Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T20:57:20.456Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

On Talismanic Language in Jewish Mysticism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2024

Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Linguistic magic can be divided into three major categories: the fiatic, the Orphic and the talismanic. The first category includes the creation of the signified by its signifier, the best example being the creation of the world by divine words. The Orphic category assumes the possibility of enchanting an already existing entity by means of vocal material. Last but not least is the talismanic, based on the drawing of energy by means of language, in order to use this energy for magical purposes. While the fiatic view assumes the complete superiority of the creator over the created object, the Orphic presupposes a certain similarity between the subject-magician and its object, whose role is to understand and follow the instructions of the magician. In these two categories meaning seems to be a crucial part of the magical linguistic activities. In the third category, the talismanic, linguistic powers are used in order summon higher powers which then descend to take possession of it. By talismanic I refer to the inherent ability of an entity, material, a moment in time, or a human act to draw upon these powers. Unlike amulets, which are usually taken to be objects that protect their possessor, the talisman is able to add power.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © 1995 Fédération Internationale des Sociétés de Philosophie / International Federation of Philosophical Societies (FISP)

References

Notes

1. See Gershom Scholem, "Le nom de Dieu (II)," Diogène, no. 80,1972 pp. 168-196.

2. Ms., Munich 214, fol. 51a.

3. Frances Yates, Giordano Bruno and the Hermetic Tradition, Chicago, 1964, pp. 49-57, 70-72, 80-82, and Eugenio Garin, La cultura filosofica del Rinascimento Ital iano, Florence, 1961, pp. 159-165.

4. Exode 31: 2-3.

5. 'Asarah Ma'amarot, II, fol. 41b.

6. Quoted by Rabbi Baruch de Kossov in his 'Amud ha-'Avodah, Chernovitz, 1863, fol. 113c.

7. Rabbi Aharon de Zhitomir, Toledot Aharon, I. fol. 5c.

8. Sefer ‘Einei ha-'Edah, Commentary of Alemanno on the book of Genesis, Ms., Jerusalem, JNUL 8th 598, fol. 52b.

9. Ms., Oxford, Bodleiana 2234, fol. 95b.

10. Ibid.

11. Collectanaea, Oxford 2234, fol. 17a.

12. Ibid., fol. 3b.

13. Sha'ar ha-Hesheq, Halberstadt, 1860, fol. 38b.

14. Traité sans titre, Ms. Paris, BN 849, fol. 77a.

15. Anonymous Kabbalistic Responsum, Ms., New York, JTS 255, fol. 59b.

16. 'Or Yaqar, Jerusalem, 1983, vol. XII, p. 147.

17. Rabbi Ya'aqov Yosef de Polonoy, Ben Porat Yosef, Pietrkov, 1884, fol. 21a.

18. Sefer Notzer Hesed, Jerusalem, 1982, pp. 110-111.

19. I, 9.

20. Collectanea, Oxford 2234, fol. 3a.

21. Sha'ar ha-Hesheq, fol. 34b.