Foreword.
CHAPTER I. NAME AND ORIGIN OF THE CABALA.
CHAPTER II. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CABALA IN THE PRE-ZOHAR PERIOD.
CHAPTER III. THE ZOHAR.
CHAPTER IV. THE CABALA IN THE POST-ZOHAR PERIOD.
CHAPTER V. THE MOST IMPORTANT DOCTRINES OF THE CABALA.
CHAPTER VI. THE CABALA IN RELATION TO JUDAISM AND CHRISTIANITY.
BIBLIOGRAPHY.
Foreword.
Although the Cabala belongs to the past, it
nevertheless demands our attention on account of the interest taken
in it by men like Raymond Lully, the "Doctor Illuminatus" as he was
styled (died 1315): John Picus di Mirandola (1463-1494); John
Reuchlin (1455-1522); Cornelius Henry Agrippa von Nettesheim
(14861535); John, Baptist von Helmont (1577-1644); the English
scholars Robert Fludd (1574-1637) and Henry More (1614-1687). How
much Theophrastus Paracelsus (1493-1541) and Jacob Boehme
(1575-1624), called "Philosophus Teutonicus," were influenced by
cabalistic doctrines, is difficult to state. At any rate the names
mentioned before are sufficient to call attention to a theosophical
system which has engaged the minds of Jewish and Christian
scholars.
It is surprising how scanty the English literature is on the
Cabala. True that in the History of the Jews by Basnage, London,
1708, we have a lengthy account of this theosophy (pp. 184256); but
this account is originally given in the French work Histoire des
Juifs, by the same author. John Gill (died 1771) in his
"Dissertatio de genuina Punctorum Vocalium Hebraicorum Antiquitate,
contra Cappellum, Waltonum," etc., prefixed to his Clavis
Pentateuchi, Edinburgh, 1770, refers to the Zohar to prove the
antiquity of the Hebrew vowel-points, because it states that "the
vowel-points proceeded from the Holy Spirit who indited the Sacred
Scriptures," etc. (on Song of Songs 57b; ed. Amsterdam, 1701). Of
course so long as the Cabala was believed to be a genuine
revelation from God, and Simon ben Jochai (of the second century)
was believed to be the author of the Zohar, to whom God
communicated all the mysteries, it was but a matter of course to
believe in the antiquity and divinity of the vowel-points.
John Allen (died 1839) in his Modern Judaism, London, 1816,
(2d. ed. 1830) also gives an account of the Cabala, in which he
premises the antiquity of the Zohar, which he makes the primary
source of the primitive Cabala. Passing over Dean Milman's (died
1868) History of the Jews, London, 1829, (often reprinted), in
which we naturally also find references to the Cabala, we mention
J. W. Etheridge (died 1866), author of Jerusalem and Tiberias; Sora
and Cordova, a Survey of the Religious and Scholastic Learning of
the Jews, Designed as an Introduction to Hebrew Literature, London,
1856. This author seems to have been acquainted with the researches
of the Jewish scholars in Germany, but he nevertheless stoutly
adheres to the traditional view. Thus he remarks on page 314:
"To the authenticity of the Zohar, as a work of the early
Kabalistic school, objections have indeed been made, but they are
not of sufficient gravity to merit an extended investigation. The
opinion that ascribes it as a pseudo-fabrication to Moses de Leon
in the thirteenth century, has, I imagine, but few believers among
the learned in this subject in our own day. The references to
Shemun ben Yochaï and the Kabala in the Talmud, and abundant
internal evidence found in the book itself, exhibit the strongest
probability, not that Shemun himself was the author of it, but that
it is the fruit and result of his personal instructions, and of the
studies of his immediate disciples."
We may say that Etheridge's view is mutatis mutandis also
that of Ad. Franck, author of Système de la Kabbale ou la
philosophie religieuse des Hebreux, Paris, 1843 (2d. ed. 1892);
translated into German by A. Gelinek (Jellinek), Die Kabbala oder
die Religionsphilosophie der Hebräer, Leipsig, 1844, with which
must be compared D. H. Joel, Die Religionsphilosophie des Sohar,
ibid., 1840, which is an exceedingly good supplement to Franck's
work. But an examination of the works published by Zunz, Die
gottesdienstlichen Vorträge der Juden, Berlin, 1831, p. 405;
Geiger, Melo Chofnayim, ibid., 1840, introduction, p. xvii; Sachs,
Die religiöse Poesie der Juden in Spanien, ibid., 1845, p. 327,
Jellinek, Moses Ben Schem Tob de Leon, Leipsig, 1851, could have
convinced Etheridge that the Zohar, the text-book of the Cabala, is
the "pseudo-fabrication" of Moses de Leon in the thirteenth
century. That Landauer (died 1841) in his essays on the Cabala
published in the Litteraturblatt des Orients, 1845, p. 178 et seq.,
1846, p. 12 et seq., ascribes the authorship of the Zohar to
Abraham ben Samuel Abulafia towards the end of the second half of
the thirteenth century, is the more weighty and instructive because
he originally started with opinions of an exactly opposite
character (Steinschneider, Jewish Literature, p. 299). Nevertheless
Etheridge's book was a good work; it was the praiseworthy attempt
of an English Christian to acquaint the English-speaking people
with the post-Biblical literature of the Jews.
Four years after the publication of the above work, Canon
Westcott (died 1901) published his Introduction to the Study of the
Gospels, London, 1860, in which he incidentally refers to the
Cabala, without adopting Etheridge's view as to the authorship of
the Zohar; oh the contrary he says (p. 159, Boston, 1867): "The
Sepher ha-Zohar, or Book of Splendor, owes its existence to R.
Moses of Leon in the thirteenth century," and this, he says in a
note, "has been satisfactorily established by Jellinek in his
tract, Moses ben Schemtob de Leon und sein Verhältniss zum Sohar,
Leipsig, 1851. The warm approval of Jost is sufficient to remove
any lingering doubt as to the correctness of Jellinek's conclusion:
A Jellinek und die Kabala, Leipsic, 1852."
The publication of Jellinek's Beiträge zur Geschichte der
Kabbala, 2 parts, Leipsic, 1852; and his Auswahl kabbalistischer
Mystik, part I, ibid., 1853; Stern's "Versuch einer umständlichen
Analyse des Sohar" (in Ben Chananja, Monatsschrift für jüdische
Theologie, Vols. I-IV, Szegedin, 1858-1861); Jost's Geschichte des
Judenthums und seiner Sekten, Vol. III, pp. 66-81, Leipsic, 1859;
more especially of Graetz's Geschichte der Juden, 1 Vol. VII, pp.
73-87, 442459; 487-507, Leipsic, 1863, paved the way for Christian
D. Ginsburg's (now very scarce) essay The Kabbalah, London, 1865.
As a matter of course he adopts the results of modern scholarship
and rejects the authorship of Simon ben Jochai.
As far as we are aware, nothing has been published in English
since 1865. The Kabbalah Unveiled by S. L. M. Mathers, London,
1887, gives only a translation of some parts of the Zohar, which
Knorr von Rosenroth had rendered into Latin. Nevertheless this work
is interesting, because an English reader--provided he has enough
patience--can get a taste of the Zoharic wisdom and unwisdom.
Footnotes
7:1 The English translation of this work, published by the
Jewish Publication Society of America, is of no service to the
student, because the scholarly notes, which are the best part of
the original, are entirely omitted.
