The Divine Attribute of Transcendence in Dionysius the Areopagite's Work: Differences and Confluences with the Jewish Kabbalah
This article undertakes a comparative analysis of divine transcendence as conceptualized in the Neoplatonically-infused Christian mysticism of the Corpus Areopagiticum and the esoteric tradition of Jewish Kabbalah, with a primary focus on the Zohar. It argues that despite their distinct theological...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Interlibrary Loan: | Interlibrary Loan for the Fachinformationsdienste (Specialized Information Services in Germany) |
| Published: |
2025
|
| In: |
Diakrisis
Year: 2025, Volume: 8, Pages: 65-84 |
| Further subjects: | B
Hierarchy
B Proclus B Dionysius the Areopagite B Divine Names B Transcendence B Kabbalah B Neoplatonism B Mystical Theology |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (kostenfrei) Volltext (kostenfrei) |
| Summary: | This article undertakes a comparative analysis of divine transcendence as conceptualized in the Neoplatonically-infused Christian mysticism of the Corpus Areopagiticum and the esoteric tradition of Jewish Kabbalah, with a primary focus on the Zohar. It argues that despite their distinct theological origins and historical contexts, both systems develop sophisticated apophatic theologies to safeguard the absolute otherness of the Godhead, while simultaneously positing a structured series of divine emanations or processions that bridge the chasm between the transcendent source and the created world. The study explores the apophatic methodologies (the via negativa), the role of divine names, and the hierarchical structures of emanation (divine processions in Dionysius, the Sefirot in Kabbalah). A central, speculative hypothesis is advanced: the potential analogical identification of the Sefirah Hokhmah (Wisdom) with the Person of Christ as the Logos (the Verb). The article defines the necessary theological and philosophical conditions that would render such a comparison reasonably acceptable within a comparative mystical framework, highlighting both the profound confluences in their structural roles and the insurmountable dogmatic differences that prevent a full equation. The aim is not to syncretize, but to use the comparison as a heuristic tool to illuminate the unique contours of each tradition's approach to the paradox of a transcendent yet self-revealing God. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2601-7415 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Diakrisis
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.24193/diakrisis.2025.4 |
