The Theologies of Kabbalah Research

Introduction

It is commonly accepted today that Gershom Scholem’s study of Kabbalah was shaped within the framework of his national and anarchic theology (although there remain scholars who dismiss this claim).¹ In this article I would like to expand the discussion on the theological perspectives of the study of Jewish mysticism beyond the discussion of Scholem’s theological positions and their influence on his studies. In the following, I will suggest that the theological nature of the academic study of Kabbalah and Hasidism is not exclusively connected to Scholem’s theological interest, rather it is imprinted within the basic assumptions of the field, and mainly in the use of “mysticism” as the central analytical category in the study of Kabbalah. As I have claimed in the past, the term “mysticism” is embedded in theological discourse and its use as an analytical category entails basic theological assumptions. ² From this point of view, it is not only Scholem’s research that bears a theological nature, but that of his successors as well, as long as it is based on categorizing Kabbalah as “mysticism.” It should be noted that a few researchers opposed use of the term mysticism to categorize the Kabbalah (and it seems that this opposition has increased in the past few years).³ Yet, the theological perception that identifies Kabbalah as mysticism is still accepted by most researchers and, to a great extent, this notion shapes and dictates academic research on the Kabbalah and Hasidism. It should be noted that similar theological perceptions shape academic research in other fields of religious studies that use terms such as “mysticism,” “the sacred,” and “religious experience” as analytical categories.⁴

In the following article I will reiterate and elucidate my claim that the category “mysticism” is based on theological assumptions; I will clarify the theological assumptions underlying the research of Jewish mysticism and I will present their affinity to theological perceptions of modern spiritual currents, mainly New Age movements. Finally, I will claim that nontheological research of the Kabbalah and Hasidism requires demystification of these historical phenomena and abandoning the category Jewish mysticism as the constitutive category of this field of research.

Mysticism as a Theological Category

Before I present my claim that mysticism is a theological category, I would like to explain my use of the term “theology,” which has recently become quite popular, particularly in the framework of discussions of political theology. In this article, I will use the term theology in its original meaning, as indicating discussion and research of God, his divine nature, and his activities in the world (as Augustine defined this—de divinitate rationem sive sermonem).⁵ Theology, in this sense, is a field of knowledge dealing with God and his attributes and which posits the Divine as a casual factor that explains natural, historical, and social phenomena.

Moshe Idel raised criticism against the overemphasis of the theological aspects of Kabbalah by Scholem and his disciples (at the expense of its mystical and experiential elements) calling it the “theologization of the Kabbalah.”⁶ I would like to stress that my claim is not that research of the Kabbalah overemphasizes the theological aspects of the Kabbalah, rather that Kabbalah research itself is based on fundamental theological assumptions.⁷ These fundamental theological assumptions are entrenched in the use of the term “mysticism” as an analytical term in Kabbalah research.

I believe that mysticism is a theological term not only because it originates (as do many other terms in the modern academic discourse) in Christian theology, but also because its use in characterizing and analyzing historical, social, and literary phenomena assumes that God is the key explanatory factor of these phenomena. As I will demonstrate, the term “mysticism” assumes the existence of God, or a transcendent being, that people—in certain circumstances—encounter, experience, or unite with. The use of the term “mysticism” as an analytical category assumes that the contact with God or the metaphysical entity (i.e., “the mystical experience”) explains the behavior of human beings, the nature of their cultural productions, and their impact on historical events. This is the underlying theological assumption...