Customer Reviews

Kabbalah: New Perspectives

5 star:		(6)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

The "New Perspectives" to which Idel refers in his title depend upon a firm grasp of the foundational work of Gershom Scholem. In order to understand Idel's work here, you really need to know your Scholem pretty well; begin with "Major Trends" and move on from there.
Now once you understand a fair bit about the history of Kabbalah in the Scholem model, you are ready to make sense of Idel's highly constructive critique. In short, Idel notes that Scholem divides Kabbalah into two major blocks: what he calls the "theosophical," i.e. discussions of emanations (sefirot) and related topics, particularly within the tradition of the Sefer Zohar, and the "ecstatic" or "practical," which focuses on various means of achieving mystical unity with the Godhead through revolutions of letters and so forth.
Now Scholem, you must understand, was working against a conception of Kabbalah as basically nonsense: the antisemites saw it as typical ... stupidity, and the philosemites as essentially fodder for antisemitic tracts and thus something to be suppressed. So Scholem focused on theosophical Kabbalah because it is quite congenial to an intellectual, philosophical perspective on mysticism.
Idel, however, is working in the next generation after Scholem. It is no longer necessary to defend Kabbalah: everyone grants that it's an important, legitimate tradition. So in this book, Idel begins the process of rehabilitating ecstatic Kabbalah, particularly that of Abraham Abulafia (on whom Idel wrote his dissertation). There's more to it than that, of course, but this is the basis.
The book is elegantly argued, erudite, and deserved the prize it won. But trust me on this--you really need to know quite a lot to understand what he's on about. You do not, fortunately, need to know Hebrew or Aramaic. If you've never read much about Kabbalah and want an introduction, go to Scholem and come back in a while. If you want to practice Kabbalah, I doubt this will be much use to you. But if you know some Scholem and are ready to work through a rigorous critique very slowly and carefully, "Kabbalah: New Perspectives" is hands-down the best there is.

Prior reviews provide much detail on the differences between G. Scholem's approach to Kabbalah and M. Idel's approach while recognizing the differing scholarly climate in which each operated. But, I think there is one more important difference. By restricting "Kabbalah" to the Middle Ages (though he certainly knew of the prior Jewish mystical literature, e.g. Sefer Yetzirah, Heikalot & Shiur Koma, Biblical Chariot, etc.) he failed to recognize an historical, mystical thread in Judaism. He also failed to adequately recognize (discernable, for example, in many other religions) a history of oral tradition (despite the existence of the Mishnah!) in Jewish mysticism. Idel helps to rectify this tremendous oversight. Even if Idel isn't correct that a group of mystics, including de Leon, wrote the Zohar -- perhaps based on an ancient fragment, his thesis deserves to be seriously considered. As a hard scientist, I am unimpressed with Scholem's (and his followers') arguments that de Leon composed the entire work himself. But, then, I've only read it in English (Sperling et al). IMHO, Idel's book is of significant historical importance.

Idel's work explores many hitherto unrecognised issues and motifs within the broad variety of historical Kabbalistic thought. This book maintains an excellent balance of scholarly information and edification, being a lucid phenomenological exploration the two main types of Kabbalah: the Ecstatic and the Theosophical. Facinating chapters and well supported arguments relating to the issue of the antiquity of Jewish mysticism and kabbalistic teaching; as well as a thorough exploration of mystical union with God, often ignored in past scholarship due to primary focus on the speculative aspects of kabbalah. This book demands a revision of the accepted views on the entire history of Jewish mysticsm, and it heralds a new era in kabbalistic scholarship.

I have learned from reading KABBALAH, NEW PERSPECTIVES by Moshe Idel, professor of Jewish thought at Hebrew University. In this book, Professor Idel surveys the state of Kabbalah Research in the wake of Herr Professor Gershom Scholem's death, the strength of whose research casts a ubiquitous shadow. Further, Professor Idel challenges scholars of mysticism to consider the questions uncovered by the solutions currently offered. Without diminishing, in any way, the importance of the work accomplished by Herr Professor Scholem, Professor Idel calls for an examination of some of his basic assumptions. First, very early in this text, he calls for us to "distinguish between the authentic material and the opinions of scholars on the content of this material." (p17). In the process of following his own advice, he observes that Scholem's "Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism" is undergirded with the implicit assumption that a given cultrual religious phenomenon is closely intertwined with or dependent upon its immediate historical predecessors" (p264). He challenges the reader to consider, not only an historical approach, but also, phemonology as a descriptor of the evolution of religious movements. In recognising the limits of historical research, the two professors are in complete agreement. In his text, "On the Kabbalah and Its Symbolism" Herr Professor Scholem writes, "From a historian's point of view, the sum of religious phenomena known as mysticism consists in the attempts of mystics to communicate their 'ways,' there illuminations, their experience, to others." Professor Idel acknowledges this in his discussion of the varieties of "devekut" in Jewish mysticism, "The chance of success in reconstructing the nature of a mystical experience from written texts is close to nil." (p36). In his chapter on Kabbalistic Hermeneutics, he brings a fresh perspective on the status of symbol by distinguishing between a "theosophical" and a "linguistic" approaches, represented by the "Zohar" and R. Abraham Abulafia, respectively. In the former, the symbol is central, and in the latter it matters very little, if at all. Professor Idel offers that, "A more adequate formulation would insist that the two axes of Kabbalah are symbolism, which is related to nonunitive experiences, on the one hand, and unitive experiences, which coalesce with nonsymbolic language, on the other." (p203) From this, I received clarity in my own spiritual commitment. I found that I fall more into the category of "ecstatic" than "theosophic". I feel affirmed in my striving to attain an experience of the Divine, and my reservations that symbols cannot help achieve a better understanding of divine matters. From this text, I learned a great deal about the issues still to be explored in this tradition which spans the centuries. I also learned a little about my own spiritual commitment.

This is an absolute classic that should be read by every student of Kabbalah. However, it should be read after studying Scholem's Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism. Idel's book is predicated on Scholem's. The main benefit in Idel's work is that he studies the experiential dimension of Kabbalah too. He is very interested in the actual practices that kabbalists used, not just their doctrines and myths and their history, which seemed to be the most interesting aspects to Scholem.

This set of essays by Professor Moshe Idel of Hebrew University attempts to map and in a sense re-map the whole world of Kabbalah studies. He presents what he calls a 'phenomenological approach' as opposed to the 'historical trends' approach of the great pioneering - founder of academic Kabbalah studies, Gershon Scholem. Idel who is perhaps the most distinguished of all Scholem's students points to four major contributions of Scholem.
1) " He surveyed the major trends of Jewish mysticism on the basis of persual of the basic documents extand in print and manuscripts. His writings therefore contain the first authoritative presentation of the history of Jewish mysticism in its entirety."
2) Idel claims that Scholem did long bibliographical studies which 'laid the basis' for the modern bibliography of Kabbalah.
3) Idel says that Scholem studied Kabbalah as a 'religious phenomenom' in a deeper way than his predecessors had.
4) Idel writes that Scholem "regarded Kabbalah as a vital part of the Jewish religion, emphasizing its centrality for a proper understanding of its evolution"
Despite his deep appreciation of the work of his great teacher Idel sees certain shortcomings in Scholem's work. In one key essay here Idel contends with the claim of Scholem and other students of Judaism that Jewish mystics avoided the unio mystica , the merging of the person into the One, which is a general feature of other forms of mysticism. Scholem's position was that the Jew is always awed by the transcendent dimension of God, and so aims at approaching God but never entirely merging into the Divine Unity.
Idel also contests some of the major historical conclusions of Scholem. i.e. The claim that it is the Exile from Spain in the late fifteenth century which is directly responsible for Lurianic Kabbalah. And that Lurianic Kabbalah is a central element in the rise of Shabbateanism. And that further the collapse of the Shabbatean illusion is the central element in the rise of Hasidim in the early eighteenth century. It is not that Idel seeks to wholly overturn these claims but rather to point out that Scholem's linkages were too absolute , and did not allow for other causes.
Instead of focusing on the 'trends' Idel looks at Kabbalah phenomenologically as divided into two major forms. The first the theosophic- theurgic is God - centered, the second the ecstatic is anthropocentric and involves the individual's quest for spiritual perfection. The first form of Kabbalah " encompasses two central subjects
theosophy- a theory of the elaborate structure of the divine world- and the ritualistic and experiential way of relating to the divinity in order to induce a state of harmony." For the ecstatic kabbalah it is mystical experience of the individual which is the center and the highest good.
This work is a state- of - the - art description of the world of Kabbalah studies. It is very clearly written and provides an overall map of this area of study.
At one point in it Idel speaks about the difference between the scholarly study of Kabbalah and the actual living religious experiences of the true Kabbalists. He indicates that Scholem had a certain regret that he himself never achieved much in that area. The same sense and feeling is given by the writing of Idel himself.
Nonetheless this is a most recommended work of scholarship done at an extremely high level.