The
rare book room of the library of the Jewish Theological Seminary holds a
manuscript of Sefer Gematriaot, a fourteenth-century esoteric work, where the
following instructions can be deciphered.
‘Take virgin wax and make a
female figure with the sex organs clearly delineated and with the features of
the person you have in mind. Write on the breast X daughter of [father’s name]
and X daughter of [mother’s name] and on the back, between the shoulders write
the same and say over it, ‘May it be thy will God, that X daughter of [father’s
name] burn with a mighty passion for me. Then bury the figure and cover it completely
so that the limbs are not broken and leave it thus for 24 hours. Then bury it
under the eaves, being careful that no-one witnesses your acts and cover it
with a stone so that it does not break. When you disinter it, dip it carefully
in water three times so it is clean, once in the name of Michael, again in the
name of Gabriel and the third time in the name of Raphael, and immerse it in
some urine. Then dry it and when you wish to arouse passion in her pierce the
heart of the image with a new needle’[2]
I.
None of the cardinal works of
Conservative Theology has chapters on magic. Emet v'Emunah is silent on the subject, as is the Sacred Cluster.
The more popular theological works of Rabbis Gillman, Dorff, Jacobs, Kushner
and Gordis (senior and junior)[3]
likewise, have little to say on the subject. One gets the sense that a movement
that owes its origins to the schools of Historical Positivism and Wissenschaft des Judentums often feels
it has no need for a theology of magic. This, I argue, is both an error and a
shame.
Moses Mendelssohn, the father of
all breeds of progressive Judaism, believed the more rationally he was able to
explain Jewish behaviour and Jewish existence the more Jews and even non-Jews
would accept his claims. His pursuit of rationalism, echoed in the work of
Zecharias Frankel, left little room for the study of the mysterious and the
magical. Gershon Scholem spent a lifetime railing against what he perceived to
be the failure of non-Orthodox Jewry to devote serious effort to understanding
the mystical, but on those occasions when Wissenschaft
did enter the world of the esoteric, see for example Louis Ginzberg's extended
essay on 'Cabbalah' in the Jewish Encyclopaedia, the subject was treated much
as one might treat an area of Halachah such as sacrifices or ritual impurity.
The Conservative Movement views the mystical as a historical curiosity, rather
than a vibrant area of Judaism worthy of serious thought and capable of shaping
the way Jews lived their lives. A few mystically orientated Jews have landed in
the Conservative Movement, but they seem to have had a lonely time. Abraham
Joshua Heschel was an isolated figure and, more recently, Art Green left to try
and blend academic study and spiritual questing elsewhere. That said I know
that without a way of articulating a theology of magic my Judaism is weaker,
and I believe the same holds true for Conservative Jewry as a whole.
It is arguable that from the very
earliest days of Progressive Judaism the lack of an articulated mystical vision
has weakened the movement. It is well known that four of the children of Moses
Mendelssohn left Judaism for the Church. Until recently I had assumed that
since their Jewish practice had become so stripped of spirit they had drifted
into an equally spiritless Protestantism. While this was the case for Abraham
and Nathan Mendlessohn, Dorothea and Henrietta in fact joined, from a deep
longing for spiritual sustenance, the ritually intense Catholic Church. [4]
We see similar patterns today. While there are Jews who slip from spiritless
Judaism to spiritless atheism, many leave their mother faith to find spiritual
solace in Jesus, Eastern religions and even shamanism. Yet more leave
Conservative Jewish homes in search of richer spiritual pickings in Orthodoxy,
neo-Hasidism, Renewal and even the Kabbalah Learning Centre. This attempt to
articulate a theory of Jewish magic is indeed based on the same desire to
explain Jewish behaviour and Jewish existence that drove Mendelssohn. Where I
differ from Mendelssohn, however, is in his most basic assumption. Whereas
Mendelssohn believed the more rational he was able to articulate Judaism, the
more successful he would be, I believe the more capable I am of articulating
Judaism within the context of irrationality
the more effectively I will be able to function theologically.
The idea that this Universe
functions, at its very source, in an irrational manner is not a radical
statement. Since Kant's Critique of Pure Reason the idea that in its purest
form, we live in a world that is noumenal, non-phenomenolgical and indeed irrational
has become widely accepted. This philosophical underpinning is a gift to the
theologian. Even Isaac Breur, founder of Aggudat Yisrael, clearly understood
the implications of Kant's withering critique of rationality, he claimed 'every
real Jew who seriously and honestly studies the "Critique of Pure
Reason" is bound to pronounce his "Amen" on it.'[5]
Likewise the deep level irrationality of the Universe is recognised by pure
science. Quantum mechanics simply defies attempts to apply classical rational
rules to the behaviour of sub-atomic particles. Indeed we have reached a point
where Kabbalists like Daniel Matt can quote theoretical physicists such as
Steven Hawking and vice versa. All
this I take to be good news. Indeed there are even traces of irrational thought
in the corpus of works on Conservative Theology; the Creation of the Universe,
Sinai and theodicy are often 'explained' with a nod to the irrational, but this
is not enough. One cannot have a view of the Universe that is largely rational,
apart from the bits that are not. If there is a shred of irrationality that
exists in this Universe then all rationality is to be distrusted. The battle
between rationality and irrationality is not a fair fight. Irrationality has an
absolute advantage. The grains of irrationality articulated by Heisenberg and
Kant and recognised in classic theologies, particularly in the field of
theodicy, render untenable attempts to sentence our world to rationality.
Logic aside, it also feels somewhat
bizarre to restrict the application of the irrational to only long since passed
moments of mythic history and times of hardship (the election of Abraham and gift of revelation primary among them). The irrational, the mystical
and the magic have the ability to bring joy and excitement to our everyday
lives. We should not keep the nod to the irrational in a box only to be opened
when all other attempts to explain have failed, rather, we should treat the
irrational nature of the Universe as a primary source of theological succour.
In the course of this essay I
intend to define magic and show its place within the corpus of our tradition.
Secondly through an analysis of case studies, taken from disparate parts of the
Jewish tradition I intend to articulate some principles of magic that we, as
Conservative Jews, might be able to internalise into our own lives.
Two caveats; The sources analysed
in this paper are chosen not for their historisitic accuracy, but rather as
articulations of ways of thinking about the irrational, and the human's ability
to shape it. Secondly, this is not an academic paper, rather a personal quest.
The footnotes will not be of an academic standard and the argument cannot be as
watertight as one might hope for in, say, an academic dissertation. Rather this
is an attempt to end the sentence that should lie at the heart of all theological
endeavours, the sentence that begins, 'I believe …'.
II.
Thus far we
have been deliberately imprecise in the use of the terms irrational, mystical
and magical. Now we need a narrower focus. I intend, in this section, to
examine definitions of magic offered by modern anthropology and psychology. I
will attempt to illustrate these theoretical models with examples drawn from
the corpus of Jewish practice. In the next section I turn to examine Judaism's
self-confessed relationship with magic.
As a definition
of magic, I enjoy the articulation of Marcel
Mauss. For Mauss, magic 'is a giant variation on the theme of the principle of
causality'. [6]
An example will be helpful. Were I to lay my hand on a person's back their skin
would depress, this would be a standard consequence of the theme of the
principle of causation. If, as a result of my laying hands, the person
recovered from some illness, that would be a giant variation on this principle.
Of course, this articulation provides no way of gauging whether a particular
effect is indeed a 'giant variation' on the principle of causality and
therefore magic, or merely an oddity and therefore simply … an oddity, and
indeed I will return to this question of quantitative assessment of magic
later, but for now, I believe the articulation is helpful.
Magic,
therefore becomes a method of cheating the Universe. Science would suggest that
in order for a person to achieve effect E, he or she would need to access the
causal mechanisms A,B,C and D. Magic is the short cut, a way of moving directly
from A to E. Indeed, the idea of magic as short cut is well known to the Rabbis
of the Talmud. The term used is kifitsat haaretz. In BT Sanhedrin 95a-b we find Avishai, King David's General taking a shower. As he
washes his hair he sees blood and realizing his master is in grave danger he
jumps on David's horse and sets off to rescue his King. As he does so, the
Gemorah informs us, the ground collapses beneath him and by means of kifitsah he immediately arrives at his faraway destination and is able
to rescue the King from the clutches of his enemy.[7]
Another
key articulation is that of the father of modern anthropology, James Frazer.
According to Frazer there are two principles of magic, the first, the Law of
Similarity, claims that 'like produces like, or that an effect resembles its
cause.' The second, the Law of Contact or Contagion, claims 'things which have
once been in contact with one another continue to act on each other at a
distance after physical contact has been severed.'[8]
Both these principles are well known to Jewish practice. The act of smichah - the laying of hands - whether
it be on the goat to be sent to Azazel,[9]
or any of the various sacrificial animals catalogued in the opening chapters of
Leviticus, or even the action of conferring Rabbinic ordination (also called smichah)[10]
is predicated on the notion that touch imparts something from the toucher to
the touched. The notion of Contagion is established in quantum theory and also
documented in the field of twin studies,[11]
but let us also consider a less rigorously scientific example of the power of
touch. Surely anyone who has ever hugged or been hugged is aware of the
operation of the Law of Contagion, but is it right to call this magic? Again
our desire to retain clear distinctions between 'giant variation' and normal
operation is thwarted.
Examples
of attempts to influence by Similarity are also common in Jewish ritual. The
pouring of water during the temple celebration of the Festival of Succot[12]
seems an attempt to entice God into bringing rain for the Children of Israel by
acting in a similar way to the way we wish the heavens to respond. Likewise, we
can see in the mezuzah an attempt to
gain divine protection through mimicking the acts of the ancient Israelites on
the night the Angel of Death passed over their houses on the way to the houses
of the Egyptians. Indeed, the very language with which Jews explain ritual
suggests an awareness of the role of similarity. The word ta'm - taste - is used to express an almost homeopathic sense of
mimicking cosmic ideas through patterns of ritual observance. Reams of exegesis
are devoted to ascertaining tamei mizvot
the taste (or relevance) of the commandments, Shabbat therefore becomes a tam of the world to come and we observe
it mimicking the resting of the Divine on the seventh day. The word cneged,
literally meaning opposite, also lexicographically encodes a sense of the
mimicry that Jews perform in an attempt
to win Divine favour. Thus the four cups of wine at the Passover Seder are
explained to be cneged the four ways
in which the children of Israel
were rescued, saved, redeemed and taken out of Egypt.[13]
When we, as Jews, do an act cneged an
action of the Divine we have the opportunity to do more than merely encode as
ritual non-corporeal sensitivities, we have the option to attempt to influence
cosmic patterns through accessing the power of the Law of Similarity.
To articulations of Mauss and Frazer I wish to
restrict the scope of this essay further. At present, I am only interested in
magic as performed by human beings without ad
initio Divine causation. I do not consider God, in deciding to split and
splitting the Sea
of Reeds, to be a
magician, these ad initio Divinely
caused miracles are not our present field of concern. I also am not discussing
anything done on Divine fiat, God commands Moses to do something, he does it
and the effect appears magical. So be it, but I am exclusively interested in
those acts done by humans, inspired by human needs and human articulations.
This is not to say, as shall become clear, that I do not intend to address the
role of the Divine in magic.
III.
Judaism's self-confessed relation
to magic is complex. 'A witch you shall not permit to live', says Exodus,[14]
which sounds straightforward, until, in a discussion on that very verse the
Rabbis of the Talmud are revealed to be using variations of letters to mimic
the Divine act of Creation thereby creating a three-year-old calf which they
would eat for Shabbat dinner.[15]
We also gain a sense of the subtlety of the prohibition against witchery from
the counsel of the Sefer Gematriaot, here the
verse 'A witch you shall not permit to live' is suggested as an inscription for amulets to ward off
the magic of others! As Levinas explains in his discussion of the talmudic
episode of the magic creation of the calf[16]
the Rabbis seem far more concerned with expunging idol worship from the
Children of Israel than in removing from the individual human the ability to
shake the standard principle of cause and effect. Magic is to be prescribed
within acceptable borders of halachic monotheism, rather than proscribed out of
the tradition altogether.
Let
us consider the example of Elisha and the Shunamite woman. The wandering Elisha
regularly lodges with one particular couple when he visits Shunem. As
a mark of his gratitude for the couple's hospitality, he appears to arrange for
the childless pair to bear a son. One day however, the child dies and the
mother sends for Elisha demanding that he remedy the situation.
II Kings 4:32-35
Elisha came into the house,
and there was the boy, laid out dead on the couch. He went in, shut the door
behind the two of them, and prayed to HaShem.
Then he mounted [the bed], and placed himself over the child. He put his mouth
on his mouth, his eyes on his eyes, and his hands upon his hands, as he bent
over him. And the body of the child became warm. Then he stepped down, and
walked once up and down the room, then mounted and bent over him. Thereupon the
boy sneezed seven times and the boy opened his eyes.
In this episode we see a number of
issues illustrated clearly. We see Elisha making use of Similarity and
Contagion, breathing into the child and pressing against him. We note Elisha
calls on God using the tetragrammaton, thereby eliminating any suggestion of
idolatry. And we also see the normal function of the principle of cause and
effect is shattered, or do we? To the modern rational mind one could see in
this tale an exaggerated retelling of a case of Cardio-Pulmonary Resuscitation.
But is CPR magical? What are we to make of the medical ability to resuscitate -
the human power to raise the dead? Yet again we are challenged by the desire to
distinguish more clearly between 'giant variations' and standard unfolding of
the principle of causation. Maybe the problem, instead of gnawing at us, should
serve as an inspiration. I suggest
the willingness to look at the oddities in the world and be moved by the
gigantic nature of their oddness is close to what A. J. Heschel called radical
amazement. When we begin to see magic in the world, our appreciation of the
Universe and its ultimate cause is heightened. In this world where the power of
perception, the subjective, is the only thing we can, objectively, be sure of,
the ability to see magic in the world becomes not a mark of objective certainty
(how could it ever be?) rather an act of faith.
Another example will further flesh
out some of the themes I believe are present within the Jewish tradition. In Tractate Ta'nit the Rabbis discuss
reactions to tzarah sba al ha tzibor -
woes that fall on the community. With the exception of an excess of rain these
woes are responded to with a blast of the shofar. The Rabbis illustrate the
nature of this exception with a tale.
Mishna Ta'anit 3:8
Once the people said to Honi
the circle drawer, "Pray for rain to fall."
He replied, "Go and
bring in the Passover ovens so that they do not dissolve."
He prayed but no rain fell.
He drew a circle and stood
inside it and cried out, "Ribbono
shel 'olam, Master of the Universe, your children have turned to me because
they believe me to be as a member of your house; I swear by your great name that I will not
move from here until you have mercy on your children."
Rain then began to drip, he
said: It is not for this that I have prayed
but for rain (to fill) cisterns, ditches and caves.
The rain then began to come
down with great force and he said "This is not the rain I prayed for.
Rather rain of kindness, blessing and bounty."
Rain then fell in the normal
way until the Israelites in Jerusalem were forced to go up for shelter to the
Temple Mount because of the rain…Then Simeon Ben Shetah said top him, "if
you were not Honi I would excommunicate you, but what can I do to you who makes
demands of Ha-Makom, God and he accedes to your request,
like a son who makes demands of his father and he accedes to his request"
Again
we see the very definite placing of this magical act within the Jewish corpus, Ribbono shel 'olam and Ha-Makom are both unambiguously 'kosher' ways of referring to
the Divine. More importantly, we are also beginning to paint a picture of the
magician within Jewish tradition. Both Elisha and Honi demonstrate significant chutzpah. They both rail against a numb
acceptance of what appears to be the pre-ordained manner of unfolding of the
Universe. We should note how Honi's oath, astoundingly, serves to bind, not
Honi, but God![17]
Perhaps this is what makes us uncomfortable with tales
of magic. In many ways we, as humans, enjoy thinking of our lives as tiny and
meaningless. In the context of the Universe we are accomplished at believing we
are 'but dust and ashes,' but Judaism provides a second model of living one's
life in the context of the Universe - 'for indeed the entire world was created
for my sake.' With this sense of the centrality of the Human the magician feels
able to call on the world to be re-shaped around his or her demands. Jung
defines magic as 'an attempt to enslave to human will forces that are thought
to be beyond her control',[18]
but this begs the question - how powerful is the human will, what is the level
of our ability to act in the world? I suggest that magic is more than an
undifferentiated element of a broader mystical outlook on life, magic is the
articulation by action of a broad conception of the power of the human. I will
return to this idea.
We also see, in the tale of Honi, two other key
elements - the centrality of ritual and the beloved nature of the 'magician'. I will begin by focusing on the nature of
ritual. While kavanah - intentionality
and meditation play a role in other mystical practice, in magic the role of
ritual is elevated to particular heights. In both Honi and Elisha we have
articulations of a connection between ritual and the human exercise of cosmic
power. Ritual acts are keys by which humans obtain access to the cheating
mechanism of kfitsat ha'aretz. The
Han Philospher, Yang Hsiung (whose life coincided with the time of the
redaction of the Mishnah) articulates the potential of ritual particularly
well.
Tai Hsuan Ching - The Canon of Supreme Mystery
The good man learns to use ritual to effect a balance
in ever wider circles within the family and society at large...The ritual
act...partakes of divinity because it is categorically akin to the sacred
Mystery in its operation. As an unseen motive force behind profound social
change, the noble man mimics the cosmic mystery in its catalyzing activity.
Through ritual the noble man takes on divine aspects.
I shall come on to discuss the relationship between
these rituals and mainstream Jewish behavioral practice (halacha) later, but for at present I believe it is important to
stress a theology in which our ritual actions are more than illustrations of
our affiliation with the collective and more than the straightforward
fulfilment of God's commandment as understood through the law codes of our
tradition. Through ritual, we impact on forces that Jung suggests are beyond the
control of the human will. Through the observance of ritual, or mimicry of cosmic
mystery, the human cultivates the divine within him or herself.
In Jewish theology, these two ideas, the centrality of
the human and the divine aspect of ritual, are linked via the concept of tzelem elohim - the image of the Divine
present in every human. Masechet Sotah illustrates
the point particularly well. Jews are commanded to bury the dead and clothe the
naked, but the articulation of these commandments shows an awareness of these
two ideas.
BT Sotah 14a
What does the verse, 'You should walk after Hashem your God' (Deuteronomy 8:5) mean?…You should walk after
the attributes of the Holy One Blessed Be He. Just as He clothes the naked, as
it is written, 'And Hashem, God, made
coats of skin for Adam and his wife'
(Genesis 3:21) so
should you also clothe the naked. … The Holy One Blessed Be He buried the dead,
as it is written 'And He buried [Moses] in the valley' (Deuteronomy 34:6) so
should you bury the dead.
These ritual commands are made of us since we are
created btzelem elohim, through
fulfilling them we make ourselves closer to the Divine. Thus ritual becomes a
way of connecting to the essence of the Universe. Let us take the example of
ritual connecting Jews to the flow of time. The Harvest Festivals, the blessing
of the new moon, the marking of each morning and evening are all methods,
encoded within the Jewish tradition for enriching this connectedness within our
own lives.
As we become closer to the Divine so we begin to reach
an understanding of a third central element to the Honi narrative. In order for
us to access the cheating mechanism of magic we need to be beloved. In the Honi
tale, Honi is compared to a child of a Divine parent who, being loved, is able
to make demands of his father and have the father accede to the son's request.
It is through our use of divine mimicry in ritual, I argue, that humans can
come close to God and it is through our divine mimicry that we become beloved
and in turn this is how we begin to gain access to Divine powers.
Perhaps even more remarkable than Honi's action is the
fact that the tale is deemed worthy of inclusion in the Mishna. Simeon ben
Shettach is often considered the founding father of Pharisees, the representative
of Rabbinic orthodoxy in the pre-destruction era. He sees Honi as an affront to
Rabbinic piety. Hayim Lapin[19]
and William Scott Green paint a picture of Honi as an itinerant Magic man,
outside the cloistered world of Rabbinic scholarship,[20]
why then has this story been included? I suspect the editor of the Mishnah
shares the concern I outlined in the introduction to this essay. The Rabbis are
aware of the presence of the irrational in the Universe. They are aware that
there are competing claims made on the Jews, Christianity is offering its
understanding of the miracle worker and even the more rationally minded Rabbis
feel the need to allow a conception of magic to take its place in the earliest
redaction of the oral law. More interesting still is to see the Rabbinic
response to the tale in the centuries after its inclusion.
In the talmudic discussion of the tale we see Honi
becomes co-opted by the Rabbis, several folio and seventy years after the
potentially unrabbinic act of magic the Gemorah reports ‘the law is as clear to
us today as in the time of Honi The Circle Maker for when he came to the House
of Study he would settle for the scholars any difficulty they had.'[21]
We see a deliberate attempt to draw this tale of weirdness into the rational
world of Bet Midrash. Honi is rabbinised, Honi The Circle Drawer becomes Honi
the Rabbi. In the eyes of the tradition, we are to understand Honi to be God's
leading disciple on earth, and as such it is only to be expected that he should
be capable of performing magic. The Rabbis wrap up the actions of Honi in
halachic acceptability. In this Rabbinic wrap anything that increases the power
of the Jew to connect and thus impact on the world is brought within the fold
of acceptable Jewish action, as long as these actions are not perceived to be
idolatrous.
IV
As a final case study I wish to
look at what is probably the most quintessential and famous example of Jewish
magic, the Golem. In the light of the preceding analysis I believe we can gain
fresh theological insights from what might otherwise appear to be a mere fairy
story. In particular I am looking for an articulation of the extent of the
human will, an essential piece to our puzzle.
Leviticus Rabbah 29:1
In the first hour Adam
ascended in [God's] thought. In the second he discussed with the angels. In the
third he collected his dust. In the fourth he kneaded him. In the fifth he
formed him. In the sixth he made him a
Golem. In the seventh he blew in him the soul. In the eighth he put him in the
Garden of Eden.
The Golem is not a toy, made of
something that has nothing to do with the human, rather the primordial human
was a Golem before life was given to him/her. The idea is that the Golem is a
step along the way to creation of human, a step that an omnipotent God can
take, but man cannot. But we should see how capable a 'normal' human is, a
human can have thoughts, discuss, collect dust, knead and form. The mystical
literature goes on to suggest that particularly powerful humans can go on to
even the sixth step - the creation of a Golem. In the eyes of R Joseph ben
Shalom Ha-Arokh, Abraham and Sarah were such people, and like, every good
exegete, he has his scriptural evidence.
Commentary of R Joseph ben
Shalom Ha-Arokh on Sefer Yetzirah[22]
[Abraham and Sarah] combined
the letters and [were] successful in creating a creature [Golem] as it is said
"The soul they made in Haran"
(Gen 12:5).
The classic commentaries ad locum attempt to release us from this
beguiling pshat, 'the soul they made'
is interpreted as the converts Abraham and Sarah attracted, but the magical
reading is, it is submitted, a less forced read.[23]
We also have a view of the magical potential of the righteous when we examine
the context within which the Gemorah discusses the creation of a Golem,
Sanhedrin 65b
Raba said, if the righteous
desired it they could create the world as it says "for their sins separate
(mvdilim) you from God." (Isiah
59:2) Rabbah created a man and sent him to R. Zeira. He spoke to him and
received no answer. Therefore he said to him, you are a child of magicians,
return to your dust.
Jews are used to thinking that
Shabbat rest is mimicking God, but weekday malachah
is no less a copy. Just as the Shabbat is separated from the week by a hevdel, so too the human is separated
from God by a hevdel. The extent to
which this hevdel manifests itself in
any one of us is dependent how far we fall short of Godliness. Idel's own
analysis of the Golem tradition leads the normally conservative scholar to
speculate, 'Man is empowered ex definitio with creative forces that
are divine powers which cease to function only when he defiles his soul.'[24]
Practically, we humans are able to do many of the creative acts of God, but we
run out of creative ability at a certain point along the way to the full
creation of humanity as modelled by God.
V
We are now able to offer some
conclusions.
We have
discussed the irrationality of the Universe. I believe that if magic is irrational then this is not a case of magic being
apart from a rational world of knowledge, but rather the property of its very
foundation - a world of interconnectedness and irrationality. I believe that if
I see interconnectedness in all my actions, both rational and irrational, my
awareness of the power of my own actions is heightened.
We have discussed the non-discrete
nature of 'giant variations on the theme
of the principle of causality'. I suggested that when we start looking at the
world around us with the radical amazement demanded by A. J. Heschel, we begin
to see traces of magic in many places. I believe that my sensitivity and
willingness to believe in magic is conditioned by my ability to be radically
amazed by the world.
We have discussed the problem of finding a role for
God in a theology of magic. I have argued that the Rabbis wrapped up magic
inside borders of acceptability. Jewish magic is not an attempt to confront the
Divine by turning to other forms of ultimate power, rather an attempt to
imitate God, a testimony to the greatness of creation. I believe magic per se is no more idolatrous than, say,
prayer. I believe the encoded rituals of normative Jewish practice form a framework
for allowing the Jew to mimic the Divine and thereby become Godly. I believe
when I see halacha as a method of
mimicking the divine and becoming Godly I begin to see Jewish practice not as a
system of rules to be obeyed (or ignored) rather as a never perfect piece of
art which I can spend my life improving.
We have discussed the nature of the
Jewish magician and the extent of human power. I have argued human power comes,
in part, from the notion of the creation of the human in the image of the Divine
(we are after all only a hevdel
away). I have also argued that magical power arises out of a combination of chutzpah and belovedness or
righteousness. I believe 'the
magicality of human beings lies in [our] embodied passionate existence toward
others.'[25]
I believe my willingness to hurl myself into the maelstrom of
interconnectedness that is the world can force the world to listen. I believe
that my ability to love (be it love God, my fellow humans or the world around
us) is dependent on this belief in the power of a passionate existence.
Magic is not beyond us, as humans, it is merely the
edge of our power. It exists on both sides of the gap between God and human.
Again Yang Hsiung articulates the difference between Divine and human realms
particularly well.
Tai Hsuan Ching - The Canon of Supreme Mystery
The way of the heaven is a perfect compass. The way of
Earth is a perfect carpenters' square. The compass in motion describes a
complete circle through the site. The square, unmoving secures things [in their
proper place]. Circling through the sites makes divine light possible, securing
things makes congregation by type possible. Mystery is the way of the heaven,
the way of Earth and the way of Man.
At the meeting point between finite and infinite, the
meeting point between the heavens and the earth, the rational and the
irrational is mystery and magic. And yes, I do believe in magic.
[1] This
paper is based on material first taught at the
Limmud Jewish Education Conference in
Nottingham, England
in December 1999.
[2]
see
Trachtenberg, Jewish Magic and Superstition, p125
[3] Sacred Fragments, From our Ancestors to our
Descendants, We Have Reason to Believe, To Life!, Conservative Judaism and A
Still Small Voice
[4] See
Meyer,
Origins of the Modern Jew pp
89 and 101
[5] Quoted
in Salomon Ehrmann, 'Isaac Breur',
Guardians
of our Heritage, ed L. Jung 624f
[6] A General Theory of Magic
[7] The
notion of
kfitsat ha'aretz is also
applied to journeys of Eliezar (servant of Abraham) and Jacob
ad loc.
[8] In
The Golden Bough, Frazer takes twelve
volumes to fully outline his theory. What follows is, for reasons of brevity,
can only be a sketch of how these laws apply in Judaism.
[10]
Rabbinic ordination, by virtue of the laying of hands, died out in the
aftermath of the destruction of the Second Temple, but see Jacob Katz's essay
on 'The Dispute Between Jacob Berab and Levi ben Habib Over Renewing
Ordination' in
Divine Law in Human Hands.
[11] S
ee the work on separated identical
twins in Male and Male, Studies in
Genetics
[13] BT
Pesachim 99b Rashi DHM
arba' cosot
[14] Exodus
22:17, see also Deuteronomy 18:10-14
[15] BT
Sanhedrin 67b. Note the use of the root form
bra - creation, a term that specifically refers to Divine action.
[16] Nine Talmudic Readings
[17] Lieberman in, Greek in Jewish Palestine 108 n85 recognizes that 'if a Jew wished
to adjure an angel in an incantation he might instead bind himself by an oath
according to which the angel should and will act. If the angel acts differently
he causes himself to perjure himself, which is not compatible with piety.' But
this seems a step beyond this possibility.
[19] 'Rabbis
and Public Prayers for Rain in Later Roman Palestine' in
Religion and Politics in the Ancient Near East, ed
Berlin
[20] The
nature of Holy Men in Antiquity is a hotly contested subject for academic
debate. See Richard Kalmin's paper 'Holy Men, Rabbis and Demonic Sages in Late
Antiquity' presented at a recent conference held at JTS.
[22] I found
this reference in Moshe Idel's
Golem
[23] Idel,
in
Golem, is convinced esoteric
Jewish tradition considered Abraham a maker of Golems, this commentary is
however his only textual proof.
[25] An
articulation of Bruce Kapferer,
Feast of
the Sorcerer
Posts
