The Kabbala of Shakespeare

By

Paul T. Olson


At the age of twelve,  my grandmother introduced me to the
mysterious world of Shakespeare when she gave me Clark and
Wright's The Complete Works of William Shakespeare.
Compared to this early interest in the Bard, I was a late
bloomer when in the summer of 1991 I began studying the
Mystical Kabbala.  The Kabbala is defined in the glossary of the
Zohar as "the esoteric teachings of Judaism" (Matt, 304).
Authorities differ about whether it was found by Adam, Noah,
or Moses (Kraig, 54).
This knowledge is best explained with a figure called the Tree
of Life.  It is composed of ten spheres or sephiroths numbered
one through ten and divided in different formations depending
on their operations, which we will see later. By using various
systems of manipulation, magicians believe they can reach
God's intellectual world or control nature by harnessing the
energy concealed therein (Woodman, 15).
Although I had studied the Kabbala and Shakespeare avidly, I
didn't make any connection until Fall semester of 1993 when a
fellow student in EN 420 Shakespeare leaned over to me and
suggested that the conflict between Theseus and Hippolyta
reminded him of the conflict between the Pillar of Mercy and
the Pillar of Severity (see appendix).  Like two vines bent
toward each other, I could not prevent Shakespeare and the
Kabbala from becoming hopelessly entangled by the end of the
semester.  When the assignment was given to do research on
some topic in Shakespeare, there was little doubt in my mind
what I would examine:  William Shakespeare must have been
aware of the Kabbala and included Kabbalistic doctrines in his
plays.
Documentation was my major apprehension.  Shakespeare never
uses the word "Kabbala" in the text of any of his plays, but that
does not disprove my thesis as Shakespeare made reference to
many things that he does not address directly.  I searched to
see what the occult "scene" was like in the renaissance.  John
Mebane says, "In the late sixteenth and early seventeenth
centuries, magic became the most powerful manifestation of
the growing conviction that human-kind should act out its
potential in the free exercise of its powers on the social and
natural environment" (3).  David Ruderman describes the work
of "Marsilio Ficino and Giovanni Pico della Mirandola, the
leading neoplatonists in Florence in the second half of the
fifteenth century" (140), as being "Christian Kabbala" (142)
Gershom Scholem says, "On the whole, the spread of Lurrianic
Kabbalism [a branch devoted to reunion with God] was almost
entirely due to the activity of another Kabbalist, Israel Sarug,
who between 1592 and 1598 carried on a lively propaganda in
the interests of the new school among the Kabbalists of Italy"
(p. 257).
Shakespeare had a keen ability to identify the spiritual
concerns and social interests of his times and incorporate them
into his dramatic works.  He must have been aware of the
influence of the Kabbala on the thinkers of Europe and included
Kabbalistic doctrines as themes and details in his plays.
The Kabbalistic influence on Shakespeare's work must have
resulted in the airtight psychology of his characters.  Volume
upon volume of published analysis demonstrate that
Shakespeare's characters bear up well under the harshest of
psychological examinations.  The psychological system of the
Kabbala corresponds to Freudian psychology: the Yechidah
(sephiroth 1) corresponds to the superego, the Nephesh
(sephiroth 9) corresponds to the id, and the Ruach (sephiroths 4-
8) corresponds to the ego (Kraig 155-8), but Freud wouldn't be
born for hundreds of years. Regardie says, "I conceive of
analytical psychology as the spouse of the ancient system of
magic" (40)  I have been able to find no system of psychology
that would have been superior to Kabbala that Shakespeare
would have had access to.
In all the rereadings, translations, and transpositions of the
Kabbala that were done--no matter how much the philosophies
and doctrines were watered down, misconstrued, or just plain
lost-- the one major ideal of Kabbala that always rose to the
surface in some form (perhaps the ideal that mythified the
Zeitgeist  of Elizabethan England) was that "the world would
become perfect when humanity regained the knowledge and
power it had lost through original sin" (Mebane, 84).
In The Tempest, Prospero becomes purified by his studies, and
because of them he can perform God's Will (Mebane 176).
Prospero regains his power through his studies.  Additionally,
"Shakespeare may have been aware of the alchemical meaning
of the term tempest :  it is a boiling process which removes
impurities from base metal and facilitates its transmutation
into gold" (181).  Prospero's redemption comes before the
beginning of the play;  his actions result in the redemption of
the other characters.
In Henry IV part 1 & 2, Hal's redemption precedes his
assumption of the throne.  This redemption also takes place in
Twelfth Night when Viola's disguise is revealed and she is
reunited with Sebastian (regaining of lost knowledge).
Failure to regain the knowledge and power lost after the
introduction of original sin is a major part of tragedy.  In the
tragedies, the characters realize their mistakes and their
ignorances too late to save themselves.  This also reflects the
perfection doctrine by showing the results of ignoring the need
to pursue it.
In Hamlet,  impurities and decay are caused by the "original
sin" of Claudius' reign--his assassination of Hamlet's father.
Hamlet gains the knowledge to act when he meets the ghost but
doesn't have the power to act until Gertrude is poisoned and
then it is too late for him to save himself.  Additionally,
Hamlet may be referring to the Kabbalistic doctrine of
metempsychosis (punishment of an evil soul by confinement in
a beastly body) when he describes "how a king may go a
progress through the guts of a beggar" (4, 3, 33).  Even if this is
not the only meaning of this line, Shakespeare knew that with
all the talk of evil people dying, the Kabbalists in the audience
would have been thinking about it.
In the Kabbala (see appendix), the sephiroth Binah
(understanding), Gibburah (strength), and Hode (splendor)
comprise the pillar of severity.  The sephiroth Hochma
(wisdom), Hesed (mercy), and Netzach (victory) comprise the
pillar of mercy (Kraig 87, 88).  The human being resides
between these two forces.  The ideal is to balance these
opposites. "Unbalanced mercy is but weakness and the fading
out of the will.  Unbalanced severity is cruelty and the
barrenness of the mind (Regardie 21)."
In light of this polarity, it seems to me that the
aforementioned dispute between Theseus and Hippolyta,
mirrored by the dispute between Oberon and Titania in A
Midsummer Night's Dream, is a clear dispute between severity
(law) and mercy (love).  As the government official, Theseus
speaks for law when he says, "Such tricks have strong
imagination" (5, 1, 18).  In other words, he says, "love means
nothing."  Hippolyta speaks as love saying, "More witnesseth
than fancy's images" (5, 1, 25).  In other words she says,
"Because everyone feels the same thing when they are in love,
it can become something more than law."
If Shakespeare feels that mercy, or love, is necessary to
temper severity, or law, nowhere does this become more
obvious than in The Merchant of Venice when Portia--embodying
love just as Hippolyta did--is forced to become law (severity).
Disguising herself as a man to save Antonio, she says outright,
"And Earthly power doth then show likest God's/ When mercy
seasons justice" (4, 1, 196-7).
Both Midsummer Night's Dream and Merchant of Venice
originate from the period between 1594 and 1596 (Watt, et. al.
14).  This suggests that Shakespeare learned this doctrine and
was inspired by it.
There is a problem with Shakespeare's depiction of the
necessity for balance between mercy and severity:  Hochma (at
the head of the Pillar of Mercy) corresponds to man and Binah
(at the head of the Pillar of Severity) corresponds to woman
(Kraig 103). This gives rise to the doctrine that the Pillar of
Mercy is masculine and the Pillar of Severity is feminine.  In
these early plays, the severe characters are male and the
merciful characters are female.  Even so, the conflict between
severity and mercy is solid.
Shakespeare more closely follows the orthodox sexual
attribution of severity and mercy in  King Lear and Macbeth.
These plays, coincidentally both originate between 1605 and
1606 (Watt, et. al. 14).  This may suggest that Shakespeare
learned the proper attributions of mercy and severity and found
inspiration from them.
Shakespeare examines the consequences of unbridled severity
in King Lear. Lear's daughters--Goneril, Regan, and Cordelia--
are driven to extraordinary lengths by their soft father and
become severity incarnate.  Maiming, invasion, murder, and
adultery are perpetrated by the daughters of Lear to attain
their selfish goals.  These plots collapse on themselves, leaving
all three daughters and many others dead.  In this, severity and
mercy regain balance only with the death of all offenders.
The title character of Macbeth is shown that he will become
king. He is merciful and would like to let fate run its course;
however, his severe wife convinces him to take matters into
his own hands and kill the king.  She shows her severity when
she describes how she would "dash the brains" of her own baby
if she had promised such a thing to Macbeth (1, 7,  58).
Macbeth's softness (mercy) become his downfall when he obeys
the demands of his lady.  As in King Lear, death awaits the
Macbeths as the reward for unbalanced severity.
In the Kabbala, divine knowledge and energy descend from
Kether to Malkuth (Kraig 68).  The Ritual of the Middle Pillar is
a meditation technique by which, it is believed, one may bring
this divine knowledge down through one, through the parts of
the body that correspond to the sephiroth (see appendix),
energizing Kether at the head, Daath at the throat, Tifaret at
the heart, Yesode at the genitals, and Malkuth at the feet
(Regardie 123).
In King Lear, the Fool criticizes Lear's obsession with the
process of generation.

The cod-piece that will house
Before the head has any,
The head and he shall louse;
So beggars marry many.
The man that makes his toe
What he his heart should make
Shall of a corn cry woe,
 And turn his sleep to wake (King Lear 3, 1, 18-34).

In this the fool talks about the imbalance created by placing
sexuality before personal safety and love.  He says that when
one puts the importance of the genitals (cod-piece) over the
head or if one puts the foot (genitals?) over the heart it will
cause anguish and disruption.  In my interpretation, this shows
Lear has lost touch with how divine energy flows down from
the head to the feet.
The evidence I have presented--that Shakespeare knew the
Kabbala--is all circumstantial. Shakespeare never included
anything that was irrefutably Kabbalistic. He shied from
controversy even in the plays that were critical of the
monarchy.  He made sure that everything was back in balance by
the end of the play.  "The late sixteenth and early seventeenth
centuries in England witnessed the culmination of an intense
struggle between those who maintained the continuing validity
of traditional sources of knowledge and those who assessed
that inherited beliefs must be tested and, if necessary,
rejected (Mebane 6). Shakespeare lived in a world where "even a
pious mage like John Dee was called upon to defend himself
against charges that he was in league with the devil (7)."
Shakespeare was very careful to avoid saying anything that
would arouse suspicion of witchcraft or heresy.
The doctrines I have identified as having parallels in
Shakespeare's plays are hardly new, nor are they even specific
to the Kabbala.  They have their place in most other systems of
mysticism, and many systems of mysticism were studied and
practiced during Elizabethan times.  But that very fact is the
reason I find the topic so compelling:  the Kabbala applies
universally, just as Shakespeare's characters and themes are
universally understood.  The Kabbala addresses the full range of
human experience.  Shakespeare's characters and plots are as
relevant today as they have ever been.
Universality is the measure of any system of beliefs, any body
of work, and even a good education.  In each case, I must ask
myself-- does this body of knowledge cover everything?  If it
can not, I must fill the hole in for myself; if it can, I know I
have found something I can live with and within.

Works Cited

Clark, W. G. and W. Aldis Wright, ed. The Complete Works of
William Shakespeare.  Garden City, New York:  Nelson Doubleday,
nd.

Kraig, Donald Michael.  Modern Magick.  St. Paul:  Llewellyn,
1991.

Matt, Daniel Chanan, translator.  Zohar.  New York:  Paulist
Press, 1983.

Mebane, John S.  Renaissance Magic and the Return of the Golden
Age.  Lincoln:  University of Nebraska Press, 1989.

Regardie, Israel.  The Middle Pillar.  St. Paul:  Llewellyn, 1985.

Ruderman, David B.  Kabbala, Magic, and Science.  Cambridge:
Harvard University Press, 1988.

Scholem, Gershom G.  Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism.  New
York: Schocken, 1941.

Watt, Homer A. et. al.  Outlines of Shakespeare's Plays.  New
York: Barnes and Noble, 1962.

Woodman, David. White Magic and English Renaissance Drama.
Rutherford: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 1973.



Paul T. Olson
box 43 Student ActivitiesOffice
Northern Michigan University
Marquette, Michigan 49855

