Avishai BAR ASHER Hebrew University of Jerusalem FROM ALPHABETICAL MYSTICISM TO THEOSOPHICAL KABBALAH: A RARE WITNESS TO AN INTERMEDIATE STAGE OF MOSES DE LEÓN’S THOUGHT ABSTRACT This article investigates Moses de León’s early kabbalistic thought through a cluster of his unsigned works in manuscript, some of which have only recently come to light, and others of which have not received any scholarly attention at all. The analysis of these works reveals an intermediate stage of his thought that bridges his earlier eso- teric writing with the later, and more familiar, theosophical compositions that bear his name. The folia of these unsigned works are replete with speculations concerning the letters of the Hebrew alphabet and the names of God, through which de León expressed a unique blend of theology and angelology that was shaped, mainly, by Aristotelian paradigms. Scholars previously posited that de León, and other kabbalists active in roughly the same time and place, abruptly and mysteriously abandoned this worldview for a new one predicated on the theosophical foundation of a multiplicity of attributes or sephirot within the emanated Godhead. Through careful study of these works in manuscript, particularly a neglected work in MS Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibl., hebr. 47, the author recovers a transitional period in de León’s thought, when he had not quite given up one conceptual paradigm for the other. A new historiographical account is then proposed, according to which Castilian kabbalists living in the genera- tion of the Zohar absorbed the new theosophy slowly and tried to incorporate it into existing paradigms, resulting in unique hybrids, even as they also consolidated new modes of speculation. This article therefore provides an alternative account of a criti- cal stage in the history of medieval kabbalah, one which concerns the fundamental stratum of the so-called Sepher ha-Zohar. In addition to deepening our knowledge of the conceptual humus from which the Zohar’s foundational concepts germinated, the findings of this study force us to reconsider what we know about the appearance of the most canonical work in Kabbalistic literature. RÉSUMÉ Cet article examine la pensée kabbalistique de Moïse de León à travers un ensemble de ses œuvres manuscrites non signées, dont certaines n’ont été découvertes que récemment et d’autres n’ont fait l’objet d’aucune étude scientifique. L’analyse de ces œuvres met à nu une étape intermédiaire de sa pensée qui fait le lien entre la doctrine reflétée par ses premières œuvres ésotériques et les compositions théosophiques plus Revue des études juives, 179 (3-4), juillet-décembre 2020, pp. 351-384. doi: 10.2143/REJ.179.3.3288802 352 FROM ALPHABETICAL MYSTICISM TO THEOSOPHICAL KABBALAH tardives et plus familières qui portent son nom. Les pages de ces œuvres non signées renferment des spéculations sur les lettres de l’alphabet hébraïque et les noms de Dieu, à travers lesquelles Moïse de León exprime un mélange original de théologie et d’angélologie s’inscrivant pour l’essentiel dans un cadre aristotélicien. Les chercheurs ont jusqu’ici considéré que Moïse de León et d’autres kabbalistes actifs à peu près à la même période et au même endroit avaient brusquement et mystérieusement aban- donné cette vision du monde pour une autre, reposant sur le fondement théosophique d’une multiplicité d’attributs ou sephirot émanés au sein de la divinité. En étudiant attentivement ces œuvres manuscrites, en particulier un traité négligé présent dans le ms. Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibl., Cod. hebr. 47, l’auteur de cet article retrouve une période de transition dans la pensée de Moïse de León, alors qu’il n’avait pas tout à fait abandonné le premier paradigme conceptuel. Un nouveau récit historiographique est alors proposé, selon lequel les kabbalistes castillans vivant dans la génération du Zohar ont lentement absorbé la nouvelle théosophie et ont essayé de l’incorporer aux paradigmes existants, ce qui a donné lieu à la production de pensées hybrides origi- nales et à l’élaboration de nouveaux modes de spéculation. Cet article présente donc une nouvelle façon de rendre compte d’une étape critique de l’histoire de la Kabbale médiévale, concernant la strate fondamentale du Sepher ha-Zohar. En plus d’appro- fondir notre connaissance du terreau conceptuel sur lequel ont germé les concepts fondateurs du Zohar, les résultats de cette étude nous conduisent à penser à nouveaux frais l’apparition de l’œuvre canonique entre toutes de la littérature kabbalistique. I. Introduction The medieval doctrine of the ten sephirot, the veritable heart of theo- sophic kabbalah, is structurally and terminologically indebted to a basic decadic speculative framework found in Sepher Yeṣira. The “ten sephirot belima” mentioned repeatedly in the book are widely considered the mold into which various kabbalistic groups poured their own configurations of ten potencies, attributes, gradations, or sephirot created (or emanated, in Neo- platonic accounts) by God. From kabbalah’s first appearance and through the thirteenth century, different arrays of cognomina, allusions, and “sym- bols” evolved to refer to the aspects of this divine decad, and much space was devoted to their characterization and explication. The anonymous and enigmatic homilies in Sepher ha-Bahir – usually identified as the earliest examples of theosophic kabbalah in our possession – exercised great influence during kabbalah’s formative period. Many of the homilies reflect on the letterforms of the Hebrew alphabet, which they conceive as linguistic and graphic blueprints of the divine architecture.1 Whether the homilies of Sepher 1. See esp.: H. PEDAYA, “The Provencal Stratum in the Redaction of Sefer ha-Bahir” (Hebrew), Jerusalem Studies in Jewish Thought, 9/2 (1990), p. 139-164; O. H. LEHMANN, “The Theology of the Mystical Book Bahir and Its Sources,” Studia Patristica, 1 (1957), p. 477-483; FROM ALPHABETICAL MYSTICISM TO THEOSOPHICAL KABBALAH 353 ha-Bahir are already correlated with Sepher Yeṣira’s ten sephirot is hard to determine, but the connection is certainly made by the earliest groups to draw on the Bahir. Over time, interpretive activity concerning the Hebrew alphabet and its secrets increased in most circles of theosophic kabbalists.2 Early rabbinic literature fueled this facet of kabbalistic creativity (we see this in classic midrashim on letters in the Torah and Talmudic aggadot about the alphabet, in Ši‘ur Qoma, in the Hekhalot and Merkabha literature, and in neglected magical works such as the Otiyyot de-Rabbi ‘Aqibha)3 as did medieval exegesis of the letters, of the type found in the writings of R. Abraham Ibn Ezra.4 The earliest Catalonian kabbalists recorded a number of ancient traditions about the creation of the universe through letters (especially those of the Tetragrammaton: YHWH).5 Some of these they attributed to “the Ḥasid,” the Provençal kabbalist R. Isaac the Blind, son of R. Abraham b. David (Rabad) of Posquières.6 At the same time, they systematically deemphasized Sepher Yeṣira’s characterization of the ten sephirot as spheres or numbers. A perusal of the kabbalistic literature produced in Catalonia during the first two-thirds of the thirteenth century reveals minimal discussion of the numerological value of the letters or of the sephirot as numerical cyphers. Similarly, cosmo- gonic accounts from this same period, which are dedicated to defining the E. R. WOLFSON, “Hebraic and Hellenic Conceptions of Wisdom in Sefer ha-Bahir,” Poetics Today, 19 (1998), p. 151-156; J. DAUBER, Knowledge of God and the Development of Early Kabbalah, Leiden and Boston, 2010, p. 191-216. 2. For an extended discussion of these matters, see in particular the following compre- hensive studies with works cited: S. KATZ, “Mysticism and the Interpretation of Sacred Scripture,” in S. KATZ (ed.), Mysticism and Sacred Scripture, Oxford, 2000, p. 21-32; M. IDEL, Absorbing Perfections: Kabbalah and Interpretation, New Haven, 2002, and E. R. WOLFSON, Language, Eros, Being: Kabbalistic Hermeneutics and Poetic Imagination, New York, 2005. 3. K. E. GRÖZINGER, “The Names of God and the Celestial Powers: Their Function and Meaning in the Hekhalot Literature,” Jerusalem Studies in Jewish Thought, 6 (1987), p. 53- 70; E. R. WOLFSON, Alef, Mem, Tau: Kabbalistic Musings on Time, Truth, and Death, Berkeley, 2005, p. 145-166. 4. On the special influence of Ibn Ezra’s writings, such as Sepher Ṣaḥut, on the development of kabbalistic letter speculation, see D. NEUMARK, Toledot ha-Pilosophiya be-Yiśra’el [The History of Jewish Philosophy], vol. 1, New York, 1921, p. 258-260; E. R. WOLFSON, “Anthro- pomorphic Imagery and Letter Symbolism in the Zohar” (Hebrew), Jerusalem Studies in Jewish Thought, 8 (1989), p. 150-152. 5. See especially H. PEDAYA, Name and Sanctuary in the Teaching of R. Isaac the Blind (Hebrew), Jerusalem, 2001, p. 103-147. See now H. H. BEN-SASSON, YHW-H: Its Meanings in Biblical, Rabbinic, and Medieval Jewish Thought (Hebrew), Jerusalem, 2019, p. 171- 230. 6. See esp.: PEDAYA, Name and Sanctuary, p. 1-102; E. P. FISHBANE, “The Speech of Being, the Voice of God: Phonetic Mysticism in the Kabbalah of Asher ben David and His Contem- poraries,” Jewish Quarterly Review, 98 (2008), p. 485-521. 354 FROM ALPHABETICAL MYSTICISM TO THEOSOPHICAL KABBALAH role of the sephirot or the importance of primordial letters in the creation of the world, spend little time on the mathematical and Pythagorean specula- tions common in Sepher Yeṣira and its rich commentarial tradition. But Catalonia was the exception rather than the rule. Elsewhere, roughly contemporary schools of mystics and esotericists invested more energy into unpacking the meaning of the Hebrew alphabet. A few generations of mys- tics active in the Franco-German cultural orbit left behind a fascinating body of works dedicated to alphabetical speculation on the Godhead and on cosmo- logy. Compositions written by members of the Rhenish Kalonymide family7 stand out in this regard, as do works linked to Nehemiah of Erfurt (especially those which have come to light in recent years).8 Other regions witnessed the vigorous activity of R.