'סר לבם מן העליונה': חשיבה מחודשת על גבולותיה של 'ספרות הקבלה' ועל ההתנגדות ל'קבלה' במחצית הראשונה של המאה השלוש-עשרה

In many depictions in the scholarly literature of the emergence of Kabbalah in the 13th century, the Kabbalists are described as having been involved in disseminating Jewish theosophical, mythical and mystical perceptions. In this paper, I intend to demonstrate that even in the early stage of Kabbalah, during the first half of the 13th century, the Kabbalists were already also involved in a contrary effort, namely, to moderate contemporary Jewish mythical attitudes which they found to be reckless.
In the main part of the article, I discuss a text by R. Meir b. Simon of Narbonne (known as HaMe’ili), in which he expresses his objection to contemporary theological attitudes which were connected to the theosophical Kabbalah of the ten Sefirot. The discussion of R. Meir b. Simon is considered by scholars to be very important evidence toward understanding the way in which Kabbalistic notions were depicted outside the inner circles of the Kabbalists, and the way in which they were understood by Rabbis who did not sympathize with Kabbalistic ideas. In the paper, I compare R. Meir b. Simon’s arguments with those of contemporary Kabbalistic texts, in order to demonstrate that R. Meir b. Simon did not refer to the Kabbalists or to the Kabbalistic treatises that are known to us from this period. According to my main argument, R. Meir b. Simon was addressing his arguments to other theological movements that indeed used some Kabbalistic notions, but, unlike them. espoused a unique binitarian approach which held that there are two main parts in the Godhead, and which prescribed all worship to be dedicated to the lowest part while forbidding worship to the uppermost part. This approach, as we shall see, was known in Provence, in Catalonia and even in Burgos, Castile.

The comparison between R. Meir b. Simon’s arguments and the texts of his contemporary Kabbalists gives a new historical context to the early Kabbalistic literature. It demonstrates that at the time of the emergence of the Kabbalah, other Jewish mythical attitudes, which have a scarcely written record, were known and even common. Those attitudes were a medieval development of earlier Jewish binitarian approaches and were rejected by different rabbis – Kabbalists and non-Kabbalists alike.