From Divine Names To Dolphins and Sexual PDF

Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION 3
PART I 8
LANGUAGE AND HIGHER KNOWLEDGE: A CONTRIBUTION TO

THE DEMARCATION OF WESTERN ESOTERICISM AND
KABBALAH 8
1. A DISCUSSION OF VAGUE TERMINOLOGIES 8

1.1 The Concept of Western Esotericism 8
1.2 Defining Kabbalah 24

1.2.1 The Symbolic World of the Sefirot 24
1.2.2 The quest for a Definition 26
1.2.3 Kabbalah and Gnosticism 33
1.2.4 Summary 36
1.3 Mysticism or Esotericism. An Attempt at Clarification 37
1.4 Kabbalah and Western Esotericism 46
2. THE CONCEPT OF LANGUAGE IN MEDIEVAL KABBALAH 50

2.1 The Language of Creation 50
2.2 Language as Higher Knowledge 56
2.3 Gates of Light 61
2.4 The Fountain of Wisdom 68
3. CONCLUSION OF PART 1 74
PART II 80
CONTEMPORARY KABBALAH: A NEW (?) FIELD OF STUDY 80
4. INTRODUCTION TO PART II 80
5. KABBALAH IN WESTERN ESOTERIC TRADITIONS: 81
A VERY SHORT OVERVIEW 81
6. THE ACADEMIC STUDY OF CONTEMPORARY KABBALAH 91
7. THE KABBALAH CENTRE 94

Table of Contents
7.1 A General Presentation 94
7.2 The Red String and its cosmological framework 101
7.3 The 72 Names of God 104
7.4 The Zohar 110
7.5 Kabbalah or New Age, Religion or Spirituality? 115
7.6 Summary 117
8. THE KAMADON ACADEMY AND THE MELCHIZEDEK

METHOD 118
9. THE GNOSTIC TEACHINGS OF SAMAEL AUN WEOR 122

9.1 Sexual Magic and Apocalyptic 122
9.2 Kabbalah in the doctrine of synthesis of Weor 126
9.3 Summary 129
10. ERWIN NEUTZSKY-WULFF AND THE NEUROLOGICAL

LANDSCAPE OF THE SEFIROT 129
10.1 A General Theory of Religion and Reality 130
10.2 Religion as Sexuality/ Sexuality as Religion 133
10.3 Neutzsky-Wulff and Kabbalah 137
10.4 The Occult Connection 141
10.5 New Age Nonsense or Creative Interpretation 144
11. CONCLUSION OF PART II 146
12. FINAL DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIVE WORDS 148
BIBLIOGRAPHY 155
References to websites 168
The Kabbalah Centre 168
The Kamadon Academy 169
Samael Aun Weor 169
RÉSUMÉ 170
Introduction
Introduction
This thesis places itself in the midst of a crossroad of different

academic discursive fields, primarily those of “Kabbalah” and “Western
esotericism”, and secondly that of “mysticism”. As a result of this quite
fluid foundation, the first part of the thesis will aim at clarifying the
necessary concepts. The main argument in this first part is that
Kabbalah is an umbrella term covering a wide range of texts and
practices, of which there are different discursive strategies, some
esoteric and some mystical, just to name the two relevant for the
present thesis.
I will argue that Kabbalah to a large extend can be studied as part of
Western esotericism. As will be shown, I see Western esotericism as a
discursive strategy implying a claim of higher knowledge and in the
kabbalistic texts analysed in the last chapters of Part I, this higher
knowledge is identified with the proper knowledge of language. Thus,
in these texts, the conception and use of language becomes itself an
esoteric discourse.
An important clarification is to state from the beginning that when I
use the terms mysticism or (Western) esotericism, they do not imply
any empirical value: I use these terms only as heuristic tools, as
scholarly constructs necessary for conceptualizing and analyzing the
historical evidence. None of the terms should be seen as essential, sui
generis phenomena. Likewise, the definitions proposed should be seen as
working definitions and are thus neither universal nor final.
Before turning to a discussion of the crucial concepts for the present

thesis, it is necessary to give a brief explanation of my general
epistemological foundation. Since the main problems presented in this
thesis are of definitorial and terminological character, it is important to
demarcate the epistemological premises for such a pursuit though it will
-3-
Introduction
by no means be an exhaustive attempt. As a point of departure,

Jonathan Z. Smith twenty years ago called for an adequate theoretical
foundation for the general study of religion. He argued that without a
proper theoretical foundation the academic study of religion would
stagnate and this general theory had to be built upon purely theoretical
grounds1. This does not only concern the definition of “religion” per se
but the very approach to the study of religion and to the quest of
definition2. A scholar who has taken up the proposal by Smith is Jeppe
Sinding Jensen. His approach to the study of religion in general serves
as the epistemological basis for the present thesis. In his doctoral thesis
Jensen strives to clarify the epistemological foundations of the study of
religion. Problems with the relationship between explanation and
interpretation, between metaphysics and rationality and between
semantics and references are widely discussed in the search for an
answer to the problem of the ontological status of cultural expressions
like religious utterances in the broadest sense. No clear answers are
given, but the necessity of addressing the questions and the importance
of an ongoing self-reflection of these issues is highly stressed, as to
maintain a raison d’être for the study of religion. Jensen explains both
the religious and the academic ontology as being constructions. What
then, is the difference between these models? Where the religious
models emphasize their statements about the world as being true
mirrors of the ‘actual’ world, scientific models are precisely
characterized by their explicit dependency on theory and their
acknowledgement of themselves as being mere models 3 . Generally
Jensen argues that religion can only be construed as a theoretical object
1 Smith: Imagining Religion ch. 2.

2 For a comprehensive account of the problem of definition within the study of religion see
Platvoet: ’The Definers Defined’. Platvoet also offers an extensive bibliography to the
subject, and though I do not agree with his definition of religion, the article provides a good
overview of the problem. However, it should be noted that the article is from 1990 an as
such does not present the current state of research. A more recent and elaborate work is
Platvoet and Molendijk (eds.): The Pragmatics of Defining Religion.
3 Jensen: The Study of Religion, part II.
-4-
Introduction
by looking at it as a semantic system4 – religion is a method for people,

as social beings, to construe their world. As such, religion is a semantic
phenomenon made up of both cognitive and semiotic aspects and thus
cannot be reduced to either of those but is to be found where they
meet, that is, in language5.
The emphasis on the theoretical character of both scholarly models and
the subject matter is extremely important when we address the question
of clear terminology and definitions. As Jensen states:
I propose to view definitions in the human sciences as

‘generalized interpretations’. In the study of religion that
would amount to an understanding of ‘definition’ as ‘the
construction of an image of religion from a set of
metaphors that have a certain degree of precision. But at
the same time flexibility and openendedness’. To make the
long story even shorter: Definitions are the shortest possible
versions of theories. That is, definitions are no better than the
theories they are based on. So, what we may formally ask
of a theory is that it is backed by explicit theorizing […]
All we demand is that theories are complementary and not
contradictive and that it is clearly indicated at what level
the definition and its associated theorizing operates on6.
The consequences I draw from Jensen’s approach are as follows: 1) A

general theory of religion must be meta-theoretical and construed from
a purely theoretical foundation. 2) Definitions can be made on different
taxonomical levels and should be theoretically construed accordingly.
Thus a general definition of religion has to be independent of historical
4 Jensen: The Study of Religion, p. 420.

5 Another scholar who should be mentioned in this context is Gavin Flood who, as Jensen,
argues for the importance of focusing on language in religious studies. Flood, however, has
another approach than Jensen in that he argues for the necessity for a dialogical relationship
between the academic research and the subject matter. This, he argues, would imply a
consciousness of both being imbedded in a socio-historical context and give the scholar a
position from “elsewhere rather than the view from nowhere” (Flood: Beyond Phenomenology p.
223). He rightly observes that perfect objectivism is impossible and thus the scholar should
rather be explicitly aware of his/her own position. However he does take this implication a
bit too far in his emphasis on the inclusion of the social, cultural historical and political
context of both scholar and the object of study. If this was to be fully implemented, one
would hardly get to the actual subject of inquiry.
6Jensen: The Study of Religion p. 63. (emphasis by Jensen).
-5-
Introduction
evidence and construed on a strictly theoretical background. This is also

the case with concepts which are merely scholarly constructs such as
Western esotericism and mysticism. The question of how to define
Kabbalah is more complex since the concept of Kabbalah comprises
both a historical group of texts and persons on one hand and a
scholarly construct on the other.
The theoretical foundation should be seen as an epistemological outset
that makes it possible to arrive at a proper methodology for researching
historical realities. This strictly theoretical approach to definitions is
what the following discussions of Western esotericism, Kabbalah and
mysticism should be viewed against. What I hope to do in the following
chapters of part 1 is to clarify the problematic epistemological status of
some of the prevalent definitions and more or less arbitrary uses of the
terms and try to arrive at theoretically adequate definitions so as to
demarcate the different fields.
Conclusively, I will analyze two medieval kabbalistic texts in order to
exemplify my theoretical statements. This part should provide the
foundation for the following discussion of the incorporation of
kabbalistic discursive elements in the construction of traditions in
contemporary esoteric movements.
The second part of the thesis is devoted to the study of contemporary
Kabbalah in its various guises. In order to follow the connection from
the Medieval Jewish Kabbalah I will first present a short overview of
the role of Kabbalah in Western esotericism. Secondly a short chapter is
devoted to the status of the academic study of contemporary Kabbalah.
As it will be demonstrated the shortness of the chapter is not due to
laziness from my side but rather the fact that the study of contemporary
Kabbalah has been much neglected both within the study of religion in
general and in Jewish studies in particular. Finally I will include an
exemplary analysis of an eclectic selection of contemporary groups and
persons which use Kabbalah as a part of their teachings. As will be
-6-
Introduction
shown, these movements are very different in practice, religious

objective, target group and, most important for the present discussion,
their perception of Kabbalah and the extent to which Kabbalah play a
role in their traditions.
The main purpose of the thesis is thus fourfold:
• To arrive at an adequate terminology for the study of Western
esotericism and Kabbalah.
• To argue that Kabbalah is indeed an integrated part of the field
of Western esotericism.
• To show how language functions as higher knowledge in
medieval Kabbalah.
• To introduce contemporary Kabbalah as a worthy field of study.
-7-
A Discussion of Vague Terminologies
Part I
Language and Higher Knowledge: A
Contribution to the Demarcation of
Western Esotericism and Kabbalah
1. A Discussion of Vague Terminologies

In this chapter I will make an effort to disentangle and clarify the key
terms of the thesis in order to provide an adequate analytical
framework. This is highly important since much usage of the terms
“esotericism”, “Kabbalah” and “mysticism” happens without any
considerations of what he terms imply. Thus the following discussion
will imply a critical examination of the different attempts to define and
approach the different concepts.
1.1 The Concept of Western Esotericism

As the field of Western esotericism becomes a more and more accepted
and integrated part of the study of religion, new problems and
questions seem to emerge. It is hardly necessary anymore to argue the
relevance and academic purpose of the field. Rather, the focus is now
an attempt at reevaluating the foundations and demarcations of the
field of Western esotericism.
Several problems present themselves in many of the prevailing
definitions of Western esotericism. As such, the case is no different
than with other ambiguous concepts such as gnosticism and mysticism
- or religion for that case, just to take a few relevant examples.
Esotericism is not a sui generis phenomenon but a scholarly construction.
That is, a heuristic tool for analyzing a certain set of historical evidence
which seems to share some discursive similarities.
-8-
Western esotericism was made a more or less independent field of

study with the efforts of Frances Yates in the 1960’s. Until then,
esotericism was mainly studied as equivalent to mysticism or “gnosis”
by the scholars of the respective fields 7, such as Gershom Scholem,
Carl Gustav Jung, Henry Corbin and Mircea Eliade, who were also part
of the Eranos circle8. The work of these scholars within the Eranos
circle can be seen as part of an attempt to oppose the prevailing
“disenchantment of the world”, an attempt that was to be continued by
Yates.
To Yates, Western esotericism was conceived of as the “Hermetic
Tradition”, which she saw as an extremely influential though neglected
undercurrent in Renaissance Western culture9. She even argued that the
revival of hermetic philosophy was crucial for the development of
modern science10 and that this philosophy also played a major role on
the political scene in the first half of the 17th century11. The most
important part of Yates’ approach to esotericism was that she
considered it a worthy object of study and did not dismiss it as
“superstition”. It is problematic though that she saw the “Hermetic
Tradition” as almost equal in importance to the mainstream of Western
culture. However, as Wouter Hanegraaff has showed, her narrative fell
within the current research paradigm of her time12. The influential
works by Yates opened up the contemporary study of Western
esotericism, which until recently has been dominated by Antoine Faivre.
Faivre, himself being part of the Eranos circle, also adopted the
7 See Stuckrad: ’Esotericism’, p. 607.

8 The Eranos Circle has flourished as an academic and spiritual group since 1933. For a study
of the role of the above mentioned scholars in the Eranos, see Steven M. Wasserstrom:
Religion afterReligion. Wasserstrom argues for the influence of esoteric and especially masonic
ideas on at least Eliade, Corbin and Scholem (p. 38-49). For the role of Eranos particular
within the study of esotericism see Hans Thomas Hakl: Der verborgene geist van Eranos. See also
Hanegraaff: ‘Beyond the Yates Paradigm’ for a critical approach to both the Eranos circle and
Frances Yates.
9 Hanegraaff: ‘Beyond the Yates Paradigm’, p. 18-21.
10 Yates: Giordano Bruno and ‘The Hermetic Tradition’.
11 Yates: The Rosicrucian Enlightenment.
12 Hanegraaff: ’Beyond the Yates Paradigm’, p. 17-18.
-9-
religionist views prevalent in the group, a point that has later been
subject to critique 13 . It should be pointed out however, that the
religionist writings of Faivre are restricted to the earlier part of his
scholarship. Also, I will maintain that the importance of the works by
Yates and Faivre for the establishment of the academic study of
Western esotericism cannot be overemphasized. Thus the following
critical discussion should mainly be seen as aimed at the problem in
question of the present thesis; namely the inclusion of Kabbalah in the
demarcation of Western esotericism. It is the theoretical frameworks
proposed by these scholars which are under scrutiny here and not their
contributions in general.
Overall, Faivre regards Western esotericism as a certain “form of
thought”14 that can be identified through six characteristics of which
the first four are intrinsic and the last two secondary for a certain
phenomenon to belong to the field of Western esotericism. These can
be summarized as follows15:
1. Correspondences. The idea that all parts of the universe are

connected and influence each other.
2. Living Nature. That a kind of living soul embodies all of nature;
closely connected to the theory of correspondance and an
important element of the magia naturalis of the Renaissance.
3. Imagination and Mediations. Imagination is necessary to reveal and
use mediations, both ritualistic and mediating entities.
4. Experience of Transmutation. An experience of the complete
metamorphosis of the self, resulting in a collapse between
subject and object.
5. The Praxis of Concordance. The idea that different sets of teachings
fundamentally are connected.
6. Transmission. That the esoteric teaching has to be passed on from
an authorized master.
To designate Western esotericism as a “form of thought” has the

unfavourable risk of implying a notion of essentialism. And
13 McCalla: ’Antoine Faivre’.

14 Faivre: Access, p.10.
- 10 -
furthermore Faivre’s theory is developed from certain religious currents

in a specific historical and geographical location, that is, Christian
Western Europe in the Renaissance and early Modern period. This
means that the foundation of the definition is of empirical character
and not theoretical and general, the result being a tautology where the
different taxonomical levels get mixed up.
As stated in the introduction, a theoretically valid general typology must
necessarily be ahistorical. Compared to this, the definition proposed by
Faivre can be designated as an example of historical essentialism.
To demarcate the field of Western esotericism to a group of historically
related currents, like Antoine Faivre does, results in the problem of
distinguishing exactly where this relation ends. To Faivre the Christian
kabbalists of the Renaissance are central to the field of Western
esotericism, whereas their sources of inspiration, the Jewish kabbalists,
are not. This shows a conscious choice and a certain perception, not
only of the concept of esotericism, but certainly also of “Western” as a
cultural category. This choice implies a monolithic view of European
culture and neglects the plurality of the society: it does not refer to
“Western” as a merely geographical delimitation but as a certain cultural
and religious entity strictly connected to Christianity. As Faivre states:
En fait, Faivre avait seulement entendu, par choïx de

méthode, traiter d’un ’Occident visité par le judaïsme et
l’Islam’, donc majoritairement pénétré (jusqu’au XXe
siècle) de christianisme16.
According to Faivre this ought to show his acknowledgement of

Europe as religiously pluralistic. But on the contrary it demonstrates
exactly how Faivre does not recognize Judaism and Islam as important
factors in constituting European culture when he claims that Judaism
15 The full description can be found in Faivre: Access: p. 10-15 and Faivre and Needleman:
Modern Esoteric Spirituality, p. xiv-xxii.
16 Faivre: ‘Kocku von Stuckrad’, p. 208. (Emphasis by Faivre).
- 11 -
and Islam are only visitors on the European scene17. As a contrast to

Faivre’s monolithic perception of Western culture we find the position
of Kocku von Stuckrad who suggests a threefold approach to the
appreciation of a pluralistic Western culture and the study of
esotericism within this conceptual framework:
First, religious pluralism and the existence of alternatives

are the normal case, rather than the exception, in the
history of Western culture; second, Western culture has
always been characterized by a critical reflection on
religious truth claims and the interaction between different
cultural systems (such as religion, science, art, literature,
politics, law, economics, etc.); third, competing ways of
attaining knowledge of the world is a key to understanding
the role of esotericism in Western discourse18.
I will return to Stuckrad’s approach shortly, however, first I will present

another example of the monolithic perception of Western culture as it
was stated by Faivre. This is paradoxically exposed by Monika
Neugebauer-Wölk, who on the one hand argues for viewing esotericism
as an independent tradition opposed to Christianity, but on the other
shows an explicit Christocentric approach to Western culture19. She
proposes five thematic fields within esotericism in order to show its
opposition to Christianity: 1) ‘Transgression of holy scriptures’,
denoting the dependency on non-Christian sources for esoteric
knowledge. 2) This knowledge becomes the foundation for the self
understanding of early modern esotericism as being the ‘true
17 For a discussion and refutation of the narrative of a monolithic Christian West see
Meyerson and English (eds.): Christians, Muslims, and Jews; Nederman: Worlds of Difference and
Popkin (ed.): Jewish Christians.
I do contend that Western Europe is and has been dominantly Christian. However, while
recognizing this, it is still possible to see other cultural input as inherent to the social reality of
Western Europe, thus shifting the focus from cultural plurality to cultural pluralism. There is a
subtle but important difference between seeing Western culture as 1)“Christian pluralistic”
where “Christianity” is a broad cultural system that can even encompass rivaling religious
systems, or 2) pluralistic but dominantly Christian. This gives the rivaling religious systems a
more autonomous status even being minorities, a fact that I find of immense importance.
18 Stuckrad: ’Esoteric Discourse’.
- 12 -
Christianity’ 20 . 3) ‘Realisation and worldly power’, indicating that

exertion of power is ‘an integral part of esoteric religiosity’. 4)
Interpretations of Christ which are ‘incompatible with the Christian
system of meaning’. 5) The notion of ‘invisible church and secret
society’ which is opposed to the public nature of both church and
society in institutionalized Christianity21. The problem of identifying
Christianity with only the confessionalized and institutionalized
churches is noted by both Wouter Hanegraaff 22 and Kocku von
Stuckrad who concludes:
Even taken as an ideal typical point of departure,

Neugebauer-Wölk’s model subscribes to a theological or
even heresiological discourse of purity and difference. The
crucial problem of this Christocentric approach is the total
neglect of non-Christian traditions in Western culture, a
neglect that is all the more remarkable since Jewish and
Muslim mysticism had an enormous influence on the
development of Western esotericism, however defined23.
Hanegraaff’s own approach to the field of Western esotericism is a bit

more ambiguous than the ones presented by Faivre and Neugebauer-
Wölk. This is due to a much more explicit development within his
writings, a development that shows his change in attitude towards
Western culture in general and Western esotericism in particular.
In Hanegraaff’s entry on ‘esotericism’ in the Dictionary of Gnosis and
Western Esotericism it becomes clear that he is willing to extend Faivre’s
approach to Western esotericism in time, that is back to antiquity and
forward to the presence instead of restricting the period to the
Renaissance and the early Modern period. Still, culturally Hanegraaff
19 Neugebauer-Wölk: ’Esoterik’. See Stuckrad’s discussion of Neugebauer-Wölk in Stuckrad:

‘Western Esotericism’, p. 83-84.
20 As Stuckrad rightfully notes it is difficult to see how ‘the esoteric claim to represent ‘true
Christianity’ fits the argument that esotericism stands outside Christianity’ (Stuckrad: Western
Esotericism, p. 83, n. 15).
21 Neugebauer-Wölk: ’Esoterik’, p. 137-143 and Stuckrad: ‘Western Esotericism’, p. 83-84.
22 Hanegraaff: ’The Dreams of Theology’.
- 13 -
wields a notion of “Western” that implies a Christian or Christian

secularized cultural milieu 24. This gives an ambiguity regarding the
relation between Kabbalah and Western esotericism:
In said dictionary “Kabbalah” is only described in the entry ‘Jewish
Influences’25. However, as Hanegraaff states in his introduction to the
dictionary, the exclusion of Jewish and Islamic esotericism is only due
to pragmatic reasons, since the two fields have already achieved general
academic recognition compared to the field of Western esotericism26.
So there “is” a Jewish esotericism, but whether this is seen as included
or excluded in the notion of Western esotericism is unclear.
In response to Faivre, the approach proposed by Hanegraaff
emphasizes a methodological agnosticism and his proposed and applied
historical-empirical methodology is unimpeachable27. He emphasizes
that the field of Western esotericism can only be a field of study when it
is construed as such by the scholars studying “it”28. It should be seen as
intermingled with Western culture and religion in general, as an
integrated but underestimated and under-studied dimension29. This far
Hanegraaff’s approach is irreproachable and my current criticism
should be viewed solely as aimed at his attitude towards the
demarcation and definition of Western esotericism and not towards his
methodology.
When it comes to the pre-enlightenment period Hanegraaff still clings
to the Christian cultural demarcation of Western esotericism as
presented by Faivre:
In the end, to study pre-Enlightenment manifestations of

Western esotericism means quite simply to study pre-
23 Stuckrad: ’Western Esotericism’, p. 84.

24 Hanegraaff: ‘Esotericism’, p. 337-340. See also ibid.: ‘Empirical Method’ p. 122-123 and
ibid.: New Age Religion p. 384-386.
25 Hanegraaff (ed.): Dictionary p. 633-647.
26 Hanegraaff: ‘Introduction’, p. xii.
27 See especially Hanegraaff: ‘Empirical Method’ and ibid.: New Age Religion.
28 Hanegraaff: ‘The Study of Western esotericism’, p. 489.
29 Hanegraaff: ‘The Study of Western esotericism’, p. 511.
- 14 -
Enlightenment Christian culture while concentrating on

dimensions which have not yet received sufficient
attention30.
Even though Christianity for Hanegraaff is used in its broadest possible

sense, it still reduces Western esotericism to a strictly Christian
phenomenon, once again showing a Christocentric perception of the
West. Furthermore, Hanegraaff when speaking about “manifestations
of Western esotericism” does exactly what he argues against, namely
transforming Western esotericism from a purely scholarly construct to
historical phenomena31. A more nuanced view is found in the later
article ‘Forbidden Knowledge’ where Hanegraaff argues:
The field of study referred to as “Western esotericism” is

the historical product of a polemical discourse, the
dynamics of which can be traced all the way back to the
beginnings of monotheism. Moreover, it is in the terms of
this very same discourse that mainstream Western culture
has been construing its own identity, up to the present
day32.
Still, Western esotericism as a discourse is confused with historical

reality, as it is presented as a “product of a polemical discourse” instead
of a discourse in itself. Furthermore Hanegraaff notes that Western
esotericism should be understood as
a general label for certain specific currents in Western

culture that display certain similarities and are historically
related33.
As noted by Stuckrad this is a very vague approach due to the double

use of “certain” 34 . So even though Hanegraaff emphasizes the
30 Hanegraaff: ‘The Study of Western esotericism’, p. 511. Hanegraaff’s delimitation of

Western esotericism has been altered since the writing of this article. Now he does include
Jewish Kabbalah into the notion of Western esotericism (private communication, July 2007).
31 I do not mean to imply any notion of essentialism in the quotation, I only wish to point
out the problem of confusing typological and historical categories.

32 Hanegraaff: ‘Forbidden Knowledge’, p. 226.
33 Hanegraaff: ‘Esotericism’, p. 337.
- 15 -
constructed state of Western esotericism, an ambiguity in the relation

between typology and historical reality prevails. In Hanegraaff’s most
recent publications he explicitly rejects “Faivre’ian” approaches to
Western esotericism when he argues:
…it is becoming less and less convincing to see western

esotericism as a quasi-coherent and more or less self-
contained “tradition”, “counter-culture”, or “subcurrent”
that can be defined by pitting it against “mainstream”
currents or traditions such as Christian theology, rational
philosophy or empirical science. Nor, or so I would argue,
does the new emerging perspective sit very well with
looking at esotericism along phenomenological lines, as a
quasi-essentialist “form of thought” which is in fact
defined by its very contrast with that of a “disenchanted“
secular worldview (and is hence incapable of accounting
for processes of secularization in western esotericism since
the eighteenth century). Instead, what we presently see
emerging in the work of an increasing number of scholars
is an emphasis on the complexity of western culture as a
pluralistic field of competing religious and ideological
entities and on western esotericism as an analytical concept
(not a descriptive category) which brings that situation into
focus by systematically highlighting religious and cultural
dimensions that have traditionally been marginalized as
“other”35
This turn towards cultural complexity and the stating of “Western

esotericism” as an analytical tool and the consequent rejection of any
notion of essentialism is fundamentally correct. However, when
Hanegraaff combines this attitude with his notion of Western
esotericism as a product of what he terms the “Grand Polemical
Narrative” I find that he again confuses the different categories and
reinstate the analytical category “Western esotericism” into the status of
a “more or less self-contained counterculture”. And this is exactly what
he wants to avoid. I believe that the problem lies in the concept of the
34 Stuckrad: ‘Western Esotericism’, p. 79. However the use of “certain” would for Snoek be a
way to mark out the “fuzzy” character of the classes involved in the definition. See Snoek:
‘Defining ‘Rituals’’, esp. p. 12-14. In my opinion this is only useful in the process of making a
definition and not in the “final” solution.
- 16 -
“Grand Polemical Narrative”. It was developed in his article ‘Forbidden

Knowledge’ and denotes the above mentioned polemical discourse
which is seen as the monotheistic rejection of the “pagan other” or
what he in a later article terms “cosmotheism”:
In sum: I suggest that the construction of a “pagan other”

has been the first step—and arguably the most crucial
one—in the development of a “grand narrative” of
Western religion, culture and civilization. This narrative of
“who, what and how we want to be” relies upon a concept
of who, what and how we do not want to be: pagan, or
associated with anything pagan. But regardless of such
wishes, as a matter of historical fact paganism is and
always has been part of what we are: it is an integral part of
Western religion, culture and civilization, and cannot be
separated from what lived Christianity has been from the
very beginning. This fact, however, could not be openly
acknowledged, or even be allowed to surface into
conscious awareness; and as a result, a “space” was created
in the collective imagination that was occupied by the
pagan “other”. In the course of a long development, this
space eventually developed into what we now refer to as
Western esotericism36.
Thus, according to Hanegraaff Western esotericism is the historical

outcome of the “Grand Polemical Narrative”37 a narrative which he
lately has connected to the role of images in Western cultural history.
He argues that an anti-image discourse can be found at the very core of
the “Grand Polemical Narrative” and by examining this discourse we
can get to the central point of what the “Grand Polemical Narrative”
and thus Western esotericism is all about38. This is heavily criticized by
Stuckrad who replies:
That Hanegraaff is turning away from typological

approaches based on content and ideas and that he instead
35 Hanegraaff: ’The Trouble With Images’, p. 108-109.
36 Hanegraaff: ’Forbidden Knowledge’, p. 234.
37 Hanegraaff: ’The Trouble With Images’, p. 109.
38 Hanegraaff: ’The Trouble With Images’, p.113.
- 17 -
explores the structures that underlie European history of

culture is interesting and opens new perspectives.
However, in my view the construction of what is
pathetically called a ‘Grand Polemical Narrative’ is
misleading. Claiming ‘complexity’ in the study of
European history and religion certainly is correct; but the
simplification and reduction to an imagined polemical
narrative is the opposite of complex analysis39.
The identification of the “Grand Polemical Narrative” leads Hanegraaff

to see the “mission” of the academic study of Western esotericism as
analyze and deconstruct the strategies of the “Grand Polemical
Narrative” in order to correct the misleading pictures of Western
cultural history as they are implied within the polemical discourse and
to replace them with ‘others that more adequately reflect the historical
evidence’ 40 . Though I can to a large extend agree with the basic
assumption of an ideal objectivism in the academic study of Western
esotericism (and all other academic pursuits for that matter), I cannot
help to find this missionary statement rather naïve and simplistic since
implicit in the declaration lays a tendency to see the scholar of Western
esotericism as the saviour of the critical historical analysis and
presentation of Western culture. Furthermore, Hanegraaff fails to
take the utmost consequence of his own theory which would be that we
can never fully differentiate between mnemohistory and historiography.
As he himself notes:
This difference is crucial because often our memories are

misleading and factually incorrect, both on the individual
and the collective level: they are not “photographic
reflections” of what actually happened, but highly selective
social constructs41.
39 Stuckrad: ’Esoteric Discourse’, p. 12.

40 Hanegraaff: ‘The Trouble With Images’, p. 111.
41 Hanegraaff: ’The Trouble With Images’, p.111.
- 18 -
Now I can fully agree with this statement, however I do not believe that
there is any way out of this problem. Certainly, it is important to be
aware of the notion of history as a social construct but it is naïve to
believe that historiography can fully avoid this. Admittedly, Hanegraaff
lessens the radicalism of an entirely objective historiography in his
description of the term as an ‘attempt to describe, as accurately as
possible, what actually happened’ 42 . Still his agenda seems rather
unrealistic:
My agenda, by contrast [to mnemohistory] is

historiographical throughout: my concern is with pointing
out how traditional historiography has been continuously
influenced and conditioned – indeed, one might say,
contaminated – by normative concepts, assumptions, and
terminologies rooted in the Grand Polemical Narrative,
frequently leading to “false” or “artificial” memories of
our own past which are simply not supported by the
historical evidence. No dimension has suffered from the
resulting distortions more severely than western
esotericism. The ultimate goal is therefore to break the
power that traditional mnemohistorical constructs exert
over historiography, in the interest of a more neutral, less
prejudiced, and factually more accurate perspective43
Now this is not only naïve in its idealism, it is bordering a paranoid,

almost conspiratorial, perception of Western culture and its related
historiography. As Stuckrad convincingly argues the proposed Grand
Polemical Narrative is a way too simplistic construct and that
many of the ‘currents’ within the field of Western

esotericism have in fact never been simply neglected,
marginalized, or banned as dangerous; they all have a
complex and changing history in many different contexts44.
42 Hanegraaff: ’The Trouble With Images’, p. 111. (My emphasis).

43 Hanegraaff: ’The Trouble With Images’, p. 112.
44 Stuckrad: ’Esoteric Discourse’, p. 13. As examples Stuckrad mentions Hermeticism,
astrology, alchemy, Freemasonry and Kabbalah.
- 19 -
This undermines the very foundation for the assumption of the

existence of a Grand Polemical Narrative and opens up for a far more
nuanced and complex view of European cultural history which in my
view is much more fruitful.
To sum up the difficulties pertaining to the definitions and approaches
to Western esotericism it is possible to discern two major problems: 1)
The confusing of historical and typological categories and 2) A
monolithic or at least simplistic picture of Western culture.
This is precisely what Olav Hammer and Kocku von Stuckrad strive to
overcome in their approaches to the field of Western esotericism. Olav
Hammer strictly differentiates between esotericism as a historical
category and as a typological one, primarily focusing on the latter as it
provides a broader framework for studying various different
phenomena which are not necessarily historically connected45.
Kocku von Stuckrad argues that a common ground for the academic
study of Western esotericism
can only be found when esotericism is seen not as a

selection of historical ‘currents’, however defined, but as a
structural element of Western culture46.
This common ground is explicated in Stuckrad’s proposed two-fold

approach to Western esotericism that focuses on 1) claims of higher
knowledge and 2) ways of accessing this knowledge 47. This model
avoids any cultural or religious discrimination as it acknowledges the
inherent religious and cultural pluralism of Western society. Stuckrad
explains this approach as follows:
On the most general level of analysis we can describe

esotericism as the claim of higher knowledge. Important
here is not only the content of these systems but the claim to
45 Hammer: ‘Esotericism’.
46 Stuckrad: ‘Western Esotericism’, p. 80. See also Stuckrad: Western esotericism ch. 1 and
‘Western Esotericism’ p. 88-94.
47 Stuckrad: ‘Western Esotericism’, p. 88.
- 20 -
a wisdom that is superior to other interpretations of

cosmos and history […] The idea of higher knowledge is
closely linked to a discourse of secrecy, albeit not because
esoteric truths are restricted to an ‘inner circle’ of
specialists or initiates but because the dialectics of
concealment and revelation is a structural element of
secretive discourses. Esoteric knowledge is not so much elitist as
hidden48.
Western esotericism is in the rendering of Stuckrad a specific structure

within the vast field of European religion and as such it is closely tied to
discourses involving in the construction of tradition and identity.
The last approach to Western esotericism that I will discuss is the one
recently presented by Arthur Versluis. He is evidently inspired by both
Faivre and Stuckrad in his definition, although he speaks of “gnosis”
instead of “higher knowledge”. He seeks to identify common traits
within all Western esoteric traditions much like Faivre did earlier and he
finds that they all revolve around various approaches to “gnosis”. He
defines gnosis as ‘direct spiritual insight into cosmology or
metaphysics’49, however it is not entirely clear how this differs from the
term “higher knowledge”. What does differ from Stuckrad’s emphasis
on higher knowledge is that to Stuckrad, what is important, is the claim
of knowledge and not the content of the knowledge. With Versluis the
focus seems to have changed towards the substance and not the
discourse. Furthermore, the term “gnostic” becomes more or less
synonymous to “esoteric” in the rendering of Versluis:
One could as accurately refer to “Western gnostic” as

“Western esoteric” traditions […] they all have in
common:
1. gnosis or gnostic insight, i.e., knowledge of hidden or

invisible realms or aspects of existence (including both
cosmological and metaphysical gnosis) and
48 Stuckrad: ‘Western Esotericism’, p. 88-89 (last sentence emphasis by me).

49 Versluis: Magic and Mysticism, p. 1.
- 21 -
2. esotericism, meaning that this hidden knowledge is

either explicitly restricted to a small group of people, or
implicitly self-restricted by virtue of its complexity or
subtlety50.
If we follow Versluis’ first argument that we could just as well speak

about Western gnostic traditions as Western esoteric traditions it does
not correlated to his following characteristic of the common
denominators as being both gnosis and esotericism. And furthermore,
to argue that what esoteric traditions have in common is “esotericism”
seems a rather redundant statement to me. In his characterization of
Western esotericism Versluis continues to argue for the possibility to
see magic and mysticism as constitutive elements in Western
esotericism and to say that ‘magic and mysticism form the twin currents
that, like the intertwined serpents of Hermes’ caduceus, together make
up much of the stream of Western esotericism’51. He correlates magic
to “cosmological gnosis” and mysticism to “metaphysical gnosis”, thus
forming two poles or esoteric pools in which the different traditions
can partake. Versluis explains the difference between the two as
follows:
Cosmological gnosis illuminates the hidden patterns of
nature as expressing spiritual or magical truths; it
corresponds, more or less, to the via positiva of Dionysius
the Areopagite. Metaphysical gnosis, on the other hand,
represents assertions of direct insight into the
transcendent; it corresponds, more or less, to the via
negativa of Dionysius the Areopagite52.
In a general demarcation of Western esotericism it is out of place to use

distinctions made by a single tradition, i.e. Dionysius the Areopagite, as
the foundation for an academic typology as is the case in the above
quotation. This mixture however, is exemplary to Versluis’ general
50 Versluis: Mysticism and Magic, p. 2.

51 Versluis: Mysticism and Magic, p. 3.
52 Versluis: Mysticism and Magic, p. 166, emphasis by Versluis.
- 22 -
perception of the ideal academic attitude towards Western esotericism.

Versluis sees Western esotericism as something entirely different from
anything else. Thus he concludes:
If Western esotericism is to fully develop as a field of

scholarly inquiry, its unique nature must be recognized.
Most unique about it is not its transdisciplinary nature
alone, but the fact that its manifold currents are each
concerned with new ways of knowing […] While purely
historical research obviously has its place in this field, the
most important works may be those that suggest new ways
of seeing or knowing53.
In other words, according to Versluis it is not enough to use traditional

historical methods, rather, to achieve a full understanding of the object
of study we need to adapt the very same methods as this object. This is
further stressed in the introduction where Versluis writes:
What I am suggesting, in other words, is that in magic and

mysticism we see areas of study that by their very nature
are not entirely reducible to objects of rationalist discourse
and manipulation, but instead border on and open into
dimensions of life that remain partially veiled to us unless
we enter into them for ourselves54.
There is hardly need for comments to a statement like this, other than
this is exactly why the academic study of esotericism might have a
difficult task in gaining acknowledgement within the study of religions
in general.
Among the different approaches and definitions of Western esotericism
that have been under scrutiny in the present chapter the one proposed
by Stuckrad seems to me to provide the most fruitful framework and to
be the most consistent.

- 23 -
Thus this elaborated definition of Western esotericism will be my

foundation for the current thesis and my own references to esotericism
should be understood based on this background. The reason why I
choose this approach is that it complies with the criteria I sat out in the
introduction. These entailed that a definition of a theoretical category
such as the scholarly construct “Western esotericism” must be based on
strictly theoretical foundation. However, reservations can be taken
against this approach too. The gravest criticism would be that it does
not even touch upon the difficult issue of what “Western” might entail.
For an adequate definition of Western esotericism and not just
esotericism this would be imperative.
In short esotericism can be seen as a structural discourse pertaining a
claim of absolute knowledge which is combined with a dialectics of
secrecy and revelation. This dialectic relationship between the hidden
and the revealed is of immense importance in the main part of
kabbalistic texts, and, as we shall see, it is also central to arriving at an
adequate definition of Kabbalah, a task that will be pursued in the
following chapter.
1.2 Defining Kabbalah
1.2.1 The Symbolic World of the Sefirot

A reoccurring central topic in the following chapters is the kabbalistic
doctrine of the ten sefirot wherefore it is important to give a basic
introduction to this highly complex discourse. Very generally, the
kabbalistic picture of the godhead can be described as an organic
multidimensional system where all possible aspects of creation are
included. The supreme transcendent God is seen as the essence of Ein
Sof (no end) and can not be comprehended and the only way to
perceive him is through the symbolic language of the materialized
creation. This creation is mirrored in the divine realm in the concept of
- 24 -
the ten sefirot, a system of divine emanations ranging from the

uppermost sefirah Keter (crown) where God still is utmost transcendent,
down to the lowest tenth sefirah Malkhut, identified with the Shekhinah,
the feminine aspect of God who dwells with Israel as long as it is
righteous and who is immanently present in all of creation. It is through
the Shekhinah that the (male) mystic can approach the godhead and
eventually “climb the cosmic tree” in order to ascend through the
heavenly realms. She is like a mirror collecting and reflecting the divine
light shining forth from all the other sefirot, first gathered in the ninth
sefirah Yesod (foundation, but also the penis in the anthropomorphic
image of the sefirot) and then impregnating the Shekhinah who can now
pour the divine providence down on Israel.
Below Keter, we find a sefirotic pair called Hokhmah (wisdom) and Binah
(understanding) which represent the essential fatherhood and
motherhood respectively. The next pair is Hesed (mercy) and Gevurah
(strict judgement, justice). When there is unbalance in the world of the
sefirot the most recognizable effect is that the fire of Gevurah is
strengthened and evil which clings to the holy sphere by the shells of
this sefirot becomes more powerful in both the divine and the human
world. Further down there is the pair of Netzah (eternity) and Hod
(glory) and the last of the ten sefirot to be mentioned is the sixth sefirah
Tiferet who can be paired with Malkhut, the Shekhinah. He is the groom
and the absolute masculine aspect of God while she is the bride and the
ultimate feminine 55 . Outside these ten is a hidden sefirah, Da’at
(knowledge). In medieval Kabbalah this sefirah is somewhat uncommon
but as will be demonstrated later it holds a position in Joseph Gikatilla’s
55 It is a very simplified picture I have given on the system of the sefirot. I will refer to the
following for a more subtle picture of this complex divine realm: Tishby: Zohar pp.269-308,
Scholem: Major Trends, p.205-243, Scholem: On the Mystical Shape of the Godhead; ‘Shekhinah’
p.140-197, Scholem: Kabbalah p.96-116 and Wolfson: Through a Speculum that Shines. The latter
presents a special emphasis on the sefirot as the visual representation of god in the
imagination. It should be noted that this is the presentation of the sefirot to be found from the
Bahir and on. The sefirot appearing in the Sefer Yetzirah has a totally different, much more static
function, strictly tied to the process of creation through the Hebrew language.
- 25 -
Sha’arei Orah (Gates of Light). Da’at resides between the three upper
sefirot: Keter, Hokhmah and Binah and the seven lower: Hesed, Gevurah,
Tiferet, Netzah, Hod, Yesod and Malkhut and denotes a certain hidden
knowledge necessary in order to reach the upper triad. There are
explicit erotic connotations to the word Da’at since this is the biblical
word used for sexual intercourse. In kabbalistic rendering it becomes a
symbol of the higher knowledge which is achieved when the erotic
fusion between the masculine and feminine aspects of the sefirot is
completed and Malkhut is filled with the divine light.
1.2.2 The quest for a Definition

The foundation of the scholarly preoccupation with Kabbalah in
modern times lies with Gershom Scholem who spent most of his life
studying kabbalistic texts 56 . The theories exposed by Scholem
dominated the field until his death in 1982 and it was a very
comprehensive albeit one sided picture of Kabbalah that was
presented 57 . Scholem was responsible for making Kabbalah a
recognized field for academic studies and he made it accessible through
extensive publishing of the kabbalistic manuscripts and dozens of
articles and monographs on the subject but the monopole status that
Scholem had in Kabbalah scholarship made the field freeze in the
position towards its subject. Scholem’s approach was reproduced by his
students and with Idel’s words resulted
in a striking lack of novel theories of the nature of Jewish

mysticism that differ from those of Scholem […] His
views have been repeated time and again with no proper
attempt to add new theoretical perspectives influenced by
modern research in comparative religion58.
56 For a discussion of Scholem’s predecessors in Kabbalah scholarship see Daniel Abrams:
‘Defining Modern Academic Scholarship’.
57 The following discussion is based on reading s of the following of Scholem’s works:
Origins of Kabbalah, Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism, Kabbalah and On the Mystical Shape of the
Godhead.
58 Idel: Kabbalah, p. 23.
- 26 -
Scholem’s focus was the kabbalistic works which revolved around the
doctrine of the ten sefirot, the doctrine that has been designated as the
theosophical Kabbalah. Scholem viewed Kabbalah as an intellectual,
theoretical pursuit and this was what he wanted to promote. Those
texts that did not fit into this narrative were bypassed in silence. A
reason for this choice was that Scholem wanted to see Kabbalah as an
intellectual elitist type of Judaism, that is, as an elevated form of pious
religiosity. A more practical and especially magical involvement did not
fit into this picture. Thus the definition of Kabbalah rested on the
concept of the doctrine of the ten sefirot, a definition that excluded
several important kabbalistic works, in particular those of the prophetic
or ecstatic kabbalist Abraham Abulafia 59 . However, Scholem does
consider Abulafia to be kabbalist, thus showing an example of the
inconsistency in Scholem’s theory. Joseph Dan adheres to Scholem’s
restrictive definition of Kabbalah, as he regards the doctrine of the ten
sefirot as pivotal to all kabbalistic texts. He states, regarding the text
Ma’ayan ha Hokhmah (Fountain of Wisdom) that will be analysed in a
subsequent chapter of this thesis:
These mystical works can - and perhaps should - be read

as comprising a Jewish mysticism completely free of the
symbols and theories of the Kabbalah. These texts share
neither the sources nor the symbolic theosophy of the
Kabbalah60.
This statement is problematic since the defining factor of Kabbalah is

the ambiguous term ‘symbolic theosophy’ which turns out to be the
59 The scholar who has made a great effort to include ecstatic Kabbalah in his approaches
and definitions of Kabbalah is primarily Moshe Idel who has published extensively on
Abulafia and ecstatic/ prophetic Kabbalah and mysticism. See among others: Messianic
Mystics, The Mystical Experience in Abraham Abulafia, and Studies in Ecstatic Kabbalah. A more
nuanced view of the Kabbalah of Abulafia is also found in Wolfson: Abraham Abulafia. On
Scholem’s views on Abulafia see Idel: ‘The Contribution of Abraham Abulafia’.
60 Dan: The Early Kabbalah, p. 26.
- 27 -
doctrine of the ten sefirot as it is expounded in the Bahir61 . The ‘Hug ha

Iyyun (Circle of Contemplation) 62 which was the kabbalistic group
behind the Fountain of Wisdom, did use the concept of the sefirot, though
mainly as they were used in the Sefer Yetzirah63 which is a common
source for many kabbalistic texts. Concerning the apparently missing
‘theories of the Kabbalah’ I will later show that in the Fountain of Wisdom
we can find an attitude towards language that is shared by later
kabbalists, especially Gikatilla, and if accepting Moshe Idel’s proposal of
seeing the tradition of the divine names64 as a constituting factor of
Kabbalah, the texts of the ‘Iyyun - circle can by all means be considered
as a kabbalistic group.
It is interesting to note that the kabbalists themselves acknowledged
different kinds of Kabbalah. Abulafia gives three types of religious
involvement: The philosophical, the Kabbalah of the sefirot and the
Kabbalah of the divine names, where one has to go through each step
to go to the next. As Elliot Wolfson argues:
For Abulafia himself, the Kabbalah embraces both the

knowledge of the sefirot and the knowledge of the letters,
an idea that he traces back to the thirty-two paths of
wisdom mentioned in the Sefer Yesirah, which consist of the
ten sefirot and the twenty-two letters65.
61 Sefer ha Bahir is generally considered one of the earliest kabbalistic writings and is probably
written in the last half of the 12th century in Provence. See Abrams: The Book Bahir (in
Hebrew) for the best edition and study of the text. Other editions are Saverio Campanini: The
Book Bahir, a critical edition of Flavius Mithridates Latin translation, providing Hebrew, Latin
and English translation of the text. Scholem: Das Buch Bahir and Aryeh Kaplan’s English
translation (though his commentaries are not reliable): The Bahir.
62 See chapter 2.4: The Fountain of Wisdom.
63 Though not itself a kabbalistic work, the Sefer Yetzirah, probably composed somewhere
between the 4th and the 9th century CE has been of immense importance in medieval
kabbalistic literature. It was in this text the notion of the ten sefirot first appeared, though in
another guise than the one developed by the later kabbalists. For the latest and best edition,
translation and commentary on the Sefer Yetzirah see Peter Hayman: Sefer Yesira. See also
below, chapter 2.1.
64 See below. Idel: ‘Defining Kabbalah’.
65 Wolfson: Abraham Abulafia, p. 6 (emphasis by Wolfson).
- 28 -
As is explained by Wolfson, Abulafia sees the sefirotic Kabbalah as a

lower form of Kabbalah, where the Kabbalah that is concentrated on
the divine names is seen as the true or most advanced Kabbalah66.
It is a difficult task to establish a comprising definition of Kabbalah.
The word in itself means reception or transmission and is thus closely
linked to notions of authority and tradition. Moshe Idel’s attempt at
arriving at a solution traces the first use of the word qabbalah, which he
finds in relation to the transmission of the doctrine of the divine names
in texts from the gaonic (8th to 10th century CE) period. He finds that:
The secret doctrine related to the pronunciation of the

divine names was designated as qabbalah long before the
first references to this term in relation to the doctrine of
the ten sefirot67.
This is part of Idel’s refutation of Scholem’s and Dan’s insistence of the

doctrine of the ten sefirot as en essential and constitutive part of
Kabbalah. Both Scholem and Joseph Dan 68 also reject seeing the
Ashkenazi esoteric literature as part of Kabbalah69, whereas if we accept
Idel’s approach and see the esoteric doctrine of the divine names as a
constitutive element of Kabbalah, the Ashkenazic writings of Eleazar of
Worms are without doubt part of the kabbalistic text corpus70.
Heidi Laura follows Idel in her delimitation of Kabbalah, though her
approach goes a step further:
The kabbalistic usage of the term “Kabbalah” suggests

that it is primarily a marker for esoteric transmission rather
than a specific set of doctrines. “Kabbalah” may indeed
66 Wolfson: Abraham Abulafia, part II, especially p. 104-106. See also Wolfson: ‘The
doctrine of Sefirot’.
67 Idel: ‘Defining Kabbalah’, p. 101.
68 In his book Kabbalah, Dan does not even mention the medieval Ashkenazi Kabbalah.
69 For a representation of Scholem’s and Dan’s views on the Ashkenaz see Dan: ‘Ashkenazi
Hasidim’.
70 Eleazar of Worm’s book Sefer ha-Shem (the Book of the Name) is a perfect example of an
Ashkenazic kabbalistic text concerning the theurgical and theosophical aspects and uses of
the divine names.
- 29 -
refer to any tradition that is transmitted esoterically and

that can be claimed to be part of an ancient layer of Jewish
wisdom.71
In order to arrive at a useful and adequate definition of Kabbalah, it is

necessary to clarify which taxonomical level the definition belongs to.
Since Kabbalah is not only a scholarly construct but was and is actually
used as an identity marker for historical groups and persons we cannot
argue for a completely ahistorical definition. What I will propose is a
twofold approach to Kabbalah, namely a typological definition which is
closely connected to a historical definition: 1) Kabbalah is the product
or activity of a historical current of people who use the notion of
Kabbalah as a designation of the practice and transmission of Jewish
esoteric knowledge and who often identify themselves as mequbalim –
kabbalists. 2) Kabbalah can be seen as a discourse of transmitting
esoteric teachings claimed to belong to ancient Jewish wisdom lore
received through either an unbroken chain of transmission or by direct
revelation.
That the typological definition is tied to the historical one implies that a
kabbalistic discourse cannot be found before the appearance of the
historical Kabbalah in Western culture. However it also means that it is
possible to find kabbalistic discourses that have no connection to the
historical Kabbalah. As will be demonstrated later religious groups
making use of a kabbalistic discourse might not consider themselves
neither kabbalists nor necessarily Jewish.
Laura continues the discussion of transmission, also elaborated by
Wolfson and Idel72, regarding the different modes of transmission of
kabbalistic teachings, that is, the relation between what was orally
71 Laura: The Ashkenazi Kabbalah, p. 42. If the esoteric mode of transmission is seen as
referring to the dialectics between the hidden and the revealed as suggested in Stuckrad’s
definition of esotericism, we get very close to a comprehensive definition of Kabbalah. For
the esoteric dialectics of transmission of secret teachings in Kabbalah see Wolfson:
‘Kabbalah’.
72 Wolfson: ‘Beyond the Spoken Word’ and Idel: ‘Transmission’.
- 30 -
transmitted and what was written down. Her heuristic conclusion is as

follows:
We may imagine the scope of the term “Kabbalah” as a

circle that has the most esoteric traditions and practices in
its centre, surrounded by layers of traditions that to a still
greater degree can be transmitted in written and more
accessible form without jeopardizing them. Traditions on
holy names, prophetism and magic would then be at the
centre of the circle, while the theosophical symbolism
would be found in the more exterior layers.73
However, this does not explain that so much kabbalistic material,

belonging to the central and therefore most esoteric teachings, has been
written down and thus more or less exposed to the public, unless we
assume that these writings were meant to be accompanied by oral
teachings.
The problem of definition is not made easier by the constant confusing
of the terms “mysticism” and “esotericism”.
Joseph Dan who has written extensively on Kabbalah is not consistent
in his use of the terms and sometimes consequently refers to Kabbalah
as Jewish mysticism74 and other times as Jewish esotericism75, without
properly clarifying the exact meaning of his use of the words. It seems
that Dan prefers the use of esotericism to denote the purely intellectual
and theosophical kabbalistic pursuits where mysticism is reserved for
the ecstatic Kabbalah as that presented by Abulafia.
It is a general problem of scholars outside the specific study of
esotericism, that very often they use the word ‘esoteric’ as
interchangeable with ‘secret’ and both Joseph Dan and the scholars that
I will discuss below are part of this terminological problem.
73 Laura: The Ashkenazi Kabbalah, p. 43. It is interesting to note that Joseph Dan takes the
total opposite stand and regards the theosophical doctrines to be the core of kabbalistic
esotericism (Dan: ‘Christian Kabbalah’ p. 121 and 128). However, this is not surprising
when recalling his definition of Kabbalah as the traditions concerning the ten sefirot.
74 Dan: ’In Quest of a Historical Definition’.
75 Dan: ’Christian Kabbalah’.
- 31 -
Part of the problem of the definition of Kabbalah, especially with

regard to the question of whether the Ashkenazic pietists are included
or not, is the issue of origins and the history of transmission within
Kabbalah.
Scholem’s theory of the history of Kabbalah can be described as an
attempt to locate the origins of Kabbalah in the Orient. He assumed
that an oriental esoteric tradition opposed to rabbinic Judaism was
passed untouched from the Orient, through Germany to Provence,
where it suddenly developed into Kabbalah. The Ashkenaz was not
counted as an important factor in the formation, but was seen as a
channel, which only passed on the tradition without adding anything
new to it76. This is what can be described as the linear theory which has
been heavily criticized the last twenty years, especially by Moshe Idel,
Elliot Wolfson, Mark Verman, Daniel Abrams, and Heidi Laura who
sums up the discussion77:
This theory is often called Scholem’s linear theory, but

since the crucial point is the assumption that the kabbalists
inherited and developed ancient mystical traditions that
had passed “untouched” from the Orient to Provence, I
will also refer to it as the “Oriental link theory”78.
The opposing theory is what Heidi Laura calls “the organic

development theory” which emphasizes the pluralistic and
communicative development of Kabbalah within the borders of
rabbinic Judaism; both in the circles of mystics in the Diaspora of
Germany and in France and Spain79. According to this theory Kabbalah
was formed by continuing exchanges of ideas between the different
Jewish mystical circles of Europe. The theory thus corresponds better
76 Scholem: Origins, especially ch. 2:4 and 2:9.

77 See especially: Idel: Kabbalah, ch. 1 and 2, Ibid: ‘Rabbinism Versus Kabbalism’, Wolfson:
Through a Speculum, Mark Verman: ‘The Evolution’ p. 167-170, Abrams: ‘Defining Modern
Academic Scholarship, Ibid: ‘The Literary Emergence’, Laura: The Ashkenazi Kabbalah. See
also Harvey Hames: The Art of Conversion, ch. 1 and Daniel Weidner: ‘Reading Gershom
Scholem’.
78 Laura, The Ashkenazi Kabbalah, p. 33.
- 32 -
to the general view of European Middle ages as a pluralistic and non-

static world. What could be added is the importance of
interconfessional circles which paved the way for the infusion of Neo-
Platonic philosophy into medieval Jewish thought.
An example of the vivid exchange of ideas throughout European
intellectual circles is the preoccupation with the notion of evil and
demonology, which suddenly appeared in the works of the kabbalists of
southern Europe, particularly those of Isaac ha-Kohen80. The different
forces of darkness have always been considered a reality in major
currents of Judaism, so this is not puzzling; however the degree of the
mythological framework ascribed to evil appearing in these works is.
The most probable situation is that Kohen was influenced by the
German pietists through especially the Bahir and creatively composed
his treatises from these influences and his own theological creativity.
The influence of Kohen’s works did not spread far, but he inspired
those who counted the most: Moses de Leon and Joseph Gikatilla.
Neither the student of Isaac ha-Kohen Moses de Burgos nor Kohen’s
brother Jacob ha-Kohen elaborated further on the radical dualistic
worldview as presented by Isaac ha-Kohen. Rather they turned back to
more moderate considerations about the concept of evil. As Isaac ha-
Kohen was influenced by Ashkenazi ideas, so in turn did he inspire the
later German mystics. Menahem Ziyyoni’s works especially bear many
traces of the demonological and cosmological speculations presented by
Kohen81. The radical dualism of Isaac ha-Kohen and the so called
Gnostic mythology exposed in the Bahir were the main reasons for
Scholem to indicate the origin of Kabbalah as gnosticism, a discussion
we will turn to in the following chapter.
1.2.3 Kabbalah and Gnosticism
79 Laura, The Ashkenazi Kabbalah, p. 34.

80 Kohen: Treatise on the Left Emanation.
81 Laura, The Ashkenazi Kabbalah, chapter 5 and Huss: ‘Demonology and Magic’.
- 33 -
A central component of Scholem’s linear theory was his conviction of

Gnosticism as a predecessor and direct influence of Kabbalah,
especially the Bahir. The problem was first addressed by Scholem in
193882, and has been discussed widely ever since83. Tishby agrees with
Scholem in that gnosticism influenced the theosophical system as it was
found in the Zohar, and was a constituent element in the pleromatic
doctrine of the ten sefirot84.
In the article ‘Jewish Gnosticism’ 85 , Joseph Dan argues that a
distinction has to be made between “gnosticism” and “gnostic” where
gnosticism refers to a specific group of mystical sects and

movements between the late first century C.E. and the
thirteenth, sects and movements which had different
ideologies, symbolisms and religious views, with very few,
if any, characteristics common to them all86.
“Gnostic” denotes the
proximity of a certain idea or symbol to an artificial,

modern concept created by scholars in the field of history
of religions, a concept which may have never existed in
historical reality87.
82 First published in Reshit ha-Kabbalah in 1938, then in the enlarged German version Ursprung
und Anfänge der Kabbalah in 1962 and finally in Origins of Kabbalah in 1987. Please note that
the first Hebrew version was published before the discovery of the Nag Hammadi Library in
1945. He later elaborated further on this thesis in ‘Merkabah Mysticism and Jewish
Gnosticism’, published in Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism 1941 and in Jewish Gnosticism,
Merkabah Mysticism and Talmudic Tradition in 1960.
83 The subject has been thoroughly treated by Nathaniel Deutsch in his The Gnostic
Imagination, though the force of this book lies in its account of Scholem’s treatment of the
problem and its examination of the sources from Antiquity, rather than a convincing theory
regarding the seemingly gnostic inspiration in medieval Kabbalah.
See also Dan: ‘Gershom Scholem’s Reconstruction’, Idel: Kabbalah, p. 115 – 117, Wolfson:
‘Review of Gershom Scholem’, and Abrams: ‘Jewish Gnosticism’.
84 Tishby: The wisdom of the Zohar, p. 236.
85 Dan: ’Jewish Gnosticism’. Dan has discussed the problem of Kabbalah and gnosticism in
a series of articles: ‘Kabbalistic and Gnostic Dualism’, ‘The Emergence of Messianic

Mythology’ and ‘Samael and the Problem of Jewish Gnosticism’. Though the latter implies a
rather selective reading of the text The Holy Book of the Great Invisible Spirit (The Gospel of the
Egyptians), NHC III,2 & IV, 2. I agree with Dan’s main point that there is no proof of any
direct affinities between ancient gnostic texts and medieval Kabbalah.
86 Dan: ’Jewish Gnosticism’, p. 316-317.
87 Dan: ’Jewish Gnosticism’, p.317
- 34 -
With the distinctions between “gnosticism” and “gnostic” in mind it

should be possible to keep the two terms in an academic discourse.
Because to criticize and discard a term for having no historical reality
would imply the abolition of many of the crucial terms in the history of
religions as for example religion, ritual, mysticism, esotericism, tradition
and so on. What is important is to be aware that these terms are
scholarly constructions with, if not more then at least, a heuristic
purpose.
The reason I still find it relevant to use the two terms are, that what
these so-called gnostic movements might have in common is exactly
why they in the first place would have been called gnostic, that is the
emphasis on gnosis as the only way of salvation88. One should limit the
use of the categories of “gnosticism” and “gnostic” to the literary
genres exposed in the Nag Hammadi library and its circles, even though
some of the discourses presented there could fit other religious
categories as well, and realize that the categories do not necessarily
exclude each other. However, to use the terms “gnostic” and
“gnosticism” in a kabbalistic context seems to obscure more than to
clarify, especially since the affinities, if any, between gnosticism and
Kabbalah are only of typological nature. These typological similarities
are mainly the idea of a divine pleroma composed of sefirot in the case
of Kabbalah and aeons in that of gnosticism, the apparent cosmological
dualism, coincident names and the magical/ theurgical efficacy of divine
names. However, this is not a sufficient argument for the use of the
term gnostic as a designation for kabbalistic concepts.
For the present discussion this is meant to show how typological
characteristics have served for scholars of Kabbalah, i.e. Scholem and
88 Hanegraaff ’Gnosticism’. For further discussion about “Gnosticism” see Williams:

Rethinking Gnosticism and Karen King: What is Gnosticism ?. The term gnosis could serve a
purpose outside the field of gnosticism as a synonym for higher or absolute knowledge.
However, to avoid confusion I prefer not to use the term. See also Merkur:Gnosis for an
elaborate though contestable account of “gnosis” as a certain esoteric tradition of “visionary
practices” within the three scriptural religions.
- 35 -
Tishby in particular to trace Kabbalah back to the orient as part of their

linear theory of the origins and transmission of Kabbalah. The result is,
as we have seen in the case of Faivre’s definition of Western
esotericism, a deficient theoretical construction where typological and
historical categories are confused.
1.2.4 Summary
In the preceding chapters I have discussed different definitions and
approaches to Western esotericism and Kabbalah and reached the best
possible working definitions of both. I will briefly summarize the
chosen definitions before continuing to the discussion of mysticism.
• Esotericism is a discursive strategy implying a claim of higher or

absolute knowledge combined with a notion of secrecy in the
way of transmitting this knowledge. For pragmatic reasons we
can delimitate the field to only denote discourses prevalent in
the West. However, Western should be understood in its
broadest possible sense, as a geographical category with
whatever pluralistic cultural and religious implications this might
entail. Western esotericism should thus not be restricted to a
certain period or cultural or religious denomination within
Western history.
• 1) Kabbalah can be seen as a discourse transmitting esoteric
teachings claimed to belong to ancient Jewish wisdom lore. Thus
the definition does not rely on a certain set of doctrines but
rather on the mode of transmission. In this context “esoteric”
must be seen as defined through the above criteria. 2) Kabbalah
is the product or activity of a historical current of people, the
mequbalim, who use the notion of Kabbalah as a designation of
the practice and transmission of Jewish esoteric knowledge.
- 36 -
With these definitions in mind we can move on to the discussion of

whether Kabbalah should be regarded as “mysticism” or “esotericism”.
To do this I will begin with a discussion of mysticism per se and attempt
to arrive at a useful definition of the concept, before discussing the
classification of Kabbalah.
1.3 Mysticism or Esotericism. An Attempt at

Clarification
Neither mysticism nor esotericism are fixed and unambiguous
categories. The purpose of this chapter is to make an attempt to
untangle the seeming randomness in which the terms are used.
When addressing the question of a definition of ‘mysticism’ per se
several problems arise. Joseph Dan calls his approach to mysticism for
“the contingental approach” and emphasizes the historical contextual
nature of his definition:
This methodology can be characterized as a contingent

approach to the study of mysticism; it emphasizes the study of a
specific context, striving to reach general conclusions
based on a comparative study of particular cases in detail,
rather than using any abstract concept and imposing it on
individual religious phenomena89.
If we take Jensen’s remark on the importance of a strictly theoretical

foundation for definitions, and if we see definitions as he suggests, as
“the shortest possible versions of theories”, then it is evident that the
approach proposed by Dan runs the same risk of typological confusion
as we have seen earlier since he bases it on historical evidence. The
actual definition of mysticism reached by Dan does, however escape
this theoretical problem but is nonetheless still very problematic. He
states that mysticism implies:
89 Dan: ’In Quest’ p. 2.(emphasis by Dan).
- 37 -
…the negation of the veracity of communicative language,

and the belief in a noncommunicative truth lying in a
symbolic fashion deep within revealed divine language90.
Though I do agree in Dan’s denial of a universal sui generis mysticism, I

find his “contingent” approach to mysticism too restrictive since he
emphasizes the necessity of the presence of historical groups or persons
to be designated as “mystics” for their products to be studied as
mysticism. Dan argues for the importance of locating the beginning of a
certain mystic tradition91. Furthermore, he contends that mysticism is
reserved for the three scriptural religions:
Only scriptural religion offers a valid, structured avenue of

mystical expression by its insistence that God, the source
of all truth, chose human language for His own expression,
both when creating the world by the power of language
and when revealing His secrets to the prophets and His
other messengers92.
I will discuss Dan’s perception of language in more detail in a

subsequent chapter, but here it is important to note that to Dan the
perception of language as being of divine origin is a necessary part of
what can be designated as mysticism93.
Much of the modern conceptions of mysticism tend to focus on the
non-sensory, ineffable experiences of the divine, often emphasizing an
internal experience of unity with the divine. A result of this is, as
Richard King argues, that mysticism becomes decontextualized in that
the account of the experience is seen as autonomous and devoid of any
social relevance94.
90 Dan: ’In Quest’, p. 31.

91 Dan: ’In Quest’, part III.
92 Dan: ’In Quest’, p.30. Though it is evident that my view of Dan’s approach is very critical,
see Hanegraaff: ‘On the Construction’ p. 52-54 for another presentation of Dan.
93 This is a highly problematic statement since it excludes many eastern forms of mysticism
like that presented by Nagarjuna or the mystical aspects of Daoism, to take a few examples.
94 King: Orientalism, ch. 1.
- 38 -
Dan can be seen as an example of how the study of mysticism within

the history of religions has, in recent years, shifted its focus from seeing
Christian mysticism, Jewish mysticism etc. as manifestations of a
universal religious phenomenon95 to embedding the different mystical
traditions within their normative religious traditions. Thus studying the
different historical evidence as belonging to a distinct religious, social
and cultural context is now the norm. Steven T. Katz argues for the
very conservative character of mystical experiences and convincingly
shows that the mystic experiences whatever he/ she expects to
experience96. Though the social and cultural context of a given mystical
experience is of immense importance, as Annette Wilke and Michael
Sells also contend, Katz’ approach has the danger of being too
reductionistic since it leaves no room for personal creativity or strictly
cognitive processes. Furthermore, it does not give any solution to the
definitorial problem of mysticism as we are still in the realm of
‘experience’. McGinn tries to overcome this problem in his
monumental work on Christian mysticism:
When I speak of mysticism as involving an immediate

consciousness of the presence of God I am trying to
highlight a central claim that appears in almost all mystical
texts. Mystics continue to affirm that their mode of access
to God is radically different from that found in ordinary
consciousness… What differentiates it from other forms
of religious consciousness is its presentation as both
95 This has been presented, among others, by Rudolph Otto who saw the mystical
experiences as experiences of the “Holy” that he believed to be behind all religions. See Otto:
Mysticism. More recently Frits Staal has promoted the idea of a universal mysticism, though
from a different angle. Staal argues that the common mystical experiences in different
cultures can be explained from a psychological point of view in that the human
consciousness generates similar experiences and only the interpretation of these experiences
is culturally conditioned, see. Staal: Exploring Mysticism. Staal also argues that a student of
mysticism inevitably has to become a practitioner of mysticism him/herself to be able to
understand mysticism properly (Staal: Exploring Mysticism p. 154.) This also shows Staal’s
perception of the mystical experience as being trans-subjective since he believes the actual
experience to be the same from one person to another. However, this cannot be defended
from an academic viewpoint, since it is not possible to detach the interpretation from the
experience itself. We have to accept that the only acces to mystical experiences are the
descriptions of various sorts, not the experiences themselves.
96 Katz: ‘The ‘Conservative’ Character of Mystical Experience’.
- 39 -
subjectively and objectively more direct, even at times

immediate97.
This, however, only moves the problem from one place to another. It
evades the problematic focus on ‘experience’ but ends up in the even
more ambiguous term of ‘religious consciousness’. The same problem
arises in Moshe Idel’s definition of mysticism as ‘intensified
religiosity’98, since one is left to wonder how it is possible to measure
the degree of intensity or consciousness? This cannot be a theoretically
adequate criterion for defining mysticism. What might be appropriate is
to see mysticism as a certain religious activity. The mystical praxis
establishes a privileged speech situation, and what might be
characteristic of mystical speaking situations is the emphasis on a
rhetoric of transcendence, in which the mystic inscribes him/ herself.
Instead of focusing on a unio mystica, as many definitions of mysticism
do, this approach gives a broader concept of the mystical praxis.
Michael Sells calls the climax of this mystical activity for the ‘meaning
event’, a very useful concept taking the place of unio mystica. Additionally
it indicates a point of apprehension, that is, the ‘moment when the
meaning has become identical or fused with the act of predication’99.
In contrast to the realization as an instance of mystical

union which entails a complete psychological,
epistemological, and ontological transformation, the
meaning event is a semantic occurrence… it is the
semantic analogue to the experience of mystical union100.
This removes the focus from the experience itself, which we do not
have any access to, and places it on the description and/ or
interpretation of the experience. This also facilitates the use of the
97 McGinn: The Foundations of Mysticism, p. xix.

98 Lecture given at the EASR conference in Bucharest, September 2006.
99 Sells: Mystical Languages, p. 9.
100 Sells: Mystical Languages, p. 9.
- 40 -
concept of “mysticism” with regard to many kabbalistic texts that often

do not imply the notion of Unio Mystica, but show different types of
contemplation, praxis and ecstasy.
Boaz Huss goes as far as to argue for the abandoning of the term
“mysticism” altogether. His radical position comes as a response to
recent voices within the Israeli academic study of Jewish mysticism who
argue that there is a need to include practical and experiential elements
in teaching Jewish mysticism in the academy. Not surprisingly other
voices strongly object to such an idea arguing that in an academic
context Jewish mysticism has to be taught from a purely historical and
theoretical perspective. Huss however, goes against both fractions
arguing that they both are
based on the same common assumption, namely that

Kabbalah (along with the Hekhalot literature, Hasidism,
and other Jewish cultural formations) is a Jewish
expression of a universal mystical phenomenon101.
It is this very assumption that Huss wants to question as he argues:
“Mysticism” is not a universal category that should be used

as a basis for academic study; rather it is a Christian
theological term, that was used in the modern period due
to political or theological motivations – in order to classify
and categorize phenomena from non-Christian cultures.
The use of this term is bound up in a theological position
which, I believe, has no place in academic scholarship. The
argument regarding how to teach “mysticism” is
fundamentally not an academic debate, but a theological
disputation102.
After the preceding discussions of the definition and use of the terms
esotericism, Kabbalah, Gnosticism and currently mysticism, it can be of
no surprise that I find Huss’ argument overreacting and simplistic. I can
fully agree with the first and basic problem of mixing religious practice
101 Huss: ‘Jewish Mysticism’, p.1.
- 41 -
and academic study or teaching and perfectly contend to Huss’

argument that theological disputation has no place in the academic
study of religion and culture. However, to discard a term merely
because it was an originally theological concept is in my opinion not
very well thought out. It would, as already stated earlier with regard to
“gnosticism” mean that we would have to get rid of a large portion of
the terminology that we use in the academic study of religion. After all,
whether we wish to acknowledge it or not, the study of religion did
emerge from within a theological position. One of Huss’ arguments for
the invalidity of the term mysticism is that it is used to denote cultural
phenomena in cultures to which the “mysticism” had no intrinsic
meaning. And thus, that the employment of the term to these cultures
was an expression of Western imperialism and colonialism 103 .
Furthermore, in Huss’ short description of the scholarly attempt at
defining “mysticism” he concludes with a sweeping generalization that
The shared assumption behind all these definitions is that

people of different cultures all experience an encounter
with a transcendental entity104.
As I have shown in the previous discussions this is a much too

simplistic picture to draw of the problem. Though none of the above
mentioned definitions are fully valid in my opinion they are definitely
too diverse to be collected in the general statement provided by Huss.
He continues to argue that there is absolutely no common elements
between the different “so-called mystical” cultural formations and that
the assumption that such elements should exist is based on reductionist
or essentialist “scholarship”. To me this tells more about Huss’ own
reductionist perception of the academic study of “mysticism” in
particular but also of religion in general. To me it seems clear that in the

- 42 -
broad study of religion much pain is taken to reevaluate theological

terminology and reinstate the terms in order to provide a proper
theoretical framework for the study of religion. If Huss had taken more
general theories of the problem of definition into consideration and had
expanded his discussion of mysticism to include these considerations, a
much more constructive approach could be reached. He fails
completely to consider the discussions by Michael Sells or Elliot
Wolfson for instance who both have a radically different approach to
mysticism than the general conclusion reached by Huss. Furthermore
it would have proved fruitful to try to view mysticism as a certain genre
or a structural element within religious discourse. Furthermore he
exaggerates the consequences of using the category “mysticism” in
academic research when he writes:
The use of the term mysticism implies that people, in all

cultures, sometimes experience an encounter with the
Divine, or a transcendent reality. Using this assumption to
categorize cultural formations and to establish academic
fields that are devoted to their study is based on the
assumption that the cause of various historical, cultural
and social phenomena is the encounter with the Divine or
the Transcendent [sic!] reality105.
This is a completely misunderstanding of the use of the category of

mysticism in an academic context. To examine a certain historical
phenomenon under the rubric of mysticism does not mean to accept
the truth claims made by this phenomenon. An academic analysis of
such a phenomenon does not imply an uncritical adoption of the
religious worldview presented, but rather focuses on the cultural, social
and historical implications that these truth claims might entail. This is
what the study of religion is all about and I am certain Huss would
agree. So how come the study of mysticism in particular should not be
capable of this? If accepting that the notion of mysticism is nothing
- 43 -
more than an analytical tool, a scholarly concept useful in the academic

study of religion in order to be able to identify a certain structural
element within the vast field of historical evidence, then I do not see
any far reaching problems. Certainly one has to be critically aware all
the pitfalls mentioned by Huss but this is the case with “religion” in
general as well.
In my opinion the most comprehensive and useful definition of
mysticism is the one formulated by Annette Wilke:
• Mysticism is an umbrella concept for (1) experiences in which

boundaries are
dissolved – those of the subject, such as in a vacuum of thought,
or in ecstasy; those of the object, so that dualities are removed;
those of space, to experience the infinite in the finite-, those of
time, when the ‘timeless, everlasting now’ replaces successive
time. Mysticism also denotes (2) the concepts, teachings, and
literary genres that contemplate, recount or describe this
immanent transcendence or transcendent immanence106.
An important consequence of this approach is that it leaves room for

the notion of Unio Mystica and other modes of experience but does not
regard it as mandatory for something to be termed mystical107. This
definition is also the one I will adhere to in the remaining thesis.
Regarding the confusion of the terms mysticism and esotericism Rousse
–Lacordaire proposes two observations. First, the semantic fields of
mysticism and esotericism are close to each other, both implying a
notion of secrecy. Second, he argues that many scholars consciously
have chosen to use the term mysticism instead of esotericism due to the
mainstream academic discredit of the study of esotericism108. He is to a
large extend right in his observations, albeit I do not agree with his
conclusion:
106 Wilke: ’Mysticism’, p. 1279.

107 Regarding the role of Unio Mystica in Kabbalah see Idel:Kabbalah ch. 4 and Ibid. ‘Unio
Mystica’. Idel convincingly argues against Scholem’s steadfast conviction that there is
absolutely no Unio Mystica to be found in Kabbalah.
108 Rousse-Lacordaire: ‘Mysticism’ p. 818.
- 44 -
Esotericism and mysticism do have similarities: the

primacy of experience and inner transformation, the quest
for unity, and the claim that the very heart of religion will
be revealed only by going beyond rational discursivity109.
Obviously the implicit definition of esotericism is that of Faivre and it

is also Faivre’s distinction between mysticism and esotericism that
concludes the entry.
That the fields of mysticism and esotericism often coincide is a fact also
acknowledged by Faivre, who, however, does not emphasize the claim
of higher knowledge as what might separate the two categories, but
rather the role of intermediary agents:
…The mystic - in the strictly classical sense - aspires to the

more or less complete suppression of images and
intermediaries because for him they become obstacles to
the union with God. While the esoterist appears to take
more interest in the intermediaries […] He prefers to
sojourn on Jacob’s ladder where angels (and doubtless
other entities as well) climb up and down, rather than to
climb to the top and beyond110.
At least Faivre himself calls this an oversimplified model, because it

essentializes both mysticism and esotericism to a degree of uselessness,
especially in disregarding the importance of visuality and intermediaries
in mystic discourse.
As stated, there is no agreement as to whether Kabbalah should be
designated Jewish mysticism, Jewish esotericism or simply Kabbalah,
avoiding any definitorial implications.
109 Rousse-Lacordaire: ‘Mysticism’ p. 819.

110 Faivre: Access to Western esotericism, p. 12.
- 45 -
In Hebrew there is no word for mysticism. What is used is the word sod,
which literally means ”secret”, though usually in combination with
another word, e.g. sod ha-torah (secret of the Torah). Regarding
Kabbalah this word has been translated both as mysticism and as
esotericism, trying to denote a sense of social exclusivity. There is thus
no explicit differentiation made between mystical Kabbalah and esoteric
Kabbalah. However, by the proposed definitions of esotericism,
Kabbalah and mysticism respectively, I do believe it possible to discern
the different types of discourse in a given text. What is most important
in distinguishing mysticism from esotericism is the constitutive element
of esoteric discourse, namely the claim of a higher knowledge. This is
not necessarily involved in mystical activity, but it is by no means
excluded. Thus a given text can be both mystical and esoteric, but with
the proper analytical tool it is possible to clarify which levels are
mystical and which esoteric. Our definition of Kabbalah as transmitter
of esoteric teachings places Kabbalah in the centre of the field of
esotericism, yet as stated, this does not exclude mystical material since
the higher knowledge that is transmitted in the kabbalistic texts often is
achieved by means of mystical praxis.
Before turning to an example of esoteric discourse in two kabbalistic
texts, I will address the question of Kabbalah and esotericism a bit
further.
1.4 Kabbalah and Western Esotericism

I have in the previous chapters shown how Kabbalah can be defined as
the transmission of esoteric traditions i.e. traditions concerning higher
knowledge; and that this claim of possessing a special wisdom is exactly
what makes Kabbalah fit the concept of esoteric discourse. However,
since this position is not yet widely accepted I here present one of the
current discussions regarding the question of whether Kabbalah can be
- 46 -
regarded as esoteric or not. In his book The Art of Conversion Harvey

Hames argues that Kabbalah should not be seen as esoteric. On the one
hand he wishes to withdraw Kabbalah from earlier assumptions that
Kabbalah is esoteric and elitist in its doctrine:
Generally, scholars who have worked on the Kabbalistic material

have been inclined to take the texts at face value, in other words,
to see the texts as a preserve of an elite who shared the esoteric
knowledge among themselves… The question that needs to be
answered is, why did these initiates start to put pen to paper and
to write works devoted to Kabbalah?
And he answers:
The need for written texts goes hand in hand with the growing
interest in the Kabbalistic approach to Judaism, and
demonstrates clearly the impossibility of restricting the doctrines
to an intellectual elite111.
He does concede however, that the kabbalistic texts have a twofold

purpose: The exoteric fulfils the need of attracting the attention of
curious readers, and the more esoteric purpose lies in what the texts do
not reveal, namely the techniques of gaining mystical experiences112.
This dialectic between the hidden and the revealed is of utmost
importance. Hames elaborates this further:
In the main, it was this distinction between the esoteric

teachings and mystical practices associated with the names of
God, and the general conception of the godhead and the
inferences of these teachings for everyday life, which marked the
borderline of what was revealed and what was concealed113.
I am certain that Hames is right in his conclusion, that there are

different levels of accessibility within the variety of kabbalistic texts.
111 Hames: The Art of Conversion, p.35-36.

112 Hames: The Art of Conversion, p. 36. It should be stated that the word esoteric in Hames
apparently is used as a synonym for secret, something that is often the case in common
scholarly literature. Albeit Hames does not speak of esotericism but only uses the adjective
esoteric. This is an important distinction to maintain, though it still needs to be explicitly
clarified how the term is used.
113 Hames: The Art of Conversion, p. 64.
- 47 -
However, I find that he underestimates the theurgic implications of

engaging in theosophical Kabbalah, and after all, both kinds of texts are
written down and therefore more or less revealed to the public. Further
on it becomes clear that what is to be revealed only to initiates is the
secret knowledge of the chariot and of creation, whereas the theosophical
teachings concerning the sefirot are the foundation of more common
teaching114. But the secret doctrines of creation and the chariot can very
well be of theosophical kind and not necessarily connected to the
question of mystical techniques and divine names.
Though I do agree with Hames’ argument, that we need to examine the
kabbalistic text corpus within its social context, I am not persuaded by
his conclusions regarding the writing of the texts themselves. The
writing of esoteric material can very well be an element of an esoteric
discourse to reveal the secret teachings. That is, it is by no means
evident that everything in the written texts is possible to understand
without proper (oral) introduction or on the background of earlier
teachings. Also, the writing down of esoteric teachings could be a result
of an ever-growing amount of material, so that the only way to preserve
it would be to write it down. This is a purely hypothetical solution, but
the point is to show that the conclusion of Hames is as well. However,
the huge corpus of kabbalistic texts from the late medieval period does
indicate that Kabbalah grew in popularity, also as an alternative to the
more rationalistic and philosophical approach to Judaism as presented
by Maimonides. But I will argue that the different layers of accessibility
are not just thematic, since they are to be found within almost every
theme in the kabbalistic text corpus.
This solves some of the contradictory scholarly opinions regarding the
problem of esotericism versus exotericism in Kabbalah. Where Elliot
Wolfson sees Kabbalah as almost entirely esoteric, Harvey Hames
argues for the almost complete lack of esotericism within Kabbalah.
- 48 -
Again the problem seems to be mainly the equalization of esotericism

with secrecy115.
Another solution is found in an article by Yechiel Shalom Goldberg
where he examines the taxonomy in the works by mainly Scholem and
Idel and ends up comparing Wolfson’s approach with the one of
Hames. He sees one common denominator: namely wisdom in
different guises, traditional (Hames) or concealed (Wolfson):
One way to classify medieval Kabbalah, as it emerged in

Provence and Catalonia and was elaborated in the Zohar, is a
medieval form of wisdom literature, representative of a medieval
wisdom tradition, with roots in biblical and rabbinic wisdom
literatures, but also with features that set it apart from earlier
wisdom traditions116.
Actually Goldberg points to, what I would argue is an element where

Kabbalah falls into place within an esoteric discourse, when he writes:
‘kabbalistic wisdom is a form of knowledge that can be transmitted
among tridents, but should not be transmitted openly’117. This also
complements our working definition of Kabbalah.
A fruitful approach to the esoteric side of kabbalistic texts is to see the
dialectical tension of the impossibility of revealing the secret
knowledge, meanwhile preserving this concealed secrecy as an
expression of an apophatic discourse. This type of discourse makes the
impossible dilemma of revealing the hidden a necessity for achieving
the ultimate knowledge regarding the divine. It should not be seen as an
epistemological problem to be solved by the scholar, but one of the
very means for the user of the texts to achieve illumination. Very similar
problems can be observed in the writings of Ibn Arabi, where every
statement about the divine is immediately dissolved in infinity. A
115 This is mainly the case with Hames’ use of the term. Wolfson seems to see esotericism as
the dialectics between the hidden and the revealed.
116 Goldberg: ’Wisdom’, p. 13.
117 Goldberg: ’Wisdom’, p. 14.
- 49 -
thorough analysis of this textual and discursive phenomenon is done in

the influential work by Michael Sells118. Apophatic discourse can often
be seen as connected to higher knowledge. However, in the texts which
will be examined later in this thesis, apophasis is not one of the keys
that connect language and higher knowledge. Rather, as I will show,
language serves a double function as both the means and the goal for
higher knowledge.
2. The Concept of Language in Medieval

Kabbalah
2.1 The Language of Creation

It is a basic premise for Judaism that the world is created by means of
the Hebrew language. In the cosmogony of the Torah god creates the
world out of nothing by ten utterances, that is, in Genesis I it is written
ten times “‫( ”ויאמר אלהים‬and god said). The conclusion by the
rabbinical authorities in the mishnah Pirkei Avot (Sayings of the Fathers)
5:1119 was that
Ten times God said something, a statement composed of

the letters of the Hebrew alphabet, and behold – there was
the world. From this one can conclude that by combining
the powers of the letters with the numbers, God created
the world out of nothing120.
This conclusion was taken to its extreme in the very short but highly
influential text, the Sefer Yetzirah (Book of Formation). As previously noted
it was in this text that the concept of the sefirot was introduced, however
118 Sells: Mystical Languages.

119 Neusner (transl.): The Mishnah, p. 672-688.
120 Dan: The Ancient Jewish Mysticism, p. 201.
- 50 -
The Concept of Language in Medieval Kabbalah
only in its basic meaning of “ciphers”. The main concern of this small
book was to give a precise representation of the process of creation as
expounded in Genesis. However, the scope was something radically
different from just a mishnahic exegesis. The purpose of the explanation
of the act of creation was nothing less than possibility of reproducing
the divine creation. With the words of Joseph Dan:
This is not a description of Genesis I but a scientific

statement, that a certain combination of these thirty-two
paths brings about the creation. This is not a formulation
or a description, but a formulation which seeks to find the
scientific truth regarding the way that the world was created – and if
this is scientific truth, then bringing it to light means that
one will be able to repeat the process, in all or in part.
Thus whoever knows the secret of the thirty-two paths can
possibly participate in the process of creation, either of a
world or a creature121.
The thirty-two paths are the twenty-two letters of the Hebrew alphabet
combined with the ten numbers by which god created everything. As
the Sefer Yetzirah states in the first chapter:
Yah, the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel, the Living God,
God Almighty, high and exalted, dwelling for ever, and
holy is his name, carved out thirty-two wondrous paths of
wisdom. He created is universe with three groups of letters
(separim): with seper and seper and seper122.
The different groups of letters are later explained to be the twenty-two

letters of the Hebrew alphabet divided into three groups: 1) Three
primary letters or “mothers”, 2) seven double letters and 3) twelve
simple letters. However if we take the three groups as they are
explained in the alternative version they are not just groups of letters
121 Dan: The Ancient Jewish Mysticism, p.202 (emphasis by Dan).

122 Sefer Yetzirah §1, version A in Hayman: Sefer Yesira, p. 59. Hayman’s translation is a
synoptic edition based on the earliest manuscripts. One of the other renderings of this
paragraph reads in the last line: ‘He created his universe with three types of things: seper
(writing), separ (numbers) and sippur (speech)’,(version C). The root letters however are the
same: ‫ספר‬.
- 51 -
but contains the activity of writing and speaking a certain number of

times. This is elaborated further in several of the versions of the text. It
is evident that it is not just the writing of the language that has creative
powers but even more the act of speaking. This of course a direct
consequence of the creation story in Genesis I but here it is explained
in detail with regard to the pronunciation of the different letters. As in
§ 17:
The Twenty-two letters are the foundation: Three primary

letters, seven doubles and twelve simple. They are carved
out by the voice, hewn out in the air, fixed in the mouth in
five positions123.
The author continues to explain how each letter is pronounced. It is in

the act of speaking that creation unfolds. However, it is not enough to
have created the universe by means of the letters. The letters are
combined and fixed on a wheel with two hundred and thirty-one gates,
the sum that is reached when combining each of the twenty-two letters
with all the others. The letters are also connected to the numbers, i.e.
the sefirot and they are seen as the basis where the letters are the
foundation of creation, and consequently creation can only be
accomplished by the combination of the two.
The sefirot are identified with different parts of creation so that the first
is the “Spirit of the Living God”, the next three are the elements air,
water and fire and the final six are the physical directions above and
below, east, west, north and south. The different parts of the newly
created world have to be sealed in order to be stable:
Five - he sealed above. He chose three simple letters and

fixed them in his great name YHW (‫)יהו‬. And he sealed
with them the six edges (of the universe), and turned
upwards and sealed it with YHW. Six – he sealed below.
He turned downwards and sealed it with YWH. Seven – he
sealed the east. He turned in front and sealed it with
123 Sefer Yetzirah §17, version A in Hayman: Sefer Yesira, p. 93.
- 52 -
HYW. Eight – he sealed the west. He turned behind and

sealed it with HWY. Nine – he sealed the south. He turned
to his right and sealed it with WYH. Ten – he sealed the
north. He turned to his left and sealed it with WHY124.
The notion of sealing something in order to gain control over it is a

widespread idea in late antiquity literature such as the Heikhalot texts,
Jewish magical treatises and certain of the so called gnostic texts,
especially the Books of Jeu and some of the apocryphal tractates of the
Nag Hammadi Library. However, the act of sealing is mainly attributed
to the human being who moves in the divine realms and not the
divinity itself. This is what could lead us to view the Sefer Yetzirah as a
manual of creation by which one can imitate the divine act of creation
more than just a cosmogony.
Several aspects of this short treatise are important with regards to the
later Kabbalah. First and most important is the invention of the
concept of the ten sefirot and second is the notion of the possibility of
copying the divine act of creation. Intrinsic to both is the concept of
language and what differed from the mainstream rabbinical
understanding of language was first and foremost the radically creative
nature attributed to the letters but also the basic view of the spoken
language as the foundation of the universe. As Dan sums up:
The two main characteristics of the concept of language in

the Sefer Yezira are, first, language as an oral phenomenon,
pronounced rather than written, and second, language as
the expression of structure, reflecting the intrinsic
structure of the divine world and emplying it to give shape
and order to the universe and everything in it125.
The focus on the oral aspect of language had an enormous impact on

later Jewish esotericism where it was to be combined with idea of the
oral Torah. As we will later see in the analysis of the text the Fountain of
124 Sefer Yetzirah §15 , version A in Hayman: Sefer Yesira, p. 89-90.
- 53 -
Wisdom it is the different types of pronunciation which come to be the

key to the esoteric knowledge inherent in the Hebrew language. These
different modes of dealing with language come from one of the final
parts of the Sefer Yetzirah:
When Abraham our father came, and looked, and saw, and
investigated, and understood, and carved, and combined,
and hewed, and pondered, and succeded, the Lord of All
was revealed to him […] He bound twenty-two letters into
his language, and the Holy One revealed to him the
secret126.
This is also one of the key paragraphs for the reinterpretation given by
Abraham Abulafia who understood it such as prophesies could be
achieved through repeating what the biblical Abraham did. Thus his
ecstatic practices involved the seemingly random recitation of the
Hebrew letters until the sought experience was achieved. The Zohar on
the other hand made a quite different point from the paragraph. Here
Abraham was seen as the one who through his piousness became
worthy to study the oral Torah with god in his celestial academy.
In the Zohar the process of creation as it is expounded in the Sefer
Yetzirah is restated but the notion of the ten sefirot is put into a fullblown
mythical narrative. In this way all of Torah is seen as an explanation of
the inner life of the godhead as it unfolds in the sefirotic realm and the
creation is understood through sefirotic symbolism:
When concealed of all concealed verged on being revealed,

it produced first a single pint, which ascended to become
thought. Within, it drew all drawings, engraved all
engravings, carving within the concealed holy lamp a
graving of one hidden design, holy of holies, a deep
structure emerging from thought, called ‫( מי‬Who), origin
of structure. Existent and non-existent, deep and hidden,
called by no name but Who.
125 Dan:’The Language of Creation’, p. 146.

126 Sefer Yetzirah §61, version A in Hayman: Sefer Yesira, p. 182.
- 54 -
Seeking to be revealed, to be named, it garbed itself in a

splendid, radiant garment and created ‫( אלה‬these). ‫אלה‬
attained the name: these letters joined with those,
culminating in the name ‫ ]…[ אלהים‬Just as ‫ מי‬is
combined with ‫אלה‬, so the name ‫ אלהים‬is constantly
polysemous. Through this mystery the universe exists127.
The concealed of all concealed is Ein Sof which becomes Keter, the first
emanation when it is just about to be revealed. The single point is the
second sefirah, Hokhmah, the primordial point from where all creation
begins. In the drawing, engraving and carving all the subsequent sefirot
were prefigured within the divine thought before emerging in the
process of creation. The one hidden design is the third sefirah, Binah
from which the seven lower and more revealed sefirot emanates. This is
also why the upper triad of the sefirot, personified in Binah is called ‫מי‬,
since she is so concealed that she is beyond naming. Only in
combination with the seven lower sefirot connected in the single name
‫ אלה‬can she be named with the name achieved by combining the two
words, that is, ‫אלהים‬. This name is said to be polysemous as it denotes
other sefirot than just Binah, most notably the Shekhinah.
This short introduction to the concept of the Hebrew language as the
means of creation serves as a background for the following discussion
of the esoteric implications of this understanding of language. The Sefer
Yetzirah and the Zohar can in this exposition be seen as two extremities
both in time and meaning, ranging from late Antiquity to the golden
days of Kabbalah in the thirteenth century and from the concise
“scientific” character of the first to the lengthy theosophical and highly
symbolic representations in the latter. Between these two extremes we
find the two texts I will focus on in the final chapters of this part of the
thesis. But first I will engage in a more general examination of the role
of language in the medieval Kabbalah and especially how language
127 Haqdamat Sefer ha-Zohar 1:2a, in Sefer ha Zohar, Pritzker edition vol. I, p.8.
- 55 -
comes to serve as both the goal and the means of absolute or higher
knowledge.
2.2 Language as Higher Knowledge

The kabbalistic concept of the Hebrew language as both transmitter
and container of divine truths, some explicit and some inaccessible for
all other than the illuminated kabbalist, is an example of the esoteric
character of Kabbalah. Hebrew is not only seen as the primordial
language by which and of which the world is created. The kabbalistic
interpretation of language is even more radical in its view of the infinite
layers of meaning in the letters. This meaning is not only found in the
formation of words, but in the very appearance of the letters on the
Torah scroll. It is not only the black form of the written letter that is
significant, but even more the negative white background of the letter.
It is here that the secret and hidden meaning is to be found and it is
through this that the kabbalist can gain access to the supreme
knowledge of God 128 . An article by Scholem brings an interesting
quotation from Nahmanides:
We have an authentic tradition, according with which the

whole of the Torah consists of divine names, namely in
the manner in which the words, which we can read there,
can be divided up in very varied ways, and namely into
(esoteric) 129 names… The Torah was originally written
with black fire upon white fire130.
This idea has been the object of much rumination and one of the
interpretations was to see the white fire as the garments of god, or even
more radical, the very skin of god on which the pre-existent Torah was
128 Moshe Idel has treated this subject extensively in Idel: Absorbing Perfections, especially in
chapter 2.
129 I suspect this word has been inserted by Scholem himself since, there is no word for
esoteric in Hebrew and sod probably would not appear alone.

130 Scholem: ‘The Name of God (I)’ p. 77.
- 56 -
written131. This makes it possible for the kabbalist to look behind the
written text and focus on the backgrund, the white fire, and thereby see
god himself. This is elaborated among others by Jacob ha-Kohen in his
Explanation of the Letters:
When I said to you that the white form and not the black
exterior form in the aleph [‫]א‬corresponds to the exaltedness
of the Holy One, blessed be He, I said this to you as a
principle and a great secret: The white form corresponds
to the white robe132.
Possibly this approach to language can be best described as a sort of

visual negative theology, where the reverse form of the letters is seen as
containing the ultimate knowledge of god and the Torah133.
Also according to Nahmanides, the Torah, when conceived of as a
series of divine names, is the oral Torah that was revealed to Moses134.
And with Scholem’s words:
For the kabbalists, God is at once the shortest and the

longest name. The shortest because each individual letter
in itself represents a name. The longest, because it
expresses itself first as being all-encompassing in the total
whole of the entire Torah135.
That the Torah is interpreted as an almost indefinite series of divine

names is exemplary to the kabbalistic concept of language in general.
Within the Hebrew language itself there are always deeper layers of
meaning which can be extracted from the text and the Torah, in being
divine, is just the perfect and most inexhaustible text of all. The
perception of the Torah as consisting of a myriad of divine names is the
131 Idel: Absorbing Perfections, p.47-50.

132 Jacob ha-Kohen: Explanation, p. 154.
133 See Idel: ‘Between Presence and Representation’ for an exposition of the relationship
between god and the Torah.

134 Idel: ‘Between Presence and Representation’, p. 78.
135 Scholem: ‘The Name of God (II)’, p. 169-170.
- 57 -
very foundation of the more particular and different ideas of language

that we meet in the different kabbalistic schools.
Moshe Idel presents three models of kabbalistic conception of
language, the ecstatic model, the talismanic model and the theosophical-
theurgical model:
The ecstatic model is concerned more with the changes a certain

mystical technique, based mainly on language, may induce in
man; the talismanic model emphasizes the effect that someone’s
ritualistic linguistic acts may have on the external worlds; and the
theosophical-theurgical model centers on inducing harmony
within the divine realm136.
The talismanic model is elaborated further:
In general, this approach can be called hyposemantic, which

means that language is regarded as magically effective even when
one ignores its semantic aspects137.
It is difficult to strictly maintain these categories in practice as the

kabbalistic text material often crosses these taxonomical boundaries, as
for instance in the case of the ineffable divine name YHVH. This name
is used as a designation for the supreme godhead and it bears no
meaning in itself but is on the other hand seen as the foundation of all
linguistic meaning, so this name could indeed be called hyposemantic
and it certainly also has an inherent efficacy as all the other divine
names do. But still, this name is used differently by the various
kabbalists and could very well fall into each of the abovementioned
categories even within the same texts. As in the case of the Gates of
Light, the name YHVH is both magical effective, hyposemantic and can
be used both for personal advantage and for inducing divine harmony.
Idel’s model is useful as a tool for opening up the texts under
136 Idel: Absorbing Perfections, p. 15.

137 Idel: Absorbing Perfections, p.14.
- 58 -
examination, but it lacks one vital aspect with its focus on the effect or
goal of language, namely the concept of the infinite layers of meaning
within language in general and the Torah in particular.
Joseph Dan draws the distinction between communicative and non-
communicative language, and magical versus mystical uses of language.
Concerning the divine names he argues:
“we can define a sacred name of god as that linguistic

expression of the divine that is not communicative; it just
is, representing in a linguistic form the inexpressible
essence of god himself”138.
As an example of this he shows how a piece from the Song of Songs is

used in the Heikhalot literature to denote the most secret and potent of
the names of god by arranging the verses with the title Tzevaot added to
each phrase. This, he argues is an example of how description is turned
into essence and how the mystics are doing their best to distance
themselves as far as possible from the communicative and semantic
aspect of language. In my opinion, this is not a correct interpretation of
the role of language in these texts. On the contrary I would argue that
the mystics try to combine these levels, so that language becomes both
communicative and non-communicative at the same time. In this way,
the verses from the Song of Songs mentioned by Dan are both a
description of god and his very essence.
The whole of the Torah can be understood strictly literally while at the
same time seen to include infinite layers of meaning, both linguistic,
that is communicative and visual and non-communicative when
focusing on the “white fire” instead of the “black fire”. In short: The
communicative aspect of the Torah is the different layers of semantics
inherent in the text while the non-communicative aspects are the
138 Dan: ‘The name of God’, p. 143.
- 59 -
background of the letters and the mingling of letters to create non-

semantic structures from the text.
As is the case with the dialectics in transmission, the linguistic dialectics
are of the utmost importance in these texts: It is in the meeting point
between apparent oppositions that new levels of meaning are produced,
and it is this that is seen as the entrance to hidden and absolute
knowledge.
Regarding the other distinction made by Dan, of magical versus
mystical uses of language, this too seems difficult to maintain
empirically. Magical use of language should involve the idea of the
above mentioned inherent efficacy of the language and this is what Dan
wants to distance mysticism from. Especially in the Heikhalot texts and
in the ecstatic mysticism of Abraham Abulafia, it is this efficacy that
becomes the means for mystical illumination. In this way magical and
mystical interpretations of language get intermingled.
Idel has earlier approached the idea of the dialectic concept of language,
though from a slightly different angle, when he describes how
intentional speech such as prayer has a theurgical function that
transcends human creation to complement the descending divine
speech139.
In the following chapters I will present two kabbalistic texts in order to
exemplify my point about language as an esoteric discursive element in
Kabbalah. Though very different, both texts view and use language in
two ways: First, as a means to achieve higher knowledge, secondly, they
see the proper understanding of language, and as such the divine
names, as being the sought knowledge.
139 Idel: ’Reification of Language’.
- 60 -
2.3 Gates of Light

Joseph ben Abraham Gikatilla (1248 - c. 1325) was the author of several
kabbalistic tractates from the late thirteenth century. These works can
roughly be divided into two main parts, namely the philosophical-
kabbalistical writings and the theosophical-kabbalistical writings140. The
main focus of this chapter is one of Gikatilla’s most influential
theosophical books: the Sha’arei Orah (Gates of Light)141, which is a
systematic treatise concerning the ten sefirot and the divine names. Like
in his earlier writings, Gikatilla emphasizes the importance of the
Hebrew language as a means for enlightenment and the true perception
of the language can even be considered the goal of the kabbalist. But
unlike the earlier mainwork, Ginnat ‘Egoz (The Nut Garden), all wordplays
and elaborations on the divine names are connected to the sefirotic realm
and the names of the specific sefirot.
The chapters of the Gates of Light follow the structure of the classical
representation of the ten sefirot, namely as a tree. The first gate is thus
the tenth sphere or the lowest sefirah, Malkhut, and from here the
author slowly proceeds up the sefirotic realm, one sphere/gate at a time
elaborating on all the different divine names connected to each of them.
Each has their own chapter except from the third and fourth gate
corresponding to the eighth and seventh sphere, which are joined
together in one chapter. The reason for this is explained in the very
beginning of the chapter:
It was necessary to bring both Names within the same gate

even though each of the other names has a single gate to
itself. For these two Names are defined in the light of each
other. For when one is defined the other has to be brought
140 This distinction is made by Blickstein in his: Between Philosophy and Mysticism, which is an
analysis of the philosophical- kabbalistical treatises, especially the Ginnat Egoz.

141 I use the transliteration provided by Weinstein. All following quotations from the Gates of
Light follow his choice of transliteration, even though it is at times not consistent. Besides
Weinstein’s edition I have consulted the Hebrew original in the Gershom Scholem Collection
at the National Library of Jerusalem: 1561 (cat. nr. R261).
- 61 -
in, thus they end up being defined as one, for they are
united together as one142.
The two names in question are Elohim Tzavaot and YHVH Tzavaot
corresponding to the sefirot Netzah and Hod. The reason for them
being joined together is that in these two the divine light from the
upper realm of the tree is collected and conducts the gathered light into
Yesod and from there to Malkhut.
The book is written as a guide from a master to his student or at least
fellow kabbalist143 where the reader is instructed in using the divine
names to achieve his goals. The short introduction is one of the most
important parts of the book and indeed gives the framework into which
the rest of the text is to be understood. Therefore I will quote the
beginning at length:
You, my brother and soulmate, have asked me to show

you the pathway to the Names of the Ever-Blessed God
so you may derive what you will from them and reach the
place that you desire. Even though your enthusiasm is far
greater than your question, I still feel compelled to divulge
to you the way the light is disseminated and how God
wants us to reach it. When you have learned this, then
God will answer when you call144.
Gikatilla reveals to his student how the divine names can be used to
gain access to divine realms otherwise unattainable to man. These
realms are considered guarded by dreadful creatures that are to be
overcome to reach the intended destination in the upper spheres. This
can be done through correct knowledge of the divine names attributed
to each level. At this point Gikatilla polemicizes with those who claim
that it is the mere mentioning of the appropriate name that will help the
person in his theurgical task: “The verse does not promise safety by
142 Gates of Light, p. 115.

143 Gikatilla writes the book as a request from his ”brother and soulmate”, Gates of Light,. p.
3.
144 Gates of Light, p. 3
- 62 -
merely mentioning His Name but by knowing His Name. It is knowing

that is the most significant145”. The student should put every effort in
knowing the meaning and significance of each of the divine names, so
they will bring glory to god and in return give merit to the person.
Those who use the names without the proper knowledge will on the
other hand be ruined.
The purpose of the book is to reveal the ultimate wisdom regarding the
divine names, that wisdom which discards all other interpretations of
the names. Like Nahmanides, Gikatilla too states that all of Torah is
made up of the divine names:
…all the words of the Torah are intrinsically woven into

the tapestry of God’s Cognomens which are tied to God’s
Names which, in turn, are tied to the ineffable
Tetragrammaton, YHVH, to which all the Torah’s words
are inextricably linked146.
To properly know the divine names means to know the relations

between the different names and the attributes connected to each name,
but also how these names are spread throughout all of the Torah. It is a
method for achieving the hidden meaning of the Torah, the meaning
that lies in the interconnectedness of attributes, names and the text of
the Torah. This higher knowledge is the one that enables the kabbalist
to ascend through the sefirotic tree, as it is explained in the third and
fourth gate:
Those who knew these truths would direct their prayers to

these ideas and they would nullify all strong decrees, for
they had the keys of the Kabbalah in their grasp and they
would enter the place they needed to147.
145 Gates of Light, p.5 (my emphasis).

147 Gates of Light, p.141.
- 63 -
The decrees could come from the sefirah of Binah, but the one who
knows how to ascend properly will be able to pass these decrees and
proceed to the highest sefirah, Keter; it all depends of knowing to which
names and thereby sefirot one should direct the prayers. That the ‘strong
decrees’ would stem from Binah seems to indicate Gikatilla’s
indeptedness to Isaac ha-Kohen. Kohen explains in his Treatise of the Left
Emanation how the Sitra Ahra (The Other Side) emerges from
emanations brought forth from Binah.
The metaphor of seeing the sefirotic realm arranged as a tree is distinct in
the Gates of Light. It shows the name YHVH as the trunk, the name
EHYE148 as the roots with all the other names as branches to the tree
and some as the treetop. This is exemplified in the following:
Know that all His Names are carried and included with the
unique Name which is YHVH, some of which may be
analogized to roots, some to branches, and others to the
treetop. His unique Name, may He be Blessed, stands in
the centre and is called the centre line, while the other
Names are interconnected like a tree with roots and
branches.149
It should be noted though, that the tree is upside down, so that the
roots have their firmament in the uppermost realm and the treetop
reaches toward the human world. The names are the foundations of the
world and the names by which the world was created. The inherent
potential residing in these names therefore places a heavy burden of
responsibility on the one who knows them. To utter a name at the
wrong circumstances will shake the divine realms and thereby also the
human world. And the unique name YHVH, as it contains all other
names, is of course the most potent of them all and therefore usually
148 EHYE would be better transliterated EHYH (Hebrew: ‫ )אהיה‬meaning “I am”, the name
that God uses to identify himself when he reveals himself to Moses in the desert (Exodus
3:14). EHYH also refers to the highest sefirah Keter.
149 Gates of Light p. 159-160.
- 64 -
ineffable. But a passage of the Gates of Light seems to alter this usual
prohibition against uttering exactly this divine Name:
For there are no Names that are not contained in the

Name YHVH, may He be Blessed. Now that you know
this great and terrible thing, you must realize how careful
one must be at the time one mentions it. For when you do
you carry all the Sacred Names and it is as if you bear on
your lips and upon the tongue the Holy Name and all Holy
Names, it is as if your lips bear the responsibility of the
world and all that it contains150.
It is not explicitly stated when it is appropriate to pronounce the

otherwise ineffable name, but it is stated that in the temple the high
priest would pronounce the name in praise and it would bless all the
upper realms, so that it would flow all the way to the human realm. So
the apprentice should imitate the high priest and only pronounce the
name in utmost piety151.
The image of the Torah as the garment of god is also a topic of
investigation in the Gates of Light. God wears his names like a garment
as is seen: ‘Know that when God wears the name TZAVAOT…152’
As long as the Shekhinah is in exile god wears all his names and
attributes, but when Shekhinah again dwells among Israel, god will cast
off all his names and cognomens so that Israel can see god himself153.
Since the exposition of the sefirotic tree is so well structured and fairly
easily understood, the Gates of Light is one of the kabbalistic texts that
has been easiest to access for seekers of divine knowledge. Therefore it
has been of major importance in the development of the Christian
150 Gates of Light, p.165.

151 Until the destruction of the temple, the high priest uttered the name during Yom Kippur
with the ritual implication of renewing the cosmic order. After the destruction of the temple,
the tetragrammaton was considered ineffable, since there was nowhere holy enough to
invocate god. The uttering of the name would draw down the divine presence and this was
considered inappropriate or even impossible outside the sanctuary of the temple.
153 Gates of Light p. 177.
- 65 -
adaptations of kabbalistic material, like in the Kabbalah of Johannes

Reuchlin154.
The rhetoric of the book is typical for kabbalistic esoteric literature.
Now and then it is stated that the author does not have permission to
reveal more on a given subject, but still he continues, giving the reader a
feeling of exclusivity and secrecy. This is part of the privileged speech
situation already established by the style of master to student dialogue.
This situation is further enhanced by the repeated references to well
esteemed ancient Rabbis like Rabbi Akiva and earlier esoteric literature,
the Sefer Yezirah and the Heikhalot, providing the text with authenticity
and authority. This is further enhanced by the claim that the text is not
innovative in nature but rather just transmitting and revealing ancient
esoteric tradition.
As stated in the beginning of the book, “knowledge” is utterly
important. This is emphasized further regarding the sphere of Da’at
(knowledge):
It [Da’at] is the Sphere that includes all the Spheres. For it

is the source of the spring which has no end or final
purpose. Because the Sphere DAT begins from
MaLCHUT (the lowest and most humanly accessible
Sphere) and reaches to AYN SOF155.
But Da’at is not only a sphere encompassing all the other spheres, it is
the symbol of the middle pillar of the sefirotic tree. This also shows how
it is possible for it to reach all the way from Malkhut to Keter and
beyond.
The importance of language can be seen in the perception of the
difference between Moses and the other prophets. Moses is the only
one who receives verbal revelation whereas all the other prophets only
receive visionary revelations. Thus Moses is the only one who has seen
154See Reuchlin: On the Art of the Kabbalah, Bibliotheca Philosophica Hermetica: Philosophia
Symbolica and below n. 122.
- 66 -
the name YHVH without all the other names as garments, that is, he
has seen god as he is behind the veils of names and cognomens. This
provides the notion of language a status much higher than the notion of
vision and consequently implies that absolute knowledge is to be sought
within language and not in visions.
The idea of seeing the Torah as made up of the divine names enables
the kabbalist to do a whole new form of exegesis so as to find deeper
levels of meaning within the text. The names show in which state of
emanation god reveals himself in the specific passage. Knowledge of
the divine names and the pathways of the sefirotic realm provide the
kabbalist with the means of personal advantages but also with the
obligation to act according to the divine will. It is the theurgical task for
the one who knows the way, to restore the primordial balance within
the godhead:
Those therefore who know how to please their creator

know how to repair the way to the SHeCHINaH, to bring
her back to her place and to repair the channels that have
been ruined; then the upper SHeCHINaH [Binah] will
bestow her blessings upon the upper beings, which allows
the other Spheres to fill the lower SHeCHINaH [Malchut],
and that allows her to return to her place to bring forth
blessing to the world156.
This reestablishment is precisely what kabbalistic theurgy is about. The

kabbalist is the tool by which the original cosmic order can be restored;
by observing the mitzvot, that is, the 613 religious commandments and
prohibitions listed in the Torah, and study the Kabbalah he works on
fulfilling the soteriological task of reestablishing the connection
between this world and the divine, so that the Shekhinah once again can
dwell among the people of Israel. In this rendering, the proper
knowledge of language is the tool for the kabbalist by which he can act
155 Gates of Light. p. 231.

- 67 -
according to the divine will and perform the theurgic aspects of the
mitzvot. However, it is not only a tool, since the acquisition of the right
knowledge of the language implies a higher knowledge of the divine
which is only accessible through and within the language of the torah and
the divine names.
In the next text we also see the emphasis on the proper understanding
of divine language as identifiable with higher knowledge. It is the short
treatise Fountain of Wisdom, which will be analysed in the following
chapter.
2.4 The Fountain of Wisdom

The Ma’yan ha Hokhmah (Fountain of Wisdom) is an anonymous work
attributed to a circle of kabbalists called the ‘Hug ha Iyyun’ or the Circle of
Contemplation which flourished in Spain and Provence around 1230.
Among the other writings of the circle are the Books of Contemplation and
the Book of Unity. The writings complement each other so that the Books
of Contemplation is a mostly theosophical work, the Fountain of Wisdom is
more concerned with an elaborate cosmogony and finally the Book of
Unity is focusing on three supreme lights of the godhead, which
represent the single essence of the divine. The texts are scattered among
several different manuscripts that show great inconsistency, and
consequently this analysis is based on the eclectic edition and
translation published by Mark Verman together with the printed
Hebrew versions available at the National Library in Jerusalem157. The
Fountain of Wisdom is the least accessible of the three books by the Circle
of Contemplation, it is focuses on the very beginning of creation and is
said to communicate the teachings given by the archangel Michael to
157 Verman: The Books of Contemplation. Joseph Dan gives another translation of the Fountain of
Wisdom in The Early Kabbalah, but it is based only on a single manuscript, wherefore I chose
the version given by Verman. The editions consulted in the Gershom Scholem Collection at
the National Library in Jerusalem are: Amsterdam 1651 (cat. nr. 942), Venice 1601 (cat. nr.
- 68 -
the angel Pe’eli158 who then revealed them to Moses159. This gives an
authority to the text that is even stronger than the usual pseudepigraphy
as employed by attributing the teaching to ancient rabbis. What the
readers should understand is that this text is a divine revelation
revealing the divine secrets without other intermediaries than Moses
himself. This text takes the doctrine of the Sefer Yezirah to its most
radical interpretation. Not only is everything created from and by the
Hebrew letters, here every part of creation is considered to have its own
language which can be learned through contemplation of the 231 gates
of wisdom also taken from the Sefer Yezirah. The following is one of the
most essential passages of the Fountain of Wisdom, wherefore it is quoted
at length:
For all wisdom and understanding, all comprehension and

thought, inquiry, knowledge, vocalization, reflection,
speech, whispering, voice, action, guarding, and
undertaking - all are found in this Name160. When you
want to comprehend and become enlightened about these
four letters, calculate them using the 231 gates. From them
you will ascend to activity, from activity to experience,
from experience to visualization, from visualization to
inquiry, from inquiry to knowledge, from knowledge to
ascension and from ascension to certainty - until you
fathom the explanation of each and every thing and are
enlightened in the seventy languages. Then you will
understand the words of man, the speech of domesticated
animals, the chirping of birds, the utterances of wild
animals, and the barking of dogs; [all of] which are
accessible for the wise to know. From thence you will
become enlightened in the highest of levels: namely,
comprehending the conversations of palm trees, the
175), Berlin 1651 (cat. nr. 147), N.N. (cat. nr. 152), Tzernowich 1863 (cat. nr. 155) and
Warsaw 1885 (cat. nr. 160).
158 Can be translated as “God’s mouth” or “wondrous”, depending on the vocalization.
159 The idea of Moses receiving more than just the written Torah on the Mount Sinai, is one
of the most common themes in kabbalistic literature. Within rabbinic tradition it is

acknowledged that Moses received both the written Torah and the oral Torah, but the
kabbalists tend to go further and argue that he also received the secrets of the kabbalistic
tradition.
Also the idea of an angel transmitting divine secrets to Moses is common in Old Testament
Pseudepigrapha. (Verman: The Books of Contemplation p.50, n.68).
160 That is EHYH or YHVH.
- 69 -
vocalizations of the seas, and the perfection of hearts and

innermost thoughts. Finally, you will attain complete
clarity and tranquillity, in order to consider the thought of
the Supreme One, who dwells in the Ether; there is no
level higher than this161.
As is the case with the Gates of Light the entrance to enlightenment is

through contemplation of language. Here the supreme enlightenment is
not only concerned with the divine, though it is definitely the utmost
goal, i.e. the thought of the Supreme One, ultimate knowledge of the
created world is a necessary part of the illumination. It is significant that
it is through the active use of language that one can reach this
enlightenment. This is seen by the choice of words: inquiry, knowledge,
vocalization, reflection, speech, whispering, and voice as listed in the
above quoted section. Throughout the book the same rhetoric is
provided, giving a series of words indicating the proper order in which
to engage in the contemplative activities.
The ether where the Supreme One dwells is also called the root-
principle, the Primal Ether and the Holy Spirit. This ether existed prior
to all things and from this primordial light and primordial darkness
sprang forth. These realms are outside even the highest level of human
inquiry and not even Moses was allowed to ask questions about them.
The reason for this is that here lay the very foundation of the existence
of god, but from the darkness on, Moses is revealed everything, ‘even
the creation of My essence and the essence of My Name and My
Glory162.’
One of the major topics of this treatise is the concept of tikkun. This
concept has a different meaning in the present text than the usual
indication of restoration. Here it is rather a method or an “analytical
process: Uncovering the fundamental elements of the object of
161 Fountain of Wisdom, p. 52-53.

162 Fountain of Wisdom, p. 58.
- 70 -
inquiry”163. This however, might involve a theurgical restorative process

as a consequence of a successful implementation of the tikkun. It is
closely related to the understanding and achievement of the divine
language and divine names:
This is the tikkun, by directing your heart upon these four

letters that constitute the Ineffable Name. In them is
hidden a flowing stream and an overflowing fountain.
They divide into several parts and run like lightning. Their
light continues to increase and grow stronger164.
The increase and flow of divine light could very well be the kind of
restorative process that we later see in Zoharic theurgy, where it is the
goal of the kabbalist to study the torah and observe the mitzvot in order
to re-establish the cosmic balance within the godhead; a theme we also
noted in the Gates of Light. The overflow of divine light can, in the
symbolic world of the sefirot, only reach the human world when the
divine realm is in balance. Thus, the goal of the theurgical kabbalists
was to reestablish the harmony in the world of the sefirot. It was possible
when he, through the study of Torah, had understood the divine
mysteries. Then he then obliged to carry out the theurgical task which
was the meaning of human existence: That is, the uttermost purpose of
Kabbalistic work was to bring back the original balance within the
godhead:
The focus of the Kabbalistic theurgy is God not man; the

latter is given unimaginable powers, to be used in order to
repair the divine glory or the divine image; only his
initiative can improve Divinity. An archmagician, the
theurgical Kabbalist does not need external help or grace;
his way of operating – namely, the Torah – enables him to
be independent; he looks not so much for salvation by the
intervention of God as for God’s redemption by human
intervention165.
163 Fountain of Wisdom, p. 50, n. 69.

164 Fountain of Wisdom, p. 61 (emphasis by Verman).
165 Idel, Kabbalah, p.179.
- 71 -
There is both a soteriological and an eschatological side to the

theurgical process. If Israel succeeded in performing the mitzvot, a
double redemption would take place in that the divine balance would be
restored so the Shekhinah could once again dwell among men as the
divine presence. Thus the world would be restored to its original state
of purity where evil is only a potential within the sefirot of Gevurah.
Whereas the Zoharic theurgy is centered on performing the mitzvot, the
theurgy of the Fountain of Wisdom is ultimately based on the proper
understanding of the Hebrew language and its inherent tikkun:
The tikkun of which we have spoken is the start of

everything. It is the direction of the heart, intention of the
thought, calculation of the viscera, purification of the
heart, until the mind is settled and logic and language are
formed. From language [stems] clarification and from
clarification the word is formed. From the word is the
uttereance and from the utterance is the deed. This is its166
beginning167.
Within the Circle of Contemplation the concept of tikkun should not be

understood as “restoration”as it is in Lurianic Kabbalah. Here it is
rather a technical term for a certain analytical process or primal attitude
towards the true perception of the divine names and thus a linguistic
phenomenon:
These are the tikkun, combination, utterance, sum and

computation of the Ineffable Name – unique in the
branches of vocalization that is magnified in the thirteen
types of transformation168.
166 I.e. the Primal Ether.

167 Fountain of Wisdom p. 62 (emphasis by Verman).
168 Fountain of Wisdom p.50 (emphasis by Verman).
- 72 -
This concept of tikkun and its relation to language is also prevalent in

another text of the ‘Iyyun - Circle, namely the one Mark Verman names
Contemplation Standard:
The explanation of knowledge of Him is through five

processes and they are: Tikkun, combination, utterance,
sum and computation. The knowledge of these processes
is unique in the branches of the root of vocalization that is
magnified in the root of the thirteen types of
transformation169.
This text is a redaction of the Fountain of Wisdom and where, in the first
example, the combination, sum etc. are parts of the tikkun which thus
becomes the congregative designation for the different praxis; the
tikkun of the second example is the beginning of the series of practices
and attitude toward the divine names. In both texts tikkun is closely
linked to experiential knowledge as a part of the daily liturgical activity,
where tikkun can be seen as the foundation for the proper perception
and performance of language.
In the Circle of Contemplation higher knowledge is identified with
tikkun and tikkun is accomplished by a mystical dissolution of dialectical
boundaries:
It [tikkun] derives the word through the utterance and the

utterance through the word; the tikkun through the
combination and the combination through the tikkun; the
sum through the computation and the computation
through the sum - until all the words are positioned in the
font of the flame and the flame in the font – until there is
no measuring or quantifying the light that is hidden in the
superabundance of the secret darkness170.
Only in the completion of tikkun will the kabbalist be able to fully

understand this tikkun and as such the foundation of creation and thus
of divine language. The dialectic is therefore retained even in the
169 Contemplation Standard p.100 (emphasis by Verman).

170 Fountain of Wisdom p. 51 (emphasis by Verman).
- 73 -
acquisition of the absolute knowledge. With Idel’s terminology we

could say that language, at the moment it reached the utmost
hyposemantic level it gains its ultimate meaning and it is in the
understanding of this dialectic that the absolute knowledge resides.
Thus, mysticism and esotericism do not exclude each other, rather they
describe different discursive layers of the text. As is seen in the Fountain
of Wisdom, the rhetorical style ascribes itself in a mystical context and the
full accomplishment of tikkun can be seen as the semantic “meaning
event” as described by Sells, where all boundaries are dissolved. Still
this accomplishment implies the acquisition of an absolute knowledge
of the divine and of creation, thus showing the close but distinct
relationship between mystical and esoteric discourses.
3. Conclusion of Part 1
In the preceding chapters I have dealt with the theoretical construction
of central terminologies as well as with textual analysis.
I have chosen to use the typologies necessary for the present study in a
broad and elastic sense. That is, they do not exclude each other, but
merely show a certain discursive aspect within the text, group, current
etc. It is, however, still important to distinguish the different layers of
discourse, and to do this it is necessary to have the proper analytical
tools. Therefore I think it is of utmost importance to disentangle the
different scholarly constructs from the confusion of the current state.
Theoretically adequate definitions are essential to this pursuit and
therefore this has been a main goal of the first chapters of the thesis.
The definitions of Western esotericism have revolved around two
major problems: 1) The notion of “Western” as denoting a monolithic
Christian European culture where Islam and Judaism are only seen as
minor influences upon rather than integrated parts of Western culture
(Faivre, Neugebauer-Wölk), 2) The acknowledgement of a pluralistic
- 74 -
Conclusion of Part I
Western culture but without taking the full consequence as to include

Judaic or Islamic developments in the definition (Hanegraaff), and 3)
The confusion of historical and typological categories (Faivre and to a
less extend Hanegraaff). Solutions to these problems have been
presented by Olav Hammer and Kocku von Stuckrad, where the
approaches proposed by the latter two have shown to be the most
useful and theoretically consistent according to the epistemological
foundation set out in the introduction. Thus I have arrived at the
following definition of Western esotericism:
• Esotericism is a discourse implying a claim of higher or absolute

knowledge combined with a notion of secrecy in the manner by
which this knowledge is transmitted and attained. For pragmatic
reasons we can delimit the field to only denote discourses
prevalent in the West. However, “Western” should be
understood in its broadest possible sense, as a geographical
category with whatever pluralistic cultural and religious
implications this might entail. Western esotericism should thus
not be restricted to a certain period or cultural or religious
denomination within Western history.
The next discussion of the thesis is concerned with a definition of

Kabbalah. This implies a treatment of the different theories of the
origins of Kabbalah which roughly can be divided into two main
positions: Those who adhere to a linear theory, considering the origin
of Kabbalah to be of gnostic character (Scholem and Tishby) and those
who argue for a multilinear theory. Dan stands in between these
positions as he refutes the gnostic origins of Kabbalah albeit not
recognizing the early ashkenazi material as constitutive factors in the
formation of Kabbalah in southern Europe.
- 75 -
This leads to the discussion of a sufficient definition of Kabbalah where

the standard version has been to equate Kabbalah with the doctrine of
the ten sefirot (Scholem and Dan). This has been contested and
Kabbalah has been taken to imply also the ecstatic or prophetic
teachings (Idel and Wolfson) or simply to refer to the transmission of
the teachings of the divine names (Idel). However, none of these
proved theoretically sufficient and thus the final solution has taken its
outset in Heidi Laura’s definition and can thus be described as follows:
• Kabbalah should be seen as 1) the product or activity of a

historical current of people, the mequbalim, who use the notion of
Kabbalah as a designation for the practice and transmission of
Jewish esoteric knowledge. And 2) a discourse of transmitting
esoteric teachings claimed to belong to ancient Jewish wisdom
lore.
Thus the definition does not rely on a certain set of doctrines but rather
in the mode of transmission. In this context “esoteric” must be seen as
defined from the above criteria. Furthermore ad 2) is dependent on 1)
in that a kabbalistic discourse cannot exist before the historical
appearance of what was deemed Kabbalah by the mequbalim.
With an adequate definition of both Western esotericism and Kabbalah
it should be possible to determine whether these two discursive
categories can possibly include each other. To this purpose it has been
necessary to include the enquiry of mysticism since much Kabbalah
scholarship has been concerned with the relationship between
Kabbalah and, on the one hand mysticism, and on the other
esotericism. To clarify this, a definition of mysticism had to be reached
which did not imply a notion of “universal mysticism” (Staal) or was
too focused on “experience” (McGinn and Katz). The most suitable
definition turned out to be the one proposed by Annette Wilke:
- 76 -
• Mysticism is an umbrella concept for (1) experiences in which

boundaries are dissolved – those of the subject, such as in a
vacuum of thought, or in ecstasy; those of the object, so that
dualities are removed; those of space, to experience the infinite
in the finite-, those of time, when the ‘timeless, everlasting now’
replaces successive time. Mysticism also denotes (2) the
concepts, teachings, and literary genres that contemplate,
recount or describe this immanent transcendence or
transcendent immanence171.
To this definition was added the designation of the most important

factor for distinguishing mystic from esoteric discourse, namely the
notion of higher knowledge. As such the two discourses do not exclude
each other as esoteric higher knowledge can be achieved through
mystical praxis, however mystical praxis does not inevitably generate
this higher knowledge.
I am fully aware that the proposed definitions of both esotericism and
Kabbalah can and should be subjects for criticism. The one of
esotericism can be seen as both too restricted: subjects like alchemy and
magic, which usually is included in the concept of esotericism, might
not be included in the proposed definition. And too broad: it could be
argued that certain kinds of modern science would fulfil the criterions
of the definition.
The definition of Kabbalah could be seen as too inclusive since much
of Judaism draws or claims to draw their teachings from ancient Jewish
lore in more or less secretive ways. To this I will argue that since my
definition of Kabbalah includes the definition of esotericism, we should
see the teachings transmitted as teachings that claim a sort of absolute
knowledge. This is often gained by biblical hermeneutics; another
common enterprise of Jewish religious practice. But what should
171 Wilke: ’Mysticism’, p. 1279.
- 77 -
distinguish Kabbalah from other types of Judaism and/or esotericism is

the presence of an esoteric discourse and the claim that the teaching of
this discourse has its source in ancient Jewish lore.
My choice also deliberately implies that much modern Kabbalah fits the
definition, even though this type of Kabbalah is not Jewish. An
implication which most Kabbalah scholars, also deliberately, has tried to
avoid.
The following discussion was centred on the question of whether
Kabbalah can be designated esoteric or not. For this I presented the
views of Harvey Hames who argues for the exoteric mode of Kabbalah,
and on the other hand Wolfson, who argues for the inherent esoteric
character of Kabbalah. We have seen earlier in the thesis that one major
problem with the notion of esotericism as it is used by Kabbalah
scholars is that it is taken as synonymous to secret. This is also the case
for Hames, whereas Wolfson sees esotericism as the dialectic
relationship between the hidden and the revealed. Goldberg found a
common denominator for the two opposing views on Kabbalah,
namely the notion of wisdom. This is what brings together Kabbalah
and esotericism as defined above, where wisdom is both the higher
knowledge that is transmitted and the source for this knowledge.
Thus we can conclude that Kabbalah can very well be understood
within the framework of Western esotericism. However, it is important
here to note that since the scholarly term Kabbalah is inherently tied to
a historical notion of Kabbalah it is placed on a lower taxonomical level
than Western esotericism.
The remainder of the first part of the thesis shows an example of
esoteric discourse within two different kabbalistic texts. This discourse
could in both texts be seen as a certain perception of language as the
tool for gaining absolute knowledge and simultaneously being the core
of the knowledge. This again shows the dialectics emphasized by
Wolfson. In the latter of the two texts, the Fountain of Wisdom we see
- 78 -
that the higher knowledge is actually gained by means of mystical praxis

thus showing how the two discourses can be present but distinct as
different discursive layers within a single text. With the two analyzed
texts I have shown how claims of higher knowledge are embedded in
the perception of language. Language becomes both the tool and the
bearer of this knowledge which is transmitted both through writing and
orally. Thus the access to the esoteric kabbalistic teachings and the
actual content is closely connected in that it is here that the revelatory
dialectics between the hidden and the revealed is found.
Conclusively: My purpose of proposing the definitions is to give a
theoretically adequate foundation for the common study of Kabbalah
and Western esotericism and to query the current perception and
definition of Western esotericism and Kabbalah. It should not be seen
as a final solution to the problems of definition but rather as a
suggestion for the demarcation of the respective fields and a point of
departure for further examinations.
In comparing the concept of Western esotericism with that of
Kabbalah we can say that Kabbalah makes use of the same discursive
strategies that proved constitutive for the notion of Western
esotericism. Consequently, when applying the view of religious
pluralism in Europe, Kabbalah does indeed belong to the discursive field
of Western esotericism.
- 79 -
Introduction to Part II
Part II
Contemporary Kabbalah: A New (?) Field
of Study
4. Introduction to Part II
I will now turn to contemporary examples of movements that use
Kabbalah as a constitutive element in their religious systems. I have
chosen the following cases in an attempt to present the huge divergence
of uses of kabbalistic material. Thus, some of the currents which will be
examined will prove to comply with the definition of Kabbalah as it was
reached in the previous part of the thesis. However there will also be
some of the movements that cannot be termed Kabbalah but rather can
be designated as New Age movements which to a lesser extend makes
use of kabbalistic material.
When examining contemporary Kabbalah it is important to keep in
mind that Kabbalah should be understood in the widest possible sense,
sometimes indicating only the self identification of the respective group,
rather than any historical affinity with the medieval Kabbalah presented
in the beginning of this thesis. My emphasis on this is not an attempt to
argue that there exist a “true” or “original” Kabbalah but it should
rather be seen as an attempt to clarify the different uses of Kabbalah.
For example we can see that in many instances of New Age Kabbalah,
the term “Kabbalah” simply denotes an ancient esoteric teaching used
in order to provide the group with authenticity and authority. One
could as a heuristic model see the chosen groups arranged on a scale
from the clearest kabbalistic to the most eclectic. According to this we
would have:
• The Kabbalah Centre
- 80 -
Introduction to Part II
• Erwin Neutzsky-Wulff
• The Gnostic Teachings of Samael Aun Weor
• The Kamadon Academy
These four cases could be further divided into what I would term
1)”Contemporary Kabbalah” to which the Kabbalah Centre would
belong, 2) “Occult Kabbalah” to which Neutzsky-Wulff belongs and
finally 3) “New Age Kabbalah” which is exemplified by Samael Aun
Weor and the Kamadon Academy. Obviously this is an extremely
eclectic selection, but due to the enormous popularity of Kabbalah
within contemporary esotericism and occultism a thorough treatment
of all the variations would be an impossible task. I have tried to give a
representative overview of the different directions the use of kabbalistic
discourses have taken in recent years.
5. Kabbalah in Western Esoteric Traditions:
A Very Short Overview

The emergence of Kabbalah in the Middle Ages did not go unnoticed
by the Christian intellectuals residing in the same areas of Europe and
one of the first to get acquainted with the kabbalistic writings was
Ramon Lull (ca. 1232-1315). He lived in Catalonia, one of the main
centres of Kabbalah in the 13th century. His interest in Kabbalah was
mainly due to his continuing efforts of converting Jews and Muslims to
Christianity. To do this he had to be well versed in their respective
doctrines as to prove either the superiority of the Christian teachings or
by showing the underlying Christian truths of their doctrines. For some
forty years he developed his Ars Magna for this purpose. It was meant
as a means to prove, through logical argumentation, the superiority of
Christianity and for Lull the incorporation of kabbalistic elements was
- 81 -
Kabbalah in Western Esoteric Traditions:
“the ultimate instrument for achieving conversion172” A reason for this

was that one of Lull’s major discourses evolved around the problem of
the trinity and the unity of god, the same problem that the kabbalists
encountered in the doctrine of the ten sefirot. For both Lull and the
kabbalists one of the major arguments in solving this relationship was
to use neoplatonic ideas of emanation within the godhead itself. Also
the neoplatonic inspiration in both Kabbalah and in the Ars Magna
could be seen in the perception of both the human being and the world
as true microcosms that mirrored the whole of creation. A common
feature was also the importance given to the Hebrew language, albeit
they perceived it different. The Christians as well as the Jews saw the
Hebrew language as the original and divine language but where the
kabbalists saw a higher knowledge imbedded in each and every letter
and behind every letter i.e. the black fire on white fire, Lull saw the
letters as designations for different concepts and not bearers of an
esoteric truth173.
Though Lull would not have regarded himself as a kabbalist, he was to
be perceived as such by the later proponents of a full-blown Christian
Kabbalah, such as Pico della Mirandola (1463-1494) and Marsilio Ficino
(1433-1499). Pico was the student of Ficino, one of the greatest
renaissance intellectuals, who worked for the Medici family in Florence.
Ficino was the translator of the platonic treatises from Greek to Latin
and even more important, he also translated the Corpus Hermeticum. The
revival of Platonism combined with the search for a Philosophia Perennis
and a Prisca Theologia was the core of what Yates later termed “the
Hermetic tradition of the renaissance”. The Corpus Hermeticum was seen
as the foundation of all philosophy and theology and the supposed
author Hermes Trismegistos was said to be the teacher of such
prominent characters as Zarathustra, Moses, Abraham and Plato. Since

173 For a thorough monograph on the relationship between Lull and Kabbalah see Hames:
The Art of Conversion.
- 82 -
Kabbalah at this time was considered to be of ancient origins, or

actually being the oral Torah received directly from God by Moses on
Mount Sinai, this fitted perfectly in the search for Philosophia Perennis.
A common theme for the use of Kabbalah in the renaissance was the
attempt at finding the primordial language which was supposedly
spoken in the Garden of Eden. This was often assumed to be Hebrew
and the Kabbalah was perceived to be the tradition stemming directly
from the Garden itself. As Håkan Håkansson puts it:
Thus the impact of Kabbalah on Christian scholarship not

only reinforced the notion that language can yield
knowledge of the natural world; it also redirected attention
towards a previously disregarded linguistic element. In
Kabbalah it was neither the word that was believed to
“imitate” the inner essence of an object (as in “Platonic”
language view), nor was it the grammatical system that was
considered to correspond to physical reality (as in the
various theories of a universal grammar). Rather, it was the
letters of the alphabet which, in their graphical shape as
well as in their different combinations, enclosed the
hidden treasures of the divine Word174.
Compared to the discussion presented in chapter 2, Håkansson’s

presentation emphasizes the same important aspects of the kabbalistic
concept of language. Namely: 1) the esoteric content of the graphical
shape of the letters as one aspect of the esoteric discourse inherent in
language and 2) the formation of words and the gematria as another. In
the renaissance, the emphasis that Kabbalah laid on language fitted
perfectly in the search for the prisca theologia, since this was closely
connected with the search for the language of Adam which was spoken
in the Garden of Eden.
To transfer the Jewish teachings into a Christian framework, Kabbalah
was generally considered by the Christian Renaissance humanists to be
misinterpreted by the Jewish kabbalists, whereas the “true” Kabbalah
was perceived to prove the authenticity and truth of Christianity. This is
- 83 -
evident in the famous 900 theses that Pico della Mirandola published in
1486 and presented to the pope in Rome. 13 of the 900 theses were
condemned, but interestingly none of these belonged to the kabbalistic
theses.
47 theses belong to the category “Cabalistic conclusions according to
the secret doctrine of the Hebrew Cabalist wisemen, whose memory
should always be honoured” 175 . 72 theses belong to the category
“Cabalistic conclusions according to my own opinion, strongly
confirming the Christian religion using the Hebrew wisemen’s own
principles”176. That so large a percentage of the theses were devoted to
Kabbalah shows how great valued this tradition was to Pico and it is
evident that Pico contributed immensely to the spread of Christian
Kabbalah in Europe. A key figure for this was Pico’s helper Flavius
Mithridates, a Jew who had converted to Christianity and taught Pico
Hebrew while also translating several kabbalistic texts177.
The next important figure in the history of Christian Kabbalah is Pico’s
student Johannes Reuchlin (1455-1522) who wrote one of the most
important works for modern occultist Kabbalah, namely De Arte
Kabbalistica from 1517. As Pico, Reuchlin saw in Kabbalah the
foundation and proof of Christianity as the “True Religion”. His earlier
book De Verbo Mirifico exposes the three scriptural religions as basically
identical and interestingly the kabbalistic arguments are shown to be the
most convincing. De Verbo Mirifico is structured around a conversation
between three scholars, a Christian, a Muslim and a Jew. An important
detail is that the Jewish scholar is called Simon, named after the
mythical author of the Zohar, Rabbi Shimon bar Yohai. Though a
174 Håkansson, p. 176.

175 Pico della Mirandola: 900 Theses, p. 345.
176 Pico della Mirandola: 900 Theses, p. 517.
177 Much study has been done as to define the kabbalistic sources of Pico. The best
contributions are the commentaries and introduction to the 900 theses by S.A Farmer in his
edition of the text: Farmer: Syncretism in the West. Another valuable source is Saverio
Campanini: The Book Bahir. A critical edition with commentaries of the Hebrew text with
- 84 -
dedicated Christian, Reuchlin was extraordinary positive in his attitude

towards Judaism in general and Kabbalah in particular and his works
were constantly under attack from both Protestants and Catholics. One
major concern of Reuchlin was his exploration of the divine names.
According to Reuchlin god revealed himself first to the patriarchs by
the three-letter name SDY (‫)שדי‬, Shadday, next he revealed himself to
Moses by the tetragrammaton YHVH (‫ )יהוה‬and finally by the coming
of Christ a shin (‫ )ש‬was introduced in the center of the tetragrammaton,
forming the name Yehoshuah (‫)יהשוה‬, believed by Reuchlin to be the
original Hebrew name for Jesus. The importance of the Hebrew
alphabet is also evident in the writings of Cornelius Agrippa (1486-
1535) who in his three books on occult philosophy laid the ground for
the preoccupation with Kabbalah in future grimoires.
During the renaissance, a major event took place which had a huge
impact on the development of Kabbalah, namely the expulsion of the
Jews from Spain in 1492. Since this had been the main centre for
Kabbalah for almost 300 years, this event cannot be underestimated. It
meant the spreading of the Jewish intellectuals to other areas of Europe
and to Palestine. Here a new centre developed in the holy city of Safed
in what is now Northern Israel178. The small mountain town became a
spiritual center for Judaism and one of the most important kabbalistic
teachers came from this place. This was the rabbi Isaac Luria (1534-
1572). With Luria Kabbalah underwent a substantial transformation
towards an increasing messianic and highly dualistic attitude. The
concept of tikkun which earlier was a vague term regarding the process
of perfecting the world179 became the central aspect of all kabbalistic
Mithridate’s Latin translation and further provided with an English translation by the editor
in collaboration with Giulio Busi.
178 It is in this place that the mythic author of the Zohar, Rabbi Shimon Bar Yohai, is buried.
Thus it is still a place of worship for many contemporary kabbalists who ventures on
pilgrimage to the site.
179 See my chapter on the Fountain of Wisdom where tikkun is related to the proper usage of the
Hebrew language.
- 85 -
endeavours. It developed into a precise term denoting the ultimate

weapon against the forces of evil. Tikkun was in the context of Luria
the perfect restoration of the balance within the godhead180. Luria was
not only an influential kabbalist in his own time. He was to become a
major influence and inspirational source for most of contemporary
Kabbalah. His commentaries to the Zohar are the foundations of almost
all contemporary kabbalistic interpretations whether Jewish or non
Jewish181.
Many of the Jews who stayed in Europe fled to the Netherlands who
already at this time had freedom of religion, at least in private settings,
and this made Amsterdam in particular to one of the main Jewish
intellectual cities in Europe. As a consequence of this, a large part of
the printed kabbalistic manuscripts from this period is printed in the
Netherlands.
Other kabbalistic centres were located in the Eastern European
countries and Germany where the Ashkenazi Kabbalah had flourished
since the Middle Ages, especially with the works of Eleazar of Worms
(ca. 1176-1238) who among other works wrote Sefer ha Shem (The Book of
the Name), a commentary to Sefer Yetzirah and the Account of the Chariot of
Ezekiel and other kabbalistic treatises. His works was and still is of
immense importance to the Hasidic communities.
By the end of the renaissance the knowledge of Kabbalah became more
and more widespread and three other figures from the last half of the
16th century have to be mentioned, namely Guillaume Postel (1510-
1581), Giordano Bruno (1548-1600)and John Dee (1527-1609). Postel
was, as Reuchlin, a dedicated Christian who nevertheless was highly
interested in Kabbalah. He was well versed in Hebrew, Aramaic and
Arabic and made travels to the Orient for the French Court in search
180 Much has been written on the Kabbalah of Isaac Luria. A short but profound overview
can be found in Scholem: Major Trends, seventh lecture p. 244-286. A comprehensive edition
of all Scholem’s writings on Luria is Daniel Abrams (ed.): Lurianic Kabbalah (in Hebrew).
181 I will get back to the teachings of Isaac Luria in the chapter on the Kabbalah Centre.
- 86 -
for manuscripts for the king’s library. He translated the Sefer Yetzirah,
the Sha’arei Orah, large parts of the Zohar and several other kabbalistic
works while also composing kabbalistic texts himself as his Or ha
Menorah (Light of the Menorah) During his work on the Zohar he was
accompanied by a woman whom he termed the “Venetian Virgin” and
identified with the feminine messiah – the second Eve and the
embodiment of the Shekhinah. She lived an intense mystical life and
received continuous revelations which Postel saw confirmed on every
page of the Zohar. Shortly after the death of the Venetian Virgin, Postel
fell seriously ill. When he recovered, he saw himself as radically
transmuted, having
incorporated the “celestial body” of the Venetian Virgin

and, thus, to have become substantially her son and that of
Jesus Christ, the first born of the second Adam and the
second Eve182!
The theories proposed by Postel was evidently quite radical for his time
and the only reason he escaped the inquisition with his life was that he
was declared officially insane by the court in Venice. For the last years
of his life he was confined to stay in the monastery of St Martin des
Champs, where he kept writing and teaching until his death.
John Dee claimed to have become friends with Postel and if this is true
Dee would have had direct access to at least Postel’s translation of Sefer
Yetzirah183. It is certain from Dee’s library catalogue that he collected
everything possible connected to Kabbalah though mostly books by the
Christian kabbalists184. Dee took the search for an original language one
step further when he through angelic revelations or rather
conversations received the “True Language” of the angels, namely the
Enochian language. The culmination of Dee’s search for the true
language was his “discovery” of the monas hieroglyphica, a symbol
182 Jean-Pierre Brach: ’Guillaume Postel’, p. 971.

183 Håkan Håkansson: Seeing the Word, p. 181.
184 Håkan Håkansson: Seeing the Word, p. 181
- 87 -
which ‘functioned as a form of “meta-language” from which the

Hebrew, Greek and Latin letters could be derived185’. Throughout the
Renaissance Kabbalah kept the status of perennial philosophy and prisca
theologia side by side with the Corpus Hermeticum though its teachings
were still looked upon with suspicion by the church authorities.
The most crucial event of the history of Kabbalah reception since the
expulsion of the Jews from Spain was the publishing in 1677 of a Latin
translation of a selection of some of the main works of Kabbalah. The
editor and translator was Christian Knorr von Rosenroth, chancellor of
Sulzbach one of the most important centres of esotericism and science
in Europe on that time. In the wake of the thirty years war Sulzbach
had grown into a proponent of interconfessionalism and intellectuals
flocked to the court of Sulzbach, resulting in a hitherto unseen
flourishing of religious, artistic and scientific enterprises gathered in one
place. In this milieu Knorr von Rosenroth wrote several books on
diverse topics, but none would hold such importance as his Kabbala
Denudata (Kabbalah Unveiled) which translated parts of the Zohar and
selections of the writings of Joseph Gikatilla and Moses Cordovero
among others.
The impact of this work on Western esotericism cannot be
overemphasized. Until the late nineteenth century it was the standard
reference work of Kabbalah and in its English translation it is still the
major reference for promoters of occultist Kabbalah such as The
Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn. It was one of the founders of the
Golden Dawn, namely Samuel Liddell MacGregor Mathers who
translated the Kabbala Denudata to the English the Kabbalah Unveiled in
1887 and it this translation the prominent European occultists used. Of
other important figures relating to Kabbalah from this period Adolphe
Franck deserves to be mentioned. In 1843 he published the monograph
La Kabbale ou la philosophie religieuse des Hébreux, a book which gained
185 Håkan Håkansson: Seeing the Word, p. 183.
- 88 -
enourmous popularity and which according to Moshe Idel ‘contributed

more to the knowledge of Kabbalah in modern Europe than did any
other work prior to the studies of Scholem’186. Franck’s approach to
Kabbalah was of unprecedented scholarly nature even though he was
definitely also religiously engaged in the topic. He continued the view of
Kabbalah as the foundation of religion so prevalent in the Renaissance
and also upheld by Eliphas Lévi, while also applauding the works of
Papus and the Theosophical Society187. They lay the foundation for the
development of occultist Kabbalah as it was exemplified by Mathers
and his contemporary occultist Aleister Crowley. They in turn were
developers of a more systematic use of Kabbalah integrated in a
Masonic initatory system of orders. Many of today’s magico-occult
orders such as the many versions of Golden Dawn or the Ordo Templi
Orientis, the Dragon Rouge and the Temple of Set derive from those
early secret societies.
Parallel to the development of occultist Kabbalah, several Jewish
kabbalistic currents flourished, especially in Eastern Europe, continuing
the tradition of Eleazar of Worms. Of these Hasidic movements one of
the most notable is the Kabbalah of the rabbi Nachman of Breslov
(1772 – 1810), the grandchild of Baal Shem Tov who was considered
the founder of hasidism. Rabbi Nachman’s teachings were highly
messianic and there has been a vivid controversy going on whether he
thought of himself as the messiah or not. He seems to have been
influenced by the selfproclaimed messiah of the seventeenth century
Sabbatai Zvi (1626-1676) though Rabbi Nahman took great effort in
renouncing sabbateanism. More importantly was Nahman’s usage of
the teachings of Isaac Luria and again we find the central doctrines
evolving around the concept of tikkun. Nahman’s followers today do
not believe he was the messiah but rather see him as a spiritual leader
186 Idel, Kabbalah, p. 8.

187 Hanegraaff: ‘Kabbalah and Modernity’.
- 89 -
leading the way to the coming messiah. One of his famous sayings was
that it is a mitzvah always to be happy. As a response to this his
followers today can be found dancing and singing to loud dance music
in the streets of Jerusalem. Instead of the original lyrics they chant
either the rabbi’s name or their mantra which is ‘Na Nah Nahma
Nahman meUman’188. These were the last words of the rabbi, spoken just
before he died and perceived to contain the secret key to the mysteries
of the universe. Furthermore the mantra contains an inherent efficacy
so chanting it or writing it as graffiti in the streets slowly cleanses the
world of impurity and thus preparing the coming of the messiah.
Many contemporary orthodox Jewish communities offer Kabbalah
study groups and entire Yeshivas (religious schools), especially in
Jerusalem, are devoted to the study of Kabbalah. Outside strictly Jewish
circles Kabbalah has upheld the status it was given in the renaissance as
an ancient wisdom tradition applicable to almost any other tradition.
This can be witnessed in the role of Kabbalah in the teachings of widely
different types of esoteric movements, from initatory orders like the
Dragon Rouge to the theosophy of Helena Blavatsky or the rosy red
New Age healers. A common trait for many of the non-Jewish
adoptions of Kabbalah is the very sporadic knowledge of traditional
kabbalistic material and the emphasis on the single notion of the Tree
of Life. In the following chapters a selection of the different more or
less kabbalistic movements will be analyzed.
188 In Hebrew this is: ‫נ נח נחמ נחמנ מאומן‬. Nah man meUman literally means Nah man
from Uman, the hometown of the rabbi.
- 90 -
The Academic Study of Contemporary Kabbalah
6. The Academic Study of Contemporary

Kabbalah
The scholarly attention given to the different varieties of contemporary
Kabbalah is sporadic at best although it is currently improving
considerably189. To find the reasons for the neglect of contemporary
Kabbalah as a worthy field of study we will have to turn to Scholem
whose attitude towards his contemporary practitioners of Kabbalah was
marked by disdain. This stance has long been upheld by Scholem’s
students, even those who on other points have distanced themselves
from Scholem. The main figures have already been mentioned in my
discussion of the definition and demarcation of Kabbalah, namely
Joseph Dan and Moshe Idel.
In the article ‘Authorized Guardians’ Boaz Huss shows how Scholem
and his successors see themselves as being the “authorized guardians”
of contemporary Kabbalah190. Scholem hardly paid attention to his
contemporary kabbalists, though several (Jewish) kabbalistic
communities flourished during his time, both in Jerusalem and in
Eastern Europe. But for Scholem these groups were nothing more than
a once precious tradition that now had degenerated and lost any cultural
value and historical significance 191 . This disdain for contemporary
Kabbalah is closely connected with Scholem’s overall view of modern
culture as inherently secularized, leaving no room for any kind of
mysticism:
In the final analysis, one may say that there is no authentic

original mysticism in our generation, either in the Jewish
189 Within the last few years two conferences have been arranged dedicated the topic of
contemporary Kabbalah: One in Amsterdam, July 2007 and one in Israel, May 2008.
Furthermore several research projects have been undertaken both in and outside Israel and
already a few books have been published or are at least coming soon. These are for example
Jody Myers: Kabbalah and the Spiritual Quest from 2007 and the forthcoming publication
Kabbalah and Modernity edited by Boaz Huss, Marco Pasi and Kocku von Stuckrad, expected
late 2008.
190 Huss: ’Authorized Guardians’.
191 Huss: ’Authorized Guardians’, p. 108.
- 91 -
people or among the nations of the world. […] It is clear

that in recent generations there have been no awakenings
of individuals leading to new forms of mystical teachings
or to significant movements in public life. This applies
equally to Judaism, Christianity and Islam192.
As Huss explicitly states:
Scholem’s disregard of contemporary kabbalists is

dependent on his claim that it is the Zionist movement,
and not traditional Kabbalah, that continues the historical
national role of Jewish mysticism193.
It is interesting to note that where Scholem sees contemporary (Jewish)

Kabbalah and occultist Kabbalah as misinterpretations and
degeneration of Kabbalah “proper”, the Renaissance Christian
Kabbalah is not subject to any critique.
The occultist Kabbalah as expounded by Eliphas Lévi (ps. Alphonse
Louis Constant), Edward Arthur Waite and Aleister Crowley is
dismissed as forgery or at best fanciful misrepresentation as the famous
quote from Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism shows:
The natural and obvious result of the antagonism of the

great Jewish scholars was that, since the authorized
guardians neglected this field [i.e. Kabbalah], all manner of
charlatans and dreamers came and treated it as their own
property. From the brilliant misrepresentations of
Alphonse Louis Constant, who has won fame under the
pseudonym of Eliphas Lévi to the highly coloured
humbug of Aleister Crowley and his followers, the most
eccentric and fantastic statements have been produced
purporting to be legitimate interpretations of kabbalism194.
192 Scholem: On the Possibility, quoted in Huss: ‘Authorized Guardians’, p. 108.
Note also that Scholem does not include the possibility of mysticism outside the three major
scriptural religions, a stance which has been followed by Joseph Dan. See my discussion in
chapter 1.3.
193 Huss: ‘Authorized Guardians’, p. 109.
194 Scholem: Major Trends, p. 2. As Boaz Huss ads, Scholem later writes in a note to this
lecture that ‘No words should be wasted on the subject of Crowley’s “Kabbalistic” writings
[…] (ibid. p. 353. Quoted in Huss: ‘Authorized Guardians’, p. 115, n.38).
- 92 -
In his Eranos lecture in 1977 Scholem continues:
Insebesondere haben noch im 19. Jahrhunder die

französischen Theosophen der martinistiscen Schule
(Eliphas Lévi, Papus und viele andere) und in diesem
Jahrhundert Scharlatane wie Aleister Crowley und seine
Bewunderer in England das Menschenmögliche an
allgemeiner Konfusion aller okkulten Disziplinen mit der
”Heiligen Kabbala” geleistet. Ein grosser Teil der
Schriften, auf der Titelblatt das Wort Kabbala prangt, hat
gar nichts oder so gut wie gar nichts mit ihr zu tun195.
This attitude is continued by Joseph Dan who states the following

regarding the Kabbalah Centre:
A distressing example of this phenomenon [i.e. New Age

forms of Kabbalah”] is the vast enterprise of “kabbalistic”
publications initiated and directed by “kabbalist Rav Berg”.
Originally he based his teachings on the work of one of
the last authentic kabbalists of the twentieth century,
Rabbi Ashlag, who wrote a voluminous commentary to the
Zohar, based on the teachings of Isaac Luria. It was
heartbreaking to observe how this authentic enterprise
deteriorated into a New Age mishmash of nonsense196.
Dan’s dismissal of the Kabbalah of Rabbi Berg is interesting for several

reasons. First and most important Dan accuses the Kabbalah Centre for
having no connection to the Hebrew Kabbalah. Now, this is obviously
not the case when looking at the material promoted by the Centre or
the themes around which their main teachings revolve; namely the
Zohar and the 72 names of god. Part of the interpretation is different
from traditional Kabbalah, but as will be shown in the following
chapter the connection is definitely still there. Secondly Dan opposes
the Kabbalah of the Centre to the “authentic Kabbalah” which
apparently in the views of Dan, ended with Rabbi Yehuda Ashlag and
his kabbalistic enterprise in the middle of the twentieth century.
195 Scholem: ‘Alchemie und Kabbala’, p. 2.
- 93 -
What is worth noting about this disdain against contemporary non-

traditional Kabbalah is the implicit conception of “tradition”. Dan
himself argues for medieval Kabbalah to be an innovative branch of
Judaism that is radically creative in its interpretation of ancient Jewish
material. What then, makes the Kabbalah Centre’s creative
interpretation of the medieval kabbalistic material so different from
what the medieval kabbalists themselves were doing? Structurally, there
is hardly any difference. To Dan the difference must be that the
medieval kabbalists in his opinion were developers of and partaking in
an authentic tradition opposed to the artificial and constructed tradition of
the Kabbalah Centre. As a Kabbalah scholar this presumption is
untenable since it builds rather on Dan’s personal preference for the
traditional Kabbalah than on a scholarly analysis of the actual topic in
question. In the following chapter I will deal with the Kabbalah Centre
and especially focus on its interpretation of the medieval kabbalistic
material.
What the academic study of contemporary Kabbalah needs is a set of
new terminological tools. The highly useful distinction between
theosophical-theurgical Kabbalah and ecstatic-profetic Kabbalah as
suggested by Idel was made with Medieval Jewish Kabbalah in mind
and is thus not sufficient when it comes to the much more complex
situation of Kabbalah today. My tentative proposal would be to
introduce a more nuanced classificatory terminology in order to be able
to distinguish the different types of Kabbalah prevalent in the cultural
matrix of contemporary society.
7. The Kabbalah Centre
7.1 A General Presentation

According to its own perception the Kabbalah Centre is
196 Dan: The Heart and the Fountain, n. 56, p. 285.
- 94 -
The Kabbalah Centre
a spiritual and educational organization dedicated to

bringing the wisdom of Kabbalah to the world. The
Centre itself has existed for more than 80 years, but its
spiritual lineage extends even further — to Rav Isaac
Luria, in the 16th century, and through Rav Luria to Rav
Shimon Bar Yochai, who revealed the principal text of
Kabbalah, the Zohar, more than 2000 years ago197.
The acclaimed connection to Isaac Luria and Shimon Bar Yohai as the
direct lineage of the Centre is not surprisingly an important part of the
Centre’s strategy of authorization and self legitimization. Since
Kabbalah cannot be separated from the act and history of transmission,
this is an extremely important factor for a kabbalistic movement. Now,
one thing is to construct a spiritual lineage using actual historical
persons as pinpoints as the Kabbalah Centre does. Another is to
reinstate the mythical authorship of the Zohar to Shimon Bar Yohai
thus bringing the origins of Kabbalah back to Antiquity. As shown by
Olav Hammer, this extensive use of emic historiography is a common
trait of esoteric traditions which transform pieces of actual history into
what is needed for the organization to establish its legitimization. As
he writes:
Clearly, emic historiography rarely builds its narratives ex

nihilo. Elements recognizable from a non-esoteric tradition
of historiography are reinterpreted and find their way into
accounts of mythologized or emic history198.
The Kabbalah Centre does not only use pieces of actual historical facts
such as the existence of the two rabbis, they combine these details with
already well established mythologized narratives regarding the historical
figures. Thus they reconfirm the claim made by Moses de Léon in 13th
century Spain that the Zohar was an ancient document handed down
197 www.Kabbalah.com/03.php (accessed February 2, 2008)

198 Olav Hammer: Claiming Knowledge, p. 157.
- 95 -
The Kabbalah Centre
through generations from the well esteemed rabbi Shimon Bar Yohai. A
statement which has been upheld by kabbalists ever since despite
numerous convincing scholarly arguments that the book could never
have been written by Shimon Bar Yohai199. The authenticity of the
pseudepigraphic work was also upheld by Isaac Luria himself who
proposed a direct lineage between himself and Bar Yohai. While
holding on to a traditional kabbalistic account of transmission, the
interpretation of the material as promoted by the Kabbalah Centre is
radically different from that of Luria. The Kabbalah Centre relies
heavily on the Lurianic tradition especially in the interpretation of
Yehuda Ashlag, however an entirely new perspective is added as a
fundamental part of their Kabbalah:
The startling truth is that Kabbalah was never meant for a

specific sect. Rather, it was intended to be used by all
humanity to unify the world200.
The claim of the universality of Kabbalah is a relatively new

phenomenon, introduced but never really popularized by occultism.
However, with the growth of New Age201, the focus on the universal
character of spiritual teachings became increasingly incorporated into
the teachings of groups like the Jewish Renewal Movement and
likewise, kabbalistic ideas became more and more common in
mainstream New Age culture.
Before going further into the doctrines of the Kabbalah Centre I will
turn the attention to the history of the movement.
The historical foundation of the Kabbalah Centre lies in the teachings
of the Polish kabbalist Yehuda Ashlag. Born in Warsaw in 1885 and an
avid socialist he combined Marx’s rejection of capitalism with a strong
199 See the splendid discussion by Arthur Green in the introduction to the first volume of the
Zohar, Pritzker edition.
200 www.Kabbalah.com/03.php (accessed February 2nd 2008)
- 96 -
The Kabbalah Centre
conviction of the need of religion in a healthy society. In 1921 he

moved to Palestine to teach and study Kabbalah which for him meant
the theosophical teachings of Isaac Luria. He was even convinced that
the soul of Luria had transmigrated into his own by the will of god as to
make him able of continuing the exact understanding of Kabbalah as
begun by Luria202. Naturally the teachings of the old kabbalist were
transformed as to fit the context of the 20th century socialist. Thus the
most important of Luria’s doctrines, that of the tikkun, the restoration
of god and thereby the world was transformed into a social and ethical
quest for achieving equality and justice in the world. Only then would
the individual human being be able to elevate itself and return to its
divine roots. Thus attention was moved from the restoration of the
divine realm to the perfection of the material world203. As Jody Myers
writes:
He [Ashlag] understood the cataclysmic “breaking of the

vessels”204 in social terms, as an event that resulted in the
creation of self-centered, destructive human beings. For
Ashlag, tikkun moves forward when individuals become
altruistic, promote economic justice and reshape society to
be just and peaceful205.
Ashlag never gained much acknowledgement in his own time and he

had only a few faithful disciples. What became the most important
product of his kabbalistic enterprise was his translation of the Zohar
into Hebrew, including extensive commentaries. The dissemination of
Ashlag’s teachings in America was undertaken by one of his devout
students, Levi Krakovsky, who tried to introduce the study of Kabbalah
201 Here as well as in the remaing the thesis I use the term New Age in accordance with
Hanegraaff: ‘The New Age Movement’.
202 Jody Myers: Kabbalah, p. 18
203 Cohen and Cohen (eds.): In the Shadow, p. 38-42.
204 A concept invented by Luria as a cosmogonic event, resulting in the divine sparks being
captured in the human body and in a larger framework in an unbalance in the divine realm.
This is what tiqqun is supposed to overcome.
205 Myers: Kabbalah, p.19.
- 97 -
The Kabbalah Centre
to Jews in New York. However, American Jewish culture in the

twenties was radically different from that in Jerusalem or in Eastern
Europe. Hardly anybody knew Hebrew and Kabbalah was basically
unknown. Where, in Europe and Palestine the people interested in
Kabbalah were devout, orthodox Jews it was in America the non-
orthodox Jews and even non-Jews who had an involvement in
spiritualism and occultism, who showed interest in the kabbalistic
teachings.
In Krakovsky’s version Kabbalah became a “science”206. This is an
extremely important shift in the rhetorical promotion of Kabbalah,
since this is exactly what the later New Age inspired proponents of
Kabbalah would argue. Furthermore, Krakovsky seems to be the first
Jewish kabbalist to advocate the idea of a universal Kabbalah albeit still
in a restricted sense. In his rendering Kabbalah was the foundation of
all religion and spirituality and in the Messianic Age, in which he
believed to live, everybody would learn Kabbalah.
In the years before Krakovsky’s death in 1966 he taught Kabbalah to
young orthodox Jewish men. Among these was Shraga Feival
Gruberger who is more known under the English equivalent of his
name: Philip Berg. With the help of Krakovsky Berg founded the
National Institute for Research in Kabbalah, the foundation which
would later become the Kabbalah Centre.
To this day Berg and his family reject any affinity to Krakovsky. As
already noted, the question of lineage is of immense importance when it
comes to Kabbalah and the only way of obtaining authority is to have
the teachings of Kabbalah passed down through reliable sources. In this
respect it is of higher value for a kabbalistic teacher to be able to show a
direct link to a kabbalistic master in Israel than an unsuccessful rabbi in
Brooklyn. Thus Berg acclaims his teacher to be another of Ashlag’s
students, namely Yehuda Zvi Brandwein with whom he had studied in
206 Levi Krakovsky: The Omnipotent Light.
- 98 -
The Kabbalah Centre
Israel207. In the early seventies Philip Berg moved to Israel together

with his wife Karen. They taught Kabbalah to both religious and non-
religious young Jews, men and women alike. To the Berg’s the broad
teaching of Kabbalah was an attempt to introduce young people to a
spiritual type of Judaism more appealing than the strict dogmatic
Judaism which apparently made the young Jews feeling alienated
towards their own religion and flee to ‘more mystically inclined eastern
religions208’. The Centre developed out of a mixture of Israeli and
American culture and addresses spiritual seekers of both Jewish and
non-Jewish background. The enterprise in Israel was almost entirely
directed towards Jews and for these students Berg edited and published
Hebrew and Aramaic texts of primarily Isaac Luria and Yehuda Ashlag
where in America they published English translations of the texts and
books in English written by Berg himself. The Kabbalah Centre
promoted itself as a form of spirituality rather than as a religion and
thus they reached an audience who were reluctant towards organized
religions but nevertheless still interested in religious topics. Berg offered
a radical new interpretation of the Jewish scriptures and especially of
the mitzvot which he understood not as commandments but as
suggestions or gifts from god to humanity. If one chooses to follow the
mitzvot he will receive the benefits from them but if not he would not
have to feel guilty209. This new approach to Judaism filled out a
religious vacuum between orthodoxy and secularism and the movement
quickly gained a lot of followers. However a major controversy in the
eighties between the orthodox Jewish powers in Israel and the
Kabbalah Centre resulted in a drastic loss of students and the break
between Berg and one of his major students, Michael Laitman. Laitman
was also a close follower of Yehuda Ashlag’s still living son Rabbi
207 Myers offers an introduction to the controversy between Krakovsky and Berg in Myers:
Kabbalah, p.30-31.
208 Berg: Kabbalah for the Layman, p. 11 and Myers: Kabbalah, p. 51.
209 Myers: Kabbalah, p. 54-55.
- 99 -
The Kabbalah Centre
Baruch Ashlag and his more orthodox teaching. With Laitman’s final
outbreak from the Kabbalah Centre several members followed him and
joined Laitman’s own kabbalistic movement called Bnei Baruch which
still exist210. Despite the internal crisis of the Kabbalah Centre in Israel,
its popularity in America was increasing especially among non-Jews and
secular Jews. Parallel and maybe as a consequence of the shift in
audience Berg grew progressively polemic against orthodox rabbis
accusing them of denying important kabbalistic teachings to the seeking
students and for restricting the transmission of Kabbalah to their own
narrow religious circles211.
The teaching of the Kabbalah Centre is aimed at two different kinds of
audience. The first is a very narrow Jewish group that observes
orthodox Jewish practices and is highly dedicated to the religious
education within the Centre. The other and more dominant group
consists of more loosely connected people whose engagement range
from attending a course or meditation session now and then, buying a
book or two and maybe wearing a red string around their wrist to the
dedicated followers who attend service every Friday and Saturday,
participate in the high holiday retreats and generally follow the more
expanded education program offered by the Centre without necessarily
being Jewish.
At the core of the Kabbalah Centre’s teaching we find a number of
“spiritual tools”, that is, kabbalistic tools for increasing ones spiritual
level. The most important ones revolve around the doctrine of the
famous red string which followers wear around their wrist to remove
evil, the seventy two names of god, and finally the text of the Zohar. In
the next chapters I will focus on each of these subjects.
210 Myers: Kabbalah, p. 60.

- 100 -
The Kabbalah Centre
7.2 The Red String and its cosmological framework

On the frontpage of the Kabbalah Centre’s website the red string is
listed side by side with the Zohar as one of the fundamentals of
Kabbalah. It is called a “powerful technology” whose purpose is
twofold:
to protect us from the envious looks of others, and to help

us eliminate feelings of jealousy and resentment in
ourselves. The technology is the Red String: a strand of red
wool worn around the left wrist. This technology is an
indispensable tool for spiritual and physical protection.
The teachings of Kabbalah do not include prohibitions or
commandments. Instead, the kabbalists speak of positive
and negative energies212.
This reflects the general anthropology of the Centre that perceives the
human being as essentially receiving and giving different types of
energies. The goal is not surprisingly to be able to only give and receive
positive energy and avoid the bad energies. What is interesting in this is
the explicit turn towards a typical New Age rhetoric instead of
traditional kabbalistic terms. Not only is the emphasis on energies
which can be manipulated through spiritual elevation a common trait in
much New Age rhetoric, the very perception of the spiritual teachings
and tools as being technology or science213 is a very important key to
the universalization of the Kabbalah Centre’s teachings. It has to be
recognizable and appealing to a certain audience, namely the “spiritual
seekers” of the New Age milieu. I do not think one should
underestimate the importance of the highly competitive character of the
spiritual market and its influence on the different movements’ choice of
rhetoric and self promotion.
212www.Kabbalah.com/13.php (accessed April 16, 2008).

213Though I will not term the Kabbalah Centre a New Age Movement per se it is beyond
doubt that they are highly inspired by New Age rhetoric. In the case of the relationship
between New Age and science see James R. Lewis: ‘Science and the New Age’ where he
- 101 -
The Kabbalah Centre
The red string itself symbolizes danger and evil since in the Zohar red is
associated with the sefirah Gevurah 214 which represents god’s stern
judgment and is the point, at least according to the Zohar where evil is
attached to the godhead as a parallel system to the holy sefirot; the Sitra
Ahra, literally the Other Side. By wearing the red string one gains control
over these chaotic forces but not every piece of red string will do. It has
to be properly prepared in order to gain its efficacy and furthermore
one has to observe a specific ritual for tying the string around the wrist.
The Kabbalah Centre explains that to infuse the red thread with
protective energy they take it to the tomb of Rachel, the biblical
matriarch, and wind it around the tomb. The protective forces that
she stood for alive is thus transferred to the woolen string wound
around her tomb since ‘according to Kabbalah, the burial sites of the
righteous are a portal to the energy they created in their lifetimes215’.
When the string is impregnated with Rachel’s protective energies it is
sold in small packages with a specific guide to the ritual fastening of the
string around the wrist.
It says that the string should be placed around the left wrist as this is
where the energies enter the body and thus:
By wearing the Red String on the left wrist, negative

energies are intercepted at the precise point of entry. The
string is tied in a carefully prescribed sequence of seven
knots, each of which symbolizes a separate spiritual
dimension that infuses our reality. It’s important that
someone who loves us—someone we deeply trust—ties
the string around our wrist. As they do, we should ask for
the power to radiate kindness, compassion, appreciation,
and absence of the Evil Eye to everyone around us216.
convincingly demonstrates how contemporary science provides New Age Movements with
their basic legitimization.
214 See for example Zohar II, 20a-20b. Midrash ha Ne’elam in Tishby: Wisdom of the Zohar III p.
930-932.
215 www.Kabbalah.com/13.php (accessed April 17, 2008)
216 www.Kabbalah.com/13.php (accessed April 16, 2008).
- 102 -
The Kabbalah Centre
The reason why the “Red String Technology” holds such a central
position within the practice of the Kabbalah Centre can be found in
their interpretation of the cosmogony and anthropogony of Isaac Luria.
According to Luria all creation began when the only existing “thing”
Ein Sof (without end) made a contraction, leaving an empty space. This
is the process which in kabbalistic terminology is called tzimtzum. In this
empty space the primordial man Adam Kadmon was formed out of light
emanating from Ein Sof and from him the light flowed into special
vessels. The divine light however proved too powerful for the vessels
and they broke into pieces unleashing the sparks of light. Some of these
sparks attached themselves to the fragments of the vessels which then
became the kelippot, evil shells whereas others entered human bodies,
forming semi-divine beings. Thus the human being consists of a divine
soul trapped in a material body, living in a chaotic world where the link
to the divine has been broken. The fragmented nature of the material
world is a mirror of the state of the divine realm and the theurgical task
of the kabbalist was to restore the divine balance by observing the
mitzvot and engaging in restorative meditations. The individual purpose
was to make sure that the divine soul could in death be re-integrated
with its divine source, but this was only possible for the extreme
righteous man, the tzaddiq. For those who had not gained the spiritual
elevation necessary for this the soul would be reincarnated, a process
which in kabbalistic rendering is referred to as gilgul, until complete
righteousness would be achieved.
This detour around Luria’s highly mythologized interpretation of
kabbalistic material is meant to show the context in which the Kabbalah
Centre inscribes itself. It is in this context that the remaining discussion
of the Centre should be seen.
- 103 -
The Kabbalah Centre
7.3 The 72 Names of God

Apart from the red string the doctrine of the seventy two names of god
is highly important in the teachings of the Kabbalah Centre.
Ruminations concerning the names of god have always been central to
Jewish thought and we find several treatises of the Heikhalot literature
dealing with the theurgical use of the divine names217. In the medieval
Kabbalah the theme reappeared and as dicussed in chapter 1.2,
Kabbalah can be characterized as the transmission of the secret
doctrine of the pronounciation of the divine names. The specific case
of the seventy two names of god has its roots in rabbinic speculations
concerning different secret divine names among which is an unknown
name of seventy two letters by which god saved the Israelites from
Egypt218. But the idea of seventy two different names of god was first
presented by Rashi (Rabbi Shlomo Yitzaqi) in the eleventh century
when he explained a certain passage of Exodus as exposing these secret
names. In chapter 14:19-21 we find three sequential verses each
containing seventy two letters:
ְ ‫יט וִַ ַ ע ַמ ְל‬
19 And the angel of god, who
‫ ַהה ֵֹל ְ ִל ְפנֵי‬, ‫ָה ֱאל ִֹהי‬ went before the camp of Israel,
removed and went behind
,ְ ‫ֵל‬
ֶ ‫ ַו‬,‫ַמ ֲחנֵה יִ ְ ָר ֵאל‬ them; and the pillar of cloud
‫יה ; וִַ ַ ע ַע ד‬ ֶ ‫ח ֵר‬ֲ ‫ֵמ‬ removed from before them,
,‫ ַו ַ ֲעמֹד‬, ‫ֵיה‬ֶ ‫ ִמ ְ"נ‬,!ָ‫ֶה ָענ‬ and stood behind them;
. ‫יה‬ ֶ ‫ח ֵר‬ֲ ‫ֵמ‬
‫י! ַמ ֲחנֵה‬$ֵ ‫כ ַו ָבֹא‬ 20 and it came between the
‫בי! ַמ ֲחנֵה‬ ֵ , ִ‫ִמ ְצ ַרי‬ camp of Egypt and the camp of
Israel; and there was the cloud
!ָ‫ וַיְ ִהי ֶה ָענ‬,‫יִ ְ ָר ֵאל‬ and the darkness here, yet gave
)‫ָאר ֶאת‬ ֶ ‫ ַו‬,ְ 'ֶֹ ‫וְ ַהח‬ it light by night there; and the
217 See Peter Schäfer: Synopse zur Hekhalot-Literatur and Hekhalot Studien and more notably the
brilliant analysis of the magical and theurgical aspects of this literary corpus in Michael
Swartz: Scholastic Magic.
218 Huss: ‘All You Need Is LAV’, p. 612-613.
- 104 -
The Kabbalah Centre
‫ַה ָ*יְ ָלה; וְ לֹא) ָק ַרב זֶה‬ one came not near the other all
.‫ל) ַה ָ*יְ ָלה‬-ָ ,‫ֶאל)זֶה‬ the night.
,/‫כא ַוֵט מ ֶֹ'ה ֶאת)יָד‬ 21 And Moses stretched out

‫ל ְ יְ הוָה‬/ַ
ֶ ‫ ו‬, ָ‫ַעל) ַה‬ his hand over the sea; and the
lord caused the sea to go back
‫רח ָק ִדי‬ַ $ְ ָ‫ֶאת) ַה‬ by a strong east wind all the
ֶָ ‫ ַו‬,‫ל) ַה ַ*יְ ָלה‬-ָ ‫ָה‬0‫ַע‬ night, and made the sea dry
;‫ֶאת) ַהָ ֶל ָח ָר ָבה‬ land, and the waters were
. ִ‫ ַה ָ י‬,‫ ְקע‬$ָ ִַ‫ו‬ divided.
According to Rashi these can be combined to form the seventy two

divine names by taking the first letter of the first verse, the last letter of
the second verse and the first letter of the third verse, giving the first
name ‫והו‬, the second name is constructed by taking the second letter of
the first verse, the last but one letter from the second verse and the
second letter of the third verse, thus forming the second name
‫ילי‬.When continuing this process throughout all seventy two letters the
following scheme of names can be arranged (read and counted from
right to left):
Each of these names is perceived to possess certain divine powers and

thus they can be used for ritual purposes. A famous example is the
thirteenth century kabbalist Abraham Abulafia who used the different
names in meditative practices aimed at achieving prophesies. He did not
- 105 -
The Kabbalah Centre
restrict himself to the tradition of the seventy two divine names but
extended his usage to include for example the doctrine of seeing the
whole Torah as consisting of one single divine name.
The Kabbalah Centre reaffirms the inherent efficacy of the names in
stating that the names themselves radiate divine power just by being
watched:
Because of their Divine source and the superhuman power

contained in them, these three-letter combinations came to
be known as the Names of God.
But these aren’t “names” in the ordinary, earthly sense of
the term. They're actually energy fields, visual mantras that
are activated spiritually rather than vocally. In other words,
you don't have to know how to pronounce them. And you
don't need to understand exactly how or why they work.
All you have to do is look at them. Incredibly,
mysteriously, in that simple act, enormous power is
unleashed219.
As noted earlier in my discussion of the Kabbalah Centre, the New Age

type of rhetoric is obvious. The names are not just names enhanced
with divine power; they are “energy fields” and “visual mantras”. And
furthermore, where the perception of the ritual efficacy of the names
might be the same as in the more traditional kabbalistic renderings, the
promotion of them is not surprisingly radically different. In medieval
Kabbalah, the knowledge of the divine names was a dangerous and
consequently restricted knowledge that was only passed on to the ones
wise enough to possess it. Contrary to this, the Kabbalah Centre makes
the acquisition of the names a universal right: ‘This is truly technology
for the soul - amazing spiritual power that no one is meant to live
without!220’. And again we can notice the emphasis on “technology”, a
strategy which should ensure the consumer that this is a tool that works
219http://store.Kabbalah.com/product_info.php?cPath=150_202&vcats=150&page=2&pro
ducts_id=166 (accessed April 11, 2008).

ducts_id=166 (accessed April 11th. 2008).
- 106 -
The Kabbalah Centre
by itself, belief and knowledge is irrelevant. They continue the

description of the wondrous capabilities of the divine names:
In The 72 Names of God, you'll find a remedy for just

about every challenge that's likely to come up in the course
of a lifetime. Simply by properly meditating on the
appropriate Name, you will be able to: * Bring more
money into your life whenever you need it. * Ignite sexual
energy and passion unlike anything you've experienced
before. * Eliminate guilt forever and undo the damage it
has caused you. * Recharge physical energy and heal
illnesses - your own, and others'. * Radiate beauty to
everyone who sees you. * Stop attracting the wrong people
into your life. * Meet your true soul mate. And so much
more!221.
Once again the New Age rhetoric is evident. This catalogue of

properties of the divine names could have been found in almost all
New Age groups and has no strict connection to Kabbalah besides the
medium of the divine names. The peculiar thing however is that the
Kabbalah Centre promotes as a central teaching the elimination of the
ego and the above qualities seem rather ego enhancing than ego
diminishing.
The process of eliminating the ego is connected to a specific divine
name: ‫ לאו‬or LAV. There is no literal meaning of the Hebrew word
but if the English word “love” should be transliterated into Hebrew it
would be ‫לאו‬. This fact is played upon in the Kabbalah Centre’s
explanation of the divine powers attributed to this particular name,
since LAV designates charity, love for humankind and the will to
bestow instead of the egocentric wish to receive. Since this individual
spiritual development is crucial with regard to a larger scale cosmic
redemption LAV is one of the most important of the seventy two
divine names.
ducts_id=166 (accessed April 11th. 2008).
- 107 -
The Kabbalah Centre
As is well known the pop star Madonna is involved with the Kabbalah
Centre and their teachings have made their way into her creative work.
Thus we find the name LAV an essential element in her video
performance of the theme song for the James Bond movie ‘Die
Another Day’222. The movie shows Madonna with the Hebrew letters
‫ לאו‬tattooed on her right arm, being tortured in a prison similar to the
one James Bond is held in in the movie. The location shifts between
this and a fencing dueling scene displaying a white and a black
Madonna fighting each other (In the movie Madonna plays the role as a
fencing instructor named Verity!). As the fighting increases in intensity
the imprisoned Madonna straps her arms in tefillin, the leatherstraps
Jewish men binds around their arms and forehead before prayer, just
before she is tied to an electric chair. In the end of the video the white
Madonna kills the black Madonna and simultaneously the electric chair
is empowered, leaving a thick cloud of smoke in the room. When her
executioner enters the room the chair is empty but the name ‫לאו‬
appears in flaming letters on its back while we see Madonna escaping
down the corridor 223 . Among the lyrics to the song we find the
important sentences: ‘I’m gonna break the cycle, I’m gonna shake up
the system, I’m gonna destroy my ego’. The connection between the
lyrics and the divine name is unmistaken and Huss arrives at the
following conclusion:
The significance of the letters LAV, according to the

teaching of the Kabbalah Centre, enables us to read
Madonna’s ‘‘Die Another Day’’ video clip as a Bergian
kabbalistic text. The power of the seventy-two names of
God saves Madonna, in the prison sequence, from the
suffering and death caused by the external, evil powers of
this world. Yet, as we learn from the dueling sequence and
222 In his article ‘All You Need is LAV’ Boaz Huss offers a splendid analysis of the music
video. Thus the following is more or less a summary of his main points.
223 The video can be found on Youtube:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=dAPh72JQ6qU&feature=related (accessed April 30, 2008).
- 108 -
The Kabbalah Centre
the lyrics of the song, the victory over the evil powers is
contingent upon an internal victory, a destruction of the
ego, the victory of the white Madonna (the divine light, the
will to bestow) over the black Madonna (the evil side, the
will to receive, the ego). This victory can be achieved
through the power of the letters LAV224.
What is surprisingly is that while Huss in his analysis acknowledges the

postmodern symbolism in the function of Madonna in her constant
blurring of boundaries; She dissolves the boundaries between religion
and popular culture, between different religions by being the catholic
Madonna and the Jewish Esther, he does not recognize the genderly
dichotomy that she promotes by the laying of the tefillin. This practice is
a strictly male mitzvah and thus the basic gender roles are being torn
down225.
I will now turn to the actual usage of the seventy two names of god in
everyday practices within the Kabbalah Centre. The function of the
divine names can be divided in to two different practices: meditative
scanning and talismanic usage. The first of these involves the visual
skimming of the table of the divine names in order to activate the
healing light of the names. It is a ritual which can be practiced in
solitude for one’s own benefit or better in communion with others in
order to spread the healing divine energy to people or places around the
world in need of healing. It is not necessary to understand the letters or
being able to pronounce the names. The simple activity of looking at
224 Huss: ‘All You Need is LAV’, p. 617-618.

225 Kocku von Stuckrad discusses the deconstruction of stereotype gender roles by
Madonna in his article: ‘Madonna and the Shekhinah’. However I do not agree with his view
of the kabbalistic image of god as andropomorphic instead of just anthropomorphic or with
his notion of the gender of the Shekhinah: ‘Thus, in kabbalistic interpretation the gender of
the Shekhinah is multivalent; the Shekhinah is reflective of a male dominance that incorporates
the female aspects of the divine. It reveals the power of male definitions and an androcentric
organization of perceived differences’. For a different viewpoint see the works of Daniel
Abrams, most notably The Female Body of God in Kabbalah especially p. 68-122 and ‘"A light of
her own"’ where Abrams convincingly argues for the highly independent and elevated status
of the divine feminine in Kabbalah.
- 109 -
The Kabbalah Centre
them is enough to release their power226. The talismanic usage implies

choosing the appropriate name in accordance to one’s needs; LAV (‫)לאו‬
to eliminate the ego, ALAD (‫ )אלד‬for protection against the evil eye or
MAHASH (‫ )מהש‬for physical protection, just to take a few popular
examples. These names can be written on amulets, t-shirts or directly
on the body if the purpose is to heal physical pain. The names can thus
be used as tools aiding the practitioner in her/ his spiritual quest, the
completion of which would be impossible without the divine power
inherent in the names.
7.4 The Zohar

The essential purpose of reading and scanning
THE ZOHAR is to restore both our lives and our
universe to their natural balanced state227.
Besides the red string and the divine names another important spiritual
tool is promoted by the Kabbalah Centre. This is the medieval literary
masterpiece, the Sefer ha Zohar, meaning the Book of Splendor. The Zohar
was written in the late thirteenth century as a pseudepigraphic work
mainly by the Spanish kabbalist Moses de Leon. He presented the work
as being an ancient work by the rabbi Shimon bar Yohai and now he
was able to pass piece by piece of this sacred authoritative teaching on
to his own students. It developed into a huge compilation of kabbalistic
exegeses on the Torah written in the style of ancient midrashim combined
with legendary tales of the lives and teachings of the ancient, honored
rabbis. It quickly achieved a canonical status among the kabbalists, a
status which has been maintained until today. Despite the academic
consensus about the pseudepigraphic character of the book, most of
the contemporary kabbalist adhere to the alleged authorship of the

227 www.Kabbalah.com/scanchart07-08.pdf (accessed May 4, 2008).
- 110 -
The Kabbalah Centre
Zohar as being Shimon bar Yohai and not Moses de Leon. This is also
the case with the Kabbalah Centre who even promotes the Zohar to a
far greater extend than the Torah itself. Where the Zohar holds a place
on their website as part of the central teachings of the center and a
whole section of their online store is devoted to the book itself in
different languages and various commentaries on it, hardly any
references to the Torah are found. Only in their store it is possible to
buy a two volume Hebrew commentary on the Torah by Yehudah Berg.
Furthermore, in practice the Zohar has gained a similar function as the
Torah in that a special chart is given of when to read which portion of
the Zohar over a period of one year, exactly as it is common practice in
a traditional Jewish synagogue to read a designated chapter of the Torah
each Shabbat.
As with the divine names, the Kabbalah Centre emphasizes that
understanding of the language is of minor importance. The efficacy of
the Zohar is embedded in the physical representation of the letters, not
just in its literary meaning:
The Zohar is a spiritual book–the most powerful tool that

has been given to us for revealing the Creator’s Light in
our lives. This power does not depend on understanding
or belief. Rather, it is imbued in every word and letter of
The Zohar, and from every letter and word it passes to
us228.
The reason for the elevated status of the Zohar compared to the Torah
can be found in the Kabbalah Centre’s distinction between Judaism and
Kabbalah, where Judaism is a closely defined religion opposed to
Kabbalah which is perceived as universal wisdom. Thus studying the
Torah is only relevant for the very small circle of orthodox Jews
attending the higher educational programs within the Centre, whereas
the Zohar is available for everybody. It is highly interesting to note how
228 www.Kabbalah.com/scanchart07-08.pdf (accessed May 4, 2008).
- 111 -
The Kabbalah Centre
the differentiation between what is conceived as esoteric and exoteric

has been reversed in the practical teachings of the Kabbalah Centre. In
traditional Kabbalah severe restrictions was made as to who was worthy
to study the Kabbalah and it was only a theoretical possibility after
several years of intensive study of the traditional orthodox Jewish
curriculum, that is the Torah, Mishnah, Halakhah and so on. Today
everybody can attend service at the synagogue, listening to the reading
of the Torah. In the Kabbalah Centre this has been turned upside down.
It is far more complicated to get to study the Torah in the context of the
Kabbalah Centre than the formerly esoteric teachings of the Zohar.
Here, everybody can attend the weekly readings of the Zohar and
everybody is encouraged to buy a Zohar to achieve the spiritual benefits
inherent in the book:
The Zohar not only reveals and explains, it literally brings

blessings, protection, and well-being into the lives of all
who come into its presence. Nothing is required but
worthy desire, the certainty of a trusting heart, and an
open and receptive mind. The Zohar’s ultimate purpose is
to draw Light into our lives, and thereby bring complete
fulfillment. The Zohar, therefore, is an opportunity for us
to transform our natures. To bring about this
transformation is why all the teachings of Kabbalah exist,
and why The Zohar should always be in our homes, our
thoughts, and our hearts229.
And as is written in the sales description of the pocket size edition of

the part of the Zohar which is attributed to the function of healing and
protection:
The Zohar is not only a book of Kabbalistic teachings and

wisdom. It is a powerful tool for protection from physical
illness and danger in all forms […] By keeping it with you
or giving it to those you love, you can insure health in a
world fraught with chaos and negativity. This miniature
229 www.Kabbalah.com/11.php (accessed May 4, 2008).
- 112 -
The Kabbalah Centre
volume is ideal for travel bags, your car, children's

backpacks, and even in your purse. Don't leave home
without it!230.
The Zohar actually functions in the same way as the divine names and
they compliment each other in the everyday practice of the Kabbalah
Centre attendee. Different sections of the book is said to be connected
to different spiritual functions just as the names of god and both the
book and the names are perceived to pave the way for the spiritual
perfection of the individual and thus for the world itself. The theurgical
utility of the Zohar is a reminiscent of the teachings of Yehuda Ashlag
who thought of himself as being the one who had completed the
understanding of the Zohar and made it available to all of humankind231.
Ashlag was convinced that he lived in the messianic age, a time where
the connections between the physical and the divine worlds were closer
than ever, and he saw it as his task to bring the knowledge of god and
of Kabbalah out into the world. And to this, the understanding and
spreading of the Zohar was mandatory for the complete spiritual
fulfillment of the physical world. In the Kabbalah Centre the Zohar
along with the divine names become the key tools to achieve the
individual and thus cosmological completion and purification.
For us to manifest complete fulfillment, we need to evolve

into our greatest selves. In our thoughts, feelings, and
actions, we need to erase negativity and replace darkness
with Light. It is for this purpose that the teachings and
tools of Kabbalah were given to all humanity—and the
greatest of these tools is The Zohar232.
It should be noted however, that to Ashlag the task of individual and

cosmological purification was solely a duty for the Jews albeit the effect
230 http://store.Kabbalah.com/product_info.php?cPath=164&vcats=164&products_id=258
(accessed May 4, 2008).

- 113 -
The Kabbalah Centre
would embrace all of humanity. But Ashlag thought of the Jews as

being on a far higher spiritual level than non-Jews, a level that non-Jews
would never be able to attain. He would never have thought of teaching
Kabbalah to gentiles. So the Kabbalah Centre’s adaption of Ashlagian
teachings and viewpoints is by all means eclectic and transformative.
The designation of Jews and gentiles are only referring to different
spiritual levels according to the Kabbalah Centre and thus everybody
can overcome their “gentile status”. As Myers explains:
The Centre rejects the Bible’s explanation that the name

Yisrael was given to Jacob after he wrestled with God’s
angel and was not defeated, and rejects any genealogical or
national associations. It is a spiritual designation only. It
refers to people who struggle with Satan and try to
connect to the Light. In short, everyone at the Kabbalah
Centre is Yisrael233.
This allegorical interpretation of the designation of Israel as a universal

spiritual category instead of a strictly Jewish one is part of the Centre’s
strategy towards spreading Kabbalah to all of humankind. They
insistently promote Kabbalah, not as a religion and certainly not as a
branch of Judaism, but as a universal wisdom available to everybody
regardless gender, religion and age:
It is quite understandable that Kabbalah could be confused

with Judaism. Throughout history, many scholars of
Kabbalah have been Jewish. But there have also been
many non-Jewish scholars of this wisdom, such as
Christian Knorr-von-Rosenroth, Pico Della and Sir Isaac
Newton, just to name a few.
[…] It is a way of life that can enhance any religious
practice. Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims, and Jews
use Kabbalah to improve their spiritual experience234.

- 114 -
The Kabbalah Centre
7.5 Kabbalah or New Age, Religion or Spirituality?

The above distinction between religion and spirituality is another typical
aspect of New Age culture adopted by the Kabbalah Centre. However,
I would not go as far as to call the Kabbalah Centre a New Age
movement. Rather it is a perfect example of a religious organization’s
adaptation to the challenges which postmodern Western society poses
to traditional religion. In certain ways the Centre consequently can be
mistaken for presenting “New Age spirituality” in the guise of
Kabbalah. But I would argue that it is actually the other way around.
Even though the Kabbalah Centre, as shown above, evidently makes
use of typical New Age strategies and rhetoric they do not share the
crucial syncretistic elements so characteristic of New Age. On the
contrary the Kabbalah Centre offers traditional kabbalistic teachings on
new bottles, adapted to the conditions of post modernity. They are
aware of which rhetorical strategies work in a consumer oriented
culture and they have managed to establish themselves as an attractive
religious or, as they would say, spiritual choice in the subjectivity-
centered mode of life which Paul Heelas and Linda Woodhead have
found so central to the religious milieu of post modernity235. This is not
the place for an extensive discussion of the distinctions between
religion and spirituality236 but I find it important to clarify my own
position in the debate. Suffice to say that I myself see the terms as
artificial emic distinctions which are employed by religious groups or
people in order to position themselves in relation to other types of
religion than their own. None of the above academic discussions of the
possibility of using the terms in an etic analysis seem convincing to me,
rather they tend to blur the boundaries of the respective categories. The
235 Heelas and Woodhead: The Spiritual Revolution.

236 This topic has been elaborated extensively by Christopher Partdridge: The Re-Enchantment
of the West, esp. vol. I, chapter 3 and vol. II, p. 6-13, Paul Heelas: ‘The Spiritual Revolution’,
Robert Fuller: Spiritual but not Religious, Steven Sutcliffe and Marion Bowman: Beyond the New
Age, et al. Apart from their diverse viewpoints, what is common to all these discussions is
- 115 -
The Kabbalah Centre
problems of defining “religion” are well known and it will not get any
easier by the employment of an extra category as “spirituality”. It only
extends the definitiorial quest to comprise two fuzzy categories instead
of just one. An example of a definition of “spiritual” which in my view
does not distinguish itself from any definition of “religion” is the
following from Robert Wuthnow:
At its core, spirituality consists of all the beliefs and

activities by which individuals attempt to relate their lives
to God or to a divine being or some other conception of a
transcendental reality […] But spirituality is not just the
creation of individuals; it is shaped by larger social
circumstances and by the beliefs and values present in the
wider culture237.
I do not think that this definition by any means differentiates itself from
any other type of religion and consequently it confuses more than
clarifies. Within the study of contemporary Kabbalah the designation of
“spirituality” is also prevalent. As Boaz Huss writes:
The eclectic nature of postmodern spirituality involves a

blurring of distinction between science, religion and
popular culture. Both New Age and contemporary
kabbalistic movements blur and challenge the accepted,
modernist distinctions between religion and magic,
theology and science, religious ritual and show business.
New Age and contemporary Kabbalah combine diverse
themes such as Tarot cards and quarks, sefirot and chakras,
pop culture celebrities and Nobel laureates238.
He does not, however, involve in a discussion or definition of the term

spirituality and I think he misses an important distinction between
kabbalistic movements which use New Age concepts and religious
strategies and New Age movements which employ kabbalistic material
their basic agreement that a distinction of the two terms is of intrinsic value to the academic
study of contemporary religion, an assumption that I do not contend.
237 Wuthnow: After Heaven, p. vii-viii.
238 Huss: ’The New Age of Kabbalah’, p. 118.
- 116 -
The Kabbalah Centre
into their eclectic systems. Without doubt Kabbalah has become a

religious buzz word, and to incorporate kabbalistic concepts into New
Age teachings gives the movement a widely recognized authority.
Kabbalah has become the universal wisdom in contemporary
esotericism, including New Age, and holds a position as divine
knowledge and tradition similar to the status that was given to Indian,
Tibetan or Egyptian religious traditions in earlier esotericism.
7.6 Summary
In the previous discussion I have shown how the Kabbalah Centre
places itself in two traditions. The substance of their teaching belongs
to quite traditional kabbalistic doctrines which however have been
interpreted in a New Age rhetoric. As a consequence they base their
teaching on such traditional kabbalistic subjects as the divine names, the
Zohar and speculations about the use of amulets but the usage of these
teachings have been transformed into tools for spiritual purification and
everyday improvements. Still as the final quotation will show, the
selfevolvement is deeply imbedded in traditional Lurianic doctrines:
Kabbalah teaches that every human being is a work in

progress. Any pain, disappointment, or chaos that exists in
our lives is not because this is how life is meant to be, but
only because we have not yet finished the work that
brought us here. That work, quite simply, is the process of
freeing ourselves from the domination of the human ego
and creating an affinity with the sharing essence of God239.
239 www.Kabbalah.com/03.php (accessed April 17, 2008).
- 117 -
The Kamadon Academy and the Melchizedek Method
8. The Kamadon Academy and the Melchizedek

Method
In 1997 the spiritual teacher Alton Kamadon chanelled a new method
for spiritual enlightenment: a teaching which was called the
Melchizedek Method. It was received from the ascended master Thoth
or Enoch. This teaching was said to be practiced first by the cetaceans
(that is, the dolphins and whales) in the temples of higher learning in
Atlantis. Kamadon is also said to constantly have received new
information from and worked with The Ascended Masters, The Angelic
Realms, Lord Sananda and Lord Melchizedek in the Intergalactic
Council of the Great White Brotherhood. He also had memories of his
deep connection to the ancient Mystery Schools of Lemuria, Atlantis
and Egypt240.
The teachings itself consists of five initiatory levels where the first two
always are taught together. Of the benefits gained from the different
initiatic levels, these can be highlighted:
Level 1 & 2:
• Activating the Hologram of Love 3 Breath Merkaba lightbody.
• Accessing the time-space continuum through the spine.
• Instant holographic chakra balance.
• Encoding the five sacred key languages of Egyptian, Hebrew,
Sanskrit, Tibetan & Chinese through the pineal gland.
• Opening dimensional doorways to time travel with teleportation.
• Retrieving beneficial aspects and talents from past lives on Earth
and other planets.
• Amplifying the 33rd Degree Energies of your Adam Kadmon
light body with rotational light colour rays.
• Opening up the ancient seals of wisdom within the Great
Pyramid and the Sphinx.
Level 3 & 4:
• Opening your Superconsciousness to Star Languages and God’s
Light Mansion Galaxy Worlds.
240 www.kamadonlove.com/Alton_Kamadonx.html (accessed May 21, 2008)
- 118 -
• Interaction with the Galactic Councils that Oversee the

Ascension of our Soul.
• A conversation with God.
• A visit to the Intergalactic Melchizedek University on the
Pleiades.
The main teaching concerns the activation of one’s “33rd degree

Merkaba Adam Kadmon Light Body”, also called the “Zohar Body”241.
Merkaba is explained as follows:
MerKaBa is a term which translated means 'chariot' in Hebrew.

In ancient Egyptian (18th dynasty) means MER= rotating fields
of light, KA= spirit and BA= soul.
When the MerKaBa is activated around a person's body, he or
she is in a place of complete protection, generated by the Love
of the Universe242.
The notions of Merkaba and Adam Kadmon are central to the

teachings of the Academy with the Merkaba as the “technology” by
which to reach one’s own Adam Kadmon Light Body. Adam Kadmon
is basically perceived through Lurianic kabbalistic glasses and is thus
seen as the primordial divine being stemming forth from Ein Sof and
through which all creation began. Also in Lurianic terms mankind is
considered to contain sparks of this divine being, which can be
awakened through spiritual practice. This is what is called the Light
Body and with the intervention of YHVH the powers of Adam
Kadmon can be bestowed upon the individual as to transform the
person into an ‘extension of YHWH’ 243. It is no coincidence that
“Kamadon” is an anagram of Adam Kadmon:
“Kamadon” is the anagram of Adam Kadmon, the name

given to our light body, the ‘archetypal’ or prototype of
241 www.holisticwebs.com/orbital/level4.html (Accessed May 19, 2008).

242 www.4dshift.com/back/july99.htm (accessed May 19, 2008).
243 Richardo Serrano: Reaching to Kamadon.
- 119 -
humanity. It is this divine human form that contains the

essence of YHVH, God244.
Furthermore Adam Kadmon has the ability to manifest himself

physically in whatever guise he finds necessary in order to transmit the
divine truths. Obviously this is where any connection with traditional
Kabbalah has evaporated. Adam Kadmon is also connected to the
Kamadon Temple which is said to be an ethereal temple hovering
above the earth and awaiting to be drawn down through human
consciousness. It contains all the wisdom of Adam Kadmon and is even
perceived to be the ‘temple of the soul of Adam Kadmon’245.
Of other kabbalistic terms the Kamadon Academy operates with the
doctrine of the ten sefirot which is identified with Kabbalah in general.
Furthermore Kabbalah is given a universal status which however can
only be revealed directly from a divine mediating agent:
Kabbalah is the science of the many universes of higher

intelligence that serve the Godhead. Kabbalah cannot be
understood exclusively in the languages of Man and, according
to Enoch, must be revealed directly by the angel/ emissary of
YHWH246
Strangely, the functionality of the Hebrew letters and the divine names
(mainly YHVH) is not connected to Kabbalah but has a status of its
own. Thus we find the following from the text Keys of Enoch:
Key 202:1 The name of YHWH is coded within every

biochemical function in our body, especially within the life-
giving DNA/RNA matrix.
Key 202:29 The Hebrew “letters” are used because they are, in
actuality, thought-forms of Light vibrations which control the
244 www.holisticwebs.com/orbital/level3info.html (accessed July 13, 2007).

245www.kamadonacademy.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=151&Itemi
d=60 (Accessed May 19, 2008).

246Richardo Serrano: Reaching to Kamadon.
- 120 -
higher force fields used to evolve all forms of intelligibility from

the divine mind.
Both these “keys” sounds much like a rewording of some basic

kabbalistic notions of language and the tetragrammaton. In the Sefer
Yetzirah all creation stems from the Hebrew letters and the Torah and
in Medieval Kabbalah this is transferred to the tetragrammaton, since it
is the essence of the Torah, as being the foundation of all creation. This
was also prevalent in the Gates of Light. And in the paragraph 202:29 the
Hebrew letters achieve the same hyposemantic qualities as Abulafia
attributed them, that is an inherent efficacy.
Now, I am certain that most practitioners of the Melchizedek Method
are absolutely unaware of these traditional kabbalistic elements and
maybe that even counts for Alton Kamadon himself. However this
shows how traditional Kabbalah has become a structural element in
Western esotericism and as such can be reused in a more or less
recognizable shape.
Obviously the Melchizedek Method shows a high degree of eclecticism
and leaves the sense of a theosophical doctrine combined with New
Age rhetoric and UFO religion. Kabbalistic terms are in the usage of
the Kamadon Academy mere buzzwords meant to provide the method
with attractiveness for a certain audience. The general rhetoric chosen
by the Academy is marked by an extreme predilection for putting
together as many similar buzzwords (sometimes resulting in a
meaningless redundance) as possible into one concept such as “God’s
Light Mansion Galaxy Worlds” 247 , “New Meta-Galactic Luminous
Zonalight”248, “Activation of the Metatronic Waveform Cell Recorder
Crystalline Frequency”249. This pseudo scientific language has the effect
of providing the specific benefits of the method an air of
d=60 (accessed May 19, 2008).

248www.kamadonlove.com/zonalightx.html (accessed May 19, 2008).
- 121 -
unintelligibility and mystery on one hand and scientific authority on the

other. Kabbalah is not an explicitly dominant part of this tradition.
However when spoken of kabbalah always has a highly elevated status
of universal esoteric truth. The knowledge of “traditional” kabbalah is
restricted to a few central concepts like Adam Kadmon and the sefirot,
but any deeper knowledge is very rare. Thus a Kamadon teacher in
Denmark could inform me that Zohar was an ascended master and not
a kabbalistic work written in the end of the 13th century.
9. The Gnostic Teachings of Samael Aun Weor

9.1 Sexual Magic and Apocalyptic
Samael Aun Weor (pseudonym of Víctor Manuel Gómez Rodríguez)
was born in Columbia in 1917 and raised as a Jesuit. In his early teenage
years he became interested in spiritualism and after having studied this
for some years he joined the Theosophical Society in 1933. From this
he enrolled in Arnoldo Krumm-Heller’s Fraternitas Rosicruciana
Antiqua which had come to South America in 1927250. His extensive
studies included among others, the prominent thinkers Helena
Blavatsky, Rudolph Steiner, Gurdjieff, Edward Bulwer-Lytton and
Eliphas Levì from which he drew heavily when composing his own
teachings.
In his autobigraphic book The Three Mountains Weor describes how he is
born a consciuos being compared to other people, and that he from
early on have memories of past incarnations. These includes a period
on Lemuria, Atlantis, a member of an esoteric Tibetan order (in his
Lemurian body), an Egyptian priest, as Julius Caesar and the equivalent
d=60 (accessed May 19, 2008).

250Zoccatelli: ‘G.I. Gurdjieff’. See also Peter König: ‘Ordo Templi Orientis’.
- 122 -
The Gnostic Teachings of Samael Aun Weor
of Jesus on the Moon251. He tells of his initiations of fire (i.e the sexual
fire) that allows him to get rid of his egos and earthly attachments. He
describes an early meeting with a highly illuminated master who
explains to Weor what his mission on earth should be: You will have to
draw the mulitudes, and form the Army of World Salvation to initiate
the new Aquarian Era [...] Your specific mission is to create Men, to
teach the people to fabricate the astral, mental and causal bodies so that
they can incarnate the Human Soul252.
This is closely connected to the name Samael which is explained as

follows:
Samael, the inner Being of Samael Aun Weor, is a great

Archangel who has been assisting humanity for ages. He has
been known by many names throughout our history, but he is
perhaps best known as Ares, Mars, the God of War. His war is
always a spiritual one, the war against the corruption of the
human mind253.
Everybody is said to have an innermost being that can be found

through the work of sexual magic. By entering the abyss of oneself, one
can encounter and free the sparks of one innermost being, sparks which
are captured in the demonic “I”s and egos. With the alchemical
transmutation of the “Ens Semini”, the essence of the semen, one can
dissolve the “I”s and reach higher states of conscious being. The inner
being is the only one who can make the true Human being, without the
consciousness of this one is only an “intellectual animal”.
Weor saw himself as the bodhisattva of Samael and the messenger of
the new era which is said to begin on 4th February, 1962, between
2 and 3 o’clock in the afternoon:
251 Zoccatelli: ‘G.I. Gurdjieff’.

252 Weor: The Three Mountains p. 162.
253 www.gnosticteachings.org/content/view/163/75/ (accessed July 10th 2007).
- 123 -
Since long ago, all the spiritualist brethren of the world have
been waiting for the great Avatar of Aquarius; listen, do not wait
for another messenger, because I am the Initiator of the new
era254.
In 1950 Weor published The Perfect Matrimony of Kinder or The Door to

Enter into Initiation later named The Perfect Matrimony which contains his
sexual magical teachings. Published in Catholic Mexico it is no surprise
that the book caused immense aversion and Weor was even sent to jail
because of the book. The prosecution is probably also one of the
reasons that Weor’s teachings became very apocalyptical in the
following years, as exemplified in his lecture ‘Final Catastrophe’:
Then, let it not be strange for you that the future Earth will have
light and wisdom. However, the present moment is the critical
moment, my dear brothers and sisters; these are terrible times.
People of other planets of infinite space know the present state
in which we are living; it is clear that they will assist us.
However, only those who deserve it will be saved255.
According to this lecture the end of the world will happen in the year
2500, due to kabbalistic readings of the numbers:
Humanity is completely mature for the supreme punishment.

The end of this shameful humanity is near.
The Kabbalistic analysis demonstrates that in the numbers two
(2), five (5), zero (0), and zero (0), the secret of the great
catastrophe is enclosed. Whosoever has understanding, let him
understand for there is wisdom therein.
Unfortunately, people do not know how to comprehend the
profound meaning of certain Kabbalistic numbers. Lamentably,
they interpret everything literally.
We must wait in cold blood for the supreme hour of
punishment for many and of martyrdom for others256.
254 www.gnosticteachings.org/content/view/536/43/ (accessed July 10th 2007).
255www.gnosticteachings.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=60&Itemid=
43 (accessed July 10th 2007).

256www.gnosticteachings.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=60&Itemid=
43 (accessed July 10th 2007).
- 124 -
However, in other texts the date is set according to the Maya calendar
and arrives at the year 2043257.
According to his Christmas message of 1952 the single path to
redemption is walking on the “razor’s edge”, which is the direct path of
sexual magic. Only in this way can one become “christified” and thus
eligible for salvation258.
In the following years Weor managed to publish extensively on a wide
range of esoteric subject, though all with the pivotal aspect of sexual
magic. He also established the AGEAC (Asociación Gnóstica de
Estudios Antropológicos Culturales y Científicos), a school with the
purpose of spreading the gnostic teachings to all humankind. The
organization still exists today with branches all over the world.
However several other institutions also claim to be the proper heirs of
Weor’s gnostic teachings and this seems to sometimes cause tensions
between the different groups. Weor himself did not claim monopoly
over one single school. A multitude of schools could exist as long as
they kept to his teachings and kept three initiatic chambers,
corresponding to the three mountains of his initiatic autobiography.
It is difficult to distinguish fact from fiction in the records of the life of
Weor. This is due to the material available which mainly consists of
more or less hagiographic description given by his followers on one
hand and Weor’s autobiographical statements on the other. Not even
the amount of books written by Weor is it possible to find a consensus
of. Some claim that he has written 49 books and some claim 70259. Be
this as it may, it is beyond any doubt that he was very productive and
wanted his teachings to reach any corner of the world. For this reason
he chose to deny all copyright on the material, a fact that facilitates the
257 This is different from most other interpretations of the end of the world according to the
Maya calendar which usually arrives at the year 2012. See Sacha Defesche: ‘The 2012
Phenomenon’.
258 Weor: ‘Christmas Message 1952’.
- 125 -
research, since most of his books are spread in various languages on the
internet.
With the words of Weor himself, we can say that he presents a
“doctrine of synthesis”. He sees all religions as expressions of a single
universal truth, but he himself is the one to present the correct path to
this truth. This path, as already stated is the practice of sexual magic by
which one becomes “christified” and a “real (conscious) human being”.
In the following chapter I will clarify which role Kabbalah plays in this
sexual magical doctrine.
9.2 Kabbalah in the doctrine of synthesis of Weor

At first sight Kabbalah does not play any prominent role in the writings
of Weor. However, a closer examination of his texts reveals an
underlying system of references which to a large extend makes use of
kabbalistic terminology and symbolism.
By studying Weor’s books it becomes almost certain that he did not
have any direct knowledge of the medieval kabbalistic literature, not
even in any of the available translations. It is evident that he did not
know Hebrew, and the very rare references to any primary kabbalistic
sources indicates that he did not have immediate knowledge of any of
these treatises. Now and then references are given to the Zohar but the
references are extremely vague and could in reality refer to any
theosophical kabbalistic treatise. Though never said explicitly, it seems
likely that Weor got most of his knowledge of Kabbalah through the
teachings of Eliphas Lévi whom he studied in his early days. Also, as a
member of the Theosophical Society, he probably inherited Madame
Blavatsky’s views on Kabbalah.
Weor himself defines Kabbalah accordingly:
259 Zoccatelli: ‘G.I. Gurdjieff’.
- 126 -
[Kabbalah is] an ancient esoteric teaching hidden from the

uninitiated, whose branches and many forms have reached
throughout the world. The true Kabbalah is the science and
language of the superior worlds and is thus Objective, complete
and without flaw260.
In the doctrine of Weor every human being incarnates the ten sefirot.
These should be “activated” through the practice of sexual magic in
order to awaken the sefirotic crown, i.e. the three upper sefirot261.
The sefirotic tree is seen as a map of the universes, both the created,
material universe and the inner universe of the human soul. The three
upper sefirot: Keter, Hochmah and Binah serves as the first, second and
third Logos respectively, corresponding to the Father, the Son and the
Holy Spirit. The third Logos, Binah, is then further divided into a
feminine and masculine principle, serving as the divine Mother and
Father.
The seven lower sefirot is seen as corresponding to the seven different
bodies of the human being262:
1:10 Malkhut: The physical body.

2: 9 Yesod: The ethereal/ vital body.
3:8 Hod: The astral body.
4:7 Netzah: The mental body.
5:6 Tiferet: The causal body/ the body of Will.
6:5 Gevurah: The body of the Consciousness.
7:4 Hesed: The body of the Innermost.
The sefirot are counted with two numbers each in order to show how
they are stepwise emanated from Ein Sof and meanwhile function as a
ladder to be reached from below. Thus Malchut is both number one, as
the first step from the physical world and number ten, as the final
divine emanation. According to Weor the initiant should descend in his
own inner worlds in order to ascend the sefirotic tree. This can only be
done with the practice of sexual magic, a practice he calls the Arcanum
260 Weor: The Initiatic Path, p. 240.

- 127 -
A.Z.F. The purpose of this is to move from one type of body to the
next, the final goal being the solar body which is achieved when the
practitioner reaches the three upper sefirot: the divine Logos. When this
ascend is accomplished it results in a second birth, the birth of the solar
body. Only when reaching this state one can call him/ herself a Human
Being263.
The second sefirah Hochmah is said to be the second Logos, the Christ.
Christ is not seen as an individual being but rather as a cosmic entity or
principle:
Christ is a cosmic force that can express Himself through any

human being who is properly prepared […] A human being is
Christified when the Christ substance is assimilated physically,
psychologically and spiritually. Then the human being becomes a
Christ; then the human being is converted into a living Christ264.
Among the examples of Christs who have appeared in different cultures

are Quetzalcoatl, Ahura-Mazda, Osiris, Hermes Trismegistos and
obviously Jesus.
The three upper sefirot symbolizes the sexual union between the second
sefirah Hochmah, the Christ symbolized by the Lingam, the erected
phallus and the third sefirah Binah, The Holy Spirit and the Divine
Mother symbolized by the Yoni and the Chalice. The union of the two,
performed within the human being is awakening the Divine Serpent,
the Kundalini that rises towards the Father, the first sefirah Keter. It is
this accomplishment that gives birth to the solar body in the human
being.

- 128 -
9.3 Summary
Weor inscribes himself in a conglomerate of different esoteric traditions
and characteristically describes his own teaching as a doctrine of
synthesis. As is the case with the Kamadon Academy Weor does not
seem to have any direct knowledge of traditional kabbalistic materials.
But due to his lifelong involvement with esoteric movements that make
use of basic kabbalistic teachings he does indeed show a greater
knowledge of kabbalistic doctrines than what is to be found in the
Melchizedek Method. The main components of Weor’s teaching derive
from Tantra and Kabbalah as they are found in the rendering of early
modern occultism and theosophy. However in the doctrine of synthesis
these two esoteric currents have gained a wholly new context by being
incorporated into an apocalyptic setting.
10. Erwin Neutzsky-Wulff and the Neurological

Landscape of the Sefirot265
Erwin Neutzsky-Wulff (born 1949) is one of the most influential and
important contemporary Danish occultists. However, as he mainly has
positioned himself as an underground science fiction writer he has
hardly been noticed in the academic study of religion. One of the
reasons for this might be that Neutzsky-Wulff is placed on a borderline
between literature and pseudo science, both topics which have been
highly neglected in the study of religions. The literary career of
Neutzsky-Wulff has been varied and thus he has written comic strips,
stories for porno magazines and horror magazines, computer manuals,
voluminous science fiction novels and last but not least quasi-scientific
literature regarding magic, occultism and religion. This last type of
265 This chapter will appear in the forthcoming book Kabbalah and Modernity edited by Boaz
Huss, Marco Pasi and Kocku von Stuckrad. See Thejls: ‘Erwin Neutzsky-Wulff’ in the
bibliography.
- 129 -
Erwin Neutzsky-Wulff and the
Neurological Landscape of the Sefirot
publications culminated in a huge volume entitled Det overnaturlige (The

Supernatural) published in 2004.
The novels bear explicit connotations to the religious ideologies and
practices elaborated in the quasi-scientific writings and so most of his
books are divided into ten chapters often arranged according to the ten
sefirot. Here I will explore the role of Kabbalah in the writings of
Neutzsky-Wulff and how his perception of Kabbalah on one hand is
inscribed in the tradition of occult Kabbalah reaching back to early
Modernity and on the other hand is extremely innovative. Furthermore
the question of how this type of Kabbalah relates to traditional
Kabbalah and other forms of contemporary Kabbalah will be
interesting to examine.
10.1 A General Theory of Religion and Reality

The religious main work of Neutzsky-Wulff is Det overnaturlige which is
entitled both “the Ultimate Grimoire” and “the proper history of
religions” by the author. It is written in ten parts each divided into ten
subchapters. The book is almost like a new Golden Bough of
comparative mythology and one of Neutzsky-Wulff’s main arguments
is, not surprisingly, that all religions are revolving around the same axis
and are more or less identical.
He sees the historical evolution of religions as degeneration and
Christianity as it is exemplified by the National Lutheran Church in
Denmark as farthest removed from “true religion” as possible. The
reason for this, according to Neutzsky-Wulff, is that religion proper is
identical with love and life. But as he says, Lutheran Christianity has
removed itself from both love and life especially in its rejection of
sexuality. And to Neutzsky-Wulff no separation between religion and
sexuality is possible. To him, religion is sexuality and more, it is
masochistic.
- 130 -
To Neutzsky-Wulff religion proper is only found where a true hieros

gamos takes place, where the woman is the temple prostitute who
assures the god’s presence by being devoted to him in all aspects of her
life. I will get back to the implications of this later.
His main argument is that the religious and thus the supernatural once
was part of what was considered natural and that it is a necessary part
of the human worldview and reality.
However, reality is no easy category in the writings of Neutzsky-Wulff.
Actually most of his novels imply several levels of reality. This should
lead us to his perception of what reality “really” is, namely a mere
projection from the brain. This implies that there is no such thing as an
objective reality ”out there”, but only subjective realities that we can try
to communicate to each other by means of language. In short: Reality
does not exist as an objective, measurable unit and neither the
humanities nor the natural sciences are able to provide a sufficient
worldview266:
With its insistence on observation science has tried to escape

metaphysics but has still received it from the back door.
Metaphysical problematics have been ignored rather than solved
and with modern physics the time had come.
Observation might be formalized experience but experience
nonetheless and in this century the scientists suddenly found
themselves in a universe of experience where everything
depended on the chosen model. With the Heisenberg
uncertainty relation the waterproof shatters between “what is”
and “what we can observe” finally broke down.
If one had to avoid the metaphysical, in principle immeasurable
one had to dismiss the notion of a reality behind the
observations. Reality is what the scientist observes; or rather it is
his observations arranged in a tasteful and appropriate way. The
world is experience267.
266 All citations are translated from Danish by me. Where Hebrew terms appear I have chosen to keep
Neutzsky-Wulff’s transliteration even though they sometimes diverge from my own. All emphasis and
capitalizations are in original.
267 Neutzsky-Wulff: ’Kabbala 1’.
- 131 -
What we perceive to experience as reality is filtered by the different

centers of the brain and obscured by sense perception. This leads
Neutzsky-Wulff to the declaration that experience and thus reality is
nothing but neurological processes. Nonetheless, it is possible to
transcend this projected reality by “cheating” the brain, more
specifically by overruling the prefrontal cortex. The goal of this is to get
behind sense perception and reach or at least recognize what can be
termed as unmanifested reality, which, as we shall see is equaled to the
kabbalistic concept of En Sof.
The brain constantly works to create a world from the needs of

the organism, which are transcendent, as they are behind the
world, are “supernatural”, unconceptualized. It is this
transcendent dynamics that the Kabbalah names en soph, that is,
without end, border, undefined268.
The manual for this is the book Det overnaturlige (The Supernatural). As
Neutzsky-Wulff says in the introduction:
On this epistemological Titanic, most of us naturally live

relatively unconcerned, and for those, this book will not have
much to say, but only for those who seek “the golden key that
unlocks the palace of eternity”269.
In the view of Neutzsky-Wulff Det overnaturlige should be seen as such a

key – a book which provides the theoretical foundation for the true
mysteries of religion and thus reality. These mysteries are sexuality and
neurology. The book is dedicated to two women, mystes for whom
Neutzsky-Wulff functioned as mystagogue.
Religion might be the most sophisticated extension of limbic

behavior and in its source inseparable from the reflecting
sexuality. Thus a study, in the original sense of the word, of
268 Neutzsky-Wulff: ’Kabbala 1’

269 Neutzsky-Wulff: Det overnaturlige, p. 15.
- 132 -
sexuality becomes simultaneously a submerging into the

mysteries270.
10.2 Religion as Sexuality/ Sexuality as Religion

Religion is the most radical affection possible as exemplified in the
temple prostitute or the slavegirl who unconditionally devotes herself to
her god/master. This also reflects Neutzsky-Wulff’s theory of mankind
which simplified proposes that the human nature seeks the ultimate
devotion: Men the devotion directly to the gods and women to the gods
incarnated in the man. This devotion has to be unconditioned and the
modern myste has to return to the state of the priestess which is the
temple prostitute. She has to let go of her self and be nothing but the
object of the attention of her god. Without his attention, his proximity
she is nothing. Neutzsky-Wulff describes an “academy” for this type of
modern priestesses, Huset (the House) where girls aspiring to become
slaves can apply for admittance. They have to sign a contract giving the
governors of the House absolute control over the girl and she becomes
nothing but a piece of property. Their education is described as follows:
They put away their clothes, which they will never get back and
spend a couple of days in the cage which will later function as
qodhesh haqqodashim [holy of holies]for those who will be
elected priestesses. It is a case made of ironbars, one meter high
and wide and one and a half in length. After this their
disciplinary training begins.
They receive an erotic version of the maiden’s uniform, which in
its simple form is the peplos of the priestess […] Furthermore
they have to be at their master’s sexual disposal.271
The means of discipline are whipping, hand, neck and foot fetters,
bridle and the pillory:
The collar reduces the slave to a pet; the handcuffs make her
give up resistance towards sexual advances and the foot fetters
270 Neutzsky-Wulff: ’Den frygtelige virkelighed 2 (’The terrible reality)

271 Neutzsky-Wulff: Det Overnaturlige, p. 170.
- 133 -
prevent escape. Another effective means of discipline is the

pillory where she is freely available in a humiliating position.272
However, they are more than disciplinary tools since the consequence
of this treatment is the experience of transcendence. To Neutzsky-
Wulff the relationship between the master and his slave is that of
ultimate love with absolute mutual devotion and while he becomes her
god she will be his gateway to the divine. It is in Neutzsky-Wulff’s
interpretation in this relationship that the world comes into being.
What men are to do in order to transcend is much more complicated. It
is not enough to be the master of the woman and thus to be her god.
The man has to go the long way of studying and slowly changing his
own mindset and reality perception. A key to this lies in the book Rum
(Space273) from 2001 which is written as to be read like a kabbalistic
treatise with several layers of meaning and different possibilities of
interpretation. One of the ways to read the book is through the use of
gematria and with the aid of this method find one’s way through the
different cross-references spread throughout the book. However, the
gematria is not restricted to the traditional numerical values of Hebrew
words and letters. It is broadened as to also correspond to other
religious systems, so that when examining the Hebrew letter nun, the
significance is not only imbedded in its numerical value but also in its
association to the Egyptian god of chaos “Nun”.
This, of course makes the book a challenge to the reader and it is
expected from the author’s side, that the reader is acquainted with his
former works. Without former knowledge of Neutzsky-Wulff’s work
Rum would probably not make much sense, but rather give an
impression of a rambling mess of separate parallel stories without much
connection. As such the books by Neutzsky-Wulff can be said to
272 Neutzsky-Wulff: Det Overnaturlige, p.172.

273 The Danish word ”rum” denotes both the abstract ”space” and the more concrete “room“ where it
is also the same word in both singular and plural. The book plays on all of the different connotations of
the word.
- 134 -
present a sort of textual initiation. Rum and Det Overnaturlige are the
representatives of the higher knowledge necessary for the initiate to
begin the ritual practice. The earlier books provide the theoretical
background whereas these latter two are more or less ritual manuals
hidden behind literary narratives in the case of Rum and mythological
readings in that of Det Overnaturlige. If they are studied thoroughly and
seriously enough and the guidelines are followed the reader/ initiate
should be able to reach a state of expanded reality perception and
furthermore, to be able to control and form this reality. The books have
been accompanied by a series of articles in Neutzsky-Wulff’s magazine
Bathos meant to facilitate the shift from theory to practice that the two
books propose. It is mainly aimed at the male initiate that do not have a
(female) mystagogue to manage the initiation. In her place the initiate
must attract a succubus, a female entity which can replace the mystagogue.
The guide ‘Transcendens for Dummies’ (‘Transcendence for
Dummies’) suggests the arrangement of an adytum, a restricted room
only meant for the work on transcendence. The room ought to be as
sound and light proof as possible and sparsely furnished with only a
mattress covered with leather and a set of fetters to make the
impression of being in a cell convincing. The initiate should only step
into the room naked and after a shower and should stay in the room for
a fixed amount of time, maybe from sunset to sunrise or even longer
locked to the fetters in the wall. Obviously this kind of sense
deprivation has psychological consequences. As Neutzsky-Wulff
explains, the mind will defend itself and try to make the initiate
abandon the project and return to the safe and ordinary perception of
reality. Thus one might expect boredom followed by anxiety and
feelings of blind and numbness. To overcome this it is of utmost
importance to respect the scheduled time of the stay in the adytum. The
acknowledgement of being a prison or a slave is mandatory to achieve
the experience of transcendence since it will not only be a recognition
- 135 -
from the side of the initiate but also on the side of the transcendent
entities the actualization of which the whole ritual is aimed at. This
leads to one of the major points in the teachings of Neutzsky-Wulff.
That transcendence and descendence are two sides of the same coin
and it is thus necessary for the initiate to transcend that at the same
time an entity descend. The female entity is tempted to approach the
initiate and thus descend by the fact that he is a prisoner. The initiate
will become her slave but in the process be able to control his
experiences of transcendence and actively navigate in the expanded
realms of reality.274
The relationship between the “ordinary” reality and the transcendence
is explained as follows:
Neither the theurge nor the entity exist in any “real” sense, only
the self-manifesting nothing which, following the same rules,
adopts the role as object. The difference between everyday
experience and transcendence is not that they have two different
worlds as object, but that only the latter is an experience in the
proper sense of the word (by which reality is generated) whereas
the first is illusory (images and signs).275
This is an important recognition for the initiate. He has to realize that

what is usually perceived to be reality is nothing but a consensual
projection of the mind. We experience what we expect to experience.
This is what the adytum is supposed to overcome. It helps the initiate to
override the pre-frontal cortex which is the place for the conformity of
reality and gain access to unfiltered or direct experiences. But to obtain
transcendence is one thing, another is to be able to use the new
perception of “reality” and navigate in the transcendent realm. This is
the point where Kabbalah becomes central.
274 Neutzsky-Wulff: ’Transcendens for Dummies’ 12-14 in Bathos 46, p. 4-17, 34-49 and 60-69.
275 Neutzsky-Wulff: ’Transcendens for Dummies’ 12, in Bathos 46, p. 4.
- 136 -
10.3 Neutzsky-Wulff and Kabbalah

To Neutzsky-Wulff the most accurate approach to the concept of
reality is Kabbalah. The reason is that Kabbalah is seen as the map of
the cognitive universes that lie behind sense perception. Reality is seen
not just as a mirror reflecting the transcendence of Ein Sof but a
stepwise neurological process, indicated by sefirot276. This process is the
manifestation or creation of one’s own reality where the sefirot
designates the level of actualization from pure potentiality or
transcendence in Ein Sof to the blueprint of the physical world in
Malkhut. As Neutzsky-Wulff explains in Det overnaturlige:
When we are “rising” through sephiroth, the steps and layers of

actualization/ conceptualization, we are actually moving
“backwards” in the brain; or inferior brain centers manifest
themselves without the interference of PFC277.
With Kabbalah as the theoretical guiding principle one can navigate in

the neurological landscape and create one’s own reality – that is, the
actualization. This is closely connected with transcendence/
descendence. Since when the myste transcends through the sefirot the
unmanifested reality descends simultaneously to become increasing
materialized.
The ten sefirot are thus seen as different cognitive levels. Malkhut is the
veil that one has to get through to start the actualization which leads to
transcendence and the rest of the sefirot accordingly correspond to
certain centers of the brain or neurological processes. Thus the upper
triad of the sefirot Keter, H okhmah and Binah is seen as lying even below
the limbic behavior pattern suggested as to indicate the autonomous
nervous system, the pillars of Gevurah - Hod and H esed – Netzah as
respectively the negative and positive side of the limbic system where
276 Neutzsky-Wulff: Det Overnaturlige, p. 127.
- 137 -
Hod and Netzah could more specifically be the negative and positive
centre of approval in hippocampus. Tiferet matches hypothalamus, Yesod
the thalamic filter and finally Malkhut parallels cerebrum where the
projection of the physical world takes place.
Each of the ten sefirot is understood to exhibit individual geographical
characteristics and also to be inhabited by certain types of entities
belonging to each sefirah. The two lowest sefirot are most elaborate
described as the following examples from two transcendence accounts
show.
Malkhut
Malkhut is explained to be like a fairytale place, the forest that you as
the main character of a fairytale are entering in order to find “the wise
woman”, “the evil witch” or “the troll”278. These supernatural figures
are entities that descend simultaneously as the mystic ascends.
A myste of NW gives the following description of Malkhut, a description
which is matched by other transcendence accounts:
In Malchut they [the entities] are often children, dwarfs or

maybe pixies. They are very hospitable and usually treat you like
if you were the Queen of Saba (but then, to them you are). They
wait you and tell edifying stories around the table, where you get
the most honorable seat. It is like visiting a peasant family
hundred years ago. They offer you food and drinks that keep
you in the astrality because they want you to stay as long as
possible [...] The old men are kind and grave, the women meek
and shy. The children which for some reason are always boys are
teasing and annoying.279
The importance of the residents of Malkhut lies in their function as

guardians of the gate to the other realms. To continue the astral journey
to Yesod it is necessary to acquire both enough confidence in the astral
realm to have the courage to delve deeper into the system and a key to
277 Neutzsky-Wulff: Det Overnaturlige., p. 131.

278 Neutzsky-Wulff: Transcendens for Dummies 16, Bathos 47, 2007, p. 14-27.
279 Anonymous (1): Transcendence Account..
- 138 -
be able to enter the next sefirot. This can be a name or a number which
can be subject to gematria upon returning to the “ordinary” world.
Similar to the woman in a cage the male initiate who spend his time in
the adytum might experience what Neutzsky-Wulff terms precipitate
transcendence to Malkhut. With time she/ he will be able to transcend
consciously and to control the experience so she can continue to the
next sefirah Yesod:
Yesod
In Yesod the circumstances are not as cozy. You might be
pinned on a cross or a tree, put in a cage, raped by ten
raving beasts or boiled, cut to pieces and vacuum packed.
Here, the trick is not to be afraid or panic. It is easier than
it sounds like, as the prefrontal cortex (where the fear for
these kind of totally harmless things belongs) is on stand-
by so to speak or works on your/ the transcendence’s side.
Let yourself be killed, raped and humiliated, preferably
without too much murmur (that makes them so sad). Try
to be an object or an animal, then in time you will pass the
test and continue to Rachamim.280
In Yesod the temple service truly begins and it is where the initiate can
attract the upper transcendent entities through her sexual service. Here
the myste has the responsibility of the actualization of the world(s), of
her own transcendence and of the descendence of the “supernatural”
entities. In Malkhut the myste is still a novice who has to learn how to
navigate, still not quite aware of the territory in which she is situated but
if she has managed to proceed to Yesod she commits herself to the
duties of the priestess or as a myste states, she has become a female
tzaddiq, :
Through the transcendence I have become what you could call

the world’s servant. I have been in the service of the world as
restorator of the contact between the world and its underlying
spirit. I serve, with a Jewish term, as a female caddiq. I
contribute to the maintenance of the world machinery and do
280 Anonymous (1): Transcendence Account. Rachamim is another name for the sefirah Tiferet.
- 139 -
what I can to keep the paths between the worlds clean

(tiqqun)281.
As in much of Neutzsky-Wulff’s own writings the inspiration from

Lurianic Kabbalah is evident. The Lurianic concept of the breaking of
the vessels has in the context of Neutzsky-Wulff become equal to the
degeneration of religion, that is, the division between sexuality and
religion. With the removal of the priestess/ the temple prostitute the
direct connection between the divine and the world was interrupted.
The Sefer Yetzirah is seen as the most important kabbalistic [!] text and
Neutzsky-Wulff published a Danish translation written by one of his
followers282. In his translation the title is not The Book of Formation as it
is usually translated but the Book of Actualization. As we have seen, this is
a central term in the teachings of Neutzsky-Wulff as actualization is
closely linked to one’s own conceptualization of the world. Since the
work is very much a cosmogony, in the interpretation of Neutzsky-
Wulff it becomes a manual of creation, and as the world is seen as
essentially subjective it can be used as a do-it-yourself guide to your
personal cosmogony. It teaches the mystic to be aware of the creative
mechanisms of language, mechanisms which in Neutzsky-Wulff’s
rendering are neurological.
The verse ends with a request to accommodate the wisdom of

the book and to “reinstate the creator on the throne”. The
creator is here man who by the adoption of a communicative
aspect of language has lost the cognitive, logos. It is the declared
purpose of Sepher Yetzirah to teach the student the cognitive
language – Teach Yourself Creation283.
Again it is the concept of language which is central. To Neutzsky-Wulff

reality as a neurological concept is essentially linguistic and Kabbalah is
the key to this language, hence it is no surprise that the Sefer Yetzirah has
such an elevated status in the teachings of Neutzsky-Wulff.
281 Anonymous (2): Transcendence Account.

282Lennart Amden: Sefer Yetzirah.
283 Neutzsky-Wulff: ‘Kabbalah 2’.
- 140 -
10.4 The Occult Connection

As is often the case with the creator of a new religious system
Neutzsky-Wulff claims to be independent and highly superior in
comparison to every other contemporary religious tradition. According
to him all religion since Antiquity has been in a state of increasing
degeneration, even the Medieval kabbalistic works which are held in
high esteem are nonetheless seen as showing the inevitable signs of
depravation. This is another reason why the Sefer Yetzira is perceived to
be of even more importance than the Zohar. Kabbalah is thus also one
of the only traditions since Antiquity which Neutzsky-Wulff wants to
acknowledge any value at all. And even though he obviously is inscribed
in the occult tradition of early modernity he dismisses every other
teaching as mere nonsense. Prominent occultists like Éliphas Levi or
Aleister Crowley are barely mentioned and if they are, they are mocked
as dilettantes. However, as shown by Alfred Vitale284 with regard to
modern occultism in general and Egil Asprem285 with regard to the
occultist Kabbalah in particular, what was characteristic of fin de siècle
occultism was the reinterpretation of available religious material
through the means of scientific methods and rhetoric. And this is
exactly what Neutzsky-Wulff is doing. The observations made by
Asprem in his analysis of Aleister Crowley’s use of Kabbalah can
reasonably be applied to Neutzsky-Wulff as well:
The comparative methodology of Frazer is applied, but in place

of Frazer’s skeptical agenda we find here an esoteric, perennialist
agenda. The main argument of this article will show how
disembedded elements of the Kabbalah, through an instance of
religious creativity, are put to the forefront of this novel occult
284 Alfred Vitale: ’The Method of Science’.

285 Asprem: ’Kabbalah Recreata’.
- 141 -
methodology, as the very matrix which makes the innovations

possible286.
Asprem continues to show how Crowley in his book Liber 777 uses
Kabbalah as a basic system of classification into which all religious
phenomena might be applied and is thus used as a taxonomical
device 287 . Furthermore we might consider the first of the seven
definitory theses of Kabbalah that Crowley presents in his appendix to
Liber 777:
Qabalah is:
a) A language fitted to describe certain classes of phenomena,
and to express certain classes of ideas which escape regular
phraseology…
b) An unsectarian and elastic terminology by means of which it
is possible to equate the mental processes of people
apparently diverse…
c) A system of symbolism which enables thinkers to formulate
their ideas with complete precision…288
Though certainly not directly applicable to Neutzsky-Wulff’s perception

of Kabbalah, there are important similarities. First of all the
implications of a) and b), that Kabbalah is a certain symbolic language
which is superior to ordinary language and enables the user to speak of
extraordinary realities with utmost precision, is a common claim made
by Neutzsky-Wulff in Det overnaturlige. Secondly that Kabbalah can be
used as a terminology applied to mental processes is also as we have
seen, a theme easily recognizable in the teachings of Neutzsky-Wulff.
Furthermore, the propensity to write fictional works with kabbalistic
themes is a common trait for both writers289. This said the similarities
286 Asprem: ’Kabbalah Recreata’, p. 136.

287 Asprem: ’Kabbalah Recreata’, p. 138.
288Crowley: Liber 777, Appendix A, p. 125. Also presented and discussed in Asprem: ‘Kabbalah Recreata’,
p. 138.
289 See especially Crowley: The Wake World and Neutzsky-Wulff: UFO and RUM.
- 142 -
of Crowley’s and Neutzsky-Wulff’s perception and use of Kabbalah

should not be stretched too far. To Crowley Kabbalah is a universal and
not strictly Jewish system whereas to Neutzsky-Wulff Kabbalah is a
Jewish phenomenon and the knowledge of Hebrew essential in order to
be able to use Kabbalah properly as a classificatory and navigatory tool
and to understand its specialized symbolic language. Moreover
Neutzsky-Wulff’s interest in and understanding of traditional Kabbalah
is much more profound than that of Crowley’s even though his
interpretation is even more innovative.
As Asprem shows, Kabbalah is used by Crowley to fulfill the motto the
method of science, the aim of religion and if we transfer that to Neutzsky-
Wulff it is evident that he takes that motto to its utmost consequence.
The kabbalistic enterprise in the interpretation of Neutzsky-Wulff
becomes identical with that of the scientist’s as the following quote
illustrates:
The kabbalists square God as a physicist would square a wave

function. The world is language and thus linguistic analysis as
deduction is a viable alternative to the scientific induction290.
This again leads back to Neutzsky-Wulff’s interpretation of the first

lines of Sefer Yetzirah where the created, that is actualized, world is
divided into three realms namely the one who describes (writes), that
which is described (written) and the description (writing) itself291. Here
the kabbalist/ scientist can put himself in the place of God as the
master of creation, and this is the utmost purpose of transcendence.
290 Neutzsky-Wulff: ’Kabbala 2’.

291 Neutzsky-Wulff: ’Kabbala 2’. The part of the Sefer Yetzirah which is referred to is:
‘‫’בשלשה ספרים בספר וספר וספור‬
- 143 -
10.5 New Age Nonsense or Creative Interpretation

The perception of Kabbalah as a map of the transcendent and
neurological realm and of the sefirot as corresponding to certain brain
centers cannot but challenge the prevailing conceptions of Kabbalah.
As has recently been discussed in chapter 6, the academic study of
Kabbalah has been characterized by a polemical attitude against
contemporary Kabbalah practitioners and with regard to Neutzsky-
Wulff the case is similar. In Denmark the sole mention of Neutzsky-
Wulff and his kabbalistic enterprise is a short article written for the
Christian anti-cult movement “Dialogcentret” by Marianne Schleicher.
Under the title ‘Kabbalah: En middeladerlig klassiker udsat for pop’
(‘Kabbalah: A Medieval Classic Exposed to Pop’) she examines the
adoption of Kabbalah by New Age representatives and as examples
Schleicher points to Madonna and the Kabbalah Centre and Erwin
Neutzsky-Wulff. Her conclusion regarding these phenomena is as
follows:
No, neither Madonna nor Wulff engage in Kabbalah. They

merely reuse elements from a Jewish mystical theological praxis
and subjugate them to their modern worldview in their
religious/ spiritual seeking of meaning. Then, at the same time
they can benefit from that aura of insight and wisdom which
have always surrounded Jewish mysticism292.
With no explicit demarcation of Kabbalah it is difficult to follow this

conclusion. There are no arguments regarding why the Kabbalah of the
Kabbalah Centre or Neutzsky-Wulff is not Kabbalah, only that it is part
of the New Age rendering of Kabbalah. Apparently, in the view of
Schleicher this is enough to exclude the currents from Kabbalah
proper. As previously discussed, the Kabbalah Centre can hardly be
deemed a New Age phenomenon per se. It is rather a New Religious
Movement which increasingly has been inspired by New Age rhetorics
- 144 -
but at the core of its teachings still has quite traditional Jewish
Kabbalistic themes. The designation of Neutzsky-Wulff as a New Age
representative seems even more arbitrary as he has nothing whatsoever
to do with what is usually characteristic of the New Age milieu. Most
importantly, the notion of the coming of a new age is entirely absent in
Neutzsky-Wulff’s teachings. Regarding his use of Kabbalah it is, like the
Kabbalah Centre, grounded in traditional Kabbalistic practice, though
interpreted in a radically creative manner. These cases seem to indicate
how New Age is used as a sort of terminological garbage bin instead of
an analytical tool. What the Kabbalah Centre and Neutzsky-Wulff do is
to take from the traditional Kabbalah what is useful to them and put it
into new frameworks and new representations. As Wouter Hanegraaff
points out innovation and new interpretations are needed for a tradition
to continue. ‘Perfect understanding’ he says ‘would logically imply the
death of tradition’293. In its outset Medieval Kabbalah itself was highly
creative in its interpretation of ancient Jewish material so it can be to no
surprise that contemporary Kabbalah is just as innovative with regard to
their interpretations of the available sources. Moreover Medieval
Kabbalah was not a unified movement. Rather there were many
varieties of what was termed to be Kabbalah. Though there by no
means is agreement among Kabbalah scholarship exactly as to how to
demarcate Medieval Kabbalah, as least there is agreement on the fact
that diverse currents existed within what can be defined as Kabbalah.
So when it is possible to speak of theosophical, ecstatic, practical or
magical Kabbalah within the field of Medieval Jewish Kabbalah and
also acknowledge the later currents of Christian Kabbalah it ought not
to be of great trouble to establish new taxonomies within contemporary
Kabbalah. As such, concepts like occult Kabbalah and New Age
Kabbalah can be used as analytical tools without negative connotations
292 Schleicher: ’Kabbalah’.

293 Hanegraaff: ’Kabbalah and Modernity’.
- 145 -
of not being “proper” Kabbalah. So even though Neutzsky-Wulff is

obviously quite extreme in his interpretation of Kabbalah it does not
imply that what he does is not Kabbalah. It is definitely not traditional
Jewish Kabbalah, but if looked at from as objective a point as possible
his ideas of the sefirot as a map of the brain is not more radical than the
Renaissance Christian kabbalists who interpreted Kabbalah to prove the
truth of Christianity.
11. Conclusion of Part II

The second part of the thesis has been concerned with a short historical
overview of the role of Kabbalah in Western esoteric traditions. It
illustrated how Kabbalah in the renaissance was gaining a status of
being ancient, divine wisdom, transmitted by the Jews but actually
containing the hidden wisdom and foundational truth of Christianity.
The attribution of a universal esoteric wisdom to Kabbalah has been
prevalent ever since albeit under different guises. However, the role of
Kabbalah in the construction of traditions in contemporary religion has
to a large extend gone unnoticed by academic scholarship due to a
dismissive attitude among Kabbalah scholars. Thus it is only in recent
years that the study of contemporary Kabbalah in its various forms has
begun to be considered worthy of attention.
The case studies analyzed in this part were chosen in order to exemplify
the variety of creative interpretations of Kabbalah that we can witness
in contemporary religion. Thus we have examined the largest kabbalistic
movement of today; the Kabbalah Centre which presents traditional
kabbalistic teachings transformed into postmodern consumer oriented
“spirituality”. Then we had Erwin Neutzsky-Wulff who in his neuro-
linguistic interpretation of Kabbalah and reality upholds an extreme
elitism. To Neutzsky-Wulff the knowledge, use and understanding of
Kabbalah is definitely not for the masses! Neutzsky-Wulff’s rendering
- 146 -
Conclusion of Part II
of Kabbalah is highly inspired by fin de siècle occultism and this is also

evident in the sexual magic taught by Samael Aun Weor. Weor,
however did not share the same primary knowledge of traditional
kabbalistic material as Neutzsky-Wulff, but relied on the interpretations
he received through his religious education within the different esoteric
movements that he consulted throughout his life. The last group that
has been examined is the Kamadon Academy and its Melchizedek
Method. This showed to be the movement which had the least
connection to traditional Kabbalah among the groups under scrutiny.
This is also mirrored in the minor role that Kabbalah plays in their
teachings. Kabbalah has in the Melchizedek Method been wrapped in
so many layers of New Age symbolism that the kabbalistic material is
barely recognizable. But this has not only happened to the kabbalistic
material. Since their teaching is comprised of bits and pieces of every
conceivable part of the New Age milieu, all these fragments have been
decontextualized and reworked into a new context. This is obviously
nothing outstanding in the history of religions where the invention of
new traditions happens all the time. But in the present context the
Kamadon Academy is the most radical example of that process.
Now, I am perfectly aware that this is far from being a representative
selection. However, what I have strived to do in the present chapter
was primarily to introduce and exemplify this vast field of understudied
currents within contemporary Western esotericism and to show the
importance of Kabbalah within these diverse movements. In this way
Kabbalah can fruitfully be viewed as a structural element within
Western esotericism.
- 147 -
Final Discussion and Conclusive Words
12. Final Discussion and Conclusive Words

When Western esotericism was established as an independent field of
research it was necessarily much clearer demarcated as is the case today.
As a new field it had to place the academic study of esotericism on solid
foundations and to be positioned distinctly in relation to other
academic categories.
Since then the situation has gradually changed. More and more scholars
have in the concept of Western esotericism found a fruitful framework
for their own studies. A consequence of this is that the specific
historical category that Western esotericism once was constructed to be
is opened up. The borders of the field of Western esotericism are
increasingly blurred and the definition of the field has been contested
both implicitly and explicitly. Explicitly in the theoretical discussions
flourishing within the academia and implicitly by the research carried
out under the umbrella of Western esotericism.
It is evident that the classic definition of Western esotericism as
suggested by Antoine Faivre is challenged by the actual research
presently carried out in the field. The borders are crossed in both time,
space, approaches and concepts and thus the subjects studied and
presented under the term Western esotericism has come to include such
diverse themes as Sufism, New Age, pre-Socratic philosophy, ancient
Jewish magic, Chechen traditionalism, Kabbalah in various guises, neo-
paganism and contemporary magical orders. However, more traditional
topics of Western esotericism are also covered such as theosophy,
Christian kabbalah, rosicrucianism and alchemy.
That the “fringe” topics are overrepresented in current scholarship is by
no means a surprise considering the age of Western esotericism as a
more or less accepted academic field of study. Now that the field has
been quite solidly consolidated in the academia, the scholars of Western
esotericism have the opportunity to turn the focus inwards and look at
the state of the field itself. As is also happening all the time with the
- 148 -
broader concept of religion, the limits of the concept of Western

esotericism are explored and challenged. And it is not only the term
“esotericism” which is being evaluated, stretched, deconstructed and
reassembled. Just as important is the question of what the ambiguous
concept of “Western” denotes. Is it a cultural category, a geographical?
And what does it imply? As I have strived to show in the first part of
the thesis it is obvious that we cannot uphold the earlier Christocentric
demarcation of Western esotericism. The definitorial problems are an
essential part of the evolution of an academic field, without which the
field would stagnate. Paradigms are there to be challenged in order to
fruitfully develop and continually revisit the academic pursuit. However,
it is important that the boundaries of the field are not only challenged
and explored in empirical research. Whether one perceive Western
esotericism as a historical or a typological category, the theoretical
foundations should be considered and explicitly elaborated294. Thus I
have provided a critical examination of the prevalent definitions, not
only of Western esotericism but also of primarily Kabbalah and
secondly mysticism. The purpose of this was to be able to disentangle
these often intermingled categories and provide a sufficient definitorial
and theoretical framework for studying Kabbalah within the field of
Western esotericism. I argued that the concept of “Western” has to
imply the notion of religious and cultural pluralism in order to avoid the
Christocentric approach presented by Antoine Faivre and Monica
Neugebauer-Wölk. After examining the different approaches and
definitions of esotericism I ended up refuting the ones proposed by
Faivre since it mixed up typological and historical categories and was
based on tautological argumentation; Hanegraaff due to its
inconsistency; Neugebauer-Wölk since it was build on Christocentric
premises; and Versluis who apart from having an explicit religionistic
294 This part of the discussion has been published in a slightly other version in Thejls: ‘The
Demarcation of Western Esotericism’.
- 149 -
agenda fails to give any convincing definition. Instead I have chosen to

follow the approach suggested by Kocku von Stuckrad who perceives
Western esotericism to denote a structural element or a specific
discourse in Western history that involves a claim of higher or absolute
knowledge which is attained and transmitted through a dialectic of
secrecy and revelation.
I continued to discuss the definition of Kabbalah. Though seldom
defined explicitly, Kabbalah has persistently been identified with the
doctrine of the ten sefirot first by Gershom Scholem and later by his
student Joseph Dan. This position has been contested by other
Kabbalah scholars such as Moshe Idel and Elliot Wolfson who have
endeavored to include the more practical Kabbalah into the definition.
Thus Idel established two distinct categories of Kabbalah, namely the
theosophical-theurgical Kabbalah and the ecstatic-prophetic Kabbalah.
Furthermore he argued that the name Kabbalah had been a designation
for the doctrine relating to the pronunciation of the tetragrammaton
long before the doctrine of the ten sefirot became a central part of
Jewish thought. Heidi Laura continued the discussion about the
definition of Kabbalah but fruitfully chose to move the focus from
doctrinal contents to the mode of transmission. Thus to Laura
Kabbalah can be designated as the transmission of Jewish esoteric
teachings. This is the approach that I have chosen to elaborate further,
so that my suggestion for a definition of Kabbalah is twofold. This
is due to the twofold status of Kabbalah as both an actual historical
current and a typological category. Thus the typological category has
to be dependent on the historical demarcation but still be theoretically
independent. My solution was to view Kabbalah as both a historical
product related to selfidentification of a certain group of people as
mequbalim, kabbalists and as the transmission of esoteric knowledge
claimed to derive from ancient Jewish wisdom lore.
- 150 -
My next concern was a definition of mysticism that was not dependent

on the notion of experience, universalism or consciousness. For this
purpose I discussed the approaches suggested by primarily, Bernhard
McGinn, Richard King, Steven Katz and Michael Sells. However I
found that the most theoretically valid definition was the one proposed
by Annette Wilke who focused on the breaking down of the boundaries
between immanence and transcendence as a foundation for a mystical
discourse.
The following discussion revolved around the question of whether
Kabbalah should be seen as mysticism or esotericism. In the current
scholarship the two terms have been used interchangeably so that
Kabbalah is often designated Jewish mysticism just as well as Jewish
esotericism. I argued that Kabbalah as such is best understood in the
framework of esotericism but that this does not exclude the notion of
mysticism. In such, a kabbalistic text according to our definition of
Kabbalah will often claim to be in possession of a higher knowledge
which is achievable for the one who knows how to unlock the secret,
that is, the one who holds the interpretive key. This might be attained
through mystical practice but not necessarily so. Likewise, mystical
practice does not automatically generate esoteric knowledge. Thus we
can say that the most important factor for distinguishing esotericism
and mysticism is the claim of higher or absolute knowledge.
I concluded the first part of the thesis with an examination of the role
of language in medieval Kabbalah. My basic premise was that in
Kabbalah language exhibits a dual function as both the means of
gaining access to the higher knowledge and being this knowledge itself.
It is within the acknowledgement that the hyposemantic aspect of
language is essentially where meaning is found, that absolute knowledge
is hidden and gained. This was what I strived to show in the final
analysis of the Gates of Light and the Fountain of Wisdom both of which
perceive the proper knowledge and understanding of language as the
- 151 -
tool for gaining absolute knowledge. But not only this. The actual
knowledge is contained within the very same perception of language so
that language becomes both the means and the object of higher
knowledge.
In the second part of the thesis I turned to the study of contemporary
renderings of Kabbalah. First of all I discussed the academic
scholarship, or rather the lack of it, on contemporary Kabbalah. Here I
found that much of the disinterest in contemporary formations of
Kabbalah is due to the attitude of Gershom Scholem. In being the
biggest authority on the field Scholem’s dismissal of contemporary
Kabbalah had a huge effect on the subsequent scholarship. Thus,
nobody bothered to study contemporary Kabbalah. This means that
there is still a vast field of study which I have only touched upon in the
present thesis. However, what I have hoped to show is that
contemporary Kabbalah in its various guises is certainly an interesting
and important field of study both for Western history of religions in
general and for the study of Western esotericism in particular.
What is interesting to note is how much the academic scholarship on
Kabbalah has influenced the formation of contemporary Kabbalah.
Since the academic study of Kabbalah until recently has focused on the
doctrine of the ten sefirot as constitutive for Kabbalah, it is exactly this
doctrine which has come to be known among religious groups in the
process of constructing their tradition. This, combined with the fact
that without any knowledge of Hebrew the doctrine of the sefirot has
probably been the easiest accessible doctrine of Kabbalah, have had the
effect of identifying Kabbalah more or less with the doctrine of the ten
sefirot, at least in popular understanding. After all it was to a large extend
texts concerned with the sefirot that was translated in Knorr von
Rosenroth’s Kabbalah Denudata. This becomes evident when we turn
towards groups with only a superficial knowledge of the primary
sources of traditional Kabbalah. Their founders’ main source of
- 152 -
knowledge of Kabbalah stems from the popularization and accessibility

of the major works by Gershom Scholem and the different creative
interpretations available in previous esoteric material, interpretations
which to a large extend were based on Mather’s translation of Kabbala
Denudata. In the examples analyzed in the present thesis this is
obviously the case with the teachings of the Kamadon Academy and
Samael Aun Weor who basically use the symbolic representation of the
ten sefirot and a few related concepts such as the idea of Adam Kadmon
as designations for Kabbalah. Weor’s own appellation of his teaching as
the “doctrine of synthesis” could thus fittingly be applied to The
Melchizedek Method as well.
The two other contemporary groups examined in the thesis show a far
larger kabbalistic framework. For the Kabbalah Centre the reason is
obvious. The founder Philip Berg went through a long kabbalistic
education with the teacher and kabbalist Yehuda Ashlag and is thus
very well versed in the larger corpus of traditional Kabbalah. It is
noteworthy then, that in the teachings of the Kabbalah Centre the
doctrine of the sefirot has been downplayed, so it is not until you attend
their courses that the concept appears. This is probably part of their
strategy of popularizing Kabbalah by focusing on the practical tools by
which to enhance ones spiritual life and the concept of the sefirot
belongs to the doctrinal realm and not the practical.
The central teachings of the Kabbalah Centre can be said to reiterate
and reinforce the medieval kabbalistic understanding of the
hyposemantic aspect of the Hebrew language in its use of the Zohar and
the divine names. Where the medieval conception involved a balance
between the understanding of the meaning of the text and the
independent efficacy of the letters, the Kabbalah Centre
overemphasizes the efficacious aspect of the language so that
understanding of the meaning of language is of minimal importance.
- 153 -
In the teachings of Neutzsky-Wulff language also holds a key

position. His perception of reality is linguistic in nature so that
reality is created through the language in a way very similar to what
is explained in the Sefer Yetzirah. Consequently Neutzsky-Wulff
perceives the Sefer Yetzirah to be the most important book of
Kabbalah which in turn, in his understanding, comes to denote an
ancient Jewish doctrine. To Neutzsky-Wulff Kabbalah is the key
to the neuro-linguistic reality and the map one can use in order to
navigate within the supernatural realm.
To sum up, it is first and foremost important to restate that when
accepting a pluralistic view of Western cultural history it paves the
way for the opening up of the earlier Christocentric conceptions
of the field of Western esotericism. Moreover, in order to detach
the typological concept of Western esotericism from any distinct
cultural and historical phenomena it is useful to view esotericism
as a certain structural element in Western culture. As I have
shown, this also allows for the study of Kabbalah within the
framework of Western esotericism. I have strived to overcome
earlier scholarly presumptions against contemporary Kabbalah by
choosing the different historical groups under scrutiny from both
traditional medieval kabbalistic circles and from the broad
spectrum of contemporary reinterpretations and usages of
kabbalistic material. What I found in common between the
medieval texts examined and the two groups that showed to be
most aware of their traditional kabbalistic sources was the special
status of the Hebrew language. Thus in all four cases language
could be seen as bearer of esoteric knowledge in both its semantic
and hyposemantic aspects.
- 154 -
Bibliography
Bibliography
The bibliography contains both source material and academic literature.
At the end there is a special section for web references.
Abrams, Daniel: ‘”A light of her own”: minor kabbalistic traditions on

the ontology of the divine feminine’ in Kabbalah: Journal for
the Study of Jewish Mystical Texts 15 (2006), p. 7-29.
‘Defining Modern Academic Scholarship; Gershom Scholem

and the Establishment of a New (?) Discipline’, Journal of Jewish
Thought & Philosophy 9 (2000), p.267-302.
‘Jewish Gnosticism’: Review of: Nathaniel Deutsch, The Gnostic

Imagination – Gnosticism, Mandeism and Merkabah Mysticism in:
Kabbalah: Journal for the Study of Jewish Mystical Texts 3 (1998) p.
219-223.
Lurianic Kabbalah: Collected Studies of Gershom Scholem, Los Angeles,

Cherub Press 2008 (in Hebrew).
‘Presenting and Representing Gershom Scholem: A Review

Essay’, Modern Judaism 20 (2000) p. 226-243.
The Book Bahir: An Edition Based on the Earliest Manuscripts, Los

Angeles, Cherub Press 1994 (in Hebrew).
The Female Body of God in Kabbalah, Jerusalem, Hebrew University

Magnes Press 2004 (in Hebrew).
’The Literary Emergence of Esotericism in German Pietism’ in:

Shofar 12:2 (1994), p. 67-85.
Amden, Lennart: ’Sefer Yetzirah: Skabelsens bog’ in Elsebeth 7 (1993).
Anonymous (1): Transcendence account. Private collection.
Anonymous (2): Transcendence account. Private collection.
Asprem, Egil: ’Kabbalah Recreata: Reception and Adaption of Kabbalah
- 155 -
Bibliography
in Modern Occultism’ in The Pomegranate 9:2 (2007), 132-

153.
Berg, Philip: Kabbalah for the Layman: A Guide to Cosmic Consciousness,

Jerusalem, Research Centre of Kabbalah 1981.
Bibliotheca Philosophica Hermetica: Philosophia Symbolica: Johann

Reuchlin and the Kabbalah, Catalogue of an exhibition in the
Bibliotheca Philosophica Hermetica commemorating Johann Reuchlin
(1455-1522), Amsterdam, Bibliotheca Philosophica
Hermetica 2005.
Blickstein, Shlomo: Between Philosophy and Mysticism: A Study of the

Philosophical-Qabbalistic Writings of Joseph Gikatilla,
Dissertation submitted to the Jewish Theological Seminary
of America, 1983.
The Books of Contemplation in: Mark Verman: The Books of

Contemplation, Albany NY, SUNY Press 1992.
Brach, Jean-Pierre: ‘Guillaume Postel’ in Wouter J. Hanegraaff (ed.),

in collaboration with Antoine Faivre, Roelof van den
Broek and Jean-Pierre Brach: Dictionary of Gnosis and Western
Esotericism, Leiden, Brill 2005, p. 970-974.
Cohen, Mark and Yedidah Cohen (eds.): In the Shadow of the Ladder:
Introductions to Kabbalah by Rabbi Yehudah Lev Ashlag. Safed,
Nehorah Press 2002.
Crowley, Aleister: Liber 777 in Israel Regardie (ed.): 777 and other
Qabalistic Writings of Aleister Crowley, first published as The
Qabalah of Aleister Crowley, York Beach, Maine: Samuel
Weiser 1987.
The Wake World in Ibid.: Konx Om Pax: Essays in Light, Teitan

Press 1990.
Dan, Joseph: ‘Ashkenazi Hasidim, 1941-1991: Was there Really a

Hasidic Movement in Medieval Germany? in Peter Schäfer and
Joseph Dan (eds.): Gershom Scholem’s Major Trends in Jewish
Mysticism 50 Years After, Proceedings of the Sixth International
Conference on the History of Jewish Mysticism, Tübingen, J.C.B Mohr
(Paul Siebeck) 1993, p. 87-102.
- 156 -
Bibliography
‘Christian Kabbalah: From Mysticism to Esotericism’ in: Faivre

and Hanegraaff (eds.): Western Esotericism and the Science of Religion,
Leuven, Peeters 1998. p. 117-130.
‘Gershom Scholem’s Reconstruction of Early Kabbalah’ in

Harold Bloom (ed.): Modern Critical Views: Gershom Scholem, New
York, Chelsea House 1987, p. 155-178.
‘In Quest of a Historical Definition of Mysticism: The

Contingental Approach’ in Joseph Dan: Jewish Mysticism (vol III),
New Jersey, Jason Aronson Inc. 1999. p. 1-46.
‘Jewish Gnosticism?’ Jewish Studies Quarterly 2 (1995) p.309-328.
Kabbalah: A very short introduction, New York, Oxford University

Press, 2006.
‘Kabbalistic and Gnostic Dualism’ in Joseph Dan: Jewish

Mysticism (vol III), New Jersey, Jason Aronson Inc. 1999. p.415-
434.
‘Samael and the Problem of Jewish Gnosticism’ in “Perspectives on

Jewish Thought and Mysticism. Proceedings of the International Conference
held by the Institute of Jewish Studies, University College London 1994,
Amsterdam, Overseas Publishers Association 1998. p. 257-276.
‘Samael, Lilith and the Concept of Evil in the Early Kabbalah’ in

Lawrence Fine (ed.) Essential Papers on Kabbalah, New York
University Press 1995. p. 154-178
The Ancient Jewish Mysticism, Tel Aviv, MOD Books 1993.
‘The Emergence of Messianic Mythology in 13.th Century

Kabbalah in Spain’ in Occident and Orient: A tribute to the Memory of
Scheiber, Leiden, Brill 1988, p. 57-68.
The Heart and the Fountain: An Anthology of Jewish Mystical

Experiences, Oxford/ New York, Oxford University Press 2002.
’The Language of Creation and Its Grammar’ in Joseph Dan:

Jewish Mysticism (vol I), New Jersey, Jason Aronson Inc. 1999. p.
129-154.
‘The Name of God, the Name of the Rose, and the Concept of
language in Jewish Mysticism’ in: Ibid. p. 131-160.
- 157 -
Bibliography
Defesche, Sacha: ‘The 2012 Phenomenon’: An historical and typological

approach to a modern apocalyptic mythology, MA Thesis, Department
of History of Religions, University of Amsterdam 2007.
Deutsch, Nathaniel: The Gnostic Imagination: Gnosticism, Mandeism and

Merkabah Mysticism, Leiden, Brill 1995.
Faivre, Antoine: Access to Western Esotericism, Albany, SUNY Press

1994.
‘Kocku von Stuckrad et la notion d’ésotérisme’ in Aries: Journal

for the Study of Western esotericism 6:2 (2006) p. 205-214.
Theosophy, Imagination, Tradition: Studies in Western Esotericism,

Albany, SUNY Press 2000.
Farmer, Stephen A.: Syncretism in the West: Pico’s 900 Theses (1486). The
Evolution of Traditional Religious and Philosophical Systems, Tempe,
Arizona Centre for Medieval and Renaissance Studies at
Arizona State University 1998.
Flood, Gavin: Beyond Phenomenology: Rethinking the Study of Religion,

London/ New York,
Cassell 1999.
The Fountain of Wisdom in: Mark Verman: The Books of Contemplation,

Albany NY, SUNY Press 1992.
Franck, Adolphe: La Kabbale ou la philosophie religieuse des Hébreux, Paris

1982.
Fuller, Robert: Spiritual but not Religious: Understanding Unchurched

America, Oxford/ New York, Oxford University Press
2001.
Gikatilla, Joseph: “Sha’are Orah - Gates of Light” Translated by Avi

Weinstein, Walnut Creek, AltaMira Press 1995.
Goldberg, Yechiel Shalom: ‘Wisdom Preserves the Life of the One

who Possesses It: Towards a Taxonomy of Kabbalah’,
(work in progress).
Gruenwald: Ithamar: Apocalyptic and Merkavah Mysticism, Leiden, Brill

1980.
Hakl, Hans Thomas: Der verborgene Geist von Eranos: Unbekannte
- 158 -
Bibliography
Begegnungen von Wissenschaft und Esoterik. Eine

alternative Geistesgeschichte des 20. Jahrhunderts, Bretten,
Scientia Nova Verlag 2001.
Hames, Harvey J.: ‘Exotericism and Esotericism in Thirteenth

Century Kabbalah’ in Esoterica: The Journal 6 (2004)
The Art of Conversion: Christianity and Kabbalah in the Thirteenth

Century, Leiden, Brill 2000.
Hammer, Olav: Claiming Knowledge: Strategies of Epistemology from

Theosophy to the New Age, Leiden, Brill 2004.
‘Esotericism in New Religious Movements’ in James R. Lewis

(ed.): The Oxford Handbook of New Religious Movements, Oxford/
New York, Oxford University Press 2004, p. 445-465.
Hanegraaff, Wouter J.: ‘Empirical Method in the Study of

Esotericism’ in: Method & Theory in the Study of Religion 7:2 (1995)
p. 99-129.
‘Esotericism’ in Wouter J. Hanegraaff (ed.), in collaboration with

Antoine Faivre, Roelof van den Broek and Jean-Pierre Brach:
Dictionary of Gnosis and Western Esotericism, Leiden, Brill 2005, p.
336-340.
‘Forbidden Knowledge: anti-Esoteric Polemics and Academic

Research’ in Aries: Journal for the Study of Western Esotericism 5:2
(2005) p. 225-254.
’Gnosticism’ in Kocku von Stuckrad (ed.): The Brill Dictionary of

Religion, Leiden, Brill 2005.
‘Introduction’ in Wouter J. Hanegraaff (ed.), in collaboration

with Antoine Faivre, Roelof van den Broek and Jean-Pierre
Brach: Dictionary of Gnosis and Western Esotericism, Leiden, Brill
2005.
‘Kabbalah and Modernity’, (work in progress).
New Age Religion and Western Culture: Esotericism in the Mirror of

Secular Thought, Leiden, Brill 1996.
‘On the Construction of “Esoteric Traditions”’ in Faivre and

Hanegraaff (eds.): Western Esotericism and the Science of Religion,
Leuven, Peeters 1998. p. 11-61.
- 159 -
Bibliography
‘The Dreams of Theology and the Realities of Christianity’ in

Jacques Haers and P. de Mey (eds.): Theology and Conversation:
Towards a Rational Theology, Leuven, Peeters 2004. p. 709-733.
‘The Study of Western Esotericism: New Approaches to

Christian and Secular Culture’ in Peter Antes, Armin W. Geertz
and Randi R. Warne (eds.): New Approaches to the Study of Religion
(vol.1), Berlin, Walter de Gruyter 2004.
Hayman, Peter: Sefer Yesira: Edition, Translation and Text-Critical

Commentary, Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck 2004.
Heelas Paul and Woodhead, Linda: The Spiritual Revolution: Why

Religion is Giving Way to Spirituality, Oxford, Blackwell 2004.
Heelas, Paul: ‘The Spiritual Revolution: From “Religion”

to“Spirituality”’ in Linda Woodhead et al. (eds.): Religions
in the Modern World, London, Routledge 2002, p. 357-378.
Huss, Boaz: ‘All You Need is LAV’ in The Jewish Quarterly Review 95:4
(2005), p. 611-624.
‘”Authorized Guardians”: The Polemics of Academic Scholars

of Jewish Mysticism against Kabbalah Practitioners’ in Kocku
von Stuckrad and Olav Hammer (eds.): Polemical Encounters:
Esoteric Discourse and its Other, Leiden, Brill 2007.
‘Demonology and Magic in the Writings of Menahem Ziyyoni’

in: Kabbalah: The Journal for the Study of Jewish Mystical Texts 10
(2004), p. 55-72.
‘Jewish Mysticism in the University: Academic Study or

Theological Practice?’ in: Zeek: A Jewish Journal for Thought and
Culture, December 2007.
‘The New Age of Kabbalah: Contemporary Kabbalah, the New

Age and Postmodern Spirituality’ in Journal of Modern Jewish
Studies 6:2 (2007), p. 107-125.
Håkansson, Håkan: Seeing the Word: John Dee and Renaissance Occultism,
Lund, Ugglan Minervaserien, Lund University 2001.
Idel, Moshe: Absorbing Perfections: Kabbalah and Interpretation, New

Haven/London, Yale University Press 2002.Kabbalah – New
Perspectives, New Haven, Yale university Press 1990.
- 160 -
Bibliography
‘Defining Kabbalah: The Kabbalah of Divine Names’, in: Robert

Herrera (ed.): Mystics of the Book: Themes, Topics and Typology, New
York, Peter Lang 1992. p. 97-122.
Messianic Mystics, New Haven/London, Yale University Press

1998.
‘Reification of Language in Jewish Mysticism’, in Stephen T.

Katz: Mysticism and Language, Oxford/ New York, Oxford
University Press 1992. p. 42-79.
Studies in Ecstatic Kabbalah, Albany, SUNY Press 1988.
‘The Contribution of Abraham Abulafia’s Kabbalah to the

Understanding of Jewish Mysticism’ in Peter Schäfer and Joseph
Dan (eds.): Gershom Scholem’s Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism
50 Years After, Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on the
History of Jewish Mysticism, Tübingen, J.C.B Mohr (Paul Siebeck)
1993, p. 117-144.
The Mystical Experience of Abraham Abulafia, Albany, SUNY Press

1988.
‘Torah: Between Presence and Representation of the Divine in

Jewish Mysticism’ in Jan Assmann and Albert I. Baumgarten
(eds.): Representation in Religion: Studies in Honour of Moshe Barasch,
Leiden, Brill 2001, p. 197-236.
‘Transmission in Thirteenth-Century Kabbalah’ in Yaakov

Elman and Israel Gershoni (eds.): Transmitting Jewish Traditions:
Orality, Textuality & Cultural Diffusion, New Haven/ London,
Yale University Press 2000, p. 138-165.
‘”Unio Mystica” as a Criterion: Some Observations on

“Hegelian” Phenomenologies of Mysticism’ in Journal for the
Study of Religions and Ideologies 1 (Spring 2002) p. 19-41.
Jensen, Jeppe Sinding: The Study of Religion in a New Key: Theoretical and
Philosophical Soundings in the Comparative and General Study of
Religion, Aarhus, Aarhus University Press 2003.
Kaplan, Aryeh: The Bahir: Translation, Introduction and Commentary, York

Beach, Weiser Books 1998.
Katz, Steven T.: ‘The ‘Conservative’ Character of Mystical Experience’
- 161 -
Bibliography
in: Steven T. Katz (ed.): Mysticism and Religious Traditions,

Oxford/ New York, Oxford University Press 1983.
King, Karen: What is Gnosticism?, Belknap Press, 2005.
King, Richard: ‘Orientalism and Religion: Postcolonial Theory, India and ‘the
Mystic East’’, London, Routledge 1999.
ha-Kohen, Isaac ben Jacob: Treatise on the Left Emanation, in: Joseph
Dan: The Early Kabbalah, Mahwah New Jersey, Paulist
Press 1986.
ha-Kohen, Jacob ben Jacob: Explanation of the Letters, in: Joseph Dan:
The Early Kabbalah, Mahwah New Jersey, Paulist Press
1986.
Krakovsky, Levi Isaac: The Omnipotent Light Revealed: The Luminous

Tegument to Unite Mankind into One Loving Brotherhood,
Hollywood, CA: Kabbalah Culture Society of America
1939.
König, Peter: ‘Ordo Templi Orientis Phenomenon, Fraternitas

Rosicruciana Antiqua, Baphomet and Rosycross, Arnoldo
Krumm-Heller’. http://user.cyberlink.ch/~koenig/fra.htm
(accessed July 11, 2007).
Laura, Heidi: The Ashkenazi Kabbalah of R. Menahem Ziyyoni,

Dissertation submitted to the University of Copenhagen
2005.
León-Jones, Karen Silvia de: Giordano Bruno and the Kabbalah: Prophets,
Magicians and Rabbis, New Haven/ London, Yale University
Press 1997
Lewis, James R.: ‘Science and the New Age’ in Daren Kemp and
James R. Lewis (eds.): Handbook of New Age, Leiden, Brill
2007, p. 207-230.
McGinn, Bernard: The Foundations of Mysticism, New York, Crossroad

2003.
Mastrocinque, Attilio: From Jewish Magic to Gnosticism, Tübingen, Mohr

Siebeck 2005.
Mathers, Samuel Liddell MacGregor: The Kabbalah Unveiled,

Facsimile edition, Kessinger Publishing 1998.
- 162 -
Bibliography
Merkur, Dan: Gnosis: An Esoteric Tradition of Mystical Visions and Unions,

Albany, SUNY Press 1993.
Meyerson, Mark D. and English, Edward D.: Christians, Muslims and

Jews in Medieval and Early Modern Spain: Interaction and
Cultural Change, Notre Dame, Notre Dame University
Press 2000.
Myers, Jody: Kabbalah and the Spiritual Quest: The Kabbalah Centre in
America, Westport: Praeger Publishers 2007.
Nederman, Cary J.: Worlds of Difference: European Discourses of Toleration,

c.1100-c.1550, University Park PA, Pennsylvania State
University Press 2000.
Neusner, Jacob (transl.): The Mishnah, a New Translation, New Haven

and London, Yale University Press 1988.
Neutzsky-Wulff, Erwin: ’Den frygtelige virkelighed 2,

www.eskapisme.dk/20012005/2001_den_frygtelige_virkeli
ghed_2.html (accessed December 16th 2007)
Det overnaturlige, Copenhagen: Borgens Forlag 2004.
’Kabbala 1’ i Elsebeth 1 (1992).
’Kabbala 2’ i Elsebeth 2 (1993).
Magi, Copenhagen: Borgens Forlag 1986.
Okkultisme, Copenhagen: Borgens Forlag 1985.
Rum, Copenhagen: Borgens Forlag 2001.
’Transcendens for Dummies’ 1-32 in Bathos vol. 43-56. (2006).
UFO, Copenhagen: Borgens Forlag 1999.
Otto, Rudolph: West-Östliche Mystik: Vergleich und Unterscheidung zur

Wesensdeutung, München, Gütersloher Verlagshaus 1979.
(First published in 1926).
Partridge, Christopher: The Re-Enchantment of the West, vol. I-II,

London, T&T Clark International 2005.
- 163 -
Bibliography
Pearson: Birger A.: Gnosticism, Judaism and Egyptian Christianity, (Studies

in Antiquity and Christianity), Augsburg, Augsburg Fortress
Publishers 1990.
Platvoet, Jan: ‘The Definers Defined: Traditions in the Definition of

Religion’ in: Method & Theory in the Study of Religion 2:2
(1990) p. 180-212.
Platvoet, Jan and Molendijk, Arie (eds.): The Pragmatics of Defining

Religion. Contexts, Concepts and Contests, Leiden, Brill 1999.
Popkin, Richard H. and Weiner, Gordon M. (eds.): Jewish Christians

and Christian Jews: From the Renaissance to the Enlightenment,
Dordrecht, Kluwer Academic Publishers 1994.
Reuchlin, Johann: On the Art of the Kabbalah. De Arte Cabalistica, transl.

Sarah & Martin Goodman, New York, University of
Nebraska Press 1983.
Rousse-Lacordaire, Jérome: ‘Mysticism’ in Wouter J. Hanegraaff

(ed.), in collaboration with Antoine Faivre, Roelof van den
Broek and Jean-Pierre Brach: Dictionary of Gnosis and Western
Esotericism, Leiden, Brill 2005.
Schäfer, Peter: Synopse zur Hekhalot-Literatur, Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck

1981. Hekhalot-Studien, Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck 1988.
Schleicher, Marianne: ‘Kabbalah: en middelalderlig klassiker udsat for

pop’
www.dci.dk/index.php?option=com_content&view=articl
e&id=1032:kabbalah--en-middelalderlig-klassiker-udsat-
for-pop&catid=96:dnd96 (accessed January 15, 2008).
Schmidt-Biggemann: ‘Christian Kabbala: Joseph Gikatilla (1247-

1305), Johannes Reuchlin (1455-1522), Paulus Ricius (d.
1541), and Jacob Böhme (1575-1624) in Allison P. Coudert
(ed.): The Language of Adam, Wiesbaden, Harrassowitz
Verlag 1999, p. 81-122.
Scholem, Gershom: ‘Alchemie und Kabbala’ in: Adolf Portmann and

Rudolf Ritsema (eds.): Der Sinn des Unvollkommenen, Eranos
Jahrbuch 1977, vol. 46, Kassel, Insel Verlag 1981, p. 1-96.
Das Buch Bahir: Ein Schriftdenkmal aus der Frühzeit der Kabbala auf
Grund der kritischen Neuausgaben, Leipzig, W. Drugulin 1923.
- 164 -
Bibliography
Kabbalah, New York, Penguin Books 1978.
Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism, New York, Schocken Books

1961.
On the Mystical Shape of the Godhead, New York, Schocken Books

1991.
Origins of the Kabbalah, Princeton University Press 1987.
‘The Name of God and the Linguistic Theory of the Kabbala’ in

(part I) Diogenes 79 (Fall 1972) p. 59-80 and (part II) Diogenes 80
(Winter 1972) p. 164-194.
Sefer ha-Zohar in: Isaiah Tishby: The Wisdom of the Zohar, an Anthology of
Texts, Oxford University Press 1989.
Sefer ha-Zohar in: Daniel Matt: The Zohar: Pritzker Edition, Stanford,
Stanford University Press 2004-2006.
Sells, Michael A.: Mystical Languages of Unsaying, Chicago/ London,

University of Chicago Press 1994.
Serrano, Richard: Ascension to Superconsciousness, ebook from

www.holisticwebs.com
Reaching to Kamadon, ebook from www.holisticwebs.com
Smith, Jonathan Z.: Imagining Religion: From Babylon to Jonestown,

Chicago/ London, Chicago University Press 1982.
Snoek, Jan A. M.: ‘Defining ‘Rituals’’ in Jens Kreinath, Jan Snoek and
Michael Stausberg (eds.): Theorizing Rituals: Issues, Topics,
Approaches, Concepts, Leiden, Brill 2006, p. 3-14.
Staal, Frits: Exploring Mysticism, Berkeley/ Los Angeles, University of

California Press 1975.
Stroumsa, Guy: “Another Seed, Studies in Gnostic Mythology (Nag Hammadi

studies 24), Leiden, Brill 1997.
Stuckrad, Kocku von: ‘Esoteric Discourse and the European History

of Religion: In Search of a New Interpretational
Framework, (work in progress).
- 165 -
Bibliography
‘Esotericism’ in Kocku von Stuckrad (ed.): The Brill Dictionary of

Religion, Leiden, Brill 2005, p. 606-622.
Madonna and the Shekhinah: The Playful Transgression of

Gender Roles in Popular Culture (work in progress).
Western Esotericism: A Brief History of Secret Knowledge, London/

Oakville, Equinox 2005.
‘Western Esotericism: Towards an Integrative Model of

Interpretation’ in: Religion 35:2 (2005), p. 78-97.
Sutcliffe, Steven and Bowman, Marion (eds.): Beyond the New Age:
Exploring Alternative Spirituality, Edinburgh, Edinburgh
University Press 2001.
Swartz, Michael D.: Scholastic Magic: Ritual and Revelation in Early Jewish
Mysticism, Princeton: Princeton University Press 1996.
Thejls, Sara Møldrup: ‘Erwin Neutzsky-Wulff and the Neurological

Landscape of the Sefirot’ in Boaz Huss, Marco Pasi and
Kocku von Stuckrad (eds.): Kabbalah and Modernity
(working title), Leiden, Brill (forthcoming).
‘Kabbalah in Denmark’ Denmark’ in Henrik Bogdan and Olav

Hammer (eds.): Esotericism in Scandinavia (working title), Leiden,
Brill (forthcoming).
‘Occult and Magical Groups in Denmark’ in Henrik Bogdan and

Olav Hammer (eds.): Esotericism in Scandinavia (working title),
Leiden, Brill (forthcoming).
‘The Demarcation of Western Esotericism in Theory and

Practice’ in ESSWE Newsletter, December 2007.
(esswe.blogspot.com)
Tishby, Isaiah: The Wisdom of the Zohar (three vols.), Oxford University
Press 1989.
Verman, Mark: The Books of Contemplation, Albany, SUNY Press 1992.
‘The Evolution of the Circle of Contemplation’ in Peter Schäfer

and Joseph Dan (eds.): Gershom Scholem’s Major Trends in Jewish
Mysticism 50 Years After, Proceedings of the Sixth International
- 166 -
Bibliography
Conference on the History of Jewish Mysticism, Tübingen, J.C.B Mohr

(Paul Siebeck) 1993, p. 163-177.
Vitale, Alfred: ‘”The Method of Science, the Aim of Religion”: A

Systematic Model for the Academic Study of Modern
Western Occultism’. www.aseweb.org/Papers/vitale.htm
(accessed December 10, 2007).
Wasserstrom, Steven M.: Religion after Religion: Gershom Scholem, Mircea

Eliade, and Henry Corbin at Eranos, Princeton, Princeton
University Press 1999
Weidner, Daniel: ‘Reading Gershom Scholem’ in Jewish Quarterly Review

96:2 (2006), p. 203-231.
Weor, Samael Aun: Christmas Message 1952, pdf version from

www.gnosiscentral.com/onlineBooks.php
(Accessed July 3, 2007)
The Initiatic Path in the Arcana of Tarot and Kabbalah, nn, Thelema
Press 2006.
Three Mountains, pdf version from www.gnosiscentral.com/

onlineBooks.php (Accessed July 3, 2007)
Wilke, Annette: ‘Mysticism’ in Kocku von Stuckrad (ed.): The Brill

Dictionary of Religion, Leiden, Brill 2005, p. 1279-1285.
Williams, Michael: Rethinking Gnosticism: An Argument for Dismantling a

Dubious Category, New Jersey, Princeton University Press,
1999
Wolfson, Elliot R.: Abraham Abulafia: Kabbalist and Prophet. Hermeneutics,

Theosophy and Theurgy, Los Angeles, Cherub Press 2000.
‘Beyond the Spoken Word: Oral Tradition and Written

Transmission in Medieval Jewish Mysticism’ in Yaakov Elman
and Israel Gershoni (eds.): Transmitting Jewish Traditions: Orality,
Textuality & Cultural Diffusion, New Haven/ London, Yale
University Press 2000, p. 166-224.
‘Kabbalah’ in Kocku von Stuckrad (ed.): The Brill Dictionary of

Religion, Leiden, Brill 2005, p. 1052-1057.
‘Review of Gershom Scholem’s Origins of Kabbalah’ in: Journal

of Religion 69 (1989) p. 139-140.
- 167 -
Bibliography
Through a Speculum that Shines, New Jersey, Princeton University

Press 1997
Wuthnow, Robert: After Heaven: Spirituality in America since the 1950s,

Berkeley, University of California Press 1998.
Yates, Frances A.:Giordano Bruno and the Hermetic Tradition, London,

Routledge 2002 (1.ed. 1964)
‘The Hermetic Tradition in Renaissance Science’ in C. Singleton

(ed.): Art, Science and History in the Renaissance, Baltimore, John
Hopkins University Press 1967, p. 255-274.
The Rosicrucian Enlightenment, London, Routledge & Kegan Paul

1972.
Zoccatelli, PierLuigi: G.I. Gurdjieff and His Grandson in Kurliyun.

www.cesnur.org/2005/pa_zoccatelli.htm (accessed July 11,
2007). The original version of this paper was published under
the title ‘Note a margine dell’influsso di G. I. Gurdjieff su
Samael Aun Weor’ in Aries. Journal for the Study of Western
Esotericism 5:2 (2005), p. 255-275.
References to websites
The following web references are arranged according to the chapters in
which they appear.
The Kabbalah Centre

• www.Kabbalah.com/03.php
• www.Kabbalah.com/scanchart07-08.pdf
• http://store.Kabbalah.com/product_info.php?cPath=150_202
&vcats=150&page=2&products_id=166
• http://store.Kabbalah.com/product_info.php?cPath=164&vcat
s=164&products_id=258
• www.youtube.com/watch?v=dAPh72JQ6qU&feature=related
- 168 -
Bibliography
The Kamadon Academy

• www.4dshift.com/back/july99.htm
• www.holisticwebs.com/orbital/level3info.html
• www.holisticwebs.com/orbital/level4.html
• www.kamadonacademy.com/index.php?option=com_content&
task=view&id=151&Itemid=60
• www.kamadonlove.com/Alton_Kamadonx.html
• www.kamadonlove.com/zonalightx.html
Samael Aun Weor

• www.gnosticteachings.org/content/view/163/75/
• www.gnosticteachings.org/content/view/536/43/
• www.gnosticteachings.org/index.php?option=com_content&tas
k=view&id=60&Itemid=43
- 169 -
Résumé
Résumé
A Master’s Thesis presented to the Department of History of Religions, University
of Copenhagen May 2008 by Sara Møldrup Thejls.
This study deals with two fields of European history of religions,

namely Western esotericism and Kabbalah. It challenges the former
notion of Western esotericism as being a strictly Christian cultural
phenomenon by discussing the prevalent definitions of and approaches
to the field; an understanding of Western esotericism which would
exclude a phenomenon such as Kabbalah from the field of Western
esotericism. The preliminary alternative to this view is most importantly
to perceive Western culture not as culturally monolithic Christian but
rather as a complex system marked by cultural and religious pluralism.
However it is also necessary to detach the definition of Western
esotericism from exact historical phenomena and instead view the
heuristic construction of Western esotericism as a structural element
and a certain discourse in Western history of religions. This discourse
involves a claim of higher knowledge and is transmitted or achieved
through a dialectic of concealment and revelation. With this approach
to Western esotericism and Western cultural history it is not only
possible but naturally to study Kabbalah as a part of this framework.
In an analysis of the concept of language in medieval Kabbalah it
becomes clear that language holds a twofold position in that it contains
indefinite layers of both semantic and hyposemantic character and
furthermore becomes both the transmitter and the container of higher
or absolute knowledge. This is exemplified in two medieval kabbalistic
texts, the Gates of Light and the Fountain of Wisdom.
The scope is extended as to include a discussion of the academic study
of contemporary Kabbalah, a topic which to a large extent has been
neglected. The following examination of four widely different religious
- 170 -
Résumé
groups is focusing on the various degrees to which Kabbalah is used in

the construction of tradition in the more or less traditional Kabbalah
Centre, The Danish occultist Erwin Neutzsky-Wulff, the doctrine of
synthesis of Samael Aun Weor and the New Age eclecticism of the
Kamadon Academy. This thesis thus reconsiders earlier restrictive
attitudes towards both Kabbalah and Western esotericism and
introduces contemporary Kabbalah and kabbalistic renderings as a
worthy field of study for the study of religions in general and for
Western esotericism in particular.
- 171 -

From Divine Names To Dolphins and Sexual PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

From Divine Names To Dolphins and Sexual PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

From Divine Names To Dolphins and Sexual PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Table of Contents

LANGUAGE AND HIGHER KNOWLEDGE: A CONTRIBUTION TO

1. A DISCUSSION OF VAGUE TERMINOLOGIES 8

1.2 Defining Kabbalah 24

1.3 Mysticism or Esotericism. An Attempt at Clarification 37

1.4 Kabbalah and Western Esotericism 46

2. THE CONCEPT OF LANGUAGE IN MEDIEVAL KABBALAH 50

2.2 Language as Higher Knowledge 56

2.3 Gates of Light 61

2.4 The Fountain of Wisdom 68

CONTEMPORARY KABBALAH: A NEW (?) FIELD OF STUDY 80

5. KABBALAH IN WESTERN ESOTERIC TRADITIONS: 81

A VERY SHORT OVERVIEW 81

6. THE ACADEMIC STUDY OF CONTEMPORARY KABBALAH 91

7. THE KABBALAH CENTRE 94

7.1 A General Presentation 94

7.2 The Red String and its cosmological framework 101

7.3 The 72 Names of God 104

7.4 The Zohar 110

7.5 Kabbalah or New Age, Religion or Spirituality? 115

7.6 Summary 117

8. THE KAMADON ACADEMY AND THE MELCHIZEDEK

9. THE GNOSTIC TEACHINGS OF SAMAEL AUN WEOR 122

9.2 Kabbalah in the doctrine of synthesis of Weor 126

9.3 Summary 129

10. ERWIN NEUTZSKY-WULFF AND THE NEUROLOGICAL

10.2 Religion as Sexuality/ Sexuality as Religion 133

10.3 Neutzsky-Wulff and Kabbalah 137

10.4 The Occult Connection 141

10.5 New Age Nonsense or Creative Interpretation 144

11. CONCLUSION OF PART II 146

12. FINAL DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIVE WORDS 148

This thesis places itself in the midst of a crossroad of different

Before turning to a discussion of the crucial concepts for the present

by no means be an exhaustive attempt. As a point of departure,

1 Smith: Imagining Religion ch. 2.

by looking at it as a semantic system4 – religion is a method for people,

I propose to view definitions in the human sciences as

The consequences I draw from Jensen’s approach are as follows: 1) A

4 Jensen: The Study of Religion, p. 420.

evidence and construed on a strictly theoretical background. This is also

shown, these movements are very different in practice, religious

1. A Discussion of Vague Terminologies

1.1 The Concept of Western Esotericism

Western esotericism was made a more or less independent field of

7 See Stuckrad: ’Esotericism’, p. 607.

1. Correspondences. The idea that all parts of the universe are

To designate Western esotericism as a “form of thought” has the

13 McCalla: ’Antoine Faivre’.

furthermore Faivre’s theory is developed from certain religious currents

En fait, Faivre avait seulement entendu, par choïx de

According to Faivre this ought to show his acknowledgement of

and Islam are only visitors on the European scene17. As a contrast to

First, religious pluralism and the existence of alternatives

I will return to Stuckrad’s approach shortly, however, first I will present

Christianity’ 20 . 3) ‘Realisation and worldly power’, indicating that

Even taken as an ideal typical point of departure,

Hanegraaff’s own approach to the field of Western esotericism is a bit

19 Neugebauer-Wölk: ’Esoterik’. See Stuckrad’s discussion of Neugebauer-Wölk in Stuckrad: