Chapter 5

(A. G.; T. A. I.)

JUVENTAS(Latin for “youth”: laterJuventus), in Roman mythology, the tutelar goddess of young men. She was worshipped at Rome from very early times. In the front court of the temple of Minerva on the Capitol there was a chapel of Juventas, in which a coin had to be deposited by each youth on his assumption of thetoga virilis, and sacrifices were offered on behalf of the rising manhood of the state. In connexion with this chapel it is related that, when the temple was in course of erection, Terminus, the god of boundaries, and Juventas refused to quit the sites they had already appropriated as sacred to themselves, which accordingly became part of the new sanctuary. This was interpreted as a sign of the immovable boundaries and eternal youth of the Roman state. It should be observed that in the oldest accounts there is no mention of Juventas, whose name (with that of Mars) was added in support of the augural prediction. After the Second Punic War Greek elements were introduced into her cult. In 218B.C., by order of the Sibylline books, alectisterniumwas prepared for Juventas and a public thanksgiving to Hercules, an association which shows the influence of the Greek Hebe, the wife of Heracles. In 207 Marcus Livius Salinator, after the defeat of Hasdrubal at the battle of Sena, vowed another temple to Juventas in the Circus Maximus, which was dedicated in 191 by C. (or M.) Licinius Lucullus; it was destroyed by fire in 16B.C.and rebuilt by Augustus. In imperial times, Juventas personified, not the youth of the Roman state, but of the future emperor.

See Dion. Halic., iii. 69, iv. 15; Livy v. 54, xxi. 62, xxxvi. 36.

JUXON, WILLIAM(1582-1663), English prelate, was the son of Robert Juxon and was born probably at Chichester, being educated at Merchant Taylors’ School, London, and at St John’s College, Oxford, where he was elected to a scholarship in 1598. He studied law at Oxford, but afterwards he took holy orders, and in 1609 became vicar of St Giles, Oxford, a living which he retained until he became rector of Somerton, Oxfordshire, in 1615. In December 1621 he succeeded his friend, William Laud, as president of St John’s College, and in 1626 and 1627 he was vice-chancellor of the university. Juxon soon obtained other important positions, including that of chaplain-in-ordinary to Charles I. In 1627 he was made dean of Worcester and in 1632 he was nominated to the bishopric of Hereford, an event which led him to resign the presidency of St John’s in January 1633. However, he never took up his episcopal duties at Hereford, as in October 1633 he was consecrated bishop of London in succession to Laud. He appears to have been an excellent bishop, and in March 1636 Charles I. entrusted him with important secular duties by making him lord high treasurer of England; thus for the next five years he was dealing with the many financial and other difficulties which beset the king and his advisers. He resigned the treasurership in May 1641. During the Civil War the bishop, against whom no charges were brought in parliament, lived undisturbed at Fulham Palace, and his advice was often sought by the king, who had a very high opinion of him, and who at his execution selected him to be with him on the scaffold and to administer to him the last consolations of religion. Juxon was deprived of his bishopric in 1649 and retired to Little Compton in Gloucestershire, where he had bought an estate, and here he became famous as the owner of a pack of hounds. At the restoration of Charles II. he became archbishop of Canterbury and in his official capacity he took part in the coronation of this king, but his health soon began to fail and he died at Lambeth on the 4th of June 1663. By his will the archbishop was a benefactor to St John’s College, where he was buried; he also aided the work of restoring St Paul’s Cathedral and rebuilt the great hall at Lambeth Palace.

See W. H. Marah,Memoirs of Archbishop Juxon and his Times(1869); the best authority for the archbishop’s life is the article by W. H. Hutton in theDict. Nat. Biog.(1892).

KThe eleventh letter in the Phoenician alphabet and in its descendant Greek, the tenth in Latin owing to the omission of Teth (seeI), and once more the eleventh in the alphabets of Western Europe owing to the insertion of J. In its long history the shape of K has changed very little. It is on the inscription of the Moabite Stone (early 9th cent.B.C.) in the form (written from right to left) ofand. Similar forms are also found in early Aramaic, but another formor, which is found in the Phoenician of Cyprus in the 9th or 10th centuryB.C.has had more effect upon the later development of the Semitic forms. The length of the two back strokes and the manner in which they join the upright are the only variations in Greek. In various places the back strokes, treated as an angle <, become more rounded (, so that the letter appears as, a form which in Latin probably affected the development of C (q.v.). In Crete it is elaborated intoand. In Latin K, which is found in the earliest inscriptions, was soon replaced by C, and survived only in the abbreviations forKalendaeand the proper nameKaeso. The original name Kaph became in GreekKappa. The sound of K throughout has been that of the unvoiced guttural, varying to some extent in its pronunciation according to the nature of the vowel sound which followed it. In Anglo-Saxon C replaced K through Latin influence, writing being almost entirely in the hands of ecclesiastics. As the sound-changes have been discussed under C it is necessary here only to refer to the palatalization of K followed earlier by a finaleas inwatch(Middle Englishwacche, Anglo-Saxonwæcce) by the side ofwake(M.E.waken, A.-S.wacan); batch, bake, &c. Sometimes an older form of the substantive survives, as in the Elizabethan and Northernmake=matealongsidematch.

(P. Gi.)

K2,orMt Godwin-Austen, the second highest mountain in the world, ranking after Mt Everest. It is a peak of the Karakoram extension of the Muztagh range dividing Kashmir from Chinese Turkestan. The height of K2as at present determined by triangulation is 28,250 ft., but it is possible that an ultimate revision of the values of refraction at high altitudes may have the effect of lowering the height of K2, while it would elevate those of Everest and Kinchinjunga. The latter mountain would then rank second, and K2third, in the scale of altitude, Everest always maintaining its ascendancy. K2was ascended for the first time by the duke of the Abruzzi in June 1909, being the highest elevation on the earth’s surface ever reached by man.

KA‘BA, KAABA,orKaabeh, the sacred shrine of Mahommedanism, containing the “black stone,” in the middle of the great mosque at Mecca (q.v.).

KABARDIA,a territory of S. Russia, now part of the province of Terek. It is divided into Great and Little Kabardia by the upper river Terek, and covers 3780 sq. m. on the northern slopes of the Caucasus range (from Mount Elbruz to Pasis-mta, or Edena), including the Black Mountains (Kara-dagh) and the high plains on their northern slope. Before the Russian conquest it extended as far as the Sea of Azov. Its population is now about 70,000. One-fourth of the territory is owned by the aristocracy and the remainder is divided among theaulsor villages. A great portion is under permanent pasture, part under forests, and some under perpetual snow. Excellent breeds of horses are reared, and the peasants own many cattle. The land is well cultivated in the lower parts, the chief crops being millet, maize, wheat and oats. Bee-keeping is extensively practised, and Kabardian honey is in repute. Wood-cutting and the manufacture of wooden wares, the making ofbúrkas(felt and fur cloaks), and saddlery are very general. Nalchik is the chief town.

The Kabardians are a branch of the Adyghè (Circassians). The policy of Russia was always to be friendly with the Kabardian aristocracy, who were possessed of feudal rights over the Ossetes, the Ingushes, the Abkhasians and the mountain Tatars, and had command of the roads leading into Transcaucasia. Ivan the Terrible took Kabardia under his protection in the 16th century. Later, Russian influence was counterbalanced by that of the Crimean khans, but the Kabardian nobles nevertheless supported Peter the Great during his Caucasian campaign in 1722-23. In 1739 Kabardia was recognized as being under the double protectorate of Russia and Turkey, but thirty-five years later it was definitively annexed to Russia, and risings of the population in 1804 and 1822 were cruelly suppressed. Kabardia is considered as a school of good manners in Caucasia; the Kabardian dress sets the fashion to all the mountaineers. Kabardians constitute the best detachment of the personal Imperial Guards at St Petersburg.

A short grammar of the Kabardian language and a Russian-Kabardian dictionary, by Lopatinsky, were published inSbornik Materialov dla Opisaniya Kavkaza(vol. xii., Tiflis, 1891). Fragments of the poem “Sosyruko,” some Persian tales, and the tenets of the Mussulman religion were printed in Kabardian in 1864, by Kazi Atazhukin and Shardanov. The common law of the Kabardians has been studied by Maxim Kovalevsky and Vsevolod Miller.

KABBA,a province of the British protectorate of Northern Nigeria, situated chiefly on the right bank of the Niger, between 7° 5′ and 8° 45′ N. and 5° 30′ and 7° E. It has an area of 7800 sq. m. and an estimated population of about 70,000. The province consists of relatively healthy uplands interspersed with fertile valleys. It formed part at one time of the Nupe emirate, and under Fula rule the armies of Bida regularly raided for slaves and laid waste the country. Amongst the native inhabitants the Igbira are very industrious, and crops of tobacco, indigo, all the African grains, and a good quantity of cotton are already grown. The sylvan products are valuable and include palm oil, kolas, shea and rubber. Lokoja, a town which up to 1902 was the principal British station in the protectorate, is situated in this province. The site of Lokoja, with a surrounding tract of country at the junction of the Benue and the Niger, was ceded to the British government in 1841 by theattahof Idah, whose dominions at that time extended to the right bank of the river. The first British settlement was a failure. In 1854 MacGregor Laird, who had taken an active part in promoting the exploration of the river, sent thither Dr W. B. Baikie, who was successful in dealing with the natives and in 1857 became the first British consul in the interior. The town of Lokoja was founded by him in 1860. In 1868 the consulate was abolished and the settlement was left wholly to commercial interests. In 1879 Sir George Goldie formed the Royal Niger Company, which bought out its foreign rivals and acquired a charter from the British government. In 1886 the company made Lokoja its military centre, and on the transfer of the company’s territories to the Crown it remained for a time the capital of Northern Nigeria. In 1902 the political capital of the protectorate was shifted to Zungeru in the province of Zaria, but Lokoja remains the commercial centre. The distance of Lokoja from the sea at the Niger mouth is about 250 m.

In the absence of any central native authority the province is entirely dependent for administration upon British initiative. It has been divided into four administrative divisions. British and native courts of justice have been established. A British station has been established at Kabba town, which is an admirable site some 50 m. W. by N. of Lokoja, about 1300 ft. above the sea, and a good road has been made from Kabba to Lokoja. Roads have been opened through the province. (SeeNigeria.)

KABBABISH(“goatherds”: James Bruce derives the name fromHebsh, sheep), a tribe of African nomads of Semitic origin. It is perhaps the largest “Arab” tribe in the Anglo-Egyptian Sudan, and its many clans are scattered over the country extending S.W. from the province of Dongola to the confines of Darfur. The Kabbabish speak Arabic, but their pronunciation differs much from that of the true Arabs. The Kabbabish have a tradition that they came from Tunisia and are of Mogrebin or western descent; but while the chiefs look like Arabs, the tribesmen resemble the Beja family. They themselves declare thatone of their clans, Kawahla, is not of Kabbabish blood, but was affiliated to them long ago. Kawahla is a name of Arab formation, and J. L. Burckhardt spoke of the clan as a distinct one living about Abu Haraz and on the Atbara. The Kabbabish probably received Arab rulers, as did the Abābda. They are chiefly employed in cattle, camel and sheep breeding, and before the Sudan wars of 1883-99 they had a monopoly of all transport from the Nile, north of Abu Gussi, to Kordofan. They also cultivate the lowlands which border the Nile, where they have permanent villages. They are of fine physique, dark with black wiry hair, carefully arranged in tightly rolled curls which cling to the head, with regular features and rather thick aquiline noses. Some of the tribes wear large hats like those of the Kabyles of Algeria and Tunisia.

See James Bruce,Travels to Discover the Source of the Nile(1790); A. H. Keane,Ethnology of Egyptian Sudan(1884);Anglo-Egyptian Sudan(edited by Count Gleichen, 1905).

KABBALAH(late Hebrewḳabbālah,qabbālah), the technical name for the system of Jewish theosophy which played an important part in the Christian Church in the middle ages. The term primarily denotes “reception” and then “doctrines received by tradition.” In the older Jewish literature the name is applied to the whole body of received religious doctrine with the exception of the Pentateuch, thus including the Prophets and Hagiographa as well as the oral traditions ultimately embodied in the Mishnah.1It is only since the 11th or 12th century that Kabbalah has become the exclusive appellation for the renowned system of theosophy which claims to have been transmitted uninterruptedly by the mouths of the patriarchs and prophets ever since the creation of the first man.

The cardinal doctrines of the Kabbalah embrace the nature of the Deity, the Divine emanations orSĕphīrōth, the cosmogony, the creation of angels and man, their destiny, and the import of the revealed law. According to thisDoctrine of the Sephiroth.esoteric doctrine, God, who is boundless, and above everything, even above being and thinking, is calledĒn Sōph(ἄπειρος); He is the space of the universe containingτὸ πᾶν, but the universe is not his space. In this boundlessness He could not be comprehended by the intellect or described in words, and as such the Ēn Sōph was in a certain senseĂyĭn, non-existent (Zōhar, iii. 283).2To make his existence known and comprehensible, the Ēn Sōph had to become active and creative. As creation involves intention, desire, thought and work, and as these are properties which imply limit and belong to a finite being, and moreover as the imperfect and circumscribed nature of this creation precludes the idea of its being the direct work of the infinite and perfect, the Ēn Sōph had to become creative, through the medium of ten Sephiroth or intelligences, which emanated from him like rays proceeding from a luminary.

Now the wish to become manifest and known, and hence the idea of creation, is co-eternal with the inscrutable Deity, and the first manifestation of this primordial will is called the firstSephirahor emanation. This first Sephirah, this spiritual substance which existed in the Ēn Sōph from all eternity, contained nine other intelligences orSephiroth. These again emanated one from the other, the second from the first, the third from the second, and so on up to ten.

The ten Sephiroth, which form among themselves and with the Ēn Sōph a strict unity, and which simply represent different aspects of one and the same being, are respectively denominated (1) the Crown, (2) Wisdom, (3) Intelligence, (4) Love, (5) Justice, (6) Beauty, (7) Firmness, (8) Splendour, (9) Foundation, and (10) Kingdom. Their evolution was as follows: “When the Holy Aged, the concealed of all concealed, assumed a form, he produced everything in the form of male and female, as things could not continue in any other form. Hence Wisdom, the second Sephirah, and the beginning of development, when it proceeded from the Holy Aged (another name of the first Sephirah) emanated in male and female, for Wisdom expanded, and Intelligence, the third Sephirah, proceeded from it, and thus were obtained male and female, viz. Wisdom the father and Intelligence the mother, from whose union the other pairs of Sephiroth successively emanated” (Zohar, iii. 290). These two opposite potencies, viz. the masculine Wisdom or Sephirah No. 2 and the feminine Intelligence or Sephirah No. 3 are joined together by the first potency, the Crown or Sephirah No. 1; they yield the first triad of the Sephiric decade, and constitute the divine head of the archetypal man.From the junction of Sephiroth Nos. 2 and 3 emanated the masculine potency Love or Mercy (4) and the feminine potency Justice (5), and from the junction of the latter two emanated again the uniting potency Beauty (6). Beauty, the sixth Sephirah, constitutes the chest in the archetypal man, and unites Love (4) and Justice (5), which constitute the divine arms, thus yielding the second triad of the Sephiric decade. From this second conjunction emanated again the masculine potency Firmness (7) and the feminine potency Splendour (8), which constitute the divine legs of the archetypal man; and these sent forth Foundation (9), which is the genital organ and medium of union between them, thus yielding the third triad in the Sephiric decade. Kingdom (10), which emanated from the ninth Sephirah, encircles all the other nine, inasmuch as it is the Shechinah, the divine halo, which encompasses the whole by its all-glorious presence.

From the junction of Sephiroth Nos. 2 and 3 emanated the masculine potency Love or Mercy (4) and the feminine potency Justice (5), and from the junction of the latter two emanated again the uniting potency Beauty (6). Beauty, the sixth Sephirah, constitutes the chest in the archetypal man, and unites Love (4) and Justice (5), which constitute the divine arms, thus yielding the second triad of the Sephiric decade. From this second conjunction emanated again the masculine potency Firmness (7) and the feminine potency Splendour (8), which constitute the divine legs of the archetypal man; and these sent forth Foundation (9), which is the genital organ and medium of union between them, thus yielding the third triad in the Sephiric decade. Kingdom (10), which emanated from the ninth Sephirah, encircles all the other nine, inasmuch as it is the Shechinah, the divine halo, which encompasses the whole by its all-glorious presence.

In their totality and unity the ten Sephiroth are not only denominated the World of Sephiroth, or the World of Emanations, but, owing to the above representation, are called the primordial or archetypal man (=πρωτόγονος) and the heavenly man. It is this form which, as we are assured, the prophet Ezekiel saw in the mysterious chariot (Ezek. i. 1-28), and of which the earthly man is a faint copy.

As the three triads respectively represent intellectual, moral and physical qualities, the first is called the Intellectual, the second the Moral or Sensuous, and the third the Material World. According to this theory of the archetypal man the three Sephiroth on the right-hand side are masculine and represent the principle of rigour, the three on the left are feminine and represent the principle of mercy, and the four central or uniting Sephiroth represent the principle of mildness. Hence the right is called “the Pillar of Judgment,” the left “the Pillar of Mercy,” and the centre “the Middle Pillar.” The middle Sephiroth are synecdochically used to represent the worlds or triads of which they are the uniting potencies. Hence the Crown, the first Sephirah, which unites Wisdom and Intelligence to constitute the first triad, is by itself denominated the Intellectual World. So Beauty is by itself described as the Sensuous World, and in this capacity is called the Sacred King or simply the King, whilst Kingdom, the tenth Sephirah, which unites all the nine Sephiroth, is used to denote the Material World, and as such is denominated the Queen or the Matron. Thus a trinity of units, viz. the Crown, Beauty and Kingdom, is obtained within the trinity of triads. But further, each Sephirah is as it were a trinity in itself. It (1) has its own absolute character, (2) receives from above, and (3) communicates to what is below. “Just as the Sacred Aged is represented by the number three, so are all the other lights (Sephiroth) of a threefold nature” (Zohar, iii. 288). In this all-important doctrine of the Sephiroth, the Kabbalah insists upon the fact that these potencies are not creations of the Ēn Sōph, which would be a diminution of strength; that they form among themselves and with the Ēn Sōph a strict unity, and simply represent different aspects of the same being, just as the different rays which proceed from the light, and which appear different things to the eye, are only different manifestations of one and the same light; that for this reason they all alike partake of the perfections of the Ēn Sōph; and that as emanations from the Infinite, the Sephiroth are infinite and perfect like the Ēn Sōph, and yet constitute the first finite things. They are infinite and perfect when the Ēn Sōph imparts his fullness to them, and finite and imperfect when that fullness is withdrawn from them.

The conjunction of the Sephiroth, or, according to the language of the Kabbalah, the union of the crowned King and Queen, produced the universe in their own image. Worlds came into existence before the Ēn Sōph manifestedThe Universe.himself in the human form of emanations, but they could not continue, and necessarily perished because the conditions of development which obtained with the sexual opposites of the Sephiroth did not exist. These worlds which perished are compared to sparks which fly out from a red-hot iron beaten by a hammer, and which are extinguished according to the distancethey are removed from the burning mass. Creation is notex nihilo; it is simply a further expansion or evolution of the Sephiroth.3The world reveals and makes visible the Boundless and the concealed of the concealed. And, though it exhibits the Deity in less splendour than its Sephiric parents exhibit the Ēn Sōph, because it is farther removed from the primordial source of light than the Sephiroth, still, as it is God manifested, all the multifarious forms in the world point out the unity which they represent. Hence nothing in the whole universe can be annihilated. Everything, spirit as well as body, must return to the source whence it emanated (Zohar, ii. 218). The universe consists of four different worlds, each of which forms a separate Sephiric system of a decade of emanations.

They were evolved in the following order. (1) The World Of Emanations, also called the Image and the Heavenly or Archetypal Man, is, as we have seen, a direct emanation from the Ēn Sōph. Hence it is most intimately allied to the Deity, and is perfect and immutable. From the conjunction of the King and Queen (i.e.these ten Sephiroth) is produced (2) the World of Creation, or the Briatic world, also called “the Throne.” Its ten Sephiroth, being farther removed from the Ēn Sōph, are of a more limited and circumscribed potency, though the substances they comprise are of the purest nature and without any admixture of matter. The angel Metatron inhabits this world. He alone constitutes the world of pure spirit, and is the garment of Shaddai,i.e.the visible manifestation of the Deity. His name is numerically equivalent to that of the Lord (Zohar, iii. 231). He governs the visible world, preserves the harmony and guides the revolutions of all the spheres, and is the captain of all the myriads of angelic beings. This Briatic world again gave rise to (3) the World of Formation, or Yetziratic World. Its ten Sephiroth, being still farther removed from the Primordial Source, are of a less refined substance. Still they are yet without matter. It is the abode of the angels, who are wrapped in luminous garments, and who assume a sensuous form when they appear to men. The myriads of the angelic hosts who people this world are divided into ten ranks, answering to the ten Sephiroth, and each one of these numerous angels is set over a different part of the universe, and derives his name from the heavenly body or element which he guards (Zohar, i. 42). From this world finally emanated (4) the World of Action, also called the World of Matter. Its ten Sephiroth are made up of the grosser elements of the former three worlds; they consist of material substance limited by space and perceptible to the senses in a multiplicity of forms. This world is subject to constant changes and corruption, and is the dwelling of the evil spirits. These, the grossest and most deficient of all forms, are also divided into ten degrees, each lower than the other. The first two are nothing more than the absence of all visible form and organization; the third degree is the abode of darkness; whilst the remaining seven are “the seven infernal halls,” occupied by the demons, who are the incarnation of all human vices. These seven hells are subdivided into innumerable compartments corresponding to every species of sin, where the demons torture the poor deluded human beings who have suffered themselves to be led astray whilst on earth. The prince of this region of darkness is Sāmāel, the evil spirit, the serpent who seduced Eve. His wife is the Harlot or the Woman of Whoredom. The two are treated as one person, and are called “the Beast” (Zohar, ii. 255-259, with i. 35).

The whole universe, however, was incomplete, and did not receive its finishing stroke till man was formed, who is the acme of the creation and the microcosm. “The heavenly Adam (i.e.the ten Sephiroth) who emanatedDoctrine of Man.from the highest primordial obscurity (i.e.the Ēn Sōph) created the earthly Adam” (Zohar, ii. 70). “Man is both the import and the highest degree of creation, for which reason he was formed on the sixth day. As soon as man was created everything was complete, including the upper and nether worlds, for everything is comprised in man. He unites in himself all forms” (Zohar, iii. 48). Each member of his body corresponds to a part of the visible universe. “Just as we see in the firmament above, covering all things, different signs which are formed of the stars and the planets, and which contain secret things and profound mysteries studied by those who are wise and expert in these things; so there are in the skin, which is the cover of the body of the son of man, and which is like the sky that covers all things above, signs and features which are the stars and planets of the skin, indicating secret things and profound mysteries whereby the wise are attracted who understand the reading of the mysteries in the human face” (Zohar, ii. 76). The human form is shaped after the four letters which constitute the Jewish Tetragrammaton (q.v.; see alsoJehovah). The head is in the shape ofי, the arms and the shoulders are likeה, the breast likeו, and the two legs with the back again resembleה(Zohar, ii. 72). The souls of the whole human race pre-exist in the World of Emanations, and are all destined to inhabit human bodies. Like the Sephiroth from which it emanates, every soul has ten potencies, consisting of a trinity of triads. (1) The Spirit (nĕshāmah), which is the highest degree of being, corresponds to and is operated upon by the Crown, which is the highest triad in the Sephiroth, and is called the Intellectual World; (2) the Soul (rūăḥ), which is the seat of the moral qualities, corresponds to and is operated upon by Beauty, which is the second triad in the Sephiroth, and is called the Moral World; and (3) the Cruder Soul (nephesh), which is immediately connected with the body, and is the cause of its lower instincts and the animal life, corresponds to and is operated upon by Foundation, the third triad in the Sephiroth, called the Material World. Each soul prior to its entering into this world consists of male and female united into one being. When it descends on this earth the two parts are separated and animate two different bodies. “At the time of marriage the Holy One, blessed be he, who knows all souls and spirits, unites them again as they were before; and they again constitute one body and one soul, forming as it were the right and the left of the individual.... This union, however, is influenced by the deeds of the man and by the ways in which he walks. If the man is pure and his conduct is pleasing in the sight of God, he is united with that female part of the soul which was his component part prior to his birth” (Zohar, i. 91). The soul’s destiny upon earth is to develop those perfections the germs of which are eternally implanted in it, and it ultimately must return to the infinite source from which it emanated. Hence, if, after assuming a body and sojourning upon earth, it becomes polluted by sin and fails to acquire the experience for which it descends from heaven, it must three times reinhabit a body, till it is able to ascend in a purified state through repeated trials. If, after its third residence in a human body, it is still too weak to withstand the contamination of sin, it is united with another soul, in order that by their combined efforts it may resist the pollution which by itself it was unable to conquer. When the whole pleroma of pre-existent souls in the world of the Sephiroth shall have descended and occupied human bodies and have passed their period of probation and have returned purified to the bosom of the infinite Source, then the soul of Messiah will descend from the region of souls; then the great Jubilee will commence. There shall be no more sin, no more temptation, no more suffering. Universal restoration will take place. Satan himself, “the venomous Beast,” will be restored to his angelic nature. Life will be an everlasting feast, a Sabbath without end. All souls will be united with the Highest Soul, and will supplement each other in the Holy of Holies of the Seven Halls (Zohar, i. 45, 168; ii. 97).

According to the Kabbalah all these esoteric doctrines are contained in the Hebrew Scriptures. The uninitiated cannot perceive them; but they are plainly revealed to the spiritually minded, who discern the profound importAntiquity and Influence of Kabbalah.of this theosophy beneath the surface of the letters and words of Holy Writ. “If the law simply consists of ordinary expressions and narratives, such as the words of Esau, Hagar, Laban, the ass of Balaam or Balaam himself, why should it be called the law of truth, the perfect law, the true witness of God? Each word contains a sublime source, each narrative points not only to the single instance in question, but also to generals” (Zohar, iii. 149, cf. 152).

To obtain these heavenly mysteries, which alone make the Torah superior to profane codes, definite hermeneutical rules are employed, of which the following are the most important. (1) The words of several verses in the Hebrew Scriptures which are regarded as containing a recondite sense are placed over each other, and the letters are formed into new words by reading them vertically. (2) The words of the text are ranged in squares in such a manner as to be read either vertically or boustrophedon. (3) The words arejoined together and redivided. (4) The initials and final letters of several words are formed into separate words. (5) Every letter of a word is reduced to its numerical value, and the word is explained by another of the same quantity. (6) Every letter of a word is taken to be the initial or abbreviation of a word. (7) The twenty-two letters of the alphabet are divided into two halves; one half is placed above the other; and the two letters which thus become associated are interchanged. By this permutation,Aleph, the first letter of the alphabet, becomesLamed, the twelfth letter;BethbecomesMem, and so on. This cipher alphabet is calledAlbam, from the first interchangeable pairs. (8) The commutation of the twenty-two letters is effected by the last letter of the alphabet taking the place of the first, the last but one the place of the second, and so forth. This cipher is calledAtbash. These hermeneutical canons are much older than the Kabbalah. They obtained in the synagogue from time immemorial, and were used by the Christian fathers in the interpretation of Scripture.4Thus Canon V., according to which a word is reduced to its numerical value and interpreted by another word of the same value, is recognized in the New Testament (cf. Rev. xiii. 18). Canon VI. is adopted by Irenaeus, who tells us that, according to the learned among the Hebrews, the name Jesus contains two letters and a half, and signifies that Lord who contains heaven and earth [ieshu=יהוה שמים וארץ] (Against Heresies, ii. xxiv., i. 205, ed. Clark). The cipherAtbash(Canon VIII.) is used in Jeremiah xxv. 26, li. 41, where Sheshach is written for Babel. In Jer. li. 1,לב קמי,Leb-Kamai(“the heart of them that rise up against me”), is written forכשדים,Chaldea, by the same rule.

Exegesis of this sort is not the characteristic of any single circle, people or century; unscientific methods of biblical interpretation have prevailed from Philo’s treatment of the Pentateuch to modern apologetic interpretations of Genesis, ch. i.5The Kabbalah itself is but an extreme and remarkable development of certain forms of thought which had never been absent from Judaism; it is bound up with earlier tendencies to mysticism, with man’s inherent striving to enter into communion with the Deity. To seek its sources would be futile. The Pythagorean theory of numbers, Neoplatonic ideas of emanation, the Logos, the personified Wisdom, Gnosticism—these and many other features combine to show the antiquity of tendencies which, clad in other shapes, are already found in the old pre-Christian Oriental religions.6In its more mature form the Kabbalah belongs to the period when medieval Christian mysticism was beginning to manifest itself (viz. in Eckhart, towards end of 13th century); it is an age which also produced the rationalism of Maimonides (q.v.). Although some of its foremost exponents were famous Talmudists, it was a protest against excessive intellectualism and Aristotelian scholasticism. It laid stress, not on external authority, as did the Jewish law, but on individual experience and inward meditation. “The mystics accorded the first place to prayer, which was considered as a mystical progress towards God, demanding a state of ecstasy.”7As a result, some of the finest specimens of Jewish devotional literature and some of the best types of Jewish individual character have been Kabbalist.8On the other hand, the Kabbalah has been condemned, and nowhere more strongly than among the Jews themselves. Jewish orthodoxy found itself attacked by the more revolutionary aspects of mysticism and its tendencies to alter established customs. While the medieval scholasticism denied the possibility of knowing anything unattainable by reason, the spirit of the Kabbalah held that the Deity could be realized, and it sought to bridge the gulf. Thus it encouraged an unrestrained emotionalism, rank superstition, an unhealthy asceticism, and the employment of artificial means to induce the ecstatic state. That this brought moral laxity was a stronger reason for condemning the Kabbalah, and the evil effects of nervous degeneration find a more recent illustration in the mysticism of the Chasidim (Ḥăsīdīm, “saints”), a Jewish sect in eastern Europe which started from a movement in the 18th century against the exaggerated casuistry of contemporary rabbis, and combined much that was spiritual and beautiful with extreme emotionalism and degradation.9The appearance of the Kabbalah and of other forms of mysticism in Judaism may seem contrary to ordinary and narrow conceptions of orthodox Jewish legalism. Its interest lies, not in its doctrines, which have often been absurdly over-estimated (particularly among Christians), but in its contribution to the study of human thought. It supplied a want which has always been felt by certain types, and it became a movement which had mischievous effects upon ill-balanced minds. As usual, the excessive self-introspection was not checked by a rational criticism; the individual was guided by his own reason, the limitations of which he did not realize; and in becoming a law unto himself he ignored the accumulated experiences of civilized humanity.10

A feature of greater interest is the extraordinary part which this theosophy played in the Christian Church, especially at the time of the Renaissance. We have already seen that the Sephiric decade or the archetypal man, like Christ, is considered to be of a double nature, both infinite and finite, perfect and imperfect. More distinct, however, is the doctrine of the Trinity. In Deut. vi. 43, where Yahweh occurs first, then Ĕlōhēnū, and then again Yahweh, we are told “The voice though one, consists of three elements, fire (i.e.warmth), air (i.e.breath), and water (i.e.humidity), yet all three are one in the mystery of the voice and can only be one. Thus also Yahweh, Ĕlōhēnū, Yahweh, constitute one—three forms which are one” (Zohar, ii. 43; compare iii. 65). Discussing the thrice holy in Isaiah vi. 3, one codex of theZoharhad the following remark: “The first holy denotes the Holy Father, the second the Holy Son, and the third the Holy Ghost” (cf. Galatinus,De arcanis cathol.lib. ii. c. 3, p. 31; Wolf,Bibliotheca hebraica, i. 1136). Still more distinct is the doctrine of the atonement. “The Messiah invokes all the sufferings, pain, and afflictions of Israel to come upon Him. Now if He did not remove them thus and take them upon Himself, no man could endure the sufferings of Israel, due as their punishment for transgressing the law; as it is written (Isa. liii. 4), Surely He hath borne our griefs and carried our sorrows” (Zohar, ii. 12). These and similar statements favouring the doctrines of the New Testament made many Kabbalists of the highest position in the synagogue embrace the Christian faith and write elaborate books to win their Jewish brethren over to Christ. As early as 1450 a company of Jewish converts in Spain, at the head of which were Paul de Heredia, Vidal de Saragossa de Aragon, and Davila, published compilations of Kabbalistic treatises to prove from them the doctrines of Christianity. They were followed by Paul Rici, professor at Pavia, and physician to the emperor Maximilian I. Among the best-known non-Jewish exponents of the Kabbalah were the Italian count Pico di Mirandola (1463-1494), the renowned Johann Reuchlin (1455-1522), Heinrich Cornelius Agrippa of Nettesheim (1487-1535), Theophrastus Paracelsus (1493-1541), and, later, the Englishman Robert Fludd (1574-1637). Prominent among the “nine hundred theses” which Mirandola had placarded in Rome, and which he undertook to defend in the presence of all European scholars, whom he invited to the Eternal City, promising to defray their travelling expenses, was the following: “No science yields greater proof of the divinity of Christ than magic and the Kabbalah.” Mirandola so convinced Pope Sixtus of the paramount importance of the Kabbalah as an auxiliary to Christianity that his holiness exerted himself to have Kabbalistic writings translated into Latin for the use of divinity students. With equal zeal did Reuchlin act as theapostle of the Kabbalah. His treatises exercised an almost magic influence upon the greatest thinkers of the time. Pope Leo X. and the early Reformers were alike captivated by the charms of the Kabbalah as propounded by Reuchlin, and not only divines, but statesmen and warriors, began to study the Oriental languages in order to be able to fathom the mysteries of Jewish theosophy. TheZohar, that farrago of absurdity and spiritual devotion, was the weapon with which these Christians defended Jewish literature against hostile ecclesiastic bodies (Abrahams,Jew. Lit.p. 106). Thus the Kabbalah linked the old scholasticism with the new and independent inquiries in learning and philosophy after the Renaissance, and although it had evolved a remarkably bizarre conception of the universe, it partly anticipated, in its own way, the scientific study of natural philosophy.11Jewish theosophy, then, with its good and evil tendencies, and with its varied results, may thus claim to have played no unimportant part in the history of European scholarship and thought.

The main sources to be noticed are:—1. TheSēpher Yĕsīrah, or “book of creation,” not the old Hilkoth Y. (“rules of creation”), which belongs to the Talmudic period (on which see Kohler,Jew. Ency.xii. 602 seq.),Main Sources.but a later treatise, a combination of medieval natural philosophy and mysticism. It has been variously ascribed to the patriarch Abraham and to the illustrious rabbi ‘Aqiba; its essential elements, however, maybe of the 3rd or 4th centuryA.D., and it is apparently earlier than the 9th (see L. Ginzberg,op. cit.603 sqq.). It has “had a greater influence on the development of the Jewish mind than almost any other book after the completion of the Talmud” (ibid.).2. TheBāhīr(“brilliant,” Job. xxxvii. 21), though ascribed to Neḥunyah b. Haqqanah (1st centuryA.D.), is first quoted by Naḥmanides, and is now attributed to his teacher Ezra or Azriel (1160-1238). It shows the influence of theSēpher Yēṣīrah, is marked by the teaching of a celestial Trinity, is a rough outline of what theZoharwas destined to be, and gave the first opening to a thorough study of metaphysics among the Jews. (See further 1. Broydé,Jew. Ency.ii. 442 seq.).3. TheZohar(“shining,” Dan. xii. 3) is a commentary on the Pentateuch, according to its division into fifty-two hebdomadal lessons. It begins with the exposition of Gen. i. 4 (“let there be light”) and includes eleven dissertations: (1) “Additions and Supplements”; (2) “The Mansions and Abodes,” describing the structure of paradise and hell; (3) “The Mysteries of the Pentateuch,” describing the evolution of the Sephiroth, &c.; (4) “The Hidden Interpretation,” deducing esoteric doctrine from the narratives in the Pentateuch; (5) “The Faithful Shepherd,” recording discussions between Moses the faithful shepherd, the prophet Elijah and R. Simon b. Yoḥai, the reputed compiler of theZohar; (6) “The Secret of Secrets,” a treatise on physiognomy and psychology; (7) “The Aged,”i.e.the prophet Elijah, discoursing with R. Simon on the doctrine of transmigration as evolved from Exod. xxi. 1-xxiv. 18; (8) “The Book of Secrets,” discourses on cosmogony and demonology; (9) “The Great Assembly,” discourses of R. Simon to his numerous assembly of disciples on the form of the Deity and on pneumatology; (10) “The Young Man,” discourses by young men of superhuman origin on the mysteries of ablutions; and (11) “The Small Assembly,” containing the discourses on the Sephiroth which R. Simon delivered to the small congregation of six surviving disciples. TheZoharpretends to be a compilation made by Simon b. Yoḥai (the second centuryA.D.) of doctrines which God communicated to Adam in Paradise, and which have been received uninterruptedly from the mouths of the patriarchs and prophets. It was discovered, so the story went, in a cavern in Galilee where it had been hidden for a thousand years. Amongst the many facts, however, established by modern criticism which prove theZoharto be a compilation of the 13th century, are the following: (1) theZoharitself praises most fulsomely R. Simon, its reputed author, and exalts him above Moses; (2) it mystically explains the Hebrew vowel points, which did not obtain till 570; (3) the compiler borrows two verses from the celebrated hymn called “The Royal Diadem,” written by Ibn Gabirol, who was born about 1021; (4) it mentions the capture of Jerusalem by the crusaders and the re-taking of the Holy City by the Saracens; (5) it speaks of the comet which appeared at Rome, 15th July 1264, under the pontificate of Urban IV.; (6) by a slip theZoharassigns a reason why its contents were not revealed before 5060-5066 A.M.,i.e.1300-1306A.D., (7) the doctrine of the Ēn Sōph and the Sephiroth was not known before the 13th century; and (8) the very existence of theZoharitself was not known prior to the 13th century. Hence it is now believed that Moses de Leon (d. 1305), who first circulated and sold theZoharas the production of R. Simon, was himself the author or compiler. That eminent scholars both in the synagogue and in the church should have been induced to believe in its antiquity is owing to the fact that theZoharembodies many older opinions and doctrines, and the undoubted antiquity of some of them has served as a lever in the minds of these scholars to raise the late speculations about the Ēn Sōph, the Sephiroth, &c., to the same age.Literature.—The study of the whole subject being wrapped up with Gnosticism and Oriental theosophy, the related literature is immense. Among the more important works may be mentioned, Baron von Rosenroth’sKabbala Denudata(Sulzbach, 1677-1678; Frankfort, 1684); A. Franck,La Kabbale(Paris, 2nd ed., 1889; German by Jellinek, Leipzig, 1844); C. D. Ginsburg,The Kabbalah, its Doctrines, Development and Literature(London, 1865); I. Meyer,Qabbalah(Philadelphia, 1888); Rubin,Kabbala und Agada(Vienna, 1895),Heidentum und Kabbalah(1893); Karppe,Ét. sur les origines du Zohar(Paris, 1891); A. E. Waite,Doctrine and Literature of the Kabbalah(London, 1902); Flügel,Philosophy, Kabbala, &c.(Baltimore, 1902); D. Neumark,Gesch. d. Jüd. Philosophie d. Mittelalters(Berlin, 1907); also S. A. Binion, in C. D. Warner’sWorld’s Best Literature, 8425 sqq. See further the very full articles in theJewish Ency.by K. Kohler and L. Ginzberg (“Cabbala”), I. Broydé (“Bahir,” “Zohar”), with the references.

The main sources to be noticed are:—

1. TheSēpher Yĕsīrah, or “book of creation,” not the old Hilkoth Y. (“rules of creation”), which belongs to the Talmudic period (on which see Kohler,Jew. Ency.xii. 602 seq.),Main Sources.but a later treatise, a combination of medieval natural philosophy and mysticism. It has been variously ascribed to the patriarch Abraham and to the illustrious rabbi ‘Aqiba; its essential elements, however, maybe of the 3rd or 4th centuryA.D., and it is apparently earlier than the 9th (see L. Ginzberg,op. cit.603 sqq.). It has “had a greater influence on the development of the Jewish mind than almost any other book after the completion of the Talmud” (ibid.).

2. TheBāhīr(“brilliant,” Job. xxxvii. 21), though ascribed to Neḥunyah b. Haqqanah (1st centuryA.D.), is first quoted by Naḥmanides, and is now attributed to his teacher Ezra or Azriel (1160-1238). It shows the influence of theSēpher Yēṣīrah, is marked by the teaching of a celestial Trinity, is a rough outline of what theZoharwas destined to be, and gave the first opening to a thorough study of metaphysics among the Jews. (See further 1. Broydé,Jew. Ency.ii. 442 seq.).

3. TheZohar(“shining,” Dan. xii. 3) is a commentary on the Pentateuch, according to its division into fifty-two hebdomadal lessons. It begins with the exposition of Gen. i. 4 (“let there be light”) and includes eleven dissertations: (1) “Additions and Supplements”; (2) “The Mansions and Abodes,” describing the structure of paradise and hell; (3) “The Mysteries of the Pentateuch,” describing the evolution of the Sephiroth, &c.; (4) “The Hidden Interpretation,” deducing esoteric doctrine from the narratives in the Pentateuch; (5) “The Faithful Shepherd,” recording discussions between Moses the faithful shepherd, the prophet Elijah and R. Simon b. Yoḥai, the reputed compiler of theZohar; (6) “The Secret of Secrets,” a treatise on physiognomy and psychology; (7) “The Aged,”i.e.the prophet Elijah, discoursing with R. Simon on the doctrine of transmigration as evolved from Exod. xxi. 1-xxiv. 18; (8) “The Book of Secrets,” discourses on cosmogony and demonology; (9) “The Great Assembly,” discourses of R. Simon to his numerous assembly of disciples on the form of the Deity and on pneumatology; (10) “The Young Man,” discourses by young men of superhuman origin on the mysteries of ablutions; and (11) “The Small Assembly,” containing the discourses on the Sephiroth which R. Simon delivered to the small congregation of six surviving disciples. TheZoharpretends to be a compilation made by Simon b. Yoḥai (the second centuryA.D.) of doctrines which God communicated to Adam in Paradise, and which have been received uninterruptedly from the mouths of the patriarchs and prophets. It was discovered, so the story went, in a cavern in Galilee where it had been hidden for a thousand years. Amongst the many facts, however, established by modern criticism which prove theZoharto be a compilation of the 13th century, are the following: (1) theZoharitself praises most fulsomely R. Simon, its reputed author, and exalts him above Moses; (2) it mystically explains the Hebrew vowel points, which did not obtain till 570; (3) the compiler borrows two verses from the celebrated hymn called “The Royal Diadem,” written by Ibn Gabirol, who was born about 1021; (4) it mentions the capture of Jerusalem by the crusaders and the re-taking of the Holy City by the Saracens; (5) it speaks of the comet which appeared at Rome, 15th July 1264, under the pontificate of Urban IV.; (6) by a slip theZoharassigns a reason why its contents were not revealed before 5060-5066 A.M.,i.e.1300-1306A.D., (7) the doctrine of the Ēn Sōph and the Sephiroth was not known before the 13th century; and (8) the very existence of theZoharitself was not known prior to the 13th century. Hence it is now believed that Moses de Leon (d. 1305), who first circulated and sold theZoharas the production of R. Simon, was himself the author or compiler. That eminent scholars both in the synagogue and in the church should have been induced to believe in its antiquity is owing to the fact that theZoharembodies many older opinions and doctrines, and the undoubted antiquity of some of them has served as a lever in the minds of these scholars to raise the late speculations about the Ēn Sōph, the Sephiroth, &c., to the same age.

Literature.—The study of the whole subject being wrapped up with Gnosticism and Oriental theosophy, the related literature is immense. Among the more important works may be mentioned, Baron von Rosenroth’sKabbala Denudata(Sulzbach, 1677-1678; Frankfort, 1684); A. Franck,La Kabbale(Paris, 2nd ed., 1889; German by Jellinek, Leipzig, 1844); C. D. Ginsburg,The Kabbalah, its Doctrines, Development and Literature(London, 1865); I. Meyer,Qabbalah(Philadelphia, 1888); Rubin,Kabbala und Agada(Vienna, 1895),Heidentum und Kabbalah(1893); Karppe,Ét. sur les origines du Zohar(Paris, 1891); A. E. Waite,Doctrine and Literature of the Kabbalah(London, 1902); Flügel,Philosophy, Kabbala, &c.(Baltimore, 1902); D. Neumark,Gesch. d. Jüd. Philosophie d. Mittelalters(Berlin, 1907); also S. A. Binion, in C. D. Warner’sWorld’s Best Literature, 8425 sqq. See further the very full articles in theJewish Ency.by K. Kohler and L. Ginzberg (“Cabbala”), I. Broydé (“Bahir,” “Zohar”), with the references.

Back to Index Next