 |
| A 19th century depiction of the Ten Sefirot (unknown origin). |
INTRODUCTION:
Kabbalists always had to deal with the challenge of their seemingly multiple perceptions of G-d coming very close to a violation of the monotheistic idea of a single unity of the divine being. In this article, based extensively on the research by Rabbi Professor Marc Shapiro[1], we delve into some of these perceptions in an attempt to see just how far they have sometimes gone.
TEN SEFIROT:
According to classical Kabbalah and modern Chasidut,
the G-dhead comprises or manifests as Ten Sefirot, or G-dly spheres. In
other words, G-d has ten ‘aspects’ (kindness, severity, beauty etc.) and
through them He is known to mankind and the world. Of course, adherents of this
doctrine will explain that G-d is still one, it’s just that G-d can manifest in
ten different ways, depending on the circumstances. However, this is not how
the proponents of Kabbalah and practitioners of the mystical doctrine
always envision the Sefirot.
Maimonides (1135-1204) would not have known about the Sefirot
as these ideas only became prevalent after his time with the publication of the
Zohar in around 1290. However, based on his writings it is abundantly
clear he would have opposed the Sefirotic principles as a departure from
his well-known notion of a transcendent, unknowable G-d with a simple unity.
THE ‘TEN’ AND THE ‘THREE’:
After Maimonides, opponents of the Kabbalah became
quite outspoken against the belief in Sefirot. As Shapiro puts it:
“…opponents of kabbalah viewed
the…Sefirot…in the same way as the Trinity, namely a violation of G-d’s
absolute unity and thus idolatrous.”
Even R. Avraham Abulafia (1240-1291), a radical if not
maverick Kabbalist, actually sided with the non-mystics on the issue of Sefirot,
and believed it to be more theologically provocative to the unity of G-d than
the Christian notion of Trinity.
[See Kotzk
Blog: 187) THE CENSORSHIP OF ABULAFIA AND HIS ATTEMPT TO CONVERT THE POPE:]
R. Yitzchak ben Sheshet (1326-1407), also known as the
Rivash, quotes a philosopher who says that Christians believe in the ‘three’
whereas Kabbalists believe in the ‘ten’.[2]
ARE SEFIROT THE MANIFESTATION OR THE ESSENCE
OF G-D?
As to whether the Sefirot are the softer version of a
‘manifestation’ of G-d or the harder version of G-d’s ‘essence’, Kabbalists
like R. Moshe Cordovero (1522-1570) maintained them to be part of G-d Himself.
In this sense, G-d becomes divisible into ten G-dly components which remain “one
with Him”. R. Cordovero writes:
“At the start of the
emanation, the Ein Sof [Infinite One]…emanated ten Sefirot, which are from His
essence, are one with Him and He and they are all one complete unity.”[3]
This view, that the ‘ten are one’, is reflected not only in
Cordovero but in much of Kabbalisic thought as G-d’s ‘unknowable essence’.
However, heaping difficult ideas under the rubric of vague or mystical
nomenclature does not remove their theological challenge to basic monotheism.
KAVANAH ON THE SEFIROT DURING PRAYER:
The difficulty is compounded when we start seeing the common
Kabbalistic practice of directing kavanah, or intention, toward
various Sefirot during prayers. Through this, one appeals to the
‘correct’ divine power at the appropriate time. There is a fine line between ‘directing
attention’ and ‘praying’ to a particular Sefira, especially during the
process of prayer.
R. Yakov the Nazirite from twelfth century Southern France
who taught that the first and last three blessings of the Amidah must be
directed towards the Sefirah of Bina, while the middle section
must be directed towards Tiferet by day and Bina by night. In
response to that view, R. Avraham ben David of Posquieres (c. 1125-1198), known
as Ravad taught that the first and last three blessings are to be directed
towards the ‘main’ G-d, Ilat ha’ilot (the Cause of causes) but the
middle section which is more personal and less universal, is to be directed
towards the Creator of the universe, Yotzer Bereishit. On this view, one
would not make personal requests of the Supreme Deity because He does not hear
prayers. One only praises the Ilat ha’ilot but prays to the Shomea
Tefilah, the G-d who hears the prayers.[4]
SEFIROT AS CREATORS OF THE UNIVERSE:
There is also the Kabbalistic idea that the Ein
Sof, or Infinite One, similarly known as Ilat ha’ilot, or Cause
of causes, created the universe with his ‘light’ or ‘power’ which allude to
the ten Sefirot. This way the Sefirot are elevated to a parallel
position with the G-dhead. And again, some supporters of this doctrine will explain
that this really means that the intent is to the Ein Sof behind the Sefirot
and not to the Sefirot themselves. Either way it still brushes very
close to - some might say this even supports - the notion of a form of G-dly dualism
and parallelism.
THE ‘LESSER G-D’:
This is how R. Yitzchak ibn Latif (c.1210-1280)[5]
describes the ‘lesser’ G-d of creation, also known as the ‘Immanent G-d’ or the
‘First Created Being’:
“The First Created Being, may
He be blessed, knows everything by virtue of His essence, for He is everywhere
and everything is in Him…and all beings exist through Him by way of emanation
and evolvement, and nothing exists outside of Him.”[6]
THE SABBATEAN NOTION OF THE ‘G-D OF ISRAEL’:
Building on this type of foundation, the Sabbatean
Kabbalist Avraham Miguel Cardozo explained that ‘main’ G-d is
essentially removed from this world and its affairs, and that it is only the “G-d
of Israel” who created the universe and continues to provide providence
over it. It was this “G-d of Israel” who appeared to the patriarchs and
took the Jews out of Egypt.
This is very similar to the belief of the early Gnostics - a
mystical tradition followed by non-rabbinical Jews and Christians during the
first century CE – where a distinction was made between the highest and
unknowable G-d who was the Supreme Being, and what was known as the Demiurge or
creator of the world and physicality. The Gnostics emphasised spiritual
knowledge (from Greek gnosis which means knowledge, particularly
spiritual knowledge) and they broke away from the more orthodox versions of
their respective religions and sects.
This approach, where the ‘main’ G-d remains aloof and
oblivious to the affairs of the universe, was not only the province of the
Sabbateans. R. Yitzchak Lopes of Aleppo, for example, endorsed this view of
Cardozo, although, in fairness, some believed him to have been a secret
Sabbatean.
THE PRE-SABBATEAN NOTION OF THE ‘G-D OF THE TORAH’:
The fact remains that Cardozo’s Sabbatean views did not
emerge in a vacuum, because many medieval Kabbalists (i.e., prior to the
Sabbatean movement) held such views as well. Ilat ha’ilot, the Cause of
causes was indeed considered to be totally removed from the affairs of the
world. This was why these Kabbalists specified that no prayers should be
directed to the ‘main’ G-d as He is too transcendent. Rather, prayers need to
be addressed to the ‘lower’ G-d who created the world. This G-d is the “G-d
of the Torah” (reminiscent of Cardozo’s “G-d of Israel”), who in the
case of these mainstream Kabbalists was identified as Keter, the
highest of the Sefirot. Sometimes it was to Chochma, the ‘second
highest’ of the Sefirot, that the prayer were directed.[7]
THE IDEA THAT THE SEFIROT PRAY TO G-D:
There is a further position where it is believed that the Sefirot
themselves pray to Ilat ha’ilot. This view was held by R. Yosef ben
Shalom of Barcelona of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, who is known
for his commentary on Sefer Yetzirah. If the Sefirot are said to
pray to G-d, it becomes rather difficult to accept the idea that the G-dhead
with the Sefirot make a complete and indivisible unity.
SEFIROT AS CREATED BEINGS:
The alleged uncorrupted unity of G-d and the Sefirot is
again challenged by the opinion of R. Azriel of Gerona (1160-1238) who claimed
that besides for first Sefira, which is said to have always coexisted
with Ilat ha’ilot, all the other Sefirot had a beginning in time
and were therefore created entities. How can a created being be equated with an
Infinite G-d?
THE KERUV HAMEYUCHAD:
Shapiro brings another example of the Kabbalistic distinction
between aspects within the G-dhead from the entity known as the Keruv
haMeyuhad, or Unique Cherub. This idea originated during Medieval
times and was probably the forerunner to the very idea of the Sefirot. This
Unique Cherub was said to be an anthropomorphic entity resembling the
future human, and man was made in its image.[8]
It was to this ‘being’ that many Kabbalists directed their prayers. This
Keruv haMeyuhad was considered to be a ’lesser YHVH’.[9] These
references to so-called ‘lesser G-ds’ and ‘higher G-ds’ resemble other mystical
systems not usually associated with basic monotheism.
SEFIROT ARE NOT ABOVE TIME:
Another indication that the Sefirot are not simply
viewed as different manifestations of a single G-d can be seen in the teachings
of the nineteenth century R. Yitzchak Pilitz. To solve the question of how can
G-d - who knows everything including the choices we are yet to make - give us
freedom of choice? Where is the freedom if the outcome is already foretold? R.
Pilitz suggests that that is true only of the Ein Sof, the Infinite One,
but it is not true of the ‘other’ parts of G-d, the Sefirot. The Ein Sof knows the outcome of
future events but the Sefirot, who run the world, function within time
and do not know the future and therefore do not know which choices a person
will make[10].
Again, this underscores the fundamental differences between
the Sefirot and G-d, and it becomes difficult to accept that both
entities are considered an indivisible unity or a manifestation of a simple monotheistic
oneness.
FURTHER READING:
Kotzk
Blog: 266) BETWEEN FRANKFURT AND TZFAS:
Kotzk Blog:
104) PRAYING TO ANGELS?
[1] Marc
Shapiro, 2004, The Limits of Orthodox Theology: Maimonides’ Thirteen
Principles Reappraised, The Littman Library of Jewish Civilization, London,
40-44.
[2] She’elot
uTeshovot haRivash 157.
[3] Pardes
Rimonim, 4. 4.
[4] See
Joseph Dan, Jewish Mysticism, Northvale, NJ, 1998, 2, 48.
[5] He
lived in Toledo just before the publication of the Zohar.
[6] See
Heller-Wilensky, “First Created Being”, 263.
[7] See
Heller- Wilensky, “First Created Being” in Early Kabbalah and its Philosophical
Sources (Hebrew) in ead. And Moshe Idel (eds.), Mehkarim behagut yehudit
(Jerusalem, 1989), 261-276).
[8] See
Joseph Dan, The ‘Unique Cherub’ Circle, Tubingen, 1999, 72.
[9] See
Gershom Scholem, 1987, Origins of the Kabbalah, ed. R.J.Z. Werblowsky,
trans. Alan Arkush, Princeton, NJ.
[10] Zera
Yitzchak, 10b-11a.
No comments:
Post a Comment