Harvard Divinity School

Through the Void: The Absence of God in R. Naman of Bratzlav's "Likkutei MoHaRan" Author(s): Shaul Magid Source: The Harvard Theological Review, Vol. 88, No. 4 (Oct., 1995), pp. 495-519 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Harvard Divinity School Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1509839 . Accessed: 21/06/2011 05:12
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Cambridge University Press and Harvard Divinity School are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Harvard Theological Review.

http://www.jstor.org

lNhrough in R.

the Nahman

Void: of

The Bratzlav's

Absence Likkutei

of

God

MoHaRanl
Shaul Magid
Rice University

A lthoughnot usually viewed as a manifestation modernspirituality, of hasidism strikinglyresemblesa productof the spiritualandideological reorientation Westernreligion in the post-Copernican of world.2Largely unawareof the philosophicaland theologicalchangesin European intellectual culture, many of the hasidic masters exhibited a sensitivity to the existentialplight of humankind the modernworld. in

tUnless otherwiseindicated,translations italics throughout articleare mine. and the 2Martin Buber, SamuelAbba Horodetzky,and Hillel Zeitlin introduced hasidismto the modernworld.Buber'searly studieson hasidicthoughtwere directedat the largerscholarly audiencein Europewith the hope that hasidismwould serve as a Jewish componentin the mysticalrevival at the turnof the century.This is trueto a lesser extent for Horodetzky and Zeitlin.See, for example,Horodetzky's comparative studyof R. Nah. andSchleiermacher, man "Rabbi Nachman Brazlaw:Beitragzur GechichtederjudischenMystik,"in StevenKatz, von ed., Studies by Samuel Horodezky (New York:Arno, 1980);Hillel Zeitlin,Rabbi Nah,man miBratzlav: ,Hayavu-Torato (Warsaw:n.p., 1910); and idem, Reb Nakhman Braslaver (New York:Harper,1952). See also MartinBuber,The Legend of the Baal Shem Tov (1908; trans. MauriceFriedman; New York:Harper,1955);and idem, The Tales of Rabbi Nah.man (1906; trans.MauriceFriedman; AtlanticHighlands,NJ: Humanities PressInternational, 1988). On the contributionof hasidism in general and R. Nahmanin particular modernWestern to spirituality,see idem, "Spinoza,SabbataiZvi, andthe Baal Shem,"in idem, The Origin and Meaning of Hasidism (AtlanticHighlands, Humanities NJ: PressInternational, 1988)89-112; idem, "ThePlace of Hasidismin the Historyof Religion,"in idem, The Origin and Meaning of Hasidism, 219-39; and JosephWeiss, "Sense and Non-Sense in Defining Judaism The Strange Caseof Nahman Braslav," idem,Studies in East European Jewish Mysticism (ed. of in David Goldstein;Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress, 1985) 249-69. HTR 88:4 (1995) 495-519

496

HARVARD THEOLOG ICAL REVIEW

It must be stated at the outset that any analysis of hasidism and its ideological symmetryto modernthought must begin by recognizing the divergent multifarious and nature hasidicspirituality. of Contemporary scholarship has renderedany overarchingstatementabout hasidism obsolete. The hasidicmovementcontainedand still containsnumerous strains,differentiatedby various schools of thoughtthat flourishedin EasternEurope from the mid-eighteenth centuryuntil the present.3Thus, any conclusions drawnfrommy analysisof one very provocative hasidicthinker, Nahman R. of Bratzlav(1772-1810), should not be viewed as a statementregarding hasidismin general. The life and thoughtof R. Nahmanof Bratzlavis particularly strikingin its sensitivity to the struggleof one who seeks God in the very realm of God's absence. In this sense he is unique among early hasidic thinkers, many of whom adopteda more acosmic stance, where God'sabsence was viewed as an illusion to be overcomeby meansof devotion,culminating in an experienceof communion with God (devekut). is therefore surprisIt not ing that, whereasmost hasidic mastersat first attainedlegitimacyby being disciples of a particular master,R. Nahman's reputation based largelyon is the originality this thought.4 of This themeof divineabsenceandthe struggle to overcomeit places R. Nahmansquarelyin the companyof some of the more provocativetheistic existentialistsof the eighteenth,nineteenthand early twentiethcenturies.The paradigmshift from the medieval period's sense of the incomprehensibility God to the humanestrangement of from God may be seen in light of the shift in orientation early modernthought of from the cosmos to the individual.5 Perhaps most strikingcharacteristic the
3Joseph Weiss's typological analysis ("Contemplative Mysticism and 'Faith' in Hasidic Piety," in idem, Studies, 47-55) maintains that hasidism can be divided into two trends: "mystical hasidism" and "faith hasidism." While this is perhaps too simplistic, it does point to a useful distinction. Much of this theory rests on how much each hasidic school integrated and interpreted the medieval kabbalistic tradition. 4R. Nah. man was born into the family of the Baal Shem Tov (Besht), the founder of hasidism. His mother Feige was the granddaughter of the Baal Shem and his two uncles, R. Moshe Hayyim Ephraim of Sudikov (1737-1800) and R. Barukh of Medzhibozh (1750-1812) were leaders of Ukrainian hasidism at the end of the eighteenth century. His family lineage was important to him and he used it to legitimate his place in the annals of hasidism. Yet even as he was influenced by his uncles and their disciples, R. Nahman did not consider himself to be a disciple of one particular master. He often portrayed himself as a self-made gaddik. For more on his early life, see Arthur Green, Tormented Master: A Life of Rabbi Nahman (Woodstock, Vermont: Jewish Lights, 1992) 23-62. sFor a general discussion on this shift in modern theology, see Anthony T. Padovano, The Estranged God: Modern Man's Search for Belief (New York/Kansas City: Sheed & Ward, 1966); David Everett Roberts, Existentialism and Religious Belief (New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press: 1967); Ralph Harper, On Presence: Variations and Reflections (Philadelphia: Trinity, 1991); and John Wild and James M. Edie, eds., Christianity and Existentialism: Essays by William Earle (Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press, 1963).

SHAUL MAGID

497

of R. Nahmanis thathis outlookreflectsthis shift withouthis being aware of its existence. Moreover,R. Nahman's"existential" stance, which was rooted in the sixteenth-century Jewish mystical traditiontypical of early hasidism,emergedout of a theosophicworldviewthat did not easily lend itself to such an existential interpretation.6 In this article, I illuminatethe hasidic treatmentof divine absence in orderto show how it offers a creativetheistic Jewish responseto the existentialistposition of alienationrootedin traditional piety.7The first part of this article includes an analysis of the theory of divine absence in R. Nahman, which is depicted as the divine void (halal ha-panui) the in theosophickabbalism the sixteenth-century of Jewishmystic,R. IsaacLuria. I shall then attemptto place R. Nahman's position in the context of other moderntheistic existentialistswho grappledwith similar issues, even as they reacheddifferentconclusions.I hope thatthe creativespiritualstruggle of R. Nahman,whichhas remained largelyinaccessibleto the generalschol6Thequestionof how muchR. Nahmanintegrated kabbalistic this worldviewis a topic for anotherstudy.Althoughhe used kabbalisticcategoriesandjargon,it is difficultto determine how much his thinkingreflects this medieval mystical tradition.Both Scholem and Buber agree although fromdifferentperspectives-that earlyhasidismcontributed little to furthering the kabbalisticagenda.See GershomScholem,Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism (New York:Schocken,1941)338. WhileScholemsuggestedthathasidismadopted kabbalistic ideas withoutoffering anything"new,"MartinBuber argued("The Faith of Judaism,"in idem, Mamre: Essays in Religion [trans.,GretaHorn;Westport,CN: Greenwood,1970] 13) that hasidismhad overcomeKabbalain the same way he felt it had overcometalmudism: "The Kabbalah overcome[in hasidism]becauseit was takenup into the ur-Jewish was conception of the dialogical life just as it was. This overcomingof Kabbalais the important work of Chassidism; left all middle-substances fade beforethe relationship it to betweenGod'stranscendence,only to be called 'the limitless'with the suspensionof all limitedbeing, and his immanence, 'indwelling."' his Althoughone can surelyarguethis point for the hasidictradition of early Habadandthe Polish school of Kamarno, Buber'ssweepingclaim resonatesin R. Nahman's personalistapproach. 7Sucha theoryis impliedby Eliezer Schweidin his Jewish Thought in the 20th Century: An Introduction (trans.AmnonHadary; Atlanta,GA: ScholarsPress, 1992) 327-33. Schweid places R. Nah. man'stheoryof divineabsencebetweenthe quasi-Nietzschean pessimismof the Jewishpoet Yosef HayyimBrenner the positivisticTolstoyianideologyof A. D. Gordon, and two influentialthinkersin early twentieth-century Israelithought.Referringto R. Nah. man's stories, Schweid states, "The picture which emerges from his stories is one of unbridled apostasywheredemonicdepravityreignsthe world.The state of 'hester panim' the eclipse of God which is endemic to Exile has deteriorated a full-blown severancefrom God. to God'spresenceis nowherein evidence, not even tangentially.... The sovereigntyof God is at best a distantdream,a willed vision, a groundless chimera,whereasevil is mighty,palpable andinescapable" 328). I wouldsuggestthatSchweid,possiblyinfluenced JosephWeiss's (p. by studieson R. Nahman's existentialpersona,is readingtoo muchof JosephHayyimBrenner's pessimisminto R. Nahman. Nahman,unlikeBrenner, R. does claimto resolvethe crisis, both existentiallyas well as mystically.I am, nonetheless,in total agreement with Schweid'sjuxtapositionof R. Nah. man betweenBrennerand Gordon,makinghim a model of the modern struggleto come to termswith a world from which God is absent.

498

HARVARD THEOLOGICAL REVIEW

arly audiencedue to its intricateexegeticalframework, offer an authencan tic Jewish response to the idea of divine absence which challenges the modernseeker of religious meaning. W An Explicationof R. Nahman For the most part,classical scholarship the ideologicalfoundations on of hasidism has worked under the assumptionthat hasidism is preoccupied with the notionof divine immanence.8 Besht'semphasison God as the The "fillerof worlds"has been viewed as the signpostfor hasidic ideology. In both its mystical formulationsand its more faith-orientedpresentation, hasidismhas often been viewed as a religiousideology foundedon uncovering the presence of God in the world. This uncoveringis seen as a personaland collective process of redemption. The notion of revealingthe divinity hidden in the recesses of nature,however,presupposesthe omnipresenceof God in the world;God'shiddennessis thereforeepistemological ratherthan ontological. Althoughsuch a principleindeedexists in hasidism,9 Nahman's R. philosophy is different.His theory of divine presenceand the humanexperience of it (devekut) based upon overcomingthe ontologicalabsence of is God depictedin the void thatprecededcreationin the Lurianicscheme set forth by R. Luria.lIn order to understand Nahman'sposition on the R. absenceof God, one must first addresshis readingof the Lurianicconcept of gimzum. Zimzum, divine contraction, the kabbalisticsolutionto the or is perennialproblemof how the finite world could emerge from the infinite God. Even as the Lurianicreadingof gimzum suggests the creationof a void a place of divine absence that becomes the space of creation-this absenceof God is usuallyviewedas one stagein a dynamicprocesswhereby the absence of God, or the void, is overcome by a new influx of divine
8Forsome classical articles in English on the social and ideological foundations of hasidism, see Ben Zion Dinur, "The Origins of Hasidism and its Social and Messianic Foundations," in Gershon David Hundert, ed., Essential Papers in Hasidism: Origins to Present (New York/ London: New York University Press, 1991); Simon Dubnow, "The Beginnings: The Baal Shem Tov and the Center in Podolia," in Hundert, Essential Papers in Hasidism, 25-58; Abraham J. Heschel, The Circle of the Baal Shem Tow(Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1985); Louis Jacobs, "Hasidism," EncJud 7 (1972) 1403-7; and Gershom Scholem, "Devekut or Communion with God," in idem, The Messianic Idea in Judaism (New York: Schocken, 197 1) 203-27. 9This was particularly true of early Habad hasidism. See Rachel Elior, The Paradoxical Ascent to God (Al?rany, NY: SUNY Press, 1993) 49-78. 10Theimportance of the recognition of divine absence has been addressed by scholars of Jewish mysticism. See, for example, Scholem, Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism, 7-8: "There is no room for mysticism as the link, as the abyss between man and God has not become a fact of the inner consciousness.... Mysticism does not deny or overlook the abyss; on the contrary it begins by realizing its existence."

SHAUL MAGID

499

the light into creation.While the notionof gimgum introduces possibilityof phase in the dynamicprocess of credivine absence as only a temporary ation, R. Nahmanfocused his attentionon this part of the process rather than on its culmination,when the absence is infused with a renewedstate
0t c .lvlnlty.

of Jewish proponents the gimzum theory While some easternEuropean R. divine contraction,ll Nahmandid to attempted theosophizeor rationalize on the emotionalangst of not focus on the cosmic movementof God, but the one who seeks God's presence. His position emerged slowly as he attemptedto integratethe conventionalnotion of gimzum into his radical reading.Initially,he followed the classic kabbalisticview that God creates Whatis his own absencein orderto allow for the possibilityof creation.l2 thereforefirst createdis the void, which is then filled with a finite form of divine presence that culminatesin humanbeings, who serve as a bridge the approach, betweencreationand that which precededit. In R. Nahman's kabbalisticnotion of God'spresencein creationdoes not fully supplantthe as initial creationof the void.l3 The void is interpreted the empiricalexpeis Kabbala central readingsof ;.im;.umin post-Lurianic X XThe issue of literalandnonliteral Zalmanof Liady, in in earlyhasidism,particularly Habadhasidism.See, for example,Shneur Kehot, 1979) 104-6; andAharonha-Leviof Starosielce,Sha'arei Likkutei Torah (Brooklyn: Mekkor,1982) 1. 42a-43b. See also Elior,Paraud ha-Yih. ve ha-Emunah (2 vols.; Jerusalem: of doxical Ascent, 79-91; and TamarRoss, "Two Interpretations T;im;.um: R. Hayyim of Volozhin and R. ShneurZalmanof Liady,"Mehkarei Yerushalayim 2 (1982) 152-69 [Hebrew]. For an alternatereadingof the use of gimzum in postmedievalJewishmysticism,see Mehkarei Yerushalayim of of "TheKabbala the Ariin theTeachings R. Kook," Y. Ben-Shlomo, 10 (1992) 449-57 [Hebrew]. I2See,for example,R. HayyimVital, Ogrot Hayyim, part1:Mevo She'arim 1.1.1andidem, of in ha-Kelalim" E; Hayyim (n. p.: MekorHayyim,n. d.) Sa. A systematicappraisal "Sha'ar Lurianicgimzum, which may have influencedR. Nahman,can be found in Moshe Hayyim Luzzatto,One Hundred and Thirty-Eight Openings of Wisdom (Bnei Brak:n. p., 1992) 58-72 See [Hebrew]. also IsaiahTishby,The Doctrine of Evil and the 'Kelippah' in Lurianic Kabbala and Magnes, 1991) 13-20 [Hebrew]; Scholem,Major Trends in Jewish Jerusalem: (reprinted Mysticism, 261-64. On Luzzatto'sinfluenceon hasidism,see IsaiahTishby, "IkvotRamhal of rendition thekabbalistic Zion ha-Hasidut," 43 (1978)201-34. Fora moretraditional be-Mishnat Moznaim,1990) 120-31. This notionof gimzum, see AryehKaplan,Inner Space (Jerusalem: It mostlyfromthe Lurianictradition. is majorthemesin Kabbala, to book attempts introduce interestingthat in the discussion of gimzum, a large part of the chapteris devoted to R. readingof gimzum and the void. Nahman's alone. 3The notion thatthe void remainsaftercreationis, as far as I knowsR. Nahman's A more conventionalview is expressedby Luzzatto(One Hundred Thirty-Eight Openings, light.... The secret of light is called a rishimu ['remnant'] the primordial 66): "Theemanated is of this remnant whatis called the spaceof all existence,becauseit gives [life] to all of that which exists, which the eternallight could not have given. This space is called halal ['void']. light whichexistedbefore."See also It is emptyof the eternaleyn sof, whichis the primordial to commentary Vital'sOgrot Hayyim in Ginzei Ramhal (Bnei Brak:n.p., 1984) 297: Luzzato's whichremains "Thevoid (halal) is thatwhichis emptyof eternity(bilti takhliot). Theremnant

500

HARVARD THEOLOGICAL REVIEW

rience of God's absence that becomes, in R. Nahman'sunderstanding, the hereticalnotion of faithlessness.l4Faithlessnessis the outcome of giving credence to the observationof a world empty of God; yet R. Nahman apparently could not let go of the very notionthathe deemedso dangerous. He was not willing to turn away from the heresy of divine absence by calling it an illusion.ls Whereastraditionalreadersof R. Nahmanstress that his interpretation the void is in concert with the cosmic void of of creationin the Lurianicscheme, I would argue that R. Nahmanhad little interestin the ontology of the cosmic void. What interestedhim was that the void may serve as a foundationfor the emotionalresponseto the perception of divine absence in human experience. To complicate matters further, suggestedthatthe absenceof God and the eternalnatureof God he (as eyn sof) are identical vis-a-vis humanexperience.Both representthe unbridled passion of humanemotionsand desire that yield spiritualimpotence, faithlessness,and heresy,if left unattended.l6 kabbalistic The formuis called 'emptyair.'[Yet] thereis no void withouta remnant divine light]."The notionof [of the remnant light left afterthe gimz:um of serves as a sourcefor the panentheistic idea in the hasidic readingof Kabbala.R. Nahmansuggestedthat the void or emptinessof God is not supplanted the divine light ('or yashar) that is injectedsubsequentlyinto the void. For by moreon the sourceof this remnant light in Lurianic of Kabbala, HayyimVital, Sha'ar hasee Hakdamot (Jerusalem: n.p., 1850) 17-23; R. Shlomo b. Hayyim Haikel Eliashuv,Leshem Shevo ve-Ah. Iamah, Hakdamot ve Sha'arim (Jerusalem: p., 1948) 35ff; Shemen Sasson no. n. 2, a commentary R. ShalomSharabi's of Nahar Shalom printedin the MekorHayyimedition of theE; Hayyim p. 49c andJacobb. HayyimZemah,Zohar ha-Raki'a (Koretz:Kriger,1785) 23a. 14The classic Lurianicstance on this is that the productof gimzum is the emergenceof Judgment (middat ha-din). See, for example,HayyimVital, "Drosh Igulimve Yosher,"in E: Hayyim, 1ld. For a scholarlystudy on this idea in Kabbala,see MordecaiPachter,"Circles and Lines The Historyof an Idea,"Da'at 18 (1987) 59-90 [Hebrew]. X5Mendel Piekarzargues(Studies in Bratzlav Hasidism [Jerusalem: MosadBialik, 1972] 21-55) thatR. Nahman infatuated was withheresy;aftera fire destroyed housein Bratzlav, his R. Nahmandecidedto settle in Uman,a Ukranian town knownfor its Jewishheretics.When he firstarrivedin Umanhe stayedin the houseof a well-knownmember theJewishEnlightof enmentratherthan in the residenceof the local rabbi.Traditionalinterpreters explain this strangephenomenon arguingthat R. Nah. by man intentionallyengagedthese hereticsto redeem the divine sparksembeddedin their souls, fulfilling the Lurianic directiveof "descent for the sakeof ascent."This ideabecamea centralfeaturein the thought Sabbatai of Zvi, who proclaimedhimself messiahin the seventeenthcentury.For a discussionon the similarities betweenthesetwo figures,see Yehuda Liebes,"Ha-Tikkunha-Kelali of R. Nah. of Bratzlav man and its Sabbatean Links,"in idem, Studies in Jewish Myth and Jewish Messianism (trans. BatyaStein; Albanv:SUNY Press, 1993) 115-48. I6See,for example,R. Nahmanof Cheryn(in his commentary Likkutei MoHaRan ento titled Parpera'ot le Hokhma [Brooklyn:n. p., 1976] 37a) who comments:"Weare forcedto state that God removedHimself fromthat place [thatis, the place of the gimzum]. In truth, however,in this place thereis also divinity since therecan be notbingwithoutHim. Rather, godliness is hiddenandconcealedthereso muchthatit is likenedto an 'emptyvoid' in order

SHAUL MAGID

501

lation of the cosmic void reflects R. Nahman'sempiricalfindings, placing him constantly on the verge of faithlessness and despair.l7Rather than of to succumbing the temptation fatalism,however,R. Nahmansaw in the process of creation an antidote for his own situation;humanbeings can and move beyond the void by first recreating then possessingit, retreating from our own creationas God did in the kabbalisticreadingof the biblical R. accountof creation.In such a manner, Nahmaninvitedhumansto reproemotionallythe entirecreativeprocess and thus to utilize the void, as duce was the case in creation, as a constructivetool in the search for divine 18 presence. most explicit and developed statementof the void in R. Nahman's The MoHaRan1.64, wherehe describedhis typolthoughtappearsin Likkutei ogy of heresy:
Knowthat thereare two types of heresy.Thereis one heresy which is wisdom.... [The claims ofl this heresy may derivedfrom extraneous wisdom,broughtaboutby for they come fromextraneous be answered, the breakingof the vessels.... God can be found there, if one looks for Him and seeks Him out.... Thereforeit is said, "Knowwhat to answerthe heretic"[m. 'Abot2.14].... God is, as it were, inside all them. But there must remainsome space the worlds, yet he surrounds for between His immanenceand His transcendence, if not, the world
of This readingindeedreflects the classical interpretation to createa place for the creation." See, for example,Zemah,Zohar ha-Raki'a, 23a-b. In my view, howof ;.im:um. all theories man in Likkutei MoHaRan ever, it deviates sharplyfromthe way this void is used by R. Nah. 79d (1.64). man'steachingsas the basis for theirrespective GreenandWeiss used R. Nah. 17Although of appraisals his personality,I do not intendto take a similarstance.Rather, psychoanalytic teachingsas indicativeof a JewishspiriI find the spiritualstruggleimplicitin R. Nahman's tuality foundedupon the real possibility of unbelief. In my view, his strugglemirrorsthe spiritualstrugglewere not deemed spirituallife of Pascal, whose conversionand subsequent Pascalfor Guardini, as by his biographers psychoticor depressive.See, for example,Romano & New York:Herder Herder,1966)45-88; andJeanMesnard, Our Time (trans.B. Thompson; Universityof AlabamaPress, 1965). Alabama: Pascal (trans.Claudeand MarciaAbraham; I8Thenotion that the affirmationof the void can lead to a renewedsense of religious meaningis strikinglysimilarto Nietzsche'sstancethat nihilism can be restorative.See, for example, KarenLeslie Carr,The Banalization of Nihilism: Twentieth Century Responses to Meaninglessness (Albany,NY: SUNYPress, 1992);Carrstates,"Suchquestioning[thequesstate;fromsuchabysses,fromsuchseveresickness, tioningof truth],however,is a temporary one returnsnewborn." One requiresa more'delicatetaste of joy,' and finds within a second that Nietzsche regardednihilism as a dangerousinnocence.Thus we see here confirmation event, somethingnot only useful, butnecessaryfor the and potentiallyrestorative redemptive as man,restoration mystical renewedexperienceof the world"(p. 48). Of course,for R. Nah. experiencearisesonly throughfaith. ForNietzsche,accordingto Carr,the healingqualityof and nihilismis thatit finally liberatesmanfromthe "sick"stateof dependence impotence.As betweenhasidismandexistentialism,theircommonbond is the case with most comparisons not is only in their sharedassumptions, in theirresolutions.

502

HARVARD THEOLOGICAL REVIEW

could not exist.... There is [thus] a second type of heresy, made up of wisdom, which is really no wisdom at all. The perplexitiesand questionsof this heresy come from the void (halal).They have about them the qualityof silence, because no intellect nor languagecan resolve them. Creationcame about throughthe word.... In language there is intellect... languagedefines all things.... But in the void which surrounds worlds and is completelyempty, there is no lanall guage.19. . Therefore questionswhich arise,they are silent.20 . the

In this synopsis of a much more complex text, R. Nahmanintroduced the basic elements of his readingof the void. The person of faith faces two challenges.The first challengeconfrontingthe one who seeks divine wisdom is the heresy rootedin the finite creation,the productof the breaking of the cosmic vessels in LurianicKabbala(shviratha-kelim).In this heresy, as in the finite world, God exists, and by finding the divine element in the philosophicalquestionone can resolve the crisis of faith. The challenge is to uncoverthe divine element hidden in the shardsof the apparently hereticalquestion,revealingthat it is not heresy at all. R. Nahman believed that this type of heresy was not compelling for the seeker of divine truth,but only satisfyingfor one whose spiritualjourneyis limited to this finite world. On this, R. Nahman stated, "Thereis a difference betweenthese [two] questions.Thereis a questionto which one can understandthe answer.On this [type] of questionthe mishnastates, 'Knowwhat to answerthe heretic'[m. 'Abot 2.14]. There is also a question,however, to which it is impossiblefor a humanbeing to find an answer.''2l This is the second challenge.Apparently unsatisfiedwith uncoveringthe divine in the first question,R. Nahmanset for himself a muchmoreformidable task: he soughtnot only the God in creation the immanent God but the transcendent God as well. This search for the transcendent God forced R. Nahmanto confrontthe initial perceptionof God's absence. The question of the first heretic is resolved by coming to understand apparentabthe
19Theterm '4language"here refers to the noncommunicative language of the Sefer Yegirah, where the Hebrew letters are viewed as the fabric of the cosmic world. Therefore, R. Nahman suggested that the void is the remnant of divine contraction (gimzum) that was not filled with the finite form of God in the supernal worlds. He drew his notion of language in this case from m. 'Abot 5.1, "With ten utterances God created the world." On the nature of language in Sefer Yegirah, see Ithamar Gruenwald, "Some Critical Notes on the First Part of Sefer Yezira," REJ 132 (1973) 475-512; and Joseph Dan, Three Types of Ancient Jewish Mysticism (Cincinnati: University of Cincinnati Press, 1984) 16-24. 20See R. Nah. man of Bratzlav, Likkutei MoHaRan (New York: n. p., 1976) 78b-79c. I used portions of Green's translation (Tormented Master, 312). 2IR. Nahman of Bratzlav, Likkutei MoHaRan l9d (1.62). See also 20b (2.12). For a study on the implications of the "question" in R. Nah. man, see Joseph Weiss, "The 'Question' in the Teachings of R. Nah. man," in Piekarz, Studies in Bratz.lawHasidism, 109-49 [Hebrew].

SHAUL MAGID

503

sence of God as an illusion. The questionof the second hereticcannotbe resolved rationally. and history,the dichotomybetweenthe immanent transcenThroughout dent God permeatesJewish theology, both rationalistand mystical. For example, the mystics of the Lurianicschool have openly stated that the One could argue that God, or eyn sof, is not their concern.22 transcendent has no ontic status,but is only a psychologicalor empiricalbarrier the void God of creation. the thatseparates eternalGod (eyn sof) fromthe immanent all of creationis divine. The distinctionbetweenGod and worldis Thatis, only the result of humanlimitations.Althoughthis may very well be the position of R. Nahman,close readingsof his teachingsyield anotherpossibility. The anguish and anxiety that permeatedhis life as well as his discoursesuggestedthat his experienceswere not of the absenceof God's presence but the presenceof God's absence;the void is not a lacunabetween the two dimensionsof God, but the possibility of the nonexistence God an illusion. This God, which makesthe immanent of the transcendent came to such a conclusion;his life's work is not to say that R. Nahman to attempted avert such heresy and disbelief. He began, however,with the that the hereticalquestionmust be takenseriouslyif it is to be assumption this overcome.Moreover,only by confronting questioncan one achieve an God.23 experienceof the transcendent Whoevercontemplatesthe void not as the absence of divine presence, but the experienceof divine absence, is confrontedby the second heretic, whose question is rooted in this void. In this case, the humanintellect is rendereduseless as the question is no longer intellectualbut experiential. Regardingthis, R. Nahmanstated, "Whena man follows his intellect and
22This was not so in the earlier Kabbala. Gershom Scholem (in R. J. Z. Werblowsky, ed., Origins of the Kabbalah [trans. Alan Arkush; Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1987] 431) states, "From 1250 onward, a degree of uncertainty existed among kabbalists with regard to such important questions as whether the first sefirah itself was not to be considered the transcendent diety, or whether the sefirot were to be regarded as identical with the substance of the diety, or merely organs of its manifestation." This was not the case for the Lurianists, for whom eyn sof is clearly beyond the scope of human inquiry; see also Daniel Chanan Matt, "Ayin: The Concept of Nothingness in Jewish Mysticism," in Robert K. C. Forman, ed., The Problem of Pure Conciousness (New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990) 121-59; and Moshe Idel, "Onthe Concept of Zimzumin Kabbalaand its Research"MekhkareiYerushalayim 10 (1992) 59-l 13, esp. 60-68 [Hebrew]. 23R.Nah.man's interest in heresy was not limited to the theoretical. Although his desire to settle in Uman at the end of his life is shrouded in mystery, one theory is that he was drawn to the Jewish heretics in the city, with whom he developed an ongoing relationship. For studies that deal with the move to Uman and R. Nah.man's relationship to the Maskilim, see Hayyim Lieberman, "Rabbi Nah.man Bratslaver and the Maskilim in Uman," Yivo Annual of Jewish Social Studies 6 (1951) 287-301; Piekarz, "The Episode of Uman in the Life of R. Nahman of Bratzlav," Studies In Bratzlav Hasidism, 21-55 [Hebrew]; and Green, Tormented Master, 25 1-65.

504

HARVARD THEOLOGICAL REVIEW

mindhe can fall prey to manymistakesand barriers can come to great and evil, God forbid."24 concludefrom this statementthat R. Nahmanvied To for a retreatto "simplefaith"as the only solution to the humanepistemic dilemma is, in my view, premature. The challenge of the void poses a particular dangerto the spiritualseeker. Yet one's desire for God should not be destroyedby this ominouschallenge;unless one passes throughthis dark forest, the quest for the transcendent God remainsunanswered.R. Nahmanstatedthatthe generalsolutionis faith ('emunah), this mustbe but understood practicallyin terms of what R. Nahmanin other places called silence and the primalwordless scream25 two appliedmethodsof attaining the necessaryemotionalstate in orderfor the languageof faith to be constructive. R. Nahman's view of faith is complex,and a full treatment his highly of nuancedapproach beyondthe scope of this presentstudy.It is important, is however, to note that he spoke of two distinct types of faith, the first a "simple" faith, the second a "dialectical" faith. R. Nahmanmaintained that the first type of faith should be that of everyoneexcept the zaddikof the generation,a group that includedR. Nahman,one presumes.It is a faith that rejectsphilosophicalspeculationand negates the use of reason as the matrixof religiousworship.26 Nahmanstronglyarguedthatthe one who R. adheresto simplefaith mustdiscardreason:"Truly,reasonoughtto be cast aside and all cleverness discarded God must be worshippedin simplicity."27 This simple faith is highly antirational, even in the devotionalworld of hasidic piety. The second type of faith requiresinteractionwith the heretic,a knowledgeof philosophy,and thus the constantstruggleto overcome the hereticalquestion.28 This second, dialecticaltype of faith brings forth sufferingand anguish;it is the faith of the zaddik,for only he can truly overcomethe absence of God and reach the experienceof the tran24R. Nahman of Bratzlav, Likkmtei MoHaRanl9d (2.12). 25Ibid., 9b-c (1.8). 26The simple faith of the Hasid is perhaps the faith in the zaddikand the ability of the gaddik,who exhibits the second type of faith, to redeem him from his spiritual malaise. See R. Nahman's image (Likkutei MoHaRan 80a-81b [1.65]) of the "master of the garden" (the gaddik)who must nurture the "trees outside the garden" (the Hasidim), whom the zaddik ultimately brings back to the garden from which they have been exiled. This lesson has been translated and published as a pamphlet by the Breslov Research Institute; see Gardenof the Souls (trans. Avraham Greenbaum; Monsey, NY: Breslov Research Institute: n.d.). See also R. Nahman of Bratzlav, Sihot ha-Ran(Jerusalem: Breslav Publishers, 1961) 141. 27R. Nahman of Bratzlav, Likkutei MoHaRan15 (2.5). This battle against reason for the masses and the interaction with reason (tikkun) the gaddikis developed in Liebes, "Hafor Tikkun Ha-Kelaliof R. Nah.man of Bratzlav," 1 15-51, esp. 124. 28Fora discussion of the notion of dialectical faith in R. Nah.man see Green, Tormented Master, 285-330; and Joseph Dan, TheHasidic Story:Its Historyand Development (Jerusalem: Keter, 1975) 144-71 [Hebrew].

SHAUL MAGID

505

in however,thatthe faithpresented R. Nahman's It scendentGod.29 appears, lessons is a dialecticalone and not a simple faith that would retreatfrom of with the void. For the adherent simplefaith, the whole any confrontation is exegetical enterprise largelyuseless, as is the possibilityof experiencing God. Hence, the patternof using the primal scream and the transcendent prayer,which I shall now address,should open one's consciousnessto the new dimensionof God'spresencebeyondGod'sabsence,but this patternis only relevantfor the one who dares to take the road of the dialectic. In numerousplaces R. Nahmanstressedthat the nonverbalscreamhas the potentialto breakthroughthe silence which is the experientialconfrontationwith divine absence of God and thus yield an experience of clvlne presence.
. .

Sometimesit is thatconsciousness(mohin)anddivine everflow(shefa) are hidden in the dimensionof pregnancy(ibur).30 At that time, the This human scream is wonderful,whetherin prayer or study.... screamis in the place of the screamof the shekhina,as if the shekhina At is screaming. thatpoint,the [hidden]mohinare born[revealed].3l
explicit directionsnot to becomeinvolvedwith this some examplesof R. Nahman's 29For Breslav (Jerusalem: of dialecticalfaith, see R. Nathan(Sternharz) NemerovHayyeiMoHaRan man ot Publishers,1976) 48-55; andSih, ha-Ran.R. Nah. stated("Devotionto God,"175-76): "Andhe spoke to me aboutthe ways of servingGod, whichusuallyentailgreatsuffering.... He then said, But this does not mean you, since you always must be joyful." R. Nahman can himself stated,however,thateven the ;.addik experiencejoy once he recognizesthathis 80c-d [ 1.65]). For a developown sufferingis due to his lack of vision (Likkutei'MoHaRan mentof the notionof sufferingandthe tragicfate of the gaddikas a necessarycomponentin MoHaRan 37c Parpera'otle Hokhma on Likkutei of healingthe world,see R. Nahman Cheryn, notes thatthe lesson in questionwas deliveredjust beforethe death ( 1.65), wherethe author felt man'sson, ShlomoEfrayim.R. Nahmanapparently thathis son's sufferingwas of R. Nah. version the fate of the gaddikwho hadto perishin orderto redeemthe world.A moreelaborate of this episode can be found in AryehKaplan,Until the Mashiach:RabbiNachman'sBiogBreslov ResearchInstitute, Jerusalem: (ed. David Shapiro; raphy,an AnnotatedChronology man'sfirst son, ShlomoEfrayim,was bornthe 1985) 121-23. Accordingto this source,R. Nah. The lesson on the tuberculosis. of springof 1805 anddied the summer 1806 aftercontracting necessity of the sufferingof the gaddikwas said beside his son's deathbed,days before his untimelypassing. is ('ibur)in LurianicKabbala a centralprinciplein the processof idea 3()The of pregnancy and Thereare threestages of cosmic pregnancy, each serves as a gestationperiodfor tikkun. the brokenfragmentsof the supernalworld;these are bornas "new"stages of conciousness See, for example, Vital, (mohin) and then nurtured(yenika) until they reach maturation. in ha-Kelalim," E; Hayyim,9c, lOa;and idem, Mevo She'arim12a-b (2.3.2). See "Sha'ar also R. Jacob Hayyim Zemah'sgloss to Mevo She'arim 12a (2.3.2) no. 2. For a scholarly "Smallness Pachter, see Kabbala, Mordecai in discussionon the notionof pregnancy Lurianic 10 Yerushalayim (1992) 171-210 [Hebrew]. Mekhkarei andGreatnessin LurianicKabbala," 30b MoHaRan ( 1.21). See also 11lb ( 1.198):"When manof Bratzlav,Likkutei 31R. Nah. as one screamsto God,they say to him 'go forward,' it is written(Exod 14:15), 'thenthe Lord Interestingly, said to Moses, Why do you cry out to me? Tell the Israelitesto go forward.'"

506

HARVARD THEOLOGICAL REVIEW

The scream serves as a midwife, as it were, which, reflecting the exilic character the shekhina,yields a new level of consciousness. This new of by mohin diminishesthe alienationof the worshipper revealingthe divine overflow (shefa). ("hoveringlight"),32 In a complex discussion concerningthe makkifim which R. Nahmandefinedas a level of consciousnesshoveringoutsidethe realm of humanexperience,he stated:
question[whichconcernsus] is how do we birththis The fundamental from its concealed state? Afterward,when it consciousness(mohin) consciousness"] the ["external emerges,how can we integrate makkifim has How this is accomplished alreadybeen inside [ourconsciousness]? well explained. That is, by way of the scream of Torah study and prayerwe can birth this consciousnessfrom its concealed place. By which meansof the sanctityof the seven lights of the Templemenorah of representthe sanctification our eyes by not gazing upon forbidden things; also by sanctifyingthe mouth,the nose and the ears we can inside.33 drawthese makkifim

case, the scream is not wordless but rathera mode of In this particular verbalexpressionthat allows the wordsof study or prayerto give birthto a new state of consciousness.This then becomes integratedinto the indiwhich then must be integratedas vidual only to introducenew makkifim, well. In anotherinstance,the screamdoes not containwordsbut opens up the possibilityfor words. Discussing the trial of sexual desire, which faces each individual,R. Nahmanstated:
R. Nah.man transformed the apparently negative implications of Moses' scream in the biblical narrative to something that enables one to "go forward," that is, to give birth to conciousness (mohin) and thus pray. For other examples of this, see R. Nahman of Bratzlav, Lukkutei MoHaRan 32d (1.22) 50d (1.36) 89d-9Ob (1.75). 32R. Nah.man's use of makkifim is quite complex; in Lurianic Kabbala this term generally refers to light that first retreated from vessels of creation before they shattered and then descended into the depths of the void. These lights remain undamaged and subsequently are utilized in the process of tikkun by slowly entering and exiting the broken vessel, each time building the vessel until it will be able to sustain a total integration of the light. R. Nahman used this concept to illuminate the slow development of human consciousness. Green states (Tormented Master, 302-4) that the term makkifim in R. Nah.man's thought serves as the core of his dialectical faith as opposed to simple faith. In Lurianic Kabbala the "dialectical" phenomenon in the cosmic process of tikkuncan be found in Et: Hayyim Palace l, Palace of Adam Kadmon, Seventh Gate, the Gate of Mate ve lo Mate, 24-30. R. Nahman used this motif explicitly in one instance in Likkutei MofiIaRan (36d [1.24]), where he stressed the impossibility of apprehending the light of eyn sof, even by means of the dialectical process of mate be lo mate except via simha ("joyousness"). 33Ibid., 31d (1.21).

SHAUL MAGID

507

The principletest that man is confrontedwith is the test of sexual desire. This [desire]is embodiedin the seventy nationsswhich is embodiedin the notionof other ('aher), anotherGod. Whenone screams, as it is written,"Mysoul cries for You, O Gods'(Ps 42:1), one must to screamseventytimes, not less [corresponding the seventynations].34 Then the secretsof the Torahwill be open to him and the hiddenwill be revealed to him, new souls and Torah will be born. That [new] Torahis embodiedin the totality of the souls of Israel. It will reveal the faces of Torahwhich were, until now, concealedin the extraneous matter(kelippot).35

In each of the three cases cited, the screamdiscloses new possibilities. In the second text, a screamwithoutwordsbreaksapartthe silence, which as is represented both the root of sexualdesire and idolatry.In the previous to text, the use of the word'aher-literally, "other"-appears have a double God"or idolaeither"another meaning.As R. Nahmanindicated,it implies heretic R. Elisha try. It is also, however, the name given to the talmudic b. Avuiah, whose statement,"thereis no judge and there is no justice,"36 resoundswith the heresyof divine absencewith which R. Nahmangrappled his throughout teaching.Accordingto my readingof R. Nahman,Elisha b. Avuiah'smistake was not in his perceptionof the absenceof God, but in his inabilityto completethe creativeprocess beginning but not endingnatureof God beyond the with gimzumin orderto apprehend transcendent the absence.The hereticalnatureof this tannaiticsage is that he initiated a process that he did not complete. Perhapsthe silence of divine absence R. Nahmanlikened to the questionof the second hereticdiscussedearlier is the very root of the heresy of the rabbinic sage and is transcended throughthe scream, or the voice that precedes creation,the scream that enables the words of creationto emerge. As the world is createdthrough (m. and gimzum this is followed by the "tenutterances" 'Abot 1:5), human gimzumis accomplishedby the scream, which is followed by words of study and prayer.The scream brings one past the darkness,throughthe void to the presenceof God as creatorby giving birth to a new state of consciousness, moving from the wordless to the word.37This scream is
34ForR. Nah.man, the seventy nations are synonymous with idolatry and the force of evil. See, for example, ibid., 13a (1.10) where the Gentile as idol worshipper is likened to the "power of death" in Gen. R. 9. 3sR. Nahman of Bratzlav, Likkutei MoHaRan 50d-51a (1.36); my italics. This statement is not part of the original lesson, but a later addition by the editor. These additions, most of which are statements made by R. Nah.man himself, are not uncommon in Likkutei MoHaRan. See Weiss, Studies in Bratzlav Hasidism, 251-77. 36b. Ber. 15b. 37In another passage (Likkutei MoHaRan 9b-c [1.8]), R. Nahman likened the creative process to the breath (ruah) of God, again an illusion to a sound that has no linguistic formu-

508

HARVARD THEOLOGICAL REVIEW

intendedto force the individualto confrontdivine absenceand to produce a way beyond that absence.38 typical hasidic style, R. Nahmanargued In that one must confrontthe cosmic emptiness with one's own emptiness, with the very fabric of the void within oneself.39Yet this void is not an intrinsicpart of the individualbut must be createdby the person,just as the void of the gimgum created God.Through was by silenceandthe wordless scream-through that which comes before prayer and throughprayeritself R. Nahmanbelieved that he could delve into the void and emerge unscathed.The mechanicsof this process must now be addressed. In Likkutei MoHaRan R. Nahman 1.5, addressed issue froma slightly this differentperspective.The wordless scream discussed above becomes the image of thunder,which empties the heartof insincerity literally,crookedness-in orderto experiencejoy.
The fundamental place of joy is in the heart,as it is written(Ps 4:8), "Youputjoy into my heart."It is impossiblefor the heartto be joyous until it removesthe crookedness whichis in the heart;thatit shouldbe a "straight heart"(yishrei lev). At thatpoint he will meritjoy, as it is written(Ps 97:12), "O you righteous[straighthearted],rejoice in the Lord."The crookednessin the heartis removedby thunderas it says in TalmudBerakhot (59b), "Thunder not createdexcept to remove was crookednessfrom the heart."Thunder corresponds the voice which to comes forth strongly in prayer.From this [strong voice] thunderis
created.40

This text likens the heavenlyvoice of thunderwhich, as the talmudicpassage suggests, causes the heartto become straightby arousingone to fear the power of God, to the voice that emergesin prayer.The individual,by being attentiveto his or her own voice-not the words of prayer,but the power of the voice itself enablesthe heartto become "straight" thus and experiences (simha).Like the primalscreamdiscussedearlier,the voice joy of prayer in this passage empties the heart. The emptying of the heart enablesone to be joyous; it allows one's heartand mindto interactin order to filter reason throughthe chambersof the heart, the place of faith, and
lation: "How great is the groan and sigh of a Jew, for this [causes] the perfection of his deficiencies. By means of the aspect of breath, which is the spirit of life, the world was created.... The newness of the world comes about through breath [ruah, meaning both breath and spirit]." This breath or spirit is depicted here as a sigh or groan that shares the nonlinguistic character of the scream that precedes linguistic prayer. 38Seefor example in Yehudit Kook, R. Nahman of Bratzlav: Studies in His Writings(Jerusalem: Mosad Y. L. Girsh, 1973) 169-75 [Hebrew] . 39Thisidea is strikingly similar to Carl G. Jung's notion of the "shadow" or the "dark self." See his Psychology and Religion (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1938) 93-95; and idem, Man and His Symbols (New York: Doubleday, 1964) 168-76. 40R. Nahman of Bratzlav, Likkutei MoHaRan 5c (1.5).

SHAUL MAGID

509

I thus to experience the true nature of the mitzvot,the commandments. furtherin orderto view how R. Nahmanconmust now develop this idea tinued to deepen his reading of gimzumas a human act that opens the God. possibility for the experienceof the transcendent 1.49, R. Nahmanbegan a lengthy discussion on In LikkuteiMoHaRan of prayerwith what seems to be a reiteration his view of gimzum.There noting. R. Nahmanstatedthat the conare, however,subtlenuancesworth for cept of eyn sof (God as infinite) is a prerequisite creation,yet cannot of creationis, as R. Nahmanput it, sustaincreationas such. If the purpose of "to revealthe glory of God,"this recognition God can only occurthrough hold attributesof God's finite presof the fragmentation worlds that can is, ence.4l This frameworkof "worldsand attributes" by definition, antitheticalto God as eternal(eyn so.f).In this case, the void (halal) is not the place empty of God but a place so full of God that God cannotbe recogby as of The ontic character gimzum presented the Lurianic nizedby humans. God's absence and God's phenomenologically. school is now interpreted eternalpresence become identical.42 The process of this act of creationis now read into the act of prayer. Prayermust be precededby a desire for God. Yearningfor God is viewed as an existential responseto the experienceof God's absence.
desire in the heartof a Jew which of Fromthe grandeur the unbridled reachesto the eternalnatureof God (eyn sof), it wouldnot be possible to performany act of devotionandthus one wouldbe unableto reveal of Fromthe grandeur this pureheart,it (middah). any positive attribute is not possible to do anything!This can be likened to the fact that in the beginningof the creativeprocess, there was no room for creation becauseeverythingwas eternal(eyn sof). The creationof the world is the creation of attributes(middot).Therefore,it is necessary for a desire in his heartwhich personto contract(limit) the greatunbridled and is eyn sof, in orderto serve God accordingto gradations attributes
41Ibid., 57a (1.49). "The fundamental purpose of creation is to reveal God's kingship. This is impossible without the creation of worlds [fragmentation] for there is no King without a people. Therefore, gimzum was necessary to [create] the empty void, to create a place for the worlds in order to reveal his kingship" (ibid., 57c [ 1.49]). This is a classic definition of the purpose of creation. R. Nah.man's innovation emerged when he likened the eternal nature of God to the unbridled emotions of the heart, and the gimzum to the human limitation of those emotions, which creates a void and thus desire in the heart. 42Fora discussion of the ontic character of the Lurianic system, see Karl Erich Grozinger, "Principles and Aims in Lurianic Cosmology," Mekhkarei Yerushalayim 10 (1992) 37-46 [Hebrew]. R. Nahman's reading of gimzum here is less psychological and more phenomenological in that his concern is how ;.imzum, as the absence of God, serve as a foundation for one's perception of the external world. His phenomenological reading retains the ontic character of ;.imzum and uses it to legitimate both his vision of a world without God and his belief in a world full of God.

510

HARVARD THEOLOGICAL REVIEW

(middot).... When one limits the light in one's heart, an empty void remains.... It is in that void where good attributes are revealed. They are the secret of the creation of worlds in the divine void (of God).43

This readingappearsto be based on the oft-quotedrabbinicdictum that prayeris the service of the heart.HereR. Nahmansuggestedthat the heart before prayer is like God before creation. It is the place of unbridled emotions incapableof sustainingany form and thus potentiallyvery destructive. It is also filled with unbridleddesire yet devoid of yearning since, like the eyn sof, it containsno distinctionand thus has nothing to yearn for.44R. Nahmansuggestedthat prayer,like creation,must be preceded by gimzum,that is, an emptinessin the heart,which will house the human desire to pray. Invoking Ps 109:22, "My heart is empty (halal) within me,"45R. Nahman stated, "Prayerof the heart is likened to the revelationof God'skingdom[thatis, the purposeof creation],from within the empty void, into the divine attributesand the worlds."46 One must create the void of divine absencein one's own heartin orderfor prayerto be effectual,just as God createdhis absencein orderto make way for his finite presence. Whatmust be avoidedare the two oppositepoles which pose the same danger.First, one must not allow the emotionsembeddedin one's heartto go unattended, thus avoidingconfrontations divine absence.This is the of
43R. Nahman of Bratzlav, Likkutei MoHaRan 57c(1.49). 44This idea reflects a similar distinction which Paul Tillich made in his discussion on the nature of the philosopher (Biblical Religion and the Search for Ultimate Reality [Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1955] 12): "We are a mixture of being and non-being. This 11, is precisely what is meant when we say we are finite. It is man in his finitude who asks the question of being. He who is infinite does not ask the question of being, for, as infinite, he has the complete power of being. He is identical with it; he is God. And a being which does not realize that it is finite (and in our actual experience that is every being except man) cannot ask, because it cannot go beyond itself and its limits." Echoing Heidegger, Tillich argued that the notion of nonbeing is the fundamental principle for philosophy (what Heidegger called "thinking" [Denken]). R. Nah. man suggested that the void perhaps his confrontation with nonbeingis the necessary prerequisite for an experience of the transcendent God. 4sR. Nah.man used this verse in another context which corrresponds to the present discussion. In Likkutei MoHaRan 6b ( 1.6) he develops his notion of repentance as the transformation from anger to passive submission: "The fundamental aspect of repentance is that one should hear an embarrassing [remark] and remain silent." Anger is likened to the blood in the left side of the heart (gevurah), which is the seat of the evil inclination. The reaction of anger is then the reaction of the evil inclination. "The fixing for this is to turn anger (dam, literally 'blood') to submission (dom, 'silence')" (6d [ 1.6l). Thus the heart is emptied of the blood and left silent or vacant. At this juncture R. Nahman again invoked the verse in Psalms, "My heart is empty within me" (109:22), to illustrate the success of repentance in destroying the evil inclination in the heart. Although in this case the emptiness is not the absence of Cod but the absence of anger, the emptiness in the heart is still seen as constructive. 46R. Nah.man of Bratzlav, LikkutecMoHaRan 6b ( 1.6).

SHAUL MAGID

511

realm of eyn sof where creation,prayerand divine service ('avodah) are the impossible.Second,one must avoid only confronting emptinessand not the creativeprocessby actuallyelevatingthe yearningfor God completing heresy in that one will in prayer.The first dangerwill lead to antinomian of justify the performance mizvot since one lacks the never be able to The seconddangerwill yield to fatalism:the properyearningto find God.47 overcomeby the absence, seeing no possibility of individualwill become redemption,and thus will be trappedin the snares of the second heretic. Eitherinaction or incompleteaction representsthe two dangersthat confront the second seeker. When the unbridledeternalnaturein the human heart is not confined and directedor when the gimzum,which createsthe potentialfor God's presence, does not look to a renewedflow of divine presence,the individualconfrontsthe secondform of heresy, which cannot be resolved by way of reason. with the void, which How, then, does one overcomethis confrontation process as well as the appearshere as a necessary step in the creative 2.12, R. Nahmanbegan MoHaRan In for initialprerequisite prayer? Likkutei his discussion on doubt by defining the place of doubt as rooted in the (ma'amarsatum)that precededcreation. "closed utterance"
After (it has been determinedthat) everythingwas created for the glory of God, it is foundthatGod is the root of all of creation.All that God createdhe createdfor (the revelation)of His glory. It follows that the glory of God is the root (telos)48 of all of creation.Even thoughit is all (rooted)in the One, creation(is divided)into parts.Eachparthas dimensionof his glory, which a its own (way of manifesting) particular is its source.This is the meaningof the mishnahin 'Abot(5.1), "Inten
is issue of antinomianism complexandquite subtlein hasidicthought.In this case, 47The I have suggested that for R. Nahmancreatingthe void in one's own heart allows one to experiencethe absenceof Godandthusto yearnfor God'spresence.This impliesthatwithout thatactionthe individualwill concludethathe or she andGod aretrulyone. Thus,any action will be God's will. AlthoughR. Nahmanhimself never reachedsuch a conclusion, it was concern.Fora discussionof the possible connectionsbetweenBratzlav of apparently primary of heresy,see Leibes,"Ha-TikkunHa-Kelali of R. Nahman Bratzlav," and hasidism theSabbatean esp. pp. 128-50. See also Green,Tormented Master, 91. For a moregeneraldiscussion,see Quietistic Elements in Eighteenth CenturyHasidic Thought(JerusaRivkaSchatz-Uffenheimet, lem: Magnes, 1968) 54-77 lHebrew];Scholem,The Messianic Idea in Judaism, 78-142; and Henochof Radzin The in ShaulMagid,"Hasidism Transition: HasidicIdeologyof R. Gershon in Light of Medieval Jewish Philosophy and Kabbala"(Ph.D. diss., BrandeisUniversity, 1994) 474-523. as of rendering the Hebrewtermshoresh (literally,"root"or "source") telos in this 48My case follows the logic of R. Nahman'sargument.Earlierhe suggestedthat the purposeof creationis the revelationof God'skingship.Herehe used the termkavod ("glory")insteadof Similarly,in this instanceI believe thathe used shoresh to meanpurmalkhut ("kingship"). pose or telos.

512

HARVARD THEOLOGICAL REVIEW

utterancesthe world was created."He could have createdthe world with one utterance. orderto makerewardand punishment In possible, however,he createdit with ten utterances. Each utterance containsits own particular dimensionof (God's)glory.49

In kabbalistic jargon,the closed utterance the root of the ten utterances is that created the world, an idea originally expressed in m. 'Abot 5.1.5 Accordingto LurianicKabbala, closed utterance rootedin the world the is of creationwheredistinctionhas yet to take place.5l This closed utterance gives birth to the ten fragmentedutteranceswith which God createdthe world.Mizvot,humanactions,or wordsof humanspeech(dibur),can serve as catalysts for humansto maintaina relationshipwith the utterances,or supernalspheres,which connect the finite with the infinite. Words,however, that are the productof creationwithinthe void of God-words, however, that are by definitionthe productof creation,which fill the void of God cannot overcome the heresy that is rooted in the void itself. This challengecan only be met by an expression is wordless for R. Nahman, that the primal screamor silence that is the ultimateexpressionof faith. The cosmic closed utterancein the process of creation is thus likened to the nonverbal preverbal or stateof human expression. Ironically, speech,whether Torahstudyor prayer,which in the realmof God'sfinite presenceconnects one to God as an answerto his infinite absence,leads to a verificationof divine absence.For R. Nahmanthe utterance words(dibur),being rooted of in the world of creationwhere the fragmentation the divine has already of takenplace, poses a challengeto the spiritualseeker;thus, if humanspeech is not connectedback to its sourceby subsequent wordsof prayer,fatalism andfaithlessness result.The wordsof prayer alone arenot enoughto achieve this goal, however.Wordsdiffuse the initial expressionof the soul and can only be productiveif they remainrooted in the soul even after they are spoken. Thus, the words of prayercomplete a circle that begins with the wordless expression of the soul respondingto the realizationof divine
absence.52

49R. Nahman of Bratzlav, Likkutei MoHaRan 12d-20a (2.12). 5For an interesting and somewhat provocative kabbalistic and hasidic reading of this mishnah, see R. Yizhak Isaac Yehuda Yehiel Safran of Kamarno, Nozar Hesed (1855; reprinted Jerusalem: n. p., 1982) 80-81. slThe notion of the closed utterance as the aspect of the infinite dimension of God that is present but undetectable in the created world is not uncommon in hasidic thought. See, for example, R. Shnuer Zalman of Laidy, Torah Or (Brooklyn: Kehot, 1975) 91b-c. In this text the "closed utterance" is termed "closed consciousness" (mohin satum). 52See R. Nahman of Bratzlav, Likkutei MoHaRan 80b-c (1.65). R. Nahman apparently based his ideas on Sefer Yezirah 1.7 (Jerusalem: Levin Epstein, 1965) 28a: "Their end is unified with their beginning and their beginning is unified with their end." See Moses Nah. manides' commentary on that statement; he illuminates the circular nature of the cosmic order in rela-

SHAUL MAGID

513

To overcomedivine absence, one must reach beyond creationby creating the abyss in oneself throughemotionalgimzum and then retreatfrom the realm of divine absence that entices the person of faith with the retreatis not a denial of philosophicalquestion.R. Nahman's unresolvable with the absenceof God. Rather,it is a stark the experientialconfrontation affirmationof it. This affirmationrequiresa retreatfrom finitude to the momentbefore creation,to relive the gimzum, confrontthe absencethat is the productof gimzum, and then utilize the void to overcomethe second heresy which entices humansto solve its speculativequestionby using the tools of the finite nature of God. Thus, without denying the existential to realityof divine absence,R. Nahmanattempted lead his readersthrough the windingalleys of his own skepticalsoul only to arriveat the iron gate with God's absence, where God is truly absent;in this very confrontation one can locate the key to enter into the palace of God's eternalpresence. In summary,R. Nahman suggested an innovativereading of Lurianic gimzumwhich froze the process of contractionand emanationin orderto readingof the void. As statedearlier,whetherR. posit a phenomenological Nahmanheld that this void has any ontologicalstatusis not centralin his argument.He had little interest in building a cosmology and used the model only as it served his existential and phenomenoZoharic/Lurianic logical needs. For R. Nahman,the void exists because humansexperience it. The question is then not whetherit really exists or is just an illusion resultingfrom our humanlimitations.R. Nahmanshowedlittle patiencefor either ontology or epistemology. He sought to resolve the empiricalabthe sence of God in orderto avoid the heresythathe felt threatens one who adopts his theory of dialectical faith. Workingwithin the frameworkof worldthatemerged worldandthe mundane betweenthe supernal correlation in the Kabbalaof Geronain the thirteenthcentury,R. Nahmanused the gimzumtheory as a model for resolving the experienceof divine absence in the heart and mind of the one who intently seeks God's presence.

Philosophy andModern W R. Nahman relevant As stated at the outset, R. Nahman'sconcernsare surprisingly and reflectthe crisis of modernpersons.In the wordsof GershomScholem, "Thevoid is the abyss, the chasm or the crack which opens up in all that well depictedin exists. This is the experienceof modernman, surpassingly
mantook this notion and appliedit to the wordsof R. tion to the system of the sefirot. Nah. prayer:"Whenone standson the last wordof his prayer,he shouldstill be on the first word fromthe first of his prayer.In thatway he can completehis entireprayerwithoutseparating the The letterof his prayer." dangerof wordsis thatthey threaten closed and holistic nature of the pristineexpressionof the soul. Thus,the one who speaksmustbe certainthatthe words do not become linearand diffuse the initial intentof the soul's yearning.

514

HARVARD THEOLOG ICAL REVIEW

all its desolationby Kaflea, whom nothinghas remained God but the for of void-in KaRa's sense, to be sure, the void of God."s3 The implications of the gimzumtheory as explicatedby R. Nahmanand reiteratedby both Scholem and Martin Buber pose a challenge to the Jewish thinker not dissimilarfrom the existentialistgrapplingwith the assertionthat God is dead.54Buber, unlike Scholem, attemptedto make a connectionbetween hasidism and existentialism.For Buber, hasidism was "envelopedby the abyss," yet differed from Nietzscheanexistentialismin that hasidism offered a solution-the redemptivenatureof history.55 Thus, if R. Nahman's discussion were placed in the context of modernsolutions to the problem of the abyss and the absence of God, his ideas are similar to those of theistic existentialistssuch as Blaise Pascal, GabrielMarcel,Paul Tillich, and, of course, S0ren Kierkegaard, not FriedrichNietzsche, Jean-Paul and Sartre,and Albert Camus.56 the following pages, I shall initiate such a In comparisonin the hope that it will inspire others to attemptto draw R. Nahman'smessage out of its intricateexegetical frameworkand place it
53Gershom Scholem,"Reflections JewishTheology,"in W. J. Donnhauser, On Jews on ed., and Judaism in Crisis (New York:Schoken, 1976) 282. Such an assertionresonatesin existentialthoughtfromPascalthrough Heidegger.Scholem'sstatement, however,is particularly relevantto the presentdiscussion in that it serves as the conclusion of his discussion on kabbalisticinterpretations creation(gimzum). As discussedearlier,gimzum is the basis of of R. Nah. man'saffirmation the void as well as his solutionagainstthe heresythatmayresult of from such an assertion.Scholemstates, "Theuniverseof space andtime, this living process we call Creation,appeared the kabbaliststo be intelligibleonly if it constitutedan act of to God'srenunciation whichHe sets Himselfa limit. Creationout of nothing,fromthe void, in could be nothingother than creationof the void, that is, of the possibility of thinkingof anythingthat was not God"(p. 282). Withoutreferenceto R. Nahman,whom Scholem respectedas a creativehasidicthinkerbutnot as a kabbalist,Scholemseems to have discovered the very foundationof R. Nah. man'sposition. 54For mostrecentdiscussionon ScholemandBuber's the dialogueon Hasidism,see Jerome Gellman,The Fear, the Trembling, and the Fire: Kierkegaard and Hasidic Masters on the Binding of Isaac (New York/London: Lanham, UniversityPress of America,1994) xiv-xxi. Gellman'sworkreflects manyof the issues I addressedin this article. ssSee MartinBuber,The Legends of the Baal Shem Tov (New York:Schocken,1969) 6970: "All thingswereenvelopedby the abyss, andyet the whole abyss was betweeneach thing andtheother.Nonecouldcrossoverto the other,indeednonecould see theother,forthe abyss was between them."As with Scholem'swriting,this appearsto be a direct referenceto R. Nah. man,statedin the largercontextof earlyhasidism.Althoughmanyearlyhasidicwritings point to this assertion,I have not foundthe sophisticated intricatetreatment the proband of lem andits solutionin texts otherthanR. Nah. man'sLikkutei MoHaRan. See also Buber,Tales of Rabbi Nahman (trans.Maurice Friedman; New Jersey:Humanities,1988) 3-17; andidem, "Judaism Civilization," idem,On Judaism (New York:Schocken,1967) 194.Thisissue and in hasalsobeendiscussedin Laurence Silberstein, J. Martin Buber's Social and Religious Thought (New York:New YorkUniversityPress, 1989) 50-56. 56For brief overview of some of these figures, see Padovano,The Estranged God; and a Roberts,Existentialism and Religious Belief.

SHAU L MAG ID

515

against the more speculative and theologically sophisticatedtheories of moderntheistic thought. The relationshipbetween faith and reason poses a complex problemin While R. Nahman initially viewed faith as the R. Nahman'sthinking.57 that draws matrixof religious worshipand reasonas the "evil inclination" R. one towardheresy, he also nuancedthe concepts.58 Nahmanwas a man of faith, but also a man forever enticed by reason. As ArthurGreen has noted, R. Nahmanwas a hasidic masterwith a complex dialecticalpersonwith reason.59 ality, and his submissionto faith never solved his infatuation Thus, faith should not be viewed as the solution to a problem,but as the between"probdistinction unfoldingof the divine mystery.GabrielMarcel's may shed light on my claim regardingR. Nahman's lem" and "mystery" dialectical faith. Marcel states, "A problem is something which I meet, lay which I find completebeforeme, but whichI can therefore siege to and For reduce. A mystery is somethingin which I myself am involved."60 Marcel, the mysteryby definitioncannotbe resolved precisely because a person can never be fully objective about it. Marcel'sdistinctionbetween dialecticalfaith. R. Nahman mysteryandproblemresonatesin R. Na4man's stressedthat the process of emotionalgimzum,which leads from wordless the screamto prayerand subsequently overcomingof divine absence,is a as constantactivity.His notionof makkifim well dynamicprocessrequiring his support view thatfaith is not to as his innovativeapproach repentance6l
57For a thoughtful discussion of this issue see, Green, Tormented Master, 275-336. 58Inmy view, the Bratzlav school has minimized the dialectical nature of his thought. For man's apparent tirade against rationalist medieval philosophy from Sa'adia example, R. Nah. Ga'on through Gersonides is viewed as his explicit rejection of the whole medieval Jewish philosophical tradition. Although that may be the case, his teachings, only a small portion of which I discussed in this article, exhibit a far more complex picture. This picture yielded a creative and innovative solution to a problem that faith, in its pristine simplistic form, could not cure. For his critique of rationalism, see R. Nathan (Sternharz)of Nemerov, Hayyei MoHaRan 2.18d-21b and R. Nahman of Bratzlav, Sihot ha-Ran, 36 (32). 59R. Nahman's dialectical thinking emerges numerous times in his teachings. See, for example Likkutei MoHaRan 7a ( 1.6): "When a person wants to go in the way of repentance, he must be an expert in halakhah. He must be a expert in two aspects-that is, an expert in 'going' (rago) and an expert in 'coming' (shov). The halakhic system becomes a dynamic process that demands an ability to be in constant spiritual motion. This results in the elevation of the one's conciousness to the realization of the divine." See Zohar 2.213b and 3.71. 60See Gabriel Marcel, Being and Having (London: Dacre, 1949) 100. See also idem, "On the Ontological Mystery," in idem, The Philosophy of Existentialism (1956; reprinted New York: Citadel, 1962) 19: "A mystery is a problem which encroaches upon its own data, invading them, as it were, and thereby transcending itself as a simple problem." 6IFor R. Nahman, repentance is dynamic in that it always yields the need for further repentance. It is the process of human transformation whereby the individual, having achieved a new consciousness through repentance, looks back on his or her first act of repentance and, from his more elevated place, needs to repent on his initial act of repentance. This process

516

HARVARD THEOLOGICAL REVIEW

the solution to the problemof divine absence but the affirmationof the ontologicalmysteryof divine presence.Just as Marcelwas not interested in constructing fundamental a ontology and had little interestin the question of Being outside of its relationship humans,62 Nahmanhad little to R. interestin kabbalistictheosophyor rooting his existentialdilemmain the ontic character classical Kabbala.63 of MarcelreflectedR. Nahman's position when he arguedthat reason limits one's access to mystery and thus one's apprehension absoluteknowledge.He stated, of
I firmly believe that scientific truthis in no sense-not even in the most criticallyreal sense the measureof the real. On the otherhand, it is not true to say that science is only an emptyformalism; rather,it
continues indefinitely. See Likkutei MoHaRan 6d (1.6c): "Even if a person knows himself that he achieved a complete repentance, he needs to repent on his first repentance. Initially when he repented, he did it according to his understanding. Afterward, when he did repent and thus achieved a higher apprehension of God, it will be found that, according to his understanding now, his initial understanding was mundane. Therefore, he must repent on his initial understanding." 62See Ralph Harper, On Presence: Variations and Reflections (Philadelphia: Trinity, 1991 ) 39-54. Harper draws an important distinction between the early Heidegger and Marcel, seeing Marcel as a bridge between Heidegger and Buber. The introduction of Buber to Harper's discussion on Marcel strengthens comparison between Marcel and R. Nah. man. Buber's earliest works on hasidism focused on R. Nah.man of Bratzlav with whom Buber shared a common journey. See Buber's Tales of Rabbi Nahman. 63This describes the general attitude of hasidism toward Kabbala, and is even more pronounced in R. Nahman. See, for example, Rachel Elior, "Hasidism-Historical Continuity and Spiritual Change," in Peter Schafer and Joseph Dan, eds., Gershom Scholem's Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism: 50 Years Later (TUbingen: Mohr, 1994) 318: "Hasidic doctrine did not intend to create a new layer of theosophy in order to decipher the subtleties of the divine cosmology. Rather, it sought to present a comprehensive dialectical worldview which would bridge between the divine processes described in Lurianic Kabbala and man's conciousness and his thinking process." Even though Elior attempts to defend Scholem's thesis that hasidism did not offer an "original" kabbalistic doctrine, I believe her point can be taken out of its formal polemical context. If Elior could make this argument for a more theosophically oriented hasidism such as Habad, it would only strengthen such a claim regarding R. Nahman. Traditional Bratzlav readings of Likkutei MoHaRan, beginning with its author R. Nathan of Nemerov, argue that Kabbala was the backbone of R. Nahman's thought. For example, see "Introduction to Sifre Likkutei MoHaRan," in Likkutei MoHaRan 5b: "All the writings of the Ari, may his memory be blessed [R. Isaac Luria, a sixteenth century Kabbalist from Safed], the Zohar, the Tikkunimand all of the holy Kabbala. All of them are included in this holy work [Likkutei MoHaRan]. Every lesson is directed toward a particular mitzvah and chapter in [R. Isaac Luria's] E; Hayyim." This may indeed be the case. R. Nahman's personalist approach, however, does not contribute to the kabbalistic system of Luria, and he does not require his reader to know intimately the kabbalistic system from which he works. In this light Buber's position that hasidism "overcame" the Kabbala by transforming it into a source for the encounter between the human and divine may be useful. See Martin Buber, "Spirit and Body of the Hasidic Movement," in idem, Origin and Meaning of Hasidism, 121-25 and idem, "The Faith of Judaism," 13.

SHAUL MAG ID

517

isolate scientific findingsfrom the spiriis such only if we arbitrarily tual activity which has engenderedthem. Science is relative to the spiritualactivity which producesit, and it is a fallacy to see in the worldconsideredas reified science a whole sufficientunto itself.64

dialecticalfaith, reasoncannotanswer In both Marcel'sand R. Nahman's For the need of the seekerof presence,but neithercan it be abandoned. R. reasonis the carrierof simple faith, which Nahman,the one who abandons cannotyield an experienceof presencethatlies beyonddivine absence.For Marcel,reason or science gives the transcendent the infinite a place in the finite and thus opens the possibilityfor an experienceof the infinite.65 Both thinkersmaintaina dialectical relationshipwith reason, each arguing or, in R. Nahman'scase, implying that reason cannot define presfor ence but cannot be abandoned the sake of presence. reasoncan be foundin Pascal'sPensees. regarding similarambivalence A distinctionbetweenreasonand Reason,between important Pascal drew an the use of the mind and heartto acquireknowledgeand the claim of Logic as certainty. For Pascal, reason is the handmaidenof faith, useful and adequateas long as it knows its limits. "Reasons,seen from afar, appear to limit our view; but when they are reached,we begin to see beyond."66 AlthoughPascal was critical of a religionbased on Reason,he understood of dialecticalrole in the apprehension relithat reasonplays an important With regardto R. Nahman's"simplefaith,"it appearsthat gious Truth.67 reason plays only a negative role and thus would fall outside of Pascal's claim. In R. Nahman'sdialecticalfaith, however, reason depicted as the by experienceof the absenceof God is represented the secondheretic,the questionto the one who is rooted in the void and poses the unanswerable seekerof divine presence.In this case, reasoncannotbe avoidedbut must be confrontedand only then overcome.This attitudeis reflectedin Pascal, of who spoke of the proponents theoriesof religioustruththatoffer "proofs of God":"But for those in whom this light is extinguished,and in whom we purposeto rekindleit, personsdestituteof faith and grace,who, seeking
64GabrielMarcel, Philosophical Fragments 1909-1914 (trans. Lionel A. Blain; Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1965) 41. 6sGabriel Marcel, The Mystery of Being (trans. Rene Hague; 2 vols.; Chicago: Regency, 1950) 46: "Not only does the word 'transcendent' not mean 'transcending experience,' but on the contrary there must be a possibility of having an experience of the transcendent as such, and unless the possibility exists the word can have no meaning." The finite or empirical world gets its life from the infinite, he explained. "In other words, if there is anything real in the finite, it will be infinite; it is from the infinite that the finite gets the little reality it possess, by itself, it is nothing, nothing but an abstract and contradictory view" (idem, Philosophical Fragments, 44). 66Blaise Pascal, Pensees (trans. A. J. Krailsheimer; Baltimore: Penguin, 1996) 263. 67Ibid. 282.

518

HARVARD THEOLOGICAL REVIEW

with all their light whateverthey see in nature can bring them to this knowledge,find only obscurityand darkness."68 Pascal, like R. Nahman,pitied the one who defines his faith by rational proofs,howeverconvincingthose proofs may be. He assertedthat whoever seeks God throughreason "find(s)only obscurityand darkness."69 R. For Nahman, personwho entersintorational the dialoguewith the secondheretic will conclude that divine absence is all that exists. While Pascal had pity for the person of reason, R. Nahman,apparently less confidentin having permanently overcomethe absenceandhavingcleansedhimselfof the second heretic, retaineda dialecticalframework. arguethat R. Nahmanwould To agree with Pascal that reason is the handmaiden faith would overstate of the case. Only by confronting reason,however,can R. Nahman's theoryof reachingbeyond the void be understood. With regardto R. Nahmanand his use of the mysticaltradition,Arthur Green has correctly noted that Weiss, in his bold typology, deleted the mystical dimension of R. Nahman'sposition.70Green notes, "Nahman's position is, on the one hand, that of a simple fideist who lives the life of Torahbecause God has commanded on the other handthat of a mystic it, who strives to reachsuch a state of oneness with God that the divine Will becomes entirely his own."7 Hasidism in general, emerging out of the 1 kabbalisticthoughtof the Zohar and subsequentKabbala,viewed itself as an authentic formof Jewishmysticism,neverrejectingthe theurgic,mythic, and even magical context of medieval Kabbala.72 Althoughthe mystical experienceof the divine may indeed challenge R. Nahman'sstrikingvali68Ibid. 242. See also Lucien Goldman, The Hidden God: A Study of Tragic Vision in the Pensees of Pascal and the Tragedies of Racine (trans. Philip Thody; New York: Humanities, 1964) 22-40, 167-92. 69Pascal, Pensees 242. 7(Green states (Tormented Master, 318-19): "As we closely examine certain passages dealing with the very heart of Nahman's 'existential' teachings, the constant struggle to search out integrate maqqifin we find that the end of that process is in fact mystical, in the most proper sense of the term." Perhaps Green intends to make a distinction between the terms "mystical" and "kabbalistic" here. While R. Nah.man indeed resolved the ominous trek through the void with a mystical perception of divine presence, the kabbalistic cosmological apparatus plays only a nominal role. Green's observation thus questions the accuracy of the typology set up by Joseph Weiss in his Studies in Bratzlav Hasidism (Jerusalem: Mosad Bialik, 1974) 8796 [Hebrew]. 78See Arthur Green, Devotion and Commandment: The Faith of Abraham in the Hasidic Imagination (Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College Press, 1989) 55. 72The use of and interest in magic and theurgy in hasidism is an area that is only now receiving scholarly attention. See, for example, Gedalyah Nigal, Magic, Mysticism and Hasidisnl (Northvale, NJ: Aronson, 1994); and Moshe Idel, Hasidism: Between Ecstasw and Magic} (Albany: SUNY Press, 1995).

SHAU L MAG ID

519

the dation of the divine void, he incorporates mystical experienceas the the rewardfor confronting void and not falling prey to its fatalisticthreat. R. Nahman froze the Lurianic theory of creation in the midst of its dynamicprocess to focus not on the creationas such, but on the frozen frame of divine absence before it is filled with the finite form of divine presence. It is this frozen frame of gimzumto which R. Na4mandevoted so much attention.He implied, perhaps,that if one seeks divine wisdom from "the bottom up" (that is, throughnatureand reason alone), one can God who lies beyond creation.It is only by never reach the transcendent disappearsthat one can achieve the freezing the void before it apparently ultimateexperienceof God. This frozen frame is also, however, the residence of the hereticalquestion,the empiricalrecognitionof divine absence which must be overcomeby reenactingthe creativeprocess and then participatingin the wordlessscream,which is the divine soul's pure yearning for its home beyondthe void. For R. Nahmanthis ominousjourney,which he apparentlytravelled daily, is the narrow bridge; spanningthe abyss below, this journey connects the yearningsoul to its place in the divine. simple faith the Not to undertake journeyis to be a carrierof R. Nahman's and thus to be satisfied with the immanentGod of creation.To step onto the narrowbridge is to step into the void, with the roaringrapidsbelow God calling from the other side. and the transcendent