Zimzum: God and the Origin of
the World (University of Pennsylvania Press, 2023), by Christoph Schulte
Reviewed by Rabbi Reuven Chaim
Klein (Rachack Review)
This scholarly work is an intellectual
history of the reception of the concept of tzimtzum in various circles. The
concept of Tzimtzum refers to the Kabbalistic notion of Divine “contraction”
or “withdrawal.” In Lurianic Kabbalah, it is fundamental for understanding how
the infinite Divine essence interacts with the finite world. According to this
concept, before creation, God — often referred to in Kabbalistic literature as
the Ein Sof (“infinite”) — filled all of existence, such that in order
for creation of the finite world to occur, God needed to make space for
creation by “withdrawing” or “contracting” His infinite presence. This
withdrawal created a void or space, which resulted in a “place” for the finite
world to come into existence outside of God Himself. Various emanations
typified by the partzufim and the sefirot percolate from this
highly spiritual “place” down to the material world which we occupy. The first
and most supernal of these emanations is known in Kabbalah as Adam Kadmon, and
it is from that realm that everything in creation emanates.
The first chapter discusses the
emergence of the concept of tzimtzum in the teachings of Rabbi Yitzchak
Luria (1534–1572), known as Arizal. That chapter shows how even in the first
generation after the Arizal, the correct interpretation of Lurianic Kabbalah
became subject to dispute, as the Arizal’s prime disciples Rabbi Chaim Vital (1543–1620)
and Rabbi Yisrael Sarug (d. 1610) disagreed over whether their master’s
teaching was meant to be taken literally, or was merely a metaphoric way of
relating a concept that actually lies beyond human comprehension. This
difference of opinion continued into later generations and the debate engaged such
important figures as Rabbi Menachem Azariah da Fano (1548-1620) Rabbi Avraham
Cohen de Herrera (1570-1635), Rabbi Yishaya Horowitz (1558-1630), Rabbi Yosef
Shlomo Delmedigo of Candia (1591-1655), Rabbi Yosef Ergas (1685-1730), and Rabbi
Immanual Chai Ricci (1688-1743).
The way Rabbi Moshe Chaim
Luzzatto (1707–1746) — known as the Ramchal — explains the idea of tzimtzum
follows the traditional Kabbalistic view of identifying the Ein Sof with God
Himself. Accordingly, he explains that because at the level of Ein Sof, God is
infinite and unlimited, He therefore has no particular “goal” or “purpose,”
because such objectives would, by definition, necessarily limit Him. Yet,
because in His eternal benevolence, He wanted to create the world, He sought to
"reign in" His infiniteness through tzimtzum, which allowed
Him to create the world and achieve His goal of being ever-beneficent to
something outside of Himself. This means that although He himself is limitless,
He consciously chose to put constraints on Himself in order to create the
finite world as we know it. When discussing Luzzatto, the author does not
explore the idea found elsewhere in Ramchal’s writings that God’s tzimtzum
was integral for man’s freewill.
An entire chapter of this book is
devoted to how the concept of tzitzum was received in early Hassidic
thought. In that chapter, the author focuses on how one of the foremost
students of the Baal Shem Tov (1698–1760), Rabbi Dov Ber of Mezeritch
(1704-1772) — known as the Maggid of Mezritch — took the concept of tzimtzum
as instructive in how man can accomplish imitatio dei by likewise
“retreating” from worldly pleasures and focusing as much as humanly possible on
immaterial, spiritual matters. Although this ascetic approach did not become a
cornerstone for all Hassidic sects, it certainly influenced many later Hassidic
Tzaddikim. Other Hassidic thinkers that this book treats are Rabbi Shneur
Zalman of Liadi (1745-1812) and Rabbi Nachman of Bratslov (1772-1810), who also
used the concept of tzimtzum in their respective Hassidic theosophies.
In the century after the Arizal’s
passing, a Christian scholar named Knorr von Rosenroth (1636-1689) translated
some important texts of Kabbalah into Latin, and his popular work brought the
ideas of tzimtzum to a wider audience. From there, knowledge of tzimtzum
spread to many Christian Hebraists and so-called Cabalists. As the author
documents, there were varied reactions to these ideas in Christian circles.
Some scholars took the ideas of Kabbalah, and particularly of tzimtzum,
as universal ideas taught by Judaism and used that to look upon Judaism and the
Jewish people more favorable as purveyors of these universal truths. Others
offered Christological reinterpretations of the doctrine of tzimtzum, conflating
Adam Kadmon (which does not actually refer to a person) as referring to none
other than Christ himself.
Some Christian interpreters associated
the Kabbalistic concept of tzimtzum with the heresy of pantheism, that
is, the belief that God is equal to nature. In doing so, they painted all Jews
in a bad light as though Kabbalists were followers of Spinoza, using that as
fodder for the furtherance of anti-Semitism. One figure particularly associated
with this approach is Johann Georg Wachter (1673–1757), who translated some
Kabbalistic texts into German. It is actually his visual depiction of tzimtzum
that appears on this book’s cover. Another figure who wrote something similar
was the German philosopher Friedrich Heinrich Jacobi (1743–1819), who accused
his fellow philosopher Gotthold Ephraim Lessing (1729–1781) of holding views in
line with Kabbalah and Spinozism, seeing the two as interchangeable. Of course,
the traditional Jewish approach to Kabbalistic cosmology sees God as
encompassing the entirety of creation but also surpassing it, rather than
equaling it (see responsa Chacham Tzvi §18).
Interestingly, the author shows
how the famous German philosopher Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph Schelling
(1775-1854) incorporated elements of the idea of tzimtzum into his
Trinitarian way of explaining the contraction of the Divine (although the
author admits that Schelling never actually used the word tzimtzum and
seems to not have had any direct engagement with Kabbalah texts written in
Hebrew).
Christians were not the only ones
to reappropriate the Lurianic concept of tzimtzum for their own
ideological purposes. In the writings of Sabbatian theologists like Abraham
Miguel Cardozo (1627-1706) and Nechemia Chiyya Chayun (1650-1730), the concept
of tzimtzum is presented in a different way. In contrast to the standard
reading of Kabbalah that equates the Ein Sof with God, these Sabbatians used
the concept of tzimtzum to support their contention that the Ein Sof is
somehow something from which the God of Israel is born in a quasi-mythological
way through tzimtzum, but is not equal to Him. This is important
for Sabbatian antinomianism, as these Sabbatians recognize that the God of
Israel gave the Torah which contains certain commandments and strictures, but
they argue that the will of the ultimate Ein Sof might not always line up with
that of the God of Israel, which according to their theology justifies their
abrogating the Torah’s laws.
Other chapters in the book
explore how tzimtzum is depicted in secular art and literature in more
recent times. If I properly understood the author’s intent, he sees an example
of a sort of secular deistic reading of tzimtzum in private letters
written by the late scholar of Kabbalah Dr. Gershom Scholem (1897–1982). It
seems that Scholem understood God’s apparent absence from This World as a
reflection of His purposeful minimizing His presence through tzimtzum
and retreating to allow nature to run its course.
Other recent appearances of tzimtzum
that the author does not discuss include Hareidi pop culture, like Naftali
Kempeh’s recent song Ohr Ein Sof, whose lyrics are drawn from Rabbi
Chaim Vital’s account of tzimtzum. Similarly, Avinoam Fraenkel’s 2015
work Nefesh HaTzimtzum is a digest on Rabbi Chaim Volozhiner’s Nefesh
HaChaim and how it differs from Hassidic conceptions of tzimtzum.
The author acknowledges Fraenkel’s work in his introduction, but does not
actually engage with it.
In conclusion, Zimzum: God and
the Origin of the World offers an insightful exploration into the intricate
realm of tzimtzum, providing invaluable snippets of historical context
that enrich the understanding of its diverse integrations across various
contexts. Because this book is a translation from the author's earlier German
study, it occasionally suffers from awkward verbiage and slightly inaccurate
translations. However, these pitfalls should not detract from the reader's
overall experience, as the depth of knowledge and the scholarly analysis
presented within its pages offer a commendable resource for those delving into
the nuanced complexities of tzimtzum and how it has been presented over
the ages.
