The "Name of Seventy-two Names": A Biblical Spin-off - Part 1

A friend and fellow Sangreal Companion asked me if I would consider sharing on this blog a complete section of "The Book of Sacred Names," i.e. the section titled "A Biblical Spin-off" from the chapter dealing with "The Name of Seventy-two Names." According to my dear "Brother in Light" in this specific portion of the book, the mentioned Divine Name is explicated in a most coherent manner which would benefit all seeking a deeper insight into this most enigmatic Divine Name. So in honouring the most sincere request of a close friend, and in memory of one who passed away yesterday to continue his journey in higher realms of existence, I am now sharing the mentioned reflections on "The Name of Seventy-two Names."

It should be noted, a major portion of what is termed “Practical Kabbalah” revolves around special meditational and ritual practices employed to open the heart and mind of the practitioner, this being understood to be a necessary prerequisite for anyone wanting to align with those special Spirit Intelligences from whom higher wisdom might be gained. In this regard, as I am sure you can imagine, there are numerous adjurations, incantations, and other ritual techniques which have been passed down the ages and preserved by serious practitioners, i.e. the Sar ha-Torah and Sar ha-Panim narratives in the Hechalotic texts of Ma’aseh Merkavah; the remarkable meditations of Eleazer of Worms, Abraham Abulafia, Yehudah Albotini; the Yichudim and Kavvanot of Lurianic Kabbalah; etc.

A remarkable feature of this great literature, is the use of Divine Names to facilitate a direct communication with a Maggid (Spirit Messenger), or even with a Bat Kol (a Divine Voice [Daughter Voice]). Linked here is a subject of very special interest, i.e. the Shem Vayisa Vayet known as “Name of Seventy-Two Names,” “Seventy-two Letter Name of God” and even as the “Shemhamforash.” The latter is actually a misnomer as the term “Ineffable Name” really refers to the Tetragrammaton (YHVH), the Divine Name incorporating the past, present and the future, and which we noted earlier is considered to be the most sacred of all Hebrew Divine Names.

Over a period of around thirty years I have collected a rather hefty and constantly expanding file comprising documents pertaining to this specific topic, some passed on to me in person by other investigators and practitioners, whilst the majority of which were drawn from the growing list of primary sources which have become available to the general public since the 1980's. What follows next is the final product of my very careful research into the “Shem Vayisa Vayet” termed the “The Name of Seventy-Two Names.”

Now, this Divine Name was derived from three verses commencing with the words Vayisa Vayavo Vayet (Exodus 14:19–21). These verses read:

Transliteration:

(Verse 19) vayisa malach ha-elohim ha-holech lifnei machaneh yisra’el vayelech mei’achareihem vayisa amud he-anan mip’neihem vaya’amod mei’achareihem

(Verse 20) vayavo bein machaneh mitz’rayim uvein machaneh yisra’el vay’hi he’anan v’hachoshech vaya’er et ha-lailah v’lo karav ze el ze kol ha-lailah

(Verse 21) vayet mosheh et yado al ha-yam vayolech YHVH et ha-yam b’Ru’ach kadim azah kol ha-lailah vayasem et ha-yam lecharavah vayibak’u ha-mayim

Translation:

(Verse 19) And the angel of God, who went before the camp of Israel, removed and went behind them: and the pillar of cloud removed from before them, and stood behind them;

(Verse 20) And it came between the camp of Egypt and the camp of Israel; and there was the cloud and the darkness here, yet gave it light by night there; and the one came not near the other all the night.

(Verse 21) And Moses stretched out his hand over the sea; and the Lord caused the sea to go back by a strong east wind all the night, and made the sea dry land, and the waters were divided.

Each of these three Hebrew verses comprises exactly seventy-two letters, and from these were formed the “Name of Seventy-two Names.” The Zohar informs us that these three verses respectively correspond to three Sefirot, i.e. the first verse to Chesed (Mercy), the second to Gevurah (Strength or Severity), and the third to Tiferet (Beauty or Balance).

As it is, the letters comprising the three verses were combined in a unique manner to construct the “Name of Seventy-Two Names.” Whilst the letters of the first verse were written in the normal Hebrew manner from right to left, those of the second verse were written in reverse order, i.e. from left to right, directly underneath the first line. Lastly the letters of the third verse were again written in the normal Hebrew manner from right to left, again directly underneath the second line. Afterwards the lines of letters were read in columns of three letters each, and so the “Shem Vayisa Vayet” or “Name of Seventy-Two Names” was discovered, each of its seventy-two Names comprising three letters as shown in the following chart:

It is interesting that all the letters of the Hebrew Alphabet, except the letter (Gimel), appear in the “Shem Vayisa Vayet.” It has been said this letter, the value of which is 3, is the “key” to this Name, since the seventy-two associated name-portions comprise three letters each. One could say that represents the user of the “Name of Seventy-Two Names.” Thus all the letters are employed when the Name is spoken: twenty-one letters to be uttered, and one for the one pronouncing the “Shem Vayisa Vayet.”

As noted, the verses from which the “Name of Seventy-two Names” is derived, pertain to the biblical saga of Moses stretching forth his hand to part the waters of the sea, whilst a “pillar of cloud” and “the angel of God” separate the Israelites from the Egyptians, their erstwhile oppressors. In fact, tradition would have it that Moses not only learned the “Shem Vayisa Vayet” at the “burning bush,” but there are actually statements to the effect that Moses used the “Name of Seventy-Two Names” to part the waters of the sea, which allowed the Israelites safe passage. There were also claims that the Eternal One had in person edged this remarkable Name onto Moses’ staff.

Another notion, popularly promulgated in Christian and Hermetic Kabbalah as well as in Masonic literature, is that Jacob the Patriarch encountered these seventy-two three-letter names in the rungs of the ladder which he dreamed about, and which was “set up on the earth, and the top of it reached to heaven; and behold the angels of God ascending and descending on it” (Genesis 28:12). Some suggested that the very angels who were ascending and descending “Jacob’s Ladder” were equally numbered exactly seventy-two.

(More to follow)

"Kabbalah," "Cabala" or "Qabalah".....?

As said in "The Book of Self Creation," it is clear that while one may understand and accept that much diversification has been going on regarding this Tradition, especially over the last century, and having closely investigated such “variances,” we equally recognise that Kabbalah would become meaningless if its fundamental principles were compromised. In other words, principle Kabbalistic teachings and rudimentary reasoning cannot simply be altered in accordance with personal whims. Hence it is necessary to first understand the central, vital core teachings behind this Tradition, before adjusting parameters in alignment with personal perceptions. One simply can no longer speak of Kabbalah when the supposed stable primary doctrines of this tradition have been sacrificed in the fray. Sadly, such has been the case in a lot of works written in the name of Kabbalah, while they bear little or no relation to the Tradition. Often basic teachings of this tradition are sidelined and even dismissed out of hand.

When you come to think of it, Kabbalah is much more than the current assumption that the doctrine of the “Tree of Life” and the ten Sefirot comprise the entire teaching of Kabbalah. In fact, the “Tree-Concept” was originally only a small part of Kabbalah, and a relatively unimportant one at that. It is mainly Gentiles who expounded and increased it to its current central place in our system. It is certainly a lot clearer, more direct, and much easier to understand than the “letter-number” permutations of early Kabbalah. Yet, if the principles of “Letter-Number Kabbalah” are understood, some remarkable practices, meditations and “inner communications” can be found in this form of mysticism, which can produce some really far-reaching results for the individual who knows the system.

The entire arena of “Ecstatic Kabbalah” is based on this system. Few of these practices were, and still are, available to the modern public. A major part of the system often amounted to no more than mental exercises which enabled the brain to cope with the obscure problems of existence. To some extent it could then be likened to a cryptic crossword, in which the satisfaction came in the exercise of ones mental faculties. This was however never the only value of the “Letter-Number Kabbalah.” There was certainly a lot more to it as the practices of Shemot (Divine Names), Yichudim (unification exercises) and Tzerufim (permutation practices) show quite clearly.

Today the tendency is to think that there is really more than one Kabbalah so to speak, with three categories specifically identified: 1. Traditional Kabbalah—the one as understood to apply to Israel alone; 2. Christian Kabbalah; and 3. Hermetic Kabbalah. The latter two refer to the tradition as interpreted and worked on by Gentile scholars for the Western Inner Tradition at large, and we understand that though the basic formulae are the same, the application and exegesis are very different. End of story? Definitely not. This is a very simplistic and narrow viewpoint, in which the strictly Jewish origins of the Kabbalah are often ignored, not to mention that even in Traditional Kabbalah there are many divergent voices regarding practically every topic within that sector, that one would have to divide what is viewed collectively as “traditional” into many subcategories.

However, most modern researchers are still inclined to speak of “pre-Lurianic” and “Lurianic Kabbalah” in reference to the earlier mentioned two distinct periods in the development of Kabbalah. The first which could be termed “Zoharic,” not entirely correctly as an early Kabbalist like Abraham Abulafia did not belong in this category, culminated in the writings of Moses Cordovero, while his pupil Isaac Luria started a new trend which is now called “Lurianic Kabbalah.”

There are many who, in trying to indicate the distinction between Traditional Kabbalah and the one as applied in the Western Inner Tradition, use the spelling “Qabalah.” It has been suggested by several authors, specifically from the “Hermetic Schools,” that the spelling of the term “Kabbalah” should be varied in order to indicate variant applications, i.e. “Kabbalah” in reference to “Traditional Kabbalah”; “Cabala” to indicate the Christian variety, and “Qabalah” for the “Hermetic Kabbalah.” I have found no use for this kind of variant spelling for a variety of reasons, amongst others:

1. The common use of the “K” spelling is a fairly recent one, apparently introduced to create a consensus. However, it should be noted that many Rabbis, historians and other scholars have been using the “C” spelling when discussing what we might loosely term “Traditional Kabbalah.” In fact, to date there are still French, Spanish, Portuguese, Italian, and Swiss authors, amongst others, who are still using that spelling in their studies of mainstream “Kabbalah.” The suggestion that the “C” spelling be used exclusively to designate a Christian variant of Kabbalistic thinking, would create confusion as far as a veritable host of works are concerned, which were written over a period of more than a hundred years. Likewise the “K” spelling was and still is being used by scholars around the globe in their discussions of “Christian Kabbalah.”

2. The division of the Kabbalistic Tradition in this manner into the mentioned three categories is seriously problematic. It suggests a uniform pattern of thought to be prevailing within the “Jewish Mystical Tradition,” which is patently an inaccurate portrayal of the tradition over the thousand and more years of its existence.

Besides the obvious differences between, for example, the teachings of Isaac Luria and that of the author of the Zohar, marking distinct periods in the development of the Tradition, there are enormous differences and major disagreements between Kabbalists living in the same era, with regard to even the most basic tenets of Kabbalah, e.g. the ten Sefirot, etc. Pertaining to this specific concept, there were Kabbalists who did not like the sefirotic system at all, and rarely made use of it. Moreover, there were thinkers within this tradition who did not agree with Talmudic studies, yet these very individuals are considered part of that tradition. In fact, there are several absolutely distinct “Kabbalistic traditions” and diverse schools of thought which developed over the centuries, some of them considered to be heretical, yet many of the latter kind are now generically accepted as part of what mainstream religionists term “Kosher Kabbalah.”

3. As far as I am concerned the word “Kabbalah” is a Hebrew term with only one spelling. The transliteration of this word has been somewhat problematic due to the fact that the sound of its initial letter is represented by two letters in the Hebrew alphabet, i.e. Kaf and Kof. The latter letter is the one used in the word itself, and has been designated “C,” “K,” or “Q” by different authors, thus the variants in the spelling of the word in languages using the Latin alphabet. Trying to use those variants to denote three different approaches within the Tradition does not work for anybody using the Hebrew, Greek or Cyrillic alphabet. Thus such usage cannot be universal.

Settling for one common spelling, i.e. “Kabbalah,” and then clearly indicating a specific subsidiary of this tradition under discussion—Ecstatic Kabbalah, Theurgic Kabbalah, Prophetic Kabbalah, Lurianic Kabbalah, Christian Kabbalah, Hermetic Kabbalah, etc., is far more useful and accurate. Besides, there is in truth only one “Kabbalah,” the teachings of which are wielded in as many ways as there are people to invent them from their personal perspectives. Provided the core principles and doctrines of the tradition are understood and upheld intact, there can be an infinite number of variant interpretations.

What Exactly Comprises Practical Kabbalah?

I have been queried regarding what exactly comprises "Practical Kabbalah." My personal stance is that the expression "Practical Kabbalah" incorporates a lot more than simply "magical applications," such as those addressed in my "Book of Sacred Names." Besides these, I personally include:

1. meditational techniques like those of Abraham Abulafia, as well as the Kavvanot and Yichudim of Lurianic Kabbalah, the Tzerufim of Albotini, and the many kabbalistic practices which Aryeh Kaplan, amongst others, listed in "Meditation and Kabbalah," etc.;

2. worshipful invocations and prayers such as those found in Kabbalistic Siddurim (prayer books), etc.;

3. practical applications of the ten sefirot, the latter having been termed "the spiritual energies of Mind and Emotion" by Rabbi Laibl Wolf in his book "Practical Kabbalah," and of which there are a number of wonderful and well-known "practical" studies such as those by my late mentor, William G. Gray, or the more recent very innovative and equally well written "The Miracle Tree: Demystifying the Qabalah" by R.J. Stewart, etc.

There is probably a lot more to add to this list. Whatever the case may be, I personally believe that ALL practical applications of Kabbalistic doctrines, pertain to what is collectively termed "Practical Kabbalah."

Tzachtzachot & the Christian Trinity

Earlier this evening I was confronted by an individual who thought the time of celebrating the birthday of the Christian Saviour to be the most ideal to practice his missionary zeal to the fullest. He "most urgently" exhorted me to attend the service to be held this Christmas Eve by his "spirit-filled" pastor, the one who could save my soul from the damnation which is, as it were, around the corner. Nothing I could say in a polite manner would sway him to "drop" the matter. As it is, I would not have referred to the incident here if it wasn't for the fact that I told him that I am a Jew and that I am particularly enamoured with the teachings of Jewish Mysticism, specifically Kabbalah. His face sort of lit up as he victoriously informed me that Kabbalah teaches the "doctrine of the Trinity," the Christian one, in its doctrine of the "Tzachtzachot." Eventually, after some fruitless bantering backwards and forwards, I informed the individual in question that I am simply not interested in going to his church, that neither my wife nor I would be attending the special service of his "spirit-filled" pastor, and he departed in great disappointment with a final rejoinder that he would "pray for my lost soul." Ah well.....this is a fairly regular occurence, albeit senza the "Tzachtzachot" bit!

The doctrine of the "Tzachtzachot" ("splendours") is the one Kabbalistic doctrine which Christian students of Kabbalah later claimed to be extolling the Christian concept of the "Trinity," quite despite the fact that in none of the extensive discussions of this topic in primary Kabbalistic literature are there any references made to the Christian "triune divine personages," i.e. "father, son and holy spirit." However, we will get to the Christian claim shortly. Let us first have a look at what the teaching of the "Tzachtzachot" is all about, and where the idea started.

Currently available evidence would have it that the source of the concept is the mystical speculations of the "Chasidei Azkenaz," the 13th century German Pietists (David ben Yehudah he-Chasid; etc.), regarding the emanation of the ten Sefirot out of Ayn Sof (Eternal No-Thing). These mystics of early Kabbalah were particularly perplexed by the fact that whilst there are ten Sefirot, there were traditionally the so-called "thirteen attributes" of God, and they were wondering whether any connection existed between the Sefirot, and these "attributes." In a "responsa" attributed to the famous rabbi Hai Gaon, there are references to "three forces" which are understood to be the foundation of the "ten," hence they thought the "thirteen attributes" should be divided into "ten" and "three," which respectively pertain to the ten Sefirot and three "primordial forces."

However, there were at the time quite diverse opinions regarding this matter, especially as some thought the "thirteen attributes" were considered to be contained in Keter, the first Sefirah. This idea was certainly not generally accepted, since others attributed the "thirteen attributes" to the sixth Sefirah (Tiferet). Others still, maintained that these "three forces" were emanations which were "split of" from Malchut, the tenth Sefirah. Some considered them to be effects "in the manner of Chesed, Din and Rachamim." It is important to keep in mind that right from the start the terms "Sefirot" and "Middot" (attributes) were used interchangeably as synonyms. We also need to consider that this topic was very complex, and that in the mystical thinking of the time it was conceived that there were, as it were, two sets of Sefirot, with the higher Sefirot of 'Illat ha-'Illot ("Cause of Causes") belonging to the "first cause." These "higher Sefirot" were considered entirely distinct from the standard, manifested Sefirot, so to speak. The Sefirot of 'Illat ha-'Illot were termed tzichtzuchim.

To really understand the very foundation of the doctrine of the "hidden splendours," one has to focus on the teachings regarding the relationship between Ayn Sof and Keter. Some of the early Kabbalists taught that Ayn Sof and Keter are the same, whilst others felt that they are not identical at all, and some even taught that Keter was not the first emanation. There was great uncertainty regarding this issue amongst the early Kabbalists. Moses de Leon for example alluded in one of his writings to the expression "Cause of Causes" ('illat ha-'illot or sibbat ha-sibbot), saying it is a reference to Keter, whilst in another he tells us "the Cause of all Causes is the cause of Nothingness (Ayn)," and he appears to be quite uncertain as to whether there should be a distinction between Ayn Sof and Keter.

As far as Kabbalists are concerned, Ayn Sof is hidden and have therefore no active participation in the emanation process. In fact, they maintain that there are intermediary stages between the unmanifest and the manifest, and some consider such a stage to exist between the "Eternal No-Thing" (Ayn Sof) and the ten Sefirot. As said earlier, in the 13th century some of the early Kabbalists, e.g. David ben Yehudah he-Chasid and the German Pietists, maintained this stage to comprise ten "higher Sefirot" considered to be the "roots" of the ten regular Sefirot. Others, specifically those from the Iyyun circle, perceived this intermediary stage to be "three roots concealed in the depths of Ayn Sof" which they termed "tzachtzachot," and which were understood to be three unattainably hidden lights. They were respectively called:

1. Or Penimi Kadmon ("internal primordial light");

2. Or Tzach ("ultra-transparant light"); and

3. Or Metzuchtzach ("clear light").

In a way, these concepts influenced many generations of Kabbalists, even though by the fourteenth century (when the thinking of many Kabbalists were more directly focused on the ten Sefirot and their significance in the world and in our lives), the earlier "ten and thirteen" ideas almost disappeared into obscurity. It took a couple of hundred years before the debate on the "ten and thirteen" resurfaced very strongly in the writings of Moses Cordovero, who offered explanations in accordance with the views held by the mystics living in sixteenth century Safed, the "home" of Lurianic Kabbalah. We are told that he "contended the thirteen truly are God's moral attributes embodied in the first Sefirah, and it is man's responsibility to emulate them." It is worth comparing the 13th century ideas regarding the three primordial lights (Or Penimi Kadmon, Or Tzach, Or Metzuchtzach) with the Adam Kadmon (primordial man) doctrine of Lurianic Kabbalah.

However, getting back to Moses Cordovero, it should be mentioned that he expounded the doctrine of emanation in many wonderful ways. The process of emanation is generally understood to be one of "unfoldment from within." Everything comprises everything, so to speak, i.e. Keter (Crown) comprises all the other Sefirot, and the succeeding Sefirah, Chochmah (Wisdom), actually derives from Chochmah in Keter. In turn, each of the ten Sefirot also comprise the entire array, an entire universe as it were, and each succeeding Sefirah derives from its equivalent in the preceding Sefirah, e.g. Binah is emanated from "Binah in Chochmah"; Chesed from "Chesed in Binah"; etc.

Cordovero tells us that each Sefirah is made up of an infinite number of bechinot (inner "characteristics" or "aspects"). Whilst most of these aspects are unknowable, there are some which can be perceived and six in particular were considered most important in the process of unfolding each Sefirah from its predecessor. Through these inner aspects all the Sefirot are causally related to one another, and each Sefirah can relate or "communicate" with any of the other, by resonating inwardly with the aspects of the other Sefirot to be found deep within itself. For example, an individual working in Malchut (Kingdom) can "awaken" Keter (Crown) by resonating his consciousness with the "Keter-aspect" hidden inside Malchut, etc.

Now, it would appear as if there was a "gulf" between the manifest and the absolute, or between the restricted finite and the limitless infinite, yet Kabbalists maintained that just as every Sefirah comprises the entire sefirotic ladder, so Ayn Sof contains the very primordial essences of the Sefirot. Whilst in early Kabbalah we were told that there are three tzachtzachot, hidden primordial lights, between the Eternal No-Thing (Ayn Sof) and the first Sefirah (Keter) on the ladder of emanation, Moses Cordovero informed us that these "concealed splendours" are in fact the loftiest bechinot (aspects) of Keter hidden within Ayn Sof.

Since the days of the great Moses Cordovero there have been a lot of speculation regarding the three hidden "splendours" (Tzachtzachot) in Kabbalistic literature, and as mentioned earlier, Christian students of Kabbalah claimed the doctrine of the three Tzachtzachot to be expressing the verity of the Christian trinity. Considering everything Kabbalists wrote about these "hidden splendours," it is rather difficult to reconcile Christian doctrine with this Kabbalistic teaching. Besides, the Christian claim has as much verity as would say a Hindu claiming this teaching to be about the Hindu trinity of Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva, or perhaps some clever physicist somewhere could say it pertains to the three basic components of the atom (proton, neutron and electron), etc. In fact, we may extrapolate from all the writings regarding the three Tzachtzachot, that they were understood to represent, amongst many other concepts, three Sefirot—Chochmah, Binah, Da'at; the three "Pillars" on the sefirotic Tree; the three levels of the "Soul" (Nefesh, Ruach, Neshamah); etc.

There are lots of primary and secondary sources which you can consult for detailed deliberation on this topic. Some of the more readily available are:

1. "Sod ha-Shabbat: The Mystery of the Sabbath" by Meir ibn Gabbai, translated by Elliot K. Ginsburg;

2. "Isaiah Horowitz: The Generations of Adam" by Isaiah Horowitz;

3. "Lessons in Tanya: The Tanya of R. Shneur Zalman of Liadi" by Yosef Wineberg;

4. "Kabbalah" by Gershom Scholem;

5. "Origins of Kabbalah" by Gershom Scholem;

6. "The Sabbath in the Classical Kabbalah" by Elliot K. Ginsburg;

7. "An Introduction to the Kabbalah" by Moshe Hallamish; etc.

Wishing one and all well over the Festive Season!