From my Notebooks: Two Treatises on the Letters of the Hebrew Alphabet

Y. Tzvi Langermann From my Notebooks Two Treatises on the Letters of the Hebrew Alphabet Although many view the search for symbolism in the letters of the Hebrew alphabet as an adventure in mysticism, a number of medieval monographs on this theme approach their subject from a viewpoint that can only be called scientific or philosophical. Both the topics they choose to develop and the sources they cite by name fall into those categories. There is nothing at all kabbalistic about these treatises; not a word about Sefirot, theurgy, theosophy, or meditational techniques is to be found. In earlier studies I have discussed the section on the Hebrew alphabet in the Midrash ha-hokmah and in Midrash hafisa, both of which fall into this category.1 In this note I should like to briefly describe two more exemplars of this genre. Let us begin with BeDur surot ha-Dotiyyot (Explication of the forms of the letters), found in two manuscripts: London, British Library, MS Add 27173, ff. 2a-12 ; Moscow, Russian State Library, MS Guenzburg Y. Tzvi Langermann, "Some Remarks on Judah ben Solomon ha-Cohen and His Encyclopedia, Midrash ha-hokmah," in Steven Harvey, ed. The Medieval Hebrew EncyclopedUs ofScience and Philosophy (Dordrecht, 2000), pp. 71-389, esp. 380-385; idem, "Ha-hibbur ha-teimani ha-mekuneh Hafisah," Kiryat Sefer 61 (1986/7): 363367 (repr. in A. David, ed, Mi-ginzei ha-Makhon le-taslumei kitvei ha-yad hacivriyyim [Jerusalem, 1996], pp. 53-57).© Aleph 3 (2003) pp. 293-299293 64, ff. 293 -309a (page references are to the London MS only). Although the texts reveal nothing about the author's name, place, or dates, both manuscripts are in Italian hands. As we shall see, there are some suggestive similarities between this text and a section of Midrash hahokmah , whose author, Judah ben Solomon, spent the latter part of his life in Italy. The anonymous author writes mainly about astronomy and astrology .2 It is true that at the end of his discussion ofalef, the first letter, he notes, "We have spoken about it in a lengthy article, as we were shown from heaven." But this single remark is offset by the statement in the introduction that the author "has researched by means of a very precise investigation" (haqarnu be-mehqar ha-binah be-ciyyun daq); by his frequent references to works of "the philosophers" as well as to some named sources, especially Ptolemy, upon whom he clearly relies; and by his acknowledgement at several junctures that there is more than one acceptable opinion. This treatise has a number of points in common with the section on letters in Midrash ha-hokmah. Both count 27 letters: the 22 regular letters and the five final forms. These divide neatly into three groups of nine; each group corresponds to one of the three realms—angelic, celestial , and terrestrial. All of this is fairly standard and the similarities really say nothing about any possible relationship between the two texts. Another shared feature is more striking, however. Both texts roundly criticize the astrologers of their day for relying too heavily on planetary indications and ignoring the role of the fixed stars. Moreover, both specifically name the hayläj as one of the misleading planetary indicators.3 Midrash ha-hokmah names the kadkudah as the second. In its place our treatise has barbarah, which makes no sense. It could, however, easily be a misreading of kadkudah, since the pairs bet-kaf and res-dalet are easily confused in most Hebrew hands. Be°ur surot ha-Dotiyyot further illustrates this point by the classic example of twins who have very different fates; the fatal difference in their destinies, it 294 Y. Tzvi Langermann argues, could have been foretold by reading the fixed stars, but not by the planetary indicators. This is not an arithmological text in the strict sense; for the most part, the author ignores the numerical values of the letters and their purported significance.4 There are some interesting exceptions, though. The letter waw, in his account, stands for the sun. Its numerical value is six. Our author cannot resist noting that this is a perfect number and listing several hexads. More hexads...