Wow.

I'm not an authority, but I've been thinking about where to even start -- the legendary origin of Kabbalah, ancient Jewish mysticism, ancient Jewish magic (which, while sometimes called "Practical Kabbalah," generally isn't Kabbalah at all), the likely real origin of Kabbalah, the Kabbalistic theory of Creation, the Tree of Life and the Sephirot, the divide between traditional Jewish Kabbalah and the sort of "Qabalah" practiced in the Western Esoteric Tradition, and so forth.

But we might as well start with the literal translation of "Kabbalah" ("receiving," the stuff passed down through the generations), and a few highly-abridged paragraphs from Kabbalah, the classic work on the subject by its greatest scholar, Gershom Scholem:

"Kabbalah" is the traditional and most commonly used term for the esoteric teachings of Judaism and for Jewish mysticism, especially the forms which it assumed in the Middle Ages from the 12th century onward. In its wider sense it signifies all the successive esoteric movements in Judaism that evolved from the end of the period of the Second Temple.

Kabbalah became to a large extent an esoteric doctrine. . . . By its very nature, mysticism is knowledge that cannot be communicated directly but may be expressed only through symbol and metaphor. Esoteric knowledge, however, in theory can be transmitted, but those who possess it are either forbidden to pass it on or do not wish to do so. The kabbalists stressed this esoteric aspect by imposing all kinds of limitations on the propagation of their teachings, either with regard to the age of the initiates, the ethical qualities required of them, or the number of students before whom these teachings could be expounded. . . . Often these limitations were disregarded in practice, despite the protests of many kabbalists.

Many kabbalists . . . saw [Kabbalah] as a kind of primordial revelation that was accorded to Adam or the early generations and that endured . . . . It became widely accepted that the Kabbalah was the esoteric part of the Oral Law given to Moses at Sinai.

From the beginning of its development, the Kabbalah embraced an esotericism closely akin to the spirit of Gnosticism, one which was not restricted to instruction in the mystical path but also included ideas on cosmology, angelology, and magic. Only later, and as a result of the contact with medieval Jewish philosophy, the Kabbalah became a Jewish "mystical theology," more or less systematically elaborated.

Once rabbinic Judaism had crystallized . . . the majority of the creative forces aroused by new religious stimuli . . . attempt[ed] to make of the traditional Torah and of the life led according to its dictates a more profound inner experience. The general tendency is apparent from a very early date, its purpose being to broaden the dimensions of the Torah and to transform it from the law of the people of Israel into the inner secret law of the universe, at the same time transforming the Jewish chasid or tsaddik into a man with a vital role in the world. . . . For Kabbalah, Judaism in all its aspects was a system of mystical symbols reflecting the mystery of God and the universe, and the kabbalists' aim was to discover and invent keys to the understanding of this symbolism.

So Kabbalah essentially is a collection of Jewish mystical and esoteric teachings, handed down through the generations, that seek to peek behind the Torah to understand the secret workings of the universe and reach God.

Or at least that's how I understand it.

A kind of midrash, then? Esoteric commentary? Really??

There is a convention in some circles to separate by different spelling three different forms. Kabbalah is the Jewish kind, Qabalah is the "Hermetic" kind, and Cabala is the Christian kind.

The form in Promethea is Qabalah. So it would help if you clarify which of these your interest is in.

There are so many aspects of this; different teachings that could fall under the umbrella of 'kabbalah' - it's a huge subject.

For instance, I've sometimes seen the term 'kabbalah' being applied - in magickal circles - to the method whereby letters of an alphabet and their numerical equivalents are compared; more precisely, the method by which one is able to discover hidden links between concepts, on account of their sharing the same numerical value when added up. A technique much beloved by Crowley and K Grant, amongst others.

As I understand it, this is only one specific aspect of kabbalah, and more correctly should be termed gematria.

Footnote: I knew someone once who was converting to Judaism; the one of the rabbis counselled him not to get involved in Kabbalah as "it sends you mad" !? (mind, he wasn't over 40 and wasn't yet married).

Also wanted to add that I recall there was a nice and succinct summary of the various aspects of Kabbalah in Kraig's 'Modern Magic' (again); citing temurah, notarikon, gematria and so on, the 'literal' and the 'practical' Kabbalah, also his own labels of 'Kosher' and 'Christian' Kabbalah, though I guess this is the same as speaking of Kabbalah and Cabala. Having said that, as Kraig was concentrating on Kabbalah as used in ceremonial Western magic, that would be Qabalah. Aaargh.

Nice thread grant :) I'll also be reading with interest. One thing I don't quite understand is how necessary kabbalah techniques like gematria are in understanding what kabbalah is all about. I mean, I get some of the basics about the tree of life and the different sephiroth, but that seems to stand quite nicely on its own as an underlying pattern/cosmology for life without needing to get all tangled up in word puzzles.

I'm pretty sure that I'm being ridiculously simplistic - I do get that deeply exploring the words and letters used in sacred text makes for a great meditation exercise; but surely there's a lot more to why that's important that I'm not getting.

Xstacy:One thing I don't quite understand is how necessary kabbalah techniques like gematria are in understanding what kabbalah is all about. I mean, I get some of the basics about the tree of life and the different sephiroth, but that seems to stand quite nicely on its own as an underlying pattern/cosmology for life without needing to get all tangled up in word puzzles.

Well, as Gershom Scholem noted above, in its wider sense Kabbalah has become a blanket term for all of the mystical and magical teachings of Judaism passed along over a couple thousand years. And there have been quite a few, ranging from mystical interpretations of Bible stories (lots of those in the Zohar) to the magical use of God names (especially in amulets) to Hebrew "word puzzles" (gematria, temurah, notarikon) to elaborate cosmologies and organizing principles such as the Tree of Life.

So what's the common thread? Essentially, Judaism -- it's Jewish magic and mysticism, and pretty much all of it is rooted in the Torah, the Talmud, and Jewish teachings and culture. (Although it picked up quite a bit from the cultures in which Jews lived over the millennia: a bit of Egyptian magic here, a bit of Hellenistic philosophy there, and even a bit from Christianity.)

As for Kabbalah, Cabala, and Qabalah (if you want to use those terms), I believe the narrower sort of Jewish Kabbalah (with the Tree of Life, the Sephirot, etc.) developed in 13th Century Spain with Moses de Leon's Zohar, Christian Cabala got moving in 15th Century Italy with Pico della Mirandola and others looking to reconcile Christian mysticism with its purported origins in Judaism, and Qabalah, which mixed in a bit of everything in the Western Esoteric Tradition, including Tarot, astrology, and so forth, really emerged from Christian Cabala in the 19th Century with Eliphas Levi and the Golden Dawn.

To get Tolkienesque, you can think of Kabbalah, Cabala, and Qabalah as Elves, Orcs, and Uruk-Hai. Common origins, not quite the same.

@derekhenry: I'm afraid I'm interested in all of it. For some reason, the "Q" spelling has always bugged me, but that's just me and how I think language should work. Which, uh, could be relevant, I guess, given the nature of this, but seems arbitrary and goofy right now.

@Gef: I read Kraig ages ago, did some stuff, got distracted, put it down.

@Evan: Looking back over "its purpose being to broaden the dimensions of the Torah and to transform it from the law of the people of Israel into the inner secret law of the universe, at the same time transforming the Jewish chasid or tsaddik into a man with a vital role in the world"... what's the vital role, here? As an activist? A teacher? A living fulfillment of God's word? Or some kind of "master of creation" who, like, regulates metaphysical reality?

(Also - cool connection between Scholem and Habermas. Words and freedom.)

Another bit of thanks for starting this thread, grant. I'll certainly follow along, and will inevitably have questions. Oddly, I've been getting pings to pick up my scattershot Qabalah studies again, too. Maybe it's nothing more than advancing age intertwined with a yearning for some kind of greater meaning in life. I dunno. But it's there.

(G - I have some books I can loan you, when and if you do get time. Regardie's Garden of Pomegranates, The Qabalah by Papus. And possibly one or two others. And email me a reminder, and I'll send you a PDF of Colin Low's Notes on Kabbalah.

And thanks, Evan, for holding forth. Much appreciated.

I disagree that the fundamental root of (Q/K/C)BL is Jewish. Even acknowledging that elements were lifted from places Jews were doesn't give justice to how substantial the practices already were in those cultures (especially when you look at Greek Qabalah), and also that the syncretism that occurred in Spain around the thirteenth century was happening thanks to open sharing between multiple traditions.

My eyebrow just shot up.

Which practices were prevalent where? (That sounds like an expression of astonishment; I mean it literally.)

You've got to be kidding.

The Jewish origins of Kabbalah, and the derivation of Christian and Hermetic Kabbalah from Jewish sources, are so thoroughly well-substantiated (for example, in Gershom Scholem's book above) that I'm not even sure whether to humor you by asking for scholarly sources for your argument.

But perhaps you mean something unusual by "the fundamental root of (Q/K/C)BL." What do you see as that root? Tzimtzum, the theory of creation? The Tree of Life? The Sephirot?

And by "Greek Qabalah," do you simply mean ancent Greek magic and mysticism, neo-Platonism, and so forth, which certainly influenced (and was in turn influenced by) Jewish magic and mysticism generally (as addressed in, say, Gideon Bohak's Ancient Jewish Magic) but isn't usually described as "Qabalah"?

derekhenry:I disagree that the fundamental root of (Q/K/C)BL is Jewish. Even acknowledging that elements were lifted from places Jews were doesn't give justice to how substantial the practices already were in those cultures (especially when you look at Greek Qabalah), and also that the syncretism that occurred in Spain around the thirteenth century was happening thanks to open sharing between multiple traditions.

Hanh? Kabbalah not Jewish in origin? Wot then? Sephirot (for example) are derived from...?

Please explain!

@Evan - what do you reckon to Kraig's explication of Kabbalah in 'Modern Magic' - a sound, common sense introduction (my view); overly simplified; or a.n.other...?

This is not my area of expertise, so, as always, do your own research and don't take my word.

Well, a good example is the Greek practice of Isopsephy, which is where Gematria comes from. Most Jewish Kabbalah only dates back to the 13th century, with older works such as Yetzirah being cleary based on (Neo)Pythagorean/(Neo)Platonic/Gnostic threads of thought. Ten sephiroth being the Pythagorean decad. Scholem, writing for Enclyclopaedia Judaica agrees with this, that Yetzirah was an attempt to "Judaize" Gnostic and Pythagorean material, with Marcus and Marsanes being preexisting sources for concepts expressed therein.

I'm mostly just browsing over The Greek Qabalah by Kieren Barry to refresh my memory and pulling stuff out.

Edit: Three posts between when I hit reply and posted! The argument is that Greek Qabalah was fully formed and being practiced a full thousand years before Jewish Kabbalah, and much of Jewish Kabbalah is a direct lift. I'm persuaded by the book I've already cited, but I do not claim to be an authority on this subject by any stretch.

Thirding mightily raised eyebrows. This better be good, derekh.

AAAAAAA x-post.

What about Merkabah ('chariot') mysticism - if not Jewish in origin, then what? 1st century ACE I believe, so well before 13th century Spain.

Well, there's Enoch, the Hekhalot literature, Sepher ha-Razim (the Book of the Mysteries), Charba d'Moische (the Sword of Moses) -- lots of early Jewish magical and mystical stuff.

Yes, early Jewish magic and mysticism were influenced by and in turn influenced early Greco-Egyptian magic and mysticism, as I've noted above. And Kabbalah (in its strictest sense) was likely created in 13th Century Spain, where there was a wonderful mix of various influences. But I don't really see how you go from that to the claim that "the fundamental root of (Q/K/C)BL" isn't Jewish.

derekhenry:Well, a good example is the Greek practice of Isopsephy, which is where Gematria comes from.

They're both practices that play with the relationship between letters and their numerical value. But I'm not aware of any source -- other than "The Greek Qabalah by Kieren Barry," which I've just heard of now -- suggesting that Gematria "comes from" Isopsephy. The practice really seems inevitable in any culture in which letters also have numerical value.

And you do understand that, Kieren Barry aside (whoever he might be), Gematria is just one small aspect of Kabbalah and hardly its "root," right?

Ten sephiroth being the Pythagorean decad.

Ten is the number of our fingers. (Or toes.) So it comes up a lot as a number suggesting completeness. Like in decimal notation. Or in various mystical systems around the world.

I know you previously said in another topic that you "have basically zero interest in Kabballah, and only stomach what minimum amount the GD requires of it's bastardized Qabalah," but I'm baffled by this attempt to de-Judaize it and its origins.

Barry's book is on Google Books. From a very brief skimming of the chapter on Jewish origins, he seems to be talking primarily (only?) about gematria*, and while he says the first Hebrew sources on gematria date to the 3rd century C.E., he also mentions that Alexander made Greek the lingua franca of the Jews 600 years prior, which seems a little... well... I'm not a historian, but if they're speaking Greek, they're writing Greek too, right?


*Book's first sentence: "Before commencing with the study of alphabetic symbolism, let us first briefly review the history of the invention of writing itself, and the evolution of the alphabet." Squarely in my field of interest, but is gematria really the "fundamental root" of Kabbalah? It may be... I don't know. This reviewer distinguishes between "literal Qabalah" (a technique) and the whole of Qabalistic philosophy.

Barry's book is on Google Books. From a very brief skimming of the chapter on Jewish origins, he seems to be talking primarily (only?) about gematria*, and while he says the first Hebrew sources on gematria date to the 3rd century C.E., he also mentions that Alexander made Greek the lingua franca of the Jews 600 years prior, which seems a little... well... I'm not a historian, but if they're speaking Greek, they're writing Greek too, right?

Alexander "made Greek the lingua franca of the Jews"? Made it the language of the Jews?

As opposed to Greek simply becoming the lingua franca of the Hellenistic world in general for obvious political, financial, and social reasons?

That's a strange way to express that idea.

As for the origins of Gematria, compare to Scholem in Kabbalah:

The use of letters to signify numbers was known to the Babylonians and the Greeks. The first use of gematria occurs in an inscription of Sargon II (727-707 B.C.E.) which states that the king built the wall of Khorsabad 16,283 cubits long to correspond with the numerical value of his name. The use of gematria was widespread in the literature of the Magi and among interpreters of dreams in the Hellenistic world. The Gnostics equated the two holy names Abraxas and Mithras on the basis of the equivalent numerical value of their letters (365, corresponding to the days of the solar year). Its use was apparently introduced in Israel during the time of the Second Temple, even in the Temple itself, Greek letters being used to indicate numbers (Shek. 3:2).

So Babylonians/Assyrians were using gematria (or at least "[t]he use of letters to signify numbers," which isn't exactly the same thing) as early as about 700 C.E. Other people in the Hellenistic world (Alexander the Great ruled 336-323 B.C.E.) -- who weren't limited to actual inhabitants of Greece, of course -- used it, too. And Second Temple Jews (roughly 516 B.C.E.-70 C.E.), who generally spoke Aramaic and a bit of Greek, appear to have started using it in the Second Temple period.

So this means ancient Jewish mystics and magicians "lifted" Gematria from the Greeks, who were practicing it "a full thousand [?] years before"?

And, I presume, the Greeks "lifted" it from Israel's neighbors, the Babylonians and/or Assyrians?

Squarely in my field of interest, but is gematria really the "fundamental root" of Kabbalah?

Not really.

Here's Scholem, in Kabbalah:

In the beginnings of Spanish Kabbalah gematria occupied a very limited place. The disciples of Abraham b. Isaac of Narbonne and the kabbalists of Gerona hardly used it and its impact was not considerable on the greater part of the Zohar and on the Hebrew writings of Moses b. Shem Tov de Leon. Only those currents influenced by the tradition of the Hasedi Ashkenaz brought the gematria into the kabbalistic literature of the second half of the 13th century . . . . Two schools emerged as the Kabbalah developed: one of those who favored gematria, and another of those who used it less frequently. In general, it may be stated that new ideas always developed outside the realm of gematria; however, there were always scholars who found proofs and wide-ranging connections through gematria, and undoubtedly attributed to their findings a positive value higher than that of a mere allusion. . . .

I never suggested Gematria was the root of Kabbalah. My post was in response to

Which practices were prevalent where?

But moving on:

Well, there's Enoch, the Hekhalot literature, Sepher ha-Razim (the Book of the Mysteries), Charba d'Moische (the Sword of Moses) -- lots of early Jewish magical and mystical stuff.

Sure, there is lots of early Jewish stuff, but is any of it Kabbalah? Or, more importantly, is it a stronger influence on the Kabbalah that came out of Spain? If the question is whether the roots of Kabbalah are Jewish, ultimately most aren't, so long as we go back far enough.

Which casts no value judgments nor denies usefulness of any tradition touched on in passing.

I'm not interested in Kabbalah, or Cabala, or most Hermetic Qabalah, as I've not only said myself, but been reminded. I am, however, interested in pretty much all of the Greek magical traditions, including those parts that Barry discusses in his book. Which I call Greek Qabalah because that's what he named that book, though it may be an inadvisable choice.

How does one measure the strength of an influence, when the influences have not only long since cross-pollinated, but had been doing so long before the measuring began?

--Ember--

derekhenry:I never suggested Gematria was the root of Kabbalah. My post was in response to

Which practices were prevalent where?

But moving on:

Well, there's Enoch, the Hekhalot literature, Sepher ha-Razim (the Book of the Mysteries), Charba d'Moische (the Sword of Moses) -- lots of early Jewish magical and mystical stuff.

Sure, there is lots of early Jewish stuff, but is any of it Kabbalah? Or, more importantly, is it a stronger influence on the Kabbalah that came out of Spain? If the question is whether the roots of Kabbalah are Jewish, ultimately most aren't, so long as we go back far enough.

In which case, and as Professor Joad was wont to say: "it depends what you you mean by Kabbalah."

So -- if you "never suggested Gematria was the root of Kabbalah," what did you mean by "I disagree that the fundamental root of (Q/K/C)BL is Jewish"?

What DO you see as the "fundamental root" of Kabbalah?

Personally, I'd say (as I have above) that it's "the Torah, the Talmud, and Jewish teachings and culture," all of which I think I can safely say are fairly Jewish, and all of which serve as foundations of every major work on the subject that comes to mind.

(How are gematria, temurah, and notarikon used in Kabbalah? To interpret the books of the Torah. Why is the Tree of Life the "Tree of Life"? It comes from various stories and verses in the Torah. Where do the names of the Sephirot come? From a verse in the Torah. What is the esoteric commentary in books like the Zohar about? The Torah, informed by the Talmud. And so forth.)

Although, as I also readily acknowledged above, Kabbalah "picked up quite a bit from the cultures in which Jews lived over the millennia: a bit of Egyptian magic here, a bit of Hellenistic philosophy there, and even a bit from Christianity." And, in my mind, those influences (which any long-running philosophical or magical system will have) don't exactly de-Judaize the subject -- they make it richer and more interesting.

It's almost as if you're a bit uncomfortable with the Jewishness of Kabbalah, and you're trying to de-Judaize the small amount you need to "stomach" for your Golden Dawn practice. But I assume that's not really your concern, right?

Indeed.
I think most people, if asked, would define Kabbalah as an accumulation of various Jewish mystical traditions, or perhaps a system of Jewish mystical thought. So - whilst one could say, as per Joad, "it depends what you mean by..." - I suspect most people's default position would insist on the primacy of this Jewishness aspect. So that if derekhenry, or anyone else, deploys the term 'Kabbalah', they should expect people to understand it thusly.

I feel I have nothing else to contribute to this thread, but since I am being addressed directly, I'm responding to this post.

Evan:So -- if you "never suggested Gematria was the root of Kabbalah," what did you mean by "I disagree that the fundamental root of (Q/K/C)BL is Jewish"?

What DO you see as the "fundamental root" of Kabbalah?

Greek philosophy and metaphysics, I guess.

It's almost as if you're a bit uncomfortable with the Jewishness of Kabbalah, and you're trying to de-Judaize the small amount you need to "stomach" for your Golden Dawn practice. But I assume that's not really your concern, right?

Couldn't be further from the truth, and I'm not sure what you are trying to imply with "uncomfortable". I don't deny that these different traditions received added value in their assimilation and transformation, but I personally have no fealty to the god of Abraham, and symbolism from any Abrahamic tradition personally has limited utility to me.

My interest in the Greek traditions mentioned come from my interest in spirit work, nothing to do with the Golden Dawn. The Qabalah in the Golden Dawn is Hermetic Qabalah, and one cannot nor should simply replace it with Greek equivalents. Which isn't to suggest that an order made some scratch with these Greek traditions as fundamental framework wouldn't interest me greatly.

So I think we can accept a definition of Kabbalah as practices normally associated with Jewish mysticism, including some things that were integrated from Greek, Babylonian and other cultures somewhere around 2,000 years ago. Older than the English language, at any rate.

I'm still wondering what "the vital role" of a Kabbalah practitioner is, and I'm wondering what the 101 lessons are for some of these practices.

I feel I have nothing else to contribute to this thread

I'd suggest that you need to contribute a fair bit more to correct the impression of anti-semitism that your contributions above appear to give. If you are going to make a statement like: "I disagree that the fundamental root of (Q/K/C)BL is Jewish", then that requires a lot more substantiation than you have given. Please do so.

Well he did state that he understands the root of (Q/K/C)BL is greek philosophy and metaphysics, and questioned wether the early Jewish mystical and magical stuff noted by Evan could be called "Kabbala" as we know it. If one sees greek philosophy and metaphyisics as the root, then this is not strange. I don't think he's trying to "de-judaize", as Evan put it.

derekhenry:
Most Jewish Kabbalah only dates back to the 13th century, with older works such as Yetzirah being cleary based on (Neo)Pythagorean/(Neo)Platonic/Gnostic threads of thought. Ten sephiroth being the Pythagorean decad. Scholem, writing for Enclyclopaedia Judaica agrees with this, that Yetzirah was an attempt to "Judaize" Gnostic and Pythagorean material, with Marcus and Marsanes being preexisting sources for concepts expressed therein.

I'm mostly just browsing over The Greek Qabalah by Kieren Barry to refresh my memory and pulling stuff out.

Edit: Three posts between when I hit reply and posted! The argument is that Greek Qabalah was fully formed and being practiced a full thousand years before Jewish Kabbalah, and much of Jewish Kabbalah is a direct lift. I'm persuaded by the book I've already cited, but I do not claim to be an authority on this subject by any stretch.

Maybe I'm blind to this sort of thing, but I'm not seeing anything really anti-semitic about his statements or tone. It's a bit bold to state with such certainty that the roots of Kabala are not Jewish (that's news to me), but it's not really anti-semitic, is it? I would like him to elaborate on his statements, or at least give me a list of books (Greek Qabalah, got it) but my biggest complaint so far is that he makes such a bold statement so casually and doesn't seem to feel the need to elaborate. If I had a bomb like that I'd be aching for someone to ask me to explain it.

So I started looking into it, but information online is scant so far. I did find http://www.astronargon.us/Greek%20Qabalah.doc>this, which is...not that great, really, and appears to be taken mostly from Greek Qabalah, which has been mentioned above, and wikipedia. So far I haven't found it to be very useful at all.

More interesting is http://www.webofqabalah.com/id30.html>this, although I'm still not quite sure what to make of it or the site. It highlights parallels between Qabalah and Platonic metaphysics (the emanationist stuff), but it says at one point

"Thus, for example, Plato and neoplatonic philosophers would say that all horses are the manifestations of the divine Idea of the horse in the realm of plurality."

I'm afraid I don't recall a realm of plurality from my Plato classes, although it was a long time ago. Maybe the author meant to write "purity"? That would make more sense.

Other sources I'm looking at now pretty much agree that the Sepher Yetzirah combined Heichaloht (Merkabah Mysticism), which some folks are saying provide a "basis" for Kabalah, with Platonism. Not having read the Sepher Yetzirah very much and knowing next to nothing about Heichaloht I can't confirm this, but it'd be cool if someone else could. Wether you take the "root" of Kabalah to be Heichaloht or Neo-Platonism would seem to decide if Kabalah is jewish or greek in origin. More info, anyone?

Tuna Ghost:W[h]ether you take the "root" of Kabalah to be Heichaloht or Neo-Platonism would seem to decide if Kabalah is jewish or greek in origin.

Oh, for fuck's sake.

There's no question that Second Temple-era Jewish magic and mysticism were influenced by Greek philosophy and mysticism. (And vice-versa, as evidenced by the common use of Hebrew god names such as IAO -- a corrupted form of YHVH -- in the Greek magical papyri.) There was a lot of cross-fertilization of ideas in the Hellenistic world, and Greek thought certainly influenced the Sepher Yetzirah, one of the early Jewish magical/mystical texts that later served as one of many sources of Kabbalah.

There's also no question that Kabbalah in its narrower sense, which most likely developed in 13th Century Spain among people well aware of earlier Jewish magical and mystical traditions, was influenced by all of the things you'd expect to be percolating at that time in that place, including, again, Greek philosophy and mysticism.

But it seems a very odd thing to insist that Greek philosophy and mysticism were more important, and more significant, to Kabbalah -- whether interpreted narrowly as the esoteric teachings of Judaism "from the 12th century onward" or broadly as "all the successive esoteric movements in Judaism that evolved from the end of the period of the Second Temple" -- than the Jewish scripture (Torah) and commentary (Talmud) that serve as the central focus, subject, and organizing principle of the entire field.

"What's the fundamental root of Jewish esotericism? Greek philosophy and mysticism."

It's like saying that the fundamental root of Jazz is Greek because pianos use the diatonic scale. (If they do -- I don't really know music.)

Among other things, it's incredibly insulting -- minimizing, marginalizing, and cheapening the Jewish nature of and Jewish contributions to Jewish esotericism.

It also has an implicit subtext -- to the extent Kabbalah has value or importance, it can't really be Jewish, can it?

That sort of perspective certainly isn't new -- for example, as Scholem observes in Kabbalah, in the 18th Century a variety of German Christian academics (Hermann von der Hardt, J.F. Kleuker, etc.) tried to prove the Kabbalah "was in essence not Jewish at all, but rather Christian, Greek, or Persian."

But personally, whenever I've previously encountered occultists trying to prove that "Qabalah" wasn't essentially Jewish, it's been because, for some strange (or not-so-strange) reason, they feel uncomfortable practicing Jewish magic, and want to explain away that aspect of their practice as something else instead.

Which isn't to say that that's what derekhenry is doing. After all, I don't really know the fellow.

So what do make of derekhenry's claim that

Greek Qabalah was fully formed and being practiced a full thousand years before Jewish Kabbalah, and much of Jewish Kabbalah is a direct lift. I'm persuaded by the book I've already cited, but I do not claim to be an authority on this subject by any stretch.

Would you say that as Greek Qabalah does not involve Jewish texts or Jewish people or Jewish history, that it is not Qabalah? Or that it is just a matter of, as Gef has said, what you mean by "Kabalah", what you mean by "fundemental root"? Or that Greek Qabalah (the book) is just very much mistaken when it makes its claims?

For the record, I do think to say that Kabalah "isn't jewish" is pretty damn silly, or at least I would feel stupid saying it. I'm reminded of my professors in Japan talking about Zen, and their insistence that Zen Buddhism is essentially, fundemantally, at its core, Japanese. The vocabulary is Japanese, its a big part of Japanese culture, it was (is) applied to Japanese customs and ideas and whenever someone is talking about Zen Buddhism they're using Japanese vocabulary and when they talk about the history of Zen they're talking about (mostly) Japanese history. When I bring up the fact that its roots are largely Chinese and Indian, they insist that Ch'an isn't Zen. Bodhidharma didn't really practice Zen, because Zen is Japanese. Hui-neng didn't really practice Zen, because Zen is Japanese. If you ask me, I'll say Zen is Japanese. But its roots aren't.

Blues is an american style of music. The early blues players were almost all american, they sang about their experiences in america, and blues is a root of other american music. But that doesn't stop its roots from being largely African. Is making the same claim about Kabalah (not that the history of Zen Buddhism and Blues music is a direct parallel, but one can see why I'm reminded of them) insulting, minimizing, marginalizing, and cheapening the Jewish nature of and Jewish contributions to Jewish esotericism? This is a genuine question, since I'm questioning whether the roots of Kabalah are primarily jewish in origin and I'd like to know.

Having briefly looked through Greek Qabalah on Google Books (a couple chapters, anyway), I found that his bit on Pythagorean Decads being the basis for the Kabalistic Sephirot a little slim. Pretty friggin' slim, actually. He doesn't really explain why that it's "obvious" that the Sephiroth came from the Decads, except that they are ten in number and have to do with emmanation of reality (although he doesn't go into detail on what exactly they, either the decads or sephirot, have to do with it or each other, at least not in the Google Books version I looked at).

I went looking for more info on Pythagoras and his decads, and found http://www.sacred-texts.com/eso/sta/sta16.htm>this, of which the relevant bit is this:

"The decad--10--according to the Pythagoreans, is the greatest of numbers, not only because it is the tetractys (the 10 dots) but because it comprehends all arithmetic and harmonic proportions. Pythagoras said that 10 is the nature of number, because all nations reckon to it and when they arrive at it they return to the monad. The decad was called both heaven and the world, because the former includes the latter. Being a perfect number, the decad was applied by the Pythagoreans to those things relating to age, power, faith, necessity, and the power of memory. It was also called unwearied, because, like God, it was tireless. The Pythagoreans divided the heavenly bodies into ten orders. They also stated that the decad perfected all numbers and comprehended within itself the nature of odd and even, moved and unmoved, good and ill." (that was paraphrasing the writings of Nicomachus, Theon of Smyrna, Proclus, Porphyry, Plutarch, Clement of Alexandria, Aristotle, and other early authorities, according to the author).

The author also threw in, I'm not sure why, that 9 was a sacred number in the Elusian Mysteries because "consciousness descended nine times to reach man". I don't think any of this shows to any degree that the ten sephirot are based on Pythagorean decads, but you'd think the author would've thrown it in there, right?

Much more informative and interesting is http://jdt.unl.edu/triadaft.htm>this, "GNOSTICISM AND PLATONISM
THE PLATONIZING SETHIAN TEXTS FROM NAG HAMMADI IN THEIR RELATION TO LATER PLATONIC LITERATURE". Full of gnostic/platonic stuff, including elaborations on their ideas of different levels of emmanation of the divine to the material world and different levels of non-being, all of which I recall being part of at least what little Hermetic Kabalah I've looked into. I can't really compare it to Jewish Kabala because I don't know much about it or how it differs from Hermetic.

On the whole, I haven't found anyone arguing that Kabalah came from the Greeks, only that it may have taken liberally from Neo-Platonists and Gnostics, or even vice-versa. Some say that the true roots of Kabalah aren't known by anyone (?), but I haven't come across any credible arguments proving that there is evidence of Jewish Kabalah borrowing wholesale from the Greeks. While there is plenty of similarities, similar ideas pop up at the same time in two different places all throughout history so that doesn't mean much in my book.

Evan:
It also has an implicit subtext -- to the extent Kabbalah has value or importance, it can't really be Jewish, can it?

I have already explicitly stated that there is value and importance of Jewish origin in Kabbalah. I intend no implicit subtext contra that.

Gypsy Lantern:
to correct the impression of anti-semitism

For fuck's sake. I feel like I'm being asked when I stopped beating my wife. I feel that I have said nothing to give an impression of antisemitism, and to defend myself further would seem to consent that I had.

Overall, I agree with Evan's last post almost completely. Almost. Ultimately one simply comes back to the question of what we are talking about. Evan is talking only about Kabbalah, while I was talking about a collection of traditions with similar sounding names. For example, one cannot say the Torah and Talmud are the central organizing principle of the entire field if we are talking about Hermetic Qabalah.

derekhenry:
Overall, I agree with Evan's last post almost completely. Almost. Ultimately one simply comes back to the question of what we are talking about. Evan is talking only about Kabbalah, while I was talking about a collection of traditions with similar sounding names. For example, one cannot say the Torah and Talmud are the central organizing principle of the entire field if we are talking about Hermetic Qabalah.

Well the thread, as begin by grant, is titled ‘Teach me Kabbalah’ - not ‘Kabbalah/Qabalah/Cabala.’

You have previously stated that you have no interest in Kabbalah, but have chosen to post a rather contentious statement on it nonetheless. Perhaps because of the Kabbalah/Qabalah/Cabala distinction – and you are only interested in the latter two? But the thread, as begun by grant, cites Kabbalah, which, as I tried to argue earlier, would by most people’s definition be deemed to have a Jewish core to it. I can see the (K/Q/C) distinction, but perhaps not everyone is aware of it, nor agrees with it.

That said, thank you for drawing our attention to the ‘Greek Qabalah’ book (I recall being aware of it when it was published, but didn’t follow it up - so was glad to finally have a read of it on Google Books). I would still argue, though, that it deals primarily with gematria, which is just one subsection of the huge body of work comprising Kabbalah – whether as an accumulation of ideas, or as a system. It seems to me that the Tree of Life and Sephiroth are central to K/Q/C-B-L, as a map of the Universe and of God’s creation of it, and that these concepts are primarily Jewish in origin.

But as you say, "Ultimately one simply comes back to the question of what we are talking about."

I feel that I have said nothing to give an impression of antisemitism, and to defend myself further would seem to consent that I had.

If you are going to make controversial statements that could be interpreted in an antisemitic light, such as: "I disagree that the fundamental root of (Q/K/C)BL is Jewish", then you really need to support such statements with a lot more solid material than you have so far presented. It's a poor contribution to drop something like that, and then refuse to elaborate any further when eyebrows are raised. I would like you to unpack your statement further.

Tuna Ghost:Would you say that as Greek Qabalah does not involve Jewish texts or Jewish people or Jewish history, that it is not Qabalah?

 
I'd say that Greek Isopsephy is not Kabbalah -- or Qabalah -- but rather a Hellenistic practice that, like gematria (one particular Jewish Kabbalistic practice) or abjad (an analogous Arabic practice), involves working with the relationship between letters and their numerical values.  Bablyonians and Akkadians were doing so at least as early as Sargon II (who declared that a wall had been built a certain length to correspond with the numerical value of his name), so I'm not at all clear that Greeks originated the practice.  And, Kieren Barry aside, I'm comfortably sure that most people describing the Greek practice of Isopsephy wouldn't use the term "Kabbalah," or even "Qabalah," to describe it, except by means of analogy.

Is making the same claim about Kabalah (not that the history of Zen Buddhism and Blues music is a direct parallel, but one can see why I'm reminded of them) insulting, minimizing, marginalizing, and cheapening the Jewish nature of and Jewish contributions to Jewish esotericism?  This is a genuine question, since I'm questioning whether the roots of Kabalah are primarily jewish in origin and I'd like to know.

As I've said ad nauseam above, "Kabbalah" is a term that by consensus generally is understood to mean "the collection of Jewish esoteric teachings -- either from antiquity forward or from the 12th-13th century forward."  These teachings incorporated and were influenced by various mystical, magical, and philosophical currents that were circulating at the time, including Greek philosophy and mysticism.  But those teachings which we generally describe as "Kabbalah" -- in contrast to other teachings of the time -- generally were devised by Jews, were written in Hebrew, Aramaic, or Yiddish, were passed pretty much exclusively from Jews to other Jews, and focused very heavily on esoteric commentary on Torah and Talmud or magical or mystical exercises derived from Torah and Talmud (for example, contemplations of scripture, or Abraham Abulafia's exercises combining breathing, movement, and the chanting of various God names and consonant-vowel combinations).

Eventually Christians like Pico della Mirandola developed an interest in Kabbalah -- often in an attempt to use Jewish mysticism to prove the divininty of Jesus, and thereby to convert Jews to Christianity. Some (like Mirandola) were extraordinary scholars who made valuable contributions to the field. Others . . . weren't. And eventually they created their own spin on Kabbalah -- which some here call "Cabala" -- which deemphasized Hebrew scripture and commentary (with which they lacked familiarity) and replaced it with Christian mysticism and philosophy. Still later, Victorian/Edwardian era occultists, who knew even less Hebrew scripture and commentary, developed an even newer spin on Kabbalah -- which some here call "Qabalah" -- which deemphasized Hebrew scripture and commentary even further and replaced it with whatever occult symbolism or techniques they could fit with a hammer and some duct tape.

Remember this line from Scholem?

The many books written on the subject [of Kabbalah] in the 19th and 20th centuries by various theosophists and mystics lacked any basic knowledge of the sources and very rarely contributed to the field, while at times they even hindered the development of a historical approach. Similarly, the activities of French and English occultists contributed nothing and only served to create considerable confusion between the teachings of the Kabbalah and their own totally unrelated inventions, such as the alleged kabbalistic origin of the Tarot-cards. To this category of supreme charlatanism belong the many and widely read books of Eliphas Levi (actually Alphonse Louis Constant; 1810-1875), Papus (Gerard Encausse; 1868-1916), and Frater Perdurabo (Aleister Crowley; 1875-1946), all of whom had an infinitesimal knowledge of Kabbalah that did not prevent them from drawing freely on their imaginations instead. The comprehensive works of A.E. Waite, (The Holy Kabbalah, 1929), S. Karppe, and P. Vulliaud, on the other hand, were essentially rather confused compilations made from secondhand sources.

That's "Qabalah."

Which isn't to say that it isn't valuable or rigorous, or that it doesn't work.  Just that it seems to have departed a bit from its ostensible source materials.

Evan:
I'd say that Greek Isopsephy is not Kabbalah -- or Qabalah -- but rather a Hellenistic practice that, like gematria (one particular Jewish Kabbalistic practice) or abjad (an analogous Arabic practice), involves working with the relationship between letters and their numerical values. Bablyonians and Akkadians were doing so at least as early as Sargon II (who declared that a wall had been built a certain length to correspond with the numerical value of his name), so I'm not at all clear that Greeks originated the practice.

Right, fair enough. Once I learned that Greek Qabalah concerned itself primarily with Isopsephy and seemed to lack anything substantial regarding anything else, the idea started to unravel anyway. Which is a shame, I was really looking forward to a comparison of Kabbalistic metaphysics and the Neo-platonism practiced by the gnostics around the time the Sepher Yetzira was written. It seems like there's something there worth investigating.

Actually, now that we've got that mess more or less settled, maybe a useful way to move back to the original purpose of the thread would be to compare the metaphysics and philosophy of Hermetic Qabbalah (i think I've spelled that word every way it can be spelled during the course of this thread), with which I imagine a few people here are familiar, with the Jewish? There's gotta be a book or some articles that do exactly that.

derekhenry:Overall, I agree with Evan's last post almost completely. Almost. Ultimately one simply comes back to the question of what we are talking about. Evan is talking only about Kabbalah, while I was talking about a collection of traditions with similar sounding names. For example, one cannot say the Torah and Talmud are the central organizing principle of the entire field if we are talking about Hermetic Qabalah.

As the above demonstrates, I've been talking about all three, not just (Jewish) Kabbalah.

You previously said "I disagree that the fundamental root of [Jewish, Christian, and Hermetic Kabbalah] is Jewish." You now appear to be saying "I disagree that the Torah and Talmud are the central organizing principle of Hermetic Qabalah." Those two statements aren't the same.

To the extent you still stand by your original statement, I disagree. As I discussed above, Kabbalah, Cabala, and Qabalah (if you use those terms) are not merely "a collection of traditions with similar sounding names." Rather, Jewish Kabbalah -- a collection of Jewish magical and mystical teachings and practices informed by and generally focused on the Torah and Talmud -- was the original source of and provides the overarching structure for both Christian Cabala and Hermetic Qabalah. And however much the latter two may have hollowed out their root and grafted on new materials they consider more palatable -- or at least more familiar -- the root remains.

Of course, you may disagree.

Another tangent that might demonstrate something: Blues music is pentatonic, a quality it actually ultimately got from Arabic sources. The guitar is a direct descendant of an oud, an instrument played by Muslim traders (and their slaves) throughout the African continent. The two primary pre-American sources of the blues are oud music and the a capella worksongs that became field hollers. You can read more about (and hear examples of) the close relationship between Arabic music and the blues in this piece by Jonathan Curiel.

Blues, as we'd recognize it, has only been around for 200 years.


What I think we've agreed as the definition of Kabbalah (certainly how I was thinking of it) is a body of practices (including what that reviewer of Barry's book called "literary Qabalah") that were gathered in the 1300s but elements of which can be traced back to Alexander's conquest and before, to the reign of Sargon.

Which means it's older than the blues... and so probably has more ingredients from more origins in the mix. Oud music ain't the blues, though.

(X-post with Evan.)

So, I'm not much for the spelling differences as they tend not to be used with sufficient consistency to actually make them useful in assuming you know what people are on about. They'll all examples of transliteration from the Hebrew Qof Bet Lamed which as Evan points out upthread is "to recieve". Transliteration pretty much by definition means that spelling is a little hazy all over the place - even down to the ways you'd spell the names of the Hebrew letters, or Sephirot, or anything. So I relax about spelling except when I'm spelling in Hebrew.

I'm going to focus on the original goals of the thread, and natter on a little about some of the core elements of the hermetic styled Kaballah, as that's where my experience is. My fathers side of the family have a current of traditional Kaballah that runs through, but that gets passed on eldest son to eldest son and therefore missed my father. Regardless, my practice is rooted in the hermetic side, despite the Jewsish elements of my family.

In fact, it's worth a brief diversion here - I certainly wasn't raised Jewish (or Catholic) despite my parents being born into those faiths respectively. I was raised lapsed, effectively. That's at least one of the reasons I find the hermetic forms appealing - they represent elements of what I consider my spiritual heritage unified into something quite different. I find that appealing.

Enough of that. Hermetic kaballah generally has a couple of key elements that would be recognisable to Jewish kaballists before it diverges completely - those would be (and I'm more than happy to be corrected or refined on any of this - it is by necessity a brief overview):

The Hebrew Letters
The Sepher Yetzirah and the Zohar, and from it the concepts of 10 Sephira placed upon the Tree of Life.
The Four Worlds
Gematria, Temurah and Notiquarion

It's worth noting that the sephira and their arrangement come to a relatively static form in the Hermetic conception (rooted in the Kircher TOL) - while in the Jewish tradition things are much more fluid - both in the manner in which they're arranged and the ways various other correspondances would be assigned to them. There are minor differences between groups, but the general form has remained relatively static.

The 22 Hebrew letters can be broken down into three groups - three mothers, 7 doubles and 12 singles. Three elements, seven planets and twelve signs of the zodiac are associated with these letters in various permutations depending on which hermetic group you listen to. Each of these 22 letters further repsents a path upon the tree of life, connecting one Sephira with another.

The Sephir Yetzirah has a whole bunch of translations, the two most commonly referenced (in Hermetic circles) being Wescott (a member of the Golden Dawn) and Kaplan (Rabbi and mystic). I recommend checking out a few translations, as each of them captures the poetry of the original in differing ways. The Sepher Yetzirah is quite short, too - if you're going to start anywhere, it's probably the most accesible point.

There are concieved to be four worlds between singular point of divine essence and the physical realm in which we live. In a sense, all of these roadmaps and seperations are an attempt to understand the manner in which ineffable G_d descends from conceptual and ineffable perfection down to us - and understanding that chain, to return along it. In this sense, it's a form of tikkun olam (repairing the world by rendering it holy, a piece at a time) to elevate elements of the gross physical world by returning them to the holy.

The four worlds represent that descent from perfection into matter, from the world of emanation (Atziluth) through creation (Briah) through formation (Yetzirah) to the material world (Assiah). At each stage, we pass from divine wholeness through to the differentiation of elements into the seperate forms and classes of matter.

Finally, Gematria is the assigning of numeric values to words with the understanding that words of the same value have an essential relationship at their core. 777 is a collection of concepts assigned to number values throughout. Temurah covers a variety of ways of switching letters for one another in order to discover new meanings for words. Notiquarion involves taking the initial letters of a phrase to discover new truth in it's summaries statement, or vice versa creating a new phrase out of a single word.

Okay, that's a start in terms of outlining the territory of hermetic kaballah. Feel free to jump in on any of those points and we can push on.

The key (and the stuff I'd like to get into here, rather than theory) is about how these various forms can be lived and used and the results thereof.

I could hug you.

Just to follow up on that, a few tools for reference:

The Hebrew Aleph-Bet.

Aryeh Kaplan's translation of the Sefer Yetzirah.

Some basics on Gematria.

Some people also divide Kabbalah into Speculative Kabbalah and Practical Kabbalah, roughly equivalent to theory and practice. The Speculative Kabbalah includes the cosmology developed through the Sefer Yetzirah, the Zohar, and later Lurianic Kabbalah. Practical Kabbalah includes magical techniques and practices (including folk magic, the creation of amulets, etc.), and doesn't necessarily depend on Speculative Kabbalah.

Oh -- and I might as well offer the classic story on studying Kabbalah:

Four entered the Orchard. They were Ben Azzai, Ben Zoma, the Other, and Rabbi Akiba.

Rabbi Akiba warned, "When you enter near the stones of pure marble, do not say 'water water,' since it is written, 'He who speaks falsehood will not be established before My eyes'" (Psalms 101:7).

Ben Azzai gazed and died. Regarding it is written, 'Precious in God's eyes is the death of His saints' (Psalms 116:15).

Ben Zoma gazed and was stricken. Regarding him it is written, 'You have found honey, eat moderately least you bloat yourself and vomit it' (Proverbs 25:16).

The Other gazed and cut his plantings (became a heretic).

Rabbi Akiba entered in peace and left in peace.

The angels also wished to cast down Rabbi Akiba but the Blessed Holy One said, "Leave this elder alone, for he is worthy of making use of My glory."

The Other -- Elisha ben Abuya -- is an interesting character in his own right . . .

Evan:Just to follow up on that, a few tools for reference:

Some people also divide Kabbalah into Speculative Kabbalah and Practical Kabbalah, roughly equivalent to theory and practice. The Speculative Kabbalah includes the cosmology developed through the Sefer Yetzirah, the Zohar, and later Lurianic Kabbalah. Practical Kabbalah includes magical techniques and practices (including folk magic, the creation of amulets, etc.), and doesn't necessarily depend on Speculative Kabbalah.

Others, (in fact I think it's mainly Moshe Idel), prefer to divide the doctrine between theurgical kabbalah and ecstatic kabbalah. Theurgical kabbalah is about helping to repair the consequences of the Fall (roughly, a part of the Divine, the "presence of God", or the "shekhinah" is exiled and isolated in the world, and the kabbalist tries to reunite God, like in a puzzle, so to say). Lurianic kabbalah is theurgical, and in fact, if I remember well, almost all kabbalah influenced by the Zohar (the most well known kabbalistic book) pertains to this kind.

Ecstatic kabbalah is about reaching union with God and mystical states by meditating on the letters of Divine Name, and is mostly represented by Abraham Abulafia, a very fascinating guy BTW.

I remember having read somewhere, but I don't remember the source, that Christian kabbalists of the Renaissance were strongly influenced by ecstatic, abulafian, Kabbalah, but that "Hermetic Kabbalah" as practiced in the Golden Dawn is mainly influenced by the theurgical, lurianic trend. So Christian and Hermetic Kabbalahs don't share exactly the same "lineage". But again, I'm not sure to remember exactly this theory.

Evan:

The Other -- Elisha ben Abuya -- is an interesting character in his own right . . .

Interesting that the apostate can still achieve paradise.

Is the idea that he's ruining it for everyone else?

Through the study and practice of Kabbalah he was able to enter Paradise. Get a glimpse while still living.

But, according to the story, this caused him to lose his faith.

The whole story is a caution: if you study Kabbalah, be prepared for the consequences -- death, madness, heresy. Or wisdom.

(As an aside, here's another story from the Talmud about how Elisha ben Abuya became a heretic: a man sent his son up into a tree to shoo away a mother bird before gathering her eggs -- a mitzvah that, according to the Torah, brings long life. The boy did so, then fell to the ground and died. Elisha shouted "There is no justice and there is no Judge!" So he was excommunicated.

And here's another: "[Elisha]'s tongue was never tired of singing Greek songs." Too much Greek philosophy, wine, horses, and architecture.)

Corporate Mage:Hermetic kaballah generally has a couple of key elements that would be recognisable to Jewish kaballists before it diverges completely - those would be (and I'm more than happy to be corrected or refined on any of this - it is by necessity a brief overview):

The Hebrew Letters
The Sepher Yetzirah and the Zohar, and from it the concepts of 10 Sephira placed upon the Tree of Life.
The Four Worlds
Gematria, Temurah and Notiquarion

Might as well start with the Hebrew letters.

In Kabbalah Hebrew letters are extremely important.

First, they can be manipulated and interpreted to reveal hidden wisdom and relationships.

We've already talked a bit about gematria. Each Hebrew letter has a numerical value, and words that have the same total value are considered to have some sort of relationship to each other. So Elohim (one of the names of God) = 26, which is the sum of Echad (Oneness) = 13 and Ahava (Love) = 13. So essential qualities of God are oneness and love.

Notarikon expands words into acronyms to create a deeper meaning. So the Orchard noted above -- PRDS (park or garden) -- not only stands for the Garden of Eden but the four layers of Scriptural interpretation: Pashat ("sim­ple" -- plain meaning), Remez ("hint" -- implied meaning), Drash ("search" -- the allegorical meaning), and Sod ("hidden" -- the mystical meaning).

Temurah involves letter substitution -- replacing letters with other letters in accordance with a given system (replace each aleph with a bet, and so forth), often to create a powerful magical word for an amulet or charm. So Temurah can be used to transform Adonai Eloheinu Adonai (the Lord is Our God the Lord) into a secret 14-letter name of God.

Second, Hebrew letters are not only powerful and magical, and not only devices that allow us to approach and understand the Divine -- they're alive and intelligent.

According to the Sefer Yetzirah, they're the foundation of everything that exists and will exist.

And according to the Zohar, before the world came into being they stood before God to argue about why each should be the source of Creation. God chose Bet (Bereshit, "In the Beginning," the first word of the Torah), because it begins the word "blessed" (baruch). But because Aleph modestly remained silent, it was placed first of all in the Aleph-Bet.

So, now onto some discussion. Gematria/Notariqon/Temurah you'll find discussed all over the place. People love to fill tomes with their observations, discoveries and proofs. Mathers did it, Regardie does it in his publication of the GD manuscripts (slyly adding his own work as part of the corpus), Crowley does it greek style all over the bleeding place (as long as it sums to 93) and you'll find lots of it in modern manuscripts.

Through a lot of personal consultation and meditation on all of this, I'd say (in brief summary) it's all pretty much useless except to demonstrate how the practice works through seeing someone else's results. The whole point is to do it yourself, and to begin to see *your* connections between things - other peoples work just muddies the pool. Again, this sort of work is easy to begin and at its most rewarding when you actually get hands on.

There's been a lot of work by various people assigning English letters to number values to build an English kaballah. If you want to kick things off, I'd just start with A=1, B=2 etc. Some degree of fiddling with that might lead you to determine your own preferences / and or pick up someone else's system - but the process is the thing.