fulfilling a promise
Two Essays On Nathan of Gazas Treatise on Dragons [1666-67, C.E.]
by
Professors Evgueni Tortchinov, Ph.D & Avraham Elqayam, Ph.D.
[As originally written for and published by Donmeh West]
[NOTE: Professors Evgueni Tortchinov and Avraham Elqayam are founding members of Donmeh West. Prof. Tortchinov, who died tragically in an automobile accident several years ago, was also Professor and Chairman of the Department of Philosophy & Religion at the University of St. Petersburg, Russia. Prof. Elqayam, still a contributing member of Donmeh West, is on the faculty of Religion and Jewish Studies at Bar Ilan University; he is considered to be one of the worlds leading scholars on Sabbatai Zevi and Jewish Mysticism in general. Both essays were written at our request for, and originally published on Donmeh West in 1998. Yalhak]
AN OVERVIEW OF NATHAN OF GAZAS TREATISE ON DRAGONS
by Professor Evgueni Tortchinov, Ph.D
Department of Philosophy & Religion
University of St. Petersburg, Russia
Originally Published by Donmeh West, 28 November 1998
Nathan of Gazas Treatise on the Dragons presents an interesting example of the reformation of the Lurianic Kabbalah in the light of the character of the Sabbatean movement and Sabbatai Zevis personality.
See Gershom Scholems book Sabbatai Sevi. The Mystical Messiah. pp. 297-325 The original Hebrew text of the Treatise can be found in: BeIqvoth Mashiah, Ed. by G. Scholem. Jerusalem, 1944 (it is a collection of Nathan of Gazas works).
Some principal points of Nathans Kabbalah are:
1. New interpretation of tehiru, or the primordial space of creation which appeared after the contraction (zimzum) of the Light of En-Sof (Or En-Sof). It contains the remnants of this Light, its traces, or reshimu, some of which counteract the idea of creation (thoughtless lights). These lights are the roots of kelippoth and of all demonic powers of another side (sitra ahra). Thus, the process of creation is thought to be the result of the dialectical struggle between two sides, or two aspects of the Absolute itself. The concentration of the reshimu of the thoughtless (i.e.having no thought to create) lights produces the dark world of kelippoth symbolically spoken of as the world of the serpents, or dragons.
2. Reinterpretation of the nature of the Messiah. The roots of Messiah are in the sphere of the highest Light. But En-Sof projects these roots to the world of the serpents because of the circumstance that only Messiah has ability not only to vin the victory over the serpents but to transform them to the abode of holiness. Thus, the spirit of Messiah from the very beginning dwells among the serpents of the kelippoth. He struggles with the kink of the dragons and sometimes this king overcomes the Messiah, torturing him. But at the end Messiah will liberate himself from the shell of kelippoth. he will ascend to this world with the mission of its redemption. But he must again descend into the abyss of the kelippoth to vin the king of the dragons and to change him and all his kingdom into the kingdom of Light.
It will be resulting in the completion of the dialectical process of the mystical purification (catharsis) of the Absolute, and the establishing of the kingdom of God everywhere. And (it is interesting to note) the Messiah himself will become the Holy Serpent (please, remember the Serpent made of silver which was erected by Moses in the desert to save Israelites from the poisonous snakes), or the Holy Dragon, the true King-Pharaoh (the gematria of the word nahash serpentis equal to gematria of the word mashiah, Messiah). There were Gnostic sects (2-3 C.E.) of ophythes and nahasens (both words were derived from the Greek and Aramaic designations of the serpents) who called the Christ (i.e., Messiah) the Holy Serpent who opened to the spiritualized souls (pnumatics) the mysteries of the Tree of Life. I do not believe in any possible influence of the Gnostic ideas on Nathan of Gazas thought but the parallels are more than striking (probably, here we meet with the archetypal paradigm in the Jungian sense).
COMMENTS ON PROF. TORTCHINOVS ESSAY
by Prof. Avraham Elqayam
Department of Jewish Studies
Bar Ilan University, Israel
Originally published by Donmeh West 29 Nov 1998
I have read with great interest Chaver Evguenis discussion of Nathan of Gazas Treatise on the Dragons. I do believe that this treatise is most significant to anyone wishing to understand the Sabbatean myth and its roots, and Evgueni is be commended for initiating this discussion.
I have a few comments to add to this discussion:
1. Following Scholem, Evgueni has described the process of creation as stemming from the dialectical struggle between two aspects of the Absolute, i.e., the Light of En-Sof and the thoughtless lights. However, if you read the original Hebrew text of the Dragons carefully, you will notice that the two-light dichotomy is not mentioned in this composition at all! Nathan of Gaza has introduced this dialectical dichotomy much later in his thought, in The Book of Creation (Sefer Ha-Beria). Scholem has actually committed an anachronism when he interpreted the myth presented in The Treatise on the Dragons (composed in 1666) in light of Nathans later development, such as The Book of Creation (composed in 1670).
[All these issues I have discussed in my Ph.D. dissertation, The Mystery of Faith in the Writings of Nathan of Gaza (Submitted to the Senate of the Hebrew University, December 1993 - Hebrew. The English abstract can be found on this URL: http://www.multimania.com/jec/abstheslqayam1.htm. Being an abstract, it does not contain this specific point which I have just pointed out. However, you can find there a discussion of the Mystery of Faith in the Treatise on the Dragons, as well as in Nathan of Gazas other writings.]
The point is, that at this phase in Nathan of Gazas thought, dualism does not originate in the Absolute, but is created out of Emanation. It is not to be found inside En-Sof itself, but is produced within the Tehiru space. It was only some years later, in the Book of Creation, that Nathan has dared to push the dualism as far as the Absolute itself. The Book of Creation was the composition in which he presented the double-light dualism. In his earlier work, of which The Treatise on the Dragon is a part, Nathan of Gaza presented a conception of a Monist Godhead, out of which a restricted cosmic dualism is derived. In his later thought, the summit of which is The Book of Creation, Nathan of Gaza presented a conception of dualism within the Godhead itself, making it a major principle of creation, and presenting it as existing as high as En-Sof.
Unfortunately, the Book of Creation, a true pinnacle of the Prophet of Gazas thought, was never printed, and can only be found in manuscripts. Scholems own Mystical Messiah discusses this composition very little, and proposes almost nothing at all to analyze it in contrast to his intensive treatment of The Treatise on the Dragons.
2. As for Nathan of Gazas sources for his portrayal of the Holy Serpent: Evgueni, following Scholem, has suggested as a parallel the Ophyte Gnostic myth. Indeed, Gnostic sources are the most important ones to understanding Nathan of Gazas thought in this treatise. Moreover, I would not reject out of hand the possibility of direct influence. More on the conception of serpent in Gnostic thought can be found in Gnosis: The Nature & History of Gnosticism, by Kurt Rudolph (available at amazon.com).
To the Gnostic sources I would also add the following mystical Jewish sources as major sources of influence (this is by no means an exhaustive list):
A. In Early Kabbalah, The Kohen Brothers, who lived in mid 13th century Castilia in Spain, in particular the Treatise on the Left Emanation by Rabbi Isaac ben Jacob Ha-Kohen. [This composition can be found in Joseph Dan and Ronald Kieners The Early Kabbalah, printed in New York 1986 - also available at amazon.com] The Kohen Brothers were the first who actually made the connetion between the gematria of Nahash (serpent) and the gematria of Mashiah (messiah) = 358.
B. Another source of Early Kabbalh, Sefer Ha-Zohar, The Book of Splendor, part II, 33a - 36b. It gives a fascinating portrayal of the struggle between the First Mystical Messiah - namely, Moses - and Pharaohs Serpents. Nathans Treatise on the Dragons was actually composed as a commentary on this discussion in the Zohar.
C. In Late Kabbalah Lurianic Kabbalah (16th century) Rabbi Josheph ibn Tabbul, a major disciple of Rabbi Isaac Luria, who has written an essay called The Treatise on the Dragons, and which has influenced Nathan of Gaza. This essay has not been printed and is available only in manuscripts (in Hebrew).
3. As for the source of the messiahs soul, Evgueni asserts that in The Treatise on the Dragons, the roots of the messiah are in the sphere of the highest Light. On this theme one can find contradictory assertions in The Treatise on the Dragons. Alongside assertions such as presented by Evgueni, one can find assertions to the effect that the messiahs soul actually originated from the Serpents world, and not only was projected there. The late Prof. Wirszubski has noted that the messiahs soul in the Treatise on the Dragons was generated from the same Tehiru which also produced the Serpent.
I foresee the continuing of this discussion in following the Serpents role in dynamic and depth psychology, in myth, in thought, in religion, in culture - both East and West.
Comment by Reb Yakov Leib HaKohain
June 19th, 2007 at 7:58 pm
Shitalphin,
Zeir shane! Todah rabah!
This should be dedicated to the memory of Prof. Tortchinov, a great scholar and even greater mench whom I was priviliged to know and call a friend. He died tragically in an automobile accident several years ago. I know he would have loved and taken as much naches from the Cows and this pasture as I do.
Yalhak