Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

5862Re: Jewish mysticism

Expand Messages
  • pmcvflag
    May 10 2:42 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      Say, I like that article. It does look like Hermetic Star is aware of
      the difference... just thought I would make it more obvious for the
      club at large :) .... and weasle my way into the conversation at the
      same time.


      --- In gnosticism2@y..., lady_caritas <no_reply@y...> wrote:
      > "Jewish mysticism then can be dated back pretty far, but not all
      > Jewish mystical forms are specifically `Kabbalah'." (PMCV, #5860)
      > Yes, of course, agreed, PMCV. I think perhaps Hermetic Star might
      > aware of this from his comment ~
      > "Even if the Kabbalah is a fairly new creation . ." (Hermetic Star,
      > #5857)
      > ~ and that, as you suggest, PMCV, it's more a matter of
      > mistakenly referring to the ancient roots as well as the medieval
      > form of Kabbalah under the same term "Kabbalah." Then again, I
      > be entirely wrong here and should probably let Hermetic Star speak
      > for himself. LOL
      > Anyway, PMCV, you mention, "There are changes that happened that
      > Kabbalah destinct from the Merkabah mysticism."
      > Are you (or others) familiar with this article?
      > http://www.metatronics.net/lit/anxiety.html
      > From the text ~
      > "By the time of the writing of the Zohar, however, God was
      > related to the visible world through an intricate web of sefirotic
      > symbolism. The world, and the human soul, were seen as deep
      > structures. Kabbalah took on the philosophical project of
      > the mitzvot, and the rest of creation, apparently without
      > why the world is necessarily "deep" to begin with. Again, while it
      > took many of its answers for how the inner structure of the world
      > built and how it related to God from non-philosophical sources, it
      > took its project from philosophy.
      > Once again, it would be helpful if a Kabbalist had written
      > that philosophy had helped him see that there were layers of
      > beyond the surface, and that was the reason why Provencal and
      > Geronese Kabbalists in the 12th and 13th century suddenly began
      > explaining the deeper significance of Jewish ritual life. But such
      > text does not exist. And, as before, I am persuaded by Scholem's
      > Dan's arguments that Kabbalah does not invent itself because of the
      > rationalist threat. But, before the twelfth century, and in areas
      > where philwas not historically widespread, Jewish rabbinic and
      > mystical thought was not at all interested on the "inner meanings"
      > the commandments. After the twelfth century, Kabbalah was all about
      > them.
      > Indeed, as Kabbalah flowered, the distinction between "shell"
      > and "kernel" became the foundation of the entire Kabbalistic
      > ontology. Here again, the doctrines were likely of ancient origin:
      > the phenomenological likeness between the Kabbalah's layer of
      > to gnosticism is quite compelling. But Jewish mysticism had for one
      > thousand years made use of gnostic imagery and symbolism without
      > constructing an elaborate system of "inner meanings" of prayer,
      > ritual acts, and the entirety of human life.
      > […]
      > I have suggested that philosophy and Kabbalah are more alike than
      > different, in that they share the same questions and concerns, even
      > though they differ greatly on the answers to those questions and
      > way those concerns are played out. So successful has the "victory"
      > been that it is hard even to imagine a religious worldview that is
      > not particularly interested in how the world was created, and that
      > doesn't try to uncover the deeper meaning of right human action.
      > And yet, both the Talmudic-rabbinic and mystical veins within
      > appear to be just that. A Yored Merkavah may meditate, utter divine
      > names, and have a vision of the Chariot, but he is unlikely to
      > connect that vision either with the nature of the universe or with
      > the inwardness of his prayers.33 Likewise, the revealed nature of
      > commandments was enough for the Rabbinic Jew, who placed value in
      > their proper performance, not in their intellectual or symbolic
      > structure. To reassert such structures could have been the response
      > of Judaism to the philosophical challenge -- it would have been an
      > interesting debate, but it would not have been Kabbalah."
    • Show all 29 messages in this topic