code Halakhot Gedolot35 and repeated, according to a
different version, in the northern French liturgical code and compendium,
based on Babylonian sources, the Mahzor Vitry36.
But a contrary practice is reported in B. Berakhot 34b:
R. Hiyya b. Abba said in the name of R. Yohanan (3rd c. Palestine):
A man should not pray except in a room with windows (so that he
can see the heavens), since it says, "Now his windows were open in
his upper chamber towards Jerusalem" (Daniel 6:11).
Rashi (d. 1105)37 interprets the conclusions of these two Talmudic
passages as follows. In Yevamot, Rabbi Yose does not mean that one should
pray looking down but rather that one should look out in the direction of
Jerusalem where the Temple on earth, down here, was located. He requires
that one pray in the direction of the Land of Israel. In Berakhot, R. Yohanan
means that one should pray looking upward, towards heaven, through a
window and thereby be humbled. One need not lower the head or look down.
Maimonides (d. 1204)38 on the other hand, interprets the passages in the
opposite way and continues the Babylonian tradition. In Yevamot R. Yose
means that one should pray looking down, and one's head should concentrate
upwards; R. Yohanan's teaching in Berakhot means that one is to open
windows or a door in the direction of Jerusalem for proper prayer orientation.
It does not mandate looking upward towards the heavens.
Thus by the early thirteenth century, the direction and gestures of the face
that one should adopt during prayer were still not agreed upon. In the passage
cited earlier from Sefer Hasidim39 we find R. Yose's conclusion cited from
Yevamot, interpreted to mean, pray looking downward, as in Halakhot
Gedolot and the Mahzor Vitry. But we also note a special tradition, not
explicitly supported from R. Yohanan's statement in B. Berakhot, that one is
to look up when reciting certain blessings, specifically those that refer to the
heavenly bodies.
From the sources mentioned thus far, we note the ancient, tradition,
apparently Palestinian, derived from Psalms and expressed in R. Yohanan's

3
%. Shimon Kayara, Sefer Halakhot Gedolot, ed., Ezriel Hildeáieimer, Jerusalem, 1971,1:34.
36
R. Simha Mi-Vitry,Mahzor Vitry, ed., S. Hurvitz, Nuremberg 1923,p. 15.
37
Rashi adfi. Yevamot 105b s.v. 'enaw lematah, ad B. Berakhot 34b s.v. halonot.
38
R. Moses b. Maimai, Mishneh Torah, "Hilekhot Tefiilah", 5: A-6.
39
SHP,par. 1583.
 Prayer Gestures 51

statement in Talmud Berakhot, that the Prayer (ha-tefillah) was to be said

when looking up. There is some suggestive evidence that German Pietists
were among those who continued to practice the ancient Palestinian custom of
praying with the eyes turned upward. Thus in the first section of the printed
edition of Sefer Hasidim (Bologna, 1538), at the end of paragraph 18, a
passage from Maimonides is quoted40 and then the following comment is
added:
One mocks those who raise their heads and eyes upward, as
though looking at the angels, and one calls them "reed head"41.
The presence of this comment ostensibly from a version of Sefer Hasidim
is midleading. The author of Sefer Hasidim is not citing Maimonides'
interpretation of R. Yose that one must lower the head. Nor is he then
criticizing those who pray with their heads erect and who look up. The first
section of Sefer Hasidim, ed. Bologna, is filled with Maimonidean quotations.
It is not directly from the German Sefer Hasidim but from a French or
northern Italian edition whose editor disagreed with the ascetic and other
customs typical of the realm German Pietists42. And so the comment added to
the Maimonidean quotation is not a German Hasid view at all but it is a pro-
Maimonidean one. Moreover, the anonymous author is probably criticizing
actual German Hasidim or those influenced by them and their practices for
looking up when they pray. Among the Hasid customs mentioned by the
author of the German Sefer Hasidim is the habit of raising the head and eyes
upward, at least at certain times.
Similarly, in the thirteenth-century anonymous collection Sefer Minhag
Τον, written by an anonymous author who studied with the French Tosafot,
and later settled in southern Italy43, we find further discussion of the practice
of looking up when praying. First, this comment:
(When the cantor recites "barekhu") the divine presence is
above the (cantor's) head and in front of him. That is why our
ancestors would not raise their eyes when the cantor recites
"barekhu" as a reminder that he fears looking towards heaven44.
But he follows this admonition with the opposite point:
It is a good custom to say all the qedushot standing, eyes raised
towards the heavens45.

40
See above, n. 38.
41
Cf. Tosafot adB. Berakhot 12b s.v. kara' ke-hizra.
42
S e e Ivan G. Marcus, "The Recensions and Structure of Sefer Hasidim1', Proceedings of the
American Academy for Jewish Research, 45 (1978), pp. 152-153. My colleague Professor Reuven
Bcnfil suggested that a northern Italian provenance is possible.
43
M.Z. Weiss, ed., Sefer Minhag Τον, in: Ha-Zofeh le-Hokhmat Yisrael ΧΠΙ, 1939, pp. 217-245.
44
Ibid,par. 9.
45
Ibid,par. 10.
52 I. G. Marcus

The practice of looking upwards when reciting the qedushah is derived in

texts from Hekhalot Rabbati46 and recorded in R. Abraham b. Azriel's
Arugat ha-Bosem47, a work heavily influenced by German Hasid teachings
and practices, which, in turn, derive from ancient Hekhalot traditions48.
Hekhalot Rabbati reads:
... I derived no pleasure from the world I created like that
experienced when you raise your eyes towards My eyes, and My eyes
look at yours when you say kadosh before Me 49 .
And R. Abraham continues: "Here it says in Sefer Hekhalot that one must
lift up the eyes when reciting kadosh"50 R. Zedeqiah b. Abraham ha-Rofe,
compiler of Shibboley ha-Leket5i, cites this passage from what he calls
Ma ase Merkavah. R. Jacob b. Asher, in the Tur, the basis of the Shulhan
'Arukh, says:
And Spanish Jews look down when they say kadosh kadosh
kadosh but German and French Jews look up and raise their bodies
upwards.
"There is a support for their custom," he continues, "from Sefer
Hekhalot52. And in his commentary on this passage, R. Joseph Karo observes
that R. Jacob did not mean that only the German and French Jews raise their
bodies up when they recite the kedusha; Spanish Jews do this too. But, he
continues, "the difference is this. The (Spanish Jews) look down; (the German
and French Jews) look up." And as late as the eighteenth century, Rabbi Jacob

46
"Hekhaiot Rabbati" ed., Adolph Jellinek, Beit ha-Midrash (3rd ed.; Jerusalem: Wahrmami, 1967),
3:90 and Peter Sdiäfer, ed., Synopse zur Hekhalot-Literatur, Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck),
1981,par. 183.
47
R. Abraham b. Aaiel, Sefer Arugat ha-Bosem, ed., E.E. Urbach, Jerusalem: Meqizey Nirdamim,
1939-1963,1:214.
48
See Peter Sdiäfer, "The Ideal of Piety of the Aáikenazi Hasidim and its Roots in Jewidi Tradition",
JewishHistory 4:2 (Fall 1990),pp. 9-23.
49
The passage in Hekhalot Rabbati continues:
Testify what your eyes see: You see what I do to the face of Jacob, your father, which is
engraved an My Thraae of Glory. For when you say before Me kadosh, I bend over it,
fondle, kiss and embrace it...
This passage strongly suggests that when the one who prays kadosh makes eye contact, as it were,
with the deity, the latter is influenced by this. This theurgic aspect of Hekhalot prayer is developed in
German Hasidism. See Idei, Kabbalah: New Perspectives, pp. 194-197 and Elliot Wolfson, "Demut
Ya'aqov Haquqah be-Kise ha-Kavod: Iyyun Nosaf be-Torat ha-Sod shel Hasidut Ashkenaz", in
Masu'ot... Sefer Zikkaron le-Efraim Gottlieb, Jerusalem 1994,pp. 131-185.
S0
Arugat ha-Bosem, 1:215.
51
R. Zedekiah b. Abraham ha-Rofe, Shibboley ha-Leqet, ed. S. Buba- (Reprint; Jerusalem, 1962),
par. 20.
cn
R. Jacob b. Adler, Arba 'ah Turim, OrahHayyim 125.
 Prayer Gestures 53

Emden reports as unnecessary the practice of looking up during prayers

whenever the Name of God is mentioned53.
Although we do not often have exact correspondences between Sefer
Hasidim, for example, and Sefer Minhag Τον concerning when to raise the
eyes, both discussed the direction of the eyes and this suggests that this
gesture was a contemporary subject of disagreement. We can compare the
prescriptions of where one who prays is to look or to concentrate with some of
the texts in which the German Pietists describe a picture of the divine world.
For example, the author of Sefer Minhag Τον states that one who prays is not
to look up when the divine presence is right above and in front of the cantor.
He is making a correlation between the presence of God, however general,
and a prayer gesture.
Similarly, in Sefer Hasidim, R. Judah the Pietist poses the issue in
connection with his version of the Talmudic comment: "When a man prays
the shekhinah is before him, as it is said, Ί have set the Lord always before
me'." (Ps. 16:8)54:
When a man prays the divine presence is before him, as it is
written, "I have set the Lord always before me" (Ps. 16:8).
Even though it is written "the Lord ... before me," he should
direct his concentration only upwards towards Heaven. Since he does
not know where the Temple is located, when he prays he should
meditate with his mind as though the divine Glory (ha-kavod) were
within four cubits in front of him, and (God's) Highness (rumo) is
way up in Heaven.
When a dwarf speaks to a man (of ordinary height), does not (the
dwarf) look (up) at the face of the "giant", and not (look straight) at
the trunk (of his body)?55 Similarly, although the Creator (ha-borey)

«
R. Jacob Emden, Sefer Mor u-Qezi'ah, Altana, 1761, par. 98, cited in Zimmer, Tiqqune ha-Guf
p. 92, n. 21.
^B. Sanhédrin 22a. In the passage which follows, compare the term rumo to the phrase rum kavod
in the "Manual of Discipline", 1 QS 10:11-12, ed. Y. Licht, Megillat ha-Serakhim, Jerusalem:
MosadBialik, 1965,p. 216.
55
T h e reading is according to MS Panna itself, corrupted in ed. Wistinetzky: "ha-lo adam 'ehad ke-
she-medabber imo nanus ha-lo poneh kenegedpeney ha- 'anak we-lo kelapey gufo ...". This text in
Sefer Hasidim explains the emphasis on meditating upward during prayer found in a passage in
Oxford, Bodleian Library, Hebrew MS Opp. 540 (Neubauer, 1567), f. 9b, ed by Joseph Dan, ed.,
Iyyunim be-Sifrut shel Hasidey Ashkenaz, Ramat Gan: Masada, 1975, p. 169 and discussed in his
Torat ha-Sod. The allusion in the passage to Seder Elyahu Rabba, 4 . 9, ed. M Friedmann, p. 46,
does not mention prayer directed upward, which is the key to that passage and is central to the
exemplum of the dwarf in SHP, par. 1585. Does looking towards the giant's trunk imply what the
author of the Zohar wanted to avoid, i.e., looking at the sexual anatomy? Cf. above, n. 31. On the
parable, see below.
54 I. G. Marcus

is everywhere, (Scripture) said (one who prays) should do (it)

towards its face (panaw), as it is said, "Pour out thy heart like water
before the face of the Lord" (Lam. 2:19). Because human beings are
down here (in relation to God on high,) they must raise their soul
and mind. For this reason, the mind of one who prays should be
(directed) upwards.
The question of towards what direction the Pietist should pray has become
a theological one: On which aspect of the deity should the Pietist who prays
concentrate? While it is not possible to review here in any detail the various
aspects of the deity in the German Pietits' writings, we may make a few
observations.
To fulfill simultaneously both prayer facing God and concentrating
upwards one needs a distinction. It is the kavod (Glory) which is to be
thought of as in front of one, as required by Ps. 16:8: "I have set the Lord
always before me." But the requirement to concentrate on God upwards, as R.
Yose requires in Yevamot, is satisfied by concentrating on God's Highness
(rumo) in Heaven. That, at least, seems to be the simplest explanation. At this
juncture, then, the author of Sefer Hasidim pictures the divine Glory (kavod)
as being the aspect of God in whose immediate presence one prays.
But the text continues with a parable of a dwarf and a "giant" in which
concentration during prayer is compared to looking up at a tall person's face.
We are familiar with the famous image of dwarfs standing on the shoulders of
giants, a twelfth-century Latin author's image, borrowed by the author of the
thirteenth-century Italian-Jewish code Shibboley ha-Leket56. Here the image
is used to contrast man's trying to look at God's face during prayer, not how
we know more than our ancestors. One who prays is like a dwarf trying to
look at a person of normal height who is now like a giant. The dwarf has to
strain to look up to see the giant's face; otherwise, if he looks straight in front
of him, he will see some other part of the "giant's" body.
The author goes on to stress that God, called here "the Creator" (ha-
borey), is everywhere, but one is supposed to pray to His, the Creator's, face
(panaw) which is pictured as up in heaven. Does one also get the impression
that God's body is down here, everywhere, but his face is up there? How is
this divine body which had a head up there called "the Creator"?
The complexity of passages such as these from Sefer Hasidim raises the
question of how different are those texts that are often referred to as "ethical"
from those called "theological". Specially, in the lengthy passage just cited
from Sefer Hasidim, how is God described in relation to how the Pietist is to
pray? The author says that when one prays it is as though the kavod is in front

^ 6 See Brian Stock, "Antiqui and Moderni as Giants' and 'Dwarfs': A Rdlecticn of Popular
Culture?", Journal of Modem Philology 76 (1979), pp. 370-374. For the Hebrew ban-owing,
explicitly acknowledged, see Shibboley ha-Leket, "Haqdamat ha-Mehabber",p. 18a.
 Prayer Gestures 55

of him, but he is to pray upwards towards God's Highness (rum). This use of
the word kavod might refer to the kavod in a biblical sense, as Ezekiel saw
the kavod in Babylonia, an immanent representation of God in the world57.
Or, it might also refer to the kavod as used by the Hasid authors to mean that
aspect of God that prophets can see58. The latter, after all, is based on the
former.
The last part of the passage can be compared directly to a similar passage
in one of the major speculative or esoteric texts in the German Pietist library.
In Sefer Hasidim, the author uses the term borey as referring to God's being
everywhere and "his face" as being above. Now in German Hasid theology,
the borey is thought of as the unknowable aspect of God, the kavod as the
predicate of all descriptions about God in this world, seen by the prophets,
described in Scripture and Midrash. How are we to understand the prayer
gesture and the theological picture? The passage in Sefer Hasidim seems to be
perfectly consistent with German Hasid terminology and usage in the more
speculative texts. The author says that the borey is everywhere but is seen
only in the form of the kavod. That idea is expressed many times, as in the
earliest published tract dealing with anthropomorphic representations of God
in German Hasid writings, Sha'arey ha-Sod ha-Yihud we-ha-Emunah59. R.
Eleazar of Worms posits about God as borey that He "created the world once"
and is near to all who call him"60. That is, he is immanent: "he is in
everything"61. Moreover, the borey has or is will, and it is as a result of His
will that the prophets see the kavod\ "According to the wish of the Creator
(borey) does He show His Glory (kavod)62.
In this text, R. Eleazar also connects these aspects of God to the term
shekhinah:
"The Glory (kavod) is the appearance of a shining light which is
called shekhinah and in that light, by the will of the Creator, may He
be blessed, he makes Himself manifest to the prophets in different
forms, according to the needs of the times, to this one one way, to
that one another way"63.
But R. Eleazar also deals with the limits of this vision about God. Thus,
he writes, "there is a kavod above the kavod and the kavod that is the great

57
Ezdciel 1:28; 10:4,10:18.
58
See Dan, Torat ha-Sod, A . 5.
Sefer 'Sha'arey ha-Sod ha-Yihud we-ha-'Emunah'le-R. Eleazar mi-Worms", Temirin 1, 1972,
pp. 141-156.
60
I b i d , p . 144.
61
Ibid
62
Ibid,pp. 148,151.
63
I b i d , p . 147.
56 I. G. Marcus

splendor (ha-hod ha-gadoT) near the shekhinah no one has ever seen" 64 . He
also says about this aspect of God: "The great splendor is the glory of the
shekhinah (kavod ha-shekhinah). No creature has permission to look at it.
Whoever is wise will understand without being told, but I may not explain
more about the Glory of the shekhinah65."
This sign of the author's reticence does not by itself prove that the text
is more exoteric than a work such as MS Oxford 1567. In the latter, for
example, we find: "we have only written an outline66." Is a dialogue less
popular or exoteric than a yihud text or exempla such as those on Sefer
Hasidim?
If we compare the discussion about the direction towards which one
should pray as found in the "theological" texts in Oxford MS 1567 with our
passage from Sefer Hasidim, the passage in Sefer Hasidim turns out to be
more complete and helps us understand better the passage in MS Oxford. The
comparison is especially valid since Joseph Dan has attributed MS Oxford
1567 to Judah the Pietist, the author to whom Sefer Hasidim is also usually
attributed 67 .
In his discussion of prayer and the kavod in German Hasidic writings,
Joseph Dan has discussed a passage from MS Oxford 1567 that takes the form
of a dialogue among a king and three philosophers who discuss different
possibilities about how prophetic visions about God are to be understood
consistently with God's incorporeality. The first sage posits that God puts the
vision into the prophet's imagination; the third, posits that the kavod can be
seen because it is a creature; the second sage develops the most complex
position. According to him, the kavod is attached to the borey but is not a
creature. The aspect of the kavod that faces towards the created world can be
perceived by prophets; the aspect of the kavod that cleaves to the Creator
cannot be perceived by creatures68.
In developing this middle position further, the second sage applies his
distinction to the passage about Moses trying to see God's face in Exodus
33:20:
In truth, we know intellectually that a Creator exists but He has
no limits or measure, but the kavod has limits and it cleaves to the
Creator. The prophets have no capacity to see the place of cleaving.
It is about this that [scripture] says, "man shall not see My face and
live [you cannot see Me and live"] (Ex. 33:20)." [The kavod] is

64
Ibid., p. 148.
65
Ibid.,p. 149.
66
Ibid.,p. 169 (OxfordMS 1567,f. 9a).
67
See Joseph Dan, "HibburBilti Yadu a be-Torat ha-Sod le-R. Yehudah he-Hasid", in: Iyyunim, pp.
134-147.
68
Ibid.,pp. 169-173.
 Prayer Gestures 57

saying: You cannot see My fece [because it] is facing [upward,

towards] the Creator's Being ( ezem ha-borey). And so the verse
does not continue, "Man cannot see My face and live" (lo yir'eh
panay, ha- adam wa-hay). This is because the face [of the kavod]
faces towards [the divine] Being ( ezem) [where it cleaves to it].
Therefore, the heart of a man who prays turns upward, like a man
who standsand speaks to his neighbor face to face.69
In interpreting this discussion of the cleaving kavod and cencentration
during prayer, the attributed author, Rabbi Judah the Pietist, makes an
unintelligible comparison. One is to pray upward just as a man speaks to his
neighbor face to face. How is speaking face to fece with one's neighbor an
illustration of concentrating upwards? As Joseph Dan has noted, the passage
alludes to a phrase in Sefer Elyahu Rabba which discussed King Hezekiah's
prayer at the seige of Jerusalem (Isa. 37:15). "He seemed to be like a man
speaking to his neighbor70."
But if that were the primary allusion, the main point would be missing. It
is in light of the parable of the dwarf and the "giant" in the parallel discussion
about prayer in Sefer Hasidim that the passage in MS Oxford makes sense. If
the one who prays is to pray to God face to face, then he must look up or
concentrate upwards, like a dwarf straining to look at the face of a "giant".
Otherwise, all one will see is the giant's body - the lower kavod.
And so, when the text in Sefer Hasidim refers to the face of the Creator as
the direction in which to pray, it is combining instructions about how to
behave, the "ethical", with detailed descriptions about the deity, "theology". In
some texts we find a direct instruction to concentrate on the borey, not on the
kavod. For example, in R. Eleazar of Worms "Introduction" to his Hilekhot
Hasidut, he writes: "direct your mind at your Creator."71 Similarly, in those
prayer texts on God's Unity and meditations thought to be "exoteric",72 the
authors insist that prayer should be directed at the highest conception of God,
"the Creator" (ha-borey). And in R. Eleazar's Sha'arey ha-Sod the reader is
also told to "think about the Creator". 73
In other texts, we find distinctions between the lower and upper faces of
the kavod, but not necessarily in those texts that can be defined as esoteric. In
the passage in Sefer Hasidim, for example, the "fece" of the creator is empha-
sized. In MS Oxford 1567 distinctions are made between the upper face and
the lower face of the kavod attached to the borey. The latter is but a more

69
Ibid.,p. 169.
7a
There the text reads', "nir'eh ke-'adam she-hu medabber 'im hovero.'
71
R. Eleazar ben Judah of Worms, Sefer ha-Rokeah, p. 3.
11
Dan, "'Sifrut ha-Yihud, shel Hasidey Ashkenaz", in: Iyyunim, pp. 72-79 and his FngliA
Introduction to Shir ha-Yihud: The Hymn of Divine Unity, Jerusalem Magnes, 1981, pp. vii-ix.
73
Dan, Sha'arey, p. 154.
58 I. G. Marcus

elaborate exposition of the former. And in R. Eleazar's Sha'arey hà-Sod,

thought to be an exoteric text, we have descriptions of the kavod above the
kavod, as noted earlier. Qualitatively, there is little difference between them.
In fact, the interruption in Sha'arey ha-Sod when the author comes to the
subject of the "splendor of the shekhinah" (hod-ha-shekhinah) is not in
principle different from the limits of written discussion anywhere else about
these subjects. Indeed, by their very existence all of the written texts of the
German Pietist' torat ha-sod are exoteric. The difference between Sefer
Hasidim and the so-called more specualtive texts is more a matter of degree
than of kind. Each may be used to illuminate passages in the other. One type
should not be prejudged to be more "ethical" or practical; the other should not
be assumed to be more theoretical or theological than the other. In other
words, it is not clear that there are two types of texts at all.
The references to German Pietist prayer gestures that involve looking
upwards, an ancient Palestian custom, are related to their religious world
view, in general, and to their picture of the divine world, in particular.
Looking up and concentrating upward are both related to the Pietists'
distinction between the omnipresent but invisible Creator and the higher
aspect of the kavod 's face.
A further sign of the correlation between the idea of looking up and
concentrating upwards during prayer and texts that imagine the kavod is
found in the Shir ha-Kavod attributed to the school of German Pietists. This
text is based on the allegorical interpretation of the figure of the male lover in
Song of Songs 5:10-16 which describes the male figure from his head to his
feet. In a passage in R. Eleazar's Sha 'arey ha-Sod14, the author goes to great
pains to deny that the biblical anthropomorphic attributes pertain to the borey
and he continues, "whoever thinks that shape, form, and limbs apply to the
Creator (ha-borey), the Maker of everything, is godless." And he concludes:
"In this way our ancient ancestors believed that everything (about God's body)
in Song of Songs: his head, curls, eyes, cheeks, lips, hands, thighs, chest - are
only a parable" (mashal), that is, figurative language.
When, however, we look at the imagery in Shir ha-Kavod based on the
biblical passage that describes the total body from head to toe, we find a
special emphasis on one part - the head. Thus, the poem stresses again and
again the image and even the sound of the Hebrew word for head, rosh: se ar
roshkha; havash kova'a yeshu'ah be-rosho, taleley orot rosho nimia; demut
rosho, mahlefot rosho, 'al rosh simhato, kesher tefillin [sheI rosh
understood], rosh devarkha emet, korey mey-rosh, am doreshkha derosh,
tehi le-roshkha ateret, tikar shirat rosh (poor), ta 'aleh le-rosh mashbir,
tena'ana' li rosh, ki besamim rosh - plus several times the word crown
( ateret) and the word mezah (forehead), all pointing upward at the head of

74
Ibid.,p. 146.
 Prayer Gestures 59

God as kavod?5

One way to understand this text, recited to this day, is as part of the
German Hasid tradition to focus in prayer gestures upward, either with the
eyes looking up or with closed eyes, concentrating upwards, and to think of
the object of prayer concentration as the upper face/head/rasft of the kavod.
The repetitious focus on the divine head, and crown, and tefillin knot cannot
be explained by reference to one or two Talmudic references or allusions.76 It
is part of a pattern, and that pattern is explained when we compare prayer
gestures of the eyes and concentration with discussions of the part of the deity
to which prayers are to be addressed.

We could explore further this theme of the relationship between prayer

gestures and the Pietists'picture of the divine world, not only in connection
with seeing and concentration but also with gestures such as bowing. We
would also explore what theurgic influence the human gestures have on the
divine world and vice versa. For now, it suffices to indicate that this approach
may prove fruitful in rethinking the entire corpus of German Pietist writings
and their recommended religious behavior and thinking, which together,
constitute their distinctive cultural reworking of ancient Jewish traditions.
This approach should also bear fruit when applied to other aspects of the
history of Judaism.

ηc
On the motive of making a crown for God's head, see Idei, Kabbalah: New Perspectives, pp. 191-
197. The special emphasis an the motif of "head" in the poem was communicated to me by Professor
Arthur Green.
76
Ä Berakhot 7a and the exegesis on Ex. 33:18-19.
 Elliot R. Wolfson

Metatron and Shi'ur Qomah in

the Writings of Haside Ashkenaz

For sometime now scholars have recognized the central role played by the
German Pietists of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries as a bridge connecting
the oldest forms of Jewish mystical speculation contained in the Hekhalot
corpus and developments in both the theosophic and ecstatic trends of
medieval Jewish mysticism.1 Despite the acknowledged importance of the
Pietistic sources for the study of ancient and medieval Jewish mysticism, as
well as a considerable amount of scholarship dedicated to the theosophy and
religious pietism of these various groups, we are still at a relatively early stage
in sorting out the wealth of ideas and traditions preserved in a voluminous
corpus of material, most of which is buried in manuscripts. Much more spade
work needs to be done if we are to develop a sophisticated approach to the

1 See A Epstein, Mi-Qadmoniyot Ha-Yehudim, ed. Α. M Habemian, Jerusalem 1957, pp. 226-248;
G. Scholem, Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism, New York 1954, pp. 80-118; idem, Origins of the
Kabbalah, Princeton 1987, pp. 4 M 2 , 97-123, 180-198, 215-216; J. Dan, The Esoteric Theology of
the Ashkenazi Hasidim, Jerusalem 1968, pp. 116-129 [Hebrew]; idem, "A Re-evaluation of the
Ashkenaä Kabbalah'," Jerusalem Studies in Jewish Thought 6, 3-4 (1987): 125-140 [Hebrew]; M.
Idei, Kabbalah: New Perspectives, New Haven 1988, pp. 130-132. The work of A Färber, "The
Concept erf" the Merkabah in Thirteenth-Century Jewish Esotericism: Sod ha-Bgoz and its
Development," Ph.D., Hebrew University, 1986 [Hebrew], is filled with important i n s i s t s pertaining
to the issue of the relationship between speculative ideas expressed in the merkavah, pietistic, and
kabbalistic writings, including the topic of this study (see below n. 10). Concerning the particular
influence of German Pietism on ecstatic kabbalah, see M. Idei, The Mystical Experience in Abraham
Abulqfia, Albany 1988, pp. 16-17, 22-24; idem, Language, Torah, and Hermeneutics in Abraham
Abulafia, Albany 1989, pp. 50,168-169, n. 77; idem, New Perspectives, pp. 98-103. Of relevance as
well is P. Schäfer, "The Ideal of Piety of the Ashkenazi Hasidim and Its Roots in Jewish Tradition,"
Jewish History 4 (1990): 9-23. See also E. R. Wolfson, "The Image of Jacob Engraved Upon the
Throne: Further Speculation on the Esoteric Doctrine of the German Pietists", in Massu 'ot Studies in
Kabbalistic Literature and Jewish Philosophy in Memory of Prof. Ephraim Gottlieb, ed. M. Orón
and A Goldreich, Jerusalem 1994, pp. 131-185 [Hebrew]; idem, "The Mystical Significance of
Torah-Study in German Pietism," Jewish Quarterly Review 84 (1993): 43-78.
 Metatron and Shi'ur Qomah 61

textual-redactional history of this literature. Even the precise relationship of

the different Pietistic groups active in Germany and northern France has not
yet been folly charted. Before one can assess the precise position of the
Ashkenazi Pietistic circles in the history of Jewish mysticism and esotericism
much more preliminary research is necessary.
In this study I wish to focus on one particular issue in the writings of the
German Pietists, viz., the images of Metatron as they are related to Shi 'ur
Qomah speculation. Let me note at the outset that while my principal focus
will be on the sources originating in the main group of the Rhineland Pietists,
the Kalonymide circle led by Judah ben Samuel he-Hasid (ca. 1150-1217) and
Eleazar ben Judah of Worms (ca. 1165-ca. 1230), I will also be drawing on
the material of several different circles, e.g., the circle that was responsible
for the commentary on the multiple names of Metatron extant in many
manuscripts and printed as S'efer ha-Hesheq in Lemberg in 1865, as well as
various other texts, some printed but most available in manuscript codices.2 I
will also avail myself of the commentary on Sefer ha-Qomah by Moses ben
Eleazar (or, according to some manuscripts, Eliezer) ha-Darshan,3 (which
has some affinity with the Sefer ha-Hesheq4), a fragment of Eleazar's
disciple, Shem Τον ben Simhah ha-Kohen,5 as well as writings that
originated in a third circle of Pietists, the Hug ha-Keruv ha-Meyuhad, the
Circle of the Special Cherub.6 While there is no reason to ignore the
important differences between these circles and thereby collapse them into
one literary and historical phenomenon, it does seem plausible to assume that
certain issues found in the texts of the different circles, as, e.g. the comments
pertaining to Metatron, do run parallel and may indeed stem from common
sources. To anticipate one of the conclusions of my analysis at the outset: an
earlier strand of tradition can be discerned in the writings of the Sefer ha-
Hesheq circle and is attested as well in material preserved in the Kalonymide

See Dan, The Esoteric Theology, pp. 220-221; idem, "The Seventy Names of Metatron,"
Proceedings of the Eighth World Congress of Jewish Studies-Division C, Jerusalem 1982, pp. 19-
23. See also Y. Liebes, "The Angels of the Shofar and Yeshua Sar ha-Panim," Jerusalem Studies in
Jewish Thought 6,1-2 (1987): 171-198, esp. nn. 7, 9,10,13,20, 21,2,33, 42 [Hebrew],
3 See G. Sdiolem, Reshit ha-Qabbalah, Tel-Aviv 1948, pp. 195-238; J. Dan, "The Vicissitudes of
the Esotericism of the German Hasidim," Studies in Mysticism and Religion presented to Gershom
G. Scholem on his Seventieth Birthday, Jerusalem 1967, pp. 92-93 [Hebrew section]; M S. Cohen,
The Shi'ur Qomah: Liturgy and Theurgy in Pre-Kabbalistic Jewish Mysticism, Lanham 1983, pp.
138-142.
4 See Liebes, "The Angels of the Shofar," p. 185,n. 10,andp. 190,n.51.
5 I have utilized MS JTSA Mie. 2430, fols. 68b-71b. See Scholem, Major Trends, p. 376, n. 122;
Dan, The Esoteric Theology, pp. 48,66.
6 See J. Dan, Studies in Ashkenazi-Hasidic Literature, Ramat-Gan 1975, pp. 89-111 [Hebrew]; The
Esoteric Theology, pp. 50-55,156-164, 255-258.
62 E R. Wolfson

texts, although in the case of the latter, especially in Eleazar's own

compositions, there is an obvious effort to recast that earlier tradition in light
of a more acceptable religious posture wherein the line separating the angelic
Metatron and the glory is more clearly and boldly drawn.
One final methodological point: it is generally assumed in the scholarly
literature that the Pietists, especially Eleazar of Worms, attempted to
contextualize earlier texts and traditions in a more "contemporary" setting
indebted to the philosophical orientation of Saadiah as well as some Jewish
Neoplatonists, principally Abraham ibn Ezra. (The influence of Abraham bar
Hiyya is recognizable in the case of certain Pietists, especially the Hug ha-
Keruv ha-Meyuhad, but not pronounced in Judah he-Hasid or Eleazar.7) In
good measure a quasi-philosophical approach was also informed by certain
views of Shabbetai Donnolo and Hai Gaon as transmitted through Hananel
ben Hushiel and Nathan ben Yehiel of Rome.8 The influence of these sources
account for the Pietists' outright rejection of anthropomorphism and their
insistence that the Creator has no material or representable form. As Scholem
astutely observed, characteristic of the German Pietists was their desire to
synthesize the early mythical material, including the anthropomorphic
elements, with the more philosophical or spiritual interpretation that denied
these elements.9 Still, the earlier traditions, heavily anthropomorphic, had a
decisive impact on the spirituality and religious sensibility of the Pietists. This
should not be underestimated.10 One thinks of a comment made by Ephraim

1 See G. Scholem, "Reste neuplatonisdier Spekulation in der Mystik der deutschen Chassidim und
ihre Vermittlung durch Abraham bar Chija," Monatsschrift fur Geschichte und Wissenschaft des
Judentums 75 (1931): 172-191; G. Vajda, "De quelques vestiges du néoplatonisme dans la kabbale
archaïque et mystique juive franco-germanique," Le Néoplatonisme, colloques internationaux du
CNRS, Royaumont 9-13 juin 1969, ed. du CNRS, 1971, reprinted in G. Vajda, Sages et penseurs
sépharades de Bagdad à Cordoue, ed. J. Jolivet and M. R. Hayoun, Paris 1989.
8 See Scholem, Major Trends, p. 86; Dan, The Esoteric Theology, pp. 20-24.
9 See Kabbalah (Jerusalem, 1974),p. 42; Major Trends, pp. 86-87,111-115.
10 See Dan, The Esoteric Theology, pp. 25, 27-28; idem, "A Re-evaluation of the Ashkenazi
Kabbalah'," pp. 133-134, where he singles out the "myth of Shi'ur Qomah" as a point of similarity
between theosophic kabbalah and German Pietism. On the other hand, see ibid., pp. 137-138, where
Dan notes that one of the two key differences between the kabbalistic and the Pietistic worldviews is
the mythological nature of the divine, especially connected to the male-female polarity, the other
difference being the theurgical element in the Kabbalah. See also Färber, "The Concept of the
Merkabah," p. 298, who notes that the Shi 'ur Qomah traditions in the circle of Judah he-Hasid are nrt
to be taken as literally attributing corporeal dimensions to the glory, but rather are an expression of a
"principle of ontological limitation and determination" expressed figuratively in mathematical terms.
Färber compares this to the principle of participatio in Neoplatonism that functions as a point of
mediation between the infinite and finite. She concludes as well that there is a basic
"phenommological similarity" between the German Pietistic doctrine of Shi'ur Qomah and the
 Metatron and Shi'ur Qomah 63

E. Urbach who contrasted the approach of Eleazar with the blatant

anthropomorphism found in a commentary on the forty-two-letter name of
God that may be related to the Se fer ha-Heshequ. Urbach went so far as to
say that the Kalonymide Pietists, especially Eleazar, fought against the
anthropomorphic tendencies of the other Pietistic circles, a point corroborated
from the evidence of Moses Taku as well as material extant in manuscripts
including a statement cited by Urbach concerning the burning of books that
attributed anthropomorphic characteristics to God.12 This no doubt is true,
but the anthropomorphic speculations of the earlier texts surface time and
again in the Pietistic writings, including those of Eleazar himself.13 Indeed,
given Eleazar's untiring effort to rid the divine of anthropomorphism, it is all
the more striking that some of these traditions find their way into his work.
The assumption that one must make is that the Pietists experienced some
tension between the anthropomorphic descriptions related in material that
they considered the sacred legacy of the Jewish past and a more contemporary
rationalist theology. Shunning any systematic synthesis, they preserved
alongside the more or less contemporary philosophical concepts the older
esoteric traditions, often in "abstruse metamorphoses," as Scholem put it, 14
such that one indeed finds in their theological and cosmological speculations
a "reversion to mythology."15 It seems to me, moreover, that the views
regarding Metatron and the Shi 'ur Qomah in the Pietistic sources may help
one reconstruct ideas articulated at an earlier stage of Jewish esotericism.
Even if we cannot go beyond the time period of the German Pietists

kabbalistic approach. For a different attitude on the role of anthropomorphism in the theology of the
German Pietists, see T. Alexander-Frizer, The Pious Sinner: Ethics and Aesthetics in the Medieval
Hasidic Narrative, Tübingm 1991,pp. 77-78.
11 See Liebes, "The Angels of the Shofar," pp. 186-187, n. 20.
12 See Abraham ben Azriel, Sefer Ά rugar ha-Bosem, e d E. E. Urbach, Jerusalem 1963,4: 74.
13 ]n this regard it is of interest to mention the Sefer ha-Qomah recension of the Shi 'ur Qomah
extant in MS Oxford-Bodleian 2257, fols. 16a-20a, which attributes the entire text to Eleazar of
Worms. See M S. Cohen, The Shi'ur Qomah: Texts and Recensions, Tiibingai 1985, p. 7. See also
the version of this text in MS Oxford-Bodleian 1791, fols. 58a-93b, which, according to the scribe 's
own testimony, consists of a copy made from the hand-written copy of Eleazar. See Cohen, op. cit.,
pp. 9-10.
1 * Major Trends, p. 87.
15 Ibid. See also p. 117 where Scholem asserts that in some cases Neoplatonic ideas incorporated by
the German Pietists "underwent a process of retrogression from the metaphysical to the theological or
Gnostical sphere, if not to pure mythology." See Scholem, Kabbalah, pp. 38-39. See also reference to
Dan's comment above, n. 10. The mythological aspects of the theological speculation of the Goman
Pietists have also been recently emphasized by Y. Liebes, "De Natura Dei: On Jewifh Myth and Its
Transformation," in Massu 'ot Studies in Kabbalistic Literature and Jewish Philosophy in Memory
of Prof. Ephraim Gottlieb, ed. M. Oron and A. Goldreidi, Jerusalem 1994, pp. 243-297 [Hebrew).
64 E.R. Wolfson

themselves, a careful analysis of such a central topic will go a long way in

helping us refine our understanding of the torat ha-sod, the esoteric teaching
that informed the mystical theosophies cultivated by these authors.

II

References to Metatron in the writings of the German Pietists are multiple

and multifaceted. It is evident in this case, as in many other significant areas,
that the Pietists were preserving and elaborating older motifs found in the
sources they copied and studied. One such tradition that figures prominently
involves the attribution of the measurements of the Sh'iur Qomah to the
angelic Metatron. 16 Before proceeding to an analysis of the relevant
Ashkenazi material, it will be recalled that such a tradition is also attested in
early kabbalistic sources. Thus, for example, in one of the few kabbalistic
teachings reported in the name of Abraham ben David of Posquières
(RABaD), Asher ben David attributes to his uncle the following explanation
of the talmudic aggadah regarding God's wearing phylacteries17:
This refers to the Prince of the Countenance [sar ha-panim, i.e.,
Metatron] whose name is like the name of his master. 18 He appeared
to Moses in the bush and to Ezekiel in the appearance of a man from
above, [and he appeared to the prophets]. 19 But the Cause of Causes [is
not seen by any man] not in the right, left, front or back. And this is a
secret in the account of creation20: Whoever knows the measurement
of the Creator is guaranteed to inherit the world-to-come. Concerning
this it says, "Let us make man in our image" (Gen. 1:26).21
The end of the passage, citing consecutively from Shi 'ur Qomah and Gen.
1:26, implies that the measurable demiurge of the ancient Jewish esoteric text

16 In the classical texts of the Shi'ur Qomah traditions Metatron is described as the reveal er of the
information contained in the texts related to the measurements and names of the Creator (yozer
bereshit ). Cf. Cohen, The Shi'ur Qomah: Liturgy and Theurgy, pp. 124-128. Although the body or
stature of Metatron in one section is described as filling the world (qornato male 'olam), there is no
question that the principal object of the anthropomorphic speculation is the Creator and net Metatron,
and indeed even the aforementioned measurement may be considered an acccntuation of the difference
in dimension between God and the angel. Cf. Cohen, op. cit., p. 133. See also the description of
Metatron in Midrash Bereshit Rabbati, ed. Ch. Albeck, Jerusalem 1940, p. 27.
17 Cf. β. Berakhot 6a.
18 Cf. Β. Sanhédrin 38b.
19 The bracketed expression is lacking in the version of the text published in 'Ozar Nehmad but is
found in Sciiolem; for references see below, n. 21.
20 The reference is to a passage repeated in various recensions of the Shi'ur Qomah text; cf. P.
Schäfer et al. (ed.), Synopse zurHekhalotLiteratur, Tübingen 1983, pp. 711,953.
21 'Ozar Nehmad, Vienna 1863,4: 37; cf. Sdiolem, Reshit ha-Qabbalah, pp. 75-76.
 Metatron and Shi'ur Qomah 65

is none other than Metatron, the Prince of the Countenance (sar ha-panim),
in whose image Adam was created. I note, parenthetically, that the linkage of
Gen. 1:26, the measurements of the demiurge (yozer be-reshit) enumerated in
the Shi 'ur Qomah, and the figure of Metatron is found in Abraham ibn Ezra
as I have argued elsewhere,22 and it is probable that he was a major source for
the RABaD's formulation.23 It is worth citing a second passage of the RABaD
where a similar characterization of Metatron is found, although in this
context he is designated the Prince of the World (sar ha- 'oiam)u rather than
the Prince of the Countenance. The passage in question is a commentary on
the talmudic statement25 attributed to R. Yohanan to the effect that there are
three keys in the hand of God that are not given to any messenger (shaliah):
"The messenger is the Prince of the World who is seen by the prophets and
who reigns upon the chariot. He has emanated (ne'ezal) from the Supernal
Cause (ha-sibbah ha-'elyonah) and the power of the Supernal is in him;
concerning him it is said, >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; Moscow-
Guenzberg 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.
 M e t a t r o n a n d Shi UT Q o m a h 69

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 be-khol
maqom beli reshit beli takhlityit'fbarakh]. On the tedmical term "visible glory," kavod 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 (ha-
kavod 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 forty-
two-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 he-
Hasid.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 Jewish-
Christian,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: u-
mosheh 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
 M e t a t r o n a n d Shi'iir Q o m a h 75

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 forty-
two-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 uvi-
khevodo. 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 la-
atarah 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 ' la-
elyon 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 ha-
Navon, 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 demiurgical-
angel 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 she-
tofes 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.
 Metatron and Shi'ur Qomah 79

Metatron and the Shekhinah were identified by certain Pietistic authors is

found in the critique of this view found in the commentary on Sefer ha-
Qomah 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/ she-
shemo 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,
80 E R. Wolfson

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 la-
Yamim ha-Nora'im, vol. 2: Yom Kippur, Jerusalem 1970, p. 406: we-tavnit harerey qedem ba-
kisse. 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 Jewish-
Alexandrian 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.
 Metatron and Shi'ur Qomah 83

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 ke-
eyti 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 ha-
keter 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 ' li-
demut ya'aqov avinu she-haquq be-khisse ha-kavod 'az mitrahev lifhe ha-kavod u-mitpa'er
legamrey bi-zekhut ya'aqov '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 ha-
mal'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 ha-
Yahadut 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 olim kemo
mal'akh... hu'sod 'am"en uva-'ellu ha-g'fimmel] '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 (1978-
79): 115 [Hebrew], See also the text incoporated in Eleazar's Sefer ha-Hokhmah, MS Oxford-
Bodleian 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
 Metatron and S h i ' u r Q o m a h 87

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. 184-
185; Dan, The Esoteric Theology, pp. 119-127; Färber, "The Concept of the Meikabah," pp. 231-
244; 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 om
qadosh be-haqdishkha 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 la-
Yamim 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.
88 E R. Wolfson

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 ha-
Kohen, 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", u-
mequbbal '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 ha-
Hesheq, 6a): zrkyh begi'[matria] qwdqwdy lefi she-biqqesh moshe lifrey hqb"h she-hayah mar'eh
lo etkevodo '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 metatron she-hayah
aharey ha-bore' we-her'ah lo le-mosheh qesher tefillin be-qadqod 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: we-
ra'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. 417-
427; 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 post-
biblical 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. 122-
130.]
 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; 202-
221.
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. 164-
67.
^ 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 sub-
categories 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 well-
being, 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. 41-
52.
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.
 Images of Women 99

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,^. 226-227.
in
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-in-
law, 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 Stowe, "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 so-
called 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 under-
standing 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 book-
form 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 pseudepi-
graphic 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 compa-
rison 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 Hasi-
dism"? 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 he-
Hasid. 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, charis-
matic 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 neutestamentliche
Wissenschaft, 65 (1974), pp. 27-42.
 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 Medie-
val 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
pp. 98-100.
17
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
E.E. Urbach, Sefer Arugat ha-Bosem, vol. IV, Mekize Nirdamim, Jerusalem 1963, pp.73 ff.
21
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 non-
existent 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 ful-
fillment 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 Hasi-
dim 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 above-
mentioned 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 ha-
Yerushalmi" ("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 Hasidic-
Ashkenazic 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 Hasidic-
Ashkenaz 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.
o An Old Yiddish Literary Genre)." Ha Sifrut 28 (April 1979), pp. 126-152.
On the HasidioAdikenaa movement see for example: Y. Baer, Ha-Megammah ha-Datit ha-
Hevratit 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 Hasidic
Narrative, Tübingen 1991.
 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 Hasidey-
Ashkenaz 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
V. Turner, Dramas, Fields and Metaphors: Symbolic Action in Human Society, London 1974.
11
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. 9-
31. 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
Compare Num. 1528,1620.
17
On "the Will of God", see: H. Soloveit chick, "Three Thanes in Sefer Hasidim", Association for
Jewish Studies 1 (1976), pp. 311-357.
18
J. Dan, "Be'ayat Qiddush ha-Shem be-Toratha ha-lyyunit áiel hasidut Ai&kenaz" (The Problem
Milhemet Qodesh u-Martirologiyya: Qovez
of Martyrdom in the ideology of Goman Hasidism).
Harza'ot she-Hushme'u ba-Kenes ha-11 le-'Iyyun be-Historiya. 1966. (Proceedings of the 11
Annual History Conference, 1966). Jerusalem 1968, pp. 121-131.
 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 Hasidey-
Ashkenaz, 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 self-
preparation 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 be-
Sippurey 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.

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 Hasidey-
Ashkenaz 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 Hasidey-
Ashkenaz31.
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*

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. 193-
196; 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, Tel Aviv, Jerusalem 1948, pp. 195-
238;[Hebrew],
140 M. Idei

manuscripts, all of them probably related to Rabbi Shem Τον ben Simhah ha-
Kohen 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. 1.
20
Peraqim, 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. 187-
193; [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 ha-
Yihud 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 "Ha-
maskil 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 she-
perashti 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: Ha-
mequbbal 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
Ibidem, fol. 55c.
56
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
Perush Parashat Bereshit, p. 215.
61
Kabbalah: New Perspectives, pp. 104-108; M Idei, "Kabbalistic Prayer and ColorApproaches
to Judaism in Medieval Times, ed. D. Blumenthal, vol. ΠΙ [1988] pp. 17-27.
 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.
63
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.
On this topic see here below n. 74.
66
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. 104-
105.
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 Translation".
79
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 be-
Qabbalah, 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.
152 M. Idei

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. 171-
173.
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

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 ha-
Eschkol 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 Alfa-
Beta, 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, 116-
117. 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 Zwangs-
Disputation 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 ha-
Nizzahon 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
Index zum Sefer ha-Nizzahon (Anni. 10), impagmiert (nach der Einleitung).
26
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 Christenfeind-
lichkeit 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 Mittel-
und 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.
33
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:
 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
Sefer ha-Nizzahon (Anm. 10), S. 191.
35
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. 114-
118.
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 für
Historische Forschung, 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,
in New York 1990, S. 68-69.
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. 1-
11.
 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 Ben-
Sasson, 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 ha-
Nizzahon 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.
G. Scholem, Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism, New-York 1941 pp. 339.
4
See André Neher, Le puit de l 'Exil, Paris 1991 2 ) and Faust et le Maharal de Prague, Paris 1987.
 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. 465-
73.
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 maqifha-
kol.
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
b. Sukkah, 53b.
15
See Sha'arey Orah, vol. 2 p. 81.
1
^ 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.
 The Maharal of Prague 177

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 food-
offering" 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
Reminiscence of Is. 45,6 : ki efes bil 'adi ani YHWH we-eyn 'od. Cf. also Is. 44,6.
23
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 ha-
Gibbor 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 la-El zorekh la-qorbanot eia kedey le-hodot lo yihudo she ha-kol mimeno. "
11
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.: Will-
Erich 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.326-
340; 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. Studia
Leibnitiana, Sondedi. 7. Wiesbaden 1978, S.19-29.
 Zauberei und Zauberer 183

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. An Introduction to
Philosophical Medicine in the Era of the Renaissance, 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 Hexen-
und 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
 Zauberei und Zauberer 189

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 Ni-
gromantia [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 Wirkungs-
und 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 cross-
influences2.
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 Hebrews-
i.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.
24
Wirsznbski, 164 f.
25
Kies2kowski, 85.
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 ex-
perience. 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
Kieszkowski, 84. r
3
'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 bet-

ween 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.
34
Id., 134.
35
Id.,81.
 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.
37
Wiiszubski, 258.
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, 84-
85. 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. Bar-
Levav, 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
 A Profile of R. Naphtali Katz 209

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
See note 1.
4
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
See J. Emden, Megillat Sefer, ed. D. Kahana, Warsaw 1897, p. 39.
9
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. 274-
283 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. 123-
126.
15
SeeL. Loewenstem, Index Approbationum, Berlin, 1923,pp. 113-114.
16
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.
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. 107-
122.
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 Ha-
Yom el Ha-Ayin, which explicitly alludes to the weakening powers of the Ein-
Sof 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, quasi-
Sabbatean 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. 282-
283 [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.
45
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.
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
Yalqut Shm'oni I: 145.
no
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 Hakhamim-
Kedusha 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. 371-
373; 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.
5
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.
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 Ha-
Hatam 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
See notes above for detailed references to the works of the sdiolars cited.
13
SeeDubnow,p. 441, Wilaiski.pt. I,p. 25.
14
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 socio-
religious 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 Maggid-
Mesharim 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
See R. Werblowsky, Joseph Karo: Lawyer and Mystic, Philadelphia 1980 (2nd. edn.), pp. 38-83.
22
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.
 Rabbi Nathan Adler 231

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-ha-
BESHT [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 u-Meqorot le-Toldot ha-
Shabta'ut ve-Gilguleyha, 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 <4"
excommunication of 1772: "When the above letter readied us [in Brody] we were thunderstruck by
what our eyes saw and upon hearing that the conflagration which broke out several years ago has
not yet been extinguished and that bands of evil-doers still cavort among us" (my emphasis). See
Wilenski, I, p. 44. Wilenski believed that these remarks referred to the controversy in Vilna which
was known in Brody, but "they did not take action until they received the letter from Vilna" (ibid., η.
59). However, he seems to be in error, for the remaries most probably refer to the circles of Sabbatian
and Frankist Hasidim who were excommunicated in Brody in 1752, 1753, 1756 and 1760. The
language of the proclamation supports this surmise: "once again awakened [our emphasis] gevorin
[in Yiddiái] among our nation sects and societies [our emphasis]." These my remaries indicate that
the anti-Hasidic excommunications were directed against the renewal of the phenomenon of
Sabbatianism and not against what was, in the opinion of the excommunicators, a distinct new
essence. Brody rabbinical court was leading the «-v<^nmmimi<-irtinns against Sabbatianism and initiated
the bans against Jonathan Eybeschuetz Leib Prosnitz and Jacob Frank in the previous decades. I
believe that Wilenski was wrong in minimizing the importance of the accusation of Sabbatianism
which stood behind the excommunications. See Wilenski, I, p. 18. Even after the excommunications
of 1757 and 1759 most Sabbatianism believers remained within the Jewish community. See G.
Scholem, Mehqarim u-Meqorot, ρ 136.
236 R. Elior

The fate of Rabbi Nathan, too, was influenced to a great extent by the
Sabbatian-Frankist threat, for at that time the distinctions between the Hasidic
pietists, the Sabbatian Hasidim, and the Frankist Hasidim were increasingly
blurred, and any manifestation of separatism which originated with a separate
prayer quorum was suspect, becoming the target of attacks and
excommunication if it did not receive the explicit approval of the community
and the authorization of its leadership.
Various testimony points to manifestations of tension between the pietistic
Hasidic circles and the traditional leadership throughout the eighteenth
century. It seems that since the mass conversion of the Doenmeh in 1683, the
Eybeschuetz-Emden controversy and the unprecedented conversion of the
Frankists in Lvov in 1759, all pietistic spiritualism was suspected of being
antinomian, and the various circles of Hasidim were thought to hold heretical
beliefs and do strange deeds, as it emerges from various accounts.36 However,
it appears that the identification of the Sabbatian-Frankist groups with the
various Hasidic circles was not unequivocal in the consciousness of the
religious and social authorities until the 1770s, the years when
excommunications against the Hasidim began to be promulgated in Eastern
Europe, including the first writ of excommunication against Rabbi Nathan
Adler and the members of his circle.
It does not appear that the proclamation of the writs of excommunication
in both Eastern and Western Europe in the 1770s has yet been linked to a
complex of critically important events which took place at the same time and
which left its threatening mark upon the Jewish world. I refer to the
Sabbatian activity at the end of the 1760s and to the travels of Jacob Frank
(1726-1791) throughout Eastern and Western Europe after he was freed from
imprisonment in Czestochowa in 1772, when he began the systematic
dissemination of his doctrines by means of emissaries, epistles, and books. 37
The letter of Yeruham ben H anani ah Lippmann of Czernowitz, Solomon
ben Rabbi Elisha Shor, the Kabbalist of Rohatyn, and his brother Nathan
Neta on the life of Frank and on his doctrine which was published by
Abraham Jacob Brower38 states explicitly:
Also upon his departure from Czestochowa in 1772 he sent us,
the undersigned, to several towns, such as Lublin, Lvov, and Brod

36
Seen. 24 above and cf. Piekarz, Bi-Yemey Zamhatha-Haádut, pp. 310,324-326,331-338.
Czestochowa was captured by the Russdans in August, 1772, and then Frank was freed from
prison. On his doings during the 1770s see A. Krauáiar, Frank we-'Adato 1726-1816, Warsha 1896
(Transi. Ν. Sokolov) pp. 272-273, Π, pp. 15-16; A. I. Brow«·, Galicia ve-Yehudeiha, Jerusalem
1965, pp. 267-275; G. Sdiolem, Mehqarim u-Meqorot, pp. 137-138. H. Levine, Ha-Khronika-
Te'udah le-Toldot Ya'aqov Frank u-Tenu'ato, Jerusalem 1984, pp. 76-86. On his intensive
propaganda in the late 1760s and early 1770s see Kroidier, I, pp. 257. 272-273.
38
See Brower, p. 272.
 Rabbi Nathan Adler 237

and to the other cities, on a mission from him to announce to all

those who fear the Lord so as to know that the time will come when
all the Jews will be forced to convert. For the decree is from God
alone, be it in whatever way it may be, and whoever comes in the
shelter of faithfully to the house of the God of Jacob, the God of
Jacob will help him, so that he shall not be lost forever, for in His
shadow we shall live among the nations.
According to the accepted historical view, Frank was released from prison
in the summer of 1772, when Czestochowa was captured by the Russians.
According to the Frankist chronicle, Jacob Frank was set free on January 21,
1772[3]39 and travelled through various places in Poland, Moravia, and
Walachia. His journey caused a spiritual awakening and waves of conversion,
arousing increased suspicion against all pietist circles and separate prayer
quorums. It also might have led to the imposition of excommunication against
them, for in the consciousness of the opponents the common denominator
between the pietist Hasidim, the Hasidim of the BESHT, and the Sabbatian-
Frankist Hasidim was greater than the substantial differences among them.
The author of Hut ha-Meshullash, the grandson of the Hatam-Sofer,
described the background of Rabbi Nathan's excommunication in that spirit:
At that time the country was full of noise and turmoil, and the war against
the Hasidim grew stronger in the lands of Poland and Russia, and the Gaon . ..
Elijah of Vilna of blessed memory, and with him other great Jewish scholars,
sent proclamations to all of the great Jewish communities, telling them to
persecute the Hasidim and to do battle against them for changing their
pronunciation and changing the words of the prayer and other established
practices. ... And the great Jewish leaders especially feared change and
innovation at that time, because then the sect of Shabbetai Zevi, may his
name be blotted out, ruled and did damage and destroyed in Poland and
Germany, and the members of that sect also studied books of Kabbalah with
hints and numerology, cloaking themselves in the garment of the pious. ...
And it was not clear whether they belonged to the Zevi-ites, whose roots gave
forth bitter wormwood or to the Hasidim, who held true faith in their hearts,
and they feared the Zevi-ites, who were similar to the Hasidim. Since they
saw in the practices and ways of the followers of Rabbi Nathan Adler of
blessed memory several things which were similar to the practices of the
Hasidim, and they did not want these things to spread in their city and state,
they therefore sought to prevent these people from [doing] this, and in Prague
the rabbinical court at that time forbade any study of the Kabbalah for that
reason.40

-5Q

See Levine, p. 76.

Hut ha-Meshullash, p. 29. Cf. the wording of the prohibition against studying Kabbalah because
the Frankists depended upon esoteric doctrine, in G. Sdiolem, Mehqarim u-Meqorot, pp. 123-124.
238 R. Elior

All of the Hasidic circles, both the ascetic and reclusive groups and the
followers of the BESHT, as well as the Sabbatians and Frankists, formed their
worldview under the inspiration of the Kabbalistic tradition, and they
consolidated patterns of thought and practice which were decisively
influenced by Kabbalistic ethical literature and its mystical-visionary trends.
Because of this, the changes in widely accepted customs which were wrought
by various circles of Hasidim, and the alterations which characterized them in
their methods of divine worship, along with their tendency towards
charismatic inspiration and authority, were too similar in the view of those
observing them from without to permit clear distinctions to be made between
the circles remaining faithful to the traditional values and those which
deviated from them. 41 The community leadership, which had to struggle
against the renewed Sabbatian heresy did not delve deeply into these
differences but rather took a general negative position regarding all of the
pietist groups which acted without the agreement and permission of the
community.
The presence of the Frankists in Poland and Galicia, in Russia and in
Moravia throughout the 1770s,42 aroused tension and fear and a feeling of
precariousness. Indeed, the numbers of those who were bound to the
Sabbatian-Frankist movement in various ways, from being secret supporters
to open apostasy, was too great not to leave a mark. The leadership arose to
constrain this social deviance and to expel the rebels who, by their actions
and behavior, damaged the values of the community. Excommunication was
the principal means used to establish the boundaries of the congregation's
common identity and to erect a barrier against spiritual separatism in all its
varieties, from ascetic pietism through ecstatic mysticism to antinomianism.
It is not implausible to postulate that the letters and emissaries which
Frank sent to his supporters and devotees in the city of Brod in the early
1770s43 could have direct or indirect influence on the enthusiastic
participation of the leaders of that community in the anti-Hasidic
excommunications of 1772.44 In any event, the Gaon of Vilna is known to
have excommunicated the Hasidim in that year because he believed that "the
sect of Hasidim" contained "many heretics from the sect of Shjabbetai]
Z[evi]," as it is quoted in his name in Shever Posh im, the anti-Hasidic

41
SeeG. Sdiolem, Mehqarim u-Meqorot, pp. 113-115.
41
See Levme, above n. 29.
43
See Brower, p. 272, and cf. evidmce regarding the rise of members of the sect in Warsaw from
1770 onward in G. Sdiolem, Mehqarim u-Meqorot, p. 137.
44
See Wilenski, I, pp. 4449, andn. 35 above.
 Rabbi Nathan Adler 239

pamphlet45. For their part the Hasidic leaders protested angrily but
ineffectively against being included among the Sabbatian heretics.46
If we may assume that the promulgation of the anti-Hasidic writs of
excommunication of the 1770s was influenced by the Frankist emissaries
dispatched throughout Europe at the end of the previous decade, by Jacob
Frank's travels during the early 1770s, and by the ferment that was aroused in
his wake, then in all likelihood these writs of excommunication directed
against the Sabbatian-Frankist heresy exerted an indirect influence on the
first ban against Rabbi Nathan and his circle. Jacob Frank's decision to settle
in Offenbach, just across the river from Frankfurt, in 1787, certainly
possessed significance with respect to the second writ of excommunication
issued against Rabbi Nathan's group in 1789.47
During the 1780s the Frankfurt community struggled against Rabbi
Nathan and his group, while at the same time the Sabbatian-Frankist threat
grew ever more intense. At the end of the decade, Frank had gathered
hundreds of followers in his stronghold in Offenbach48 and his supporters
everywhere were numbered in the thousands. These developments cannot
have exerted a moderating influence on the struggle, but rather they led to the
second writ of excommunication of 1789, which went beyond the preceding
writ in its extremism.49 An interesting and exceptional trait in the polemics
of the 1780s is the place occupied in the proclamations and
excommunications by the dreamers and prophetic visionaries who were
common in Rabbi Nathan's circle: the testimony shows the great importance
attributed by the members of the community and of the circle to dreams and
their influence:
For they began to terrify the people with their dreams and to
frighten them with the lie of their visions, and this is the sum of their
wisdom and understanding: to arouse the power of their
imaginations while they lie prone upon their beds, and whoever
dreams the most is the most praiseworthy in their society.50
The dreams were grasped by Rabbi Nathan's circle as visions, prophetic
revelations, knowledge of the future, and direct contact with upper worlds.
But by the community leaders they were viewed as deceptions and fraud,

45
ibid., 77b.
46
See Wilenski, Π, pp. 178-179, and cf. the index undo- "Sfcabta'ut." See also D. Z. Heilman, Igrot
Baal ha-Tanya, sig. 77, 83, 86. Cf. R. Elior, "Wikuah Minsk" in: Mehqarey Yerushaiayim be-
Mahshevet Yisrael, I (1982), pp. 202-203.
47
See Levine,p. 100, and see the introduction by Greenwald to Ma ase h Ta'atu'im,p 8.
48
See Scholen, Mehqarim u-Meqorot, p. 138, and see n. 200 there.
49
See Horowitz, pp. 156-157 and cf. Wilenski, Π, p. 96.
50
Ma aseh Ta atu im, p. 17
240 R. Elior

manipulative means of influencing the masses. The second excommunication,

of 1798, is, as noted, entirely devoted to that matter:
Those bans which were written in the Community Register and announced
publicly in a proclamation in the synagogue in 1779, which have already been
spoken repeatedly, prominently, with full force and power ... it is additionally
appended to all of these, so that those false prophets and their like should no
longer continue to frighten and terrify the people.51
It goes on to state that it is strongly forbidden:
for any man in the world to threaten and terrify and frighten zein wird [in
Yiddish] with their dreams and signs and vain visions and seductions, since
this sect has already made people act wickedly and sin. Hence the dreamer of
dreams is to be rejected and banned and ostracized and set apart from all holy
Jewish ceremonies.52
Rabbi Nathan's group could have based its practices upon a rich
Kabbalistic literature that attributes decisive importance to dreams. The
Zohar views the dream as a revelation granted to the soul from the world of
angels and interprets the dreams of the righteous as close in essence to
prophecy. A good deal of the Kabbalistic literature of the sixteenth century
was written under the inspiration of dreams, visions, and illuminations
possessing the force of celestial revelation. Books such as Galya-Raza,
Hayyat-ha-Qaneh, Maggid-Mesharim, and Sefer ha-Hezyonot publicly
disseminated the authority of dream and vision and determined their
significance as celestial revelation and as a sign from the upper world.53
The various Hasidic circles in Eastern and Western Europe, drawing upon
the heritage of Kabbalistic literature, attributed great importance to dreams,
were interpreting them as an expression of penetration beyond the confines of
time and space, of immediate contact with upper worlds, and of attaining the
holy spirit - goals which the entire Kabbalistic, ascetic, and ecstatic ethos was
directed to achieve. Concepts such as stripping away of corporeality,
annihilation of being, she 'elat halom (questioning through a dream), ascent
of the soul, cleaving to God, ecstatic enthusiasm, and equanimity, the
revelation of Elijah, and even spells and the use of the holy names were
widespread in all of the pietistic circles. These formed a conception of the
world which acknowledged the power of visionary authority drawing upon
contact with upper worlds. Further, this perception gave rise to charismatic
sources of inspiration and venerated those who were endowed with it.
Contemporary figures such as the BESHT, Rabbi Moses Hayim Luzzatto, the

51
Ma'aseh Ta'atu'im,pp. 24-25.
52
ibid
53
See Zohar I, fol. 183a-l 84a, and cf. Y. Tishby, Mishnal ha-Zohar, Jerusalem 1961,11, p. 128; R.
Werblowsky, Joseph Karo (η. 21, above), pp. 41, 182; R. Elior, Galya-Raza, critical edition,
Mif aley Mehqar shel Ha-Makhan le-Mada'eyha-Yahadut, series!, Jerusalem 1981,pp. 15-16.
 Rabbi Nathan Adler 241

Maggid of Mezhirech, or Rabbi Nathan Adler were viewed by the members of

their circles as charismatic figures who transcended the normal bounds of
conception and were in contact with upper realms which existed beyond the
domain of the senses. The BESHT defined his spirituality as "like someone
who conducts himself on a level above that of nature," and his disciple, the
Maggid of Mezhirech said of him, "Why are you surprised that he had a
revelation of Elijah and even achieved a very high spiritual ascension,"
whereas the Hatam Sofer, Rabbi Nathan's disciple, cites his teacher as saying:
"when I have an ascent of the soul into the Garden of Eden I always see ..." In
the Hasidic tradition Rabbi Nathan is described as the one of whom Rabbi
Elimelekh said: "for many years such a holy soul as Rabbi Nathan Adler has
not come into this world, except for our Teacher, Rabbi Israel the Ba 'al Shem,
of blessed memory."54
Paranormal phenomena are known to be interpreted according to the
status of the individual to whom they are attributed, according to the religious
significance inferred from them, and according to the cultural context of its
time and place. Thus phenomena which are interpreted as manifestations of
the holy spirit in a group which cultivates a mystical atmosphere, and which
arouse an attitude of respect and awe there, can be viewed as a manifestation
of confusion and deceit in another group, one which fears them and adopts an
attitude of contempt and criticism against them. Even more so, the evaluation
of these phenomena may depend upon whether they embody a threat to the
existing order or whether they arouse opposition to the prevailing leadership.
It seems then that this fear of the claim of unlimited authority on the part of
the spiritually inspired, who were viewed by those around them as possessing
the holy spirit, as well as fear of the new ritual expressions which were forged
for spiritual and mystical purposes were the motivations behind the great
majority of the writs of excommunication issued against the various Hasidic
circles.
Suspicion, hostility, and criticism were aroused at the moment when
contact with the upper worlds transcended the limits of the exalted individual
or left the domain of an elite few acting with the community's consent. As the
concerns of such a prophetic group became a phenomenon with social
significance, the community responded belligerently. Dreams, which in Rabbi
Nathan's circle were an expression of prophetic revelation and the inspiration
of the holy spirit were, as noted, interpreted entirely differently by the

See Toldot Ya'aqov Yosef, par. Mishpatim, fol. 56. See also Magid Devarav le-Yakov, Koretz
\7Sl, introdudáca; Derekh ha-Nesher,p. 22; OhelNaftoli, ag., 127, pp. 45-46. See also Horowitz's
statement that Rabbi Nathan was also venerated by his disciples as a miracle-worker, Rabaney
Frankfurt, p. 156, and cf. the spiritual characterization erf' exalted spirits like him in Scholem,
"Mizwah ha-Ba'ah be-'Averah," in: Mehqarim u-Meqorot, pp. 19-20; German translation in id.
Judaica 5 , Frankfurt a. M. 1992, p. 7-116.
242 R. Elior

community leadership. Rabbi Nathan and his group were depicted as deceitful
tricksters. Quite possibly, the common view that linked prophecy, revelation,
and frightening dreams with the Sabbatian movement on the one hand, and
which attributed visionary dreams and fraud to the Frankist circles on the
other, led to excessive severity in judging the significance of dreams in
Adler s circle.55 In any event, it is certain that the close proximity of Jacob
Frank, who stayed, as noted, in Offenbach during the late 1780s, and who
was known for his dreams, prophetic visions, and manifestations of the holy
spirit^ which took place in his circle, could not encourage a sober, tolerant,
or moderate assessment regarding the visionary revelations and prophetic
dreams of Rabbi Nathan's circle.
We must then conclude that the various pietistic circles, possessing
ascetic, mystical, and ecstatic tendencies, which were the subjects of the
Kabbalistic-Hasidic tradition in Eastern and Western Europe during the
1770s and 1780s, were persecuted and excommunicated not because of what
they actually were, but rather because of what their opponents deemed them
to be in the light of the Sabbatian-Frankist threat which was then being
renewed with unprecedented force. The lines of demarcation between the
Kabbalistic, Hasidic, Sabbatian, and Frankist circles, all of which called
themselves "Hasidim," became increasingly blurred in the consciousness of
those who were observing from without. Their common elements, anchored in
the Kabbalistic tradition and the pietistic-Hasidic ethos, were many, far
outweighing the shadings which distinguished them. Hence, the leadership
felt that it was proper to wield the weapon of excommunication against all
spiritual separatism. Every tendency to spiritualistic autonomy transcending
the authority of the community was banned, with no attempt to distinguish
among the essential differences between those who were delving deeply into
the mystical heritage and penetrating to the depths of the tradition and those
who had passed beyond it and constructed a new spiritual world on its ruins.
The fate of Rabbi Nathan Adler, like the fate of the Hasidic members of
his generation in Eastern Europe who viewed themselves as continuing the
holy Kabbalistic tradition and as profound innovators under its inspiration
and within its confines, was largely determined by the anarchic significance
that was enhanced to it and by the antinomian use made of that tradition by
Sabbatian and Frankist circles, who acted at the same time and in the same
place in the name of the same Kabbalistic and Hasidic tradition.

55
On prophecy, revelation, and nightmares which were bound up with the Sabbatian movement, cf.
G. Scholen, "Ha-Tenu'ah ha-Shabtait," in: Mehgarim u-Meqorot, pp. 78,98.
Frank's dreams are mentioned in Divrey ha-Adon in pars. 2145, 2201, and 2203 and in many
other places. See Levine, p. 48, par. 37; p. 72, par. 72; p. 82, par. 93 et passim. Cf. "Zikhronot Dov
Ber mi-Bolikhov," in: Brower,p. 216, and see Scholem, Mehqarim u-Meqorot, p. 119.
 Michal Orón

Dr. Samuel Falk and the Eibeschuetz-Emden Controversy

The controversy between Rabbi Jacob Emden and Jonathan Eibeschuetz and
his circle caused much comment both at the time and afterwards. To Profes-
sor Yehuda Liebes,1 this personal disagreement between two of the greatest
sages of their generation appeared to be only the tip of the iceberg in great
cultural and historical occurrences. Indeed, as Prof. Liebes has indicated,2 re-
searchers still have before them the task of uncovering the spiritual, social,
cultural and historical activity which occurred at that time in the various
circles connected with these two central personalities, Emden and
Eibeschuetz. It may very well be that, were it not for the persistence of Emden
in his struggle against the various manifestations of Sabbatianism, the
picturesque figure of Dr. Samuel Falk, the Ba 'al-Shem of London, would have
disappeared entirely from our consciousness. It is true that he is mentioned in
passing in the writings of Rabbi Hayim Yosef David Azulai (Ha-Hida).3 He
also appears in the writings of such Christian authors as Archenholz4 and
Drumont5, who recounted those exploits of his which were connected with
well-known contemporary historical figures of his who made use of his
services. But it is most doubtful whether we would have taken notice of the
peripheral character who is accorded a brief reference or a footnote by these
writers. However, a short sentence in an article of G. Scholem, "The Sabbat-
ian Movement in Poland",6 about the adventurer Dr. Falk, the Ba al-Shem of
London, aroused my curiosity. In my search for sources and evidence,

' Y. Liebes. "The Messianism of R. Jacob Emden and His Attitude Towards Sabbatianism", Tarbiz
49, Jerusalem (1979-1980), pp. 122-165; "New Writings in Sabbatian Kabbalah From the Circle of
Rabbi Jonathan Eibesdiuetz, Jerusalem Studies in Jewish Thought, vol.5, Jerusalem (1984),
pp.191-347.
2
Y. Liebes, New Writings, p.191.
3
H. D. Asulai (Ha-Hida), Ma agal Τον (Itinerary), Jerusalem, 1921 -1934, p. 136.
4
M D'Ardienholz, A Picture of England, vol.1, London (1789), pp.181, 182 (this bock is an
Fnglidi translation of the book England und Italien).
^Drumont, Edward , La France Juive, Paris (1888), p.275. See also Gleichms Denkwürdigkeiten,
Paris (1888), p.224.
Scholem, "The Sabbatian Movemmt in Poland", in: Studies and Texts Concerning the History
of Sabbatianism and Its Metamorphoses, Jerusalem (1974), p. 111.
244 M. Orón

Professor Liebes directed me to Emden s The Book of Wrestling? Whilst

this book does indeed contain an extensive description of Dr.Falk's
personality, more remains hidden than is revealed. After much searching, I
discovered the diaries of Dr. Samuel Falk, the Baal-Shem of London, as
well as the diary of his personal valet, Rabbi Zevi Hirsch of Kalisch.8
The two diaries and the external evidence scattered among various
writings shed light on this colorful, multi-faceted figure. Whilst he was a
peripheral spiritual figure, he is important and central to a description of
unique phenomena in eighteenth century Jewish Society. Much material is
found in the two diaries which is likely to be of use to researchers, historians
and anthropologists who are concerned with this period. I have edited both
and expect them to be published soon. In my paper I shall present the figure
of Dr. Falk, the Ba al Shem of London, whose childhood and youth were
spent in Furth in Germany.9 I shall also try to answer the question of whether
Dr. Falk was indeed a secret Sabbatian as Rabbi Jacob Emden implies. As
Emden relates, the Ba al Shem, Dr. Falk, or Falckon as he was sometimes

7
R. Jacob Emden, Hitabbequt (The Book of Wrestling), Gat Derukha, Lemberg (1877).
^The two manuscripts are autographical. The diary of S. Falk is available in London in the Jewish
Museum (Neubauer's Catalog 127). The diary of Zvi Hirsch of Kalisch is available in New York in
the Jewish Theological Seminary library (mie 3599).
Falk's diary was first described by Dr. Neubauer in the Jewish Chronicle (December 19, 1884) and
was then included in his catalogue of Hebrew Mss. to be found in the library of Beth-Hamidrash of
the Lbited Synagogue. In the Jewish Chronicle (Mardi 9, 1888) S. S di echter wrote about T h e Baal
S i o n , Dr. Falk '. He described the diary and Dr. Falk, its author. Schediter did not understand Falk 's
mysticism and wrote, "the writer (Dr. Falk) does not seem to have beai on good terms with Dr.
Syntax." At the beginning of this century (1903) R. Dr. H. Adler gave a lecture entitled the "Baal
Shem of London". This lecture was publidied in Berlin (1903) and in London in Transactions of the
Jewish Historical Society of England ( 1908), pp. 148-173.
Adler researched Falk's life and collected extensive source material about him. Although Adler did
not refer in his paper to the magic and kabbalistic parts of the diary, his study opened a window to the
world of Dr. Falk.
Prof. Cecil Roth spoke of Falk in radio lectures delivered in 1953 and 1955 and in a paper read before
the Jewish Historical Society of England He published the lecture in his book Essays and Portraits
in Anglo^Jewish History, Philadelphia (1962), pp. 139-164. In his paper, Roth wrote about only one
episode. He relied on other researchers and especially on Dr. Adler whom he quoted extensively. But
Roth also had at his disposal the diary of Zvi Hirsch of Kalidi, the personal valet of Falk, who was the
great- grandfather of Roth's wife. As we can see, Roth himself did not read the entire diary of Dr. Falk
and quoted from Adler s paper. Ih the middle of his study, he writes of the kabbalist and king whom
he claims to have identified as the Baron Theodore de Neuhoff. Ulis identification had been made
previously and recorded by David Kahana in his article "To'im U'Mat'im", Ha-Shiloach, vol.5, p.54.
On this, see also Adler, "The Baal Shem of London", p. 155.
9
See Emden, Hitabbequt, Gat Derukha, Lemberg(1877),p.71a, Altona (1761),p.l29.
 Dr. Samuel Falk 245

called, was born in Poland10 at the beginning of the eighteenth century and
known as Chayim Samuel Jacob De Falk Tradiola Walk Laniado. When
signing his name he used the second letters of his names, and his signature
read: D'lampali orPa'amei-dal. 11
The name of his father, Rabbi Yehoshua Rafael Ha-Sefaradi, appears in
Falk s diary in a description of a dream about him. 12 Other than the father's
name, we have no information about him or about the other members of his
family. 13 The little we know about Falk s earliest days is entirely derived
from Emden, who notes that Falk was born in Poland, went from there to
Podhayce, and then on to Furth. 14 These two cities, Podhayce and Furth 15 are
known to have harboured centers of secret Sabbatianism and are associated
with the names of Rabbi Judah Hasid and members of his circle as well as
Rabbi Moses David of Podhayce.16 Falk's connections with Rabbi Moses
David are mentioned in a letter written by Eliezer Susman Sheswonzi to his
son in which he describes the wonders of Falk, the Ba al-Shem of London.
This letter appears as a document in Emden s book.17 We can assume that
friendly relations existed between Rabbi Moses David of Podhayce and Falk
during their youth and perhaps even professional ties, since they were both
BaaleyShem\18
On the basis of Samuel Falk s diary it is possible to surmise that he grew
up in Furth. His family lived there, and he was married there. He himself
begot no children, and he adopted his wife's son (from her first marriage).
His relations with members of the Furth community are documented in his
diary, in notes he wrote to himself about sums of money which he had sent to

10
ibid
I
t a l k ' s diary, p.20a.
II Falk's diary, p.28b and see also Falk s tombstone inscription at the end of the presort paper.
11
Perhaps he was related to the family ci R. Yehoshua Falk who lived in Furth and whose
descendants are to be found even in Israel.
14
Emden, Hitabbequt, Altona, ρ. 129.
15
I. Tidiby, "The Letters of R. Mair Rofhe to R. Avraham Rovigo", Sefimot 3^», Jerusalem
(1959-1960), pp.79, 82, 83; M. Benayahu, "The Holy Brotherhood erf" R. Judah Hasid and Their
Settlement in Jerusalem," Sefiinot, vol.3-4, Jerusalem (1960), pp. 133-182, and see there note 151.
16
Ch. Wirszubsky, "The Sabbatian Kabbalist R. Mos&e David of Podhajce," Zion 7, Jerusalem
(1942),pp.73-93.
17
Emden, Hitabbequt, Lemberg, 69b-71 a.
1R
Ba 'al-Shem - Master erf" the Divine Name (Possessor erf" the Name), hi the sixteoith century the title
Ba al Shem was given to those who used the holy appelations of God in writing amulets. Those thus
rrferred to were well-known as physicians who used their amulets and their knowledge erf" folk
medicine to help the people.They were usually Kabbalists and were successful in treating mental
illness and epilepsy and in exorcising dibbuqim (i.e. ghosts). See G. Scfaolem, "Baal Shan,"
Encyclopaedia Judaica, vol.4, Jerusalem (1971), pp.5-7.
246 M. Orón

people of the city as a mark of his appreciation for their care of his mother
and for setting up a tombstone on her grave after she died. Along with the
individual gifts of money, he sent contributions to public institutions in Furth,
including the Jewish orphanage19 (the first in Germany, which was
established in Furth in 1763). In his will he orders that the Jewish community
in Furth be sent £20 annually.20 Falk moved from Furth to Westphalia. There
he appeared as a Ba 'al-Shem, a healer of the sick, a discoverer of hidden
treasures, and one who knows how to transform base metals into gold.
Because of his dealings he was accused of witchcraft and sentenced by the
court to be burnt at the stake.21 He succeeded in fleeing and reached London
in 1742. His life and activities between 1747-1751, his first years in London,
are almost fully documented in the diary of his personal valet, Zevi Hirsch of
Kalisch. Hirsch's diary is a most important document for the study of the
Jewish kabbalistic circles. In his diary are explicit descriptions of magical
activities, with the writer describing what he has seen at times through the
keyhole and at times as a full participant in the occult ceremonies.22 Falk's
first years in London were spent in poverty and deprivation. He pawned many
of his household possessions with Nicholas the pawnbroker and withheld the
wages of his valet who repeatedly complains about this. 23 He did not even
give money to his wife (to whom Hirsch refers as the Rebbetzn) for household
expenses, and on several occasions Hirsch relates how he outwitted his
master, Falk, and gave the Rebbetzn money without Falk's knowing.24 It may
be noted that according to the two diaries, relations between Falk and his wife
were shaky and unpleasant. Hirsch tells of flying crockery after a poor meal 25
and describes Falk's wish to disappear and flee from this wife who causes him
so much trouble and interferes with his mystical activities.26 Falk himself
twice dreams of foreseeing his wife jump out the window to her death. 27 In
the last period of his life the name of a female servant, Sophie, appears in

19
Falk's diary, p.28a.
20
Adler, "The Baal Shem ofLondon", pp.170-172.
lì
Emdoi, Hitabbequt, Lemberg, 71a.
22
Hirsdi's diary, pp.7b, 12b-21b.
23
Hirsch's diary, pp. lb, 4b, 8b, 24b, 31b.
24
Hirsch's diary, p.2b.
I found this evidence in Roth's paper: "The King and the CabbaJist", p. 146. I did not find any
evidence for it in the diary itself. Periiaps Roth read it on a page that can not now be found in the
diary.
26
Hirscfa
s diary, p.8a.
27
Falk's diary, p.28a: "I dreamt that I had been standing with my late wife near the window. Ifehbad
and I was confused. In the meantime I heard voices of panic from my family, and during that moment
my wife had jumped out of the window and broken her skull. I looked through the window and I saw
that her head was under her body... "
Brought to you by | New York University Bobst Library Technical Services
Authenticated
Download Date | 2/19/15 5:08 PM
 Dr. Samuel Falk 247

Falk's diary, and he mentions large sums of money and gifts which he has
given her. 28 It can be assumed that the parsimonious Falk, who also
maintained his own personal servant at the same time, made use of the
services of Madame Sophie, not necessarily for cooking and baking, but
rather for his own personal needs after the death of his wife. As becomes clear
from the diaries, Dr. Falk kept another home beside the bridge in addition to
his house in Pasquith Street. This building met the needs of his alchemic
experiments and mystical ceremonies.29
In January 1749 a change occurred in Falk's life. In his diary, Hirsch
describes how at midnight one night, a great Lord arrived at Falk's house.
His Lordship' sat with the Sage' (as Hirsch refers to Falk) in the letter's
room for two hours, and when he left, he put two guineas on the table.30 The
great Lord has been identified by David Cahana as the German, Theodore
Stephen de Stein Baron von Neuhoff, King of Corsica.31 This nobleman,
known as an international adventurer and scoundrel, managed to convince the
Corsicans to revolt against the existing regime and choose him as their king.
He came to power in 1736, but shortly afterwards, he was usurped by the
Genoese, who, with the help of the French, regained control of the island.
Baron Theodore wandered from country to country in the hope of enlisting
help in regaining the throne in Corsica. He reached England and approached
various members of the English aristocracy.32 In his attempts to raise money,

^ F a l k ' s diary, p. 18b.

In his first years in Landen he lived at 35 Prescott Street in the East End of London. He also had a
business address on London Bridge. After several years he moved to Wellclose Square, and he had
another house (Tabanacle) in the public garden of the square (see Roth, "The King and the
Cabbalist," pp.145, 146).
30
See Hirsch s diary, p.20b.
31
David Kahana. "Toim UMat im" Ha-Shiloach, vol.5, p.54; Adler, "The Baal Shan of London",
pp. 154,155; C. Roth, "The King and the Cabbalist," pp. 149-164 (and see also note 10).
-"In his paper, Roth tells of him: "Theodore Stephm de Stein, Baron von Neuhofif, was bom in 1690,
probably in Cologne. He was educated at the French Court, as Page to the Duchess of Orleans at
Versailles and thai served in the French army. He later became a colonel in the Spanidi forces and
married one of the queen's ladies-in-waiting He wandered about Europe, visiting England, Portugal,
Holland, and Italy.Here [in Italy] he made the acquaintance of some political exiles from Corsica,
then under the oppressive Genoese rule and peqietually attempting to Aake it off. He persuaded them
that if they made him king of the island, he would be able to free it and establish its independence. He
landed on the island on March 12, 1736, bringing with him a shipload of muskets and other stores and
an assurance of further assistance if his authority were recognized. He was dressed strikingly, though
not in the accepted regal faduon, with scarlet caftan, T u r k i c trousers, a Spanish hat and feather on
248 M. Orón

he also turned to Dr. Falk, the Ba al-Shem of London. With the latter's help
he hoped to acquire gold treasures which would help him achieve his plans.
Hirsch tells of the Baron's many visits to Falk s home and the large sums of
money he left behind after each visit. 33 Indeed, during this period Dr.Falk
was busy with his chemical or alchemic experiments and with writing
charms. This is how Hirsch describes the situation:34
"At night when I went to sleep on the bridge, Collier, the landlord, told
me that there had been a big commotion inside the camp grounds at three
p.m. The Sage had fired a pistol in order to light a candle in the house, and
then he committed a folly with the loaded weapon: he put a little gunpowder
in the pistol and lit it. The powder container burst, and the Sage burnt his
face and hands and also the child's face and hands as well as doing a little
damage to the Rebbetzn's eyebrows, and the Sage was in such pain that he
did not know what to do with himself and sent for the doctor.35
On Monday of the next week I went with the Sage to the water, and there
he made a new drawing. When we reached home, we found that His Lordship
was there. The Sage then went into the parlour and worked further on the
diagram that he had made by the water. Then he called in His Lordship. I
believe verily that he showed him something utterly new, quite beyond nature.

his head, and a huge scimitar girt round his waist. The islanders, believing in his claims of foreign aid,
actually proclaimed him their monarch .[referring to him as] King Theodore. At the beginning, he
acquitted himself surprisingly well. He scored a few successes in the field, impressing his subjects,
who were connoisseurs in such matters, by his personal valor. He proclaimed religious liberty,
inviting Jews and Protestants to settle under his protection. He reorganized the government in a
somewhat gaudy fadiian , bestowing titles lavishly and making great capital out of the Knightly Order
Della Liberazione' which he set up in remote imitation of the Fleece or the Garter. The degree of
popularity and even affection that he succeeded in attracting from his subjects is testified to by the
extreme virulence of the Genoese propaganda against him and the price which they put on his head.
But notwithstanding his assurances, he received neither recognition nor help from the powers. He was
defeated in the field, and the help and supplies on which he had counted failed to arrive. He left
Corsica in November 1736. King Theodore transferred to London where he intrigued industriously
for military, political, and financial aid But he speedily fell on evil days, was arrested for debt, and
was confined in the King's Bendi Prison for most of the rest of his days" (Roth, "The King and the
Cabbalist", pp. 152,153).
33
Hirsch's diary, pp.20b, 21a, 21b, 22a, 22b, 23b, 24a.
34
Ibid,pp.21a, 21b, 25a, 29b.
35
A s Hirsdi wrote in his diary, the Baal Shem blamed himself for what had happened He believed
that it happened because of a mystic mistake. He had given his signature to the wrong man, and saved
himself from death only by taking it back from him (ibid, 25a).
 Dr. Samuel Falk 249

Indeed, the Sage himself told me that the place near the water was very
auspicious.
On Monday night 26th Sivan I went with the Sage to visit the great Lord
aforementioned. He stayed there about three hours and took away the
kabbalistical names he had given him three weeks before. He also took three
guineas, which the Lord forced him to take to pay for the coach."
From what we know of Baron Theodore, Falk did not help him. The
Baron was sent to prison because of an unpaid debt and sat in jail for six
years. Shortly after his release, he died in penury.36
From 1750 onwards, descriptions appear in Hirsch's diary of the cure of
patients suffering from epilepsy and insanity.37 Hirsch's diary ends in 1751. 38
For the period between 1751-1772 we have only scattered information. Dr.
Falk s name was well-known throughout the world, and people came from
various places in the hope of meeting him and receiving his help. John
Archenholz from Sweden tells of his meeting with Falk and describes him as
a man of about seventy with a white beard who gives the impression of being
wise and learned in chemistry.39
The French historian Drumont tells of a cameo ring with a lapis lazuli
stone which Falk gave to the Duke of Orleans, promising that the ring would

36
King Theodore died on December 11,1756. See Roth, "TheKingandtheCabbalist",p.l62.
37
Hirsch's diary, 27a, 27b, 30b.
-IO

At the end of Hirsch's diary I found a long list of medical prescriptions which he wrote after he had
learned them from Falk. For example:
1 ) For a woman who is barrea: give her milk from another woman, and she will give birth quickly.
2) For headache: take two or three radishes and crush them. Mix in vinegar, put it in a pot, and wait
until only half is left. Then, give it to him to drink. It definitely works.
3) For one who cannot pass water: take a salt herring and bum it. Then, take butter and boil all with
water, and give him to drink. It is tested.
4) To encourage sleep: take rabbit's bile and put a little into the sleeper's mouth. He will sleep and
will not awaken. While sleeping, he will pass water into his own mouth.
39
MD'Archenholz (formerly a captain in the service of the King of Prussia), A Picture of England
(translated from the French), London (1789), vol.1, pp.181, 182. Archenholz writes: "There is a
person of this nation called Cairn Chemul Falk, but better known by the name of Doctor Falken, who
for thirty years has been famous for his Cabbalical discoveries. He lives in a large house, is attended
by a anali number of domestics, is engaged in no manna' of business, and gives away a great deal erf'
money to the poorWhen he goes out, which is, indeed, but seldom, he is always clothed in a long
robe, which agrees very well with his flowing beard and noble figure. He is now in the seventieth year
of his life. I diali not here recount the wonderful and incredible stories told of this old man. It is most
probable that he is a very great chemist and that he has in that occult science made some extraordinary
discoveries which he does not choose to communicate...'' See also H. Adler, "The Baal Shem of
London", pp. 152, 162.
250 M. Orón

bring kingship to its wearer. The duke gave the ring to his son who indeed
was crowned king in 1774 and became the King of France, Louis Philippe,
Louis XVI. 40 This evidence of the doings of Falk strengthens the impression
that his name was famous far and wide as a performer of wonders.
During the 1760 s, word about Falk reached Rabbi Jacob Emden. As we
know, at that time Rabbi Jacob Emden was preoccupied with his battle
against Rabbi Jonathan Eibeschuetz, his son Wolf, and the members of his
sect. A letter came into Emden's possession, written by a Polish Jew to his
son while the former was visiting London. 41 This Jew, Eliezer Susman
Sheswonzi, had joined Falk's entourage and participated in the mystical
ceremonies which took place in his house. In his letter, Susman describes to
his son his splendid appearance, his workroom, and the miracles he
performed, writing thus: 42
Hear my beloved son, of the marvellous gifts entrusted to a son of
man, who verily is not a man, a light of the Captivity, who hath set
his heart to gather the dispersed of Ariel. He is a holy light, a saintly
man. His name is Samuel Falk, Samuel Jacob Hayim, the son of
Rafael the Sefaradi, who dwells at present in the great city of
London... He wrote an explanation of his words to the worthy Moses
David, the aged and renowned Cabbalist who formerly dwelt in
Podhayce and was then famed as a Ba ai-Shem. He was certainly
well-known to the rabbi of our community. He now dwells in the
shadow of the afore-mentioned saintly man... Know thou, that all the
candelabra on the walls, of which there are many pairs in each
chamber, are of fine silver, in the form of the heavenly luminaries.
There is a big candelabrum of pure silver, with double and triple
lights, one above the other, with eight branches and flowers coming
out of the sides... And with this candelabrum, he wrought a great
miracle.
On the eve of a certain Sabbath he put therein oil of the same
measure as he did each week. But the oil continued burning for three
weeks, until he annulled the holiness of the light; then the lights
were suddenly quenched as though they had never burnt. This was a
wondrous feat, more wondrous than the miracle of Hanukkah. On
the night of Tuesday the 8th of Kislev we beheld this marvel with
our own eyes.
In Heshvan he withdrew into his house near the bridge. His house

40
Drumont, E., La France Juive, pp. 275, 276, quoting from von Gleichen's Denkwürdigkeiten. See
also Adler, "The Baal Shem of London", pp. 155,156.
41
This letter is quoted in Emden's book Hitabbequt, Gat-Derukha, AKona,(1762), pp.126-129;
Lemberg (1877), pp.69b- 71a.
42
Ibid
 Dr. Samuel Falk 251

was walled in, so that no one could go out, and there he abode about
six weeks without food, drink, or sleep, or kindling any fire. In the
sixth week from the commencement of his retreat he directed that
ten learned men should assemble, who had purified themselves by
immersion in the Ritual Bath. At midnight we came to his house and
then donned white surplices... On Wednesday he bade the Kabbalist
Moses David write in his notebook. Then he directed Moses and
another member of the Brotherhood, Jacob, grandson of Me'ir
Eisenstadt, to kindle the light of two candlesticks. When Moses had
completed the writing, he asked the company to enter his chamber
barefooted. Lo and behold, the saintly man was seated on his throne
arrayed like an angel of heaven, diademed with a golden mitre, a
golden chain round his neck reaching down to his waist, from which
a great silver star was pendent and on the star holy names were
engraved. ... His headgear was marvelously fashioned of parchment
whereon holy names were written and to each corner of the turban a
star of pure gold was fastened, and names were engraven thereon as
on the tablets. And who can describe the beauty of the painting on
the tapestries that were hung on the walls with sacred figures, as on
the heavenly throne in Ezekiel's vision. And on these figures holy
names were inscribed. In that chamber there were silver chains. Five
men sat within, and five outside the chains. And before him a shofar
was placed on the table which the saintly man had made, and also a
trumpet on which holy names were inscribed...
This is the saintly man who, according to my poor understanding
stands alone in our generation. For he knows the mystery of our Law
and does wondrous things. He is the friend of that great Kabbalist
famed throughout the province of Volhynia, Moses David, known as
the Ba al-Shem of Podhayce, who is well-known to Rabbi Jonathan,
Chief Rabbi of Hamburg, who related to him the wondrous deeds and
greatness of that man, so that the rabbi applied to him the words of
the Tikkunim·. Happy is the generation to which such mysteries have
been disclosed... I am grateful that I have been received into this
Brotherhood, who by their piety can hasten the advent of the
Messiah...43

his description, and from the description of ceremonies in Hirsch 's diary, we have an idea of the
typical mystic ceremony. As we know from the research of Prof. M. Idei about A. Abulafia and other
Kabbalists who used the same methods (see Idei, Studies In Ecstatic Kabbalah, New York ( 1988),
1 ) The ceremony takes place at night.
2) The lighting of candles is the main 'magical' means employed in the ceremony.
3) The ceremony consists mainly of the pronunciation of holy names taken from the Bible.
4) Great importance is attached to the music' of the names which are spoken with many different
252 M. Orón

In this letter, as we have seen, he mentions Moses David of Podhayce, the

same Sabbatian Ba al-Shem who was being pursued by Emden. Moses David
of Podhayce came to London (apparently in 1759) and visited the home of
Falk. 44 Since the name of Rabbi Moses David of Podhayce is mentioned in
this letter, one of Emden's friends took the trouble to send him a copy. It is
easy to imagine how Emden reacted to the letter. Emden's response appears
both in the letter itself, which he reproduced in his book, changing the
language, distorting the expressions of praise for Falk and tranforming them
into derogatory appellations, replacing "Ba'al-Shem" with "Ba al-Shed"
(possessing a demon). He adds his own biographical comments, drawn from
what he knew about Falk, mostly defamatory remarks (he refers to Falk's wife
as the infamous whore), and of course he associateshim with members of the
sect of Jonathan Eibeschuetz - that is, he regards Falk as a secret Sabbatian.
What caused Emden to classify Falk with members of the sect? Was Falk
really a secret Sabbatian? From the authentic material at our disposal, it is
clear that Samuel Falk was a mystic and miracle worker who dealt in magic
and made use of his knowledge of folk medicine and chemistry - which he
had acquired in Germany - for his activities. During his first years in London
Falk was accused of belonging to a sect, and he was excommunicated and
ostracized by members of the London community. 45 There is testimony to this
in the diary of Hirsch Kalisch who relates:46
The month of Iyar, memorandum - that on the Sabbath preceding
the new month of Iyar in the synagogue in Breslau they proclaimed
that no one should go to the Minyan in the home of the Ba al-Zafon
(the North Master), and whoever does go there will be punished. On
the holiday of Shavuot, Eli Levy of Spanhude sent a messenger to see
who had gone to the synagogue of the Sage and on Thursday he was
cursed in public and the people were gathered and told: no one
should dare to go there (to the synagogue of the Sage), and on the
Sabbath, 14 Sivan, a man called Moshe Fishman was obliged to
stand when the Torah was taken out for the Minha prayer, and the

pronunciations.
5) In the ceremony the Kabbalists must recline and write the holy names.
6) All participants in the ceremony would whisper the holy names after which they experience ecstasy.
7) All the ceremonies must take place either in a forest or somewhere near the water (usually a river).
44
About Moses David of Podhayce see Ch. Wirszubski "The Sabbatian Kabbalist R. Moshe David of
Podhajce," Zion 7, Jerusalem (1942),pp.73-93.
45
I do not agree with C. Roth who thought that the community was angry with Falk because he had a
private synagogue whidi was contrary to the decision of the community not to allow any such
synagogues. See C. Roth, History of the Great Synagogue London 1690-1940, London (1951),
pp.149, 150, 164,165.
46
See Hirsch s diary, p.24b.
 Dr. Samuel Falk 253

Shamash read to him, and he was obliged to respond and said: I have
sinned and transgressed by going to pray in the synagogue of the
North Master' and I ask the congregation's forgiveness".
The name "Baal-Zafon" appears as a deprecatory appellation for
Sabbatians in Emden s book Zizim Ufrahim. According to Professor Liebes 47
(who cites Rabbi Shimshon of Ostropol), "Kelev Ra" (bad dog) is used as the
Gematrian equivalent of "Ba al-Zafon",48 and this appellation was assigned
to Falk by members of the community and of course is indicative of their
attitude towards him.
Hirsch's diary gives us no clue as to whether or not Falk was a secret
Sabbatian. The diary does describe at length the mystical ceremonies in
Falk s home, but these descriptions do not contain any Sabbatian hints. The
friendly relations which existed between Falk and Moses David of Podhayce
(of which we have read in Susman's letter) indicate the kind of ties there were
between the two, and indeed they were both known as Ba Saley-Shem ' (it is
certain that they had a professional relationship - in his letter Susman
describes Rabbi Moses David as being present at a ceremony and recording
Falk's words). According to Emden, Rabbi Moses David recommended Falk
in a letter he wrote to Jonathan Eibeschuetz, and Eibeschuetz responded by
giving Dr. Falk his blessing. I cannot say whether or not Falk was a
Sabbatian. I did not find any evidence for it either in Hirsch's diary or in his
own diary or his manuscript Book of Fortunes (Neubauer Catalogue 128).
After extensive research, I can say that there are some hints to support
Emden's accusations, but more proof is needed. 49
In Adlers paper The Baal Shem of London, p. 162, I found this note: "In
the Gentleman's Magazine for 1762, Vol.32, p.418 there is an account of a
Cabbalist and his connection with magic and mystery. The article obviously
refers to Dr. Falk, though his name is not mentioned." In his book The
History of the Great Synagogue In London C. Roth observes (p. 15 In): "Falk
was possibly the model for the sketch of a Cabbalist which appeared in the

47
Y. Liebes, "New Writing in Sabbatian Kabbalah From the Circle of Rabbi Jonathan Eybeschuetz,"
Jerusalem Studies in Jewish Thought, Jerusalem (1986), vol.5, pp. 130, 131, and see there also note
52.
meaning of Zafone is north' and not liidden' as Roth wrote. North in the Kabbala is a symbol
of the bad or the evil.
49
I looked for evidence of Falk's Sabbatianism in his diary but did not find any. I could only use
Gematria for the words "Shabtai Zvi The Messiah King", but, as we know, we can do whatever we
wiái with Gematria. (I found two polemical letters directed to the Sa chai Mibeka [the fool from
Beka], The reference may have been to Jacob Emden, because in Gematria Emdaa equals Sa chat
which equals 115 and Jacob equals Mibeka which equals 182.) Although I looked for clues in Falk s
list of the books in his library or in the dates of Sabbatian feasts, I found no evidence that he was
Sabbatian in either Falk s or Hirsch's diary.
254 M. Orón

Gentleman s Magazine not long after his arrival in England." I found the
Gentleman s Magazine in the Bodlian Library (let me take this opportunity to
thank Ms. Doris Nicholson from the Eastern Library who helped me find it
and copied it for me). This is a strange letter about a strange person, viz., a
Kabbalist. Although the description of this man indeed fits Dr. Falk, he was
described and referred to as a "Christ Jew" (the magazine's table of contents
subtitles the article: "Very Extraordinary Account of a Christened Jew"). As
we now know from letters and documents discussed in Liebes' new study "A
Crypto-Judaeo-Christian of Sabbatean Origin", there was a Jewish-Christian
sect whose members were secret Sabbatians and who believed in Jonathan
Eibeshuetz and his son Wolf. All these people had concealed their new beliefs
and seem to have been Jewish, but they believed in Jesus.
One of the members of this sect was Moses David of Podhayce.
Ch.Wirszubsky in his paper about Moses David of Podhayce, (see note 16),
and Y. Liebes in his paper, "A Crypto-Judaeo-Christian of Sabbatean
Origin", both point to the fact that R. Moses David wanted to combine the
Sabbatian s belief with Christianity. As we know from Liebes, the members of
this sect eventually left Christianity and returned to Judaism. Whether or not
Falk was a member of this sect, at the end of his life he became a participant
in Jewish society in London.
Falk's diary contains 59 pages written in rabbinical Sefaradi Hebrew. It
begins in 1772 but contains references to events which occurred previously. It
is not a diary in the usual sense. Except for a few memoirs and a description
of strange dreams which the writer has dreamed,50 the diary contains
inventory lists of various items which are found in Falk's house: household
utensils and jewelry. It includes a list of bills, pawnslips, loans, and
promissory notes. There is a list of the books to be found in his library with
special note of those books he always carries with him. There are recipes for
cakes and liquors, undecipherable magic formulas based on verses from the
Bible which become transformed into meaningless words via Gematria and
the reversal of letters. Also mentioned in the diary are the names of various
people with whom Falk had some social connection. Among them appears the

50
For example: "A dream, the nig)it of Monday 25 of Adar, 1768. After I had come from the bridge, I
went to bed. I dreamt that Kushman was standing before me and looking at me, and I was sitting on a
chair. I saw his penis which was so hard that it stood by itself, and he was using his body and his
mouth to make it erect. When he needed to hold his polis in his hand, he did it v o y quickly. He drew
on his penis and then cast his sperm (his dirt) to the south and to the north four times without stopping,
and then the penis lost its erection." See also note 28.
 Dr. Samuel Falk 255

name of the Polish prince, Adam Czartoryski, who was one of the leaders of
the Polish revolt during the 70 s and who asked for Falk s help. 51 From his
diary we do not learn of Falk s character as an educated man or as a
prominent Torah or Kabbalah scholar. His notes are written in poor and
halting Hebrew. On this point Emden was right to speak of Falk s ignorance.
In his book Emden also noted that Falk s name, Samuel, appears on an
amulet written by Jonathan Eibeschuetz alongside the name of Shabtai Zevi.
Can it be that Falk harbored messianic pretensions?
Along with the lists in the diary concerning contributions which he gave
to various persons, Falk relates how Rabbi Yizhak Hazan suggested to him in
the name of Rabbi Me'ir Ha-parnas that he agree to be a "Ba al-Bayit" of the
community, that is, to serve in a public office. The reason for this offer was
the great wealth he had apparently accumulated from gambling (there is
evidence in the diary that he participated in games of fortune). Falk relates
that he responded to the offer saying: "Don't even mention my name in this
connection, because I am Ba al-Bayit of the entire world." 52
Emden did not have the two diaries at his disposal when he accused Falk
of Sabbatianism. It seems to me that what caused Emden to make the
accusation is the lifestyle of the man, the mystical ceremonies which he held
in his home, and his reputation as a ' Ba'al-Shem' who performs miracles.
Emden learned of all this from Susman's letter and perhaps also from various
rumors which reached him. It was enough for him that Falk was on friendly
terms with Rabbi Moses David of Podhayce, one of the entourage of Jonathan
Eibeschuetz, for him to accuse Falk and point to him as a Sabbatian.
These accusations which were published during the 1760 s were not
apparently taken very seriously. Despite them, Falk succeeded in becoming a
part of the Jewish community and gaining a respectable position within it. He
wisely assured his place by making contributions to various public institu-
tions, Ashkenazi as well as Spanish and Portuguese. His friends were
respectable people, mostly bankers. They included members of the Goldsmid
family who were appointed by him as the executors of his will. 53 With his
death, the figure of Falk was forgotten, and what remained was only a portrait
painted by the famous painter Copley, and because of the name given to it -

51
Adam Czartoryskj (1734-1823), father of Adam Jerzy, was offered the Polidi crown in 1763 but
refused it. Thereafter, he devoted himself to cultural affairs, becoming publisher of the periodical
Monitor (1763), Commander of the Polidi Cadet Corps (1768) whidi constituted the first Polidi lay
school, and the first Minister of Education in the world.
SI
Falk's diary, p.28a (in the diary it is marked [erroneously?] p.32a).
About the Goldsmid family and their relationships with Dr. Falk see L. Alexander, Memoirs of the
Life of Benjamin Goldsmid, London 1808, pp.46-50; Falk's diary, p.37a (mark ed p. 46).
256 M. Orón

"The Baal-Shem", it was mistakenly attributed to another personality, to the

Baal Shem Τον, Rabbi Israel ben Eliezer, (the Besht), the founder of
Hasidism.54
The biography of Samuel Falk is evidence of the unique mystic and
magical activity in Jewish society during the eighteenth century. This
phenomenon, even if we regard it as negative and insignificant, existed in
Judaism and cannot be ignored when we study the various phenomena at the
center and periphery of Jewish mysticism.
Samuel Falk, the Ba al-Shem of London, died at a ripe old age on April
17, three days after he wrote his will in which he left his extensive fortune to
the public. On his tombstone is inscribed:55
An aged and honourable man, a great personage who came from the East,
an accomplished sage, an adept in Cabbalah, the learned Rabbi Samuel, son
of the learned Rabbi Rafael of blessed memory. His name was known to the
ends of the earth and distant isles.
During the forty years that he resided here he uplifted the banner of the
law and of Divine Worship.
He studied and kept the law, the commandments and statutes. At the time
of his decease he devoted all his possessions - a great substance - among
many different charities. For the merit hereof may the Creator of the heaven
and the Founder of the globe bind up his soul in the garden of His Eden with
the other righteous men and may He grant him the privilege of arising at the
Resurrection with the other dead of Israel, whom He will hereafter raise up.
He departed with a good name on Thursday, April 17, and was buried
with honour and with mourning on the morrow, Friday, the twentieth day of
the Omer, 5542 A.M., April 18, 1782.
May his soul be bound up in the bond of life.

54
See H. Adler, "The Baal Shem of Landen", p.I57. Adler wrote there in note 2 that the credit for
having discovered this portrait belongs to Mr. Lucien Wolf. See also Roth, op.cit. pp.163,164.
55
Quoted from Adler, "The Baal Shem of London", p. 169.
 Rivka Horwitz
The Mystical Visions of Rabbi Hyle Wechsler in the 19th Century

The emergence of Rabbi Hyle Wechsler, a mystical messianic precursor of

Zionism, a godly inspired person (whose real name was Moshe, Pinchas,
Elchanan, Wechsler (1843-1894)1, in the enlightened Germany of the second
half of the 19th century, is in a complete contrast to what one generally knows
of German Jewry. Wechsler was not an East-European immigrant but a Jew
deeprooted in the Bavarian Jewish tradition.
It therefore helps us if we look at Wechsler in the light of several other
great men. Especially in the light of the charismatic mystic Rabbi Nathan
Adler from Frankfurt who died in 1800. Adler, who was a saintly figure, an
ascetic, a strong believer in prophetic dreams, had an exceptional pious way
of praying and viewed the slaughtering laws with extraordinary seriousness;
his way of life resembled that of Hasidic masters, living and caring for his
disciples and sharing his life with them. When a visitor from the Holy Land
stayed with him, Adler learned more of the theories of Ha-'Ari; he started to
pray in the Sefardic pronunciation and custom and he as himself was a priest,
he said the blessing of the priests every day, as is tradition in Eretz Israel,
which may express some Messianic interest. He was a mentor to the teachers
of Wechsler and was highly revered by them2.
Due to tensions in the Frankfurt community, Rabbi Nathan Adler s
disciples left Frankfurt, Rabbi Abraham Bing and Rabbi Mendel Kargau
came to Bavaria where Kabbalah was kept alive during parts of the 19th

1 Hyle Wechsler was named Elchanan and called Eli at biith, but he called himself Hyle so as not to
use the name erf' God; the other names were added when he was severely ill.
For more detailed information see: Rivka Horwitz, Devar Azhara Le-Yisrael an annotated Hebrew
translation with an Introduction, Notes and Appendices of Wechsler's German book "Ein Wort der
Mahnung an Israel um die Beherzigung der Judenhetze und merkwürdige darauf bezügliche
Träume" by "Jaschan milo Debor in Würzburg", Jerusalem, 1991. The Hebrew book also included
the German original; references following will refer to the text in that edition, in Hebrew and in
German.
2On Rabbi Nathan Adler see; M. Horovitz, Frankfurter Rabbinen vol. 4, 1889 p. 39; Rabbi Moses
Sofex (Hatam Sofer), Derashoth vol. Π,ρ. 371; G. Scholen, Encylopedia Judaica, vol. 10: 555, vol.
2: 269; Β. Auerbach, Mishnat Rabbi Natan, 1862; Lob Wetzlar, Ma'aseh Ta'tu'im-, Abaraham
Geiger in Hamzkir 1862, and Rahel Elior.in this volume. See also R. Eli or "Nathan Adler the pious
Community in Frankfurt", in: Zion vol. 59 (1994), pp. 31-64.
258 R. Horwitz

centuty, as Scholem has also observed3. Abraham Bing4 was Rabbi of

Würzburg and the many villages around, he founded a Yeshivah of fame in
which Wechsler s grandfather Rabbi Mendel Rosenbaum also studied. Rabbi
Mendel Kargau went to Fürth. He wrote Gidule Tahara, on the ritual baths
which was published with the aid of two uncles of Hyle Wechsler (Rabbi Jona
Rosenbaum and Rabbi Abraham Wechsler)5.
The most famous among Adler s disciples, Rabbi Moshe Sofer (or Hatam
Sofer), went to Hungary. As a youth, he accompanied Adler to his position in
Bohemia where he lived in exile for several years. His son Rabbi Shmuel
Sofer6 the Ketav Sofer, was one of Wechsler s teachers in Pressburg. These
circles kept alive a type of Judaism which had a critical approach to the
Enlightenment. Hatam Sofer, the great leader of Hungarian Jewry, was
acquainted with Kabbalah and on occasion expressed his positive belief in
nightly dreams in his sermons. Sometimes, their influence even led him to
action7.
This gives us an inkling of the extraordinary spirit that hovered in those
circles, which came from Frankfurt to Würzburg and Pressburg and received
renewed strength when, in a small town in Southern Germany, in Schwabach,
Wechsler developed a pattern of life which can be likened to that of the first
pious master of Frankfurt.
One possible way of approaching this unique person and his German
pamphlet Λ Word of Warning to Israel that they should take to their heart the
Persecutions and wonderful Dreams related to it, signed by the pseudonym

3g. Scholem, Die letzten Kabbalisten in Deutschland, Judaica ΙΠ, Studien zur jüdischen Mystik,
Frankfurt, 1973, p. 227. Another important disciple of Adler, Rabbi Zekel Wormser, became the
Ba'al Shem of Midielstadt.
4 Abraham Bing 1796-1838; see B.S. Hamburger, Ha-gaon Rabbi Abraham Bing, 28-33 (Hebr.).
Bing had a Yeíüva were many great sdiolars studied: Rabbi Jacob Etlinger author of Arukh la-Ner,
Rabbi Nathan Adler who became the chief Rabbi of Great Britain author of Netina la-Ger, Rabbi
Eliezer Bergman, an uncle of Hyle Wechsler author of Be-har Yeraeh, he 1835 emigrated to Eretz
Israel and Chacham Isaac Bcrnays author of Der Biblische Orient.
5 Rabbi Jona Roseibaum son of Rabbi Mendel, assisted his teacher Rabbi Kargau in bringing Gidule
Taharah to publication, (Fürth 1845) and Abraham Wechsler the Rabbi of Schwabach, a brother cf
Hyle s father wrote a recommendation for it. The book is an important contribution to the laws of the
ritual bath, a theme not irrelevant to asceticism See B. Strauss, The Rosenbaum of Zell, London,
1962 pp. 33ff. and 55.
6 Shmuel Sofer reports that on his visit to Frankfurt he discovered a Midma annotated by Rabbi
Adler; unfortunately the text is lost. See Ketav Sofer on Orah hayim nr.48.
7 Sofer relates that his third marriage was influenced by a dream he had had, ρ. 135. See Jacob Katz,
"Contributions towards a Biography of R. Moses Sofer" in Studies in Mysticism and Religion
presented to Gershom Scholem on his seventieth Birthday, Jerusalem 1967, (Hebrew section); see
also Sofer's eulogy on Adler, above note 2.
 The Mystical Visions 259

J äschern milo Debor in Würzburg,8 is a historical approach. Namely, to show

the fact that Wechsler came in a unique way to several important conclusions
in which he preceded all historians of Zionism, when, around 1879, because
of the racial antisemetic persecutions he noted: that a new era had started.9
In the antisemitic literature and journals of that time, both Jewish and
general, Wechsler saw that a destruction was being planned, a point
historians today accept; but no other Jew at that time was ready to consider it.
The only way to rescue the Jews, he argued, was to repent, leave Europe and
go to Eretz Israel. There, they should acquire land, build colonies and work in
agriculture. The beginnings of the new national movements in Greece and
Italy were, according to him, also divine signs of the beginning of this
historic time. The return to Zion, he believed, would bring to the redemption
of Israel and that of the whole world10.
In my Introduction11 to the Hebrew edition of Wechsler's brochure I dealt
primarily with the historical aspect and today I would like to focus more on
this extraordinary personality which had such unique powers, and the visions
which he himself wrote down and made public.
His political ideas were rooted in his mystical religious beliefs and
strengthened by nightly visions which he had experienced and by which he
was emotionally elated, and which cannot be explained away as being merely
a literary device. As a Kabbalist, his interest in dreams could have found
support in Sefer Hasidim, Sefer ha-Qana, the Zohar, the works of Moses
Hayim Luzzatto, the Maggid Mesharim of Rabbi Josef Karo, Shivhey ha-
Besht, the writings of Rabbi Nahman of Bratslav and many others, but in
reality they were related to Biblical stories. "The dream, when it has a
revelation character", he wrote12, "resembles a picture puzzle whose key is
primarily and in the easiest way found through the use of Biblical similes".
Wechsler lived in spiritual visions and apocalyptic enthusiasm, which were
roused in him through those nightly dreams. They gave him hope that the
pamphlet, which expresses words from his heart, will enter into the hearts of
his readers and relying on the prophecy of Isaiah (2,5), he believed that the
house of Jacob would soon go in the light of God.

S The pseudonym is explained by Wechsler in the last page of the manuscript of "Was ist nun zu tun
in dan Hirsch-Bamberger Streit?" 1878 (in Possession of the L.B.I in NY) where he signs
Miphiboshet of milo Debor. Lo Debor (Lo Davaf) is, according to the book of Samuel Π 9, 4-5, the
town of Mephiboshet with whom Wechsler identifies. Mephiboshet is an acrostic of M=Moses,
P=Pinchas, E=Eldianan, B=Ben, S=SbJomoh, T=TNZBH. See Devar Azhara, p.46.
9 Jacob Katz, From Prejudice to Destruction, Anti-Semitism 1700-1933, Cambridge Ma, 1982
p.245; Devar Azharda. Heb. p.2, Ger. p. 125.
10 Devar Azharah, Heb. p. 25-26, Ger. p.91.
11 Seenote 1.
12 Devar Azhara, Heb. p. 16,Ger.p 104. Talmud Bavli Berakhot 55a.
260 R. Horwitz

The Biblical stories of Jacob and Josef played a particularly important role
and helped him to find his place in the world. Jacob believed in the dreams of
Josef and that his son was made for greatness. 13 Wechsler, like Josef,
dreamed dreams of greatness and his "brothers" envying him. He, like Jacob,
"kept the saying in mind"(Gen. 37,11) to see what would happen. The
keeping of the dream in one's mind was essential because he dreamed of an
outbreak of antisemitism and he had to wait and see whether the dream would
come true. Years later, a partial realization of his dreams occured when a
wave of antisemitism started. He identified himself with the true prophet
(Deut. 13,2-6) a prophet who brings a sign which actually later happens. He
favored the Talmudic saying that a dream is "one sixtieth of a prophecy", as
well as that "there is no dream without irrelevant matters" 14 . Josef s dreams
were also only partially realized and then only twenty-two years later. The
true dream contains untrue elements, it is like wheat sheathed in chaff, the
wheat is the grain of truth and the straw is the garment that is external; it is
impossible for a dream to be more than partially fulfilled .
In the short autobiographical description in the pamphlet, Wechsler does
not pride himself upon his family background, that he was a grandson of the
prominent rabbi Mendel Rosenbaum of Zell, the important spokesman of the
Bavarian Jews, who opened a Yeshiva for boys in his home in Zell near
Würzburg 15 and his being a nephew of Rabbi Abraham Wechsler the Rabbi of
Schwabach 16 . Neither does one find in his autobiographical fragments
descriptions of the learning he acquired in the different yeshivoth. Instead,
Hyle deals with his personal problems and his inner conflicts.
From birth, he was stricken with life-threatening diseases which isolated
him and changed his normal development. He was raised in a poor pious
home which stressed the learning of the Torah and Talmud. But he himself
tended to asceticism, and lived in the fear of guilt of not fulfilling the purity
laws which he demanded from himself and which were in accordance with
the very high standard of 18th century ethical- Kabbalistic writings. Qualms
over transgressions are mentioned by him throughout his life. Once, at the
age of 19, when he was severely sick and approaching death, he believed he
was soon to be judged in the heavenly court. He then recorded the following
dream 17 : "I dreamt that I was led before the heavenly Court where I had to
give an account of all my actions and my lack of actions. A particularly good
deed was found to belong to me, a deed that in spite of many doubters and

13 Ibid., Heb. p. 31, Ger. p.82.

14 Heb. p. 16, Ger. p. 105
15 He was his grandfather on his mother 's side, see B. Strauss, The Rosenbaum of Zell, p.13-28.
16 He was his father's brother; A. Wechsler is mentioned in Respcnsa literature of his time; see
especially Rabbi A. Hildesheimer who also brought an eulogy on Wechsler at the end of his R espansa.
17 DevarAzhara Heb.p. 12-13, Ger. p.110.
 The Mystical Visions 261

mockers I performed with decisiveness. Because of this my young life was

saved. And I believe the verse was read to me: ... 'you shall not die'. (Samuel
11,12,13)".
The receipt of a verse at the end of a dream has its source in the Talmud
and was typical of many of Wechsler s dreams18. Modern psychoanalysis puts
much weight on the comments of a dreamer after he has woken up; here, the
interpretation is given in the form of Biblical quotations which are the key to
the meaning of the dream. A decisive difference between Wechsler s dream
interpretation and psychoanalyses is that modern dream interpretation uses
the dream to understand the person's past and Wechsler continues the ancient
dream interpretation, which considers it to be as a forecast for the future.
What the particularly good deed was that saved his life, we do not know.
One can see that fear of the death penalty for transgressions, his feeling of
guilt and failings haunted him. Later, one also hears also of his loneliness and
his standing alone against the many Satans who doubt his mission and mock
him. That dream is a nightmare and no doubt has Kaflcaesque qualities and
can also be compared to a motif of Rabbi Nahman of Bratslav19. Recently,
Grözinger discovered more of this nightmare quality in Kafka's writing. He
considers that Kafka was influenced by the kabbalistic ethical work Reshith
Hokhma20. For Wechsler, the consolation is God who is his refuge and who
rescues him again and again from the hands of the persecutors. It is worth
noting that we do not find in Wechsler s writing an appeal to any mediators,
messengers or to Gabriel the angel of dreams.
Due to physical disability and lung disease, he was prevented from
speaking much and lived as an introvert; the Bible and the Talmud became
his companions and made a deep imprint on his heart. Both in his youth and
also in his adult life, he interpreted the events of his life in accordance with
Biblical verses, or stories which he felt as if directed at him.
Since he saw an intervention of God in all that occured to him, and he
lived an ascetic life, it is surprising to note that he records a skepticism. As he
wrote, in his youth, he tried to free himself from the burden of tradition, and
study philosophy. In one of Wechsler s manuscripts I found that he expressed
great admiration for Spinoza, as is typical for a romantic but certainly not for
a Yeshiva student21. He read Eduard Hartman and other secular writings with
interest. For a short while the Enlightenment caught his soul, he confesses22,

18 Wechsler does in fact think that waking up with a verse in his mouth is a sign of a prophetic
dream. Devar Azhara, Heb. p.33, Ger p. 78.
19 A. Greai, Tormented Master, A Life of Rabbi Nahman of Bratslav, Alabama, 1979, p. 169.
20 κ . E. Grözinger, Kafka und die Kabbala, Frankfurt a.M 1992; 1994. Idem, Κφα und das
Judentum, Frankfurt a.M. 1987.
21 Found in a manuscript in the Wechsler Archive that was put to my use by Amos Samuel.
22 Devar Azhara Heb. p. 13, Ger. p. 109.
262 R. Horwitz

"It was very hard for me to fulfil perfunctorily the daily commands and
customs, the reason for which appeared to me dubious and
incomprehensible." But then "suffering led me out of my doubts and purified
me!" And after much search and thought he found reasons not to deviate from
his old ways.
There was another important youthful dream in which his concern for the
Jewish people becomes apparent, when he considers himself ready to sacrifice
himself in martyrdom. He wrote23: "nineteen years ago I had a vision in a
dream that the heavens opened and that a radiance became visible like a big
square, in which a figure of light appeared, like the founder of the Christian
religion, poised as if for a flight to earth. All on earth prostrated themselves
before him. But I remained standing upright, still dreaming I meditated ...
that even if everybody else bows down before its power, I will stand upright
and defy it - and I woke with an exclamation of Sh'ma, "Hear O Israel, the
Lord our God is One eternal being".
In the dream he considered himself alone standing against the whole
world who wished to follow the founder of Christianity, but he rejected them.
This dream too has a Kierkegaardian quality of considering himself alone
with God and against the world. The fact that a pious Jew dreams about Jesus
is extraordinary24. Therefore he calls him cautiously "the founder of
Christianity" and envisions him not as a person but in geometrical forms of
light. Light and darkness play a very important role in his spiritual
experiences. We may find analogies of this in the writings of mystics such as
one finds exemplified in the works of William James or Rudolf Otto.
A typical problem which he also described in terms of the ascetical life he
had led is his struggle with sinful thoughts regarding sexual emotions which
naturally arose in him as a young teenager. In the yeshivoth where he studied,
on account of pious, Kabbalistic and Musar influences, great emphasis was
put on the suppression of the natural sexual emotions which develop in
puberty.
When sexual desires attacked him in a way that he could not master, he
felt debased. Therefore he was very strict in his attempt not to engage in
conversation with women or girls and not even to look at them; he
concentrated his feeling upon the "heavenly daughter" the Shekhina. "Upon

23 DevarAzhara Heb. p. 14,Ger.p. 121.

24 His brother, Bmjamin Wechsler in his Mizbah Benjamin Jerusalem, 1902 (Heb. publidied under
his Hebrew name, Bmjamin ben Shi omo) also records a strange Jesfauah Jesus dream, p. 14.
 The Mystical Visions 263

her bosom I warmed my heart, my fantasy was enthusiastically kindled for

her beauties...."25. Secretly and in sublimation of terrestrial beauty, he
worshipped the divine Shekhina as is found in the first chapter of Reshith
Hokhma26.
But, nevertheless, one woman broke through his barrier with her pious
behavior. She was his cousin Clara, daughter of Rabbi Elias Raphael
Rosenbaum of Zell whom, at the age of 23 after three years of studying in the
yeshivoth of Hungary and receiving of a rabbinical ordination there, he
married. He settled in his hometown Schwabach as a teacher in the Talmud
Torah whose principal was Rabbi Jehuda Leib Wissman.
Rabbi Hyle Wechsler developed into a scholar in Talmud, well versed in
the Responsa. Many of his halakhic writings are still in manuscript27. He
corresponded on halakhic matters with most prominent German Rabbis such
as Rabbi S.R. Hirsch who was in his youth his mentor and with whom he
consulted on halakhic and ideological matters.28 In the Responsa of Rabbi
David Hoöman 29 , Wechsler is mentioned severed times, as well as in those of
Rabbi Asriel Hildesheimer30. He corresponded with Rabbi Isaac Dov
Bamberger, the Rabbi of Würzburg (1839- 1878) after Bing, who was also his
teacher for a while31, as well as with rabbis from Hungary and other
countries32. In halakhic matters he appears to be more meticulous and pious
than his German contemporaries, which shows his rejection of the
compromises with modernity. In ideological matters he tended more towards
mysticism and differed vastly from his German contemporaries; Wechsler
also knew the Zohar, quoted, though rarely, some Kabbalistic writings,and

25 DevarAzhara Heb. 13 Ger. 109.

26 On the woráiip of the princess of infinite beauty, see Reshit Hokhma Part I, di. 4.
27 Amos Samuel possesses more unstudied halakhic and historic manuscripts.
28 On the relations between Wedisler and Rabbi Hirsch see Devar zlz/ioro jntioduction p.38-44.
29 David Hoffman, MelamedLe-ho'il Π, 72 and I, 78. Hoffman treats Wechsler with great honor.
Hoffmann later head of the orthodox Rabbinical Seminary in Berlin came from Hungary to teach at
Hödiberg married the daughter of Reb Jona Rosenbaum On the correspondence between Wechsler
and Hirsch in whidi they criticized Hoffman's historic approach in his dissertation Mar Samuel
(Leipzig,1873) see Devar Azhara, Introduction p. 38, also A. Marx, Essays in Jewish Biography,
Philadelphia 1947,204 -205.
30 See Responsa Nr. 10.
31 See Y ad Halevi I, 56. Wechsler considers Bamberger as the teacher of his teachers. About 10
halakhic epistles of Wedisler to Bamberger in manuscript are in the possession of Naftali Bar-Giora -
Bamberger. See also the responsa of Simcha Bamberger, Zeker Simha nr. 86.
32 Rabbi Abraham Shag, Head of the Hungarian Kolel in Jerusalem was Wechsler s teacher in
Hungary, he called him "my disciple". Rabbi Yosef Akiva Schlesinger from Jerusalem asked
Wechsler on the nature of Tekhelet, see his Sefer Berit Olam Aharon, Introduction.
264 R. Horwitz

believed in amulets. He corresponded with Rabbi Elijahu Gutmacher both on

halakhic matters and as a sick patient consults a master of amulets. Scholem
correctly thought that there was a spiritual proximity between these two
which can be today proven by historic evidence.33 Wechsler being a sickly
person most of his life, inquired also about the healing possibilities of the
legendary cave of the prophet Elijah on Mount Carmel to which healing
powers were ascribed34.
Since Rabbi Hyle's son Shlomo and his younger brother Benjamin, who
had messianic inclinations, both went to Jerusalem and both also joined the
Bratslaver Hasidim there, one may assume that this spiritual direction had
something to do with Rabbi Hyle's own religious understanding and his
influence on them.
Rabbi Hyle Wechsler was a charismatic teacher and was deeply
appreciated by his students. His house was considered by them to be a holy
place, a miqdash me at35. His readiness to teach his followers at all hours of
the day or night in the Talmud, Kabbalah and pious ways of life, was highly
appreciated by his disciples. He was followed by his students as Rabbi Nathan
Adler in Frankfurt a century before or like some Hasidic masters. At the end
of his life these characteristics became even more pronounced when he was,
during the last eight years of his life, Rabbi of the old Jewish community of
Höchberg. Rabbi Wechsler and his wife had many children, they lived in utter
poverty yet felt themselves blessed by God36. He remained a sickly person all
his life, suffered from tuberculosis and died at the age of 51.
At night, he had dreams. He must have had many dreams during his adult
life, of which only less than twenty were recorded37. He started, as he relates,
in his youth as a person of rational philosophic thought without any belief in
dreams but those extraordinary visions changed his attitude38. He developed a
theory by which he learned to distinguish between natural dreams which have
no consequence and dreams in which a higher power interferes39. The first

33see Scholem (note 3) "Die letzten Kabbalisten", p. 228 and also in Gutmacher's Responso letter to
Wechsicr Jerusalem 1984, p.224. On Gutmacher as a Ba al Shem and the use of practical Kabbalah
see his Zofhat Pa 'aneah, 1873, p. 27. Scholem cites Gutmadiers' Sukkat Shalom, Jerusalem 1883.
34 See the answer of Jehuda Bergman to Wedisler, Jerusalem, 1878, in A. Bar-Tura, be-Lev Qashuv,
Jerusalem 1983, p. 260-261.
35 From the beautiful eulogy of Josq)h Butt enwieser in: Der Israelii vol. 35, July 5th, 1894, pp.975-
976.
36 See The Rosenbaum of Zell, p. 141.
37 An Fnglidi translation of the dreams can be found in: James Kirsch, The Reluctant Prophet, Los
Angeles 1973, p. 53-56. Kirsdi explains Wechsler in Jungian terms.
38 DevarAzhara Heb. p.14, Ger. p.107.
39 DevarAzhara Heb. p. 15, Ger. p. 106. Compare for example with Rav Kook's theory of Dreams
in IggorotRe-Iyah vol. I, Jerusalem, 1968, letter79, pp. 84-86.
 The Mystical Visions 265

kind of dream merely contains daily thoughts and presents them without
reason or order; they are based on objective thinking; whereas the second type
of dream contains correct definitions, clear thought which uses the daily affair
for a higher purpose. In them, Wechsler discovered subjective thought.
One type of dream he experienced is what is called She'elat Shalom which
is found in Sefer Hasidim. When one is troubled by a problem, one asks in a
dream for an answer and receives it. An example of a She'elath Shalom was
the receipt of a notification of a name which he was supposed to give his baby
when it was born but he forgot the name. When the baby was born Hyle
prayed to God and then he awoke with a Biblical verse containing that name
in his mouth and thus he remembered the correct name40.
Another type of dreams is more reminiscent of the Maggid of Rabbi
Joseph Karo; they are related to halakhic transgressions which he had
committed and about which his conscience bothered him. Wechsler relates
that once he dreamed that he had "enjoyed meat with milk"41, then he
discovered that the maid had indeed made an error while cooking. Another
time he dreamed that a Mezuzah was missing on one of his doors, and the
following day he realized that the Mezuzah from the kitchen door had actually
been stolen.
For Wechsler, however, the dreams were messages from God. He
considered himself a person upon whom the holy spirit rested. The Talmudic
saying42 that prophecy is given only to the wise, strong, rich and humble was
not accepted by him because he considered himself to be an ordinary man of
no exceptional value. Though as a messenger he felt guilty when he was
negligent in the keeping of the commandments and was bitter about it43.
His dream theory was selected from the rabbinic traditions which fitted it
and is based on a theory that prophecy never stops. He of course considered
the later prophecies as being less significant. The claim of Hirsch who
followed the Gaonim, that only the oral and written Halakha is from Sinai,
and Aggada is not, appeared to him inacceptable and too narrow44 because
he, like Nahmanides and his followers or like Rav Kook widened "Sinai"
much further, and believed that Aggada was also from Sinai and had an
important place in Rabbinic tradition45. Wechsler also believed, as
Nahmanides,46 that the holy spirit may rest on chosen ones in later

40 DevarAzhara Heb. p. 28. Ger. 87 ff, the name was Yiáimael.

41 Ibid., Heb. p. 14, Ger.p. 107.
42 Bavli, Bava Batra.
43 DevarAzhara, Heb. p. 16, Ger, p. 105.
44 S. R. Hiiscb "Ma'amar Rabbi Shamshon Rafael Hirsch al Agadot Hazal'jn. Hammayan
16(1976) pp. 1-16.
45 See Appendix Β Oí DevarAzhara f . 56ff.
46 Nahmanides, Hidushe Ha-Ramban vol. , Bava Batra 5b. Nahmanides distinguidles between
266 R. Horwitz

generations. He wrote47, "one cannot make a distinction between our time

and an earlier one in regard to our qualification for having intercourse with
the Highest One and for revelations for the future." Wechsler used Aggada
and his belief in holy inspiration to be able to express his own views which
were in ways contradictory to the main stream of Judaism.
If we accept his autobiographical writings as reliable evidence, then the
year 1873, when he was 30 years old, was a very critical year in his life. It
was during that year that he dreamt four dreams which moulded his entire
life. In two dreams the future of the Jewish people was revealed to him and in
the other two, his very extraordinary role in those historic events was laid out.
The receipt of a call to become a divine messenger was given to him that
year in a nightly dream under the influence of Isaiah ch. 6. He described it in
the following way48: "Once I heard [in a dream] the question directed towards
me, which was the same as in Isaiah: »whom shall I send and who shall go
for us?« and I awoke with the final sentence of this verse: »I said, Here I am;
send me«- taking upon me this solemn vow. " And since he ascribed a special
meaning to his dreams, he assumed that he received a divine mission.
The severe persecution of the Jews in Rumania and the international
debates on how to solve their problems were a burning issue in 1873. He had
another dream in which he saw himself preaching to the Rumanian Jewry. He
wrote49, "I saw myself in a dream standing on a high mountain in Rumania,
persuading the Jews there, they should not nourish any false hopes, that by
the aid of Alliance Israelite, or by the help of big European powers, they
would achieve equality. They should rather go to Eretz Israel, settle there and
take up agriculture. A large number of my audience wanted to accept my
proposals." Wechsler, like the prophet Isaiah, stands in his dream on a lofty
mountain and proclaims the news of Zion. And like an ancient prophet he
demands that no one should rely on temporary alliances, but return to God
and to the Holy Land. It is worth of note that in his dream, he lives in
harmony with the East European Jews who follow his advice, while he was in
bitter strife with the German Jewry. The redemption he dreams about is not a
miraculous divine intervention but the building of colonies in the holy land.
This dream occured after Mikveh Israel had been established in 1870 by
Alliance Israelite Universelle and five years before the first colony, Petach
Tikva, was started, in which some hungarian Jews participated. Wechsler had
numerous connections with Jerusalem: several of the disciples of the Hatam
Sofer moved to Jerusalem, Rabbi Avraham Shag Zwebner who called

prophecy of prophets in antiquity and prophecy of wise men whidi still exists. They see the future
through the holy spirit which is in them, God also reveals himself to the pious who are wise.
47 DevarAzhara Heb. p.32, Ger.p.81.
48 DevarAzhara Heb. p. 15, Ger. p. 105; based on Isaiah 6,8.
49 Ibid, Heb. p. 15 Ger. p. 106.
 The Mystical Visions 267

Wechsler "my disciple" came to Palestine with Rabbi Hayim Sonnenfeld,

Bavarian Jews had a special interest in the Holy Land, his uncle Eliezer
Bergman and family moved to Jerusalem and they coresponded with their
family in Bavaria, his son Shlomoh married in Jerusalem and Wechsler
corresponded with his in-laws. He must have heard that Jews from the old
city were involved in the buying of land for the building colonies, matters
which for them also had a redemptive character 50 .
No less remarkable was his second dream about Rumania in which he
forecasted the destruction of European Jewry. He dreamed that the evil that
was starting in Rumania would then take root in Germany, before sweeping
across Europe. He wrote51: "I saw in the East - in the proximity of Rumania -
a terrible thunderstorm, and from there a mass of threatening dark clouds
move all around to most of the European states. But it came to Germany
earlier than to Austria-Hungary. I was very struck by this. Continuing
dreaming, I thought that this meant that the Rumanian spirit of hostility
would make its rounds in other states, but it would strike roots first in
Germany, gripping other countries."
The power of evil which threatened Europe is symbolized by a frightening
thunderstorm and dark clouds, a motif which can be taken as Biblical. In this
dream, his anti-German feelings also come through, when considering that
Germany was second to be struck after Rumania, whose serious antisemitism
was public knowledge.
In the fourth dream of that year, his historic role was conveyed to him. He
was to become the fore-runner of the prophet Elijah. Elijah in this pamphlet
is not the zealous man of the book of Kings, who fights the idol worshipper
for the sake of God as Hirsch had himself conceived52, but rather the Elijah of
the Talmudic legends and Rabbinic literature; the one for whose return Jews
pray at every Sabbath end and of whom one would then sing "blessed be he
who meets him in a dream" 53 . It is the Elijah of the Book of Mal'akhi the
herald of the Messiah, who will bring good tidings and consolations.
The role Wechsler assumed he had been given Aras that of the herald of
the herald. This was intensified in a dream seven years later, when he woke
up and the verse was given to him with an explanation which Wechsler had
made up from a Talmudic saying and from which he learned that sages had a
role to prepare the world for Elijah. Wechsler quotes the verse from Mal 'akhi
(3,23) "Behold I will send you Elijah the prophet" and by an exegetic rule
used " 'et le-rabbot" which means that wherever the word " 'et" appears in the

50 Devar Azhara, Introduction p. 28-30.

51 Devar Azhara Heb. p. 15, Ger. p. 106.
52 See R. Liberies, Religious Conflict in Social Context, Westport, Ccrm. 1985,p.l26-133.
53 Ben Sira 48,11 ; included in the famous poem "Etijahu Hannavi" recited Saturday nigfrt.
268 R. Horwitz

Bible an addition is alluded54; Wechsler deduced that God would send along
with Elijah also "God fearing sages" which he understood as alluding to
himself: The sages must improve the world and prepare for redemption. He
believed that the messianic end was near and that he was the herald of Elijah.
Elijah is also described by the prophet Mal'akhi as a symbol of
reconciliation and unity between the struggling camps. Unlike the strife
between the orthodox and the reform in Hungary and Germany, Wechsler
demands unity. Elijah "shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children and
the heart of the children to their fathers" (Mal'akhi 3,24) he will unify the
people, Elijah comes to make peace between the strifing camps55. It says, in
Exodus (19,2) "And Israel encamped before the mount" which is explained
"as one person with one heart."56 Rather than a bitter fight against the non-
observant, Jews Wechsler, like Rav Kook later and not like Abraham Sofer or
S.R. Hirsch, expresses love and unity to all Jews because in those historic
times unity was of primary importance.
What Wechsler did after he had received those messages in 1873 we do not
know. He may have waited for another divine sign to pursue his mission.
When, in 1878-1879, the sudden outbreak of antisemitism started in
Germany, Wechsler way the only Jew prepared for it. He then decided to
make his tidings public and wrote in enormous excitement his Word of
Warning. In it he tried to bring his message to the world. When starting his
enterprise he considered himself to be the only wise man of his generation
who saw at the very beginning the real cause of the calamity, whereas other
German Jews minimized its extent, joked about it, were unprepared, did not
perceive its magnitude and lived in self-delusion. In describing that
movement he wrote57: "Although there were enemies of the Jews at all times,
it is our time [1878] which has created an antisemitism of a thoroughness
which has never existed before. There is no protection against the hatred of
the Jews, not baptism nor intermarriage."
Wechsler was certainly the first Jew who realized the racial character of
antisemitism. He wrote58. "One wants to destroy the Semitic element lock,
stock and barrel; in that happy hour when ne hopes to make the Semites the
anvil for Amalek's hammer, one wants to rack and ruin the Jews so radically
that their atoms will never be connected and resynthesized." Relying on his
prophetic message he thought God's action in history would soon appear. The
German Jews, on the other hand, felt that such arrogant and pessimistic

54 Rabbi Akiva in the Talmudic ccntext of Bavli Pesahim 22b explains that "et" adds sages ("le-
rabboth Τ almi dey Hakhamim").
55 According to Mishna Eduyot 8,7; DevarAzhara Heb. p. 27, Ger. p. 87.
56 DevarAzhara, Heb.p. 27 Ger. p.87. Mekhilta, on that vase.
57 DevarAzhara Heb. p.4, Ger. p. 122.
58 Devar Azharatfeb. p. 4 Ger. p. 122.
 The Mystical Visions 269

assessment of an antisemitic upheaval was unbearable. After all, they believed

that the Emancipation was there to stay.
In order to overcome the gap between his thought and those of his
opponents, Wechsler decided to seek support for his brochure from two
leading persons of German Jewry whose identity is not known. He was
unaware of the political forces within German Jewry and must have been very
surprised at what he discovered. One of those leaders consulted Rabbi Samson
Raphael Hirsch, a famous authority of German orthodoxy who was also a
revered teacher of Wechsler, and with whom Wechsler corresponded on
numerous occasions. He had also supported, from a distance, the Talmud
Torah in Schwabach. Hirsch did not attack the messianic content of the
brochure nor the plan of colonisation in the holy land which he rejected as
one can see from his letter to Ζ. H. Kalischer, but the possibility of a person
having true dreams59. The revolutionary element related to mystical dreams
roused fears in him and he tried to suppress Wechsler; Hirsch claimed that
prophecy ceased thousands of years ago. In a fiery authoritative letter Hirsch
wrote60: "It would be of no use and even harmful to attempt to influence our
generation to repent by relying on dreams and visions." "A person who
nowadays prides himself with prophetic revelation could and must be
considered almost certainly either mentally sick, or simply a cheater or a
person who wishes for selfish reasons to take advantage of other people's
superstitions".
Hirsch, as a man of the Enlightenment and a leader of the German
community, attempts to disclaim the importance of dreams in Judaism and
their having any power of decision. Wechsler must have been extremely naive
if he thought that at that time and age he could convince the world of his
truth by relying on dreams. Dreams are, according to Hirsch, of no
consequence. It was the false Messiahs who relied on dreams to influence the
people to worship idols.
In his letter Hirsch speaks of "a recent affair" which brought much harm
to the Jews. He may have alluded to the Frankists who lived in Offenbach a
few generations before his time. They relied on dreams and developed a false
messianism. Hirsch may have seen Wechsler in that context and expressed

59 The letter of Hirsch 's attack on Wechsler as written to that leader was preserved in Devar Azhara.
See Devar Azhara, Heb. p.36ff and Ger. p.75ff. One áiould also note that the letter does not carry the
signature of Hirsch, but N.N.; both G. Scholem and M. Breuer assume by its style and content it to be
Hirsch's; I agree with them. See Scholem "Die letzten Kabbalistan" (note 5) p. 236. and M Breuer,
Jüdische Orthodoxie im Deutschen Reich 1871-1981, Frankfurt 1986, p. 362, 471.
On the corrspondence between Hirsch and Kalischer and his rejection of buying soil in the Land of
Israel, see: "Rabbi zvi Hirsdi Kalisdier ve-Rabbi Shamshoo Rafael Hirsdi", in: Sefer Aviad ed. by Y.
Refael, Jerusalem 1986, p. 195-215.
60 Devar Azhara Héb. p. 36-37 and Genn. p. 75-74.
270 R. Horwitz

fear at the publication of that pamphlet. He wrote61: "I believe that reliance
on dreams is a dangerous weapon which may shatter both Judaism and
common sense. "In his anger Hirsch wrote62: "Our matters did not deteriorate
to such an extent that we should rely on such a cheating which can be used by
any shrewd actor of humbug."
Hirsch's letter shows how much he sided with Germanism, rationalism
and emancipation. He could not attribute any value to the recent outbreak of
antisemitism, the belief that the emancipation was over and that a new era
had begun which demanded the return to Zion. He did not believe that
extraordinary vision was given to the teacher of Schwabach. The affair
appeared to him dangerous because those dreams aimed at changing the
German-Jewish political course of life. If Wechsler had had a dream
concerning his own private life, the whole affair would not have started. But
this brochure concerned all of them. And in Biblical-Rabbinic literature on
dreams, one trend suggested that dreams were totally meaningless. As Rabbi
Meir said, "Dreams are of no consequence (The words of dreams neither
benefit nor harm)" ((Jittin 52a) Hirsch relied on R. Meir's view. He reduced
the dreams to nonsense and the dreamer who claimed to have heard the voice
of God to a swindler, or an insane person.
Wechsler must have been shocked by the violent reaction against him and
his being asked not to publish his Word of Warning. He was by no means
convinced by their arguments, but honoring the advice of an elder, he was
persuaded to withhold his message63. His first thought was that one should
not fight back. He understood that they wanted him away from the front. At
one point Wechsler compared the tension between himself and the older
Rabbi Hirsch to that between David and his brother Eliab at the time of the
war with Goliath. God was with David, but Eliab wanted him away from the
front and accused him of false intentions64. And at another point Wechsler
says65 that only in the end shall we see who was right...
After Hirsch's outburst, Wechsler did not forget his mission, but delayed
it; then several matters occurred which he understood to be divine
punishments and which caused him to reconsider the matter. Suddenly he and
his wife were severely ill and his baby son Yishmael died. The sickness of the
baby and then his death caused a great excitement in Rabbi Hyle's life and
appeared to be a divine omen. Wechsler perceived that these punishments
came on him as result of his not having published his prophecy. He compared
his life to that of Jacob the Patriarch who, after his vision in Beth El, vowed

61 Ibid., Heb. p. 40, Ge·, p.68.

62 Ibid.
63 DevarAzhara Heb. p.28, Germ. p. 87.
64 DevarAzhara Heb. p. 12, Germ. p. 110.
65 Ibid., Heb.p.
 The Mystical Visions 271

before God that upon his returning safely from his journey to Haran, he would
set aside a tithe of his property to God. But then when he returned he delayed
the implementation of his vow time after time; divine signs in the form of
misfortunes started to hit Jacob's household66. The midrash recounts the
calamities of Jacob; then God told him: "If you wish that no further
misfortune should befall you go and fulfil your vow." 67
Wechsler realized that he had to choose between adhering to the advice of
the German Jewry as presented by its leading representative or to follow his
vow and his inner conviction as presented to him by numerous dreams and
visions. He realized that he had made a promise to be God's messenger and
had not kept his promise.
At that point Wechsler was also encouraged by a wonderful dream that
filled his heart with renewed strength and hope. He reported68: "In my dreams
I saw myself going home from the synagogue and the whole sky was hung
with gloomy clouds. But the place where I was walking became so bright and
I saw a light, the brightness of which I had never imagined. And such an
inexpressibly blissful feeling overcame me, the like of which I have never felt
in my whole life. Then the verse was read to me: "Behold, storm clouds cover
the earth and darkness the peoples, but the Lord shines upon thee, and His
Glory becomes visible upon thee (Isaiah 60,2)."
The darkness of the establishment covered the earth and upon him alone
the Glory of God shone. The more desperate his situation became, the more
wonderful and encouraging appeared his dreams. That wonderful dream of
light, helped Wechsler to regain strength and become fearless. He realized,
though, that this road would become extremely dangerous. Instead of hoping
to become a leader as he had previously thought he now had to fear threats
and persecutions, that people would side with the establishment, call him
names and despise him 69 . He even considered himself as being in physical
danger. Therefore, he published his work under a pseudonym, and wrote that
if by mistake, on account of his anonymity, someone else would be
persecuted, he would make his name public so that nobody else would suffer
on his account. There was perhaps a real danger - on his position as teacher
in the Talmud Torah, if he was accused of being a fraud or mentally ill. But it
appeared that Hirsch did not drop his previous support for that school70.
When Wechsler attempted to publish the brochure, he became courageous,

66 DevarAzhara Heb. p. 28ff., Gamp. 86ff.

67 Tanhuma wayishlah ch. 8.
68DevarAzhara Heb. p. 29, Ger. p. 84.
69lbid, Heb. p. 16, Ger. p. 105 and Heb. p. 35, Ger. p. 76.
70 Hirsch took interest in the school, wrote letters of recommendation to its graduates, reported on its
development in: Jeschurun vol.16 1883 p. 203 and vol. 18,1885 p. 570; both written after 1881, the
year of the pamphlet DevarAzhara Introduction p.20.
272 R. Horwitz

relying on God whom he trusted and who was his refuge; he hoped that no
terror would occur. Wechsler started to re-edit the pamphlet and planned a
publication of one thousand copies71.
He then inserted into the book statements which proved his being a decent
God fearing person and not a fraud. Additionally, he inserted Hirsch's bitter
attack on him in an afterword.
The enlarged pamphlet was supplemented by Wechsler s own theory on
dreams and his opinion of Hirsch's letter. Wechsler quotes, for support, the
Talmud, Halakha, Responso literature and even the prayer book. Rather than
arguing publicly against Hirsch, Wechsler quotes a young orthodox Rabbi
Goldschmidt of Briesen who published in the Jüdische Presse a series of
articles relating to the rejection of the old belief in dreams, and proposing a
new way of explaning the dream of the chief butler and the chief baker of
Genesis 40, claiming that one can find the truth without needing to believe in
a divine intervention in Josef s interpretation of the dreams72. It was the
nineteenth century, pre-Freud, when dreams were not highly considered.
Dreams do of course play an important role in the Bible, Talmud,
Medieval Jewish Philosphy and of course in mystical literature but not in the
West at Wechsler s time. Rabbi Hyle quotes the Talmudic saying that "he who
awoke and a verse fell into his mouth, had a small prophecy" {Berakhot 55a).
This enabled him to claim the status of a small prophet73. Dreams, Wechsler
thought, were a blessing (Berakhot 55b). "He who sleeps for seven nights
without a dream is called an evil doer", about which Rashi says that to the
hated no dream is shown. Wechsler cites the prayer said before one goes to
sleep, in which one asks God not to be frightened by bad dreams. Providence -
Wechsler comments as if speaking from his own experience - can frighten
deeply those modernists who gave up the belief in dreams74. To show the
importance of dreams in Halakha, Wechsler quoted the law of the Shulhan
Arukh, which demanded that those promises which one has made in a dream
have to be fìillfilled and excommunications made in a dream are also matters
with which our Rabbis must deal with with utter seriousness.75 From the
Responsa literature, he quoted a story where Rabbi Isaac bar Sheshet (Ribash)
once demanded a three day fast on account of a dream which a member of his
community had had 76 .
Wechsler concluded that he was permitted and obliged to publish his
dreams because they included all three of the signs which the Talmud ascribes

71 According to his letto- to Rabbi Plesner Devar Azhara, Appendix A, p. 45.

72 DevarAzhara Heb. p. 30, Ger. p. 83, and also Appendix A p.43.
73 Ibid., Heb. p. 32, Ger. p. 81.
74 Ibid., Heb. p. 31, Ger. p. 82.
75 Ibid., Yore De α 210,334.
76 Ibid., Heb. p. 33, Ger. p. 80.
 The Mystical Visions 273

to a dream that is liable to occur. They repeat themselves, they include an

interpretation as part of the dream and finally, the dream is connected with a
Biblical verse. "Unfortunately", he wrote77, "the least reasonable thing had
begun: the antisemitic storm had hit Germany and Rumania." "Also, the
things that have happened to me privately demand that I shall fulfil my vow
without taking into consideration petty arguments".
Wechsler made a last attempt to receive public support. On February 1st
1881 he sent a letter to Rabbi Shlomo Plesner from East Germany, whom he
barely knew. From this letter one can see how depressed he was. He wrote78:
"Woe to me from my Creator and woe to me from my inclinations and there is
no severer disease than a mental disease."
He addressed Plesner out of a necessity which should not be denounced
and asked for his support regarding most weighty matters. Because there were
people who degraded dreams. Then Wechsler related to Plesner his great
trouble, that his son had died and if he did not keep his vow more troubles
would come upon him.
Wechsler also reports to Plesner on several supportive dreams which he
had had79. "I saw in a dream a very high mountain and it was in a round
splendid circle whose slope was of a beauty which I have never seen in my
life. When I was astounded by that extraordinary vision it was interpreted to
me in my dream by the verse of Zacharias (4,7): "Whoever you are, O great
mountain... Turn into level ground!"
Wechsler had received support from that prophecy of Zacharias and had
hoped that God would level his mountains.
He also related to Plesner another version of his Elijah dream which had
become more eschatological in its character. Because now God reveals to the
sages, who are the heralds of Elijah, that Elijah will come soon and they
should prepare "as their weak power permits".
The heavy weight of his mission is apparent. Wechsler mentions in this
letter too, the advice of his teacher, to go ahead and publish the brochure even
without support, if only for the sake of his own health80. And that is what he
eventually did and the brochure appeared in May 1881.
In conclusion, a word on the persecution he had suffered and Hirsch's
letter which was slander. After all, Hirsch knew that the law of the Torah
demands that one should inquire carefully before accusing anybody. And he
and the other leaders in Germany knew who Wechsler was, an ordained
rabbi, a teacher in a yeshiva and a righteous man of repute. Hirsch
corresponded with Wechsler for 17 years and knew what a Zaddik he was; but

77 Ibid., Heb. p. 35 Ger. p. 77.

78 Ibid., Appendix A. p. 46. Rabbi Plesner s answer has not beai uncovered
79 Ibid., Appendix A. p. 44.
80 Ibid., Appendix A, p. 46. In the letter he says "my teacher" and it is hard to know whom he meant.
274 R. Horwitz

no Emile Zola defended Wechsler and no leader had a good word to say about
him. This pamphlet which prophesied destruction and equated German Jews
to Rumanian Jews was a threat to the Jewish community and their faith in the
emancipation. And they wished to erase its existence. Therefore, the addition
of Hirsch's letter served as a warning, that no one should follow it. Even
documentation of the affair is very difficult to find; for example, in a great
eulogy that appeared on the front page of the Israelit after Wechsler's death 81 ,
the whole affair is not mentioned. Nor is it alluded to on his tombstone, nor
did any review of the pamphlet appear. The veiy short two lines which
appeared in the Israelit show the inability of the correspondent to comment on
it. 82 German Jewry over-reacted because they felt insecure in Germany and
alienated from traditional Jewish life, the kind that existed in Eastern Europe.
There is no doubt that a reaction of that sort would have been inconceivable
in Eastern Europe. It was 1880 and the German Jews were experiencing like
him the threat of antisemitism and were afraid that Wechsler was right which
was very frightening for them. The way they handled the affair reflects
heavily on their problem.

81 By Buttœwieser see above note 34.

82 On May 18th 1881 the correspondent of the Israelit in Würzburg wrote: "A detailed review of the
pamphlet will not appear although it includes many things that one sfaould take to one's heart and
was, at any rate, written in a pious spirit".
 Eveline Goodman-Thau
Meyer Heinrich Hirsch Landauer -
Bible Scholar and Kabbalist

After the decline of kabbalistic tradition in Germany at the end of the 18th
century1 and the generally negative attitude towards kabbalistic writings in
Jewish historical scholarship (in contrast to its reception in Christian circles2),
we witness a first attempt at a scholarly study of the history and development of
Jewish mysticism by a little known but highly original young scholar, Meyer
Heinrich Hirsch Landauer, who, between 1838 and 1840, engaged in a serious
study of Hebrew manuscripts in the Munich Hofbibliothek.
Born in 1808 at Kappel, near Buchau, in Württemberg, Landauer was the
son of a pious cantor, Elias Landauer, who had hoped to prepare his bright son
for a rabbinical career. He was, however, not to see this, as a chronic illness led
to his son's premature death in 1841 at the age of 33. This marked the end of a
brief but promising effort at integrating the study of Kabbalah as part of
religious life and scholarship in the German Jewish tradition. Under the
influence of German idealistic philosophy, Landauer attempted a symbolic
interpretation of the Bible - in particular the Pentateuch - according to
kabbalistic motifs. One of the few biographical sources on Landauer is
contained in an obituary which appeared on February 25, 1841 in the
Israelitische Annalew3. It described how Landauer, after proper preparation in
rabbinic-talmudic subjects, entered, at the age of 18, the Talmud-Schule in
Karlsruhe, while at the same time engaging in humanistic studies at the local
Lyceum. Later, Landauer took up studies at the universities of Munich and
Tübingen where his encounter with German Romanticism of the school of
Schelling and modern bible criticism led him to develop his own original ideas
regarding the meaning of the Names of God in the Pentateuch as a
hermeneutical key in understanding the Bible in the Jewish tradition.

'See Gersfaom Scholen, "Die letzt™ KabbalisU® in Deutschland" Judaica 3, Frankfurt 1987,p. 218.
See Gerchom Scholem, "Die Erforschung der Kabbala von Reudilin bis zur Gegenwart" Judaica 3,
Frankfurt 1987, p. 259 ff.
Israelitische Armalen - Ein Zentralblatt für die Geschichte, Literatur und Kultur der Israeliten aller
Zeiten und Länder, hrsg. Dr. J.M. Jost, Jahrgang 1841, Nr. 9,p. 69-70.
276 Heinrich Hirsch Landauer

In his first book which appeared in 18364, he laid the foundations of his
exegetical method "Verglichen mit den Vorstellungen anderer Völker des alten
Orients und der Lehre des Christenthums."5 Landauer continued along this
path "aus den dunklen Tiefen der Symbolik den Grundstein fur seine
Hypothesen herauf zu wältzen"6 and published a further development of his
theory in 18387, after discovering Jewish mystical texts which seemed to
confirm his earlier findings, concerning the meaning of the various
manifestations of God in the Bible expressed through the different Names given
to God in the Holy scripture. His obituary confirms this by describing his
discovery in the Munich Hofbibliothek of
diejenige Schriften, die hierüber mit Selbstvertrauen und
Autorität, das Wort der Gewissheit fuhren. Der Sohar war
natürlich das erste Buch, das er nun aufzuschlagen hatte, dies
führte ihn weiter auf die Forschung über die Echtheit dieses
Buches selbst und er war so glücklich, die symbolischen
Spiele gegen den kritischen Ernst auf immer zu vertauschen.
Despite his poor health and financial difficulties he delved into the world of
Rabbinics, Jewish medieval poetry and Kabbalah, copying many texts and
adding his own critical commentaries. Besides these activities he completed his
rabbinical training and in the spring of 1839 passed his final rabbinical exams
with good results. From then on he lived partly in Buchau and partly in
Stuttgart and Munich until August 1841, when he was appointed as a substitute
Rabbi for the Bezirksrabbinat Braunsbach. This position proved however too
strenuous for his weak constitution and in November of the same year he had to
leave his post and return home to his family who lovingly cared for him until
his death in the spring of 1841.
Landauer s notes, studies and commentaries were published posthumously
in the Literaturblatt des Orients of 1845-1846 under the title "Vorläufiger
Bericht über mein Studium der Münchner hebräischen Handschriften". 8 In
contrast to previous Jewish scholars, such as Jakob Emden (1769) and Samuel
David Luzzatto (1820), as well as the main proponents of the historical-critical
school such as Salomo Juda Rapoport, Leopold Zunz, Abraham Geiger, Moritz
Steinschneider and Heinrich Graetz, who generally displayed a rather negative

Landauer, Jehova und Elohim, oder die althebräische Gotteslehre als Grundlage der
Geschichte, der Symbolik und der Gesetzgebung der Bücher Mosis, Stuttgart und Augsburg 1836.
-'ibid., title page.
^As described in the obituary, see footnote 3.
' Μ Η . Landauer, Wesen und Form des Pentateuch, Stuttgart und Augsburg 1838.
^Issues no. 12^7, Gerdiom Scholen, Bibliographica Kabbalistica, Leipzig 1927, p. 92-92.
 E. Goodman-Thau 277

attitude towards kabbalistic manuscripts,9 Landauer found proof in the texts of

his theory concerning the meaning of the different Names of God in the
Pentateuch.
In the introduction to his book Jehova und Elohim which carries as a motto
a verse from the Song of Moses, "For I will proclaim the Name of the Lord,
ascribe ye greatness to our God", (Deut. 32:3) he states from the outset his
agreement with the rabbis that the five Books of Moses were written by one and
the same author. This fact, however, leads to the question concerning the use of
different Names of God, a question which occupied the rabbis and which was
now to occupy him. This topic, as we shall see, became the very basis of his
exegetical method in regard to the Pentateuch.
It is one of the ironies of modern Kabbalah research that Landauer was the
first to discover the manuscripts of Abraham Abulafia - a famous mystic known
for his pride in the achievement of knowledge of the great Name of God - and
to advance the hypothesis that Abulafia was the anonymous author of the
Zohar. (This was disproved by A. Jellinek in his book Moses ben Schemtov de
Leon und sein Verhältnis zum Sohar written in 1851.) Landauer wrote
concerning Abulafia:
I found a strange man with whose writings the contents of
the Zohar coincide most accurately down to the most minute
detail. This fact struck me at once with the first writings of
his which came into my hands. But now that I have read
many of his works and have come to know his live, his
principles and his character there cannot exist any longer
even the slightest doubt that we now have the author of the
Zohar10.
We will, however, limit ourselves in this paper to examining and
investigating Landauer s ideas as developed in his two works, Jehovah und
Elohim and his book written two years later, Wesen und Form des Pentateuch,
which includes in its second part a considerable amount of texts from the
Zohar, proving his thesis based on his findings in the Munich Hofbibliothek
and exploring their relationship to Rabbinic and Kabbalistic traditions.

II

Landauer s first book Jehovah and Elohim, written in 1835 and published a
year later, identifies him as a "mosaischer Theologie Candidaten". He provided
the book with two title pages. The first says: "Jehovah und Elohim oder die

9
See footnote 2, p. 259 ff.
quoted by Gersfaom Scholem, Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism, New York (1929) 1946, p.
130; see also footnote p. 378.
278 Heinrich Hirsch Landauer

Ζ : : Jϋ « «·
£E · a5 J·
Jm \ Β
SS
S-
" S S-t
®* si %
<3 uu
f i s »· a . * «
S :
r
βΓ I 5 ! . *5 S'
© ¿ • s ì l f i β r * r β
a ·= Φ t. 2 ^ te }J (β· 9i i
i * J°8(l S
=- 1I «"
& I •>
β
«

è r'sfcs
y · £ Î β "
*λ I- st ~¿ "τ sa| & :
β»
E
® : ®te Λ·
__ C . Λs
f Z î i î â i S
i l 5S©

ë lg β
© s S F ·
ε» s è
s s
•ê h i :
if f -
»
<2 © ai
ι«
Ί
« «
's "
» Λ© Ίτ <s> :
CT
©
 E. Goodman-Thau 279

althebräische Gotteslehre als Grundlage der Geschichte, der Symbolik und der
Gesetzgebung der Bücher Mosis." Here the Names of God are written in Latin
letters. On the second title page we find the two Names of God written in
Hebrew and the sub-title reads:
oder Begriff dieser Gottesnamen bei den alten Hebräern:
(a) als Grund der Wahl dieser Namen in den verschiedenen
Stücken und Versen; (b) als die Grundlage, und theils auch
als der Gegenstand der Geschichte; (c) als der Gegenstand der
Symbolik; und (d) als die dogmatische Idee der meisten
Gesetze der Bücher Mosis. Verglichen mit den Vorstellungen
anderer Völker des alten Orients, und der Lehre des
Christenthums.
These title pages are an illustration of his purpose, which is to discover the
Theology (Gotteslehre) of the ancient Hebrews through their naming of God,
which for Landauer is at the same time the key to their understanding of
history, symbolism and the giving of the law as expressed in the five Books of
Moses. Landauer expands on his project and purpose by providing his readers
with the Hebrew signs of these names on the second title page where he
additionally, (a) promises to deal with the different choice of these Names of
God in various parts and books of the Bible, that is, with the methods of biblical
scholarship in his time, and (b), intends to engage in comparative study
between these ideas and those of other peoples of the ancient Orient and of
Christianity. The Hebrew letters of God's Name express more than the Latin
ones and are the key to understanding their appearance in the various parts of
the Bible. This is important in grasping the difference between the Jewish
tradition and that of other religions.
In his introduction, Landauer firstly takes issue with the Rabbis, who,
although they see the entire Pentateuch as having been composed by one author
and explain the various names of God as expressing various characteristics and
consider these to be actually synonyms, still state that YHWH11 denotes a
higher level of God's Being and Acting than ELOHIM. However, this
"anticipatory model" presupposes for the Rabbis, argues Landauer, that YHWH
stands for Gods's compassion and ELOHIM for God's stern judgement. To
prove his point Landauer provides many examples in order to show that the
opposite is actually true. For instance, when Cain, after murdering his brother,
has to flee from the wrath and punishment of YHWH, and ELOHIM (v. 25) is
the one who replaces the loss of the murdered Abel for his parents with another
son. There are many other examples of this kind.12
Another rabbinic opinion which Landauer rejects is that ELOHIM is in the
first part of Genesis because God had intended to create and rule the world with

11
From now on we write YHWH when Landauer used the Hebrew letters of the Tetragram.
1 2Jehova undElohim, op. cit., p. VIH.
280 Heinrich Hirsch Landauer

stern judgement; the second part has YHWH ELOHIM because God realised
that the world could not survive this way, and He needed to combine His
attributes of Mercy and Judgement and the third part only has YHWH because
God now lets His mercy rule over his judgement. Landauer continues to show
that some Rabbis of the kabbalistic school 13 see in ELOHIM the natural
workings of God (ELOHIM has the same numerical value as Ha-Teva,
"nature"), and in YHWH the denotation of the supernatural workings of God.
All this in spite of the fact, says Landauer, that "alle Erscheinungen in der
Wahl dieser Namen bei Mose dieser Begriffbestimmung gerade
entgegenstehen". Furthermore, Landauer reiterates Abarbanel's opinion that
YHWH is singular and ELOHIM plural, that etymologically YHWH is derived
from h-w-h (Being), ELOHIM from El (Power) and that YHWH is not to be
pronounced by the Jews as it denotes the inner, unexpressed, One God.
ELOHIM on the other hand denotes God as an outer expression of this inner
dimension.
Landauer rejects this and points out that in the Hebrew Scriptures YHWH
always appears as an active agent, not as a God closed within Himself (Ex.
6:23); or in the famous passage in Ex. 4 it is YHWH who shows Moses signs
and miracles to convince the people of Israel of his mission. So the Rabbis also
claim that it is in the first part of Genesis that we find ELOHIM since in the
Creation we find Gods's power expressed, while the second part has both
YHWH ELOHIM, since that aspect of Creation is transmitted to man, he being
the only creature who can reflect on the Sein' (Being) und 'Wesen' (Essence)
of God; the third part then can only contain YHWH since the story is really
about man. Landauer goes on to refute the arguments of Christian bible
scholars such as J.G. Hasse (Halle 1801, 1805) and Ewald (1823) who use
similar arguments to explain the different use of the Names of God. In addition,
he rejects the historical-critical school (Alstuc, Eichhorn, Ilgen and de Wette)
who saw the reason for the different names of God in the fact that various parts
of the Pentateuch were written by various authors at various periods. 14
These are the only two roads, says Landauer, one can take in order to
explain the different Names. Either as the expression of different characteristics
of God, or as the proof that the various parts and sentences in which they
appear originate from different sources and periods. But, as he shows in his
own work, the assumed explanations for the different characteristics of God
solve problems only in a few instances, and in most cases are not helpful. The
hypothesis on the theories of different sources is, however, incorrect,
particularly in the case of Genesis, for the following reasons:
According to this hypothesis the redactor of the pre-mosaic documents in
their present form in Genesis either went about his task in a rather strange way

13
Ibid.,p. IX.
14
Ibid.,p. ΧΠ.
 E. Goodman-Thau 281

or it was unclear to him what he actually wanted to do. If the redactor actually
wanted to create one homogeneous work, then he had to do away with all the
different characteristics which would point to their different origin. If, on the
other hand, he wanted to stress their uniqueness and transmit to us the different
sources in their unchanged particularity, he would not have been able to afford
those liberties which he allowed himself according to his hypothesis; in this
case, he would have to transmit them in a coordinated or successive form
precisely in the way they separately appeared. If this were the case, he would
not have woven them together in such an intricate fashion that it would take
thousands of years to unravel them. Firstly, he would have been afraid to
damage the original form; secondly, he would have made it necessary to tear
them apart as he wished, omitting a part here and adding a part there. Or, are
we to believe that, having the original documents before him, he would have
overlooked those things which the historical critics now show to be their links?
Alternatively, perhaps he kept the characteristic Names of God to show how
conscienciously he went about reconstructing the documents to their original
state? Neither can be considered plausible explanations. Could it perhaps be
that an inept investigation of the subject at hand on our part has turned the
redactor or author into a clumsy or inconsequent fool? What solution then does
Landauer offer to this problem? He suggests a totally new method which
answers most of the above-raised questions and attributes to the redactor a
major role in the understanding of the Pentateuch by using the Names of God
as vectors in his hermeneutic task.
He draws our attention to the fact that in the first parts of Genesis, the
Name commonly used in those parts only continues uninterruptedly in those
verses where the redactor speaks to us in the narrative; where, on the other
hand, the redactor quotes the speech of others, then in that piece the selected
Name does not continue. For example, in the middle of the YHWH ELOHIM
chapter 3 of Genesis, the dialogue between Eve and the snake is written using
only ELOHIM and in the YHWH chapter, ELOHIM is again used when Eve
speaks. What happens then to the hypothesis which ascribes the different use of
Names of God in these parts simply to the author's choice? Was it the author's
method to use a different Name of God when telling the story in his own words
and again another Name when quoting historical figures? Surely this
hypothesis tries to escape this difficulty in two ways: either, it is claimed that
the text was corrupted when copied, or in other ways; or, it is said that this
piece must originate from an ELOHIM text. As far as the first solution is
concerned, it would be a curious coincidence if the fate of corruption never
befell the author's narration, but always the quoted speeches by the historical
figures, and that the corruption as we find it in the Hebrew text is also found in
the Samaritan text which otherwise often varies in its use of the Names of God.
As far as the second solution is concerned, one would have to overlook the
dialogue of Eve and the snake in the first verse (Gen. 3:1) and the content of
282 Heinrich Hirsch Landauer

the speech of Eve in the YHWH chapter, if one were to ascribe these speeches
to the ELOHIM document.
From those and other examples, Landauer draws the conclusion that the
author or redactor of these parts consciously chose different Names for God for
different purposes, which he wanted to do and could only do in the pure
narrative, not in the quoted speeches of the historical characters of the story.
Furthermore, Landauer based his hypotheses on the rabbinic opinion that in
many other parts of the Pentateuch the different Names of God are chosen to
correspond to their use in Genesis, which led him then to conclude that his
method might be the key to the understanding of the history, the symbolism and
the law in the Bible and the connection between these different aspects in the
Pentateuch. Landauer summed up his findings as follows:
Und ich fand als Resultat meiner Untersuchungen.
1) dass die Ideen in YHWH und ELOHIM das Wesen -
den dogmatischen Kern der Bücher Mosis, des Buches Hiobs,
und eines Teiles des Jesajas ausmachen; und zwar:
a) den dogmatischen Grund der Wahl dieser Namen in
verschiedenen Stücken und Werken
b) theils die Grundlage, theils auch der Gegenstand der
Geschichte
c) den Gegenstand der Symbolik und
d) den innern Gehalt und die Bedeutung vieler Gesetze
der Bücher Mosis bilden.
2) dass die Bücher Mosis nicht, wie die Exegeten falsch-
lich geglaubt, eine strenge in Wesen und Wirksamkeit
unaufgelöste Einheit der Gottheit lehren, sondern über-
einstimmend mit der Denkweise aller Völker des Althertums,
dieselbe nach der Art ihrer Thätigkeiten und ihrem
Verhältnisse zur Welt in gewisse unterschiedene Per-
sonalitäten partiren; dass
3) da, wie wir sehen werden, die äussere Form des Textes
mit dem Inhalt der Bücher Mosis in engem Zusammenhang
und einer wechselseitigen Correspondenz steht, deijenige, der
z.B. die Symbolik der Stifthütte, der Opfer, der Volksfeste
angegeben, der Gesetze aufgestellt, und das Leben Noah's,
der Patriarchen aufgezeichnet, auch unsere Bücher Mosis,
wenigstens was die vier ersten betrifft, im Allgemeinen in der
Gestalt verfasst haben muss, in der sie noch vor uns liegen.15
Thus, Landauer ascribes tremendous importance to the choice of the Names
of God by the redactor. What is meant here is, however, much more than the
use of a name. The Names of God, YHWH and ELOHIM - in their Hebrew

15
Ibid.,p. XVH.
 E. Goodman-Thau 283

characters - express the ability of the redactor to connect with God as an active
agent, and thus convey to his readers a text - albeit from different periods and
from different sources but one which is held together and imbued with divine
power - by the choice of the redactor. (We will develop this point later on in
more detail.) But the text is held together by this hermeneutic device not
primarily in order to bring together different sources, but rather the different
levels upon which the text operates the historical, the symbolical, and the
meaning of the laws expressed in the texts. This approach is indeed novel, as it
breaks the horizontal (historical) axis of the text and allows us to view its
vertical dimension which weaves together the various parts of the human
experience with God - the historical, the symbolic, the ritual. The text is no
longer composed of parts which come from the outside, from a far past, as loose
documents or held together by an anonymous redactor, instead it gains a
human, spiritual dimension in the choice of Names to acknowledge - that God,
as a living force speaks through these lines - actively or passively. Landauer
thus saves the text - and thus God - from impersonality, muteness and an
ahistorical dimension.

Ill

At this point Landauer s view is far away from that of Jewish mystical tradition
which used names such as Zoharariel, Adiriron, Akhtariel and Totrossiyah (or
Tetrassiyah, i.e. the Tetras or fourfoldness of the letters of God's name
YHWH), signifying various aspects of God's glory16 and other combinations of
the letters of the Hebrew alphabet as a hermeneutical device. There is, however,
already an unmistakable link to kabbalistic notions. A text called Shimmushe
Tora - the Theurgic Uses of the Torah - tells in its introduction how Moses
went up to heaven to receive the Torah, how he conversed with the angels and
how finally God gave him not only the text of the Torah as we know it, but also
the secret of combinations of letters which represent another, esoteric ascpet of
the Torah. 17 Around the year 1250 this introduction was known to one of the
earliest Spanish Kabbalists, Moses ben Nahman (Nachmanides), who refers to
it in the preface of his Bible commentary: "We possess an authentic tradition
showing that the entire Torah consists of the Names of God and that the words
we read can be divided in a very different way so as to form esoteric names ...
the statement in the Aggadah to the effect that the Torah was originally written
with black fire on white fire (Palestinian Talmud, Shekalim 6) obviously
confirms our opinion that the writing was continuous, without division into
words, which made it possible to read it either as a sequence of (esoteric) names

16
See footnote 10 above, p. 56.
17
Text only in manuscript. Gentian translation in August Wunsche, Aus Israels Lehrhallen, Kleine
Midraschim I, Leipzig 1907.
284 Heinrich Hirsch Landauer

{al derekh ha-shemoth) or in the traditional way as history and commandments.

Thus the Torah as given to Moses was divided into words in such a way as to be
read as divine commandments. But at the same time he received the oral
tradition, according to which it was to be read as a sequence of Names".
Therefore the Masoretic tradition concerning the writing of the Bible has to be
observed and a Torah scroll can only be put to liturgical use if each of its single
letters is in place. This traditon can be found as early as the second century in
the Babylonian Talmud (Erwin 13a) in the name of Rabbi Meir. So we see that
the idea of the Torah being the Names of God has its roots in Rabbinic Judaism
of the Second Temple period and later. The mystical tradition went a step
further, saying that the Torah as a whole is the One Great Name of God. Here
the Torah is interpreted as a mystical unity, that was not originally meant to
transmit a specific meaning, but to express the greatness of God's power,
contained in His Name. No longer is the Torah the source of knowledge for
God to create the world (Genesis Rabbah 1:1, 'God looked in the Torah and
created the world') but as a source of power contained in the Name of God
which is in fact the Torah. 18
One of the most famous figures in Jewish mysticism who developed a theory
of combinations of letters, was the Spanish Kabbalist Abraham Abulafia from
Saragossa whose main writings in our possession were composed between 12S0
and 1291 in the South of Italy and Sicily. The scope of this paper merely allows
a short summary of his theory. 19
In order to untie the knots of the soul' so that it can attain higher forms of
perception, Abulafia looked for an object which, without having any meaning
of its own, permits access to spiritual matters. He believed to have found an
object which fulfills this condition in the Hebrew alphabet, in the letters which
make up the written language. Basing himself upon the abstract and non
corporeal nature of the script, he develops a theory of the mystical
contemplation of letters and their configurations, as they constitute God's
Name. The Name of God is something absolute, since it reflects the hidden
meaning and totality of existence. The Name through which everything else
requires its meaning and yet which to the human mind has no concrete,
particular meaning of its own. Abulafia follows here the kabbalistic doctrine of
divine language as the substance of reality, whereby all things only exist
through their participation in the Great Name of God which manifests itself

18
See footnote 10 above, p. 119-155. Also: Moshe Idei, Language, Torah, and Hermeneutics in
Abraham Abulafia, Albany 1989; idem: Kabbalah: New Perspectives, New Havm, 1988.
'^For a more complete treatment of this subject see Gerdiom Sdiolem, "Der Name Gottes und die
Sprachtheorie der Kabbala", Judaica 3, Frankfurt, 1987.
 E. Goodman-Thau 285

throughout the entire Creation as expressed in the Torah. The Torah is here
understood (as in the above-mentioned passage from Nachmanides) to be not
only as composed of the Names of God, but it is as a whole the one Great Name
of God. 20
Abulafîa develops a discipline called Hokhmat Ha-Zeruf, the "Science of the
Combination of Letters" in order to stimulate through meditation a new state of
consciousness, a harmonious movement of pure thought, which he compares to
music. The closed doors of the soul open to the music of pure thought which is
no longer bound to meaning and opens the way to God in the ecstasy of the
deepest harmonies which originate in the movement of the letters. Every letter
represents a whole world to the mystic who abandons himself to its
contemplation. Their carefully controlled combination enables the penetration
into the mysteries of divine language, a world of divine Names that unfolds in
accordance with a law of their own. The elements of the divine language appear
as the letters of the Holy Scriptures. Letters and Names are not only
conventional means of communication. They are far more. Each of them
represents a concentration of energy and expresses a wealth of meaning which
cannot be translated, or not fully at least, intohuman language.
It should be borne in mind that when the Kabbalists speak of divine Names
and letters, they operate with the twenty-two consonants of the Hebrew
alphabet, in which the Torah is written, or as they would have said, in which its
secret essence was made communicable. The process of creation which
proceeds from stage to stage and is reflected in extra-divine worlds and of
course in nature as well, is not necessarily different from the process that finds
its expression in divine words and in the documents of Revelation (the Torah),
in which the divine language is found in the form of the Hebrew letters. Thus
there is a relationship between the mystical meaning of the Torah and the
assumptions of its divine essence.
The Kabbalist conceptions of the true nature of the Torah are, however,
based on two principles which are important for our topic: the principle of
God's Name, and the principle of the Torah as a living organism. 21
Landauer further informs us that he intends to use a heuristic rather than a
systematic approach, since only the former is suitable for the object of his study.
He warns his readers that the concept YHWH and ELOHIM in the text can be
nowhere explained as clearly as he will do it, since only in the shown context of
the historic, the symbolic and the legal parts, will it be possible to understand
the meaning of the Names of God. On the other hand, understanding the
Names of God will in their turn make the biblical text in its various parts and

G. Scbolem. "Der Sinn der Tora in der jüdisch™ Mystik", in: Zur Kabbala und ihrer Symbolik,
Zürich 1960, p.57. See footnote 19 above.
21
"Der Name Gottes", pp. 35,36.
286 Heinrich Hirsch Landauer

strata intelligible to the reader. At the end of his introduction he stresses the
esoteric character of his method.
Das Alterthum war nicht gewöhnt, seine höchsten
Wahrheiten ohne alle Hülle dem profanen Auge vorzulegen;
ein Vorhang musste das Allerheiligste lüstigen Blicken
entziehen.
According to Landauer, YHWH denotes the Being and Workings (das Seyn
und Wirken) of God within den Dingen der Welt': the Power of God which is
present in the works of creation, which preserves this creation and imbues it
with life. ELOHIM denotes the Being and Ruling of God outside and above
nature, in which the Hebrews distinguished three powers or personalities. One
creates and blesses - the personification of Power; the second preserves (saves),
leads and gives laws - the personification of Wisdom; the third destroys and
retributes - the personification of stern Judgement (but also of Love and Mercy).
In that which is brought forth, preserved and again resolved by ELOHIM,
YHWH reigns as the personification of Goodness, Faithfulness, Permanency
and Perseverence.
To illustrate this let us examine some biblical examples which Landauer
uses to prove his theoiy. In the story of Abraham only YHWH appears at the
beginning of his life (YHWH speaks with him. Abraham builds altars and
proclaims His name); only after numerous events (Gen. 14-17) which happen in
the course of Abraham's life and which point to a higher Ruler of the world,
does ELOHIM speak to him (from Gen 12-17; and from Gen. 18-19, 29). Then
in Gen. 22, ELOHIM puts him to the test by telling him to sacrifice his only
son. A messenger from YHWH stops him though, showing him physical life
(God's immanence in the world) whereupon Abraham calls the name of the
place YHWH 'Yireh ', (verse 14) in contrast to his former expression ELOHIM
Yireh '.
The following examples will illustrate the name ELOHIM. After the first
dialogue between Moses and God in the burning bush, the expression "and
ELOHIM spoke" appears only in three instances which express the most
important messages of this conversation. Once, when God announces the
deliverance of the people of Israel from Egypt - i.e. the birth of the people (Ex.
6, 2fi). The second time, at the giving of the Law on Mt. Sinai (Ex. 20, 1) and
the third time when Bileam wants to curse the people - i.e. use a destructive
power against them (Num. 22, 12).
A second example of the use of the name ELOHIM is in the story of Noah
where we find three speeches by God to Noah bearing the heading "and
ELOHIM spoke". In the first (Gen. 6, 13), God announces the near destruction
of the peoples of the earth by the flood; in the second (Gen. 8, 15, 17) God
 E. Goodman-Thau 287

promises those who survive to be fruitful and to multiply, which is followed by

the blessing of Noah and his sons in the next chapter; and the third (Gen. 9,
8ff) when God makes a covenant with the peoples of the earth, a sign for their
lasting preservation.
Landauer applies the same method to the texts dealing with the three main
festivals. For example: to explain the symbolism of the Passover festival he
pays special attention to the three main instructions for the preservation of
memory for the next generations (with each of these commandments the
question of the sons to the father is mentioned) (Ex. 12, 13): The Paschal Lamb
as the symbol of the Saving and Preserving quality of God; the Unleavened
Bread, symbolic of the Destructive Power of God.
He finds the same symbolism in the Tabernacle: the Ark with cherubim
symbolic of the lawgiving and protecting quality of God; the Table with the
Bread, the nourishing and spending quality; the Menorah with the light, the
dissolving, destructive quality of God. All these are qualities of ELOHIM.
YHWH is expressed in the Altar, as it is dedicated to YHWH and represents the
permanent Sein and Wirken' of YHWH in existence.
In the same vein, Landauer connects the various parts of Deuteronomy and
links these again to the book of Genesis, creating an almost perfect
hermeneutical circle.
A close analysis of Landauer s method would certainly show many problems
and the inconsistencies which were leveled at him by Abraham Geiger. (To
whom he responds in the introduction to his second work). It seems to us,
however, that it is important to note the following:
Landauer believed, as mentioned previously, that the redactor, in order to
create a whole text, made use of his own choice of the Names of God to reach
this aim. In the narrative parts, that is in those parts where the author or
redactor has to explain to the reader the history, the symbolism and the
meaning of the law, he therefore finds it necessary to relate to different aspects
of God. YHWH as a permanent Sein and Wirken' of God in the world and
ELOHIM as the expression of the changing manifestations of God in the world.
The fact that it was the redactor who, according to Landauer, chose these
names, makes it possible for himself - and subsequently for his readers - to
develop a relationship to God as YHWH and ELOHIM and thus a relationship
with the text, entering into a dialogue. This in turn will enable the reader to do
the same. The Names of God are the gates to the text. The novelty of this
method is that he uses the Names of God to achieve this effect, yet the Names
of God gain on the one hand a power of their own (expressive of God's power),
whereby on the other hand it is the reader who actively partakes in this power
by choosing the proper name (YHWH or ELOHIM, or YHWH ELOHIM) for
each occasion. Landauer s hermeneutic method still stands between the
midrashic and kabbalistic mode of interpretation. The midrash operates within
288 Heinrich Hirsch Landauer

a tradition which has canonised the Biblical text and interpretation is guided
not by divine inspiration, but by transmitted tradition and the ability of the
interpreter to apply his own religious inspiration within the boundaries of
authorised rules of interpretation. There is, as it were, a constant dialogue
between God, the interpreter and the Torah.
By interpreting the text, the reader enters into this dialogue which on the
one hand echoes former generations of interpreters, but also adds a
contemporary dimension to the Torah by the very act of interpretation.
According to Landauer, this echo was lost in his time; no longer was it possible
to hear the text in its original dialogue. By imbuing the redactor with the power
to have chosen the proper Name of God in the narrative portions, he reconnects
the Biblical text with its original redactor and thus its reader: the narrator in
the Biblical text becomes the reader (interpreter) in each period of time.
As has been pointed out 22 , the literary output in the Tannaitic and Amoraic
periods was aimed at extracting from the Jewish canon the guidelines for the
life of the community in all its facets. The authoritative rabbinic texts often
excluded many other types of traditions of an apocalyptic, magical, mythical or
mystical nature, which continued their hidden and fragmented life within the
vast body of rabbinic literature, in particular its midrashic parts, which was
used as a kind of interpretative canon itself fulfilling the role of the prophet or
the priest.
Later, when Jewish tradition came under attack from other religious and
philosophical movements such as Islamic Kalam, or Aristotelian philosophy, as
well as various sectarian groups, the need arose for a more rationalistic mode of
interpretation of the Bible and its midrashic parts, containing many mystical,
magical and mythical elements, were increasingly suppressed or censored.
As a reaction, these same elements came to the surface in more forceful and
crystallised forms, resulting in the creation of new hermeneutical devices which
revolutionalised the conventional understanding of the Biblical message. 23
Unlike kabbalistic traditions however, which developed a new theory of
language or ascribed a divine role to the interpreter, Landauer alloted a major
role, as we have seen, to the redactor as interpreter. He was however, not of the
opinion that this was a departure from the rabbinic mode of interpretation, but
rather a continuation of the work of the rabbinic Sages who still had the keys to
decode the holy text, keys which their medieval colleagues had lost under the
influence of scholastic thought. Just as the Kabbalists had rediscovered these
lost codes in their time, so did Landauer's search and intuitions lead him in his
time, to react against the ideas of the Enlightment, and the historical-critical
methods in biblical scholarship and rationalistic rabbinics in the use of the

22
Moshe Idei, "Infinities of Torah in Kabbalah" Midrash and Literature, ed Geoffrey H. Hartman
and Sanford Budick.
23
Ibid.,pp. 142,143.
E. Goodman-Thau 289
290 Heinrich Hirsch Landauer

kabbalistic material in the Munich Hofbibliothek.

IV

Landauer altered his views to some extent when he expanded his theory in his
second book published in 1838, Wesen und Form des Pentateuchs. In his
Rückblick' printed at the end of the book he stated: "Sehen wir nun von
unserm jetzigen Standpunkt aus auf die Belegstellen meiner Schrift »YHWH
und ELOHIM« zurück, so erscheinen uns dieselben in einem ganz anderen
Licht". He goes on to say that in his first book he showed how the Hebrews
connected YHWH with sensual and material representations, that they
considered YHWH the immanent repletive source of nature, that YHWH dwelt
personally amidst the people of Israel. But, this does not prove that YHWH is to
be considered a different personification to ELOHIM. "Nicht bloss eine Person
der Gottheit hat Israel zu ihrem Lieblingsvolk erkoren, sondern die Gottheit
überhaupt in ihrer Ganzheit und Getrenntheit".24 And after making a number
of minor corrections, he issued these surprising statements: "Zwischen den
Formeln Ani YHWH' und Ani YHWH Elohechem' ist nach unserm jetzigen
Begriffe kein essentieller Unterschied. Und das unabgesonderte
Durcheinandergebrauchen dieser Formeln spricht auch wirklich für keine
absichtliche Wahl". And he ends when speaking about the festivals: "Nach
unserm jetzigen Begriff hat dies gar nichts auffallendes, weil ja ELOHIM die
verschiedenen Gestalten des YHWH selber |ind". 25
What happened to Landauer between the writing of his two books? We may
summize that he found manuscripts by Abulafia and the Zohar in the Munich
Library and thus corrected (as he states) his understanding of the meaning of
the use of the different Names of God in the Pentateuch according to the
"Altjüdische Geheimlehre".26 No longer was it important for him to deal with
the text as far as its authorship or redaction was concerned, but the Names of
God became living realities for him as they were, according to him, for the
Kabbalist Abulafia and in the Zohar as expressed in the Sefirot. An in-depth
discussion of the creation of his new theory and the many fascinating findings
in Landauer s second book will be the topic of a future study. Here we will limit
ourselves to a short summary of his revised ideas. Writing of both concepts,
YHWH and ELOHIM, he divides their meaning into two categories: 1)
Subjektiv (psychologisch) aufgefasst; and 2) Objektiv (dogmatisch) aufgefasst.
In the first stated:
YHWH enthält die erste Grundidee des Gottesbewußtseins
- ein höchstes Wesen, als lebendige Weltursache, in seinem

^Wesen und Form des Pentateuchs, cp. cit.,p. 107 ff.

25
Ibii,p. IV.
26
Ibid.,p. IV.
 E. Goodman-Thau 291

einheitlichen Sein und Walten.

In ELOHIM hat sich diese Grundidee, wie sie das ur-
sprüngliche Bewußtsein gebar, an der Empirie und Reflexion
in Vorstellungen gebrochen. Das höchste Wesen wird nach
einer dreifachen Thätigkeitsweise unter drei verschiedenen
Charakteren, Gestalten, Personen gedacht. El Shaddai, Gott
Brüste, bringt hervor, macht fruchtbar, spendet Segen; El Roi,
Gott Gesicht, bewacht, versorgt, errettet und gibt Gesetze; El
Kana, Gott Herr, Richter, zerstört, richtet, vergilt, reinigt und
heiligt."
"YHWH verhält sich zu Elohim wie die Idee zu ihrer
Entwicklung."27
In the second category Landauer stated:
Gott YHWH (der einheitliche, in sich seiende Grund)
offenbart sich als Elohim (El Shaddai, El Roi, El Kana).
YHWH verhält sich zu ELOHIM wie das Ganze zu seinen
Teilen.
In a footnote he added that here ELOHIM is always "YHWH ELOHIM",
because ELOHIM when appearing alone means "Elohim Acherim" - other
Gods.28
Landauer, who had a great interest in Hinduism, was no doubt influenced by
some of the thinkers of his time, in particular Isaac Bernays.29 He was certainly
inspired when developing his symbolic theory by the idea of the three Hindu
deities Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva - the creator, the preserver and the destroyer.
He used these only as a point of departure and transformed the Hindu ideas into
Kabbalistic ones. He did think, on the other hand, that there was originally a
relation between Biblical and Hindu traditions. As a true historian of religion
he understood though, that it is not the influence of integration, but rather the
transformation of received traditions and the new symbolic meaning, with
which they become imbued, which yield new religions. He therefore found it
necessary to stress the monotheistic nature of the Biblical tradition:
Diese Gotteslehre enthält den Schlüssel zum Verständnis
der Geschichte, der Symbolik und Gesetzgebung der Bücher
Mosis. Theils macht sie die Grundlage dieser Theile aus,
theils sind diese wenigstens nach ihr gestaltet und
niedergelegt. In der Geschichte, Symbolik und Gesetzgebung
führt Mosis die einige Totalität YHWH neben ihrer
Auflösung als ELOHIM fort um zu verhüten, dass die

27
Ibid.,p. 3.
28
Ibid.,p. 4.
Rivka Horwitz, "On Two Types of Kabbala in Germany in the 19th Century", in: Kabbala und
Romantik, hrsg. Eveline Goodman-Thau, Got MattcnkJatt und Christoph Schuhe. Tübingen 1994.
292 Heinrich Hirsch Landauer

Gotteslehre nicht in Polytheismus ausarte". (Italics mine). 30

We discern here a new approach. No longer is there a division between
YHWH and ELOHIM; they are One and the Same, but there is the idea of a
visible revealed God and a God who is concealed and hidden. In his revised
theory we can discern changed notions which contain kabbalistic ideas and can
be summarized as follows:
1) God, who is concealed as One, as a Grundidee, a point,
breaks in his revealed appearance into many manifestations.
2) YHWH is the Idea and ELOHIM is its development.
3) There is a division between the psychological and dog-
matic ways of experiencing God. In a footnote Landauer
points out that "Eheyeh ascher Eheyeh" means "das Sein an
sich, ohne Rücksicht auf die Arten der Thätigkeit".31
4) In the Godhead itself there is a movement from poten-
tial to actualisation.
5) The Names of God are related to various parts of the
human body (El Shaddai - breasts; El Roi - eyes).
6) There is an emphasis on the visualisation of the Hebrew
letters of YHWH and ELOHIM.
True to the structure of his first book, Landauer deals again with the
historical, the symbolical and the legal parts of the Pentateuch, but his language
and statements are now much more precise:
Das Auftreten YHWH's als ELOHIM seine Thätigkeiten
als schaffende, bewachende und richtende (reinigende)
Person in verschiedenen Zeiten und gegen verschiedene
Objecte macht den Hauptinhalt der mosaischen Geschichte
aus. Der glaubige Bibelforscher sieht nun in dem Inhalt der
folgenden Geschichte einen Beweis mehr von ihrer
Göttlichkeit: der rationalistische Historiker erkennt daraus die
Denkweise der alten Welt, den Plan und die Gesichtspunkte
des Verfassers.
Here Landauer reveals his own position. No longer is it his intention to be
a mere rabbinic scholar or a rationalistic historian. Perhaps we can say that he
has turned into a "Kabbalist". At least this echoes through when he continues:
Jenem enthält die Geschichte objektive Wahrheiten,
diesem hat der Verfasser vorhandene traditionelle Materiale,
hier allgemeinorientalische, dort national-hebräische nach

30
S e e footnote 24 above, p. 5.
31
Ibid.,p. 4.
 E. Goodman-Thau 293

dogmatischen Grundideen verarbeitet. Wenn aber auch die

Skepsis das Äussere der Geschichte als accessorische
Einkleidung ganz wegschält, so blieben wenigstens die Ideen,
das Dogma - als Innere Seele des geschichtlichen Körpers.32
In this book he perfects his method into a hermeneutic system.
We must limit ourselves to some examples. Landauer starts by explaining
ELOHIM's "Urthätigkeiten". In the first chapter of Genesis ELOHIM creates
the world and mankind (El Shaddai). Gen. 2 tells how YHWH ELOHIM
prohibits mankind from eating of the Tree of Knowledge (El Roi). In the third
chapter of Genesis YHWH ELOHIM punishes the transgression of his
commandment and takes care to preserve the Tree of Life (El Kanna).
Die Thätigkeiten als El Roi und El Kanna hängen hier in
einer Geschichte zusammen, daher sie auch in Einem Stück
vorgetragen werden. Den Weg zum Baum des Lebens
bewachen die Cherubim, wie wir in der Stifthütte sehen
werden - Bild oder Attribut des El Roi und das flammende
Schwert - Bild oder Attribut des El Kanna Ρ
Landauer points out that after the unfolding of YHWH in those activities,
the story of the worshipping of YHWH on behalf of mankind is told in Gen. 4.
Eve attributes the birth of her son to the kindness of YHWH, her sons bring
sacrifices to YHWH, Lemach trusts the righteousness of YHWH. "Then
Mankind began to call YHWH by name," we read at the end of the chapter of
what Landauer calls the "Urzeit". This is followed by the genealogy which
separates the history of the "Urzeit" from that of the Flood.
Landauer continues in this vein to interpret the stories of the Patriarchs, the
story of Exodus, the Symbolism of the Tabernacle, the dress of the High Priest,
the Sacrifices, the symbolism of the Holydays, the symbolism of the
arrangement of the Camp (with the Tabernacle as its center), the Decalogue,
the meaning of the ritual laws, which he illustrates with graphic descriptions il-
luminating their visual aspects. He also provides the various chapters with
explanatory introductions concerning the general nature of his hermeneutic
method weaving the entire Pentateuch into a multicoloured pattern, with ever-
returning motifs. He uses tremendous imagination and develops most
interesting etymological connections.
At the end of his fascinating study he states: "Da ist die althebräische
Gotteslehre übergegangen in Geschichte. Symbolik und Gesetze".34 Here
Landauer explains the transformation of the Pentateuch which was originally
the expression of the encounter between Man and God, expressed in perfect
harmony within the structure of the Torah. What we now find are separate

32
Ibid. p. 6.
33
Ibid.,p. 7.
34
Ibid.,p. 80.
294 Heinrich Hirsch Landauer

pieces of a historical, symbolic or legal nature. The inner meaning of the

Pentateuch must be connected with the over-all plan of the text. Landauer then
discovers how the search for the proper understanding of the text must proceed
by way of an integrated method showing at the end the holy mosaic of the
Torah. The historical method can never discover this secret pattern.
Finally, Landauer points to the fact that the Torah does not tell the stories in
the linear time 'ein muqdam u-me'uhar ba-torah - "there is no earlier and later
in the Torah", but the Torah deals with the inner meanings of events and is
redacted according to the principle of semikhut 'inyan - "things that belong
together" as in the Mishnah. In the later period of the Hebrew Prophets the
theology of the different Names of God seldom appears (as, for example, in the
symbolic names of Jesaja's children) and becomes the sole spiritual property of
priests, prophets and the secret of the Initiated. This becomes clear, Landauer
notes, when one sees how this theology becomes the key to understanding the
mystical text, in particular the Zohar, where the old patterns are again
noticeable.
In concluding Wesen und Form des Pentateuchs, Landauer brings a number
of texts from the Zohar which he calls the Trialogie des Zohars, dealing with
the idea of Three which is One, corresponding to his system of three
manifestations of Elohim, albeit here with a different meaning. Furthermore,
Landauer makes highly interesting connections between Christianity and the
Zohar, informing us that these motifs were certainly Jewish before they were
introduced into Christianity by Jesus and the Apostles.
I close with a note by Landauer found in the Literaturblätter des Orients
No. 35 showing how this young Rabbinic and Bible scholar turned into a true
Kabbalist.
Der erste Akt der Gottheit bei der Schöpfung, oder bei
ihrem Hervortreten aus sich selbst, wird im Zohar entweder
als ein Schreiben, ein Buchstaben-Zeichen oder ein
Begattungsakt mit der Schechina und zwar unter ganz
sinnlichen Ausdrücken dargestellt - und bei Abulafia haben
wir die Lösung des Räthsels. Er vergleicht den Zeugungsakt
mit dem Akt des Schreibens. Was hier das erigierte Glied ist,
ist ihm dort die Feder, hier fliesst der Saame, dort die Tinte
herab. Die Tinte kommt auf empfangliche Materie, klebt an,
verhärtet - und das Kind des Geistes kommt zur Welt.
 Christoph Schlüte

Kabbala-Rezeption in der Deutschen Romantik

"Kabbala-Rezeption" klingt wie eine Tautologie. Ist doch "Rezeption" eine

der Hauptbedeutungen des hebräischen Substantivs Kabbala, das in dem
wissenschaftlichen deutschen Lehnwort "Rezeption" hier nur verdoppelt
scheint. Aber ich spreche hier nicht über Kabbalat-ha-Kabbaia, sondern über
Kabbala-Rezeption. Die Tautologie ist sprachlich und in der Sache dadurch
aufgebrochen, daß in "Kabbala-Rezeption" genau jener Übergang zwischen
Jüdischem und Deutschem erinnert und aufbewahrt wird, der sich in der
deutschen Romantik vollzieht.
In seiner bekannten Abhandlung Die letzten Kabbalisten in Deutschland
hatte Gershom Scholem den Niedergang originärer kabbalistischer Tradition
in den deutschsprachigen Ländern auf das Jahr 1800, das Todesjahr Nathan
Adlers, datiert: "Mit dem Ende des 18. Jahrhunderts bricht die kabbalistische
Tradition in Deutschland ziemlich abrupt ab."1 Doch das Abbrechen der
kabbalistischen Tradition bedeutete keineswegs ihr Verschwinden. Vielmehr
ist ein Prozeß der Transformation von Kabbala zu beobachten. Dem von
Scholem konstatierten Verebben kabbalistischer Literatur in hebräischer
Sprache steht ein ungeheures Anwachsen der Bezugnahme, Wertschätzung
und Erforschung von Kabbala in deutschsprachigen Texten der Romantik und
Nachromantik gegenüber. Es gehen nämlich verschiedenste Elemente der
Kabbala vom Hebräischen und Aramäischen, vom Jiddischen, Lateinischen
und Französischen in volkstümliche und wissenschaftliche, literarische und
religiöse Texte deutscher Sprache ein.
Das bedeutet nicht nur sprachlich, sondern meist auch kulturell, sozial
und religiös eine Transposition, bisweilen gar einen Bruch. Zunächst haben
wir es in der Romantik mit einer geradezu modischen Kabbala-Rezeption
seitens von Christen zu tun, es gibt jedoch daneben auch den ganz
verschiedenartigen Weg jüdischer Kabbala-Rezeption in deutscher Sprache,
von den synagogalen Gebetbüchern bis hin zu den Protagonisten der
Wissenschaft des Judentums. Und es gibt umgekehrt sogar Kenntnisse und
den Rück-Transfer von Elementen christlicher Kabbala zu jüdischen Autoren.
Das gemeinsame Merkmal all dieser Formen romantischer Kabbala-

1
Gexdiom Scholem, "Die letzten Kabbalisten in Deutschland", idem, Judaica 3 Frankfurt a.M.
1970, S.218.
296 Kabbala-Rezeption

Rezeption ist, daß Kabbala in die deutsche Sprache übersetzt, transponiert

wird.
Hier von "Einfluß" der Kabbala zu sprechen, vernebelt mehr als es klärt.
Nicht selten hat die Kabbala gar keinen Einfluß, sondern wird nur zusätzlich
herangezogen, um etwas zu belegen oder zu variieren, was ein Autor ohnehin
denkt oder aus anderen Quellen zu wissen meint. Er wird dabei nicht von der
Kabbala "beeinflußt", aber dennoch ist in diesem Fall Kabbala bekannt und
wird auf eine bestimmte Art rezipiert, selbst von ihren schärfsten Gegnern.
Die Ausgangsfrage hier ist somit nicht die nach den ersten Ursprüngen, den
Quellen, dem wahren Autor oder dem ersten historischen Entstehen
irgendwelcher kabbalistischer Texte und die Bemessung ihres "Einflusses"
auf die Romantik, sondern die, was aus der reichen kabbalistischen Tradition
aufgenommen, wie und warum es bei romantischen Autoren transformiert
wurde. Nicht wie Kabbala entsteht, sondern wie sie verstanden und verändert
wird, kann so gezeigt werden.
Verschiedene Weisen und Beispiele dieser Rezeption sind zu benennen.
Um einem präzisen Bild näher zu kommen, kann in diesem Rahmen
natürlich nicht inhaltlich all das aufgezählt oder gar geschildert werden, was
es an romantischer Kabbala-Rezeption gibt. Art und Ausmaß dieser
Rezeption waren Gegenstand von Colloquien in Kassel und Jerusalem im
Jahr 1991, die ich mit Eveline Goodman-Thau und Gert Mattenklott
zusammen organisieren konnte^. Ich greife hier also auch auf Forschungen
anderer zurück und versuche eine Art übergreifender Hermeneutik der
Konstellation von Kabbala und Romantik zu entwickeln. Um die Vielfalt zu
ordnen, werden viele verschiedene Kategorien der romantischen Kabbala-
Rezeption aufzuzeigen und an Einzelfallen kurz zu erläutern sein. Doch
zunächst einige einleitende Bemerkungen zur geschichtlichen Situation und
den Bedingungen der Kabbala-Rezeption in der deutschen Romantik im
Ausgang von der Aufklärung.

I. Kabbala und Romantik

In der Geschichte von Philosophie und Politik, Theologie und Literatur

bedeutete Aufklärung zumeist einen Bruch mit religiöser Orthodoxie. Dem
Exodus aus der Orthodoxie folgt jedoch - individuell wie sozial - nicht selten
eine Rückbesinnung auf andere, heterodoxe und mystische religiöse
Traditionen, die in neuen Konstellationen mit dem Gedankengut der
Aufklärung amalgamiert werden. Dieser Figur einer nachaufklärerischen

2
Eveline Goodman-Thau, Gert Mattenklott, Christoph Sdiulte, ed., Kabbala und Romantik. Die
jüdische Mystik in der romantischen Geistesgesdiichte, Tübingen 1994.
 Ch. Schulte 297

Wiederanknüpfung an religiöse Traditionen, die im Fall der Kabbala-

Rezeption der deutschen Romantik prägnant aufscheint, soll hier
nachgegangen werden.
Die Aufnahme der Kabbala durch die deutsche Romantik steht von
vornherein vor einem Paradox. "Denn die Welt der Kabbala war der
jüdischen Aufklärung des 19. Jahrhunderts in der Tat verschlossen."
(Gershom Scholem).3 In eben den Jahren, in denen im Zeichen jüdischer
Aufklärung und Emanzipation eine Wissenschaft des Judentums sich
konstituiert, sind es christliche Romantiker, die Kabbala sich anzueignen
beginnen. Ihr gegen die religiöse "Kahlheit der Aufklärerei" (Hegel4)
gerichtetes Interesse an Naturphilosophie, Magie, Mythos und Pantheismus,
an mystischer Sprachtheorie und Symbolik, an Kosmogonie und Theogonie
wird von der Kabbala angezogen und befeuert.
In der romantischen Naturphilosophie und in Baaders Theosophie ebenso
wie in Schellings "Metaphysik des Bösen" (Heidegger5), der
Freiheitsabhandlung von 1809, und in seiner Weltalter-Philosophie wird
Kabbala in den Bildern von En-Sof und Zimzum nicht nur metaphorisch,
sondern konzeptuell bestimmend. Molitor lernt und kommentiert
jahrzehntelang Kabbala und entwickelt in seinen Werken "Ideen und
Anschauungen, die wirkliche Einsicht in diese Welt verraten" (Scholem)6.
Die Wirkung solcher erstaunlichen Wertschätzung von Kabbala erstreckt sich
jedoch weit über Philosophie, Theologie und Religionswissenschaft hinaus bis
in die romantische Literatur, Naturwissenschaft und Medizin.
Auf der anderen Seite bleibt der Widerstand des aufgeklärten deutschen
Judentums gegen die Kabbala auszuleuchten. "Die großen jüdischen
Gelehrten des vorigen Jahrhunderts, deren Auffassung der jüdischen
Geschichte noch in unseren Tagen vorherrscht, Männer wie Graetz, Zunz,
Geiger, Luzzatto und Steinschneider, hatten, um es sehr maßvoll
auszudrücken, wenig Sympathie für die Kabbala." (Scholem).7 Im Stil der
Aufklärung werden dabei Magie und Mystik, Pantheismus und Mythologie
aus dem Bild des jüdischen Monotheismus entfernt. Die geheimen politisch-
theologischen Motive solcher Elimination sind sorgsam zu entschlüsseln.
Denn die neu entstehende Wissenschaft des Judentums wird so eindringlich
auf Aufklärung und Emanzipation eingeschworen, daß Kabbala und ihre

3
Gershom Scholem, Die jüdische Mystik in ihren Hauptströmungen, Zürich 1957, S. 2.
4
Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, Enzyklopädie der philosophischen Wissenschaften, Vorrede zur
2. Ausgabe von 1827, ed. Friedhelm Nicolin und Otto Pöggeler, Hamburg 1975, S. 16.
^Martin Heidegger, Schellings Abhandlung über das Wesen der menschlichen Freiheit (1809), ed.
Hildegard Feidc, Tübingen 1971, S. 125 u.ö.
6 Scholem, Die jüdische Mystik, S.2.
η
Scholan, Die jüdische Mystik, S. 1.
298 Kabbala-Rezeption

kritische Erforschung wissenschaftlich abseitig, ihre Praxis einigen

traditionellen Rabbinen und deren Anhängern vorbehalten bleibt.
Im Vergleich zum viel beachteten Streit zwischen jüdischer Reform und
Neo-Orthodoxie führt die Kabbala-Rezeption nur ein wissenschaftlich bis
heute fast unaufgearbeitetes Schattendasein. Während nämlich die Kabbala-
Rezeption durch christliche Romantiker blüht, bleibt sie bei jüdischen
Romantikern eher die Ausnahme. Es gibt, wie das Beispiel von Salomon
Ludwig Steinheim (1789-1866) zeigt, eine gegen die Aufklärung gerichtete,
romantische jüdische Spiritualität und Religiosität ganz ohne Kabbala, so wie
ja auch nicht-kabbalistische jüdische Frömmigkeitsliteratur durch die
Jahrhunderte fortexistiert. Dennoch ist, wenn auch in kleinen Kreisen, eine
Kabbala-Rezeption im deutschen Judentum der Romantik zu vermerken und
zu erforschen; eine Rezeption, die teilweise noch ganz aus der traditionellen
rabbinischen Vermittlung und Praxis der Kabbala, etwa durch den "Ba al
schem von Michelstadt" Seckel Lob Wormser, hervorgeht.8
Während auf christlicher Seite die Rezeption von Kabbala gegen den
Theismus der Aufklärung lediglich den Rückgriff auf ein für wichtig oder
sogar für religiös unverzichtbar erachtetes, mystisches Traditionsgut der
jüdischen, d. h. einer anderen Religion und Philosophie bedeutete, kurz: eine
zumeist rein geistige, religiöse oder weltanschauliche Bereicherung und
Erbauung auf Basis schon erreichter bürgerlicher Emanzipation, ist für einen
Juden die Rezeption von Kabbala fast immer verbunden mit einer
weitreichenden politischen, sozialen, staatsbürgerlichen und intellektuellen
Lebensentscheidung. Denn Kabbala stand nicht nur inneijüdisch seitens der
Orthodoxie noch immer im Ruch der Häresie und im Verdacht des
Sabbatianismus. Sie paßte auch nicht in das von Moses Mendelssohn in
seinem Werk Jerusalem (1783) entworfene Bild vom Judentum als
aufgeklärter, theistischer Vernunftreligion, die außer "geoffenbarter
Gesetzgebung" von "keiner geoffenbarten Religion" wisse.9
In Jerusalem wird, maßgeblich für ganze Generationen emanzipierter
deutscher Juden, die staatsrechtliche Gleichstellung der Synagoge gegenüber
der Kirche und die staatsbürgerliche Gleichstellung der Juden gegenüber den
Christen gerade damit begründet, daß das Judentum im Kern eine die
Existenz Gottes, seine Providenz und die Unsterblichkeit der Seele lehrende
rationalistische Religion sei, die die Glückseligkeit der ganzen Gesellschaft
anstrebe und fordere. Die Kabbala liegt nicht nur außerhalb des Kanons solch

8
Vgl. Gerdiom Scholem, "Die letzten Kabbalisten in Deutsdiland", idan, Judaica 3, Frankfurt a.M.
1970, S.218-246.
9
Moses Mendelssohn, Jerusalem oder über religiöse Macht und Judentum, Gesammelte Schriften.
Jubiläumsausgabe, Bd Vm, ed Alexander Altmann, Stuttgait-Bad Cannstatt 1983, S.157, 164,
193f.
 Ch. Schulte 299

aufgeklärter jüdischer "Vernunftreligion" (Kant 10 ), eine religiöse

Entscheidung für sie bedrohte vermeintlich auch die ersehnte
emanzipatorische Gleichung von jüdisch-theistischer Vernunftreligion und
der Anerkennung jüdischer staatsbürgerlicher Gleichberechtigung, die nur
mittels der Reinigung des Judentums von allen vermeintlich irrationalen'
Elementen der Offenbarung: der Wunder, Magie, Mystik oder des Mythos
aufrechtzuerhalten war. Letztere sind bei Mendelssohn nicht mehr "ewige",
sondern nur noch "Geschichtswahrheiten", also unverbindliche Privat- und
Glaubenssache.11
Salomon Maimons Lebensgeschichte (1792/93), eine Autobiographie, die
Maimons hervorragende Kenntnisse der Kabbala bezeugt und eine der
wichtigsten und reichsten Quellen des Wissens über Kabbala in der Romantik
war 12 , schildert paradigmatisch den Weg der Aufklärung als den persönlich
durchlebten Exodus aus dem ostjüdischen Stetl, wo Kabbala noch alltäglich
gelehrt und praktiziert wird, in die aufgeklärten, emanzipierten, reichen und
gebildeten jüdischen Gemeinden des Westens, besonders Deutschlands.
Kabbala steht für das geistige Ghetto des Stetl und seine Rückständigkeit in
jeder Hinsicht.
So erschwerte fiir orthodox religiöse Juden der Sabbatianismus-Verdacht
die Kabbala-Rezeption und ein positives Verhältnis zur Kabbala; für die
aufgeklärten und emanzipierten jüdischen Kreise der romantischen Periode in
der ersten Hälfte des 19. Jahrhunderts barg Kabbala die Drohung des
Rückfalls in ein vorbürgerliches Judentum, sowohl in staatsbürgerlicher als
auch in sozialer und intellektueller Hinsicht. Und trotzdem existiert, wenn
auch oft unterirdisch, eine jüdische Kabbala-Rezeption in der Romantik:
kaum in dem von Jakob Emden anti-sabbatianisch eingeschworenen, von
Reformbestrebungen gezeichneten Hamburg und kaum in den jüdischen
Berliner Salons, aber in kleinen jüdischen Gemeinden Hessens, Badens und
Bayerns, in Würzburg und Michelstadt, in Offenbach, Frankfurt oder
München.
Gemeinsam ist sowohl der christlichen als auch der jüdischen Kabbala-
Rezeption der Romantik ein neues Interesse an Sprache. Hamanns Satz, daß

10
Immanuel Kant, Die Religion innerhalb der Grenzen der bloßen Vernunft (Königsberg
1793/94), Vorrede zur 2. Aufl.; vgl. Emst Troeltsch, "Das Historische in Kants
Religionsphilosophie", Kant-Studien IX (1904), S.21-154.
11
Mendelssohn, Jerusalem, a.a.O., S. 157ff., 164f. Zu Hamanns schneidender Kritik an
Mendelssohn vgl. Karlfried Gründer, "Hamann und Mendelssohn", Religionskritik und Religiosität
in der deutschen Aufklärung, ed Karlfried Gründer und Heinrich Rangstorf Wolfenbütteler Studim
zur Aufklärung, 11 (Heidelberg 1988), S.113-144.
11
Salomon Maimons Lebensgeschichte. Von ihn selbst erzählt und herausgegeben von Karl Hiiljpp
Moritz, neu ed, ZwiBatscha, Frankfurt a.M 1984, bes. Kap. 14, S.73-88.
300 Kabbala-Rezeption

Sprache "die Mutter der Vernunft und Offenbarung, ihr A und O" 13 sei,
markiert den Konvergenzpunkt der Romantiker gegen die reine Vernunft der
Aufklärung. Das neue Verhältnis zur Sprache, namentlich zum Hebräischen
als der von Johann Gottfried Herder (1744-1803) gepriesenen Sprache der
"ebräischen Poesie" und des jüdischen "Volksgeistes"14, ist der Focus der
romantischen Kabbala-Rezeption. Denn die Berufung auf Sprache und Schrift
als Medium der Offenbarung bildet die Basis der religiösen Opposition gegen
den Theismus der Aufklärung.
Lebendigkeit und Geschichtlichkeit der Sprache werden Antidot der Logik
und der Schemata reiner Vernunft a priori. Nicht die Grenzen endlicher
Vernunft, sondern Sprache als dem Menschen schlechthin Gegebenes und
Anerschaffenes ist der Ausgangspunkt eines Denkens, das schon deshalb
immer als abkünftig, als a posteriori und geschichtlich sich verstehen muß.
Das Wort Gottes in der Offenbarung, zumal in der hebräischen Ursprache, ist
Voraussetzung nicht nur aller menschlichen Reaktion und Reflexion, sondern
- kosmologisch und geschichtlich - der Schöpfung selber. Nicht mehr
voraussetzungsloses Selbstdenken, sondern der Kommentar des
Vorgefundenen wird deshalb zur Aufgabe. Modell der Reflexion ist nicht
mehr das universale Vernunft-System, sondern eine Art universaler
Hermeneutik. Die Offenbarung gewinnt wieder die Oberhand über Kants
"Religion innerhalb der Grenzen der bloßen Vernunft". Überlieferung des
Offenbarten tritt an die Stelle der Emanzipation von ihm, Rückgang in die
Tradition an die Stelle des Fortschrittsoptimismus. Und Kabbala repräsentiert
in alledem Urtradition in der hebräischen Gottes- und Ursprache.
Diese Konzentration um Sprache erlaubt schließlich die Weite und Breite
der Kabbala-Rezeption in den verschiedenen Wissenschaften, aber auch in
der schönen Literatur, in Zeitschriften, Übersetzungen und religiösen Texten.
Nun ist die Rezeption von Kabbala selber ein immer anderes Verstehen und
ein Neuformen von sprachlichen Akten. So ergab sich die Aufgabe zu
untersuchen, welche verschiedenen Weisen von Kabbala-Rezeption sich in
der deutschen Romantik finden. Wie die vielfaltigen Inhalte im einzelnen
aussehen, muß Gegenstand am besten mehrerer Forschungsprojekte bleiben.
Hier seien einige methodische Unterscheidungen anhand von konkreten
Beispielfallen versucht und damit ein Rahmen abgesteckt, der es erleichtert,
dieses weite Feld besser zu überblicken.

Brief an Friedrich Heinrich Jacobi v. 28.10.1785, Johann Georg Hamanns.. J^eben und
Schriften, ed. C H. Gildemeister, 5. Bd. Gotha 1868, S.122. Zit. auch in: Gerdiom Scholem: "Der
Name Gottes und die Sprachtheorie der Kabbala", Judaica 3, a.a.O., S.7-70,9.
14
Jcharm Gottfried Herder, Vom Geist der ebräischen Poesie, 1782/83.
 Ch. Schulte 301

II. Wo, wie oder bei wem wurde Kabbala gelernt oder gelesen?

Formal können wir zwischen direkter und indirekter Rezeption von Kabbala
unterscheiden. Direkte Rezeption liegt vor bei der Lektüre eines
kabbalistischen Originaltextes oder aber beim direkten Unterricht durch einen
Kabbalisten. Indirekte Rezeption ist das Lesen oder Hören über Kabbala,
vermittelt durch eine Erzählung oder schriftliche Schilderung von Kabbala
seitens Dritter, die sich über Kabbala äußern.
Bei den christlichen Romantikern ist die direkte Kabbala- Rezeption
selten. Die große Ausnahme stellt der Philosoph Franz Joseph Molitor (1779-
1860) dar. Der ewige Frankfurter, Freimaurer und katholische Lehrer am
jüdischen Philanthropinum lernte von 1813 bis zu seinem Tod über vier
Jahrzehnte lang direkt mit Rabbinen in Offenbach und Frankfurt Kabbala aus
den Originaltexten. Wie das vierbändige Hauptwerk dieses wohl besten
christlichen Kenners der Kabbala im frühen 19. Jahrhundert, Philosophie der
Geschichte oder über die Tradition, erschienen zwischen 1827 und 1853,
zeigt, erwarb Molitor, der über lange Jahre zwei Rabbinen für ihren
Unterricht und ihre Hilfen bezahlte, breite Kenntnisse auch des Talmud sowie
der jüdischen Philosophie, Literatur und Geschichte15. In seiner Philosophie
der Geschichte, die Philologie, Historiographie, Theologie, Sprach- und
Geschichtsphilosophie vereint, schildert Molitor Judentum und Christentum
als gleichberechtigte und gleichgewichtige Pole einer Tradition und einer
Heilsgeschichte. Er bricht gleichermaßen mit dem Antisemitismus
christlicher Theologie wie mit den Postulaten jener
Transzendentalphilosophie der Kant, Fichte und Hegel, für die das
Christentum "absolute Religion" und das Judentum nur dessen historisch
überwundener, minderwertiger Vorläufer ist16.
In einem Brief an Schelling (vom 29.1.1828), der als Direktor der
Königlich Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften Molitors Studien
förderte, beschreibt Molitor jedoch auch sehr deutlich die Schwierigkeiten,
die ihn als Christ bei seinen Forschungen über Judentum und besonders über
Kabbala seitens der Juden erwarteten (Brief v. 29.1.1828): "Man findet zwar
viele gelehrte Juden, aber diejenigen, die recht tief in die rabbinischen
Wissenschaften eingeweihet sind, verbinden zugleich eine solche Orthodoxie
dabei, daß sie mit keinem Christen sich einlassen, und diejenigen, welche
liberaler denken, haben entweder nicht Kenntnisse genug oder sehen die

15
Zur Biographie Molitors s. Carl Frankenstein, Franz Joseph Molitors metaphysische
Geschichtsphilosophie, Diss. phil. Berlin 1928, S.106-117.
16
Heimami Greive, "Fortsdiritt und Diskriminienmg. Juden und Judentum bei Georg Wilhelm
Friedrich Hegel und Franz Joseph Molitor", Homburg vor der Höhe in der deutschen
Geistesgeschichte, ed. von Christoph Jamme und Otto Pöggeler, Stuttgart 1981, S.300-317.
302 Kabbala-Rezeption

Dinge zu flach an." 17 Die liberalen Frankfurter Juden gingen in ihrer

Ablehnung der Kabbala sogar so weit, Molitor als Lehrer am Frankfurter
Philanthropinum seiner Kabbala-Studien wegen zu entlassen. Orthodoxe
Lehrer findet er, dessen Begegnung mit der Kabbala ursprünglich durch den
jüdischen Freimaurer und Kabbalisten Ephraim Joseph Hirschfeld (1755-
1820) initiiert wurde18, ausgerechnet in Offenbach, seinerzeit einem Hauptort
des häretischen Sabbatianismus und Frankismus. Er finanziert den
Lebensunterhalt dieser Rabbinen und ihrer Familien, aber er hat, um sie vor
inneijüdischen Anfeindungen zu schützen, ihre Namen nie öffentlich genannt
und sogar seine Philosophie der Geschichte ohne Autorennamen drucken
lassen.19
Diese Details zeigen, daß es weniger die fehlenden Sprachkenntnisse als
vielmehr religiöse und soziale Gründe waren, die das Studium von Talmud
und Kabbala und damit die direkte Rezeption von Kabbala christlicherseits
erschwerten. So hatte z.B. Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph Schelling (1775-1854),
der als Sohn eines Professors für orientalische Sprachen nachweislich
ausgezeichnete Kenntnisse des Hebräischen, Persischen und Arabischen
hatte, nie einen jüdischen Lehrer und hat, obwohl ihm als Akademie-Direktor
in München die damals beste Judaica-Sammlung Mitteleuropas zur
Verfügung stand, wohl nie direkt Werke der Kabbala studiert20. Schelling ist
das Paradigma indirekter romantischer Kabbala-Rezeption: was er von
Kabbala weiß und gebraucht, hat er nicht von einem jüdischen Lehrer, er hat
es aus Boehme, aus Giordano Bruno, aus Knorr von Rosenroth, aus Oetinger,
Jacobi und Molitor, aber auch aus der berühmt-berüchtigten antisemitischen
Hetzschrift Entdecktes Judenthum (Königsberg 1711) von Johann Andreas
Eisenmenger (1654-1704), einer weiteren wichtigen Quelle des romantischen
Wissens' von Judentum und Kabbala.
Darin gleichen ihm seine Kollegen, Freunde und Briefpartner, der
Theosoph und Bergrat Franz von Baader (1765-1840) und der berühmte
romantische Mediziner Gotthilf Heinrich Schubert (1780-1860): Fast ohne
Kenntnisse des Hebräischen erwähnen und benutzen sie Versatzstücke der
Kabbala, rezipieren diese jedoch ausschließlich indirekt, etwa durch die
Werke des französischen Freimaurers und Theosophen Louis Claude de

17
In: Hans-Jörg Sandkühler, Freiheit und Wirklichkeit, Frankfurt a.M. 1968, S.255.
18
Vgl. Jakob Katz, Jews and Freemasons in Europe, Cambridge/Mass. 1970; Gershom Scholem,
Art. "Molitor", Encyclopaedia Judaica, Bd. ΧΠ, Sp.227f.
19
Sandkühler, S. 250f.
ergaben meine Nachforschungen in den nodi existierenden Ausleihemanualen der Münchener
Staatsbibliothek. Dies zwingt zur Korrektur der Annahmen von Wilhelm August Schulze, "Sdielling
und die Kabbala", Judaica X m (1957), S.65-99; 143-170; 210-232. Zur Biographie Schellmgs vgl.
G L. Plitt, Schellings Leben. In Briefen, 3 Bde. Leipzig 1869/70; Horst Fuhrmans, F.WJ. Schelling.
Briefe und Dokumente, Bonn 1962ff.
 Ch. Schulte 303

Saint-Martin (1743-1803)21. Schubert übersetzt Saint-Martin ins Deutsche,

Baader kommentiert Saint-Martin und Boehme, aber beide kennen nur die
Tradition christlicher Kabbala.
Ein Gleiches gilt für Goethe: im pietistischen Zirkel der Susanne
Katharina von Klettenberg hatte er als kaum Zwanzigjähriger 1769 neben
Paracelsus und Basilius Valentinus das Opus mago-cabbalisticum et
theosophicum (Homburg vor der Höhe 1735; 2. Aufl. 1760) des Georg von
Welling gelesen. Aus der Erinnerung rekonstruiert er im achten Buch von
Dichtung und Wahrheit, geschrieben 1811, wie er sich dort aus
verschiedensten alchimistischen und gnostischen, jüdischen und christlichen
esoterischen Lehrstücken eine Theo- und Kosmogonie zusammenphantasiert
hatte, zu der das "Hermetische, Mystische, Kabbalistische" seinen Beitrag
lieferte22. An Goethe wie auch an Novalis23 läßt sich, ganz im Gegensatz zu
Molitors oder Wormsers tief religiöser Wertschätzung der Kabbala, studieren,
wie Kabbala eigentlich nur als ein Esotericum unter anderen, als
geheimnisumwitterter Stoff und mystifizierbare, okkulte literarische Vorlage
benutzt und verarbeitet wird. Auf hohem literarischem Niveau und in
sublimer Weise ist hier eine Versuchung der gesamten modernen Kabbala-
Rezeption angedeutet: im 19. und 20. Jahrhundert wird Kabbala häufig nur
noch zu Zwecken okkultistischer Scharlatanerie in Gebrauch genommen24.
Oft steht sie dann, beliebig austauschbar, nur fürs Okkulte und wird im
Okkultismus Teil einer "Metaphysik der dummen Kerle" (Adorno)25.
Wie höchst zweideutig und widersprüchlich die Haltung zur Kabbala in
der indirekten Kabbala-Rezeption sein kann, verdeutlicht das Beispiel von
Joseph Görres (1776-1848): in einer sehr ausführlichen, theologisch und
religiös zustimmenden Vorankündigung des ersten Bandes von Molitors
Philosophie der Geschichte im Katholik (1826) bekennt Görres sich
gleichzeitig zu seiner Wertschätzung und zu seiner Unkenntnis der Kabbala

Fritz Lieb, Franz Baaders Jugendgeschichte, Mündien 1926. Gotthilf Heinrich Schubert,
Gedenkschrift zum 200. Geburtstage des romantischen Naturforschers, ed. A. Rössler. Erlange»
1980.
11
Johann Wolfgang Goethe, Dichtung und Wahrheit, Hamburger Ausgabe, Bd. IX, ed. Edwin
Trunz, Hamburg (4. Aufl.) 1961, S.350-353; vgl. Rolf Christian Zimmermann, Das Weltbild des
jungen Goethe, 2 Bde., Mündien 1969/79; Stephane Moses, "Das wiedergefimdene Eden. Goethes
Märdien >Der neue Paris<", idem, Spuren der Schrift. Von Goethe bis Celan, Frankfurt a.M 1987,
S. 13-38.
Vgl. Novalis, "Das allgemeine Brouillon" (Materialien zue Enzyklopädistik 1798/99), Schriften,
3. Bd.: Das philosophische W a l Π, ed Ridiard Samuel, Stuttgart 1968, S.266f.
24
Karlfried Gründer, "Aufklärung und Surrogate", Oikeiosis. Festschrift für Robert Spaemann, ed.
Reinhard Low, Weinheim 1987, S.55-68.
Theodor W. Adomo, Minima Moralia, Gesammelte Schriften, Bd 4, Frankfurt a.M. 1980,
S.274.
304 Kabbala-Rezeption

und des Judentums. In seiner berühmten Christlichen Mystik (4 Bde. 1836-

42), dem umfangreichen romantischen Gegenstück zu Molitors Studien der
jüdischen Mystik, äußert sich Görres später über Kabbala hingegen kurz und,
im Zusammenhang antisemitischer Kindermord-Erzählungen, eher
abfallig.26
Auf jüdischer Seite ist in der Romantik die direkte Kabbala-Rezeption
ganz natürlich noch vorherrschend. Die traditionelle Vermittlung findet sich
in den Schulen von Nathan Adler (1741-1800) in Frankfurt und Abraham
Bing (1752-1839) in Würzburg, die Praxis (ζ. B. die Anwendung von
Amuletten) beim "Ba al Schern von Michelstadt" Seckel Lob Wormser ( Π ό δ -
ι 847), zu dem als Wunderheiler Patienten aus dem ganzen süddeutschen
Raum strömen27. Aber Kabbala-Schüler von Abraham Bing wie Isaak
Bemays dürfen auch schon in Würzburg an der Universität studieren, und der
Ba al Schern von Michelstadt kannte die zeitgenössische romantische
Literatur, sogar Werke Kants und Schellings. Selbst die die Kabbala
ablehnenden, aufgeklärten Protagonisten der Wissenschaft des Judentums wie
Heinrich Graetz (1817-1891) und Moritz Steinschneider (1816-1907) haben
nach dem Muster von Salomon Maimón Kabbala noch direkt unter Anleitung
von rabbinischen Lehrern aus den Originaltexten gelernt, bevor sie sich mit
ausgezeichneten Kenntnissen der Kabbala von ihr ab- und der säkularen
Forschung und Wissenschaft zuwandten.
Erst im 20. Jahrhundert gibt es auch jüdischerseits eine rein indirekte
Rezeption von Kabbala, etwa im Fall von Walter Benjamin, der ziemlich
alles, was er über Kabbala weiß, von Gershom Scholem hat oder aber bei
Oskar Goldberg, Baader, Molitor und Schelling las28. Selbstverständlich
finden sich bei den wirklichen Kennern der Kabbala, bei Scholem wie bei
seinem großen romantischen Vorbild Molitor oder seinem großen Gegner
Graetz, stets beides, direkte und indirekte Rezeption der Kabbala. Sie kennen
die Originaltexte ebenso wie die Literatur über sie, Jüdisches wie
Christliches, Theosophisches wie Wissenschaftliches. Die meisten der hier
benannten Formen und Kategorien der Kabbala-Rezeption vermischen sich
bei diesen Autoren in immer neuen Variationen und in großer Vielfalt.

A r
Joseph Görres (Rez.), "Ueber die Tradition in dem alten Bunde, und ihre Beziehung zur Kirche des
neuen Bundes mit vorzilglidier Rücksicht auf den (!) Kabbalah", Katholik VI (1826), Bd. 19, S.241-
254; idem, Christliche Mystik, ed. Uta Ranke-Heinemarm, Frankfurt a.M 1989, Bd. 5, S.53-70.
Π
Raphael Straus, "The Baal-Shem of Michelstadt. Mesmerism and Cabbala", Historia Judaica VU!
(1946) No.l, S. 135-148; Karl E. Grözmger, "Jüdische Wundermärmer in Deutschland", idem, ed.,
Judentum im deutschen Sprachraum, Frankfurt a.M. 1991, S. 190-221.
28
Vgl. Gerdiom Scholem, Waiter Benjamin - die Geschichte einer Freundschaft, Frankfurt a.M
1975; Walter Benjamin/Gershom Scholem. Briefwechsel 1933-1940, ed. G. Scholem, Frankfurt
a.M. 1980.
 Ch. Schulte 305

III. Welche Elemente der Kabbala werden rezipiert?

Material, das ist die zweite Kategorie in der Kabbala-Rezeption der deutschen
Romantik, läßt sich unterscheiden, was tatsächlich rezipiert wurde und
welche Arten von kabbalistischen Elementen ihren Weg in deutschsprachige
Texte finden.
(1) Ganz allgemein läßt sich sagen, daß sehr selten vollständige
kabbalistische Texte, ζ. B. geschlossene Erzählungen, oder wenigstens
längere Textabschnitte zitiert werden, sei es im Original oder deutscher
Übersetzung. Eine Ausnahme ist hier die erste deutsche Übersetzung des
Sefer Jezira durch Molitors Freund und Logenbruder Johann Friedrich von
Meyer (1772-1849), den sogenannten "Bibel-Meyer", seines Zeichens
Frankfurter Gerichtspräsident, Gesandter, Bürgermeister und Herausgeber der
Blätter für höhere Wahrheit (1819-1832), in welche er ebenfalls Beiträge über
Kabbala einrückt. Die sehr sorgsam gesetzte und kommentierte, vollständig
zweisprachige Ausgabe des Sefer Jezira erscheint 1830 bei Reclam in
Leipzig29.
(2) Gewöhnlich werden hingegen nur einzelne wichtige kabbalistische
Begriffe gebraucht, d. h. material rezipiert. So wird durch den
publizitätsträchtig inszenierten, durch Friedrich Heinrich Jacobi (1743-1819)
provozierten, sogenannten Spinozismus-Streit ab 1785 der kabbalistische
Begriff des En-Sof in allen nur möglichen Schreibweisen zum Gemeingut des
romantischen Diskurses30; zumal da es diesen Begriff, übersetzt als
"Ungrund", auch schon bei Jacob Boehme gab, der die große Entdeckung der
romantischen Philosophie und Theosophie wird.
Aber die Erwähnung des "Ensoph" bei Jacobi hatte einen polemischen
Zweck. Kabbala wird mit Spinozismus und Pantheismus identifiziert, diese
hinwiederum mit Atheismus31: Und ausgerechnet mit dieser falschen Etikette
von Spinozismus, Pantheismus und Atheismus versehen, tritt Kabbala ihren
Siegeszug im romantischen Diskurs an: Kabbala als "Spinozismus" findet,
wie Spinoza, das Interesse der Jacobi-Leser Fichte und Hegel, Goethe und
Herder, Novalis und Schelling. Gegen diese Polemik Jacobis, welche dieser
ohne Kenntnis kabbalistischer Quellen in typisch indirekter Rezeption aus
christlichen Werken über Kabbala, vor allem den anti-spinozistischen
Traktaten Johann Georg Wächters (1663-1757)32, zusammenschreibt,

29
Ein Reprint dieses Werkes ersduen, mit Nachworten von Modle Idei und Wilhelm Schmidt-
Biggemann, ed. Eveline Goodman-Thau u. Christoph Schulte, Berlin 1993.
Friedrich Heinrich Jacobi, Ueber die Lehre des Spinoza in Briefen an den Herrn Moses
Mendelssohn, Breslau 1785, S. 14 u.ö.
31
Ebd., 170f.
12
Johann Georg Wächter, Der Spinozismus im Jüdenthumb / Oder / die von dem heutigen
Jüdenthumb / und dessen Geheimen Kabbala Vergötterte Welt, Amsterdam 1699; idem,
306 Kabbala-Rezeption

versucht der Herbart-Schüler Freystadt eine Ehrenrettung der Kabbala: in

seinem lateinischen Werk Philosophia cabbalistica et Pantheismus
(Königsberg 1832) zeigt er an Originalstellen aus dem Sohar, daß die
Verurteilung der Kabbala als Pantheismus und Atheismus grundlos ist.
Gleicher Bekanntheit wie das Ensoph erfreut sich sonst nur der Begriff
der Sefirot. Der terminus technicus Sefirot ebenso wie materialiter die zehn
Sefirot des Sohar sind den Anhängern ebenso wie den Gegnern der Kabbala
bekannt: Isaak Bernays (1792-1849) in Der Bibel'sehe Orient (1821) zitiert
sie zustimmend, namentlich und sogar in hebräischer Originalschrift im
ansonsten deutschen Text; Peter Beer (1758-1838), der Prager Statthalter der
Haskala und der angehenden Wissenschaft des Judentums, zählt sie in der
ersten deutschsprachigen, wissenschaftlichen Geschichte der Kabbala, seinem
zweibändigen Werk Geschichte, Lehre und Meinungen aller bestandenen und
noch bestehenden religiösen Sekten der Juden und der Geheimlehre oder
Kabbalah (Brünnen 1822/23), nur distanziert auf. Bis heute dominiert in der
Wissenschaft des Judentums die ideengeschichtliche Orientierung an
kabbalistischen Symbolen, Begriffen und termini technici, wogegen die
Wiedergabe und Untersuchung von längeren Textstücken in narrativer,
literarhistorischer oder ethnologischer Absicht lange Zeit stark zurücktrat.
(3) Als Drittes, nach vollständigen Textstücken und kabbalistischen
Begriffen, werden kabbalistische Konzepte rezipiert. Schelling gebraucht nie
den Begriff des "Zimzum", aber das lurianische Konzept einer
Selbstzusammenziehung Gottes zwecks Erschaffung und Erhaltung der Welt
bestimmt ganz wesentlich gleich mehrere seiner wichtigsten Schriften
zwischen 1809 und 1815. Schelling schreibt dort, in seiner Freiheitsschrift, in
den Stuttgarter Privatvorlesungen und in den Versuchen Die Weltalter, von
"Contraktion" oder "Zusammenziehung" oder "Selbsteinschränkung"
Gottes33. Aber das Konzept des Zimzum von Isaak Luria, das er wohl aus den
Werken Friedrich Christoph Oetingers (1702-1782), des bedeutendsten
christlichen Kabbalisten des 18. Jahrhunderts in Deutschland, kennt 34 , ist für
diese Schriften Schellings grundlegend und unverzichtbar. Denn das Konzept

Elucidarius Cabalísticas sive Reconditae Hebraeorum Philosophiae Brevis & Succincta Recensio,
Rom 1706.
33
F. W. J. Schellings sämmtliche Werke, ed. K.F.A Schelling, Stuttgart/Augsburg 1856-61, Bd.
v n , S.429ff.; F. W. J. Schelling, Die Weltalter, Fragmente, ed. Manfred Sdirôter, München 1946,1
S.23 u.ö.
34
"Nulla enirn ñeque creatio neque manifestatici Seri potest sine attractiooe, quod Hebraeis est
Zimzum." - Friedrich Christoph Oetinger, Theologia ex idea vitae deducía, Harenberg 1765, S.216;
zit. n. d kritischen Ausgabe von Konrad Ohly, Berlin/New York 1979, Teil I, S.151, Zeile 18f. Vgl.
Friedrich Christoph Oetingers Leben und Briefe, ed. Karl Christian Eberhard Hamann, Stuttgart
1859.
 Ch. Schulte 307

der "Selbstverschränkung" (Scholem35) des zunächst allgegenwärtigen Gottes

soll erklären, wie überhaupt Raum für die Welt und ein erster Anfang von
Zeit, Bewegung und Leben in ihr entstand.
(4) Viertens werden, textlich und bildlich, kabbalistische Allegorien
übernommen. Die Weisheit, Hokhma, eine der Sefirot und Allegorie schon in
der biblischen Weisheitsliteratur, nimmt als Sophia weibliche Gestalt an und
erscheint, vermittelt durch Boehme und Oetinger, bei Baader wieder; der
entwickelt aus kabbalistischen und hermetischen Quellen eine ganz eigene
Weisheits-Lehre, welche er der Vernunft-Emphase der Aufklärer
entgegensetzt36. Die emblematische Darstellung der Sophia, Hokhma, und
der anderen Sefirot, wie sie die barocke Lehrtafel der Prinzessin Antonia im
Schwarzwald-Städtchen Bad Teinach noch zeigt, wird dagegen in der
Romantik unüblich. Oetingers umfangreiches Buch über diese Lehrtafel,
veröffentlicht Tübingen 1763, ist jedoch eine der verbreiteten und bekannten
Quellen für romantisches Wissen von Kabbala37.
(5) Eine wichtige Rolle spielt, fünftens, die Rezeption von Spekulationen
über die hebräischen Gottesnamen. Die Verteidigung des Hebräischen als
göttlicher, ältester und Ursprache bei Schelling, Molitor und Baader ist schon
ein christliches Traditionsgut. Durch das Erforschen und Bekanntwerden des
Altägyptischen, Altpersischen und des Sanskrit am Anfang des 19.
Jahrhunderts hatten jedoch andere alte Sprachen dem Hebräischen diesen
Rang als älteste Sprache streitig gemacht. Die Verteidigung der Ursprache
Hebräisch wird religiös zur apologetischen Notwendigkeit. Werkzeug dieser
Apologie ist die Etymologie: lassen sich, wie Schelling38 und dann sein
philosophischer Schüler Isaak Bernays39 dies etwa gegen Friedrich Schlegels
Sprache und Weisheit der Inder (1808) anführen, die Götternamen anderer
alter Religionen etymologisch in hebräischen Wurzeln wiederfinden, ist das
Hebräische als die Ursprache und Gottessprache eines Ur-Monotheismus
gerettet. Der Turmbau zu Babel ist dann für die Sprachverwirrung der
historisch vorfindlichen Sprachen wie gleichermaßen den Polytheismus und
die Vielfalt der Religionen verantwortlich, die später erst im jüdischen

35
Gerdiom Scholem, "Schöpfung aus Nichts und Selbstverschränkung Gottes", Uber einige
Grundbegriffe des Judentums, Frankfurt a.M. 1970, S.52-89.
36
Franz von Baader, Sämtliche Werke, ed. Franz Hoffinann u.a., Leipzig 1851 -1860, bes. Bd. XIV,
S.32ff.
Friedrich Christoph Oetinger, Öffentliches Denckmal der Lehrtafel einer fVeyl.
Wirttembergischen Prinzessin Antonia, Tübingen 1763; kritische Ausgabe ed. Reinhard Breymayer
und Friedrich Häussermann, Berlin/New York 1977.
38
F. W. J. Schellmg, "Ober die Gottheiten von Samothrake" (1815) und die 6.-9. Vorlesung der
"Philosophie der Mythologie" (ab 1821).
39
<Isaak Bemays>, Der Bibel'sehe Orient. Eine Zeitschrift in zwanglosen Heften, Mündien 1821,
Heft 1,S. 17-34.
308 Kabbala-Rezeption

Monotheismus wieder vereint werden, dessen viele Gottesnamen noch ein

später Reflex der heidnischen Götternamen und der Göttervielfalt des
Polytheismus sind.
Nun sind diese hebräischen Etymologien der Gottesnamen oder die
Beherrschung von Gematria noch nicht spezifisch kabbalistisch. Es ist jedoch
festzustellen, daß vieles Jüdische von christlichen Autoren einfachhin im
Kontext von oder unter dem Titel "Kabbala" rezipiert wird, weil sie nichts
anderes kennen oder nichts anderes sie interessiert. Denn Kabbala trägt ganz
allgemein bei christlichen Kabbalisten, angefangen von Christian Knorr von
Rosenroths (1636-1689) Werk Cabbala Denudata. Doctrina Hebraeorum
Transcendentalis et Metaphysica (1677) bis hin zu Molitors Philosophie der
Geschichte oder über die Tradition und Adolphe Francks La Kabbale ou la
philosophie religieuse des Hébreux (1843) den Ehrentitel, die religiöse
"Philosophie" und "Metaphysik" der "Hebräer" zu sein.
Eine wichtige Rolle spielen die kabbalistischen Spekulationen über die
Gottesnamen bei der Verteidigung der Einheit Gottes und der Tora trotz der
vielfaltigen Gottesnamen. Gegen die zeitgenössische protestantische
Bibelkritik, die mehrere Redakteure und Quellen der Tora annimmt,
behauptet Schelling in der siebten Vorlesung über die Philosophie der
Mythologie die einheitliche Verfasserschaft und Einheit der Tora. Diese
Verteidigung wird von seinem jüdischen Studenten Meyer Hirsch Landauer
(1808-1840), der die Vorlesung 1830/31 in München hört, in zwei eigenen
Büchern vertieft: Jehovah und Elohim (1836) und Wesen und Form des
Pentateuch (1838). Seine Forschungen in kabbalistischen Manuskripten der
Königlichen Hof- und Staatsbibliothek München 1839 machen Landauer mit
Abraham Abulafias Spekulationen über die Gottesnamen bekannt und
veranlassen ihn, eine der ersten historisch-kritischen Rekonstruktionen von
Autorschaft und kabbalistischen Schulbildungen im Mittelalter zu versuchen
(post mortem 1845 veröffentlicht in dem von Jost herausgegebenen
Literaturblatt des Orients)40. Neben der vor allem von Christen viel
gelesenen, eher theosophischen Kabbala des Sohar wird damit auch auf einen
vollkommen anderen Typus jüdischer Mystik, die prophetisch-ekstatische
Kabbala Abulafias mit ihrer Sprachmystik, erstmals in der modernen
Forschung aufmerksam gemacht41.
Festzuhalten bleibt, um diese Reihe von materialen Elementen der
Kabbala-Rezeption zu beenden, also Texten, Begriffen, Konzepten und Ideen,
Symbolen, Allegorien, Emblemata und Gottesnamen, daß auch manche der

4
® "Vorläufiger Bericht über mein Studium der Münch en er hebräischen Handschriften. Von M H.
Landauer (Aus dem Nachlasse mitgetheilt)", Literaturblatt des Orients. Berichte, Studien und
Kritiken für jüdische Geschichte und Literatur, No. 12-15, 22, 24, 25, 31-34, 36-38, 47 des Jahres
1845.
41
Vgl. Moáie Idei, Kabbalah. New Perspectives, Yale 1988.
 Ch. Schulte 309

Sprachformen der Kabbala weitertransportiert werden: Lurianische Passagen

in jüdischen Gebetbüchern ebenso wie die mythologische Erzählung vom
Adam Kadmon bei Baader42 oder die eher theoretischen' Text-Passagen zum
Zimzum von Hajim Vitais (1542-1620) Ez Hajim bei Molitor43. In den
meisten Fällen aber werden diese Sprachelemente in der Rezeption verformt
oder gehen gänzlich verloren. Dafür sind nicht nur die Übersetzung in eine
andere Sprache, sondern auch die Umsetzung in einen anderen Kontext
verantwortlich.

IV. Lehrer, Übersetzungen, Techniken und Zitate der Kabbala

Das macht aufmerksam auf eine dritte Kategorie der romantischen Kabbala-
Rezeption, nachdem zunächst einige Charakteristika formal und material
unterschieden wurden: als Drittes wäre modal zu differenzieren, wie
kabbalistische Elemente in die Diskurse der deutschen Romantik eingehen.
(1) Ausgesprochen wichtig ist, ob Kabbala unpersönlich oder persönlich
vermittelt wurde. Konkret: Kennt ein Autor nur kabbalistische Texte oder
hatte er einen Kabbalisten zum Lehrer, der ihn initiierte, wie die Tradition es
vorsieht? Hieran knüpft sich die weitere Problematik von schriftlicher oder
mündlicher Lehre. Denn sowohl Inhalte wie Form des Vermittelten verändern
sich je nach Art der Vermittlung. In jüdischen Kreisen herrscht in der
Romantik noch die traditionelle Mündlichkeit, die mündliche Weitergabe der
Kabbala von Lehrer auf Schüler vor. Schriftliche Fixierung war eigentlich
suspekt, wo nicht untersagt. Seckel Lob Wormser, Isaak Bernays, Meyer
Hirsch Landauer, Hirsch Maier Löwengard (1813-1886) und Hyle Wechsler
(1843-1894), die allesamt den revolutionären Schritt tun, sich unter
Einschluß und Gebrauch von kabbalistischen Elementen öffentlich nicht in
Hebräisch, sondern in deutscher Sprache an ein zumeist nicht-jüdisches
Lesepublikum zu wenden, sind alle noch der Welt der Jeschiva und der
mündlichen Lehre entwachsen und praktizieren als Rabbinen gleichzeitig mit
der gedruckten Publikation diese Form der Überlieferung weiter44.
Für die christlichen Kabbalisten der Romantik dagegen stellt die
Verschriftlichung so wenig ein Problem dar wie schon für ihre Vorgänger seit
der Renaissance. Sie lernen z. T. noch wie Molitor mündlich bei jüdischen
Lehrern, aber tradieren selber ihr Wissen dann fast nur noch schriftlich und
damit unpersönlich. Die narrativen Strukturen mündlicher Überlieferung

42
Sämtliche Werke, a.a.O. Bd. VII, S.226 Anm.
43
Franz Joseph Molitor, Philosophie der Geschichte oder über die Tradition, Bd. Π, Münster
1834, S.240ËT. S.148ff.
44
Vgl. Werner J. Cahnmann, "Friedrich Wilhelm Schelling and The New Thinking of Judaism",
German Jewry. Its History and Sociology. Selected Essays by Werner J. Cahnmann, ed. Joseph B.
Maia, Judith Marcus u. Zoltan Tarr, New Brunswick/Oxford 1989, S.209-248.
310 Kabbala-Rezeption

gehen verloren, und es werden einseitig die leichter transponierbaren,

abstrakten und begrifflichen Elemente der Kabbala rezipiert. Oft erweckt das
Druckwerk dann den Eindruck von der Kabbala als "philosophischem"
Begriffssystem, das von außen, notwendig abstrahierend und allein mit
Mitteln der begrifflichen Analyse, geistes- und religionsgeschichtlich
eingeordnet werden kann. Der soziale Kontext des Lehrer-Schüler-
Verhältnisses, der Gemeinde mit ihren religiös-moralischen Regeln und
Kontrollen sowie der Konformitätsdruck persönlicher Bekanntschaft entfallen
damit und werden durch die ganz andersartigen, unpersönlichen
Konventionen von Druckwerken wissenschaftlicher, politischer oder religiös
erbaulicher Natur ersetzt. In dieser Hinsicht ziehen die jüdischen Autoren erst
in der Romantik mit den christlichen Kábbalisten gleich: die Drucklegung in
deutscher Sprache ist ein entscheidender Schritt aus den Grenzen des rein
innerjüdischen Kabbala-Diskurses.
(2) Wichtig ist darum auch, ob Kabbala in der Original- oder in einer
Fremdsprache rezipiert wird. Erst die Übersetzung macht sie größeren
christlichen Kreisen zugänglich. Da indessen die sprachliche Übersetzung
von Etymologien oder Gematria unmöglich ist, bleibt nur die Wahl, entweder
solche Partien im Hebräischen zu belassen, d. h. zweisprachig zu bleiben,
oder sie wegzulassen und den jeweiligen Text rein an den leichter
übersetzungsfähigen Begriffen auszurichten. In der Mehrzahl der Fälle wird
die Zweisprachigkeit gewählt, d.h. auch beim Leser verlangt, so bei Molitor,
so in Bernays Der Bibel'sehe Orient, so in den Büchern und Aufsätzen Peter
Beers, Freystadts, Landauers, Graetz', Zunz' oder Steinschneiders: die Texte
sind in Deutsch geschrieben, einzelne hebräische Begriffe oder Zitate werden
in diesen deutschen Text eingerückt.
(3) Eine sicherlich extreme Form der Kabbala-Rezeption, die ich hier
anführen möchte, ist die unwissentliche, die von der wissentlichen Rezeption
zu unterscheiden ist. Wir alle kennen Heines berühmtes Gedicht Prinzessin
Sabbath (1851), vielleicht dasjenige Gedicht Heines, in dem er sich trotz aller
ironischen Brechungen am stärksten mit dem Schicksal des jüdischen Volkes
beschäftigt, ja identifiziert. Heine schildert in seinen Versen, wie das als
Prinz Israel personifizierte jüdische Volk, das im Exil elend dahinvegetiert,
einmal in der Woche durch die Feier des Sabbat erhoben und erbaut wird:
Prinz Israel empfangt symbolisch am Freitagabend zu Beginn des
synagogalen Gottesdienstes die Prinzessin Sabbat, deren Ankunft mit größter
Spannung und Erwartung vorbereitet wird.

Lecho Daudi Likras Kalle -

Komm', Geliebter, deiner harret
Schon die Braut, die dir entschleyert
Ihr verschämtes Angesicht!
 Ch. Schulte 311

Dieses hübsche Hochzeitscarmen

Ist gedichtet von dem großen,
Hochberühmten Minnesinger
Don Jehuda ben Halevy.

In dem Liede wird gefeyert

Die Vermählung Israels
Mit der Frau Prinzessin Sabbath,
Die man nennt die stille Fürstin. 45

Prinzessin Sabbat wird mit dem Lied Lecha Dodi von der Gemeinde
jubelnd empfangen, hier gibt Heine ganz unverfälscht eine jüdische Tradition
wieder. Aber er weiß nicht mehr, daß jenes Lied Lecha Dodi, dessen
Anfangszeile er hier in der aschkenasischen Aussprache wiedergibt, die er
selber aus der Synagoge kennt, nicht von seinem tief verehrten Dichter-
Ahnen Jehuda Halevi stammt, sondern um 1540 von Salomo Alkabez verfaßt
wurde. Die Aufnahme des Liedes in das synagogale Ritual des Freitagabends
indessen verdankt sich der hohen Wertschätzung, deren sich das Lied bei
Isaak Luria und seinen Schülern erfreute, die tatsächlich singend in die
Felder vor Safed der Königin Sabbat entgegen gezogen sein sollen46. Heine
weiß nicht mehr, daß ausgerechnet dieses Festtagslied, dem sein Gedicht
Hauptfigur und Metaphorik verdankt, dieser im Gedicht höchste Ausdruck
eines ohne Reserve positiv rezipierten religiösen Judentums, ein Erbstück der
lurianischen Kabbala in Siddur und Sabbatfeier ist; ein Erbstück, durch das
der Brauch der frommen Mystiker von Safed Eingang in das Ritual der
jüdischen Orthodoxie gefunden hat und von ihr tradiert wird.
(4) Heines Beispiel führt zu einer weiteren Unterscheidung: der zwischen
expliziter und impliziter Kabbala-Rezeption. Explizit will sagen, daß die
Bezugnahme auf Kabbala von einem Autor ausgesprochen oder durch Zitat
kenntlich gemacht wird. Das ist ganz selbstverständlich der Fall bei
christlichen Kabbalisten wie Oetinger oder Molitor, ebenso wie in den eher
Kabbala-kritischen Schriften aller Protagonisten der Wissenschaft des
Judentums. Das ist jedoch nicht der Fall bei Isaak Bernays oder bei Schelling,
der das Konzept des Zimzum benutzt, ohne je zu sagen, daß dieses der
Kabbala entlehnt ist. Und dies, obwohl seine Quellen Oetinger und Jacobi
ausdrücklich auf den Zimzum als kabbalistische Lehre hinweisen. Die
Kennzeichnung von Zitaten, d. h. die explizite Bezugnahme auf Kabbala wird
in jüdischen Kreisen der Romantik erst in dem Maße nötig, wie im Prozeß

45
Heinrich Heine, "Prinzessin Sabbath", idem, Sämtliche Werke, ed. M. Windfiihr, Bd. 3/1,
Hamburg 1992, S.127.
46
Vgl. lanar Elbogen, Der jüdische Gottesdienst in seiner geschichtlichen Entwicklung, 2. verb.
Aufl. Frankfurt a.M. 1924, S.108.
312 Kabbala-Rezeption

der Emanzipation die quasi-automatische Kenntnis aller wichtigen religiösen

Quellentexte durch Memorieren in der Jeschiva nicht mehr vorausgesetzt
werden kann. Die angehende Wissenschaft des Judentums ist schon ganz dem
wissenschaftlichen Zitiergebrauch der Epoche verpflichtet.
(5) Zuletzt ist es sinnvoll, zwischen den Weisen zu differenzieren, wie
Elemente der Kabbala in der Rezeption verwendet werden. Während sie in
einigen Fällen nur ornamental erscheinen, d.h. als Ausweis oder zusätzlicher
Beleg eines ohnedies vorhandenen Wissens, sind sie bei anderen Autoren
konstruktiv neu, wichtig oder gar unverzichtbar. So schreibt Molitor sein
Hauptwerk Philosophie der Geschichte oder über die Tradition, wie schon
der Untertitel sagt, mit vorzüglicher Rücksicht auf die Kabbalah, weil er
Kabbala zum Verständnis nicht nur des Judentums, sondern auch des
Christentums für unverzichtbar hält. Er findet in der Kabbala Dinge, ohne
welche seine Geschichtsphilosophie undenkbar wäre. Gleiches gilt für die
Weltalter-Philosophie Schellings, welche ohne die konstruktive Rolle des
Konzepts einer Contraktion Gottes gar keine Basis hätte. Für Baader
hingegen bestätigt die Kabbala, etwa die Vorstellung vom Adam Kadmon, an
den bei Baader der Gedanke eines androgynen Urmenschen erinnert, nur
Überzeugungen, die Baader ganz allgemein aus der hermetischen Tradition
schöpft. Er käme grundsätzlich ohne die bei ihm nur ornamentale Erwähnung
kabbalistischer Elemente wie En-Sof, Zimzum oder Adam Kadmon aus, die er
gelegentlich wie bloßes Bildungsgut, bisweilen falsch referiert.

V. Kabbala-Rezeption und
romantischer Antijudaismus

Die Unterscheidung von ornamental vs. konstruktiv beschließt die durchaus

erweiterungsfähige Reihe der Kategorien von Kabbala-Rezeption in der
deutschen Romantik. Anhand dieser Distinktion läßt sich ein grundsätzlicher
Unterschied zwischen der Kabbala-Rezeption der Romantik und jener der
Renaissance oder des Barock verdeutlichen: Die durch Kant geprägte
Aufklärung in Deutschland ist ihrem Selbstverständnis nach eine Revolution
der Denkungsart, eine Kopernikanische Wende der Philosophie. Das
bedeutete einen Bruch der Aufklärung mit der Vorstellung einer philosophia
perennis. Was vorher galt, ist überholt und abgetan. Aus der Geschichte läßt
sich nichts lernen, weil das Weltbild auf den Kopf gestellt ist.
Gegen diese Diskreditierung von Tradition knüpfen einige romantische
Autoren wieder am Alten an. Aber sie tun dies bewußt konstruktiv. "Der
mystische Ausdruck ist ein Gedankenreiz mehr. Alle Wahrheit ist uralt. Der
Reiz der Neuheit liegt nur in den Variationen des Ausdrucks" (Novalis) 47 .

47
In: "Glauben und Liebe oder der König und die Königin", zit. n. Novalis. Auswahl und Einleitung
von Walter Rehm. Frankfurt a.M/Hamburg 1956, S.109.
 Ch. Schulte 313

Elemente der Kabbala werden bei Schelling und Molitor, bei Bernays und
Landauer nicht einfach als Schilderung und Bestätigung immer schon
gegebener, ewiger Wahrheiten zitiert, sondern werden kreativ anverwandelt
und weitergedacht.
Zugleich entsteht und besteht ein historisches Bewußtsein, welches offen
anerkennt, daß Kabbala ein jüdisches Erbe und ein Teil der jüdischen
Tradition ist. Sie zählt nicht mehr nur zum Bestand irgendeiner diffusen
hermetischen Tradition des Uralten, sondern sie wird erinnert und angeeignet
als jüdische Mystik und als jüdische Philosophie, von Juden wie von Christen.
Noch ein Gegner wie Heinrich Graetz diskriminiert sie, nolens volens und
ganz im Geiste Herders und Rankes, als integralen Bestandteil jüdischer
Geschichte und geistiges Erbe des jüdischen Volkes. Kabbala ist auch für
Schelling und Molitor, wie schon für Oetinger und Herder, nicht irgendeine
alte Weisheit, sondern sie wird von Freunden wie Feinden rezipiert, weil oder
obwohl sie eine jüdische Lehre und Tradition repräsentiert, auf die es sich
angesichts der religiösen tabula rasa der Aufklärung christlicherseits wie
jüdischerseits rückzubesinnen gilt.
Bei alledem sollte hier nicht der in der Romantik grassierende
Antijudaismus vergessen gemacht werden. In weiten Kreisen, speziell etwa in
der "christlich-deutschen Tischgesellschaft", der ab 1811 Fichte, Adam
Müller, Clausewitz, Zelter, Kleist, Brentano, Arnim und andere bedeutende
Vertreter der romantischen Intelligenzia angehörten, zählten die
antijüdischen Sottisen und Auslassungen zum guten Ton; mit Details wie der
Kabbala hielt man sich dort erst gar nicht auf 48 . Aber dort, wo man Judentum
akzeptiert, gar schätzt, überwiegen in der deutschen Romantik die Freunde
der Kabbala. Dazu wären noch ungeheuer viele, interessante und bis heute
unbekannte historische Details über Autoren und Werke nachzutragen. Hier
sei vorerst nur auf das Vergnügen der Forschung und Lektüre in diesem
Bereich verwiesen. Denn auf das widerstrebige und widerborstige Kabale und
Liebe der Aufklärung folgt in der Romantik, jedenfalls nicht selten, Kabbale
mit Liebe.

Vgl. Günther Oesterle, "Juden, Philister und romantische Intellektuelle. Überlegungen zum
Antisemitismus in der Romantik", Athenäum. Jahrbuch fur Romantik, 2 ( 1992), S.55-89.
 Hans Otto Horch

Kabbala und Liebe

August Beckers Roman Des Rabbi Vermächtniß' (1866/67)

Gewidmet dem Andenken

Chaim Shohams (1936-1993)

Man nehme folgende Ingredienzien: ein realistisches Zeitkolorit, etwas Kri-

minalstory und Thriller, etwas Liebesgeschichte, etwas Schauerromantik, Ok-
kultismus, trivialisierte Gnosis, etwas idealistisch getönte Aufklärung; man
bediene sich aus einer Bibliothek mit mystischen, pansophischen und
kabbalistischen Schriften und bringe Zitate, Motti und historische Abrisse aus
Werken dieser Bibliothek, die den Ablauf der Handlung chiffrierend
bestimmen; schließlich lasse man eine Überlieferung aus früheren Zeiten
wirksam werden, die allein schon durch das Gerücht ihrer puren Existenz für
das Schicksal der Protagonisten bestimmend werden kann. Nun mische und
kombiniere man diese Ingredienzien in einem voluminösen Wälzer zu einem
kaum mehr durchschaubaren, aber dennoch oder gerade deshalb spannenden
Ganzen. Nein, ich spreche nicht von Umberto Ecos Weltbestseller II pendolo
di Foucault (1988; dt. 1989), einer Art "epistemologischem Kriminalroman"
aus postmodernem Geist1 . Ich beziehe mich auf einen Roman des 19.
Jahrhunderts: Des Rabbi Vermächtniß von August Becker, erschienen
1866/67 bei dem Berliner Verleger Otto Janke2, ein voluminöses Opus - drei

' Umberto Eco, Λ pendolo di Foucault. Milano (Bompiani) 1988. Dt. Übersetzung: Das Foucault-
sche Pendel. Aus d. Ital. v. Burkhart Kroeber. Münchs», Wien (Hanser) 1989. Vgl. zu Ecos Roman
Ubidì Sdiulz-Buschhaus: "Sam Spade im Reich des Okkulten. Umberto Ecos II pendolo di Foucault
und der Kriminalroman1'. In: Poetik und Geschichte. Viktor Zmegac 711m 60. Geburtstag. Hrsg v.
Dieter Borchmeyer. Tübingen (Niemeyer) 1989. S.486-504.
2
August Becker, Des Rabbi Vermächtniß. Roman in drei Abtheilungen. Berlin (Otto Janke)
1866/67. Im folgenden wird aus dieser Ausgabe unter Angabe van Abteilung, Band und Seitenzahl
zitiert. Vgl. zu Beckers Roman meine knappe Analyse in: Auf der Suche nach der jüdischen
Erzählliteratur. Die Literaturkritik der "Allgemeinen Zeitung des Judentums" (1837-1922).
Frankfurt am Main, Bern, New York (Peter Lang) 1985. (= Literarhistorische Untersuchungen Bd 1).
 HO. Horch 315

Abteilungen mit insgesamt 6 Bänden und über 2000 Seiten. Sein Autor
August Becker, der nach einem frühen Erfolg mit dem Versepos Jung-Friedel
der Spielmann (1854) neben dem hier zu behandelnden Roman weitere um-
fangreiche Romane verfaßte, die beim zeitgenössischen Publikum durchaus
ankamen3, ist als Romancier weithin vergessen: weder in Fritz Martinis
großer Darstellung der Literatur des Bürgerlichen Realismus noch in anderen
literarhistorischen Darstellungen wird er auch nur erwähnt. Becker genießt
allerdings bis heute einen gewissen Ruf als pfalzischer Heimatschriftsteller.
Seine pfalzische Geburtsstadt Klingenmünster hat dem 1828 Geborenen, der
seit 1847 in München, seit 1868 in Eisenach lebte, wo er 1891 starb, im Jahr
1907 ein Denkmal, im Jahr 1930 ein Ehrengrab errichtet - als Dank für sein
Hauptwerk Die Pfalz und die Pfälzer (Leipzig 1858, Neudruck Landau 1983),
das "eine poetisch getönte, umfassende topographisch-kulturhistor[ische]
Monographie"4 in der Art der kulturgeschichtlichen Arbeiten Wilhelm
Heinrich Riehls und Gustav Freytags ist. 1986 erschien in der Pfalzischen
Verlagsanstalt Landau ein August Becker Lesebuch, in dem in sachkundiger
Auswahl und Kommentierung an Becker als pfälzischen Heimatschriftsteller
erinnert wird5.
Seinen Zeitgenossen galt gleichwohl der Roman Des Rabbi Vermächtniß
und nicht die pfalzische Kulturgeschichte als sein Hauptwerk6. Der
Erwartungshorizont der zeitgenössischen Leser läßt sich auf Grund des Titels
leicht beschreiben: schauerromantische Vorstellungen von Zauberei und
schwarzer Magie, die sich an einen vorurteilsbestimmten Begriff des

S.85-89. - Es könnte sein, daß eine Diskussion in der Gartenlaube über Jakob Frank und seine
Anhänge- in Offenbach (Jg. 1865, Nr.33 u. 34 sowie Jg. 1866, Nr.22 u. 24) die entsprechenden
Passagen des Romans mit angeregt hat. Vgl. dazu A. G. Sdienck-Rinck, Die Polen in Offenbach am
Main. Historische Erzählung aus den 80er Jahren des vorigen Jahrhunderts bis 1817. Frankfurt a.M.
(Selbstverlag des Verfassers) 1866. Vorrede S.3f. Die Tendenz Sehenck-Rincks allerdings, alle
jüdischen Bezüge des Frankismus abzuweisen und Frank gar als den gestürzten Zaren Peter ΙΠ. zu
identifizieren, der geheimnisvoll untergetaucht sei, ist abstrus und hat keinerlei Bedeutung fur Bec-
kers Roman. In Wahrheit wurde der 1728 geborene und 1762 gekrönte Zar Peter ΙΠ. nach einem
knappen halben Jahr van semer eigenen Gattin, der späteren Zarin Katharina Π., gestürzt und von
Orlow noch im selben Jahr ermordet.
3
Vervehmt. Roman aus der Gegenwart. 4 Bde., Berlin (Otto Janke) 1868; Die Nonnensusel. Ein
Bauemroman aus dem Pfalzer Wasgau, Jena (Costanoble) 1886; Der Küster von Horst. Roman aus
dem Heideland, Jena (Costenoble) 1889.
4
Rolf Paulus in Literaturlexikon. Autoren und Werke deutscher Sprache. Hrsg v. Waither Killy
[...]. Bd 1. Gütersloh, München: Bertelsmann Lexiken Verlag 1988. S.371.
5
August Becker Lesebuch. Ausgew. u. kommentiert v. Rolf Paulus, Landau (Pfalzische Verlagsan-
stalt) 1986.
®Vgl. Ludwig Fränkel, "August Becker". In: Allgemeine deutsche Biographie. Bd 46. Leipzig
(Duncker & Humblot) 1902. S.309-315, hier S.311.
316 Kabbala und Liebe

Judentums anknüpfen lassen, vielleicht auch eine Evokation des gesamten

hermetischen' Wissens seit dem Mittelalter, das in den Geheimgesellschaften
des 18. Jahrhunderts bereits trivialisiert und popularisiert wurde; und last but
not least eine spannende Handlung, die durch derlei okkulten Hintergrund
vorangetrieben wird. Zweifellos bediente Becker sein Publikum
erwartungsgerecht, wie anders wäre sonst eine zweite Ausgabe des Romans
im Jahr 1884 zu erklären. Eine auch nur annähernd angemessene Wiedergabe
der verwirrenden Handlung würde allerdings den Rahmen dieses Beitrags
sprengen; ich will daher nur kurz die Grundkonstellation des Romans
skizzieren, um sodann ausführlicher Ausprägung und Funktion der auf die
Kabbala bezogenen Passagen zu analysieren.

II

Die Hauptfigur des Zeitromans auf der Ebene der in der Gegenwart spielen-
den Handlung ist der Maler Alfred Seestrand. Er stammt aus einer altadligen
Familie, sein richtiger Name ist Graf Seeried-Strandow. Zu den ihn
bestimmenden Eindrücken zählt ein Fluch, der seit dem 17. Jahrhundert über
seiner Familie liegen soll: mehrfach wurde mit unlauteren Praktiken die
legitime Erbfolge verhindert, wobei auch magisch-kabbalistische Einflüsse
eine schwer zu bestimmende Rolle gespielt haben sollen. Alfred selbst hat
sich seit früher Jugend für die Welt der Kabbala und des Okkultismus
interessiert und - zumal nach der Lektüre des Goetheschen Faust - eine
schöne Bibliothek zu diesem Themenkreis aufgebaut. Um das über seiner
Familie schwebende Geheimnis aufzuhellen, sucht er nach Menschen, die
ihm ihrer einschlägigen Kenntnisse wegen dabei behilflich sein können. Ein
Freundespaar, das zugleich unmittelbar mit dem Schicksal der Familie
Seeried-Strandow verknüpft ist, wird zum jüdisch-christlichen Wegweiser:
der ehrwürdige alte Jude David Benasse als authentischer Dolmetsch der
jüdischen Geheimwissenschaft, verheiratet mit einer Enkelin Jakob Franks,
und dessen Freund, der christliche Pastor Reinhardt zu Hainbuchen, der
entfernt mit Alfred Seestrand verwandt ist und seine durchaus substantiellen
Erläuterungen zu Strömungen der jüdischen Mystik aus einer christlichen
Perspektive ableitet - er deutet sie als Quelle des Christentums. Beide - der
Jude wie der Christ -, aber auch ihr Schüler' Alfred, sind ebenso aufgeklärt
wie human engagiert, und so können alle sich ergebenden Konflikte auf der
Ebene der Liebe wie der Intrige am Schluß zu einem tableauhaften Happy end
führen.
Für den Verlauf des Romans bestimmend wird das Vermächtnis' eines
Rabbi Meir aus dem 18. Jahrhundert - als Romantitel bereits im Zentrum des
Interesses. Rabbi Meir aus Amsterdam ist ein Büßender, ein Ba al Teschuva,
der seine Verstrickung in die praktische, d.h. magische Kabbala und das
durch die daraus abgeleitete Prognostik entstandene Unheil wiedergutmachen
 HO. Horch 317

will. Das Motto zum 12. Kapitel des zweiten Bandes der zweiten Abteilung
(11,2 S.232) verweist auf eine literarische Spur dieser Figur: In Adelbert von
Chamissos Terzinengedicht Ein Baal Teschuba7 wird ein solcher Büßender
vorgestellt, der im Zorn eine schwangere Frau getötet hat und nun sieben
Jahre lang freiwillig sich in der Fremde kasteit. Bei Becker wird die Frage der
freiwillig-individuellen Buße mit einer geistigen Verfehlung verknüpft,
nämlich dem Mißbrauch einer großen Überlieferung (Kabbala) im Interesse
magischer Einflußnahme. Das Schicksal Rabbi Meirs enthält also in nuce den
thematischen Kern des ganzen Romans, der sich als identisch mit der
Tragödie des Doktor Faust entpuppt: daß man sich nämlich nicht titanistisch
des göttlichen Geheimnisses und der Dämonen der Unterwelt bemächtigen
dürfe, sondern das Unerforschliche ruhig verehren solle.
Rabbi Meirs explizites Vermächtnis aber ist in einer Inschrift
niedergelegt, die sich auf dem Bild des für die Handlung wichtigen
"schwarzen Grafen" befindet: "Von David kommt euch Heil. Rabbi Meyr.
Seeried 5.12. [17] 82" (111,1 S.347fif)· Diese Prophezeiung läßt sich zunächst
auf den ehrwürdigen David Benasse beziehen. Seine Schilderung zu Anfang
des Romans nimmt geläufige Klischees auf und reizt zugleich die Neugier des
Lesers:
"Es war ein bleiches, interessantes Gesicht [...] von orientalischem
Schnitt, aber von jener milderen Form, die ein Greisenantlitz anziehend
machen kann. Über der leise gebogenen Nase schwangen sich ein Paar scharf
gezeichnete Brauen um tiefliegende, aber von ungebrochenem Feuer
glänzende Augen." (1,1,3 S.56f).
Der Maler Alfred nimmt dieses orientalische' Gesicht als Modell für sein
Bild eines alten Kabbalisten, das sich offenbar an Bildern Rembrandts
orientiert. David taucht an entscheidenden Stellen des Romans als Ratgeber
auf, er bringt in der Tat alles ins Reine und gleicht die Fehler der
Vergangenheit wieder aus - von ihm kommt das Heil in der erzählten
Geschichte, da er einerseits als intimer Kenner der Tradition zwischen
Vergangenheit und Gegenwart zu vermitteln vermag, andererseits als Mensch
der Humanität des aufgeklärten Zeitalters zutiefst verpflichtet ist.
Zugleich aber enthüllt die Prophezeiung Rabbi Meirs den letztlich
christlichen Kern der Handlung: unübersehbar wird auf die Gestalt Jesu
verwiesen, der nach der Lehre des Neuen Testaments aus dem Haus Davids
stammt und als Nachfolger und Vollender der "Leuchte Israels" (2 Sam
21,17) zum "Licht der Welt" (Joh 8,12) wird. In einem aufgeklärt-humanen

7
Adelbat von Chamisso, Sämtliche Werke Bd I. München (Wmkler) 1975. S.447^50. Vgl. hierzu
Chaim Shoham: Der Ritter der Wahrheit reitet nach Berlin. Adelbert von Chamisso, Moses
Mendelssohn und Abba Glosk Lec/cka; in: Moses Mendelssohn und die Krise seiner Wirksamkeit.
Hg. von Michael Albrecht, Eva v. Engel u. Norbert Hinske. Tübingen (Niemeyer) 1994.
(=Wolfenbütteler Studiai Bd. 19). S. 381^09.
318 Kabbala und Liebe

Christentum ist demnach auch das Judentum mit aufgehoben; die besonders
rühmliche Behandlung des Frankismus im Roman als einer zwischen
Judentum und Christentum changierenden Bewegung ist hierfür ein weiteres
Indiz.
In der Mitte des 19. Jahrhunderts ist offenbar noch die Frage aktuell: wie
können in ein und derselben Epoche, nämlich der Aufklärung, so diametral
entgegengesetzte Strömungen die Menschen in Bann schlagen wie das
Faustische Übersichhinauswollen und die mephistophelische Verneinung, das
Streben nach rationaler Bewältigung der geistigen und materiellen
Herausforderungen und zugleich der Bann durch allerlei abergläubische
Praktiken. Die menschliche Psyche bedarf offenbar beider
Herausforderungen, und die kabbalistischen Strömungen scheinen für den
Autor eine Art Modell darzustellen, wie die antagonistischen Kräfte
systematisch-rational bewältigt werden können. Die Grundhaltung des
Romans ist dezidiert bürgerlich, ja weltbürgerlich; der Adel verfallt einer
durchaus harschen Kritik, ebenfalls das engstirnige Kleinbürgertum, während
für die sozialen Nöte des vierten Standes immer ein (freilich patriarchalisch,
nicht au fond politisch-egalitär motiviertes) Verständnis bleibt. Die
Gesellschaft als ganze gilt als dem Materialismus verfallen; hiergegen werden
die Kräfte eines Idealismus mobilisiert, der sich zum einen in der Welt des
Geistes, der Kunst manifestiert, zum andern in der Natur, dem Wald als der
Gegensphäre der materialistisch deformierten Gesellschaft. Aber auch die
Welt des Geistes ist durch Cliquenwirtschaft und Kunstbetrieb gefährdet,
ebenso wie die Natur durch die Ausbeutung des Industriezeitalters in Gefahr
ist, beschädigt zu werden. Die Mischung aus ökologischen und
kulturkritischen Argumenten mutet recht modern an, auch wenn die
vorgeschlagenen Lösungen des Romans trivial bleiben. Ein Widerspruch
gegen Gustav Freytags Roman Soll und Haben, der ein Jahrzehnt zuvor
(1855) erschienen war und schnell zu einem Beststeller der Epoche nach
1848 wurde, ist nicht zu verkennen: dessen platte Poetisierung des
Materiellen wird als ungenügend empfunden (vgl. 1,2 S.186f)8. Mit der Ne-
benfigur des einfachen Schacherjuden Itzig (1,2 Kap.4 fif) bringt Becker eine
traditionell stereotype komische Judenfigur ins Spiel. Ähnlich wie bei Freytag
die Figur des Veitel Itzig als Gegenfigur Bernhard Ehrenthals fungiert, kann
Beckers freilich viel harmloserer Itzig als Gegenfigur zu David Benasse
gelten. Im Gegensatz zu Freytag vermeidet Becker allerdings allzu stereotype

^Vgl. auch die Einleitung zu Beckers späterem Buch Meine Schwester, Wismar, Rostode, Ludwigs-
lust (Hinstorff) 1876, wo gegen die Ansicht Freytags polemisiert wird, man solle das Volk nur bei
seiner Arbeit aufsuchen. Wichtiger sei das Schöne, auch wenn es nur Schein sein sollte. Das Bedürfiiis
des Volks nach Ahnen und Glauben sei immer noch stark, in der Sage verankert. Gelte nur das
Nützlichkeit^rinzip, dann flüchte sich das Bedürfiiis in den Aberglauben, ä a ethisch wertlos und
schädlich sei (Lesebuch S.141f).
 Η. O. Horch 319

Darstellungen und bringt in einem Maß jüdische Religionsphilosophie ins

Spiel, daß damit die Ebene bloßer Kolportage verlassen wird. Die
einschlägigen religionshistorischen Passagen des Romans, die vor allem von
Pastor Reinhardt vorgetragen werden, sind so umfangreich, daß sich der
Autor sogar beim Leser entschuldigen zu müssen glaubt:
"Pastor Reinhardt [...] begann seine culturliche Darlegung, die von Allen
überschlagen werden kann, welche weniger Interesse für die Geschichte der
Kabbala haben, als der Held unsers Romans." (11,1 S.226; vgl. auch S.242).
Der didaktische Anspruch, mit dem in einer Zeit des sich verstärkenden
Assimilationsdrucks weit über das notwendige handlungsbestimmende Maß
hinaus Wissen über die Kabbala und jüdische Sekten' vermittelt wird,
verdient Beachtung. Es gibt wohl kaum einen anderen christlichen
Romancier dieser Epoche, der sich so ernsthaft auf jüdische
Religionsphilosophie, zumal auf die inneijüdisch durchaus kontrovers
aufgenommene Kabbala bezöge.
Im folgenden soll nun zunächst genauer auf das in Gesprächen Alfreds
mit David Benasse und Pastor Reinhardt vermittelte Bild der Kabbala und
dessen Funktion im Roman eingegangen werden. Abschließend will ich dann
auf die Quellen hinweisen, aus denen der Autor sein Wissen über die Kabbala
geschöpft hat.

III

Eher an der Oberfläche bleibt das erste ausführlichere Gespräch Alfreds mit
David, in dem der Kenntnisstand des Jüngeren vorgeführt wird. Alfred, der
vor allem durch bestimmte Interpretationsprobleme des Goetheschen Faust
auf die Kabbala gestoßen wird, erkennt ihre tiefsinnige Symbolik, ihre reine
Sittenlehre und hochpoetische Gottesvorstellung an, lehnt aber Zauberei,
Geisterbeschwörung ab (1,1,5 S.99ff).
"Mit Begierde vernahm er seitdem [seit der i<ai¿sí-Lektüre] Alles, was er
über die Kabbala erfahren konnte, deren Ursprung höheren Geistern, ja von
Einigen Gott selbst zugeschrieben wurde und die durch mystische Erklärung
der heiligen Schrift, durch die magische Chiffresprache, wie sie sich schon
beim Jeremias kundgegeben, durch die Kraft des Wortes, vor Allem des
Namens Jehova selbst und durch die heilige Zahlenlehre den Ursprung der
Dinge ergründen, Gott und seine Schöpfung erkennen, die Geister berufen
und die Zukunft erschauen wollte." (S.99).
Die mündliche Lehre, wie er sie versteht, erscheint Alfred letztlich
allerdings dunkel und verworren; von der praktischen Kabbala als schwarzer
Magie und Zauberei fühlt er sich abgestoßen.
"Schriftlich [...] geschehe ihrer zuerst bei Philo Erwähnung. Der große
Rabbi Akiba verfaßte im ersten Jahrhundert nach Christus das älteste
kabbalistische Buch Jezirah, - Simeon [!] ben Jochai das geheimnißvolle
320 Kabbala und Liebe

Buch Sohar; und die Kabbala wurde dann auch in den ersten Theil des
Talmud in die Mischnah aufgenommen. Durch das ganze Mittelalter
hindurch spukt nun ihr Wesen und wurde besonders unter der maurischen
Herrschaft in Spanien von den jüdischen Gelehrten zu Toledo, Cordova u.s.w.
gepflegt. Zur Zeit der Reformation wurde sie auch von christlichen Forschern
in Deutschland betrieben, so durch Paracelsus und den großen Humanisten
Reuchlin. Die Rabbinen der Synagoge zu Prag, besonders der hohe Rabbi
Löb, dessen Grabstein noch im Beth-Chaim der böhmischen Königsstadt zu
sehen, standen im Gerüche kabbalistischer Macht über die Geister, und die
portugiesischen Juden brachten ihre magische Geheimlehre auch nach
Holland. Endlich ging von Smyrna die jüdisch-kabbalistische Secte der
Sabbathäer aus und verbreitete sich im siebenzehnten Jahrhundert auch nach
Amsterdam und Hamburg; in Deutschland gründete ein gewisser Jakob Frank
eine neue Secte und zugleich entstand in Polen jene der Chasidim, welche
den Talmud verwarf und die Kabbala als die Quelle aller Erkenntniß annahm.
Aber wie diese Secten kamen, verschwanden sie auch. Und außer den Strei-
tigkeiten Hamburger und Prager Rabbinen um die Mitte des 18. Jahrhunderts
wäre das Gedächtniß an diese theurgische Geheimlehre wohl erloschen, wenn
nicht plötzlich in den siebenziger und achtziger Jahren des vorigen
Jahrhunderts gleich einem verspäteten, unheimlichen Phänomen die
kabbalistische Magie wieder aufgetaucht wäre. " (S.101)
Soweit Alfreds Kenntnisstand. David reagiert freundlich auf Alfreds Rede,
stellt aber dessen Verurteilung der praktischen' Kabbala in Frage: Die
Kabbala sei mißbraucht worden wie oft das Heilige, sie gehe nicht auf
Wunder aus, sondern auf Erkenntnis des Unendlichen, vor der sie aber
unmittelbar haltmache, weil Gott nie geschaut werden dürfe. Dichter und
Seher schüfen wunderbare Gestalten, sie erweckten sie zum Leben - dies seien
echtere Wunder als die Goldmacherkunst oder Geisterbeschwörung, hierin
zeige sich die wahre Magie. Und dann verteidigt David die große Leistung
der jüdischen Gelehrten der Spätantike und des Mittelalters, die geheime
Weisheit spekulativer Mystik für die Neuzeit gerettet zu haben:
"Woher hätten auch jene hohen Meister meines Stammes den aufop-
fernden Muth gehabt, verkannt und verleugnet vom eigenen Volke, verachtet
und verfolgt von der Rohheit der Zeit, das wissenschaftliche Licht des
Morgenlandes von den hohen Schulen der Araber in die mittelalterliche
Finsterniß des Abendlandes zu tragen, es mit ihrem Lebenshauch anzufachen
und vor dem Erlöschen zu bewahren? Ward nicht von ihnen, von dem großen
Adler unsers Volkes, Maimonides von Cordova, von Ben-Kena, Corduero,
Luria, vom großen Menachem de Lonzano und all den hohen Meistern zu
 HO. Horch 321

Toledo, Salerno und Zephat in der Barbarei des Mittelalters gehegt und
gepflegt der Funken, der jetzt als wohlthätiges Licht die Welt beleuchtet?"
(S. 105)
Alfred erkennt die Wahrheit des Gesagten an:
"Das große Verdienst jüdischer Gelehrten des Mittelalters um die Wis-
senschaft und Civilisation war nicht abzuleugnen, die sie die Vermittler
derselben waren, als das christliche Abendland noch in den Banden der
Barbarei lag." (S.105f)
David bestätigt das: sie waren Märtyrer für die reine Erkenntnis, nicht
interessiert an Eigennutz und Gewinn. Und dann verweist er Alfred auf das
urkundliche Zeugnis für den Mißbrauch kabbalistischer Weisheit, das in der
Hand des mit ihm befreundeten Pastors Reinhardt zu Hainbuchen liegt.
Reinhardt ist es denn auch, der Alfred im einzelnen nicht nur über den
seine Familie verfolgenden Fluch aufklärt, sondern auch dessen eher
oberflächliche Kenntnis der Kabbala und ihrer geschichtlichen Ausprägungen
zu vertiefen sucht. In einem Schrank, über dessen Schloß das "berühmte
Tetragrammaton" angebracht ist, findet sich eine Darstellung des
kabbalistischen Baums mit den zehn Sefirot.
"In ihnen [...] hat Gott nach der Kabbala sein Wesen, seine Natur
geoffenbart. Es sind die zehn Ausflüsse, Wirkungen, Kräfte oder Ei-
genschaften der göttlichen Einheit, in denen sich der Unendliche kundgiebt.
In ihnen beruhen die zehn heiligen göttlichen Namen der Schrift [...] und
zugleich die zehn Aussprüche, mit welchen Gott nach dem Talmud die Welt
erschaffen. So enthalten sie das eigentliche Mysterium der Geheimlehre, ja
deren Grundlage überhaupt. Und jener heiligste Name Gottes, der nur je
einem Auserwählten mitgetheilt werden darf, jener
zweiundvierzigbuchstabige göttliche Name ruht in ihnen. [...] Was aber hat
das mit der verstümmelten geometrischen Figur auf der Leinwand hier zu
thun? Nun, im Namen Jehova liegt die Erklärung der zehn Sefirot, er giebt
den Schlüssel zum kabbalistischen Baum, den die Eingeweihten den Baum
des Lebens, der Erkenntniß nennen, weil die Kabbala allein zur Erkenntniß
und zum Begriffe Gottes führe. " (11,1 S.96f.).
Nach weiteren Erläuterungen zum kabbalistischen Baum als einer "Art
geometrischer Versinnlichung des Wesens Gottes und seiner Weltordnung"
(S.98) nimmt der Pastor die im Schrank befindlichen Bücher zum Anlaß, auf
die Geschichte der Kabbala näher einzugehen. Reinhardt besitzt nicht nur die
in hebräischer, chaldäischer oder einer anderen orientalischen Sprache
geschriebenen Bücher - in erster Linie den Sohar sowie Werke Moses
Cordoveros und Isaak Lurias -, sondern auch Werke christlicher
Kabbalaforscher wie Reuchlin, Agrippa von Nettesheim und Knorr von
Rosenroth. Zugleich weist Reinhardt Alfred auf dessen Frage eindringlich
darauf hin, daß die moderne Philosophie, der Hegelianismus, ohne die
322 Kabbala und Liebe

Kenntnis der Kabbala oder zumindest einiger ihrer Grundaussagen über Gott
oder das absolute Nichts nicht zu denken sei (S.lOOf). Dann wird Alfred mit
dem Bücherschatz alleingelassen, der ihm natürlich geheimnisvolle
verschlüsselte Botschaften und frevelhafte Alchimistenkünste offenbart. Im
Lebensbericht seines Vorfahren Ruttger stößt er auf die Figur eines
polnischen Juden, der Sabbatai Zewi noch gekannt hat. Dieser macht sich
schuldig und wird zu einem 'Baal Teschuba ' wie Rabbi Meir, weil er Ruttger
ein Buch der "Kabbala Maschiith"9 anvertraut, das diesen in die Lage setzt,
Verstorbene zu beschwören und in die Zukunft zu blicken. Alfred ist
durchaus empfanglich für solcherart dunkle Überlieferung, aber Pastor
Reinhardts nüchterner Kommentar beruhigt ihn wieder: es ist die Macht des
Worts, auf die alle scheinbar magischen Wirkungen der Kabbala
zurückgeführt werden können (11,1 S. 102-140).
Das zwölfte und dreizehnte Kapitel des Ersten Bandes der Zweiten
Abteilung enthalten dann die ausführlichsten Ausführungen Reinhardts über
die Geschichte der Kabbala und ihrer Anhänger. Im Verlauf seines
Theologiestudiums stieß der Pastor auf die christlich-jüdisch-heidnische
Gnosis:
"Da war es nur noch ein Schritt bis zum Studium der Kabbala [...] Freilich
kostete es einen großen Aufwand von Seelenkräften, bis ich mich in einem
ungeheueren Labyrinth nur einigermaßen zu orientiren wußte [...] Ich war in
eine Lehre eingedrungen, die auf dem gleichen Boden mit dem Christenthum
und noch vor demselben sich entwickelt hatte, aber durch ein Jahrtausend als
heilige Geheimlehre fast nicht einmal eine Kunde ihres Daseins verrieth. Das
Buch Jezira und noch mehr der Sohar, das Buch des Glanzes, die Grundlagen
des kabbalistischen Systems, fesselten mich an den Studirtisch, und da
damals einige historische Untersuchungen über die Kabbala erschienen, hatte
ich mich bald über die Geschichte dieser Geheimlehre genauer unterrichtet."
(11,1 S.224Í).
Reinhardt beginnt sein Kolleg mit Raimundus Lullus, der als erster der
europäischen Welt die Kunde von der jüdischen Geheimlehre vermittelt habe
(S.226); wirklich bekanntgemacht worden sei sie jedoch erst von Pico della
Mirandola und Reuchlin (S.230). Historisch gesehen habe sich die Kabbala
erst seit dem Babylonischen Exil entwickelt, sei also nicht bereits bei
Abraham und den Patriarchen anzutreffen (S.226f). Einflüsse der
parsistisch-zoroastrischen Lehre seien anzunehmen, der ägyptischen
Tradition eher zweifelhaft (S.227). Im ersten nachchristlichen Jahrhundert
endlich träten aus der Reihe der Talmudisten die Weisen der Kabbala
deutlich hervor: Rabbi Akiba als Neuschöpfer des Buchs Jezira, und sein
Schüler Simon ben Jochai, Rabbi Nechunja und dessen Schüler Rabbi Ismael

9
Gemeint ist die "Kabbala ma'asit". die praktische' Kabbala; diese Schreibweise findet sich bei
Salomen Maimón (vgl. Anm.15) S.81.
 H O. Horch 323

ben Elischah (S.228f). Auf den Hochschulen zu Babylon und Palästina, zu

Cordova und Alexandrien sei dann die Kabbala im geheimen weiter gelehrt
worden (229f). Mit der beginnenden Neuzeit bemächtigten sich Abenteurer
wie Paracelsus der "niedere[n] oder praktische[n] Kabbala", der Aberglaube
habe den wahren Kern überwuchert (S.230).
Neue kabbalistische Systeme seien etwa zur Zeit Luthers vom
obergaliläischen Zephat oder Safed ausgegangen, nämlich von Mose
Corduero (Cordovero) und Isaak Luria. Insbesondere auf Luria habe sich
dann Sabbathai Zewi berufen. Der "wunderbare Lebenslauf' dieses
"Schwärmers" (S.238) und die ungeheure Wirkung auf die Judenheit des 17.
und beginnenden 18. Jahrhunderts sind selbst romanhaft, so daß ihnen in
Reinhardts Kolleg mehrere Seiten gewidmet werden (S.231-241). Das Leben
Sabbathais, seine Berufung, seine Wanderungen, seine Erfolge, schließlich
sein erzwungener Übertritt zum Islam werden breit geschildert. Aber auch die
Auswirkungen seiner Bewegung bis hin zu Moses Chajim Luzzatto sowie der
Streit zwischen Jonathan Eibeschütz und Jakob Emden werden nicht über-
gangen.
Im Kern enthält die Erzählung vom Religionswechsel des Pseudomessias
auch die aufgeklärt-religiöse Grundidee des Romans: daß es nämlich weniger
auf die Religion ankomme als auf das, was der Mensch handelnd aus seinem
Glauben mache. So steht über dem 13. Kapitel, das dem Ba'al-Schem und
seinem Chassidismus, vor allem aber Jakob Frank und seiner Bewegung
gewidmet ist, denn auch ein Motto aus Lessings Nathan (S.242-256). Anders
als der große Beseht und seine Bewegung, deren Behandlung sehr knapp
ausfallt, lassen sich auf der Ebene der Handlung die Ausführungen über
Frank durch dessen fingierte Verwandtschaft mit der Frau David Benasses
motivieren (vgl. S.247). Wichtiger aber scheint mir, daß Reinhardt resp.
Becker in Frank und dem Frankismus offenbar eine Art Universalreligion
jenseits von Judentum, Christentum und Islam sieht. Die Sohariten Franks
verwerfen den Talmud und schwören allein auf den Sohar, in dem die
Schriften Mosis und der Propheten in ihrer Tiefendimension entschlüsselt
erscheinen:
"[...] es sei ein einziger, allwaltender Gott, aber dreieinig, denn er
veranschauliche sich in drei Gestaltungen und der Sohar sage: Drei sind
Eins! Gott könne verkörpert auf Erden erscheinen und in Menschengestalt
unter uns wandeln; er allein sei der Messias, der unsere Sünden sühne und
nicht blos die Juden, sondern alle Menschen erlösen werde, denn Jesaias und
Jeremias sagen: der Name unseres Erlösers ist Jehova Zebaoth! Die Hoffnung
der Juden auf einen Wiederaufbau Sions aber sei eine nichtige." (S.249).
Dieser Glaube läuft - insbesondere im Begriff der Trinität - scheinbar auf
christliche Positionen hinaus, so daß die Frankisten nicht von ungefähr von
katholischer Seite gegen traditionelle Rabbiner verteidigt werden. In
Wahrheit hat das Trinitätsdenken des Sabbatianismus und Frankismus nichts
324 Kabbala und Liebe

mit dem christlichen Dogma zu tun, sondern ist Ausdruck eines in der
Wirklichkeit des Exils vorgefundenen Grundwiderspruchs, der, projiziert in
den Gottesbegriff, zu einem Dualismus und schließlich sogar zu einem
trinitarischen Gottesbegriff fuhrt, zur "mystische[n] Trinität des verborgenen
Gottes, des Gottes Israels und der Schechina"10. Von daher beruht die
christliche Unterstützung für die jüdischen Häretiker auf einem
Mißverständnis und ist nicht von langer Dauer. Erst nach langen Irrfahrten,
immer wieder von Juden wie Christen beargwöhnt, können sich Frank und
seine Anhänger schließlich in Offenbach am Main niederlassen, wo der
Sektengründer am 10. Dezember 1791 starb. Pastor Reinhardt vermutet eine
Nähe Franks zu den Illuminaten, hebt aber hervor, Frank habe - anders als
Cagliostro - "sein Andenken nicht durch magischen Betrug geschändet"; er
habe an seinen Patriarchenberuf geglaubt und seine Anhänger hätten sich zu
seinen Lebzeiten und später "durch Sittenreinheit, Friedlichkeit,
Menschenliebe hervorgethan" (S.254). Die Trias "Sittenreinheit,
Friedlichkeit, Menschenliebe" verweist auf den geistesgeschichtlichen Ort des
Frankismus, wie er im Roman herausgearbeitet wird.
"Das Vermächtnis des Rabbi ist [...] nichts anderes als eine nachauf-
klärerische, idealistische Humanität, die freilich ihrer Wurzeln und speziell
ihrer jüdischen Wurzeln eingedenk bleibt, und die daher das Abendland'
nicht nur in einem allgemeinen Sinne als geistige Einheit, sondern unter
Einschluß des morgenländisch-jüdischen Elements, gerade als eine
historische Gesamtheit aus den Differenzen dialektisch zu verstehen sucht".11
Geschichte wird in der Tat bei Sabbathai wie bei Frank zum Roman, der
Roman zur Geschichte (S.244), aber in einem nicht nur äußerlichen,
handlungsbezogenen Sinn. In ihnen zeigt sich nach Beckers Interpretation
auf paradoxe Weise ein ethischer Universalismus, wie ihn eben nicht nur das
aufgeklärte Christentum propagiert, sondern auch und gerade die bei
Aufklärern verschrieenen mystischen Bewegungen. Im Paradox einer
häretischen Ethik bereitet sich, wie Gershom Scholem betonte, nicht nur die
Aufklärung vor, sondern zugleich die gesamten modernen Strömungen
jüdischer Religionsphilosophie und Theologie.12 Eher naiv vertritt Becker

Gershom Schülern, Die jüdische Mystik in ihren Hauptströmungen, Frankfurt am Main

(Suhrkamp) 1980. (= suhrkamp tb. Wissenschaft 330), S.355. [1. Aufl. 1957]. Zu Scholems
Interpretation der jüdischen Mystik, insbes. des Sabbatianismus vgl. Joseph Dan, Gershom Scholem
and the mystical dimension of Jewish history, New York, London (New York University Press)
1987, S.286ff.
11
Hans-Peter Bayerdörfer, "Jüdisdies Mittelalter in der deutschen Literatur des 19. Jahrhunderts". In:
Das Weiterleben des Mittelalters in der deutschen Literatur, hrsg. v. James F. Poag u. Geduld
Scholz-Wilhams, Krcnberg/Ts. (Athenäum) 1983. S.122-141,bier S.133f.
12
Vgl. neben Scholem auch Joseph Dan, Jewish Mysticism and Jewish Ethics, Seattle, London (Uni-
versity of Washington Press) 1986. Insbes. S.104ff.
 Η. O. Horch 325

eine ähnliche Position, wobei er sich in ungewöhnlichem Umfang auf

jüdische, nicht etwa auf christliche Darstellungen der Kabbala stützt.

IV

Als Journalist in München konnte sich Becker ohne Schwierigkeiten über den
Forschungsstand zur Kabbala informieren. Der einschlägige dritte Band von
Isaak Marcus Josts Geschichte des Judenthums und seiner Sekten' war 1859
erschienen13, Franz Joseph Molitors voluminöse Darstellung lag mit der
Neubearbeitung des 1. Teils 1857 in erreichbarer Vollständigkeit vor14. Im
Roman selbst werden jedoch andere Quellen hervorgehoben: Salomon
Maimons Lebensgeschichte aus den Jahren 1792/93 mit ihrer knappen
Darstellung der Kabbala (11,1 S.247) 15 , Peter Beers zweibändiges Werk über
die Geschichte der jüdischen Sekten aus den Jahren 1822/23 (11,1 S.247 bzw.
254) 16 sowie Adolph Jellineks Übersetzung von Adolphe Francks Buch über
die Kabbala aus dem Jahr 1844 (11,1 S.101) 17 . Maimons aufgeklärte, um
Objektivität bemühte Einschätzung der Kabbala bestimmt auch Beckers

13
Leipzig (Dörffling & Franke) 1859, Bd HI. - Die Hinweise auf mögliche Quellen entnehme ich
Gerhard [Gershom] Scholem, Bibliographia Kabbalisrica. Verzeichnis der gedrucktm die jüdische
Mystik (Gnosis, Kabbala, Sabbatianismus, Frankismus, Chassidianus) behandelnden Bücher und
Aufsätze ven Reuchlin bis zur Gegenwart. Mit einem Anhang: Bibliographie des Zohar und seiner
Kommentare. Leipzig (Drugulin) 1927. (= Kabbala. Quellen und Forschungen zur Geschichte der
jüdischen Mystik Bd. Π).
14
Philosophie der Geschichte oder über die Tradition in dem alten Bunde und ihre Beziehung zur
Kirche des neuen Bundes. 1. Theil Frankfurt 1827, 2. neu bearb. u. verm. Aufl. Münster 1857; 2.
Theil 1834; 3. Theil 1839; 4. Heil, 1. Abt. 1855.
^Salomon Maimons Lebensgeschichte. In zwei Theil an. Von ihm selbst geschrieben und herausge-
geben von K[arl] P(hilipp] Moritz. Berlin (Vieweg) 1792/1793. - Neu hrsg. v. Zwi Batscha. Frankfurt
a.M, (Insel) 1984. Erstes Buch, Kap.14: Ich studiere die Kabbala und werde endlich gar ein Arzt
(S.76-88).
16
Peter Beer, Geschichte, Lehren und Meinungen aller bestandenen und noch bestehenden religi-
ösen Sehten der Juden und der Geheimlehre oder Cabbalah, 2 Bde., Brünn (Joseph Georg Traßler)
1822/23.
17
A(dolphe] Franck: Die Kabbala oder die Religions-Philosophie der Hebräer [...] Aus dem Frz.
übers., verbessert u. vermehrt v. Adfolf) Gelinek [sie = Jellinek] Leipzig (Heinrich Hunger) 1844. -
Originalausgabe: La Kabbale ou la philosophie religieuse des Hébreux, Paris (Hadiette) 1843.
Möglicherweise hat Becker audi die wichtige Rezension über Francks Werk ven A. Adler gelesen:
"Die Kabbalah oder die Religiansphilosophie der Hebräer, von A. Franck". 1h: Jahrbücher für
spekulative Philosophie, hrsg. v. Ludwig Noack. Darmstadt. I (1846) H.3, S. 183-198; H.4,
S.211-221; Π (1847) S. 175-191 u. 385-393. Adler erkennt klar, daß die "Kabbala nicht ein System,
sondern eine mehr als tausendjährige geschichtliche Entwicklung verschiedener Systeme innerhalb
einer geistigen Richtung" ist (S.393).
326 Kabbala und Liebe

Roman. Sie enthält Hinweise auf die generelle Unterscheidung von

theoretischer und praktischer Kabbala, auf den Sohar, auf die beiden
Hauptsysteme Moses Kordaweras (Cordoveros) und Isaak Lorias (Lurias),
wobei Maimón eindeutig Cordovero zuneigt; die praktische Kabbala wird als
Aberglauben lächerlich gemacht. In der französischen Originalfassung von
Francks Buch finden sich Übersetzungen von Maimons Bericht über die
Chassidim sowie von Peter Beers Darstellung der Sohariten; Jellinek weist in
der Vorrede zu seiner Übertragung auf beide Berichte hin, ohne sie selbst ins
Deutsche rückzuübersetzen. Es ist anzunehmen, daß Becker zunächst
Jellineks Franck-Übersetzung in die Hand bekam und dort auf Maimón und
Beer verwiesen wurde. Immerhin war Franck (1809-1893) zur Zeit der
Entstehung von Beckers Roman eine international bekannte Persönlichkeit -
als Philosoph (zuletzt an der Sorbonne und am Collège de France) wie als
Präsident der Alliance Israélite Universelle18. Im einzelnen scheint Becker
aus Franck nicht viel übernommen zu haben; explizit wird auf ihn verwiesen
im Zusammenhang der Bedeutung der Kabbala für die moderne Philosophie,
insbesondere des Hegelianismus:
"Lesen Sie des Franzosen Frank Buch über die Kabbala oder die Re-
ligionsphilosophie der Hebräer, und Sie werden den Nachweis finden, daß der
Hegelianismus Gedanken und Sätze über den Gottesbegriff, ja sogar
Ausdrücke hat, wie die vom absoluten Nichts', die sich schon im Sohar
finden." (11,1 Kap.5, S.101).
Alle Namen, die im Zusammenhang der Entstehung des Sohar und der
Kabbala-Rezeption von Bedeutung sind (von Rabbi Akiba und Simon ben
Jochai über Raymundus Lullus, Pico della Mirandola und Reuchlin bis hin zu
Kircher, Knorr von Rosenroth und Wächter) konnte Becker bereits bei Beer
finden, dessen Buch tatsächlich als Hauptquelle der kabbalistischen Exkurse
des Romans angesehen werden muß. Peter (Perez) Beer (1758-1838), in
Böhmen geboren, war Schüler der Jeschiva des Ezechiel Landau in Prag und
besuchte dann die Talmudhochschule des Rabbi Meir Barbi in Preßburg. Im
Gefolge der Josephinischen Reformen hörte Beer Pädagogik-Vorlesungen an
der Wiener Universität und wurde 1783 Lehrer an einer neuerrichteten
deutschen Schule im Burgenland. Seine hebräisch geschriebene Geschichte
Israels (entstanden 1785, erschienen 1796) wurde mehrfach aufgelegt und in
mehrere Sprachen übersetzt. 1813 wurde Beer der erste jüdische
Religionslehrer an einem staatlichen österreichischen Gymnasium in Prag.
Beer gehört nicht zur jüdischen Orthodoxie, sondern zur Reformbewegung;

18
Vgl. M[oses] G[insburge]r im Jüd. Lexikon Bd. H, 1927, Sp.706.
 KO. Horch 327

dennoch scheinen seine Schriften, insbesondere die hebräisch verfaßten, auch

in orthodoxen Kreisen gelesen worden zu sein.19
Es läßt sich zeigen, daß Beers Darstellung zum Teil fast wörtlich oder in
textnahen Paraphrasen von Becker übernommen wird. So folgen z.B. die
Ausführungen Pastor Reinhardts über die Geschichte der Kabbala (11,1
Kap. 12) ziemlich genau der Darstellung Beers (Bd 2, "Geschichte der
Kabbalah", S. 10-43). Besonders eng an Beers Text schließen sich Passagen
an, die auch bei diesem erzählenden Charakter haben. Dies gilt in erster Linie
für die Geschichte Sabbathai Zewis und seiner messianischen Bewegung (11,1
Kap. 12, S.231-241 bzw. Beer, "Sohariten oder Sabbathianer", Bd 2,
S.259-305) sowie für die Darstellung der für den Roman zentralen Bewegung
des Jakob Frank (Becker 11,1 Kap. 13, S.242-256 resp. Beer, "Sohariten oder
Sabbathianer", Bd 2, S.309-329).
Die Funktion erzählender religionsgeschichtlicher Passagen im Roman
zeige ich an einem Beispiel aus dem Abschnitt über Jakob Frank, der
Schilderung seines ersten Besuchs in Wien.
Bei Beer wird dieser Besuch so geschildert:
"Im Jahre 1778 begab er [Frank] sich mit einer großen und prächtigen
Suite, die von dem vornehmsten Sekretär bis auf den niedrigsten Stallknecht
aus getauften Juden beiderlei Geschlechts bestand, worunter auch mehrere
Rabbinen sich befanden, nach Wien, wo er einen mehr als fürstlichen
Aufwand machte. Aber eben dieser übermäßige Aufwand, da man nicht
wußte, wo die Geldquellen dazu herkamen, erregte bei der Polizeistelle
Verdacht, und er ward von Wien abgeschafft. Er begab sich von da nach
Brünn, weil er in Mähren fast in jeder Gemeinde mehrere Anhänger hatte,
von wo aus er seine Untergebenen in allen Ländern dirigirte. Der Unterhalt
für ihn und seine Suite, die sich oft durch die Ankunft von sehr schönen jun-
gen Juden beiderlei Geschlechts auf mehrere hunderte vermehrte, ward ihm
von seinem Anhange sehr reichlich gespendet, und mehrmal des Jahrs kamen
Fässer voll Geldes aus verschiedenen Gegenden, besonders aus Pohlen, unter
der Escorte seiner eigenen Miliz für ihn nach Brünn, oder wo er sonst sich
aufhielt, an. Wenn er ausführ, welches fast täglich Nachmittags, zur
Verrichtung des Gebets außerhalb der Stadt, auf freiem Felde geschah,
umgaben seinen mit sehr prächtigen Pferden bespannten kostbaren Wagen,
zehn bis zwölf vom Golde strotzende, grün und roth nach Ulahnenart geklei-
dete Reiter mit Picken, an deren Spitzen sich vergoldete Adler, Hirsche oder
Sonnen und Monde befanden. Dem Wagen folgte immer ein auf einem
prächtigen, mit vielen Schellen behangenem Rosse sitzender Reiter, der einen
mit Wasser gefüllten, und am Ende mit einer Art von Gießkanne versehenen
Schlauch mit sich führte, und nach beendigtem Gebete das Wasser auf der

19
Vgl. MJoritz] R[osenfel]d, ebd., Bdl, 1927, Sp.786f.
328 Kabbala und Liebe

Stelle, wo das Gebet verrichtet wurde, auslaufen ließ. Der Zweck dieser
Ceremonie ist unbekannt, da sie weder in der jüdischen noch christlichen
oder muhametanischen Religion gegründet ist, und selbst in dem Sohar keine
Spur davon sich auffinden läßt." (Bd 2, S.323-325).
Bei Becker lautet die Episode folgendermaßen:
"Es war im Jahre 1778, als er [Frank] zum ersten Male in Wien erschien,
umgeben von einer zahlreichen, prächtigen Suite, die vom vornehmsten
Sekretär bis zum niedrigsten Stallknecht aus getauften Juden bestand. Auch
mehrere Rabbinen befanden sich darunter. Das war in der Zeit, da der
baierische Erbfolgekrieg auch Kartoffelkrieg und Zwetschgenrummer
genannt, zum Ausbruch kommen sollte. Der mehr als fürstliche Aufwand des
Patriarchen, sein seltsamer grotesker Aufzug erregte den Verdacht der
Wiener Polizei. Er ward aus der Kaiserstadt verwiesen und zog sich in die
Mitte seines Anhangs, nach Brünn in Mähren zurück, wo er in jeder
Judengemeinde seine offenen Freunde zählte und von wo er nun die
Gläubigen im Osten und Westen leitete. Hunderte von Judenmädchen und
Judenjünglingen kamen aus den Ebenen der östlichen Slavenländer und aus
den Gebirgen Böhmens heran, - alle fanden bei ihm ihren Unterhalt, da ganze
Fässer voll Geldes, von seiner eigenen Eskorte abgeholt, besonders aus den
weiten Gebieten Polens kamen. In kostbarem, mit den schönsten Pferden
bespannten Wagen fuhr er zum Gebet auf freiem Felde vor der Stadt; grün
und roth gekleidete, von Gold strotzende Reiter, gleich Uhlanen mit Piken
versehen, an deren Spitze goldglänzende Hirsche, Adler, Sonnen und Monde
blitzten, umgaben ihn; auf prächtigem, mit Schellen behangenen Rosse folgte
ein Reiter mit einem Wasserschlauch, der jedesmal auf der Stelle des Gebetes
ausgegossen ward." (11,1 Kap.13, S.251f.).
Die religionsgeschichtliche Erläuterung Beers, daß diese Zeremonie des
Wassersprengens in den drei Weltreligionen unbekannt sei, fehlt bei Becker;
stattdessen resümiert er:
"So war der Patriarch ein Räthsel seiner Zeit, und die Menge gaffie, ob
der seltsamen, imponirenden Erscheinung im rothseidenen mit Hermelin
besetzten Talar."
Becker geht es also nicht primär darum, Einzelheiten des Kultus und
Ritus jüdischer Sekten darzustellen, sondern ihre historische Eigenart -
schwierig genug - generell zu charakterisieren und die religionshistorischen
Exkurse irgendwie in die Romanhandlung funktional zu integrieren. Je
konkreter also die Darstellung Beers die menschlichen Aspekte der
verschiedenen Bewegungen berücksichtigt, desto eher kann sich Becker ihren
Wortlaut zunutze machen. Dagegen wird etwa das von Beer auf elf Seiten
wiedergegebene "Glaubensbekenntnis" der frankistischen Sekte (Bd 2,
S 311-321) von Becker auf einer halben Seite zusammengefaßt:
"Z.B. das Gesetz soll nicht blos befolgt, sondern auch in seinem geheimen
und verborgenen Sinne erforscht werden; der Sohar führe zur Erkenntniß und
 H.O. Horch 329

Seligkeit, weil zur Entschleierung der großen Geheimnisse, welche in den

Schriften Mosis und der Propheten verborgen liegen; es sei ein einziger,
allwaltender Gott, aber dreieinig [...]" (11,1 Kap. 13, S.249; weiter wie oben).
Diese Zusammenfassung ist keineswegs unzutreffend; auffällig ist jedoch,
daß die für Christen akzeptablen Thesen besonders hervorgehoben werden.
Becker reflektiert damit - im Gegensatz zu Beer - eindeutig auf ein
christliches Publikum, dem im Gewand des Romans jüdisch-häretische
Positionen als letztlich verwandte nahegebracht werden sollen. In Beckers
Roman, der an der Schwelle einer neuen Welle des Antisemitismus im
Gefolge des deutsch-französischen Krieges 1870/71 steht, wird der
aufgeklärte Optimismus eines Lessing noch einmal beschworen, seine
Hoflhung auf eine menschheitliche Universalreligion, deren unterschiedliche
historische Ausprägungen in der humanen Praxis ihren trennenden Charakter
verlieren.

"Das neunzehnte Jahrhundert ist das Jahrhundert der Angeberei. Alle

bemühen sich unentwegt, irgendwelche Geheimnisse aufzudecken - die
Geheimnisse der Magie, der Theurgie, der Kabbala, der Tarotkarten. Und
womöglich glauben sie auch noch daran ,.."20
Mit diesen Worten sucht in Ecos Roman Das Foucaultsche Pendel Signor
Agliè als Berater des Esoterik-Verlags die von ihm verachteten Okkultisten
gegenüber den wirklichen Esoterikern abzugrenzen, zu deren Kreis er sich
selbst zählt. Agliè ist die Figuration des postmodernen Synkretismus
schlechthin, der ihm im höchsten Sinn als "Anerkennung einer einzigen
Tradition" gilt, "die alle Religionen durchzieht und nährt, alle Glaubens- und
Wissensformen und alle Philosophien". Der Weise ist für ihn "nicht
deijenige, der diskriminierend unterscheidet, sondern der die Funken des
Lichtes zusammensieht, woher sie auch kommen mögen ,.."21 Als Autor der
Superbestseiler Der Name der Rose und Das Foucaultsche Pendel scheint mir
Umberto Eco - auf zweifellos ungleich höherem ästhetischem Niveau als
August Becker und mit dem Augenzwinkern des universalgelehrten
postmodernen Ironikers - ähnlich den von seiner Romanfigur gescholtenen
Autoren des 19. Jahrhunderts einem aufs Mysteriöse begierigen Publikum
entsprechende Angebote zu machen. Immer wieder greift Eco dabei auch auf
die Kabbala zurück. Bereits die zehn Bücher des Foucaultschen Pendels -
überschrieben mit den Namen der zehn Sefirot (Kether, Chochmah, Binah,
Chessed, Geburah, Tifereth, Nezach, Hod, Jessod, Malchuth) - mit ihren 120

20
Eco, Das Foucaultsche Pendel (Anm. 1 ), S.509.
2
^Eco, ebd., S.212.
330 Kabbala und Liebe

Kapiteln deuten geheimnisvolle Bezüge an, auf deren Aufdeckung die Leser
letztlich vergebens hoffen. Das Motto zum ersten Kapitel des ersten Buchs
stammt von Isaak Luria; dadurch, daß Eco es in der original hebräischen
Schrift wiedergibt, initiiert er gleich zu Beginn im Modus der Graphie beim
unkundigen Leser (und das sind fast alle) einen Schauer - was mag sich
hinter diesen Zeichen an geheimem Wissen verbergen? Die Übersetzung des
Zitats im Anhang hilft kaum weiter, da das Zitat auch in übertragener Form
kryptisch genug bleibt. Die Behauptung, es gehe letztlich um aufklärerische
Bekämpfung des Aberglaubens im ausgehenden 20. Jahrhundert -
"Aberglauben bringt Unglück" ist eines der beiden Motti des Gesamtromans -
, kann nur als Augenwischerei gelten: in Wahrheit sollen - mit dem zweiten
Motto des Agrippa von Nettesheim - die "Kinder der Wissenschaft und der
Weisheit" sich auf die Spurensuche im Labyrinth des Buchs begeben, eine
Spurensuche, die letztlich ästhetisch-intellektueller Selbstzweck bleibt. Die
Kabbala wird von Eco keineswegs als ernsthafte jüdische
Religionsphilosophie behandelt, sondern zusammen mit der Vielzahl anderer
Quellen zum okkulten Spielmaterial degradiert.
Der Eco des 19. Jahrhunderts, August Becker, ist weniger raffiniert als
sein Nachfahre, bescheidener, nicht in erster Linie kommerziell, sondern
didaktisch motiviert. In seinem Roman geht es weniger um
Weltverschwörungsphantasien als um das Schicksal einer Familie, deren
Wirrungen sich am Ende auflösen. Die Erläuterungen zur Kabbala und zu
jüdischen Sekten gehen weit über das für die Handlung Notwendige hinaus;
sie sind keineswegs bloßes Spielmaterial, sondern sollen den Leser über eine
interessante Facette jüdischer Religiosität aufklären zu einer Zeit, in der auch
Juden über dieses eher beargwöhnte Gebiet nur vage Kenntnisse besitzen.
Steht bei Eco die "Kabbala ma'asit", die praktische' Kabbala eindeutig im
Vordergrund, so bei Becker die "Kabbala ijjunit", die 'theoretische' Kabbala.
Am Ende klärt sich alles auf - nicht etwa durch die Enthüllung des letzten
Geheimnisses', eines kabbalistisch inspirierten Vermächtnisses, sondern
durch das Eingreifen eines ehrwürdigen jüdischen Weisen und eines
undogmatischen Christen. Die Kabbala in ihrem Kern dient der Menschheit
durch ihre Konzentration auf das Geistige und Ethische - Aberglauben und
Magie dagegen sind bloße Derivate, die im Zeichen von Aufklärung und
Humanität keine Bedeutung mehr haben. Ob die zeitgenössischen Leser diese
Botschaft verstanden haben oder überhaupt verstehen wollten? Daß das
heutige Publikum eher der Raffinesse Umberto Ecos huldigt, ist offensichtlich
- nicht nur wegen des secret appeal' des Romans, sondern auch wegen
dessen verwirrend vielfaltigen und ästhetisch reizvollen intertextuellen
Bezügen. So gesehen bleibt Becker allzu bieder, um auch heute noch Leser
für seinen zeitgeschichtlich nicht uninteressanten Roman zu finden. Auf eine
prämoderne trivialliterarische Variante der Kabbala-Rezeption des 19.
Jahrhunderts aufmerksam zu machen, war die Absicht meines Beitrags - und
 Η. O. Horch 331

auch darauf, daß die postmodern-geschäftstüchtige Funktionalisierung jü-

disch-kabbalistischer Strömungen zum Zweck der Bedienung einschlägiger
Leserinteressen nicht ohne bedenkliche Aspekte ist, deren Konsequenzen eine
ernsthafte Kulturkritik wird beschäftigen müssen.
 STUDIA JUDAICA
Forschungen zur Wissenschaft des Judentums
Herausgegeben von Ernst Ludwig Ehrlich

Groß-Oktav • Ganzleinen

PAUL WINTER
On the Trial of Jesus
Second edition. Revised and edited by T. A. Burkill and Geza Vermes
1974. X X I I I , 225 pages. ISBN 3-11-002283-4 (Volume 1)

MICHAEL AVI-YONAH
Geschichte der Juden
im Zeitalter des Talmud
In den Tagen von Rom und Byzanz
XVI, 290 Seiten. 1962. ISBN 3-11-001344-4 (Band 2)

GERSHOM SCHOLEM
Ursprung und Anfange der Kabbala
X, 434 Seiten. 1962. ISBN 3-11-001345-2 (Band 3)

ABRAHAM SCHALIT
König Herodes
Der Mann und sein Werk
XVI, 890 Seiten. 1 Frontispiz, 8 Bildtafeln, 4 Karten und 1 Stammtafel.
1969. ISBN 3-11-001346-0 (Band 4)

ARNOLD MARIA GOLDBERG

Untersuchungen
über die Vorstellung von der Schekhina
in der frühen rabbinischen Literatur
Talmud und Midrasch
XII, 564 Seiten. 1969. ISBN 3-11-001347-9 (Band 5)

CHANOCH ALBECK
Einführung in die Mischna
VIII, 493 Seiten. 1971. ISBN 3-11-006429-4 (Band 6)

Walter de Gruyter W
DE Berlin · New York
G
 STUDIA JUDAICA
Forschungen zur Wissenschaft des Judentums
Herausgegeben von Ernst Ludwig Ehrlich

HERMANN GREIVE
Studien zum jüdischen Neuplatonismus
Die Religionsphilosophie des Abraham Ibn Ezra
X, 225 Seiten. 1973. ISBN 3-11-004116-2 (Band 7)

PETER SCHÄFER
Rivalität zwischen Engeln und Menschen
Untersuchungen zur rabbinischen Engelvorstellung
XIV, 280 Seiten. 1975. ISBN 3-11-004632-6 (Band 8)

JOSEPH HEINEMANN
Prayer in the Talmud
Forms and Patterns
1977. X, 320 pages. ISBN 3-11-004298-4 (Volume 9)

RACHEL ROSENZWEIG
Solidarität mit den Leidenden im Judentum
XXVI, 297 Seiten. 1978. ISBN 3-11-005939-8 (Band 10)

IRA CHERNUS
Mysticism in Rabbinic Judaism
Studies in the History of Midrash
1982. XII, 162 pages. ISBN 3-11-008589 (Volume 11)

CHANA SAFRAI
Women and Temple
The Status and Role of Women in the Second Temple of Jerusalem
1995. Approx. 260 pages. ISBN 3-11-0013676-7 (Volume 12)

DIRK U. ROTTZOLL
Rabbinischer Kommentar zum Buch Genesis
Darstellung der Rezeption des Buches Genesis in Mischna und Talmud
unter Angabe targumischer und midraschischer Paralleltexte
X, 539 Seiten. 1994. ISBN 3-11-014231-7 (Band 14)

Walter de Gruyter W
DE Berlin · New York
G