Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB
[blocks in formation]

THE hedge of the truth, and the foundation of the covenant, are as follow: Whenever the law applies to the EXALTED ONE certain expressions, as "the hand of the Lord," "the eyes of the Lord," and the like, either names of members of the human frame, or of some other corporeal qualities, attributes, and effects, which are limited, passive, and mutable-as the Holy One is neither corporeal nor has corporeal powers-these expressions, taken literally, can neither be assigned to him, nor to the unity of the Sephi roth in which he conceals himself. But the true meaning of all such expressions is solely to convey to us a simile of the high and exalted hidden powers which have neither limit, definition, nor end. The law uses these expressions because it is impossible for man to comprehend any

No. 3.

others. But thou must know that these names and forms of the sacred language are not used to express a material form or effects present to the human eye; but solely to indicate the spiritual powers and innate influences the existence and effects of which are enveloped in these words. Thus certain powers are denoted by the words "voice," and "motion," and by others like them; but they are spiritual, and descend gradually from the highest Sephiroth. cordingly it is certain, that whatever is the power expressed by the corporeal member, such is likewise the spiritual power enveloped in it;^ as from it effects are produced all of which have their source, root, and origin in the spiritual Sephiroth, the powers of which gradually descend, and from which all other power emanate.

Hechal Adoshem: 66 THE TEMPLE OF THE LORD." BY JECHIEL ASHKENASI, OF JERUSALEM. KNOW that all beings, superior and inferior, descend by degrees from the Cause of all causes,-Jod, He, Vau, He; even from his own being down to the centre of the earth, according to the plan upon which his wisdom has determined. This Cause of all causes is the INFINITE; and He has set apart the crown and all the ten Sephiroth; so that each being receives from another superior to himself. For every thing is emanated, from the hidden to the sign, from the sign to the en

The word Sephira is either derived from spiri, "transparent," or from sepir, 66 speech," or "word." What is to be un

F

Ac

graved, from the engraved to the hewn-out,-heavy marble blocks hewn out for the exalted temple. And this inferior world receives from the orbital world. The orbital world, and all its hosts, receive from each other up to that exalted orbit which receives from the angelic world. The angelic world has ten degrees, one higher than the other up to the first degree, which is the highest of the olam perad, "separated world." Accordingly the Targum, or translation of Jona

derstood by it, the following pages will elucidate.

than the son of Uzziel,* renders the words one calls to the other," (Isaiah vi. 3,) by "one receives from the other." The principal degree of the separated world receives from the lowest degree of the olam aziloth, "the distinguished world," and accordingly the prophet says, "And it shall be on that day I will answer the heavens, and he shall answer the earth." (Hosea ii. 21.) All this is done according to the will and purpose of the Deity, not from any inherent or absolute relation between the different degrees and worlds, as those thought who consider the universe as increate; but all these different degrees of the creation receive light and influence from each other in ascension, up to the Light of the world, the Highest above all exaltation, who is called INFINITE. His emanation extends to all, but he receives from none. Each imparts that emanation to its fellow, in a descending degree. The giver is

66

called rocheb, or rider;" and the

receiver is called nirchab, or "rode." Hence there is one merckaba "above

another," and rider above rider, even up to the Highest and most Exalted -Blessed be HE! The giver is called shamaim, "heaven," and the receiver is called eretz, "earth;" and therefore there is heaven above heaven, and earth below earth, down to our inferior earth. This is expressed by the translation of Jonathan ben Uzziel : "There was one wheel on earth;" (Ezekiel i. 15;) which he renders, "From below to the height of heaven." Each has front and back;-front to receive, and back to impart. All attributes, when they impart, are called "masculine;" and when they receive they are called "feminine." The ten Sephiroth, with the sacred names that are assigned to them, and their order, and the form in which they stand after they have been set apart, are as follows:

* CETHER.

BINAH. + CHACHMAH. GEBURAH. §TIPhereth. || Gedula. HOD. tt JESOD. ** NEZACH. MALCHUTH.

(To be continued.)

II. METAPHYSICS AND PHILOSOPHY OF THE RABBIES.

(Continued from page 26.)

Sepher Ikkarim:

DIVISION I. CHAPTER XIII.

66

ALTHOUGH the denial of any one of the three essential principles laid down in the preceding chapters, namely, 1. The existence of the Deity: 2. Revelation: And 3. Rewards and punishments,-involves the rejection of the whole three, and, with them, that of all Divine laws; yet it does not follow that their admission is of itself sufficient to prove any system of laws to be Divine, securing to its professors eternal felicity or even entitling them to be considered as believers in a Divine law. For, in order to be so considered, all the branches which spring from these three radical principles must likewise be admitted. For, the de

Jonathan the son of Uzziel, a disciple of the elder Hilel, lived about thirty years before the Christian era, and translated into the Chaldean language several parts of the Old Testament.

[merged small][ocr errors]

nial of the consequences which necessarily result from each of them, is tantamount to a rejection of the principle itself. Such branches are, for instance: Of the first, the belief in the unity of God, and his immateriality: Of the second, the belief in prophets as really the Messengers of the Deity, and in the truth of their messages: Of the third, the belief in Providence, and that rewards or punishments are both corporeal and spiritual.

The necessary belief involved in the first principle is in the unity and immateriality of God. We must believe in a Being whose existence is inherent, absolute, and unconditional; that this Being gave existence to all; that whatever is, receives from him, whereas he receives from no

The crown. † Wisdom. Understanding. Greatness. § Beauty. ¶ Might. ** Eternity. †† Foundation. ‡‡ Majesty. || Kingdom.

one; that every being needs him, whilst he needs no one but himself. All these, however, are consequences resulting from his immateriality: For, were he material, he would no longer be ONE, and would need a something extrinsic of himself. All matter is composite, and every composition requires a compositor to join its component parts: Consequently, the existence of a material Deity would not be inherent, absolute, and unconditional, but would be altogether conditional, and dependent on some extrinsic influence, which caused his composition: He would not be sufficient for himself, but would stand in need of something extrinsic, which would consequently be greater than he and influence him. The necessary belief involved in the third principle is in the Providence and Omniscience of the Deity. He that denies these, or maintains that whatever is, is the result of necessity, that it must be so and cannot be otherwise, either rejects rewards and punishments altogether, or accuses the Godhead of injustice and tyranny, by imputing to him, that he punishes as a sinner him who in reality is none, as he had it not in his power to act differently from what he did. "No! Far be it from God to act unjustly." (Job xxxiv. 19.)

CHAPTER XIV.

As it may be needful, more particularly and in detail, to enter into the means of knowing the branches above referred to, in order to distinguish between the true believer and him who is not; it must in the first instance be stated, that it is not proper to comprise any one of the commands of the law of Moses either in the radical principles or in their branches. He who breaks any of these commandments is a transgressing Israelite, amenable to the law, and subject to such punishment as it inflicts; but he is not excluded from the pale of the believing, or included in the number of those renegadoes who have no share in the life to come; unless he maintains, that the law is neither from God, nor given to Moses on Mount Sinai; as, in making such assertions, he rejects the second essential principle,

Revelation. In this respect all the commandments are of equal importance, even that which ordains the liberation of the brooding bird when its nest is taken away. If therefore any one of these commandments were to be regarded as an essential principle, every one of them must be so regarded. And this would be a manifest departure from the rule which teaches, that such principles ought to be simplified as much as possible.

In like manner, the belief in tradi tion is not comprised in the three essential principles: for, although it is necessary to the belief in the Divine laws, to admit the traditions of the fathers and of the teachers of those laws; this, too, is a special commandment. Such is likewise the case respecting the belief in the immutability of the law, which is subordinate to the belief in the trustworthiness of the messenger, of which we shall, God willing, treat in the third division.

That we have numbered the UNITY OF GOD amongst the branches necessarily emanating from the first essential principle, (although the belief in that unity is likewise a special and positive command,) is owing to the circumstance that this belief comprises two distinct principles, namely, 1. That the Deity is alone without any equal like unto himself. 2 That, although He is one, and his existence is inherent, absolute, and unconditional; nevertheless he is our God; that is to say, he is the first and only Cause of the manifold beings that are in existence. The first of these two principles is a commandment, and, as such, ought to be believed: The second is a branch emanating from the essential principle of his existence; and has, as such, been mentioned in its proper place.

CHAPTER XVI.

SOME of the old philosophers, who denied all human knowledge, and maintained that it is impossible for man to acquire any speculative truth, founded their opinion on the assertion,--that, as all knowledge is only the result of some prior knowledge, this, in its turn, must have arisen from something previous; and that,

so on, in continuation, the chain of knowledge must be infinite and without any commencement; but that the human mind cannot comprehend any thing infinite. They further assert, that whatever is known by comparison is likewise no positive knowledge, as every comparison is liable to be differently represented; that, consequently, whatever is previously known requires no comparison; and that what is not previously known, it is utterly impossible to attain by comparison, which must ever be most variable. These two reasons lead them to deny the possibility of man's acquiring any speculative knowledge. But other sages have refuted their opinions, and maintain that the first assertion is contrary to truth, and that no previous knowledge is required; but that ideas, and consequently knowledge, can arise without previous knowledge, or even the necessity of comparison, from innate impressions only; that is to say, that such is one of the inherent qualities of the mind, that it produces ideas which are not the result of any previous knowledge. This qualityin nate in the mind, the Rabbies call original impressions:" By which they intended to denote ideas which have not their origin from any thing external, but which arise from within; that these innate impressions are the foundation of all wisdom; and that all knowledge 'originates from them. To the second assertion they reply, that it does not follow, because comparisons may vary, that therefore no instruction should be imparted to the mind from them: For, as they say, the idea is innate, but dormant until called forth into life by the comparison, and the mind coincides in the opinion that knowledge, by that means excited, is real knowledge. Consequently the two ways in which knowledge reaches the mind are perfectly natural, though they are innate and without any trace of their origin. The opinions last expressed seem to be founded in truth; as we find the Holy One (blessed be He!) reproves Job when he presumes to complain that, according to his opinion, the moral order is imperfect, in the words, "Why does he bestow light on the wretched?" (Job

[ocr errors]

iii 20.) The reply of the Deity is expressed in the following words: "Who has put wisdom, batuchoth," (according to the authorized version, "in the hidden parts?") "And who hath given binah, understanding, to the heart?" Job xxxviii. 36. The word batuchoth has here the same meaning as in another place in Job, security or assurance, and is intended to express those innate impressions by means of which knowledge is secured to man. Binah denotes" perception," and, accordingly, the whole verse reads thus: "Who has secured to man those innate impressions from which alone wisdom arises? or perception, in order to attain knowledge by means of comparison ? Which faculty is in Hebrew called binah, "understanding," as our Rabbies say, binah is "to comprehend one thing by means of another," or "to arrive at just conclusions from dissimilar premises." The Divine reproof is consequently, "Canst thou explain how thou hast obtained faculties which animate beings of another species have not?" This is likewise the meaning of David when he says, "Thou desirest truth, batuchoth, in our innate impressions; and, as these are from thee, all knowledge is imparted by thee." (Psalm li. 6.) In like manner Solomon saith, "The Lord giveth wisdom; from his mouth is knowledge and understanding." The meaning is, that all wisdom,is from God, because dangath, "knowledge," the innate impressions, uthbuna, and perception, emanate from and are implanted by Him. Thence likewise the men of the Great Assembly,* use the following words in the authorized form of daily prayers: "Thou favorest the human being with dangath, knowledge,' and teachest man binah, ‘understanding."" The meaning of which is, "Thou hast deigned to bestow on the whole human race innate impressions, by means of which thou teachest man to perceive and compare." And the prayer ends with thanks for the gift of dangath, or "innate impressions," as they are the root of all human knowledge. This also led our Rabbies of blessed memory say, that if there is no dangath, * Ezra and his Companions.

to

there is no binah, and vice versa; meaning, that without innate impressions there can be no binah or " perception," and that without the latter the former is vain. This is likewise the meaning of Solomon when he says, "When wisdom entereth thy heart, and knowledge is pleasant unto thy soul, discretion shall preserve thee, and understanding keep thee." (Prov. ii. 11.) That is, If thou art guided by innate impressions, thou wilt not be misled by corrupt ideas."

CHAPTER XVII.

THERE can be no doubt but every human science has borrowed its first principles from some other science, on the strength of which it endeavours to raise the demonstration of its own truth: As, for instance, the mathematicians, borrow the line and the point from natural philosophers. This fundamental rule prevails in every branch of speculative science, which must borrow its first principles from some other; but when that cannot be done, innate impressions are laid down as its basis.

It is proper to inquire, “Whence have the Divine laws derived their first principles?" A question more applicable to them, than to any other system of laws, as all others are derived from innate impressions; which, however, cannot be the case with the Divine laws. For although the existence of the Deity can be demonstrated, revelation, and rewards, and punishments, cannot be demonstrated by means of innate impressions. In reply to this question, we say, that the different kinds of knowledge, the reality of which requires no further proof, is three-fold: 1. Innate impressions; examples of which are, that the whole is larger than a part; that two objects which appear alike to the eye are similar; that affirmative and negative cannot both be true in the same sense of the same thing. 2. The impressions of our senses; such as that the fire heats, and the snow maketh cold. 3. The impression arising from facts so notorious that no one can deny them; such as that Jerusalem, Rome, and Babylon dïd exist ; and though a man may not have seen any of these places, yet, it will never enter into his mind to dis

pute their existence, as there are such multifarious evidences and historical references, in proof of the fact.-Each of these three sorts of knowledge is again capable of being adduced as evidence of the truth of certain other principles: Thus, for instance, all the demonstrations of the mathematician rest on innate impressions : The natural philosopher demonstrates from the impression of the senses; and the historian demonstrates from facts universally admitted. What is thus demonstrated by evidence must be allowed to be indisputably true, although its cause cannot be understood, or is not known; for as little as it is possible to doubt that a triangle is not a square, as little is it possible to doubt that the magnet draws iron,-although the cause why it does so is not known: For what is made evident by experience can never be disproved.

As the essential and first principles of the Divine laws are not all, and at all times, demonstrated either by innate impressions, such as that the whole is larger than a part,—or by the evidence of the senses, such as, that the fire warms; the Deity, in the beginning of every Revelation, assigned the means needful to evince its truth; namely, experience, similar to that which proves that the magnet draws iron; a fact which although we are ignorant of its cause, is nevertheless proved to us by the impression of our senses. And this experience, evidenced by the senses, has always been the essential and distinguishing quality of every revelation of the divine laws.-Of Adam it is said, "And the Lord God commanded Adam, Of every tree in the Garden thou mayest freely eat," &c. Gen. ii. 16. Adam's senses heard and conceived the command, and therefore our Rabbies say, that, in this first command to Adam, there is an indication of all subsequent commandments. The proof thus afforded, by the evidence of his senses, was, moreover, confirmed by his punishment for transgressing the Divine behest,-the foretaste of a future state. Such was likewise the case with the revelation to Noah, (Gen. ix. 3,) when the Deity permitted him and his sons to feed on flesh, which

« AnteriorContinuar »