On the Kabbalah and Its Symbolism

«The literary production of the Kabbalists, more intensive in certain periods than in others, has been stored up in an impressive number of books, many of them dating back to the late Middle Ages.» — Scholem describe el corpus del que habla: una producción desigual en el tiempo y guardada en un número considerable de libros, muchos de fines de la Edad Media.

«When Israel became an independent state, the Jews of Yemen, a remote and isolated principality in southern Arabia, immigrated almost to a man aboard the ‘magic carpets/ as they called the airliners.» — el caso con que Scholem muestra que ese mundo no se ha extinguido del todo: los judíos del Yemen emigrados casi en bloque al fundarse el Estado de Israel, en los aviones que llamaban alfombras mágicas.

«They were obliged to abandon nearly all their belongings; but one object many had been unwilling to part with was their copy of the Zohar, which they have continued to study to this day.» — y lo que según Scholem no quisieron dejar atrás: su ejemplar del Zohar, que seguían estudiando.

«But this world has been lost to European Jewry. Down to our own generation, students of Jewish history showed little understanding for the documents of the Kabbalah and ignored them almost completely.» — el contraste que Scholem plantea: para el judaísmo europeo ese mundo se perdió, y los historiadores judíos ignoraron los documentos de la cábala casi por completo.

«For in the late eighteenth century, when the Jews of Western Europe turned so resolutely to European culture, one of the first and most important elements of their old heritage to be sacrificed was the Kabbalah.» — la fecha y el motivo que Scholem le adjudica a esa pérdida: al volcarse a la cultura europea a fines del siglo XVIII, lo primero que el judaísmo occidental sacrificó de su herencia fue la cábala.

«Jewish mysticism with its intricate, introverted symbolism was felt to be alien and disturbing» — cómo se la sintió entonces, según Scholem: ajena y perturbadora por su simbolismo intrincado y vuelto hacia dentro.

«The key to the understanding of the Kabbalistic books seemed to have been lost.» — el diagnóstico de Scholem sobre el punto de partida de su propio trabajo: la clave de esos libros parecía perdida.

«Scholars were perplexed and embarrassed by this world, which, instead of offering clear and simple concepts that could be developed, presented symbols of a very special kind, in which the spiritual experience of the mystics was almost inextricably intertwined with the historical experience of the Jewish people.» — y la razón que da del desconcierto: la cábala no ofrece conceptos claros que se puedan desarrollar, sino símbolos donde la experiencia espiritual del místico y la histórica del pueblo judío están entretejidas.

«It is this interweaving of two realms, which in most other religious mysticisms have remained separate, that gave the Kabbalah its specific imprint.» — para Scholem ese entretejido es lo propio de la cábala: en casi todas las demás místicas religiosas los dos planos permanecen separados.

«Small wonder that it seems strange to students of Christian mysticism, since it does not fit into the categories of ‘mysticism’ with which they are familiar.» — consecuencia que Scholem saca de lo anterior: la cábala le resulta extraña a quien estudia mística cristiana porque no cabe en sus categorías.

«The more sordid, pitiful, and cruel the fragment of historical reality allotted to the Jew amid the storms of exile, the deeper and more precise the symbolic meaning it assumed, and the more radiant became the Messianic hope which burst through it and transfigured it.» — la relación inversa que Scholem propone entre desdicha histórica y densidad simbólica: cuanto más dura la realidad del exilio, más preciso el sentido simbólico y más radiante la esperanza mesiánica.

«At the heart of this reality lay a great image of rebirth, the myth of exile and redemption, which assumed such vast dimensions with the Kabbalists and accounts for their prolonged historical influence.» — y el núcleo de esa relación: el mito de exilio y redención como gran imagen de renacimiento, al que Scholem atribuye la larga influencia histórica de los cabalistas.

«For in the books of the Kabbalists the personal element is almost negligible and so veiled in all manner of disguises that we must look very closely to find it.» — una advertencia de lectura: según Scholem, en los libros cabalísticos lo personal es casi nulo y va tan disfrazado que hay que buscarlo de cerca.

«Very rarely did a Kabbalist speak of his own way to God» — de ahí que Scholem declare que el cabalista casi nunca habló de su propio camino hacia Dios.

«And the chief interest of the Kabbalah for us does not lie in such statements, but in the light it throws on the ‘historical psychology’ of the Jews.» — Scholem desplaza el interés del testimonio personal a otra cosa: lo que la cábala alumbra es la psicología histórica de los judíos, y por eso interesa igual al historiador que al psicólogo.

«Research in this field involves an enormous responsibility. In digging up and evaluating the material, a scholar must make every effort to preserve a critical attitude.» — la exigencia que Scholem se pone a sí mismo al desenterrar y evaluar el material: mantener una actitud crítica.

«For long before historians became interested in Jewish mysticism, charlatans and cranks were drawn to it. This was of doubtful benefit to the study of the Kabbalah.» — y por qué la exige: antes que los historiadores llegaron al asunto charlatanes y excéntricos, con beneficio dudoso para el estudio de la cábala.

«We shall start from the assumption that a mystic, insofar as he participates actively in the religious life of a community, does not act in the void.» — el supuesto declarado con que Scholem abre el primer ensayo: el místico que participa de la vida religiosa de una comunidad no obra en el vacío.

«A mystic is a man who has been favored with an immediate, and to him real, experience of the divine, of ultimate reality, or who at least strives to attain such experience.» — la definición que Scholem da de místico, con la puerta abierta a quien solo aspira a esa experiencia.

«No historian can say—nor is it his business to answer such questions— whether a given mystic in the course of his individual religious experience actually found what he was so eagerly looking for.» — y la abstención con que la acompaña: al historiador no le toca decidir si el místico encontró de verdad lo que buscaba.

«From a historical point of view, the mystical quest for the divine takes place almost exclusively within a prescribed tradition—the exceptions seem to be limited» — la restricción histórica que Scholem impone al asunto: la búsqueda mística ocurre casi siempre dentro de una tradición prescrita, con excepciones escasas.

«Where such a tradition prevails, a religious authority, established long before the mystic was born, has been recognized by the community for many generations.» — cómo define Scholem la autoridad religiosa que el místico se encuentra puesta: reconocida por la comunidad desde mucho antes de que él naciera.

«Grounded in the specific experience of the community, this authority has been developed through an interchange between the community and those individuals who have interpreted its fundamental experience and so helped the community to express itself, who in a manner of speaking have made it articulate.» — y de dónde la hace venir: de un intercambio entre la comunidad y quienes interpretaron su experiencia fundante hasta volverla articulada.

«There is then a scale of values that has been taken over from tradition; there is also a group of doctrines and dogmas, which are taken as authentic statements concerning the religious experience of a given community.» — los dos componentes que Scholem le reconoce: una escala de valores heredada y un cuerpo de doctrinas y dogmas tenidos por enunciados auténticos de esa experiencia.

«But let us make no mistake. Inestimable as may be the worth of these mute, anonymous saints, the history of religions is not concerned with them.» — el deslinde con que Scholem excluye de su objeto al santo mudo y anónimo: valga lo que valga, la historia de las religiones no se ocupa de él.

«It is concerned with what happens when men attempt to enter into communication with each other. And it is generally recognized that in the case of mystics such communication presents a problem.» — porque, según Scholem, lo que la historia de las religiones estudia es lo que pasa cuando los hombres intentan comunicarse, y en el místico esa comunicación es problema.

«If not for such attempts it would be impossible to regard mysticism as a historical phenomenon.» — y de ahí la condición que pone: sin esos intentos de comunicar, la mística no sería un fenómeno histórico.

«it is precisely in the course of such attempts that mysticism comes to grips with religious authority. All mysticism has two contradictory or complementary aspects: the one conservative, the other revolutionary. What does this» — la tesis del doble aspecto, enunciada donde Scholem la hace nacer: en el momento en que el místico intenta comunicar y choca con la autoridad religiosa.

«It has been said that mystics are always striving to put new wine into old bottles—just what a famous passage in the Gospels warns us not to do.» — la fórmula ajena que Scholem retoma —vino nuevo en odres viejos— señalando que el Evangelio advierte justamente contra eso.

«The answer is that these mystics seem to rediscover the sources of traditional authority.» — su respuesta a cómo puede un místico ser conservador: le parece que redescubre las fuentes de la autoridad tradicional.

«Perceiving the ancient foundations of this authority, they have no desire to change it.» — y el corolario: al percibir esos fundamentos antiguos, no desea cambiarlos.

«Sometimes this conservative function has been included in the very definition of mysticism—but this strikes me as questionable and one-sided.» — la objeción de Scholem a quienes meten esa función conservadora en la definición misma de mística: le parece cuestionable y unilateral.

«An American author, for example, has defined mysticism as ‘the endeavor to secure consciousness of the presence of the Agency through which (or through Whom) the conservation of socially recognized values is sought.» — el ejemplo con que lo ilustra, sin dar el nombre: una definición que reduce la mística a asegurar la conservación de valores socialmente reconocidos.

«To be sure, there is always some part of it that he cannot adequately and fully express.» — la reserva que Scholem mantiene sobre la comunicación mística: siempre queda una parte que el místico no expresa del todo.

«Because mystical experience as such is formless, there is in principle no limit to the forms it can assume.» — de la ausencia de forma Scholem saca una consecuencia fuerte: en principio no hay límite a las formas que la experiencia puede tomar.

«Only the most universal formal elements are the same in different forms of mysticism.» — y el límite de lo comparable: solo los elementos formales más universales coinciden entre místicas distintas.

«In general, then, the mystic’s experience tends to confirm the religious authority under which he lives; its theology and symbols are projected into his mystical experience, but do not spring from it.» — la regla general que Scholem propone: la teología y los símbolos de la autoridad bajo la que vive el místico se proyectan en su experiencia, no salen de ella.

«He contributes not only to the conservation of the tradition, but also to its development.» — y el otro lado del mismo movimiento: al conservar la tradición el místico también la desarrolla.

«Indeed, a mystic’s understanding and interpretation of his own experience may even lead him to question the religious authority he had hitherto supported.» — hasta el punto, dice Scholem, de que interpretar su propia experiencia puede llevarlo a cuestionar la autoridad que sostenía.

«A mystic may substitute his own opinion for that prescribed by authority, precisely because his opinion seems to stem from the very same authority.» — el mecanismo de la sustitución: su opinión reemplaza a la prescrita justamente porque le parece venir de esa misma autoridad.

«One of the marks of the importance of Gershom Scholem in twentieth—century thought, however, is how he invites all readers to become “insiders” to the world of Jewish mysticism and the questions it raises for the wider investigation of religion.» — Bernard McGinn abre el prefacio de 1996 declarándose ajeno al campo y explicando por qué escribe igual: lo que le reconoce a Scholem es haber vuelto legible la mística judía para quien viene de fuera.

«Scholem himself made no universal claims for Jewish mysticism, never arguing, as did some modern Kabbalists such as the nineteenth—century Italian rabbi Elijah Benamozegh,1 that Kabbalah was the archetype or inner core of other forms of Western mysticism.» — McGinn deslinda a Scholem de la tesis universalista, y nombra a quien sí la sostuvo: el rabino italiano decimonónico Elijah Benamozegh, para quien la cábala era el arquetipo o núcleo de las demás místicas occidentales.

«Although Scholem’s writings cover the whole range of Jewish mysticism from the Merkavah texts of the early centuries C.E. through Hasidism, he was most concerned with the recovery of Kabbalah, the secret traditions about the inner meaning of Jewish life and practice that first emerged in twelfth—century France and Spain and eventually spread throughout the Jewish world.» — el arco que McGinn le adjudica a la obra entera de Scholem, de la Merkavah al hasidismo, con el centro puesto en la cábala surgida en la Francia y la España del siglo XII.

«This is not to deny the critiques and revisions of many of Scholem’s interpretations of the history of Jewish mysticism by subsequent scholars.» — McGinn consigna que hay críticas y revisiones posteriores a las interpretaciones históricas de Scholem, y no las arbitra.

«This is not to overlook such fundamental older studies of Jewish mysticism as those of Adolphe Franck,6 but the standard emphasis was on how well Judaism fit the model of a pure and “enlightened” religion, especially in the realms of law and philosophy.» — según McGinn, la Wissenschaft des Judentums del siglo XIX no ignoraba del todo la mística —cita a Adolphe Franck—, pero medía al judaísmo por su ajuste al modelo de religión ilustrada, es decir por su ley y su filosofía.

«As he put it in the essay on “Kabbalah and Myth” in this collection: “The price of God’s purity is the loss of His living reality.» — la frase de Scholem que McGinn levanta del tercer ensayo de este mismo volumen para explicar qué le faltaba a esa religión depurada.

«Scholem’s turn to mysticism as a clue to the nature of Judaism was exemplary, not only for Wissenschaft des Judentums (if the term is still useful), but also for the modern study of mysticism in general.» — McGinn extiende el alcance del giro de Scholem más allá del judaísmo, al estudio moderno de la mística en general, y de paso pone en duda que el rótulo Wissenschaft des Judentums siga sirviendo.

«Scholem advances a three—stage model of religion. In the first essay in this volume, for example, he claims that religion begins with a mythical foundation stage in which no gap is discerned between the gods and humans. Religion then moves on to a classical phase which destroys this harmony by establishing a polarity between God and human in which God founds institutional “religion” by addressing humans in revelation and demanding their obedience.» — McGinn resume así las dos primeras etapas del modelo que le lee a Scholem en el primer ensayo: la mítica, sin distancia entre dioses y hombres, y la clásica, que instaura la polaridad y funda la religión institucional en la revelación y la obediencia.

«The history of institutional religion, however, shows the possibility of a third, or “romantic” phase, in which mysticism, understood as “direct contact between the individual and God,” seeks to revive the original unity of mythic consciousness.» — la tercera etapa del mismo modelo según McGinn: la mística como contacto directo que busca reponer la unidad de la conciencia mítica.

«It is difficult to know how much stock Scholem put in this evolutionary pattern, considering his resistance to overarching theories.» — McGinn matiza su propia lectura: no sabe cuánto crédito le daba Scholem al esquema evolutivo, dada su resistencia a las teorías totalizadoras.

«Nevertheless, I find his model problematic, at least if understood in a purely sequential way, particularly because the history of many religious traditions demonstrates the ongoing persistence of all three» — la objeción propia de McGinn, dicha en primera persona: leído como secuencia, el modelo no da cuenta de que las tres fases persisten a la vez.

«Scholem’s three-stage theory does introduce us to one of the most important of his insights—the dialectical relation between myth and mysticism on the one hand and institutional religion on the other.» — lo que McGinn sí rescata del esquema, aun objetándolo: la relación dialéctica entre mito y mística, de un lado, e institución, del otro.

«According to Steven Ozment, for example, “medieval [Christian] mysticism was a refined challenge, always in theory if not in daily practice, to the regular, normative way of religious salvation.» — McGinn cita a Steven Ozment como ejemplo de la lectura que hace de la mística medieval un desafío a la vía normativa de salvación; el corchete que acota *Christian* es del propio McGinn.

«Scholem’s insistence that “there is no mysticism as such, but only the mysticism of particular religious systems, Christian, Islamic, and Jewish mysticism, and so on,”10 may seem obvious until one reflects on how much study of mysticism has been conducted on contrary premises.» — McGinn cita la regla de método de Scholem y advierte que su obviedad es aparente: buena parte del estudio de la mística se hizo sobre la premisa contraria.

«Even today, profound disagreements, not always clearly understood and expressed, over the legitimacy of speaking of mysticism as a “thing in itself” divide the scholarly» — McGinn consigna que el desacuerdo sobre si cabe hablar de la mística como cosa en sí sigue abierto entre los estudiosos.

«Like von Hiigel, Scholem believed that only by seeing mysticism as one element in a living religious whole can we begin to understand the possible meaning» — McGinn empareja a Scholem con Friedrich von Hiigel —así lo imprime el facsímil, por von Hügel— en la tesis de que la mística solo se entiende como un elemento dentro de un todo religioso vivo.

«Scholem’s view of this dynamism challenged those who insisted that mysticism was ineluctably radical and revolutionary in the face of organized, institutional religion.» — McGinn sitúa la tesis del doble aspecto contra quienes hacían de la mística algo forzosamente radical frente a la religión organizada.

«Due to the presence of the wild card of ineffability, however, mystical preservation of tradition is never mere repetition, but also allows for creative transformations of the inherited amalgam.» — según McGinn, es la inefabilidad lo que impide que la conservación mística sea mera repetición: al no caber la experiencia en las palabras heredadas, transformarlas se vuelve inevitable.

«While Scholem never denied a creative aspect to the more abstract elements of religion, like law and philosophy, it is obvious that he was drawn to the study of mysticism precisely because he saw in it the deepest resource for dynamic change and development within religion.» — McGinn le adjudica a Scholem un motivo de elección de objeto: la mística como el recurso más hondo de cambio dentro de una religión.

«Change or adaptation, however, always raises the nagging question, “How much is too much» — la pregunta con que McGinn formula el límite del aspecto revolucionario: cuánta transformación tolera una tradición antes de romperse.

«More often, circumstantial conflict between the mystic and religious authority leads to situations within which mystics may be forced to choose between their own truth and the truth of the tradition.» — para McGinn el conflicto suele ser circunstancial, no doctrinal, y solo entonces obliga al místico a elegir entre su verdad y la de la tradición.

«Scholem devoted a major book to the most prominent example of this in the history of Judaism—the career of Sabbatai Sevi.» — McGinn remite al libro de Scholem sobre Sabbatai Sevi como el caso mayor de esa ruptura en la historia judía.

«In Christianity, for example, the concept of orthodoxy enshrined in correct formulas of belief is more powerful than in Judaism, just as the forms of religious leadership and the authority they claim, varied as they have been among the Christian denominations, are different from those found in Judaism.» — el deslinde comparativo de McGinn: la ortodoxia como fórmula de creencia pesa más en el cristianismo que en el judaísmo, y con ella cambia la forma de la autoridad.

«Esoteric teaching and practice have played a significant, one might even say central, role in the history of Jewish mysticism, while Christianity’s struggle with Gnosticism» — McGinn contrasta el lugar central de lo esotérico en la mística judía con el pleito cristiano contra el gnosticismo; la frase sigue en la plana siguiente.

«Traditional Christian mysticism makes frequent use of erotic language, both biblical and extrabiblical, but its commitment to the ideal of virginity has meant that it has nothing like Kabbalah’s incorporation of marital sexuality into the mystical path.» — segundo deslinde de McGinn: el lenguaje erótico es común a las dos místicas, pero solo la cábala incorpora la sexualidad conyugal a la vía.

«Scholem’s general theory of the relationship between mysticism and religious authority remains a significant contribution that serves to correct rigid views of mystical anti-institutionalism that are still widely held.» — el balance de McGinn sobre el primer ensayo del volumen.

«Scholem’s rediscovery of Jewish mysticism was inseparable from his conviction that the revival of the study of Hebrew and its forgotten mystical texts was the only form of religious creativity possible to Jews like himself, his friend Walter Benjamin, and the “heretical Kabbalist” Franz Kafka, whom both men admired so much.» — McGinn liga el proyecto de Scholem a una convicción biográfica, y nombra a Walter Benjamin y a Kafka, a quien llama cabalista herético.

«A language is composed of names. The power of the language is bound up in the name, and its abyss is sealed within the name.» — la frase de Scholem sobre el nombre que McGinn cita para introducir el asunto del lenguaje.

«Scholem sometimes spoke as if the original moment of mystical consciousness was so private and formless that it was totally unrelated to language and all linguistic mediation.» — McGinn señala una oscilación en Scholem: a ratos habla como si el momento originario quedara del todo fuera del lenguaje.

«According to Rabbi Mendel, the revelation made to Israel at Sinai was not in the form of the actual words of the commandments, but only of the aleph that begins the first commandment.» — McGinn adelanta la tesis de Rabbi Mendel de Rymanov que Scholem expone en el segundo ensayo: en el Sinaí solo se oyó el aleph.

«Scholem’s lifelong meditation on Kabbalah enabled him to discern what we might call a primordial language, an inexpressible and potent abyss—“next to nothing”—that is the ground not only of the mystical element in religion, but also, at least as the Kabbalists claimed, the source of the Sinai tradition itself.» — la lectura que McGinn propone del conjunto, con su acotación puesta: eso último lo sostienen los cabalistas, no necesariamente él.

«Scholem even argues for a link between Christian conceptions of the fourfold spiritual interpretation of the Bible and the Kabbalistic notion of the four levels of reading Scripture revealed in the term PaRdeS (p. 61)» — McGinn destaca, con folio impreso, el vínculo que Scholem propone entre el cuádruple sentido cristiano y el PaRdeS cabalístico.

«The following essay on Kabbalah and Myth” explores the symbolic character of Kabbalistic language and argues that Gnosticism was the mediating link between ancient myth and Kabbalistic revival of mythic stuctures: “Gnosis . . . gave the Jewish mystics their language» — McGinn resume el tercer ensayo y cita la fórmula de Scholem sobre la gnosis; el facsímil imprime *stuctures* y abre la comilla del título sin cerrarla.

«The Kabbalists reinvented Jewish ritual through their efforts to “anchor the ritual of Rabbinical Judaism in myth by means of a mystical practice’ (pp. 132—33; his italics)» — así resume McGinn el cuarto ensayo, citando a Scholem y advirtiendo que las cursivas son de él.

«My point here is not to enter into any detailed discussion of Scholem s arguments, but rather to highlight his pioneering role in emphasizing the centrality of the relation between mysticism and language.» — McGinn acota lo que su prefacio hace y lo que no hace.

«Gershom Scholem was no uncridcal student of Jewish mysdcism, especially its central manifestation in Kabbalah.» — McGinn cierra advirtiendo que Scholem no leía la cábala con adhesión; el facsímil imprime *uncridcal* y *mysdcism*.

«He confessed that “anyone who concerns himself seriously with the thinking of the great Kabbalists will be torn between feelings of admiration and revulsion» — la confesión de Scholem que McGinn cita para sostenerlo: admiración y repulsión a la vez.

«This is more than sufficient reason for continuing to read this master of twentieth—century mystical scholarship.» — la frase con que McGinn cierra el prefacio.

«In 1908, the Catholic scholar Friedrich von Hiigel published his massive work, The Mystical Element of Religion as Studied in Saint Catherine of Genoa and Her Friends, the fruit of thirty years» — McGinn nombra la obra con que Friedrich von Hiigel —así lo imprime el facsímil, por von Hügel— trató la mística como un elemento del todo religioso: su estudio de Catalina de Génova, de 1908.

«the very boldness of this gnostic paradox—exile as an element in God Himself—that accounted in large part for the enormous influence of these ideas on the Jews.» — en su nota 14, McGinn cita el pasaje de Kabbalah and Myth sobre por qué la paradoja gnóstica del exilio dentro de Dios mismo pesó tanto entre los judíos; la nota remite al folio impreso 113. El mismo texto vuelve en la voz de Scholem en la p. 137.