巴林及其史学:重新评估

IF 0.4 3区 哲学 0 RELIGION
JOURNAL OF RELIGION Pub Date : 2023-04-01 DOI:10.1086/723757
Avishai Bar-Asher
{"title":"巴林及其史学:重新评估","authors":"Avishai Bar-Asher","doi":"10.1086/723757","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The book Bahir is a linchpin in the current historiography of Kabbalah, yet its origins are murky. The dominant theory, espoused by Gershom Scholem and his successors, treats the Bahir as a stratified work whose earliest elements originated in antiquity in the East. The book supposedly underwent a long, tortuous process of textual consolidation, during which its components came into contact with various esoteric circles, such as the German Pietists and “first kabbalists” of southern France. This account is to a large extent the foundation of an all-encompassing history of Kabbalah’s emergence, which has not gone unchallenged but still profoundly shapes scholarly discourse. This study thoroughly reassesses all of the evidence for this grand narrative, and concludes that it is a blend of biased interpretation and imaginative invention, which proceeds from a purist, dichotomizing approach to textual, philological, socio-intellectual, and conceptual history. Furthermore, the narrative’s conceptual constructs have constricted scholarly thinking about core kabbalistic ideas, the nature of theosophical kabbalists, and more. Therefore, despite the satisfyingly granular detail of this narrative, we remain very much in the dark about the true origins of the Bahir and, by extension, of early Kabbalah. In the epilogue, I suggest fully reinvestigating the Bahir’s textual tradition, especially in light of recent discoveries, and partly reviving forgotten but promising historical and philological avenues of inquiry in order to write a new history of the so-called first kabbalistic book.","PeriodicalId":45199,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF RELIGION","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Bahir and Its Historiography: A Reassessment\",\"authors\":\"Avishai Bar-Asher\",\"doi\":\"10.1086/723757\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The book Bahir is a linchpin in the current historiography of Kabbalah, yet its origins are murky. The dominant theory, espoused by Gershom Scholem and his successors, treats the Bahir as a stratified work whose earliest elements originated in antiquity in the East. The book supposedly underwent a long, tortuous process of textual consolidation, during which its components came into contact with various esoteric circles, such as the German Pietists and “first kabbalists” of southern France. This account is to a large extent the foundation of an all-encompassing history of Kabbalah’s emergence, which has not gone unchallenged but still profoundly shapes scholarly discourse. This study thoroughly reassesses all of the evidence for this grand narrative, and concludes that it is a blend of biased interpretation and imaginative invention, which proceeds from a purist, dichotomizing approach to textual, philological, socio-intellectual, and conceptual history. Furthermore, the narrative’s conceptual constructs have constricted scholarly thinking about core kabbalistic ideas, the nature of theosophical kabbalists, and more. Therefore, despite the satisfyingly granular detail of this narrative, we remain very much in the dark about the true origins of the Bahir and, by extension, of early Kabbalah. In the epilogue, I suggest fully reinvestigating the Bahir’s textual tradition, especially in light of recent discoveries, and partly reviving forgotten but promising historical and philological avenues of inquiry in order to write a new history of the so-called first kabbalistic book.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45199,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JOURNAL OF RELIGION\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JOURNAL OF RELIGION\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1086/723757\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"RELIGION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JOURNAL OF RELIGION","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1086/723757","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

《巴希尔》一书是当前卡巴拉史学的关键,但其起源尚不明确。Gershom Scholem及其继任者所支持的主流理论将《巴希尔》视为一部分层作品,其最早的元素起源于东方的古代。据推测,这本书经历了一个漫长而曲折的文本整合过程,在这个过程中,它的组成部分接触到了各种神秘的圈子,比如德国的虔诚主义者和法国南部的“第一个卡巴利主义者”。这种叙述在很大程度上是卡巴拉出现的包罗万象的历史的基础,卡巴拉的出现并非没有受到质疑,但仍然深刻地影响着学术话语。这项研究彻底重新评估了这一宏大叙事的所有证据,并得出结论,这是一种有偏见的解释和富有想象力的发明的融合,它源于对文本、文献、社会智力和概念历史的纯粹主义、二分法的方法。此外,叙事的概念结构限制了学术界对卡巴利主义核心思想、神智卡巴利主义者本质等的思考。因此,尽管这个故事有着令人满意的细节,但我们对巴希尔的真实起源以及早期卡巴拉的真实起源仍然一无所知。在结语中,我建议充分重新审视巴希尔的文本传统,特别是考虑到最近的发现,并部分复兴被遗忘但有希望的历史和文献研究途径,以便为所谓的第一本卡巴利主义书籍写一部新的历史。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Bahir and Its Historiography: A Reassessment
The book Bahir is a linchpin in the current historiography of Kabbalah, yet its origins are murky. The dominant theory, espoused by Gershom Scholem and his successors, treats the Bahir as a stratified work whose earliest elements originated in antiquity in the East. The book supposedly underwent a long, tortuous process of textual consolidation, during which its components came into contact with various esoteric circles, such as the German Pietists and “first kabbalists” of southern France. This account is to a large extent the foundation of an all-encompassing history of Kabbalah’s emergence, which has not gone unchallenged but still profoundly shapes scholarly discourse. This study thoroughly reassesses all of the evidence for this grand narrative, and concludes that it is a blend of biased interpretation and imaginative invention, which proceeds from a purist, dichotomizing approach to textual, philological, socio-intellectual, and conceptual history. Furthermore, the narrative’s conceptual constructs have constricted scholarly thinking about core kabbalistic ideas, the nature of theosophical kabbalists, and more. Therefore, despite the satisfyingly granular detail of this narrative, we remain very much in the dark about the true origins of the Bahir and, by extension, of early Kabbalah. In the epilogue, I suggest fully reinvestigating the Bahir’s textual tradition, especially in light of recent discoveries, and partly reviving forgotten but promising historical and philological avenues of inquiry in order to write a new history of the so-called first kabbalistic book.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
65
期刊介绍: The Journal of Religion is one of the publications by which the Divinity School of The University of Chicago seeks to promote critical, hermeneutical, historical, and constructive inquiry into religion. While expecting articles to advance scholarship in their respective fields in a lucid, cogent, and fresh way, the Journal is especially interested in areas of research with a broad range of implications for scholars of religion, or cross-disciplinary relevance. The Editors welcome submissions in theology, religious ethics, and philosophy of religion, as well as articles that approach the role of religion in culture and society from a historical, sociological, psychological, linguistic, or artistic standpoint.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信