From TheBestLinks.com
Could someone Jewish re-write this article?? PLEASE.
This is a well written article. Someone had put this request at the end, detracting from the content like graffiti. BF 06:22 Dec 13, 2002 (UTC)
REQUEST - Christian works of Kabbalah should be discussed here. Non-Jewish and non-Christian works of Kabbalah, such as neo-paganism, should also be discussed here as well.
Two important things missing:
- the Tree of Life. You dont have Kabbalah lege artis withouth Tree of Life
- I am currently working on a Tree of Life graphic to be released under the FDL. --Masterhomer 04:01, 20 Jun 2004 (UTC)
- the 4 emanation worlds (Atzilut, B'riah, Yetzirah,Assiah). Without it-no cosmology. So, these 3 things had to be juxtaposed in order to get a more comprehensive picture: 4 worlds (plus Adam Kadmon as the 5th) for cosmology, 5 souls for psychopneumatology, and Tree of Life as mythic symbol derived from Pythagorean tetractys to give esoteric link between Man and Cosmos.
Mir Harven 00:27, 14 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Other terms which originally described religious associations but have come to refer in some way to dangerous or suspicious behavior include zealot, assassin, and thug.
Why is this in this article? It seems to be an almost entirely irrelevant digression -- I fail to see why this information should be of especial interest to someone who wishes to learn about kabbalah. --Charles A. L. 19:02, Dec 15, 2003 (UTC)
More important (apart from the abovementioned balderdash) is a dated & tribalist description of Kabbalist psychology. True, pockets of Jewish fundie Kabbalists still hold to a rather idiotic "racial-religious" pneumatology- but they're a negligent minority now. This part needs editing. Uhhh......I dont want to get entangled into this. Would some merciful nefesh spare me the arduous task of typing about Atzilut, Beriah, Kadmon, tzimtzum, gilgul,... ?
Mir Harven 00:17, 17 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Excuse me?? "state of the art Kabballah"? This inherent nonsense.
Panentheism and pantheism
Regarding these, neither is "nature worship". Panentheism describes religions which consider the universe to be part of God and lesser. Pantheism describes religions which consider God to be a fundamental, immanent part of all things. They are not distinct religions.
See Kabbalah#Mystic Doctrines in Talmudic Times, and Pantheism#Kabbalah. IZAK, you ought to look things up before entertaining kneejerk reactions. --Eequor 23:09, 23 Jun 2004 (UTC)
Most religious Jews do not hold by Kabbalah?
"Most religious Jews do not hold by Kabbalah, seeing mysticism as inferior to philosophical rationalism."? On what is this claim based? Jayjg 18:14, 24 Jun 2004 (UTC)
- To clarify: The vast majority of Orthodox Jews in Europe, outside the Hasidim, rejected Kabbalah as authoritative. That was one of the battles between them. Today, Kabbalah is considered authoritative among all Hasidic Jews (so far as I know), but in the rest of Orthodox Judaism it is merely an optional (and not mandatory) belief. At least, this is what I have seen and gathered, but I could be wrong. I do know that most Modern Orthodox Jews don't consider it mandatory. The vast majority of Reform and Conservative Jews (who view themselves as religious) reject Kabbalah altogether. (I deliberately used the word "religious" instead of "observant".) RK
- Well, from what I have seen and read, Kabbalah is an integral part of both Chassidic and Sephardic belief and practice. Moreoever, even the Mitnagdim were Kabbalists (including the G"ra). And while the main Kabbalistic texts are typically not studied in Yeshivas, Luzzatto's Derech Hashem is extremely popular. I think the question of whether or not it is mandatory vs. optional is quite different from whether or not Orthodox Jews "hold by" it. While I don't agree with all of your explanation here in talk, it is, in my opinion, far more informative and accurate than the bare statement in the article itself. Perhaps you could incorporate part of it into the main text. Jayjg 02:01, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)
- O.K., I've made the text more accurate. Jayjg 16:18, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)
Popular Kabbalah - Kabbalah Institute - Hollywood
Should mention be made of the popularizing of Kabbalah by the Kabbalah Institute? It's appeal to celebrities, and criticism/condemnation by Orthodox Jewish movements and "cult-busting" organizations? Jayjg 16:20, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)
"Nonsense" quote of Lieberman
The Lieberman story is told differently at this source http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/Judaism/kabbalah.html , as follows:
- A precisely opposite view on the value of kabbalah was taken by the late Professor Saul Lieberman, the great Talmud scholar of the Jewish Theological Seminary. In an introduction to a lecture Scholem delivered at the seminary, Lieberman said that several years earlier, some students asked to have a course here in which they could study kabbalistic texts. He had told them that it was not possible, but if they wished they could have a course on the history of kabbalah. For at a university, Lieberman said, "it is forbidden to have a course in nonsense. But the history of nonsense, that is scholarship."
Second version of the story at http://notesjds.cesjds.org/libraries/upper/BookRevi.nsf/0/57b2dde471505a9685256e52000a4f4d?OpenDocument, as follows
- Saul Lieberman noted before a lecture that Scholem gave at the JTS on Ma'aseh Merkavah and Jewish gnosticism, "All of Kabbalah is complete nonsense, but the academic study of nonsense is scholarship."
Third version at http://www.trinicenter.com/Cudjoe/2003/1909.htm
- I begin with the observation of Saul Lieberman, the great Talmudist scholar who, in introducing the Gershom Scholem?s lectures on the Kabbalah, noted: "Nonsense (when it is all said and done) is still nonsense. But the study of nonsense, that is a science" (Quoted in Simon Schama, Landscape and Memory.
Fourth version at http://www.lionstale.org/21n4/feature/f-kabbalah.html
- My grandmother?s uncle?s brother-in-law Dr. Saul Lieberman once introduced Scholem before giving a lecture at the JTS with the comical remark, ?All of Jewish Mysticism is complete nonsense (shtiut). But the academic study of ?non-sense? is scholarship.?
Fifth version at http://www.jewfaq.org/kabbalah.htm
- One prominent Orthodox Jew, when introducing a speaker on the subject of Jewish mysticism, said basically, "it's nonsense, but it's Jewish nonsense, and the study of anything Jewish, even nonsense, is worthwhile."
Sisth version at http://shakti.trincoll.edu/~mendele/vol01/vol01.158
- The late Saul Lieberman is reported to have introduced him as follows: "Ladies and gentlemen, as you know, mysticism is nonsense but, as Professor Gershon Sholem will soon demonstrate, the study of nonsense is scholarship".
Seventh version at http://www.ushmm.org/research/center/publications/occasional/zipperstein_03/zipperstein.pdf
- ?Superstition? the distinguished Talmudist Saul Lieberman apparently declared (there are, it seems, several variants of this quotation), ?is nonsense, but the study of superstition is scholarship.?
Which version is right? Which should be used?
Kabbalah and Sufism
Can someone explain the differences and similarities with Sufism and Kabbalah? (Regardless of which religion they originated from.)
Thanks
Related links
Top visited
0 of
0 links
[no links posted yet]
>> place link >>
Discussion
Last posted
0 of
0 messages
[no messages posted yet]
>> post message >>
Watch
You can
add this article to your own "watchlist" and receive e-mail notification about all changes in this page.
