Daniel Reiser HISTORICISM AND/OR PHENOMENOLOGY IN THE STUDY OF JEWISH MYSTICISM: IMAGERY TECHNIQUES IN THE TEACHINGS OF RABBI KALONYMUS KALMAN SHAPIRA AS A CASE STUDY INTRODUCTION In recent years, the phenomenological and comparative approaches to the study of Jewish mysticism have come under criticism. This critique has been focused upon the very concept of ‘‘mysticism,’’ calling into question whether or not different mystical elements in different reli- gious faith traditions may be compared with one another. This per- spective is typified in the latest works of Boaz Huss, who understands all spiritual phenomena as creations anchored in their respective his- torical, social, and political contexts: I believe that the different cultural formations categorized as ‘‘Jewish mysticism’’ should not be studied as expressions of a universal reli- gious phenomenon and as different phases in the development of a Jewish mystical tradition, but rather as cultural products that were created as a result of various political interests, in distinctive histor- ical, economic and social contexts.1 Of course, this approach is valuable and quite legitimate. But Huss, who represents a much broader trend in contemporary Jewish Studies, demands that we contextualize all mystical phenomena at the expense, and negation, of the phenomenological and comparative perspec- tives.2 According to Huss, phenomenological research has a clear ideo- logical and theological aim.3 It seems that the wheel of fortune is turning once more, and Jewish Studies has returned to a position that was once criticized. The tendency toward the historicization of Kabbalah found in the work of Gershom Scholem, and especially the preference for a schema of historical continuity in which each progressive stage grew directly from that which preceded it, was criticized by Scholem’s doi:10.1093/mj/kjv037 ß The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: [email protected] 2 Daniel Reiser students, most vociferously by Moshe Idel and Yehuda Liebes. According to Scholem, the expulsion from Spain gave birth to Lurianic Kabbalah, which led to Sabbateanism, culminating in the rise of Hasidism. Historical events were thus expressed through sym- bolism and kabbalistic mythos, embodied in historical movements. But Liebes has demonstrated that the works of many Kabbalists tran- scended the historical contexts in which they lived; their creative fac- ulties were not imprisoned within time and place. Idel has further proven that Kabbalists’ libraries were not defined exclusively to (con- fined to/defined by) texts produced in that era. Jewish mystics were influenced by so many different books and traditions that they were to some degree above time.4 Huss, who is the student of Liebes and Idel, has tried to roll back the clock and return the scholarly focus to exam- ining historical context. This article will challenge the exclusive quest for historicization in the study of Jewish mysticism. By exploring the writings of a modern mystic of the twentieth century, I hope to demonstrate the advantages of phenomenology. To be clear, I do not in any way seek to invalidate approaches to the study of Kabbalah that focus upon historical, socio- logical, and political contexts. The contribution of this type of research is great indeed. My goal is to shed some light on the great lacunae that appears when this approach becomes exclusivist. Both phenomenology and historicization can certainly coexist. Indeed, his- torical research that does not dismiss phenomenology as driven by ideology will be greatly enriched by the wider perspective. IMAGERY TECHNIQUES IN THE DOCTRINE OF THE PIASECZNO REBBE The Rebbe of Piaseczno, R. Kalonymus Kalman Shapira (1889–1943),5 developed a great many guided imagery techniques that are unique in the world of Hasidic literature both in terms of their number and their quality.6 Imagery exercises, i.e. visualizing an imaginary picture, have been a part of prophetic Kabbalah since the twelfth century. They were originally primarily linguistic in nature, and the name of God in all of its variations and permutations became a focal point for im- agery-visionary exercises. Linguistic imagery exercises are found also in the sixteenth century mystical systems of both R. Isaac Luria and R. Moses Cordovero.7 Later on we find another step in imagery exer- cises which are found with much greater frequency in Hasidic litera- ture of the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. These generally consist of envisioning a particular scene, such as leaping into a fire, imagining God, visualizing one’s death, gazing upon the Imagery techniques and Rabbi Shapira 3 tsaddik, and so forth. Indeed, most of these passages reflect earlier precedents found in Zoharic and kabbalistic literature. I do not intend to argue that there are no linguistic imagery exercises in Hasidic literature, but I am suggesting that in Hasidism we see a trans- formation from a period in which linguistic imagery was central (alongside a smaller number of other exercises) to an emphasis upon visualization as the primary meditative technique. This trend reached its zenith in the writings of R. Shapira. His imagery exercises, however, combined many different scenes into extended visualizations that were quite long and complicated, like a dream or a film, a phe- nomenon that has no significant precedent in Jewish literature before his time.8 What caused R. Shapira to devote so much energy to developing imagery techniques, both in literary form and as an embodied reli- gious practice? We should note that R. Shapira was aware of his liter- ary and imaginative powers, and he employed them self-consciously and intentionally,9 just as he called upon others to do: ‘‘to bring all of one’s emotional intensity, ecstasy and even the human imagination into the house of God, transforming them into wings and flying with them like the angels on high.’’10 Scholars have examined R. Shapira’s devel- opment of imagery techniques as a response to the historical phenom- enon of secularism and the ensuing crisis in the religious world.11 This position is made quite clear in his writings,12 and it seems that one of his goals in creating these imagery techniques was to infuse religious experience with the potential to compete with the type of experiences offered by modern secular culture. According to R. Shapira, it is not enough for teachers to transmit great ideas to their students and excite them intellectually; they must present religious experiences that can serve as an alternative to ‘‘wandering in strange fields’’: For even if we return a youth’s essential mind by enlightening him ...nevertheless ...his fiery passions will leave before their time - [he will] become excited and impassioned by the imagined beauty of the vanities of the world, such as theatres and all sorts of frivolities and abandon of the world. If we do not come first and arouse his soul to feel excited by the commandments and become ecstatic from the Torah and the light of God, than we will fail, God forbid.13 The historical context certainly represents an important element for understanding R. Shapira’s mystical teachings. However, it is my con- tention that a phenomenological approach has much to offer our analysis of how and why he developed these interesting imagery tech- niques. More specifically, I believe that the concept of ‘‘empower- ment,’’ or ‘‘intensification,’’ will provide a crucial lens through which we can better understand R. Shapira’s mystical imagery praxis. 4 Daniel Reiser THE ESSENTIALIST SCHOOL, THE CONSTRUCTIVIST SCHOOL, AND THE PHENOMENON OF EMPOWERMENT IN THE STUDY OF MYSTICISM There is an ongoing debate among scholars of religion and philosophy regarding the nature of mysticism. Those who follow the ‘‘essentialist’’ approach view mysticism as an essential and universally accessible phe- nomenon, and therefore identify a common core in mystical teachings from all over the world. However, adherents of the ‘‘contextual’’ or ‘‘constructivist’’ school believe that mystical experiences are necessarily shaped (or even preordained) by the mystic’s culture, language, and religious tradition. Scholars who embrace this approach deny the ex- istence of any universal mystical elements.14 The essentialist school sees history as irrelevant to the study of mysticism, since they maintain that mysticism reflects the private and temporary experience of individuals in their own religious life, largely unaffected by the broader historical context of their environment and society.15 In contrast, the constructivist school maintains that historical context is essential for understanding the mystical experience. Thus the Christian mystic, in contrast to the Jewish mystic, is totally unified with the divine object of his contemplation, an experience that flows from the historical process of a Christian worldview that allows for unio mystica.16 Moshe Idel has raised the possibility that these two approaches are not necessarily mutually exclusive. He argues that although each and every mystical tradition exists with a certain religious and social con- text, and although it is possible to accept the constructivist claim that sees this context as its very foundation and not just an external ex- pression, it is still possible to identify a common essential element shared by different mystical traditions, namely ‘‘intensification’’ or ‘‘empowerment.’’ Each mystical tradition should be analyzed within its context, but all are united by similar processes of intensification. Indeed, each mystical tradition intensifies its own religion, but the common element of empowerment found in different mysticisms allows us to compare them in spite of these important distinctions.17 Judaism is a religion characterized by the performance of deeds. Empowerment within this framework means the intensification of the normative religious experiences, defined by these deeds, to such a great degree that they are transformed into mystical experiences— moments of living encounter with God or the experience of the divine Presence.18 Considering this element of empowerment will help us understand how R.