(a political & economic history of the Kabbalah):
July 29th, 2003 (modified Jan 22 2004):
This isn't intended as a review of the book. However, I'll
make a very brief one to start off. Silberman's book is an
interesting complement to the works of Scholem and Idel in regards
to the history of the Kabbalah. So much crap and nonsense
is being published from the new age perspective. Silberman's economic
and political approach to this history is fascinating, and quite
illuminating. There are a few points where he stretches the
argument beyond plausibility--like his analysis of Alfonso X El
Sabio and the Zohar. Although I find his interpretation
difficult to swallow, the obsession with the kingly image in the
Zohar seems to have some political relevance. It just doesn't
make a great deal of sense to think that it's intended as an
anti-monarchical statement. But, what is this peculiar
obsession with the symbolic interpretation of the image of a
gigantic king? I'm
not sure.
From my point of view, Silberman's book struck deep chords for me in the
context of current political reality.
It will be useful, I imagine, to provide a small background on
what the Kabbalah is--especially to correct misconceptions on the
part of those who have studied the New Age versions. In the simplest
terms that will help explain this brief essay, the Kabbalah consists
of an oral and written tradition of mysticism and magic within Judaism
characterized by its preoccupation with visions, hermeneutic cryptology,
manipulation of various divine and natural forces, and in particular,
apocalyptic visions. In its Judaic context, the Kabbalah is an expression
of and a cure for the suffering they experienced during their long
history. There are many types and degrees of Kabbalistic mysticism,
so I must speak in the most general terms here. The aspect that
interests me most in this context is the later forms found in the
Zohar, Moses Cordovero, and Isaac Luria.
Messianic elements, manifested in surreal symbolism and allegories
blended with ecstatic prayer--often accompanied by weeping. One
might call Pentecostalism a modernist Christian version of the Kabbalah.
This analogy is, I think, more accurate than the comparison to the
psychologized Jungian Kabbalah, or the Golden Dawn version. Besides
the more orthodox preoccupation with the Torah and Mishnah, Jewish
Kabbalists were always profoundly interested in current events and
how they might be related to activities in a sort of Platonic, spiritual
realm beyond the everyday world. The Kabbalah had a hermeneutic
aspect that allowed them to interpret texts and signs for hidden
meanings. It also contained a magical aspect that allowed them to
manipulate these forces. Thirdly, it contained a prophetic dimension
centered on the Jewish faith in the coming Messiah, and the profound
changes that can be expected at the end of history--the Apocalypse.
Hence, within Christian scripture, the Book of Revelation is distinctly
and blatantly Kabbalistic in style. Christians who place heavy emphasis
on it are quite similar to them.
Keeping this superficial introduction in mind, let's take a look
at current events. As we do so, it is worth noting that the most
zealous supporters of West Bank and Gaza settlements in occupied
Palestinian land often rely on Kabbalistic discourse and prophecy
to support their arguments. For a good example, take
a look at this on-line video, which was made before 9/11, before
Tora Bora, before the Battle of Baghdad, before the suicide bomber
blew up the United Nations office there....
Today, in the apocalyptic world of John Ashcroft and George Bush,
we see a society that is profoundly divided on religious and political
terms. Never before has society (at least in America) divided so
deeply along religious and political grounds. Never before has the
dominant regime been so religious and so effective at creating evil
on multiple dimensions. We might compare empires like Rome or the
Third Reich, but this current schism in society is, I think, quite
unique.
What are the signs of this battle between good and evil? In St. Paul, MN many liberals are still posting Wellstone bumper stickers
on their cars, as well as WWWD (What would Wellstone do?). I feel great
sympathy for this spiritual current, but do not have such stickers. What
is more telling is the juxtaposition of this phenomenon with a reaction
in which conservatives post highly visible Norm Coleman stickers and,
more aggressively, a few stickers in Wellstone's green and white that
read "Time to park the bus" and "He's dead. Get over it."
Of course, most of the liberals will take this to mean that the conservatives
are pissed off at them for dissing their empty suit senator. However,
it might be useful if we liberals took that advice a bit more to heart.
We can't vote for Wellstone, and he certainly wasn't the messiah. That
does not in the least suggest that we have any hopes whatsoever of Norm
Coleman being worthy to sit in Paul’s empty seat. [1/22/04:
I notice that the Coleman stickers have very nearly disappeared, and
Wellstone stickers have diminished, but I'd guess that there are three or
four times as many Wellstone related stickers than Coleman. I don't
believe it's a comment on Norm, but rather a comment on the intensity and
longevity of the Wellstone spirit. ]
We do see, however, clear evidence of a battle of ideology. Who
are the good guys and who are the bad guys? Naturally, this depends
on who you ask. The superficial observer might note that from a
strictly religious perspective, the Republicans are claiming to be
fighting in God's army, and the Democrats represent the minions of radical
leftism, also known as godless communism, and often connected
"logically" to homosexuality and decadence. They believe
that a narcissistic, hedonistic cult of pervert fascist-socialists is
attempting to create a one world government under the antichrist of some
Democratic politician. From the other side of the
fence, the liberal voters see the Republican party as the evil fascist
empire, not unlike the Borg of Star Trek fame. They seem themselves
as champions of the underdog, and therefore more closely aligned with the
Gospel of Jesus. Obviously, I fall into the latter category,
but I am not so unperceptive to think that there isn't a bit of truth in
their fears of what they call "liberalism." However, there
are enormous problems in explaining the decadence of gigantic corporations
ranging from AOL to Ganet and Microsft to Clear Channel and United Artists
to Fox of manipulating us toward anything resembling
socialism.
What is of Kabbalistic interest is the ancient battle between what
amount to two very imbalanced (Heb. qliphoth) ideals of
narcissism. One values an economic and environmental hedonism which
must be supported by a great deal of explosive materials and blood (SUV's
help fund Al Qaeda, which indirectly helps fund the Pentagon, which quite
directly helps fund factory jobs that are being shipped to third
world countries with tax dollar subsidies.) The other values an
internal/personal hedonism of often fuzzy thinking and fashion obsessed
superficiality. Unlike the others, they are truly and deeply
committed to the idea that nobody should be hurt and everyone's needs and idiosyncrasies
should be accommodated, and people should be able to work as little as
they want to. Our call to human benevolence and tolerance is both
wonderful and dangerous. In terms of the Kabbalistic doctrine of the
qlipphoth, what is apparent is that a statistically dominant group
of people gravitates to the dangerous poles of these two ideals. In
other words, I think that it is quite possible to be an intelligent
conservative, and be ethically upright and coherent. Likewise, we
liberals can be very intelligent, hard working, demanding, clear thinking
as well as ethically upright and coherent. Yet, among the large
masses of qlipphothic liberals and conservatives, I am rather fascinated
by both faction's paradoxical preoccupation with the Augustinian
disembodiment of cyberspace and the Cyrenaic and masturbatory indulgences
of Bally Fitness centers, tattoos, hair removal, silicone implants and
piercings. But I am straying into Harold Bloom's territory here.
These portrayals are rather superficial. Some of the liberal dissidents are often devout, and some in the junta
itself are closer to Democritus and Machiavelli than they are to St. Paul.
However, the predominant caricature of us liberals, which like all caricatures
carries a kernel of truth, is of a fragmented throng of irreligious, immoral
and communist naysayers. Accusations of communism are absurd. The number
of people in America who actually believe that a regime like Cuba’s or
North Korea’s is superior to ours is immeasurably small. We liberals are looking
for a hybrid of the capitalist individuality with a European style social
system and a Buddhist/Judeo-Christian-Muslim spiritual commitment to social
justice. Our unity is fragmented and shattered by bickering over details.
Those of us who think that racism is the root of all that is wrong in the world
are fighting with those who think it’s sexism and those who think it’s
classism. We can’t get anything done because we support narrow visions
of our own special interests.
On the other side of the political fence is another superficial caricature:
the white male with an over-sized pickup or SUV and a gaudy tattoo of
an eagle and a flag on his back who never buys anything from France (but
German cars are OK). They are marching to two carefully synchronized drums—one
beat by John Ashcroft, the other by Paul Wolfowitz. There is a new apocalyptic
image: an American Eagle with American flags painted on its body like
a fighter jet. This eagle tears itself free from the cross of Golgotha
carrying bunker busters and cruise missiles in its talons while smoking
a cuban cigar. It’s Jesus with wings and bombs, on a sortie to punish
those wicked Muslims and worse yet, those cursed lib’rals.
The strength of this ultra-fascist junta lies in the utter weakness of
the masses. Purple verbiage aside, the powers that be have no intention
to help the wage slave war zombies who vote for them. The child tax credit
change does nothing for low income families. The Neocons hosted a militaristic
orgy of flag-waving and Total Information Awareness—not to mention an
attempt to create a futures market casino to predict (or promote?) terrorism.
The last two of these were dreamed up by a convicted felon John Poindexter,
pardoned by the current president’s father, who worked with him when Reagan
was president. As if that weren't enough, they robbed us blind (Enron/Lay).
Next, the son of the secretary of state attempted to add fuel to the media
consolidation freight train. Anyone who thinks these people are looking
out for our best interest is profoundly delusory. We are in the proverbial
place between Scylla and Charybdis. Both parties are helping the corporate
special interests much more than they help us.
We are victims of this industrialized, militarized and impersonalized
cell phone world. Most of us are so absorbed in illusions and quotidian
activity that we know nothing of what outrages these fascists are foisting
on us. Some of us scream at cowardly dictators in state houses and the
White House whose only connection to us is through the distorted circus
mirror lens of sycophantic media. They do not face us or deal respectfully
with those who oppose their agenda of selfishness and violence. George
W. Bush could take a lesson in courage and manhood from the rather effeminate
Tony Blair, who regularly has to listen to his detractors tear him apart.
AND he does it with grace. Not to give old Tony too much credit here--he
is part of the machine too--but, let's think about it. When was the last
time you heard Dubyah actually hear a question that really went to heart
of our discontent? Certainly not since January of 2001.
When we do assemble for protest, we end up further fragmenting because
some of us are Christian, others are pagans and atheists. Many are Buddhists,
at least nominally so. Some of us are gay. Some of us are homophobic.
The fascists are all on the same page with these personal issues, even
if they don’t actually agree. They never argue. Their hatred of taxes
and regulations binds them together in an alliance of egoistic short-sightedness.
It seems that the only binding factor we have is our hatred of Bush. But
some will support Kerry, others will support Dean, or Nader. No unity
of purpose.
In the Lurianic Kabbalah there is an interesting metaphoric image of
sparks of Divine Light left in this realm of material creation abandoned
by the transcendent God. Believers try to gather and "lift"
these sparks back to the Divine, which will effectively remove the source
of sustenance for the powers of Evil. It's a big stretch to pull, but
an interesting analogy struck me--the shattering of the vessels in Luria's
metaphysics is like the destruction of the World Trade Center and the
death of Paul Wellstone. Crazy as it may seem, the political dimension
of the Kabbalah's history has an uncanny relevance for us today--even
if we (and especially I) do not believe in any Holy Scriptures, nor expect
a Messiah. Perhaps this means that I ought to pray to some Divine Mechanism
to help encourage people to work together to find candidates to take down
these Nazis before it's too late. Our project of Tikkun is to gather together
the sparks of liberalism and create a new fire of spirit that will conquer
them. More likely, this is all just a manifestation of my extreme depression
over current events combined with my pagan tendency to look behind them
to find underlying spiritual and economic motives.
I am starting to see an interesting sign of change, though.
Christians who really do believe in the importance of love and charity are
starting to see that Bush has other goals in mind. Even if they do
believe that it is acceptable to distribute dogma at the soup kitchen,
they at least believe it's important to give the soup too. I reject
the cynical idea that Christians use soup to attract unfortunate and poor
people. Rather, they understand that the soup is a necessity and
obligation. Their theory is that giving the dogma will make the soup
unnecessary. I am definitely worried about the distinct possibility
that they will be less likely to help gay people, or people of different
faiths. But, self-righteous liberals need to understand that there
is a long history of fairly successful parochial charity, but little
evidence of an effective secular system of charity. In the end,
these very religious Christian fundamentalists who really do believe that
Jesus is a God of love, and that we have an absolute obligation to help
the poor, may well turn out to be the salvation of humanity in the 2004
election--even if it is merely by staying home on election day.
|
