The Scandal of Kabbalah: Leon Modena, Jewish Mysticism, Early ...
3858402 Kabbalah Secrets of the Jewish Mysticism Cult
-
Upload
danielsultan -
Category
Documents
-
view
20 -
download
4
Transcript of 3858402 Kabbalah Secrets of the Jewish Mysticism Cult
CORNERSTONE UNIVERSITY
KABBALAH
SECRETS OF THE JEWISH MYSTICISM CULT
WRITTEN FOR
REL-441 APOLOGETICS
PROFESSOR DON PERINI
BY
BRIAN TICE / BOX 3594
20 MARCH 2008
Tice
Kabbalah1 has been called a “celebrity religion” due to the conversion of
Madonna, Rosanne, Liz Taylor, and Barbra Streisand to its ranks. The name, which
means “received doctrine,” derives from the Aramaic verb qabal, “to receive.”2 The
foundation of the Chassidic sect of Judaism,3 Kabbalah is described by its followers as
“the study of the inner dimensions of G-d’s holy Torah,”4 and as such, is not traditionally
made available for study to anyone under age forty. It is reasoned that they would not
have a thorough enough understanding of Torah and Talmud to understand the depths of
Kabbalah.
Outside of Chasidut, Kabbalah is not very highly regarded. This is, in part, due to
the secretive nature of Kabbalah, as evidenced by Cordovero’s statement: “Those who
know do not tell and those who tell do not know.”5 Saul Lieberman (a non-kabbalistic
Talmud professor at Jewish Theological Seminary) is reported to have said in response to
a student’s inquiry as to why the seminary offered no courses in Kabbalah, “At a
university, it is forbidden to have a course in nonsense… even if it’s Jewish nonsense.”6
Kabbalistic Scripture
Since Kabbalah is, at its roots, Jewish, the Hebrew canon is regarded as holy
Scripture, but mekubbalim (followers of Kabbalah) also addother books of “scripture” to
their study. Among these are the Talmud, the Zohar (Book of Splendor), and the
1Kabbalah can also be spelled Kabbala, Qabala, Cabala, etc. For the purposes of this paper, and for the sake of consistency, it will be spelled Kabbalah throughout.2Francis Brown, et. al., Brown–Driver–Briggs Hebrew-English Lexicon (Peabody: Hendrickson Publishers, 2004), 1110.3Chasidut, or Chassidic Judaism, is defined by kabbalaonline.org as “the pietistic, mystical movement within Judaism founded by Rabbi Baal Shem Tov in the early part of the 18th Century.”4www.kabbalaonline.org5Moshe Cordovero, quoted in Menachem Posner, “Where is Reincarnation in G-d’s Word as opposed to Man’s Word?” www.chabad.org. 6Saul Lieberman, quoted at www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/kabbalah.html.
1
Tice
Shemoneh She’arim (an 8-volume commentary on the Zohar).7 According to kabbalistic
tradition, the Zohar, a 23-volume collection of commentaries on the Torah,8 records and
preserves the deep secrets of Torah revealed to Simeon Bar Yochai and his son Elazar by
supernatural revelation from the Prophet Elijah.9
When the Romans killed the last sages of the Anshei Knesset HaGdulah (Great
Assembly) in the Bar Kokhba Rebellion (second century CE), Bar Yochai and his son
Elazar escaped and hid in a cave for ten years where, they claimed, the spirit of Elijah
guided their study of Torah.10 Ariel describes the Zohar as “a guide to how to overcome
the barriers of time and place that separate us from the immediacy of G-d.”11 To most
mekubbalim, the sentiment regarding the Zohar is, “It’s in the Zohar. Is that not the same
as if it was (sic.) in the Torah itself?”12
Scholem discovered in the 1930s, however, that there is sufficient evidence to
doubt that the written Zohar dates that far back.13 He noted that the dialect of Aramaic
used for its composition was an artificial one, littered with Spanish idioms. Wieder
observes, “To read the original is to be confounded. Even to be introduced, the Zohar
must be coaxed from its linguistic cave.”14 The fact that such a cryptic dialect was
invented to compose it is itself an indicator that the Zohar is a cultic work.
The scholarly consensus is that the likely author was not Bar Yochai, but Moses
ben Shem Tov de Leon, a late thirteenth-century mekubbal who resided in southern
Spain. Time Magazine postulates the theory, “The Zohar was far too radical to be 7Shemoneh She’arimwas written by kabbalistic Rabbi Chaim Vital, recording the teachings of his mentor, Rabbi Yitzchak Luria (the Arizal). When Vital died in 1620, all of his works were buried with him. The Shemoneh She’arim was disinterred from his grave in the 1650s and published in 1660 (cf. Moshe Miller, “Works of Rabbi Chaim Vital,” www.kabbaonline.org). 8Laurence Wieder, “The Book of Splendor,” First Things 167 (Nov 2006): 45.9Sol Scharfstein, Jewish History and You (Jersey City, NJ: KTAV Publications, 2004), 24.10Wieder, 44.11David S. Ariel, “Zohar, the Literaru Masterpiece of the Kabbalah,” Tikkun 21 (My/Je 2006): 69.12http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/kabbalah.html13“Found in Translation,” Time 163 (19 Apr 2004): 64.14Wieder, 44.
2
Tice
accepted without a fabricated imprimatur” as a possible explanation for what is almost
certainly a pseudepigraphical work.15 Even if the claim is valid, this does not undermine
the authority of the Zohar for followers of Kabbalah, who answer the charge with the
premise that de Leon merely recorded the oral teachings that had been passed down from
their traditional originator, Simeon Bar Yochai, or even further back than that – to the
mystic secrets of the Torah “taught by Moses to the elders in the wilderness and
transmitted through Joshua and the judges to the prophets and down to the sages of the
great assembly” (Ezra’s Anshei Knesset HaGdulah).16
Beliefs on the Relationship between G-d and Man
As with the Christian concept of G-d, the mekubbimperceive G-d as a composite
unity. In Kabbalah, however, the G-dhead is comprised of ten “interacting emanations,”
one of which is a female aspect of G-d named Shekinah. She is tied to the male aspect of
the G-dhead in a comic marriage which is constantly under demonic attack. The
perpetuity of their union is bound to the prayers and deeds of G-d’s people.17
This concept is reflected in the kabbalistic explanation of the Tetragrammaton, in
which the yod (y) is described as a phallic symbol, the male side of the G-dhead, while
the heis a yoni symbol, the female side of the G-dhead. The open bottom of the he (h) is
the womb from which the waw (w) springs forth as the Son of the union of the male and
female of the G-dhead, and the final he is the bride of the Son. 18 This teaching leads
some (though not most) mekubbalim to a belief in Yeshua as the Jewish Messiah, who see
the waw as Christ and the second heas His bride, the Church.
Kabbalah teaches that the meaning of “Let Us make man in Our image” (Genesis
1:26) is that the name of G-d – yod-he-waw-he – is reflected in the face of the human. 15“Found in Translation,” 64.16Wieder, 44.17Ibid.18Gershom Scholem, On the Mystical Shape of the Godhead (New York: Schocken Books, 1976).
3
Tice
Zohar 26a explains that Man’s two eyes are in the shape of the Hebrew letter yod and the
nose is in the shape of the letter waw. A major issue with this interpretation is that the
Creation of Adam considerably predates the creation of the Hebrew alphabet upon which
this teaching depends.
Kabbalah also teaches that the image of G-d manifests itself in Man asthe three
intellectual attributes of Man: chochma (wisdom), binah (understanding), and daat
(knowledge), which are collectively called chabad (taking the initial consonants from
each of the three words). Chochma is the creative capacity of Man, binah is the
developmental capacity of Man, and daat is the conclusive capacity.19 It is not
impossible that this is a facet of what it means that Man is made in G-d’s image; it is,
however, an incomplete understanding of the concept.
This doctrinal stance is but a faint shadow of the primary feature of Imago Dei,
which perceives Man as being the image of G-d in the same way that idols are the images
of false deities. Humans (of all ethnicities) are “placed” throughout Adonai’s domain to
show the boundless expanse of His sovereignty. Kabbalah, however, claims that “man” in
Genesis 1 means Israel,20 understanding Israel alone (to the exclusion of Gentiles) to
bears G-d’s likeness and image.
Beliefs on the Reincarnation (Afterlife)
The tenet of Kabbalah which goes the furthest in distancing it from the orthodox
Judeo-Christian understanding of the Scriptures and their message is the doctrine of
gilgul neshemot (reincarnation). Though the author of Hebrews declares, “Man is
appointed but once to die, and after this the judgment (9:27), Kabbalah (generally using
only the Hebrew Scriptures), argues for the transmigration of the soul into four separate
19Zalmon Posner, Kabbalah 101 www.jewish-holiday.com/kabbalasecrets. 20Moses ben Shem Tov de leon, Zohar (1280), 26a.
4
Tice
reincarnations between the “first” life and the “resurrection of the dead.”21 Because
Kabbalah teaches that the resurrection of the dead is dependent upon completion of all of
the 248 positive mitzvot, reincarnation is seen as G-d’s “loving way” of giving man a
second (and third and fourth) chance at “finishing up the list.” It also gives an
opportunity to make amends for any transgressed prohibitive mitzvot (which number
365).22
The kabbalistic case for reincarnation is complex, drawing from “strict readings”
of poetic Scriptures and from figurative readings of literal Scriptures. Consider the
lengths of life spansbefore the flood. Kabbalah interprets references to people living
several centuries as evidence that their souls have lived several lives or incarnations, i.e.
the soul of Methuselah living through several incarnations in order to make up the 969
years accounted to him, thus theirinterpretation is figurative here. The Sumerian King
List, however, records much longer life spans for people who lived before the flood as
opposed to after, seeming to support not the idea of reincarnation, but of the biblical
shortening of life spans for generations which came after the Flood. Furthermore, if these
longer life spans are evidence supporting reincarnation, there is only evidence for it
before the Flood, not after, when the Bible reports much shorter life spans.
Job 1:21, however, is held to a very wooden and literal reading in Kabbalah:
“Naked I came from my mother’s womb and naked I will return there.” Rather than
reading the second womb as figurative language for the grave, mekubbalim read it as a
literal expression for Job’s expectation that he would, upon his death from his present
life,reenter the womb and be born into a second incarnation (or third or fourth, depending
on which life he was currently in). Since Kabbalah holds that “every Jew to ever live and
21Chaim Vital, Shemoneh She’arim (1660) “Shaar HaGilgulim,”22Chaim Vital, Shemoneh She’arim (1660) “Shaar HaMitzvot” 1A
5
Tice
who ever will stood at Mount Sinai when the Jews received the Covenant from G-d,”23
yet Job is believed to have lived before Moses, they would argue that Jobwould have to
reincarnate in order to stand alongside Moses. As Job unfolds, however, we read, “Man
that is born of woman is a few days, and, full of trouble. He cometh forth like a flower,
and withers away, flees like a shadow, does not last” (Job 14:1-2). There is nothing
written there about the few days of a man’s life being followed by subsequent sets of
“few days” after the withering away of the first set.
It seems that Kabbalah employs a backwards hermeneutic. Job is obviously very
a poetic book, but is read by mekubbalimas woodenly literal. On the other hand, the
teledot (tables of generations) would be expected to be read more literally and are read as
figurative language in order to read reincarnation into them. Job, however, also records,
“Seeing his days are determined, the number of his months are with you, you have
appointed his bounds that he cannot pass” (14:5). It would seem that reincarnation would
be a means of crossing these uncrossable bounds, violating Scripture.
It is also taught in Kabbalah that the reason Scripture requires a man to marry the
childless widow of his deceased brother and name their first son together after the
deceased brother is that the soul of the deceased transmigrates into the son the widow has
with her brother-in-law, making their baby his gilgul (reincarnational host body).24 The
actual reason, according to mainstream rabbinical scholars, is to keep the dead brother’s
name alive (not his soul), a practice initiated by Jacob’s son Judah25 Yibum(the Hebrew
word for this practice) was only entered into if both parties agreed. If they did not, they
could honorably dispose of the obligation by performing chalitzah (Deut. 25:5-10). In
23Nissan Dovid Dubov, An Overview of Techiyas Hameisim Based on the Teachings of Chabad Chassidism (1995).24Joyce Eisenberg & Ellen Scolnic, Dictionary of Jewish Words (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 2006), 52.25Positive Mitzvot # 216 (cf. Knowledge Base Library, http://www.askmoses.com/article/111,176/What-is-yibum.html).
6
Tice
that case, how does the soul reincarnate? Also, Mosaic Law forbids yibum if there are
children born to the original union (Lev. 18:16), as this would constitute ervah(one of the
21 forbidden relationships). If, however, yibum is engaged, where is the soul during the
time between the husband’s death and the conceptionof his nephew? The kabbalistic
explanation is thus problematic at best, “stranding” a soul without a gilgul for at least as
long as it takes to conceive a male child.
A plethora of passages from the Tanakh speak directly in opposition to the
doctrine of reincarnation. Among these is 2 Samuel 14:14, which reads, “For we all die
someday; we will be like water spilled on the ground that cannot be gathered up again;
and G-d makes no exception for anyone.” Reincarnation would constitute a regathering
up of spilled water, which Scripture here declares impossible. Also in Samuel, we read,
“But now that he’s dead, why should I fast? Can I bring him back again? I will go to
him, but he will not return to me” (2 Samuel 12:23). Daniel, likewise, refutes the concept
of reincarnation, writing, “Many of those sleeping in the dust will awaken, some to
everlasting life and some to everlasting shame and abhorrence” (12:2). The qualifier
“everlasting” connotes that Daniel speaks of eternal life versus eternal torment – heaven
and hell, not transmigration of souls to subsequent temporary hosts (gilgulim).
As difficult as it is for this doctrine to stand up against Hebrew Scripture, if a
mikubbal(follower of Kabbalah) brings the Greek Scriptures into it, as they are
sometimes wont to do, the doctrine of reincarnation is even more easily deconstructed.
When the Greek Scriptures are invoked, it is most frequently Malachi 4:5 (3:23 in the
Jewish versification) and its “fulfillment” in Matt. 11:13-14 to which they turn. Malachi
prophesies, “Behold, I will send to you Elijahthe prophet before the coming of the great
and terrible Day of YHWH.” Mikubbalim will sometimes tie this to Matthew’s Gospel,
7
Tice
in which it is written, “For all the prophets and the Torah prophesied until John; indeed, if
you are willing to accept it, he is Elijah, whose coming was foretold” (11:13-14).
This cannot be reincarnation for several reasons. The first and most obvious is
that reincarnation involves death of the first body, and Elijahnever died; he was raptured.
Furthermore, Elijah makes an appearance at the Mount of Transfiguration,where he is
recognized by the disciples not as John the Baptist, but as himself (Matthew 17:3). Green
explains the Matthean passage as indicating that John the Baptist is the last of the pre-
Messianic prophets, thus he came in the spirit of Elijah.26
Once the mikubbalinvokes one verse form the Greek Scriptures to make his or her
case, all of them are validated. This opens the door for one to bring into the discussion
verses like Hebrew 9:27, which reads, “It is appointed to man to die once, then comes the
judgment.” In the case of reincarnation, the man would die at least twice, contradicting
the author/Author of Hebrews. Paul, likewise, refutes the doctrine of reincarnation,
writing, “We know that when the tent which houses us here on earth is torn down, we
have a permanent building from G-d, a building not made by human hands, to house us in
heaven. For we must all appear before the Messiah’s court of judgment, where we
receive the good or bad consequences of what he did while he was in the body” (2 Cor.
5:1, 10). Both “tent” and “body” are in the singular.
Kabbalah deviates enough from the standard doctrines of Judaism to qualify as a
cult in the estimation of mainstream Judaism. Stukin observes, “[R]abbis object that its
teachings are a quick-fix bastardization of a sacred Jewish tradition.”27 The amount of
non-biblical material which is regarded as Scriptural by mekubbalim and the claims of a
source for the Zohar which is neither on earth nor in the G-dhead (Elijah) make the
practice at least unorthodox, if not a cult. 26H. Benedict Green, The Gospel According to Matthew (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1987), 116-7.27Stacie Stukin, “Stars of David,” Los Angeles 43 (December 1998): 94.
8
Tice9
Tice
Works Cited
Ariel, David S. “Zohar, the Literary Masterpiece of the Kabbalah,” Tikkun 21 (May/Jun
2006): 69.
Brown, Francis et. al. Brown–Driver–Briggs Hebrew-English Lexicon. Peabody:
Hendrickson Publishers, 2004.
Cordovero, Moshe. “Where is Reincarnation in G-d’s Word as opposed to Man’s Word?”
www.chabad.org.
De Leon, Moses ben Shem Tov. Zohar. Castille, Spain, 1280.
Dubov, Nissan Dovid. An Overview of the Techiyas Hameisim on the Teachings of
Chabad Chassidism. 1995.
Eisenberg, Joyce and Ellen Scolnic. Dictionary of Jewish Words. Philadelphia: Jewish
Publication Society, 2006.
Green, H. Benedict. The Gospel According to Matthew. Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 1987.
Jewish Virtual Library. www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org.
“Knowledge Base Library.” Ask Moses. www.askmoses.com/article/111,176/What-is-
yibum.html.
Miller, Moshe. Kabbala Online. www.kabbalaonline.org.
Posner, Zalmon. Kabbalah 101. www.jewish-holiday.com/kabbalasecrets.
Scharfstein, Sol. Jewish History and You. Jersey City, NJ: KTAV Publications, 2004.
Scholem, Gershom. On the Mystical Shape of the Godhead. New York: Schocken
Books, 1976.
Stukin, Stacie. “Stars of David,” Los Angeles 43 (December 1998): 94+.
Vital, Chaim. Shemoneh She’arim. Castille, Spain, 1660.
10
Tice
Wieder, Laurence. “The Book of Splendor,” First Things 167 (Nov 2006):45.
11