|
If I am not for myself, who will be for me? And when I am for myself, what am 'I'? And if not now, when? Pirkey Avot 1:13 |
Isaac Luria (1534 – July 25, 1572) (Hebrew: Yitzhak Lurya יִצְחַק לוּרְיָא), also called Yitzhak Ben Shlomo Ashkenazi (Isaac ben Solomon Luria) acronym "The Ari" (The "Godly Rabbi Isaac") "Ari-Hakadosh", or "Arizal", meaning "The Lion", was a foremost rabbi and Jewish mystic in the community of Safed in the Galilee region of Ottoman Palestine. He is considered the father of contemporary Kabbalah, his teachings being referred to as Lurianic Kabbalah. While his direct literary contribution to the Kabbalistic school of Safed was extremely minute (he wrote only a few poems), his spiritual fame led to their veneration and the acceptance of his authority. The works of his disciples compiled his oral teachings into writing.
Lurianic Kabbalah gave a revolutionary new account of Kabbalistic thought that its followers synthesised with, and read into, the earlier Kabbalah of the Zohar that had disseminated in Medieval circles. Lurianic Kabbalah describes new supra-rational doctrines of the origins of Creation, and its cosmic rectification, incorporating a recasting and fuller systemisation of preceding Kabbalistic teaching. The main popularizer of Luria's ideas was Rabbi Hayyim ben Joseph Vital, who claimed to be the official interpreter of the Lurianic system, though this was disputed by some. Together, the compiled teachings written after Luria are metaphorically called "Kitvei Ha-Ari" (Writings of the Ari), though they differed on some core interpretations in the early generations.
Previous interpretations of the Zohar had culminated in the rationally influenced full synthesis of Moshe Cordovero in Safed, immediately before Isaac Luria. Both schools gave Kabbalah a theological development to rival earlier Medieval Jewish philosophy. Under the influence of the esoteric mystical Renaissance in 16th-century Safed, Lurianism became the near-universal mainstream Jewish theology in the early-modern era, both in scholarly circles, and in the popular imagination. The Lurianic interpretation of the Zohar, seen by its followers as harmonious with, and successively more advanced than Cordoveran, mostly displaced it, becoming the foundation of subsequent developments in Jewish mysticism. The later Hasidic and Mitnagdic movements diverged over their interpretations of Lurianic Kabbalah, and its social role in popular mysticism. The Sabbatean mystical heresy would also derive its source from Lurianic messianism, but distort the Kabbalistic interdependence of mysticism with Halacha.
Contents
|
Luria was born in Jerusalem in 1534 to an Ashkenazi father, Solomon, and a Sephardic mother; Luria died at Safed, Ottoman Empire controlled land of Israel July 25, 1572 (5 Av 5332). While still a child he lost his father, and was brought up by his rich maternal uncle Mordechai Frances, a tax-farmer out of Cairo, Egypt. His uncle placed him under the best Jewish teachers, including such minds as the leading rabbinic scholar David ibn Zimra. Luria showed himself a diligent student of rabbinical literature and under the guidance of another uncle, Rabbi Bezalel Ashkenazi (best known as the author of Shita Mikubetzet), he became proficient in that branch of Jewish learning.
At the age of fifteen he married a cousin and, being amply provided for financially, he was able to continue his studies. Though he initially may have pursued a career in business, he soon turned to asceticism and mysticism. Around the age of twenty-two he became engrossed in the study of the Zohar (a major work of the Kabbalah that had recently been printed for the first time) and adopted the life of a recluse. Retreating to the banks of the Nile for seven years, he secluded himself in an isolated cottage, giving himself up entirely to meditation. He visited his family only on the Shabbat, speaking very seldom, and always in Hebrew. Hassidism believe he had frequent interviews with the prophet Elijah through this ascetic life, by whom he was initiated into sublime doctrines.
In 1569 Luria moved back to the Ottoman Palestine Eretz Israel; and after a short sojourn in Jerusalem, where his new kabbalistic system seems to have met with little success, he settled in Safed.
Safed, over the previous several decades, had become something of a lightning-rod for kabbalistic studies. "[S]pawning an astounding array of impressive religious personalities [including] ... Rabbi Moses Cordovero, Rabbi Shlomo Alkabetz, Rabbi Jacob Berab, Rabbi Moses di Trani, Rabbi Joseph Caro, Rabbi Hayyim Vital, Joseph ibn Tabul, Rabbi Abraham ben Eliezer ha-Levi Berukhim, Rabbi Israel Najara, Eleazar Azikri, Rabbi Eliyahu de Vidas, and Rabbi Moses Alshech;" including some lesser known figures such as Rabbi Joseph Hagiz, Rabbi Elisha Galadoa, and Rabbi Moses Bassola.
In this community Luria joined a circle of kabbalists led by Rabbi Moses ben Jacob Cordovero. "Cordovero was the teacher of what appears to have been a relatively loose knit circle of disciples. Of which the most important were Elijah de Vidas, Abraham Galante, Moses Galante, Hayyim Vital, Abraham ben Eliezer ha-Levi Berukhim, Eleazar Azikri, Samuel Gallico, and an important kabbalist who studied with Cordovero for a short while in the 1560s, Mordechai Dato."
There's evidence to suggest that Isaac Luria also regarded Moses Cordovero as his teacher. "Joseph Sambari (1640–1703), an important Egyptian chronicler, testified that Cordovero was 'the Ari's teacher for a very short time.' ... Luria probably arrived in early 1570, and Cordovero died on June 27 that year (the 23d day of Tammuz). Bereft of their most prominent authority and teacher, the community looked for new guidance, and Isaac Luria helped fill the vacuum left by Cordovero's passing.
Soon Luria had two classes of disciples: (1) novices, to whom he expounded the elementary Kabbalah, and (2) initiates, who became the depositories of his secret teachings and his formulas of invocation and conjuration.
However, the most renowned of the initiates was Rabbi Chaim Vital of Calabria, who, according to his master, possessed a soul which had not been soiled by Adam's sin. With him Luria visited the grave of Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai and those of other eminent teachers; it is said that these graves were unmarked (the identity of each grave was unknown), but through the guidance Elijah each grave was recognized. Luria's kabbalistic circle gradually widened and became a separate congregation, in which his mystic doctrines were supreme, influencing all the religious ceremonies. On Shabbat, Luria dressed himself in white and wore a fourfold garment to signify the four letters of the Ineffable Name.
Many Jews who had been exiled from Spain following the Edict of Expulsion believed they were in the time of trial that would precede the appearance of the Messiah in Galilee. Those who moved to Palestine in anticipation of this event found a great deal of comfort in Luria’s teachings, due to his theme of exile. Although he did not write down his teachings, they were published by his followers and by 1650 his ideas were known by Jews throughout Europe.
Luria used to deliver his lectures extemporaneously and did not write much, with a few exceptions, including some kabbalistic poems in Aramaic for the Shabbat table. The real exponent of his kabbalistic system was Chaim Vital. He collected all the notes of the lectures which Luria's disciples had made; and from these notes were produced numerous works, the most important of which was the Etz Chayim, ("Tree of Life"), in eight volumes (see below). At first this circulated in manuscript copies; and each of Luria's disciples had to pledge himself, under pain of excommunication, not to allow a copy to be made for a foreign country; so that for a time all the manuscripts remained in Palestine. At last, however, one was brought to Europe and was published at Zolkiev in 1772 by Isaac Satanow. In this work are expounded both the theoretical and the devotional, meditative teachings of Lurianic Kabbalah based on the Zohar.
.
The characteristic feature of Luria's system in the theoretical Kabbalah is his recasting of the previous, static hierarchy of unfolding Divine levels, into a dynamic cosmic spiritual drama of exile and redemption. Through this, essentially there became two historical versions of theoretical Kabbalah, the Zoharic on its own terms, and the Lurianic, though Luria and susequent Kabbalists see Lurianic Kabbalah as no more than an explanation of the true meaning of the Zohar.
In the Lurianic scheme, the Medieval-Cordoverian ten individual Sefiroth principles become transformed into harmonised intermediary agents in Creation, which he calls Partzufim - Divine "Personas". He bases their meaning and names, such as Atik Yomin-"Ancient of Days", Arikh Anpin-"Long Visage" and Zeir Anpin-"Short Visage" on the Zohar, "Ancient of Days" itself taken from Daniel 7:9-22. As Medieval Kabbalists repeatedly stressed the unity and non-plurality in the concept of the Sephirot, so Luria stressed the metaphorical nature of the Partzufim. They are Divine "faces", manifestations of the Godhead, alternative aspects through which God manifests Himself, and do not imply any plurality in God. As Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai recounts in the Zohar:
Whatever I said of the Holy Ancient-One, and whatever I said of the Zeir Anpin, is all One; everything is absolutely One. There is no division in Him, blessed be He and blessed be His Name forever. The sum of all this is: the Ancient of the Ancient and the Zeir Anpin are absolutely One. All is, was, and shall be; He will not change, He is unchanging, and he has not changed...Should you ask, what then is the difference between one and the other? It is all One, but from above His paths divide and from below judgement is found; from our perspective they differ one from another.
In the Partzufim, the Sephirot are able to act together by harmoniously rearranging as entire schemes of the 10 Sephirot in the form of Yosher ("Upright" Man-metaphor in three columns) around one of their number. This enables the cosmic scheme of repair to be performed by Man through history.
Isaac Luria propounded the doctrine of the Tzimtzum, self-"contraction"/"concealment" of Divinity to reconcile the Infinite God with finite Creation. As previous Kabbalah taught, before the creation of any spiritual or physical realm, the Ein Sof ("Without Ending") filled all reality. In its simple, Infinite Unity, "no thing" (no limitation/end), Ayin could exist, as all would be nullified into non-existence within the Ein Sof. Medieval and Cordoverian Kabbalah then held that from the Ein Sof, the Emanated Sephirot emerged from their concealed unity in order to channel the Divine vitality to Create the "descending" chain of Worlds. The problem of finite existence emerging from Infinite was partially resolved in this through innumerable, successive tzimtzum concealments, contractions and veilings of the Divine abundance to reduce it to levels created entities could receive for their existence.
To Isaac Luria, this static, hierarchical conception of unfolding did not entirely resolve the difficulty. Rather, he advanced the notion of a prior, initial, primordial tzimtzum in which the Divine withdrew to form an "empty space"/"vacuum" ("Khalal" or "Makom Ponui"), here metaphorically devoid of spatial connotations, as spatial dimensions only emerged in the physical world itself. This new concept allowed a radical "leap" between the Infinite source and the first manifested "light" after the tzimtzum, which while still infinite, was now potentially tailored to the perspective of Creation, and so able to subsequently produce finite realms through the second innumerable progressive tzimtzum stages.
When the Creation was decided upon, in order for the hidden potential Sephirot attributes, which would emerge in all created entities, to manifest themselves in their perfection, the first act of Creation involved this prior, initial, radical tzimtzum. The Ein Sof retired into God's own nature, the Divine "concentrated"/"withdrew" His Infinity. As the Godhead in its perfection encompassed both infinitude and potential finitude, this withdrawal so enabled the previously concealed, potentially finite light within God to become manifest. There appeared in the center of the withdrawal the empty space encompassed by ten circles or dynamic vessels (kelim), the Sefirot ("Circled Numbers"), by means of which the Infinite Light, though forming an absolute unity, could appear in their diversity; for the finite has no real existence of itself.
However, the infinite light did not wholly desert the center; a thin conduit of light, the "Kav" (a new "Ray"/"Line"), much diminished from the Ein Sof, traversed the circles and penetrated into the center. This, still supremely infinite manifestation, formed the source for all Creation.
But while the three outermost circles, being of a purer substance because of their nearness to the Ein Sof, were able to bear the light, the inner six were unable to do so, and burst. It was, therefore, necessary to remove them from the focus of the light. For this purpose the Sefirot were transformed into "figures" (parzufim, cf. Greek πρόσωπον = "face").
The first Sefirah, being Keter ("Crown"), was transformed into the potentially existing three heads of the Macroprosopon (Erech Anpin); the second Sefirah, being Chochmah ("Wisdom"), into the active masculine principle called "Father" (Abba); the third Sefirah, being Binah ("Understanding"), into the passive, feminine principle called "Mother" (Imma); the six broken Sefirot, into the "male child" (Ze'er), which is the product of the masculine active and the feminine passive principles; the tenth Sefirah, Malkut which is ("Kingship"), into the female child (Bath). This proceeding was absolutely necessary. Had God in the beginning created these figures instead of the Sefirot, there would have been no evil in the world, and consequently no reward and punishment; for the source of evil is in the broken Sefirot or vessels (Shvirat Keilim), while the light of the Ein Sof produces only that which is good. These five figures are found in each of the Four Worlds; namely, in the world of Emanation (atzilut), Creation (beri'ah), Formation (yetzirah), and in that of Action (asiyah), which represents the material world.
Luria's psychological system, upon which is based his devotional and meditational Kabbalah, is closely connected with his metaphysical doctrines. From the five figures, he says, emanated five souls, Nefesh ("Spirit"), Ru'ach ("Wind"), Neshamah ("Soul"), Chayah ("Life"), and Yechidah ("Singular"); the first of these being the lowest, and the last the highest. (Source: Etz Chayim). Man's soul is the connecting link between the infinite and the finite, and as such is of a manifold character. All the souls destined for the human race were created together with the various organs of Adam. As there are superior and inferior organs, so there are superior and inferior souls, according to the organs with which they are respectively coupled. Thus there are souls of the brain, souls of the eye, souls of the hand, etc. Each human soul is a spark (nitzotz) from Adam. The first sin of the first man caused confusion among the various classes of souls: the superior intermingled with the inferior; good with evil; so that even the purest soul received an admixture of evil, or, as Luria calls it, of the element of the "shells" (Kelipoth). In consequence of the confusion, the former are not wholly deprived of the original good, and the latter are not altogether free from sin. This state of confusion, which gives a continual impulse toward evil, will cease with the arrival of the Messiah, who will establish the moral system of the world upon a new basis. Until that time man's soul, because of its deficiencies, can not return to its source, and has to wander not only through the bodies of men and of animals, but even through inanimate things such as wood, rivers, and stones.
To this doctrine of gilgulim (reincarnation of souls) Luria added the theory of the impregnation (ibbur) of souls; that is to say, if a purified soul has neglected some religious duties on earth, it must return to the earthly life, and, attaching itself to the soul of a living man, unite with it in order to make good such neglect.
Further, the departed soul of a man freed from sin appears again on earth to support a weak soul which feels unequal to its task. However, this union, which may extend to two souls at one time, can only take place between souls of homogeneous character; that is, between those which are sparks of the same Adamite organ. The dispersion of Israel has for its purpose the salvation of men's souls; as the purified souls of Israelites will fulfill the prophecy of becoming "A lamplight unto the nations," influencing the souls of men of other races in order to free them from demoniacal influences.
According to Luria, man bears on his forehead a mark by which one may learn the nature of his soul: to which degree and class it belongs; the relation existing between it and the superior world; the wanderings it has already accomplished; the means by which it can contribute to the establishment of the new moral system of the world; how it can be freed from demoniacal influences; and to which soul it should be united in order to become purified. This union can be effected by formulas of conjuration.
According to others, the sign is on the person shape likeness by which one may learn the nature of his/her soul to which value that person is to place it self on tikkun olam.
Lurianic Kabbalah has been accused by some of being the cause of the spread of the Sabbatean false Messiahs Shabbetai Tzvi (1626–1676) and Jacob Frank (1726–1791), and their Kabbalistically based heresies. The 16th century mystical renaissance in Safed, led by Moshe Cordovero, Joseph Karo and Isaac Luria, made Kabbalistic study a popular goal of Jewish students, to some extent competing for attention with Talmudic study, while also capturing the hold of the public imagination. Shabbeteanism emerged in this atmosphere, coupled with the oppressions of Exile, alongside traditional mystic circles.
Where Isaac Luria's scheme emphasised the democratic role of every person in redeeming the fallen sparks of holiness, allocating the Messiah only a conclusive arrival in the process, Shabbetai's prophet Nathan of Gaza interpreted his messianic role as pivotal in reclaiming those sparks lost in impurity. Now faith in his messianic role, after he apostasised to Islam, became necessry, as well as faith in his antinomian actions. Jacob Frank claimed to be a reincarnation of Shabbetai Tzvi, sent to reclaim sparks through the most anarchist actions of his followers, claiming the breaking of the Torah in his emerged messianic era was now its fulfilment, the opposite of the messianic necessarity of Halachic devotion by Luria and the Kabbalists. Instead, for the elite 16th century Kabbalists of Safed after the Expulsion from Spain, they sensed a personal national responsibility, expressed through their mystical renaissance, ascetic strictures, devoted brotherhood, and close adherence to normative Jewish practice.
Lurianic Kabbalah remained the leading school of mysticism in Judaism, and is an important influence on Hasidism and Sefardic kabbalists. In fact, only a minority of today's Jewish mystics belong to other branches of thought in Zoharic mysticism. Some Jewish kabbalists have said that the followers of Shabbetai Tzvi strongly avoided teachings of Rabbi Luria because his system disproved their notions. On the other hand, the Shabbetians did use Rabbi Luria's concepts of sparks trapped in impurity and pure souls being mixed with the impure to justify some of their antinomian actions.
Luria introduced his mystic system into religious observance. Every commandment had a particular mystic meaning. The Shabbat with all its ceremonies was looked upon as the embodiment of the Divinity in temporal life, and every ceremony performed on that day was considered to have an influence upon the superior world. Every word and syllable of the prescribed prayers contain hidden names of God upon which one should meditate devoutly while reciting. New mystic ceremonies were ordained and codified under the name of Shulkhan Arukh heAri (The "Code of Law of the Ari") (compare Shulkhan Arukh by Rabbi Joseph Karo). In addition, one of the few writings of Luria himself comprises three Sabbath table hymns with mystical allusions. From the third meal's hymn:
You princes of the palace, who yearn to behold the splendour of Zeir Anpin
Be present at this meal at which the King leaves His imprint
Exult, rejoice in this gathering together with the angels and all supernal beings
Rejoice now, at this most propitious time, when there is no sadness...
I herewith invite the Ancient of Days at this auspicious time, and impurity will be utterly removed...
In keeping with the custom of engaging in all-night Torah study on the festival of Shavuot for the Giving of the Torah at Mount Sinai, Isaac Luria arranged a special service for the night vigil of Shavuot. The Tikkun Leil Shavuot ("Rectification for Shavuot Night") consists of excerpts from the beginning and end of each of the 24 books of Tanakh, including the reading also of several key sections, and from the 63 chapters of Mishnah. This is followed by the Sefer Yetzirah, the 613 commandments as enumerated by Maimonides, and excerpts from the Zohar, with opening and concluding prayers. It is commonly recited in synagogue, with Kaddish if the Tikkun is studied in a group of ten. This is printed in a special book, widely used in Eastern Sephardic, some German and Hasidic communities. Afterwards, Hasidim immerse in the Mikvah pool before dawn.
Rabbi Luria's ideas enjoy wide recognition among Jews today. Orthodox as well as Reform, Reconstructionist and other Progressive Jews frequently acknowledge a moral obligation to "repair the world" (tikkun olam). This idea draws upon Luria's teaching that shards of divinity remain contained in flawed material creation and that ritual and ethical deeds by the righteous help to release this energy. The mystical theology of the Ari does not exercise the same level of influence everywhere, however. Communities where Luria's thought holds less sway include many German and Modern Orthodox communities, groups carrying forward Spanish and Portuguese traditions, a sizable segment of Baladi Yemenite Jews (see Dor Daim), and other groups that follow a form of Torah Judaism based more on classical authorities like Maimonides and the Geonim.
With its Rationalist project, the 19th century Haskalah movement and the critical study of Judaism dismissed Kabbalah. In the 20th century, Gershom Scholem initiated the academic study of Jewish mysticism, utilising historical methodology, but reacting against what he saw as its exclusively Rationalist dogma. Rather, he identified Jewish mysticism as the vital undercurrent of Jewish thought, periodically renewing Judaism with new mystical or messianic impetus. The 20th century academic respect of Kabbalah, as well as wider interest in spirituality, bolster a renewed Kabbalistic interest from non-Orthodox Jewish denominations in the 20th century. This is often expressed through the form of Hasidic incorporation of Kabbalah, emodied in Neo-Hasidism and Jewish Renewal.
Study of the Kitvei Ari (writings of Isaac Luria's disciples) continues mostly today among traditional-form Kabbalistic circles and in sections of the Hasidic movement. Mekubalim mizra'chim (oriental Sephardi Kabbalists), following the tradition of R' Haim Vital and the mystical legacy of the Rashash (1720–1777, considered by Kabbalists to be the reincarnation of the Ari), rightly see themselves as direct heirs to and in continuity with Luria's teachings and meditative scheme. Both sides of the Hasidic-Mitnagdic schism from the 18th century, upheld the theological worldview of Lurianic Kabbalah, no traditional scheme replacing it. It is a misconception to see the Rabbinic opposition to Hasidic Judaism, at least in its formative origin, as deriving from adherence to Rationalist Medieval Jewish philosophical method. The leader of the Rabbinic Mitnagdic opposition to the mystical Hasidic revival, the Vilna Gaon (1720–1797), was intimately involved in Kabbalah, following Lurianic theory, producing as much Kabbalistically focused writing as the Hasidic masters, while personally criticising Medieval Jewish Rationalism. His disciple, Chaim Volozhin, the main theoretician of Mitnagdic Judaism, differed from Hasidism over practical interpretation of the Lurianic tzimtzum. For all intents, Mitnagdic Judaism followed a transcendent stress in tzimtzum, while Hasidism stressed the immanence of God. This theoretical difference led Hasidism to popular mystical focus beyond elitist restrictions, while it underpinned the Mitnagdic focus on Talmudic, non-mystical Judaism for all but the elite, with a new theoretical emphasis on Talmudic Torah study in the Lithuanian Yeshiva movement. The largest scale Jewish development based on Lurianic teaching was Hasidism, though it adapted Kabbalah to its own thought. Joseph Dan describes the Hasidic-Mitnagdic schism as a battle between two conceptions of Lurianic Kabbalah. Mitnagdic elite Kabbalah was essentially loyal to Lurianic teaching and practice, while Hasidism introduced new popularised ideas, such as the centrality of Divine immanence and Deveikut to all Jewish activity, and the social mystical role of the Tzadik Hasidic leadership.
In the decades after Luria, and in the early 1700s, different opinions formed among Kabbalists over the meaning of the tzimtzum Divine self-withdrawal, whether it should be taken literally or symbolically. Bacharach’s Emek ha-Melekh took tzimtzum literally, while Joseph Ergas (Shomer Emunim, 1736) and Abraham Herrera, held that tzimtzum was to be understood metaphorically.
The issue of the tzimtzum underpinned the new, public popularisation of mysticism embodied in 18th century Hasidism. Its central doctrine of Panentheistic Divine Immanence, shaping daily fervour, emphasised the most non-literal stress of the tzimtzum. The systematic articulation of this Hasidic approach by Shneur Zalman of Liadi in the second section of Tanya, outlines a Monistic Illusionism of Creation from the Upper Divine Unity persective. To Schneur Zalman, the tzimtzum only affected apparent concealment of the Ohr Ein Sof. The Ein Sof, and the Ohr Ein Sof, actually remain omnipresent, this world nullified into its source. Only, from the Lower, Worldy Divine Unity perspective, the tzimtzum gives the illusion of apparent withdrawal. In truth, "I, the Eternal, I have not changed" (Malachi 3:6), as interpreting the tzimtzum with any literal tendency would be ascribing false corporeality to God.
Norman Lamm describes the alternative Hasidic-Mitnagdic interpretations of this. To Chaim Volozhin, the main theoretician of the Mitnagdim Rabbinic opposition to Hasidism, the illusionism of Creation, arising from a metaphorical tzimtzum is true, but does not lead to Panentheism, as Mitnagdic theology emphasised Divine transcendence, where Hasidism emphasised immanence. As it is, the initial general impression of Lurianic Kabbalah is one of transcendence, implied by the notion of tzimtzum. Rather, to Hasidic thought, especially in its Habad systemisation, the Atzmus ultimate Divine essence is expressed only in finitude, emphasising Hasidic Immanence. Norman Lamm sees both thinkers as subtle and sophisticated. The Mitnagdim disagreed with Panentheism, in the early opposition of the Mitnagdic leader, the Vilna Gaon seeing it as heretical. Chaim Volzhin, the leading pupil of the Vilna Gaon, was at the same time both more moderate, seeking to end the conflict, and most theologically principled in his opposition to the Hasidic interpretation. He opposed panentheism as both theology and practice, as its mystical spiritualisation of Judaism displaced traditional Talmudic learning, as was liable to inspire antinomian blurring of Halachah Jewish observance strictures, in quest of a mysicism for the common folk.
As Norman Lamm summarises, to Schneur Zalman and Hasidism, God relates to the world as a reality, through His Immanence. Divine immanence - the Human perspective, is pluralistic, allowing mystical popularisation in the material world, while safeguarding Halacha. Divine Transcendence - the Divine perspective, is Monistic, nullifying Creation into illusion. To Chaim Volozhin and Mitnagdism, God relates to the world as it is through His transcendence. Divine immanence - the way God looks at physical Creation, is Monistic, nullifying it into illusion. Divine Transcendence - the way Man perceives and relates to Divinity is pluralistic, allowing Creation to exist on its own terms. In this way, both thinkers and spiritual paths affirm a non-literal interpretation of the tzimtzum, but Hasidic spirituality focuses on the nearness of God, while Mitnagdic spirituality focuses on the remoteness of God. They then configure their religious practice around this theological difference, Hasidism placing Deveikut fervour as its central practice, Mitnagdism further emphasising intellectual Talmudic Torah study as its supreme religious activity.
The various Hasidic dynasties adapted the teachings of Luria, and Kabbalah in general, to their own thought. Hasidic thought popularised Kabbalah in a social revival through relating it to innate pschological experience. In the process, it shifted away from adherence to the abstract esoteric meditative Kavanot-methods of prayer, substituting instead its own forms of prayer meditation, centred around more direct deveikut fervour and Divine immanence. Where Luria and Kabbalah described the emanated Heavenly realms through anthropomorphic metaphors, Hasidism looked to describe Man's soul and experience through these Kabbalistic metaphors. In the process, it gave new interpretations to Lurianic Kabbalah. Especially, the Lurianic notion of Messianic redemption of the exiled "sparks of holiness" in physical existence, was shaped through the new teaching of the Baal Shem Tov concerning particular Divine providence. Where Luria recounts the cosmic process in which every individual shares involvement, in Hasidism each individual is allocated their particular "sparks of holinesss" to rectify. Divine providence directs each individual on sometimes accidental journeys, in order to perform a necessary holy act of redemption that only they can perform. Additionally, while the Lurianic tzimtzum wirthdrawl emphasised Divine transcendence, Hasidic spirituality focused on the Divine immanence nearness of God. This stressed the superiority of Divine service amidst materiality, where each Jew could seek out the Divine sparks.
Ari - Yitzhak Luria Ashkenazi
Found error in text? Please select it and press CTRL-ENTER
© 2008-2024, JewAge.org
Discussion
Please log in / register, to leave a comment