tsTemple Portals

Oded Yisraeli, Liat Keren

• Publisher: De Gruyter
• Year: 2016
• ISBN:
  9783110432763
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Teología y religión
• Subtopic: Teología judía

This monograph discusses the Zohar, the most important book of the Kabbalah, as a late strata of the Midrashic literature. The author concentrates on the 'expanded' biblical stories in the Zohar and on its relationship to the ancient Talmudic Aggadah. The analytical and critical examination of these biblical themes reveals aspects of continuity and change in the history of the old Aggadic story and its way into the Zoharic corpus. The detailed description of this literary process also reveals the world of the authors of the Zohar, their spiritual distress, mystical orientations, and self-consciousness.

Chapter 1:

The Zohar as Midrash

First appearing in Spanish Catalonia at the end of the thirteenth century, the Zohar has become one of the most important and revered books in the Jewish canon. Forming one of the central pillars of kabbalistic thought, it has left a deep imprint on Jewish texts, customs, and halakhah, its extensive circulation witnessing to its acceptance across broad sectors of the Jewish world. Its various sections were first published during the second half of the sixteenth century, subsequently seeing dozens of further editions.1

Contra the prevalent, traditional opinion that ascribes the Zohar to the second-century Sage R. Simeon bar Jochai, scholars and sages over the generations have demonstrated that its central sections were in fact penned at the end of the thirteenth and beginning of the fourteenth century.2 The circumstances of its composition and identity of its author(s) nonetheless remain obscure. The dominant scholarly view up until the 1980 s is represented by Gershom Scholem who, despite early uncertainty, ultimately concluded that it should be attributed (with the exception of Raya mehemna and Tiquney zohar) to the kabbalist R. Moses de Leon (Scholem, 1941).3 This was challenged by Yehuda Liebes in 1988 in an article in which, based on a close examination of parallels and comparison of the expositions belonging to the zoharic corpus with those cited in the works of contemporary Castilian mystics—such as R. Joseph Gikatilla, R. Joseph of Shushan, R. David ben Judah Hehasid, and, of course, R. Moses de Leon—he argued that: “The Zohar is the fruit of a whole group that together dealt with the Kabbalah on the basis of a common tradition and ancient texts” (1988: 5). This broader perspective “breaks the bounds of the Zohar’s pages,” admitting a far wider corpus into what we know as the “zoharic literature.”

In the wake of Liebes’ argument, Boaz Huss (2008) asserted that the zoharic corpus was formed over a lengthy period, the fourteenth-century mystics having at their disposal diverse collections. The compilation thus process stretched from this early material through to the printing of the book in Mantua, Cremona, and Salonica in the sixteenth century. Ronit Meroz (2001, 2002a, 2006) takes a different direction, positing that the book embodies the literary activity of various—at times rival—groups over several generations through the eleventh to fourteenth centuries, distinct sections being discernible within the book.4 Addressing the complexity of the compositional process via a study of R. Joseph Angelet, she asserts that three aspects of his work can be determined: he continued and maintained the path of the Zohar, he interpreted it, and he authored parts of it (2007: 311). The most innovative approach is that adopted by Daniel Abrams (2010: 224–428), who disputes the notion of the Zohar as a “book” in the modern historical sense of the term, contending that the zoharic corpus is rather the fruit of a “textual community”—an artifact that represents a series of treatments of an idea (or systems of ideas) by diverse figures not necessarily familiar with one another or individually with the whole text (ibid: 369). Although the notion of a group of authors remains controversial, it has now become prevalent, forming the underlying premise of the current contribution.

The Zohar has attracted the interest of mystics and scholars alike. The former have generally focused on its kabbalistic content, the latter also addressing historical-bibliographical questions—the circumstances of its composition, the identity of its author(s), the relationship between its various sections, its language and canonical status, etc. Very few have examined its literary nature and genre. This field only began to burgeon during the last decades of the twentieth century, Daniel Abrams (2003), Michal Oron (1986, 1989a, 1994), Moshe Idel, Shifra Asulin (2006), Amos Goldreich (1994), Pinchas Giller (2001), Arthur Green, Boaz Huss (2008), Melila Hellner-Eshed (2009), Joel Hacker, Elliot Wolfson (1986, 1988b, 1988c, 1993a), Naomi Tene (1986), Oded Yisraeli (2005), Yehuda Liebes (1993d, 1994, 1995, 2000), Mati Meged (1963), Dorit Cohen Aloro (1987), Daniel Matt (1989), Ronit Meroz (2001, 2002a, 2006), Haviva Pedaya, Mordechai Pachter (1989) and others all investigating the literary expressions of the zoharic myth and the poetic features of the framing story.

This volume focuses on a specific aspect of this discipline—namely, the zoharic aggadah. The aggadic tradition stretches back to rabbinic midrashim if not the biblical text itself, constituting an exegesis of the biblical narrative by way of interpretation, expansion, and elaboration.5 While the rabbinic aggadah have been extensively studied, however, those in the Zohar have largely escaped scholarly attention to date.6 I hope herein to open a window on the book from a defined and delimited perspective that is nevertheless significant and important. Rather than discussing the poetic features of the zoharic aggada or its cultural links in medieval Spain I wish to examine the links between the zoharic aggada and the ancient talmudic-midrashic aggada and their kabbalistic exegesis during the Middle Ages. I shall analyze a selection of aggadot that play a major role in the Zohar, reading each of the zoharic passages in light of its ancient sources and discussing the affinities and disparities that developed as the aggada found its way into the zoharic corpus.7

The distinctive way in which aggadic stories are reworked in the Zohar reflects in great part the vicissitudes the aggadic tradition experienced across the centuries and the changes that occurred within it prior to the thirteenth century.8 At the same time, however, the zoharic aggadot betray clear traces of their kabbalistic authors, reflecting the world of the Zohar and its compilers. An analysis of the manner in which the aggadic tradition made its way into the zoharic literature in light of its zoharic reworking thus sheds light on the Zohar’s authors. The novel and creative way in which the zoharic narrator chose to implant the ancient story into the zoharic exposition reveals much about his mystical orientation and religious interest, spiritual difficulties, and self-awareness in a Jewish world in which recognition of the status of the Kabbalah and its practitioners was far from self-evident.9 Although a long road stretches ahead of us before we shall be able to draw solid historical conclusions—facing several serious methodological issues on the way—there is no doubt that identification of subterranean streams in the zoharic exposition will help to illuminate the figure who stands behind it. In a scholarly context in which the identity of the zoharic authors remains far from clear, this constitutes a valuable tool.

In order to understand the “expanded biblical story” in the Zohar, let us first avail ourselves of the definition of aggada as a “homiletic story”—i. e., a narrative whose starting point lies in a scriptural text.10 This definition requires examination not only of the character of the story but also of the nature and significance of the homiletic method.11 The introductory chapters herein will thus be devoted to a theoretical analysis of the homily and the elements of the homiletical story in the Zohar. The discussion will focus firstly on the midrashic writing in the Zohar and its features, then turning to the aggadic story itself and the various ways in which the blending of tradition and creativity find expression in the zoharic aggada. Finally, we shall address the validity of the historical deductions that may be drawn from the literary aspects elucidated by the analysis.

Why midrash?

The midrashic nature of the homiletical story in the Zohar and its meaning forms part of a broader issue—namely, midrashic writing as a whole in the book. On the one hand, the Zohar is the only medieval text—with the possible exception of Sefer Habahir—written in midrashic style. On the other, it is also the only midrash—again with the possible exception of Sefer Habahir—whose content is kabbalistic. We must therefore ask why the zoharic authors chose precisely this genre.12

This question is sharpened by the fact that during this period methods of biblical exegesis—in particular of the pshat (literal meaning)—were developing in Western Europe that gradually replaced the midrashic discourse.13 When the Kabbalah emerged in Provenance and Spain—at the end of the twelfth and during the thirteenth century—midrashic texts were thus in serious decline, being replaced by the yalqut anthologies—Yalqut Shim(oni in Ashkenaz and Midrash Hagadol in Yemen.14 The spirit that heralded the ending of this period was also exemplified in the work of such mystics as R. Ezra, R. Azriel, and R. Todros Abulafia who, like others amongst their contemporaries, helped create the genre of talmudic aggadot exegesis.15 Midrashic writing thus already appears to have been largely regarded as a “closed” field from which one could not deviate— nor add. At the same time, mystics and kabbalists were increasingly adopting radical, non-semantic exegetical methods (exchanging/combining letters, etc.).16 The revival of midrashic writing at the height of a supremely “a-midrashic” period thus poses a conundrum. The burst of Spanish and Provençal Jewish creativity cannot help explain the emergence of a type of literature that had long since become passé. Whence, then, did this cultural renaissance (or regression, depending on one’s point of view) develop?17 The idea of mere cultural imitation —pseudepigraphy—seems too easy and facile, the literary quality of the zoharic midrash and the poetic heights it reaches reflecting profound midrashic motivations and an authentic identification with the genre.18

I suggest that the Zohar’s authors choice of midrash should be understood in light of the exegetical rejuvenation that occurred in the thirteenth century—a period of great significance in the history of the Jewish scriptural exegesis. The rise in status of the pshat posed a complex hermeneutic challenge to exegetes, philosophers, and mystics alike—namely, how to adopt broad, traditional, philosophical, or kabbalistic ideas without compromising the accepted literal meaning of the text. As early as Maimonides’ Guide for the Perplexed, scholars had attempted to deal with this problem, the Rambam formulating it in his now well-known dictum (on the basis of Prov 25:11: “Aword fitly spoken is like apples of gold in vessels of silver”): “Now see how marvellously this dictum describes a well-constructed parable. For he says that in a saying that has two meanings—he means an external and an internal one—the external meaning ought to be as beautiful as silver, while its internal meaning ought to be more beautiful than the external one, the former being in comparison to the latter as gold is to silver” (p. 12 [7a]).

The “apples of gold” are philosophical truths—visible to the eye but only discernible by those capable of observing and understanding them. This hermeneutic strategy was subsequently adopted by the kabbalists, including R. Moses de Leon and R. Joseph Gikatilla.19 Maimonides not providing any further methodological insights beyond this theoretical idea, however—neglecting to explain precise how the “apples of gold” are to be identified with the “vessels of silver”—he appears to have regarded the way to decipher the secrets of the Torah (if indeed such existed) as part of the secret itself. It could therefore only be grasped by those competent to do so.

One of the early Spanish kabbalists—Nahmanides—espoused a similar hermeneutic paradigm, proposing a method for revealing its secrets in his commentaries on the Torah. According to this methodological scheme, Scripture must be read in a dual sense: “Know that in the way of the truth Scripture tells about the lower creatures and alludes to the higher ones” (to Gen 1:1; cf. on 3:22). Perhaps the earliest kabbalistic-hermeneutical system, this method enables him to render difficult verses both literally and “by way of the truth.” In this way, the kabbalist can understand both the pshat of the biblical text and the secret it contains.20

The zoharic adoption of midrash seems to be a continuation and development of Nahmanides’ hermeneutic method.21 While Nahmanides h...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Preface
• Table of Contents
• Chapter One: The Zohar as Midrash
• Chapter 2: The Zoharic Homilies: General Outlines
• Chapter 3: From the Rabbinic to Zoharic Aggada: Preservation, Reworking, and Alteration
• Chapter 4: “The Light Hidden for the Righteous”: For Whom is it Reserved?“The light reserved for the righteous”: The early traditions
• Chapter 5: Adam’s Sin: Its Meaning and Essence
• Chapter 6: Enoch and Elijah: From Angel to Man, Man to Angel
• Chapter 7: “He failed”: The Story of Abraham’s Origins
• Chapter 8: The Aqeda: From Test to Experience
• Chapter 9: The Birthright and the Blessing: Esau’s Suppressed Cry
• Chapter 10: The Exodus and the Liberation of the Kabbalistic Spirit
• Chapter 11: The War Against Amalek: Human vs. Divine Needs
• Chapter 12: Nadab and Abihu’s Sin as a “Holy Revolt”
• Chapter 13: “But Amongst the Nations of the World There Did Arise One Like Moses”: Moses and Balaam
• Chapter 14: “Then Moses, the Servant of the LORD, Died There”: Did Moses Really Die?
• Chapter 15: Elijah the Zealot
• Epilogue
• Bibliography
• Chapters first published elsewhere
• Index of Zoharic Sources
• Index of subjects
• Index of persons
• Footnotes