Front Matter (PDF) - Stanford University Press

translation of the Torah). This unparalleled neo-Aramaic is peppered
Aramaic
enigmatic expressions, puns, outlandish constructions, puzzling neolo-
with
solecisms, and traces of medieval Hebrew and Castilian.
gisms,
Zohar's prose is poetic, over¯owingwith multiple connotations, com-
The
in such a way that you often cannot pin down the precise meaningof a
posed
The language be®ts the subject matter, which is mysterious, elusive,
phrase.
ineffable; words can merely suggest and hint. An unfathomable process
and
be stated, then immediately denied: ``It split and did not split its aura.'' 14
may
we encounter oxymorons, such as ``new-ancient words,'' alluding
Occasionally
the dual nature of the Zohar's secrets, recently composed yet ascribed to
to
bright that it cannot be seen.
intensely
the centuries, the potency of the Zohar's language has mesmerized
Through
those who could not plumb its secrets. While kabbalists delved deeply, the
even
chanted the lyrical Aramaic, often unaware of its literal meaning.
uninitiated
the words of an eighteenth-century mystic, ``Even if one does not understand,
In
the language is suited to the soul.'' 17
doubt it is risky to translate the Zohar, but it would be worse to leave
No
gems of wisdom buried in their ancient Aramaic vault. So I have plunged
these
seekingto transmit some of the Zohar's magic. The previous English translation
in,
(composed in the 1930s by Harry Sperling, Maurice Simon, and Paul
reads smoothly but often misunderstands the text. 18 Its genteel prose
Levertoff)
more a paraphrase than an accurate translationÐavoidingunfamiliar terms,
is
material, skippingdif®cult passages and even entire sections.
censoringerotic
English ¯ows too ¯uently compared to the original, subduing the unruly
The
failingto render its untamed vibrancy. Moreover, since the translation
Aramaic,
is unaccompanied by a commentary, the symbolism remains impenetrable.
its shortcomings, I have learned much from consulting this translation,
Despite
alongwith others. 19 But my approach is signi®cantly different. Though I
Zohar 1:15a. Citations of the Zohar refer to the standard Aramaic pagination (based
14.
the Mantua edition of 1558±60), which in The Zohar: Pritzker Edition is indicated in the
on
on each page.
runninghead
See Daniel Matt, ```New-Ancient Words': The Aura of Secrecy in the Zohar.''
15.
Zohar 1:15a.
16.
Moses Ḥayyim Luzzatto, in his preface to Qelaḥ Pitḥei Ḥokhmah, cited by Tishby,
17.
of the Zohar, 1:29.
Wisdom
This ®ve-volume edition is entitled The Zohar (see Bibliography). Scholem remarks
18.
241) that it ``suffers from incomplete or erroneous understandingof many parts
(Kabbalah,
the kabbalistic exposition.''
of
I have also consulted four different Hebrew translations, by Yehudah Ashlag, Daniel
19.
Yehudah Edri, and Yechiel Bar-Lev; Charles Mopsik's French translation, Le Zohar;
Frisch,
Translator's Introduction
BRKXGC
ancient sources. 15 The ®rst impulse of divine emanation is described as
B (botsina de-qardinuta), ``a spark of impenetrable darkness,'' 16 so
\GRKEZYE
xiii
wish to make the Zohar accessible, I also want to convey its strangeness,