The Gnostic Imagination: Gnosticism, Mandaeism and Merkabah Mysticism (Brill's Series in Jewish Studies) 9004102647, 9789004102644, 9789004672505

Citation preview

THE GNOSTIC IMAGINATION

Deutsch - 978-90-04-67250-5 Downloaded from Brill.com 01/09/2024 08:32:10PM via Universitats- und Stadtbibliothek Koln (USB Köln)

BRILL'S SERIES IN JEWISH STUDIES GENERAL EDITOR

DAVIDS. KATZ (Tel Aviv) ADVISORY EDITORS STUART COHEN (Bar-Ilan) ANTHONY T. GRAFTON (Princeton) YOSEF KAPLAN Gerusalem) FERGUS MILlAR (Oxford)

VOL. XIII

Deutsch - 978-90-04-67250-5 Downloaded from Brill.com 01/09/2024 08:32:10PM via Universitats- und Stadtbibliothek Koln (USB Köln)

THE GNOSTIC IMAGINATION Gnosticism, Mandaeism and Merkabah Mysticism BY

NATHANIEL DEUTSCH

EJ. BRILL LEIDEN · NEW YORK · KOLN 1995

Deutsch - 978-90-04-67250-5 Downloaded from Brill.com 01/09/2024 08:32:10PM via Universitats- und Stadtbibliothek Koln (USB Köln)

The paper in this book meets the guidelines for permanence and durability of the Committee on Production Guidelines for Book Longevity of the Council on Library Resources.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Deutsch, Nathaniel. The Gnostic imagination : Gnosticism, Mandaeism and Merkabah mysticism I by Nathaniel Deutsch. p. cm. - (Brill's series in Jewish studies, ISSN 0926-2261 ; vol. 13) Includes bibliographical references and indexes. ISBN 900410264 7 (cloth : alk. paper) I. Judaism-Relations-Gnosticism. 2. Gnosticism-Relations-J udaism. 3. Mandaeans. 4. Merkava. 5. Mysticism-Judaism. I. Title. IL Series. BM536.G54D48 1995 296.3'.872-dc20 95-17253 CIP

Die Deutsche Bibliothek - CIP-Einheitsaufnahme Deutsch, Nathaniel: The gnostic imagination : Gnosticism, Mandaeism and Merkabah mysticism I by Nathaniel Deutsch. -Leiden ; New York ; Kain : Brill, 1995 Brill's series injewish studies; Vol. 13) ISBN 90-04-l 0264-7 NE:GT

ISSN 0926-2261 ISBN 90 04 I 0264 7

© Copyright 1995 by E.]. Brill, Leiden, The Netherlands All rights reserved. No part of this publication ma;· be reproduced, translated, stored in a retrieval .rystem, or transmitted in any form or by any means, el.ectronic, mecha.nical, plwtocopying, recording or otherwise, 1L1thout prior written permission from the pub Lisher. Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use is granted by E.]. Brill provided that the appropriate fees are paid direct!J to The Copyright Cl.earance Cmter, 222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 91 0 Danvers MA 01923, USA. Fees are sul?ject to cha.nge. PRINTED i:\' THE NETHERIA.'·ms

Deutsch - 978-90-04-67250-5 Downloaded from Brill.com 01/09/2024 08:32:10PM via Universitats- und Stadtbibliothek Koln (USB Köln)

For my Imma and Abba, Suzanna and Zvi Deutsch, whose love, guidance, and sacrifice made all the difference.

Deutsch - 978-90-04-67250-5 Downloaded from Brill.com 01/09/2024 08:32:10PM via Universitats- und Stadtbibliothek Koln (USB Köln)

Deutsch - 978-90-04-67250-5 Downloaded from Brill.com 01/09/2024 08:32:10PM via Universitats- und Stadtbibliothek Koln (USB Köln)

CONTENTS Acknowledgements .. .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... ....... ... .... ...

ix

I.

The Problem ............................ .............................. .... .... .

1

IL

Defining Gnosticism and Merkabah Mysticism .. .. .. ... ..

18

III.

Scripture and Exegesis .... .... .... ........ .... .... .... .... ...............

56

IV

Cosmology and Ascent .................. ................ .......... .... ..

68

V.

Theology .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .... ... .... . .. .. .. .. ... . ... ..... ... . .. .. .. .. .. ............

80

Bibliography .... .... .... .... .... .. .. .... .... .... .... .... ... . .... .... .... .. .. .. .. .... ... .. ... . 154 Index ............................................................................................. 159

Deutsch - 978-90-04-67250-5 Downloaded from Brill.com 01/09/2024 08:32:10PM via Universitats- und Stadtbibliothek Koln (USB Köln)

Deutsch - 978-90-04-67250-5 Downloaded from Brill.com 01/09/2024 08:32:10PM via Universitats- und Stadtbibliothek Koln (USB Köln)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Every book is like a child, and this child has many parents. More than anyone, however, this book belongs to my own mother and father, Irnma and Abba. No matter how hard life became, you were always there for your children. Without your love, dedication, and wisdom this book could not have been written. The following list of thanks and acknowledgements is long, but it doe~ t come close to mentioning everyone who helped me to complete this book. First of all, I owe much of my critical faculty to my beloved sister and brother, Yael and David, who fine tuned my ability to argue from the very beginning. To my darling Sarah, whose love, strength, and intelligence have sustained and inspired me, and to her father, Julian Koenig, her mother, Maria Matthiessen, and her stepfather, Peter Matthiessen, who have always treated me like a member of the family, and who have truly become like a second family to me: Thank you. Throughout the years, my friends have provided me with great encouragement and insight. They deserve much of the credit for this book. Thanks to Qefl.i Neziri, Christopher Smith, Ethan Michaeli, Anjali Grant, Julie Ruttenberg, Stelios Valavanis, Bundy Brown, James Warden, Sudhir Venkatesh, Michelle Rosenthal, Raphael Cohen,

Greg Spinner, Joel Kaminsky, Andrew Hahn, Francesco Melfi, Abraham Green, Antonia Koenig, Jonathan Magidoff, Joshua Schreier, Olaf Walner, Abraham Pinchus, and Shai Levy, my friend and brother-in-law. Finally, I want to thank the teachers and colleagues whose guidance and instruction have been nothing less than transformative. loan Couliano, my late friend and teacher, whose kindness and brilliance will continue to bear fruit in generations of future scholars; Michael Fishbane, whose great talent and guidance have nurtured in me one of the greatest gifts a scholar can possess: the ability to read closely; Elliot Wolfson, whose profound insights while I was writing this work were only matched by the tremendous encouragement he gave me; Moshe Idel, whose great generosity has meant as much to me over

Deutsch - 978-90-04-67250-5 Downloaded from Brill.com 01/09/2024 08:32:10PM via Universitats- und Stadtbibliothek Koln (USB Köln)

x

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

the years as his groundbreaking research; Barbara Sproul, who gave me a chance to teach and whose marvelous teaching I have tried to emulate; Jon Levenson and Gene Gragg, who first encouraged me to study ancient Near Eastern religions and cultures while I was still an undergraduate. And special thanks to my editor at E.]. Brill, Elisabeth Erdman-Visser.

Deutsch - 978-90-04-67250-5 Downloaded from Brill.com 01/09/2024 08:32:10PM via Universitats- und Stadtbibliothek Koln (USB Köln)

CHAPTER ONE

THE PROBLEM Introduction Since the nineteenth century, scholars of religion have struggled to reconstruct the possible relationship between Gnosticism and Judaism. Two figures from the school of Wissenscheft des ]udentums stand out for their work on the topic. In 1846, Heinrich Graetz published Gnosticismus und ]udenthum, 1 in which he attempted to establish the Gnostic influence on a variety of rabbinic traditions. Several decades later, Moritz Friedlander inverted Graetz's methodological model and stressed the Je\'Vi.sh influence on Gnosticism.2 In the first half of the twentieth century, representatives of another scholarly tradition, namely the religi,onsgeschichtliche Schute, temporarily shifted attention away from the relationship between Gnosticism and Judaism. Instead, scholars such as ·Wilhelm Bousset and Richard Reitzenstein concentrated their not inconsiderable (though misdirected) 3 energies on the hypothetical nexus between Gnosticism and ancient Iranian religion. 4 Nearly a century after the publication of Graetz's Gnosticismus und ]udenthum; at a time when research on Gnosticism was still dominated by the "orientalizing" approach of the religi,onsgeschichtliche Schute, 5 Heinrich Graetz, Gnosticismus und ]udenthum (Krotoschin 1846). Moritz Fried.lander, Der vorchristlich·:Juedische Gnosticismus (Gottingen 1898). Although Fried.lander's work was sharply criticized following its publication, recently Birger Pearson has authored a defense of Fried.lander's position in "Fried.lander Revisited: Alexandrian Judaism and Gnostic Origins," Studia Philonica 2 (1973) 23-39; see also a revised edition of the same article in Birger Pearson, Gnosticism, Judaism, and Egyptian Christiani!J (Minneapolis 1990) I 0-28. 3 On the refutation of the religionsgeschichtliche Schult, c£ loan Couliano, Psychanodia I- A Survey of the Evidence Concerning the Ascension of the Soul and Its Relevance (Leiden 1983) 16-23, and Experiences de l' extase, de L' Hellinisme au Mayen Age (Paris 1984) 9-1 O; Carsten Colpe, Di.e rel~oionsgeschichtliche Schu/e: Darstellung und Kritik ihres Bil.des vom gnostischen Erliisermythus (Gottingen 1961 ). 4 Richard Reitzenstein, Di.e Gottin Psyche in der hellenistischen und friichristlichen Literatur (Heidelberg 1917); Wilhelm Bousset, Hauptprob/eme der Gnosis (Gottingen 1907). 5 That is not to say that observations on the relationship between Gnosticism and Judaism had disappeared from scholarly research in the first three decades of this 1

2

Deutsch - 978-90-04-67250-5 Downloaded from Brill.com 01/09/2024 08:32:10PM via Universitats- und Stadtbibliothek Koln (USB Köln)

2

CHAPTER Ol'\"E

Gershom Scholem published Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism, a work which provocatively redefined, and in some ways blurred, the boundaries between Gnosticism and Jewish mysticism. 6 In subsequent books and articles, 7 Scholem added to his observations in Mqjor Trends in Jewish Mysticism. At no point, however, did Scholem systematize his numerous statements on the topic. In this study, I would like to begin the long overdue (as Moshe Idel has recently noted) 8 task of explication with regards to one area of Scholem's work on Gnosticism and Jewish mysticism, namely the relationship between Gnosticism and Merkabah mysticism. The task at hand is not an easy one. Scholem never wrote a programmatic essay, let alone book, on the relationship between Gnosticism and Merkabah mysticism. His closest effort was Jewish Gnosticism, Merkabah Mysticism and Talmudic Tradition, 9 which examined individual topics and motifs but did not exhaustively compare the two phenomena, in toto. Moreover, throughout his writings, Scholem actually articulated a variety of complementary, competing, and, even, contradictory views on Gnosticism and Merkabah mysticism. This, in fact, represents a general pattern in Scholem' s work on Jewish mysticism and, below, I will examine the methodological strengths and weaknesses of Schol em's approach. In the face of these obstacles, one might suggest that a potential exegete of Scholem's work on Gnosticism and Merkabah mysticism 'throw in the towel' before even beginning the project. Indeed, the harsh criticism of Scholem's better known statements on the topic, most notably his definition of Merkabah mysticism as a form of "Jewish Gnosticism," would seem to preclude the need for an extensive survey and analysis of the entire body of his observations. As we will see, however, in many ways Scholem' s work has defined scholarly

century. See, for example, the parallels noted by Hugo Odeberg in his edition of 3 Enoch or the Hebrew Book ef Enoch (1928: Reprint New York 1973). 6 Gershom Scholem, Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism (New York 1941). Henceforth, citations will be from the edition published in 1961. 7 The relationship between Gnosticism and Judaism was one of the most important themes in Scholem's oeuvre. 8 Moshe Ide!, "Rabbinism Versus Kabbalism: On G. Scholem's Phenomenology ofjudaism," Modem]udaism 11 (1991) 296, n. 25. 9 Gershom Scholem, Jewish Gnosticism, Merkabah Mysticism and Talmudic Tradition (New York 1960). Henceforth, citations are from the revised edition published in 1965.

Deutsch - 978-90-04-67250-5 Downloaded from Brill.com 01/09/2024 08:32:10PM via Universitats- und Stadtbibliothek Koln (USB Köln)

THE PROBLEM

3

discourse on the relationship between Gnosticism and Merkabah mysticism, even, and perhaps especially, when his conclusions were wrong. Furthermore, to use a Gnostic metaphor, there are many 'pearls' of insight in Scholem's writings on Gnosticism and Merkabah mysticism, which until now, have been either ignored or inadequetly appreciated. Without downplaying the extreme significance of Scholem's work, it must be emphasized that scholarly research on Gnosticism and Merkabah mysticism has flowered in the half century since Scholem wrote Mqjor Trends in Jewish Mysticism. As in the case of Scholem' s writings, however, a programmatic study of the many books and articles written on the subject has never been attempted. Thus, as we will see below, Gilles Quispel has insightfully traced the relationship between Gnostic dualism and Merkabah theology, while P. S. Alexander has proposed a sophisticated methodological strategy for comparing Gnosticism and Merkabah mysticism, but neither they, nor any of the other scholars in the field, have produced an analytical survey of the secondary literature written on the subject, as a whole. One of the primary goals of the present work will be to identify, examine, and compare the views of Scholem and other scholars on the relationship of Gnosticism and Merkabah mysticism. The content and contribution of this study, therefore, will be bibliographic as well as explicatory. For this reason, I have frequently allowed other scholars, and in particular Scholem, to express their views to the reader directly, as it were, through the explicit quotation of their work, rather than its mere citation. Furthermore, in order to better compare and contrast the writings of Scholem and other scholars, I have initially focussed on Scholem's views on a particular topic, and only then analyzed different opinions on the same issue, including scholary criticism of Scholem's position. Finally, for the first time, this study will offer a programmatic comparison of Gnosticism and Merkabah mysticism. It will focus on a number of significant issues, including myth, definitions of Gnosticism and Merkabah mysticism, theology, cosmology, exegesis, terminology, and epistemology. Of course, this study will not be exhaustive, but, hopefully, it will make some small contribution to this important and fascinating field.

Deutsch - 978-90-04-67250-5 Downloaded from Brill.com 01/09/2024 08:32:10PM via Universitats- und Stadtbibliothek Koln (USB Köln)

4

CHAPTER ONE

SchoU:m's Phenomenology

of Religion

Perhaps the most important structure underlying Scholem' s understanding of Gnosticism and Merkabah mysticism is the dialectical model of religious development he outlined in the first lecture of Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism. In "General Characteristics of Jewish Mysticism," Scholem wrote that"Mysticism is a definite stage in the historical development of religion and makes its appearance under certain well-defined conditions." 10 In the first, or "mythical" stage of religion, there is no gap between humankind and the divine, and therefore, no need for mysticism. In the second, or "historical" stage, the developing religious consciousness creates an absolute abyss between an infinite God and a finite humankind. Mysticism, or the "romantic" stage of religion, develops in response to the inherent tension between the first and second stages. It should be noted, however, that Scholem's model is not absolutely linear. That is, the second and third stages of religion overlap and "interact" throughout history. 11 In the case of Judaism, the second stage of religion begins in the Bible, and is fully developed in 'Rabbinism.' Throughout his work, Scholem consistently portrayed rabbinic Judaism as antagonistic to myth, 12 even calling it the "conquerer of mythology." 13 Yet, Scholem admitted that rabbinic theology was not entirely devoid of myth. In several places, he noted that aggadic literature preserved mythical Major Trends, 7. See David Biale, Gerslwm Schol.em, Kahba!.ah and Counter-History (Cambridge 1982) 123. Biale writes, "However, we shall see that Scholem's discussion of the history of Jewish mysticism does not conform to a strictly temporal periodization ... The second and third stages were chronologically equivalent ... His periodization ofJewish history is not chronological but conceptual, and is linked to his implicit rejection of linear progress in history.' Instead of "chronologically equivalent," I would argue that for a time the second stage exists prior to the third stage, but that following the appearance of the third stage, the second and third stages "chronologically overlap" . For, at least according to Scho!em, it would seem that the second stage must be at some point historically prior to the development of the third stage. Thus, rather than Biale's formulation, i.e. "His [Scholem's] periodization ofJewish history is not chronological but conceptual," I would propose that Scholem's periodization of Jewish history is both chronological and conceptual. 12 See, for example, Scholem, Mqjor Trends, 34-35; "Kabbalah" in EncyclopedW. Judaica, Vol. X, 506; On the Kahba!.ah and Its Symbolism (New York I 965) 94-95, 97; On the Mystical Shape of the Godhead ~ew York 1991) 19. I 3 In Major Trends, 35, Scholem writes, "Judaism as the conqueror of mythology" and On the Kabba!.ah, 9 7, "the Jewish conquerers of myth" . 10

11

Deutsch - 978-90-04-67250-5 Downloaded from Brill.com 01/09/2024 08:32:10PM via Universitats- und Stadtbibliothek Koln (USB Köln)

TiiE PROBLEM

5

material. Scholem employed two strategies for decathecting the mythical elements in Aggadah of what he considered their subversive potential. On the one hand, he described the "whole of Aggadah" as "a popular· mythology of the Jewish universe." 14 In doing so, Scholem diminished the significance of the mythical elements in rabbinic Judaism by limiting them to the realm of popular or folk religion, rather than classifying them as 'serious' theology. On the other hand, Scholem depicted the mythical images in the Aggadah as mere metaphors, which were not to be taken literally: The Jewish aggadah is the living and most impressive example of this mode of discourse, in which the sense of intimacy with the Divine is still sufficiently powerful for its authors not to flinch from extravagances that they knew were not to be taken literally. The metaphorical character of such utterances, which generally refer to God's activity rather than to His appearance, is in nearly all cases quite transparent, and is often underscored by the very biblical passages quoted by way of support.15

Scholem' s analysis of Gnosticism and Merkabah mysticism must be viewed in light of his particular phenomenology of religion. According to Scholem' s model, the most basic congruence between Gnosticism and Merkabah mysticism is that both were manifestations of the third stage of religion. Each was a collective response to close the theological chasm created during the second stage. In addition to this profound phenomenological affinity, Gnosticism and Merkabah mysticism were also linked historically, according to Scholem. For both movements developed as parallel responses to the same "second

stage" religious phenomenon, namely, rabbinic Judaism. As early as Mqjor Trends, Scholem clearly portrayed Gnosticism as a reaction against rabbinic Judaism: "It was Gnosticism, one of the last great manifestations of mythology in religious thought, and definately conceived in the struggle againstjudaism as the conquerer of mythology." 16 Later writings indicate that Scholem even postu-

14 Mqjor Trends, 31. C£ also Isaiah Tishby' s attribution of mythical elements to a "rabbinic popular faith" in The Wzsdom of the .(ohar, Vol. I (Jerusalem 1961) 102-103 (Hebrew). 15 On the Mystical Shape of the Godhead, 19. 16 Mqjor Trends, 35. See also the parallel statement in On the Kabbal.ah and Its Symbolism, 98, "Gnosis, one of the last great manifestations of myth in religious thinking, conceived at least in part as a reaction against the Jewish conquerers of myth" .

Deutsch - 978-90-04-67250-5 Downloaded from Brill.com 01/09/2024 08:32:10PM via Universitats- und Stadtbibliothek Koln (USB Köln)

6

CHAPTER ONE

lated a 'genetic' relationship between Gnosticism and Judaism. In other words, Gnosticism was not only a reaction against Judaism, it actually developed from within Judaism. In Jewish Gnosticism, Merkabah Mysticism, and Talmudic Tradition, Scholem wrote: Theories that the origin of Gnosticism is to be found outside the scope ofJudaism have been widely discussed. It is one of many marvels confronting the explorer in the field that scholars who have been looking far and wide to establish the source from which it all has come have been remarkably reluctant, or, rather, unwilling to allow the theory that Gnostic tendencies may have developed in the very midst of Judaism itself, whether in its classical forms or on its heterodox and sectarian fringes. 17

And, in On the Kabbala.h and its Symbolism: for gnosticism itself, or at least certain of its basic impulses, was a revolt, partly perhaps of Jewish origin, against anti-mythical Judaism. 18

Scholem further proposed that "Jewish apocalyptic writings" were a "plausible transition to both Jewish monotheistic Gnosticism and the heretical Gnosticism that tended toward dualism." 19

Myth Although in the opinion of Scholem, both Gnosticism and Merkabah mysticism developed in response to the theological "gap" created by 17 Jewish Gnosticism, 1, 4-5, where Scholem extends this conclusion to the relationship between Judaism and Mandaeism: "Christian Gnosticism in Babylonia, too, seems to have been preceded by a form ofJewish Gnosticism, one which in this case assimilated Jewish and Persian elements and intertwined the one with the other. Indeed, I think it can be shown by a closer study of the much discussed Mandaean texts (in which the Jewish clements are much stronger than generally_supposed) that such a process may well have taken place." 18 On the Kabba/ah, 98. Cf. also, Birger Pearson, Gnosticism, Judai.sm, aruJ. Egyptian Christian#;;, 28, n. 51, where Pearson writes "In a letter to me Gan. 28, 1973), Scholem stated his belief that the Gnostic revolt did indeed arise from within Judaism." and 125, n. 6 "It should be added, however, that Scholem has (orally) expressed his essential agreement with my (and others') arguments for the Jewish origins of Gnosticism (in the technical sense of the word used here)." 19 G. Scholem, On the Origins of the Kabba/ah, Princeton, 1987, 22. Scholem cited the work of Robert Grant in support of his position, cf. 22, n. 26, "Grant strongly emphasized these relations in the face of the zealousness with which hypotheses of direct pagan influences have been maintained." Already in Mqjor Trends, 72, Scholem had speculated that "apocalyptic nostalgia was among the most powerful motive-forces of the whole Merkabah mysticism."

Deutsch - 978-90-04-67250-5 Downloaded from Brill.com 01/09/2024 08:32:10PM via Universitats- und Stadtbibliothek Koln (USB Köln)

THE PROBLEM

7

rabbinic Judaism, they were responses of a very different sort. On the one hand, Scholem described Gnosticism as "heretical" and a "revolt" against rabbinic Judaism. On the other hand, he consistently stressed that Merkabah mysticism conformed to the theological and legal norms of rabbinic Judaism.20 In Scholem's writings, the boundary between orthodox Judaism and heresy was defined according to three criteria: monotheism, Halakhah, and myth. The strictures of rabbinic Judaism required adherence to the first two criteria and proscribed the cultivation of the third. From Scholem' s perspective, non:Jewish Gnosticism was heretical from the standpoint of Judaism with regard to each of the three categories: it was dualistic, antinomean, and highly mythological. The Gnostic resurrection of mythical structures was inh~rently subversive, according to Scholem, for it attempted to undermine the anti-mythical theology of rabbinic Judaism. Although Scholem stressed the prominence of myth in what he called "heretical" Gnosticism, this was not the primitive myth of the first stage of religion. Gnostic mythology was conscious!JJ produced as a reaction against anti-mythical theology. In order to differentiate between primitive or unconscious myth and the reflective myth of Gnosticism, Scholem employed the term "semi-mythological" when referring to Gnostic mythology. 21 Although Scholem consistently stressed the importance of myth in heretical Gnosticism, he was highly ambivalent concerning the role of myth in Merkabah mysticism. Scholem downplayed the presence of myth in order to preserve the picture of an orthodox, rabbinic movement. 22 Thus, in Major Trends, Scholem stressed that unlike non.Jewish Gnosticism and Kabbalah, Merkabah mysticism was not

20 See, for example, Jewish Gnosticism, 10, "The texts of Merkabah mysticism that have so far come to our knowledge also display what I have called an orthodox Jewish tendency, and are in no way heretical. By this I mean that although they do expound some ideas of a highly mystical character, these texts adhere to monotheistic concepts ... Indeed, all these texts go to great lengths to stress their strict conformity, even in the most minute detail, to halakhicjudaism and its prescriptions." 21 Cf Mqjor Trends, 74, "Gnostical speculation and related semi-mythological thought,"; "Kabbalah," Encyclopedia ]udaica, 506, "The semi-mythological speculations of the Gnostics." Also see, Mqjor Trends, 117, where Scholem states that Neoplatonic ideas adopted by the Haside Ashkenaz "underwent a process of retrogression from,,the metaphysical to the theological or Gnostical sphere, if not to pure mythology. 22 Cf, for example, G. Scholem, "Kabbalah," in the Encyclopedia]udaica, 506.

Deutsch - 978-90-04-67250-5 Downloaded from Brill.com 01/09/2024 08:32:10PM via Universitats- und Stadtbibliothek Koln (USB Köln)

8

CHAPTER ONE

characterized by "cosmogonic speculation" or "theoretical questions," that is, cognitive modes related to and resulting in the creation of myth. 23 Yet Scholem also recognized that mysticism, in general, "represents, to a certain extent, a revival of mythical lore." 24 Since Merkabah mysticism is by definition a form of mysticism, the question must be asked: "What happened to the myth in Merkabah mysticism?" . Scholem answered this question in four ways, and in the process, attempted to resolve the tension between Merkabah mysticism as an orthodox, rabbinic phenomenon and as a form of mysticism. First, Schol em suggested that "in the very beginning" of Merkabah mysticism, there may have been a "speculative phase ... in the manner of the Gnostics who strove after 'the knowledge of who we were, and what we have become, where we were or where we are placed, whither we hasten, from what we are redeemed.' " 2s Presumably, most of this speculation was later suppressed by more conservative elements within the movement. In the second solution to the question "Where's the myth?" Scholem acknowledged that some "Gnostical speculation" and "semi-mythological thought" did manage to survive within "Jewish Gnostic" circles, although apparently not within the literature of Merkabah mysticism, itself Thus, Scholem posited that traces of "Jewish Gnostic" mythologoumena were preserved in Aggadic literature: As a matter of fact there exists indubitable proof that among certain groups ofJewish Gnostics who tried to stay within the religious community of rabbinical Judaism, Gnostical speculation and related semimythological thought was kept alive. Traces of such ideas in Aggadic literature are few but they exist.2 6

The third and fourth solutions suggested by Scholem were the most ingenious and also the most problematic. In order to locate the mythology whose development was suppressed in Merkabah mysticism, one should look to Gnosticism and to Kabbalah.2i For, accorMqjor Trends, 73. Ibid.' 34. 25 Ibid., 73. 26 Ibid., 74. 27 C£ On the Kabbal.alz, 98, "In the second century or our era, classical Rabbinical Judaism banished this form of heresy, seemingly for good; but in the Kabbalah this gnostic view of the world not only re-emerged ... " 23

24

Deutsch - 978-90-04-67250-5 Downloaded from Brill.com 01/09/2024 08:32:10PM via Universitats- und Stadtbibliothek Koln (USB Köln)

THE PROBLEM

9

ding to Scholem, Gnosticism originally developed from a "heretical Jewish myth" 28 and was "a revolt, partly perhaps of Jewish origin, against an ti-mythical Judaism," 29 just as the Kabbalah represents "the vengeance of myth against its [rabbinic] conquerers" .30 Thus, Gnosticism was a contemporary outlet for the mythological flowering which one would expect in Merkabah mysticism (at least, according to Scholem's description of mysticism as a resurgence of mythical thought), whereas Kabbalah was a post factum outlet. In so far as it may help illuminate the phenomenological relationship between Gnosticism and Merkabah mysticism, as well as the methodological approach(s) employed by Scholem when comparing religious movements, the relationship between Gnostic and kabbalistic myth will be briefly examined. An examination of Scholem's writings on the origins of kabbalistic myth reveals the following options: I. Kabbalistic myth is borrowed directly from 'foreign,' i.e. non:Jewish Gnosticism. 2. It is inherited from ancient Jewish Gnostic sources, which also transmitted earlier non:Jewish Gnostic material. 3. Phenomenologically it resembles ancient Gnostic myth, but was invented independently by medieval Kabbalists. In fact, these solutions should not be viewed as mutually exclusive. On the contrary, Scholem frequently suggested a variety of 'hybrid' solutions in his writings. In Major Trends, Scholem proposed that the Kabbalah had inherited Gnostic myths, "which lent figures of speech to the Jewish mystic." 31 Scholem contrasted the "creative and genuinely Jewish religious feeling" of the Kabbalah with the Gnostic "world of mythology" which the Kabbalah 'borrowed.' 32 In On the Kabbalah and Its Symbolism, Scholem made the juxtaposition between "an authentic and productive Jewish religious feeling" and " Foreign [emphasis added] mythical worlds" even more explicit. 33 In this later formulation, 28 G. Scholem, Sabbatai Seui (Princeton 1973) 311. Referring to Sabbatian myth Scholem writes, "Images that had crystallized once before in a heretical Je'A