Undergraduate thesis: introduction
What follows is the introduction to my undergraduate thesis in religion. It's about Jewish mysticism and language, and the ways in which Jewish mystics have used language to reach God.
I used to think the rest of the thesis would be put online once I found a good way to imbed Hebrew words in an English document, but over the last few years that's slipped to the bottom of my priority list. These days I feel like the thesis needs a good editor -- if I took the time to trim about a third of it away, it'd probably be pretty readable. As it is, it's got some interesting ideas in it, but I'm not sure I recommend reading all the way through.
If you're determined to do so, though, email me and I'll send you the thesis as a Word file.
Jewish Mystics: Using Language, Transcending Language, Becoming Language
by Rachel Barenblat
A Thesis
submitted in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the Degree of Bachelor of Arts with Honors
in Religion
Williams College
Williamstown, MA
1996
The primary question that I want to explore is how an experience of radical mystical union seems, to the mystic, to suspend both the framework of language and the boundaries of individual self-consciousness. In the course of this thesis, I will suggest a new way of thinking about mystical union, enabled by the conceptual shift of postmodern philosophy. The traditional debates about mystical union -- whether or not mystical union is linguistic, whether or not mystical union can accurately be characterized as "experience," whether mystical union is monistic or holistic -- necessarily locate mystical union within a dichotomy. Focusing on these issues, while interesting, is ultimately fruitless; it seems unlikely that any one scholar can definitively prove them one way or the other. I will argue that regarding mystical union within a system of binary oppositions is outdated. Within the framework of postmodernism, it becomes possible to envision mystical union as outside of dichotomy.
In order to make my position clear, I must define what I am calling "an experience of radical mystical union," and then explain why my perspective is only thinkable against the background of postmodernism. A close exegesis of Jewish mystical texts will then back up my claims that mystical union, as I define it, is outside of all dichotomy; and that Judaic mystical union is an experience of becoming Language, becoming the divine Word.
"Experiences" of "mystical union"the quintessence of mysticism is the sense of union with God."
-- Moshe Idel
There exist many forms of mystical experience, even within the context of the Jewish tradition. The form upon which I will focus is the "experience" of "mystical union." Jewish mystics use language, and linguistic practices, as a bridge to reach this kind of "union" with God, in which experience the structure of language seems, for the mystic, to be dissolved. The boundaries of selfhood also seem to cease to exist. The mystic seems, to herself, to exist outside of temporality in an experience of ultimate reality. In an experience of this kind, "knowing" becomes synonymous with "experiencing," and both become synonymous with "being." Knowledge becomes so total that it becomes experience, and the experience of union obviates all distinction, to the point where one is not simply "experiencing" God, but becoming one with God.
Let me be clear that the phrases "mystical experience" and "mystical union" are both misnomers. The concept of experience, within Western philosophy, necessitates a duality between subject and object; between the person who experiences and that which is experienced. In an "experience" of mystical union, the distinction between self and God seems to the mystic to be dissolved. The mystic is no longer aware of distinction between self and other, and for this reason the word "experience" is inaccurate. Similarly, the word "union" is inaccurate. The mystic is not merging with anyone or anything; instead the boundaries defining the mystic's self seem, to the mystic, to dissolve. The mystic is no longer aware of herself. There is no self which could merge with God, and no separate God which merges with a self. The Hebrew word which is usually translated as "mystical union" is tvqbd (devekut), literally "radical adhesion." Referring to an "experience" of this kind as either experience or union is ultimately incorrect, but they are the closest words our language has to express an experience which is radically outside of the structure of language and subjectivity.
Methodology
Let me make clear that I am dealing, in this thesis, with epistemology, and not with ontology. I am interested in how we experience the world, and not in how the world "actually is." Thus, when I examine accounts of mystical experience, or texts providing instructions for mystical practices, I am not dealing with whether or not the mystic "really" encounters absolute reality. Clearly, without achieving mystical union myself, I cannot ascertain whether or not the experiences these mystics describe were "really" experiences of adhesion to God. What interests me, however, is that mystics perceive that mystical union is taking place -- or, at least, after the fact of the mystical experience, mystical union is the context which these mystics lay over their experiences. I am interested in the possibility of mystical union: if mystical union is an experience which takes place without language, how is it possible to integrate such an experience with modern theories of how language shapes experience? If mystical union is an experience which temporarily dissolves the mystic's awareness of difference, what might that mean about self-consciousness and the dependence of experience and subjectivity on difference? What is the relation of language to ultimate reality?
In this thesis I intend to explore the paradox of how mystics can use language as a vehicle to reach what I consider to be the non-linguistic plane of "mystical union" with God, and what it might mean that union with God turns out to be access to the ultimate reality of Language. I will be using modern "tools" to interpret pre-modern texts, and this is intentional. Imposing an interpretive frame onto these texts is inevitable, and I think there is much to be gained in regarding these old mystical texts through the lens of modern linguistic theory.
My first chapter will establish a theoretical and philosophical framework for the primary-source exegesis and commentary that follow. I will sketch a rough outline of Kantian philosophy, as well as the linguistic philosophies of Wittgenstein, Saussure, and Lacan. In so doing I will explain why my perspective on mystical union is only possible within a postmodern perspective. I will close the first chapter with an exploration of language as it relates to mystical union, and with a foray into apophatic discourse.
Chapter two provides a close reading of the Sefer Yetzirah. The Sefer Yetzirah focuses on the theurgic powers of language; on an in-depth description of how God created the universe through language; and how language -- particularly Hebrew -- can be used to transform and to create. In addition, the Sefer Yetzirah provides step-by-step instructions for the mystic, explaining how to use language to transcend language and reach union with the Infinite. The Sefer Yetzirah is the root of the other mystics that I will discuss; Abulafia and, later, Habad, draw deeply on the formulations of language and divinity set forth in the Sefer Yetzirah.
My third chapter will deal with the writings of Abraham Abulafia. Abulafia's writings on the techniques of letter-combination and on the doctrine of the Divine Name and the Path of the Names provide insight into the practice of combining letters to achieve a nonlinguistic state of union with the Divine, as well as information on how to "use" the Divine Names to effect change in the physical world and in the realm of the Divine. My fourth chapter, combining exegesis with analysis of a living community, is an exploration of modern Habad hasidism. Habad is a fascinating mirror of the Sefer Yetzirah and the writings of Abulafia, and the Habad worldview provides at least one way to locate these mystical texts in relation to the problems of modernity. I will also explore the place of language and selfhood within the Habad paradigm.
In conclusion, I will argue that my new perspective on mystical union (enabled by postmodern thought) resolves the impossibilities that surround mystical union within Kantian philosophy. Using my exegesis of Judaic mystical texts, I will explore the rich paradox that these mystics use language to transcend language and arrive at an ultimate reality which is Language. Ultimately, I will seek to argue that mystical union is a new kind of experience, neither monistic nor dualistic, existing outside of dichotomy, and that this perspective can be used to revitalize an exploration of mysticism in this postmodern age. The final issue I will address is the place of writing, taking into account both the postmodern perspective on the "closure of the book" and the Jewish mystical perspective that ultimate reality is itself divine Language.
Please note that my writing is licensed under a Creative Commons license. Thanks for respecting it!