Ya ntata ya ntata. (Yackety-yak).

          Many names used in American English and Ebonics were borrowed from African languages during the acculturation of African slaves in the New World.  This is seen clearly in the Proper Names of slaves in Colonial America, in Africanisms found in black naming practices, and in African American nicknames.  These naming practices illustrate the transition the Africans were experiencing, and to what effect the Africans had on the Standard English spoken in the United States at that time.

            Many of the Africans arriving in the New World had obvious contact with Europeans on the western coast of Africa.  For example; Holloway stated  “Africans arriving in South Carolina from the costal communities of Africa generally spoke some pidgin or Creole English prior to coming to America” [i]  This point was also clearly made in the PBS documentary The Story of Black English.  Like the immigrants of today, acculturation and the learning of English among younger Africans was much faster than that of their seniors, who learned English with greater difficulty.  Over time, and with each generation, less and less of the African culture and language was retained.  However, Africans in Colonial America, and especially South Carolina continued to give their children African names well into the nineteenth century. 

            During the first few decades of life in the new World, Africans maintained their traditional proper naming practices of the days of the week, months, seasons and weather.  This included the popular names of Cudjoe (Monday), Beneba (Tuesday), Cuffee (Friday), and Quasheba (Sunday).  After the first and second generations, Africans began to substitute African proper names for the English translation, such as August, January, or Thursday. The text gives a wonderful account of why this practice happened from the very voice of an ex-slave, Thursday Jones:

“Dey name me dat way jis cus uh happen tuh be bawn on Thursday, I guess.  Sech things seem tub be in our fambly.  I had ad uncle who name tis Monday Collins.  It seem tuh come duh fus ting tuh folks’  mine tuh name duh babis fuh duh dey is baw on. “ [ii]

This gradual change of using the African language illustrates the African American's slow acculturation into American linguistic practices, while still maintaining a connection with their past.  However, the African tradition of naming children after the day of the week or month in which they were born spread into the naming practices of whites in the New World, and names such as April, August, and May are still commonly used today. 

            Many African American names during the early Colonial period contained what we call Africanisms, or characteristics of African culture that can be traced throughout the African diaspora.  Examples of these Africanisms included changing the name of a person in correlation with the stage of their life, changing a name to indicate the personality of the bearer, or changing ones name to indicate some sort of striking occurrence in one’s life.  The text cites a wonderful example of this, stating that the historically well know Sojourner Truth, who was a crusader for black emancipation and feminine equality, was known as Isabella until the age of twenty, when she was freed by her owner. She had a vision that revealed to her what her new name was to be, and that her mission would be to free her people.  The text lists THIRTEEN pages of words commonly used in contemporary American English that contain Africanisms.  Three words that were particularly interesting to me were “Honkie”, “Hulla-ballo”, and “Okay.”    I am familiar with the Ebonics word honkie, and it’s reference to whites coming into black communities and honking their car horns.  I was surprised to learn that the word really originates from the African Wolof word Hong, which means pink in color, and is used to describe white people in African languages! From the Bantu African “halua balualua” (meaning noise or racket), the word “hulla-ballo” is a term I use frequently!  My children are used to me saying, “What’s all the hulla-ballo about?” Lastly, I do not know of a single American who does not use the term “okay” in their everyday language.  Based on the African Mandingo “o-ke”, it literally means “yes indeed” in West African. The Story of Black English documentary also points out the prevalence of the term okay amongst the slaves arriving in Charleston.   Clearly, Colonial Americans assimilated many aspects of the African linguistic style.  African linguistic patterns continue to impact mainstream speaking patterns today as hip-hop words such as swag, swagger, fat, beast, my bad, and dope  have all become a part of American English . 

            Another important African practice that still survives in America today is the use of nicknames.  The text claims that almost every black person is known of by more than one name.  This was especially prevalent in the Gullah in the Sea Islands of South Carolina.  Many of these Gullah slaves had American English names given to them at birth, and over time a nickname of African language nature was assigned.  Holloway cited many examples of these nicknames, including:

“Pie Ya, Puddin’-tame, Frog, Tennie-C, Monkey, Mush, Cooter, john de Baptist, Fat-Man, Preacher, Jack Rabbit, Sixty, PopCorn, Old Gold, Dootes, Angel-Eye, Bad Luck, Sky-up the Greek, Cracker Jabbo, Cat-Fish, Bear, Tip, Odessa, Pig Lasses, Rattler, Pearly, Luck, Buffalo, Old Blue, Red Fox, Coon, and Jewsharp.”  [iii]

I do not know if  Colonial Americans used nicknames on a regular basis or if they adopted the practice after the acculturation of the Africans. Regardless, the practice of using nicknames among Africans must have, at the very least, strengthened the practice amongst white Americans. 

            Understanding the linguistic patterns of the African slaves that arrived to the East Coast of America helps us gain a clearer insight into the patterns of speech in both Ebonics and American English.  This begins with an understanding of African naming practices, africanisms found in Standard English today, and the practice of using nicknames amongst African Americans.  Clearly, American English as we know it today would not be the same had it not been for the influence of the Africans arriving to America. 

---

[i] Holloway, Joseph E. Africanisms In American Culture. 2nd. Bloomington, IN: Indiana Univ Pr, 2006. Pg.84

[ii] Pg. 84

[iii] pg 91

Ebonics

AA English

http://youtu.be/aQrtB7cZDrA

          In this film clip, Professor Mary Zeigler of Georgia University discussed  the influence  African American's have had on the development of American English.  The three black female students featured in the clip not only defended, but also embraced a different “dialect” for blacks and whites in America. The students appeared to be very well educated and well versed on the history and roots of Ebonics. Professor Zeigler expressed her relief and joy at the academic communities acceptance of Ebonics, and commented that her students prefer to speak to one another in the language or “variety” of language that they identify with. Three things stood out to me in this clip: a well articulated point about the perceived dichotomy of Ebonics and American English (and the need for that to change); a weak and unsupported claim that the reason for the preponderance of Ebonics amongst African Americans is a lack of available teachers and examples of American English; and the great pride the students took in “owning” their language and  their heritage while accepting these beautiful things as a part of their identity. 

There were some very thought-provoking arguments in this clip.  More specifically, the comment by the student in the orange blouse: “It’s not about this is bad and this is good...  It’s not bad and good, its about teaching our kids about what will make them more successful in life but not sacrificing what they already know.”  This student expressed need for change in the way Americans place Ebonics and American English as polar opposites.  This dichotomy needs to be recognized as unsupportive and destructive, and then an active effort needs to take place to facilitate a positive change.

At the very beginning of the film, one of the students made clear that the reason for the differences in black and white English, is both the lack of time Africans have had access to education in this country (the 1960’s) and the few numbers of examples young blacks have had to model English instead of Ebonics. I disagree with this student, and find her argument to be very unsupported.  If we are to agree that equal education was not made available to blacks in this country until 1970, we can safely assume that a minimum of 3 generations of African Americans should, in the American public school systems, have been taught to read and write American English by now. Most immigrants who come to the Unites States have (first generation) children who are fluent in the language of the new country and speak the native language in appropriate cultural and familial settings.  It is unclear to me why African Americans do not approach assimilation of American English in this same manner.

Overall, the film clip exuded the pride and joy the students feel about their cultural heritage and their unique Ebonics dialect.  This reminded me very much of Asante’s description of language as one of the African cultural “experiences”  that remain with African Americans in place of African cultural artifacts.  These women are as far away from an 18^th century Slave Ship as can be, yet they still find a sense of sisterhood, pride and identity in their African linguistic similarities.  What a beautiful thing.

Black English Panel

http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/CulturePa

            This film is a recording of a panel discussion about the politics of language and culture and was held at the 11^th annual Harlem Book Fair in New York City in 2009.   Titled "We Be, You Are, They Is: Black English, Language, and Culture", the panelists in the film discussed if a nonstandard language such as "Black English" should be deemed inferior, and the problems of transferring between languages. The discussion highlighted three main features of language: the concept that language provides a sense of identity and defines ones sense of placement within society and time; the difference between the style of language we use in personal and intimate relationships vs. the language used in more formal academic or workplace environments; and the great variety of English spoken across this country and this world, of which Ebonics is but one.

            The major points of this panel presentation were very consistent with the writings and theories of Asante, in that the panelists agreed in the importance of the connection that Ebonics provides to blacks, both with their African past, and with each other.  Speakers of African English, according to the panelists, are no different than any other American who speaks English as a second language.  The strongest argument that was made by the panel was the need for black children to learn when to use Ebonics or what they referred to as “rap culture English” and when to use Standard English. Exemplified in the discussion were the differences between home language and culture, and school language and culture, as well as the media and the lack of respect for Africa, and African American people in this country.

            This film presented many theories and opinions but few solutions.  The topics discussed were merely the outer frosting on a multi level cake of issues within politics, education, urban areas, vast socioeconomic differences, linguistics, cultural awareness and biases.  Sadly, no real proposals for solutions were given.

             

             

Ink Spot: Ebonics in the age of Obama

http://youtu.be/Bt7O-nHSAp4

            In this montage of clips from “The Ink Spot”, Dr. Garrard Mcclendon moderated a conversation between the Ink Spot panel as they reviewed the book Beyond Ebonics and debated whether the use of Ebonics is “dumbing down the English Language”, or a dialect of the English Language.  Also addressed were issues the panel had with the concept of “universal black culture.”  Two of the panelist felt that while people who speak Ebonics are most certainly not “dumb”, Ebonics itself is most definitely a “dumbing down” of Standard English.  Once again, as in the prior films, the argument was made that real change for black children lies in the use of standardized English at home, and by the teachers at schools.

            The female member of the panel was in definite disagreement with the other panelists.  It was clear that she did not accept Ebonics as a cultural continuity amongst African Americans, but rather as a result of a poor education.  While it may be easy to dismiss her as unaware of the linguistic research that has been done, I feel she has a valid point for some of the African American population.  Many African American children are receiving a substandard education, especially here in metro Detroit.  While these children may hear only Ebonics at home, there are black speakers of standardized English on all of the local news channels, on television shows, and even serving as our President. If these black children have been exposed to standardized English via the media, then why are they not reading and writing standardized English? The answer to that lies in the very argument that the female member of the panel was making: they have received a poor education.  I was nauseated when I heard the man in the clip quote a teacher in a school who said “come here baby give me your feets so I can tie your shoes.”   Given this model of English from a person of supposed authority, how and when would any child learn to speak standardized English? It is so important to recognize that while a substandard education may be the reason some African Americans speak Ebonics; it is definitely not the case for others, who choose Ebonics as a clear cultural identity marker.

           

Black English

http://youtu.be/X_KKLkmIrDk

            Linguistic Discrimination in School: African American English is a short clip of a film that details the story of brothers who were tested and placed in Special Ed Courses on the basis of their use of Ebonics in the Ann Arbor school district.  The brothers were three of twenty-four black children in a sea of wealthy white students that comprised the student body.  A social worker involved with the family helped them to pursue a landmark court case on the basis that the boys were receiving a substandard education because the teachers disregarded of them due to their use of Ebonics.  This was the first time that any school district in the United States recognized that the use of Black English, or Ebonics, was a tremendous roadblock in the classroom.

Language Discrimination:

http://youtu.be/WWIbIA9BltQ

This clip from Fox 2 News features a teacher who is working very hard to teach young African Americans the difference between “Ask and Ax” and other English words that Ebonics pronunciation has slaughtered.  The news clip does present the other side of the story; highlighting how bad grammar is consistent across all aspect of American English.

            This teacher is to be applauded.  He is, by title, a teacher afterall.  It is his job to present the material in a way in which it can be processed by his students, and then re-present said material to those who might struggle with it.  In this case, he is presenting key problems African American students who speak Ebonics in the home and are trying to learn how to “switch hit”, or speak standardized English, may be experiencing in the school setting.

            This type of language discrimination occurs daily in this country.  Whites, and even some blacks hear a man or woman speaking Ebonics, and almost immediately, assumptions are drawn as to that person’s level of education, family life, IQ, professionalism, cultural, sexual, musical and style preferences, and even ability to reason and problem solve.  Like any stereotype, assumptions of any of these qualities based solely on language acquisition and verb tense usage is a very limited, shortsighted way of thinking.

African-American English, from Voices of NC

http://youtu.be/Zqohw8nR6qE

           

            This small clip from the 2008 documentary Voices of North Carolina features examples of a few common terms from Ebonics, such as right on, peace, what up man, I’m chillin, etc.  that have wporked there way into mainstream standardized English.  The film argues that every generation has to identify itself and create a new language.  According to this film excerpt, the new language addition to the Ebonics and Standard American English of this generation is  “Hip-Hop.” 

            This clip briefly explores the idea that Hip Hop is a new language of it’s own , and emphasises that culturally identifiable languages are important identifiers amongst all peopls, not only African Americans. 

My Position on Ebonics

            These six films, in combination with chapters one, two, three and four of our classroom text have shifted my previously held position of the use of Ebonics in this country.  Prior to this course, I was unaware that many aspects of Ebonics as a linguistic style (and specifically the verb tense forms) was able to be traced back to the 1700's and the West African coastline.  It is clear to me now that Ebonics has many elements that are culturally significant to African Americans.  Like any other language, Ebonics has evolved with time.  It has gained some figures of speech, and lost others. The same can be said for Standard American English.  (When is the last time you have heard a speaker of American English say "why that is just dandy"?) Shifts in intonation, inflection and pronunciation occur with all languages. Because the evolution of the genre of hip-hop music has affected Ebonics spoken in this country, many feel the language has sunk to an unsalvageable language and should be discarded. I argue instead that these changes do not lessen or weaken the language, but instead help to solidify the cultural and identity- stamping importance of the language. 

          That being said, I do feel there is a time and a place for everything.  Learning when to use Ebonics is just as important as understanding the roots from whence Ebonics came.  I would never address my boss with a "Hi hon, what’s up" although I may address my friends outside of the office in this manner on a daily basis.  I have learned situational appropriateness for my differences in language, and I strongly believe that African Americans would be discriminated upon less and treated with more respect and authority if they were to learn to do the same.  

African Elements in African American English

In his essay African Elements in African American English, Molefi Kete Asante argued that because African American slaves could not logistically retain any of their cultural artifacts from their homeland, they instead retained basic components of the African experience.   Specifically, this “experience” included a general retention of African linguistic behavior, including combinations of “classes of sounds, units of meaning, and syntax behaviors[i].” The linguistic similarities Asante detailed did not include an array of actual African lexicon, but rather grammatical style and verb conjugation patterns. Asante prefaced his argument with a scathing criticism of the early scholars of African American culture. There are both strengths and weaknesses in the argument Asante posed in favor of the retention of African linguistic behaviors and the argument he posed against the early scholars of African American culture. Overall, I found Asante’s argument against the early scholars of African American culture to be very weak, and the arguments he posed in favor of African Americans retaining portions of African linguistic behaviors to be interesting and worthy of consideration and continued study. 

The primary weakness of Asante’s argument against earlier scholars of African American culture is that he discredited pioneers in the field, such as Herskovits, Turner, Jahn and Gonzales and then subsequently used some of their research and theories as an authoritative voice to support his argument against other scholars.  Asante wrote: “They theorized on the basis of field research in African cultures, diasporas and continental, challenged many interpretations about the African connection…they provided in effect, novel interpretations of old substances.”[ii] These “old substances” Asante was referring to were previously mentioned in his essay as the prevailing ideas among early American scholars of African culture, including thoughts that the language used by African Americans was “a corruption of English”, “the babbling of children”, and  “unworthy of investigation [iii].”  If we are to agree with Asante that Herskovits, Turner et al merely provided a new twist on the same old story, then we must discredit their scholarship entirely.  In doing so, it is then very difficult for the reader to move on to the next few paragraphs, where Asante, in his example using the misinterpretations of the Gullah language by Ambrose Gonzales, uses one of the very scholars he has discredited (Turner) as a voice of authority.  Asante wrote: “The point made by Turner is that white American linguists refused to consider the possibility that blacks used African words in their vocabularies.[iv]” Here, Asante is agreeing with the very same scholarly opinion that he has just spent an entire page arguing against.  

While some may not consider it a weakness, Asante suggested, but did not come out and say, that the early scholars of African culture and African retention in the diaspora were inadequate and that while their efforts were “gallant”, they were lacking because the linguists themselves were white.  Asante wrote: “Earlier, Ambrose Gonzales, like many other white American linguists…[v]”, and “the point made by Turner is that white American linguists…[vi]”, and “in fact, the evidence demonstrates that whites unfamiliar with either African languages…[vii]”  All of these examples of why the early scholars where to be discredited included this descriptive notation of their race.  This weakened Asante’s argument, as Herskovits’s extensive studies in Africa and his concluding theories about African cultural continuity should not be undermined because of his biological race.

While Asante did allow that the conclusions of Herskovits, Garrett and the like were “interesting, provocative, and a valuable addition to our knowledge,” [viii] he concluded that they “cast too narrow a mold that often depended on continuity of specific words from several ethnic regions of Africa…. and do not make an argument for a more general retention of African linguistic behavior applicable to most black Americans.”[ix]   It appears that Asante is discrediting these pioneers of African Studies merely because of the very specifically traceable lexicon approach of their work.  One must remember, Herskovits was a cultural anthropologist, not a linguist.  Asante’s criticism would be similar to comparing specific empirical evidence and concrete examples (Herskovits and specific lexicon), to that of more inferential and broad applications (Asante and linguistic behaviors.) Both approaches are valid and applicable to different situations.  However, using one methodology to discredit another is unwarranted, especially given the small amount of research in the field of African American linguistics in comparison to other fields of study. 

Asante does, however make very plausible and creditable arguments for the transference of African linguistics to the linguistic behaviors of African Americans. The primary strength of his argument exists in the flow he created documenting the West African languages of Niger-Congo, to Pidginization, to Creolization, to Englishizatioin, (refered to as Ebonics.)  This point exemplifies how Ebonics contains structural remnants of certain African languages while maintaining an overwhelmingly English vocabulary.  Specifically, the use of aspect rather that tense in many verb conjugations and constructions is apparent.  Of particular interest is the Niger-Congo tense-aspect of Present (he go), Near past (he gone), Remote Past (he been gone), Future (he going to go), Aspect of progress (he going), Aspect of completion (he done gone) and Past aspect of repetition (he been going.)  This pattern of West African verb conjugation is obvious in American Ebonics.  The relationship between the verbs within a given construction is also of great importance and a major difference between American Ebonics and English. Asante explains: “In some sentences Ebonics speakers use several verbs, whereas Standard English has available a single verb to express the completed action. “ [x]  Examples of this include “Turn loose and drap down from dar” (Come down from there),  “I hear tell you went home” (I hear that you went home), “Go home and see about those children” (go home and attend to those children) and “he picked up and went to town” (he went to town.) [xi]  Asante pointed out that giving every action a verb and using verb tenses that are grammatically incorrect in Standard English is a common practice by African Americans.  I was unaware that these tense-agreement usage patterns are an important part of West African languages, as seen in examples like “He clumb de tree to shake de simmons down whilst I be pickin em up” (He climbd the tree to pick the persimmons)  and “Fore I knowed it I done fell slap to sleep” (before I knew it, I fell asleep!) 

Asante continued by saying that “done” is a verbal aspect of completed action, without reference to time, as opposed to the perfective (have/had/has), which is marked for time (in Standard English).” [xii]  This makes the sentence “I done ate” in Ebonics “I completed the action of eating” in Standard English, where the verb “done” specifies nothing in reference to time.  Asante points out that the American English speaker assumes the speaker of Ebonics is referring to something completed within a reference to time, when in fact, this is incorrect. 

While I find Asante’s theory that African American English (Ebonics) was a direct “descendant” of the language of the West African slaves to be convincing and academically sound, it is not lost on me that one of the very arguments he uses to discredit earlier scholars on the subject (that they were looking for too specific lexicon and word roots) is the very same proving method Asante used as he discussed verb conjugations and tense forms! In this case, he too was looking for an exact, specific link. 

Overall, much can be learned by the scholarship of pioneers such as Herskovits and Turner, and the more current linguistic approach of Asante.  As Ebonics remains one of the most obvious points of differentiation between Americans, an understanding of the roots and formation of the language is crucial for both blacks and whites in this country. 

---

[i] Holloway, Joseph E. Africanisms In American Culture. 2nd. Bloomington, IN: Indiana Univ Pr, 2006. Pg. 68.

[ii] Pg 66

[iii] Pg 65

[iv] pg. 66

[v] Pg 66

[vi] Pg. 66

[vii] Pg. 66-67

[viii] Pg. 68

[ix] Pg, 68

[x] Pg. 75

[xi] Pg. 76

[xii] Pg 78

Black-Eyed Peas and Me.

My father (may he rest in peace) was a good man.  Raised in the deep woods near the Tennessee-North Carolina border in the 1930’s, poverty was a way of life.  Their home had a dirt floor, quilts served as both bedding, a table covering, curtains and art, a huge crock of sauerkraut steeped in the corner, a still dripped silently and hidden in the back forty, and yes, he often went to school barefoot.  I realize that these descriptions of my father and his life in rural Tennessee are all typical stereotypes of Appalachian culture, but in the case of my father, who migrated to Detroit in the 1950’s to work in the new and well-paying Ford Motor Company Assembly Plant, this was a way of life.  As a white man, who had never traveled, was marginally educated, and who was raised to believe that blacks were inferior, my father struggled to assimilate into the urban and ever- increasing tense climate of Detroit during the Civil Rights movement. He was a stranger in a strange land, and I’m quite certain if you had asked him what parts of his identity and culture he shared with his black co-worker on the assembly line, he would have scoffed and said “none.”    To him, terms like cultural interaction, integration and assimilation were a complete unknown. 

            Of course, my father was wrong.  A simple look at his weekly diet of collard greens, yams, corn bread, hominy, black-eyed peas with ham hock, and cookies sweetened with black sorghum and speckled with ground goobers would show a wonderfully rich diet of foods brought to the United States from West Africa at the very beginnings of the transatlantic slave trade of the 1600’s.  While the deep Appalachians were a conglomerate of Highland Scottish and Cherokee cultures, they were also an area where the culture of the South Carolina lowland African American culture met the Northern Georgia plantation African American culture.  It was (and remains today) a sort of “Southeast meets Deep South” converging point. 

            But African American culture is much more than black-eyed peas and yams. Was it possible for enslaved Africans to carry their culture with them into the New World? The answer to this is a definitive and resounding yes.  Despite the extreme and traumatic conditions of the voyage and new life of slavery, Africans “arrived in the New World capable of using Old World knowledge to create New World realities”[i] This knowledge included everything from dairy farming, animal husbandry, folk medicine, dance, folklore, agriculture, and of course the abovementioned cuisine. 

            The interaction, integration and assimilation of African culture into the New World was based on both the geographic region in which the enslaved Africans arrived from and the geographic region they were sent to.  One cannot think of Africa as an entire continent of like-minded culturally homogeneous peoples.  Rather, Africa was and is rich with cultural “zones” as Herskovits broadly classified them, including but not limited to the Guinea Coast, the Gold Coast (Ghana), Dahomey, The Bight of Benin (the Niger Delta), and present day Gambia, Senegal and Sierra Leone.  Each geographic area held peoples varied in tradition, culture and in some cases physical attributes such as shade of skin pigmentation, height and facial features.

            Slave traders transported the Africans to ports in South Carolina, Virginia and Louisiana based on demands by the slave purchasers. These demands were based on needs and the slave owners (albeit) limited understanding of physical attributes that would best serve their needs. This explains why African American cultural identity varied greatly between the Africans of Charleston, who where mainly from the Angola region and skilled in net weaving and rice farming, both skills that served the lowland, marshy humid climate very well, and the Africans of the Georgia Plantations and the rest of the deep south, who were mainly from Central Africa and of a large, strong and sturdy physical constitution that was well suited for labor intensive peanut and cotton farming. 

            The process of how one’s culture interacts, integrates and assimilates in its New World diaspora is an interesting and complicated manner.  I believe the process for the enslaved Africans was greatly influenced and affected by the living conditions and obvious suppression that was endured.  What would an African American cultural identity be today if slavery in the South had not existed? My guess is it would be very different.  Yet what I do know is the culture that remains is rich and varied.  I am thankful for the African contributions that became a part of my father’s life in rural Appalachia, and through him, are now a part of me. 

---

[i] Holloway, Joseph E. Africanisms In American Culture. 2nd. Bloomington, IN: Indiana Univ. Pr, 2006. Print. Pg. 39

At the Heart of Blackness

As the winner of the 2009 John O’Connor Film Award, and the Hollywood Black Film Festival’s Best Documentary, “Herskovits, At the Heart of Blackness” is a fascinating film that recalls the life and work of Melville J. Herskovits (1895-1963) while raising important questions about race, “objective” scholarship, and politics.

            A pioneer in the field of African Studies, Herskovits was a Jewish American anthropologist who traveled extensively throughout Africa, documenting the everyday activities of Africans, such as dance, body movement, family structures and the roles of both men and women in African societies.  In analyzing his mountains of film and field notes upon return to the States, Herskovits concluded that cultural ties to Africa existed in the African diaspora across the New World, including the United States, the Caribbean, and the Creole of Central and South America.  This theory, known as cultural retention, was not a new one. It was commonly accepted at that time that most, if not all of the American Negros had lost their cultural connections to their African roots during the agonizing period of middle passage during the height of American slavery.  Herskovits did not agree.  Margaret Wade Lewis documented some of the connections Herskovits made between Africa and Harlem in his field notes in The Impact of the Turner~Herskovits Connection on Anthropology And Linguistics. 

            As a Jew, Herskovits was very familiar with the excluding nature of race and the struggle to incorporate race into identity in America.  The film suggests it was this understanding of exclusion and the need to understand and “own” his identity that guided Herskovits’ interest towards anthropology. Herskovits struggled with his Jewish identity throughout his career, and wrote: “drawing attention to your identity is a way of undermining your authority because authority does not have an identity.  Authority speaks with the voice of the universe.”    Was Herskovits to be a Jew, a Jewish American or just an American? Did these labels affect his identity? The same can be said for the American Negro.  Negro? Black? African American or just American? Did it make a difference? That, according to Herskovits, depended on what those labels meant to the Western World, and ultimately the Black Americans who were struggling to live there.  

At the turn of the century, anthropologists were entrenched in the concept of race, and were actively seeking physical evidence rather than cultural evidence to empirically prove the superiority of one race over another.  Known as scientific racism, this methodology peaked at the height of the Nazi regime during World War II.  Working quietly back in the U.S., Herskovits concluded that differences in races by no means equated to inferiority between races.  Herskovits advocated cultural anthropology over physical anthropology, and felt that the world could not be adequately interpreted through “western eyes.”  Known as cultural relativism, this heuristic of understanding a culture “from the inside” was clearly promoted by Herskovits, and was the beginnings of what is known today as critical cultural theory. Can a scholar objectively study another race? Can a member of race objectively study it’s own race? The film ends with the question “Who has access to understanding and explaining a people and to what use?”

             Of much interest to my own personal understanding of current race relations within the United States was the debate between Herskovits and E. Franklin Frazier that the film and Africanisms in American Culture detailed.  A sociologist, Frazier aggressively disagreed with Herskovits about the concept of cultural retention.  Frazier feared that pointing out differences between black and white Americans would only perpetuate segregation and undermine social change.  Of great interest to me is the discussion between the two about the failure of the matriarchal household as it translated to the western culture, crime, and the poor living conditions of black America.  Are these examples of cultural retention? If so, how could cultural retention be of any benefit to black Americans? I hope to explore this in greater depth as this course continues.  
http://www.pbs.org/independentlens/herskovits

A new topic of discussion for May and June

Mommy Back at College is taking a course entitled "African American Culture" this spring at WSU.  The course requires that I blog about the readings, videos and required texts.  My classmates will be blogging as well, and all enrolled in this on-line course are required to comment on each other's blogs.  If you are a regular follower of Mommy Back at College, I ask you to please be kind and respectful to any of my classmates who comment on my blog.  I am looking forward to this area of diaspora studies, and hope to gain a better understanding of the African American Culture.  

mommy back at college!: The Influence of Jewish Mysticism on the Early Chr...

The Influence of Jewish Mysticism on the Early Christian Church

The Influence of Jewish Mysticism on the Early Christian Church

                                                     Amy E. Graham

                                                Wayne State University

Prepared for Dr. Hans Hummer

History 5385: The History of Christianity up until the Reformation

March 26, 2012

___________________________________________________________________________________

Mystics know and experience God in a very different way than the ordinary believer.  Whereas the ordinary believer knows God in an objective, concrete manner as embodied in nature or via sacred scriptures, the mystic knows God by personal, one to one contact between their own spirit (soul) and the spirit of God; heart to heart, or as Augustine called it, “cor ad cor loquitur.” [1]  Because of the one to one, highly individualized nature of this experience, one might think the mystic would exist outside of the domain of the major religions of the world.  That, in fact, is not the case.  Mystics are most often allied with one of the major world religions, including (but not limited to) the Abrahamic religions of Judaism, Islam and Christianity. The mystic’s conceptions of God do not only come from the small voice speaking to him in the silence of his soul. Instead, the mystic combines these esoteric experiences with the teachings and traditions of their religion.  Much has been written on the comparability between the mystics of the differing world religions, noting that the only differences between them stem from the underlying religion itself.  The overarching practice of seeking to actually experience what philosophers call the “Absolute truth”, (what theologians refer to as God), seems to know no theological boundaries.  A Christian mystic seeks the same “beyond human” communion with the Trinity as the Jewish mystic does with YWEH, and the Muslim mystic does with Allah.  The theology of Christianity differs from the llm al-Kalam of Islam and the theology of Judaism in the same ways, whether the believer is a mystic or not.   Hence, the principal differences that separate the mystics of the world are the same as the differences that separate all believers.  My research seeks not to explain, compare, or contrast the mystics of the differing religions, as I mentioned that much has been written on that subject already, but rather to examine how the mystics of one religion (Judaism) influenced the foundation and theoretical framework of another religion (Christianity).

1. Authority

            Mysticism is not a term that an ancient mystic himself would use to describe his realm of religiosity.  In that regard, mysticism as we have come to understand and know it through most primary sources is not emic, and therefore very difficult to accurately investigate using a hermeneutic approach.  The Essenes, for example, did not label themselves “mystics” in ancient Jerusalem.  Our account of them as mystics comes form a purely etic viewpoint.  In addition, the literature on early Jewish and Christian mysticism is not the possession of a single religious community, or maintained by a single religious community.   While there is mounting evidence that that the main origins of the tradition was in Jewish priestly circles, most of the literature on the subject is from a variety of esoteric Jews and Christians over the course of several centuries. Making the matter more difficult is the amount of pseudepigrapha in “primary” Jewish sources.  While this problem also exists in Christian sources, is seems to be more of a roadblock to the student of Jewish mysticism, as most scholars agree that the predominant primary source on the topic, The Zohar, is pseudepigraphical.  It is therefore difficult to avoid an etic commentary on the topic of mysticism unless such sacred texts as the Tanakh and the Bible themselves are used.  (Although one could argue that much of the Tanakh itself is etic in nature.)   Therefore, primary sources used for my research in the area of Jewish mysticism include The Talmud[2], including portions of the Midrash[3] and the Tanakh [4](The Hebrew Bible).  Contained within the Talmud is the Torah.[5]  Very helpful to my understanding of these texts were writings by Josepus [6], a first century Jewish hagiographer, theologian and scholar.  Christian primary sources include an Interlinear Greek-English New Testament of the Bible with a parallel column in the New Revised Standard Version, [7] as well as excerpts by Origen[8], and Gregory of Nyssa[9], both Fathers of the Early Christian Church.    A basic framework for my understanding of Jewish and Christian mysticism includes secondary sources by Joshua Abelson[10] and Evelyn Underhill.[11]  The Encyclopedia of Jewish Myth, Magic and Mysticism[12] was helpful in clarifying Jewish terms that I was unfamiliar with.

2. Jewish Mysticism History

            The beginning of mysticism is usually linked to the Essenes, a sect of the Second Temple Jews.  Known by the Greeks as the “Holy Ones”[13], these mysterious Jews are now assumed to be the original owners of the Dead Sea Scroll library.  The sect was closed to society, and was dominated by hereditary priests who had to go through multiple rites of purification before being accepted into the sect.  According to Josephus, the Essenes were one of three sects among the Jews at the time of Christ who

“ …Had different opinions concerning human actions; the one was called the sect of the Pharisees, another the sect of the Sadducees, and the other the sect of the Essenes.  Now for the Pharisees, they say that some actions, but not all, are the work of fate, and that some of them are in our own power, and that they are liable to fate, but are not caused by fate.  But the sect of the Essenes affirms that fate governs all things, and that nothing befalls men but what is according to its determination.  And for the Sadducees, they take away fate, and they say there is no such thing, and that the events of human affairs are not at it’s disposal; but they suppose that all of our actions are in our power, so that we ourselves are the cause of what is good, and receive evil from our own folly.”[14]

 This clearly illustrates marked difference between the three sects.  Josephus later stated that the Essenes were interpreters of dreams, and were very diligent in the reading of the sacred books.  Philo of Alexandria, who often tried to reconcile Jewish exegesis with Stoic philosophy, wrote this of the Essenes:

“Of natural philosophy, the Essenes only study that which pertains to the existence of God and the beginning of all things, otherwise they devote all their attention to ethics, using as instructors the laws of their fathers, which, without the outpouring of the Divine Spirit, the human mind could not have devised…for, following their ancient traditions, they obtain their philosophy by means of allegorical interpretations…Of the love of God they exhibit myriads of examples, inasmuch as they strive for a continued uninterrupted life of purity and holiness; they avoid swearing and falsehood, and they declare God causes only good and no evil whatsoever…no one possesses a house absolutely as his own, one which does not at the same time belong to all; for, in addition to living together in companies, their houses are open also to their adherents coming from other quarters.  They have a storehouse for all, and the same diet; their garments belong to all in common, and their meals are taken in common.”[15]  

Clearly, this sect of Judaism combined mystical speculation with an ascetic mode of life. 

            Merkabah (chariot) mysticism came into being in the early second century.  Merkabah mysticism used as its framework a vision of God experienced by Ezekiel, and is explained in great detail in Ezekiel Chapters 1-5.

“In my thirtieth year, in the fourth month on the fifth day, while I was among the exiles by the Kebar River, the heavens were opened and I saw visions of God.

2 On the fifth of the month—it was the fifth year of the exile of King Jehoiachin— 3 the word of the LORD came to Ezekiel the priest, the son of Buzi, by the Kebar River in the land of the Babylonians. There the hand of the LORD was on him.

4 I looked, and I saw a windstorm coming out of the north—an immense cloud with flashing lightning and surrounded by brilliant light. The center of the fire looked like glowing metal, 5 and in the fire was what looked like four living creatures. In appearance their form was human, 6 but each of them had four faces and four wings. 7 Their legs were straight; their feet were like those of a calf and gleamed like burnished bronze. 8 Under their wings on their four sides they had human hands. All four of them had faces and wings, 9 and the wings of one touched the wings of another. Each one went straight ahead; they did not turn as they moved.

10 Their faces looked like this: Each of the four had the face of a human being, and on the right side each had the face of a lion, and on the left the face of an ox; each also had the face of an eagle. 11 Such were their faces. They each had two wings spreading out upward, each wing touching that of the creature on either side; and each had two other wings covering its body. 12 Each one went straight ahead. Wherever the spirit would go, they would go, without turning as they went. 13 The appearance of the living creatures was like burning coals of fire or like torches. Fire moved back and forth among the creatures; it was bright, and lightning flashed out of it. 14 The creatures sped back and forth like flashes of lightning.

15 As I looked at the living creatures, I saw a wheel on the ground beside each creature with its four faces. 16 This was the appearance and structure of the wheels: They sparkled like topaz, and all four looked alike. Each appeared to be made like a wheel intersecting a wheel. 17 As they moved, they would go in any one of the four directions the creatures faced; the wheels did not change direction as the creatures went. 18 Their rims were high and awesome, and all four rims were full of eyes all around.

19 When the living creatures moved, the wheels beside them moved; and when the living creatures rose from the ground, the wheels also rose. 20 Wherever the spirit would go, they would go, and the wheels would rise along with them, because the spirit of the living creatures was in the wheels. 21 When the creatures moved, they also moved; when the creatures stood still, they also stood still; and when the creatures rose from the ground, the wheels rose along with them, because the spirit of the living creatures was in the wheels.

22 Spread out above the heads of the living creatures was what looked something like a vault, sparkling like crystal, and awesome. 23 Under the vault their wings were stretched out one toward the other, and each had two wings covering its body. 24 When the creatures moved, I heard the sound of their wings, like the roar of rushing waters, like the voice of the Almighty, like the tumult of an army. When they stood still, they lowered their wings.

25 Then there came a voice from above the vault over their heads as they stood with lowered wings. 26 Above the vault over their heads was what looked like a throne of lapis lazuli, and high above on the throne was a figure like that of a man. 27 I saw that from what appeared to be his waist up he looked like glowing metal, as if full of fire, and that from there down he looked like fire; and brilliant light surrounded him. 28 Like the appearance of a rainbow in the clouds on a rainy day, so was the radiance around him.

                  This was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the LORD.” [16]

                  For the Jewish mystics of the 1st and 2nd centuries, Ezekiel’s image of YWEH riding upon a chariot of the “living creatures” was outside the range of the deepest esoteric experiences of all of the other Old Testament personages.  The chariot was interpreted as an invitation from the Divine to man to come and experience the secret which he so desperately seeks: the experience of the Absolute, the being of God himself.  The idea that God is the first one to initiate a union of man and God, or has “called” ones soul to unite with the divine, is important to all mystics.  The chariot, then, is a mystic vehicle to carry one to the unseen.  Every mystic wants to be the chariot rider, to be carried to his ultimate union with the divine. However, as Joshua Ableson points out in his commentary on the Merkavah mystics  “it was believed that he could only undertake this Merkavah-ride, who was in possession of all religious knowledge, observed all the commandments and precepts and was almost superhuman in the purity of his life.” [17] While these roots of Merkavah mysticism were planted firmly in the 2nd and 3^rd centuries, they did not bloom and flourish until the 7^th- 11^th centuries. Much has been speculated about the meaning of the chariot.  Was it a true vision or an experiential event? Does the text hold hidden meaning with each description holding significance for the future?  Is the text eschatological?  Some modern day occult claim the Merkavah was not a chariot but an alien spaceship! It is understandable why this passage, in the midst of literature that is otherwise devoid of dramatic and colorful descriptions would glean such attention and speculation.

            Although it is outside the scope of the time period this article seeks to examine, a mention must be made to the ultimate expression of Jewish mysticism: Kabbalah.   Kabbalah is an esoteric gnostic occult that emerged in medieval Spain in the 12^th century.   Kabbalistic teachings look to The Zohar as their primary source of inspiration.  The Zohar is a commentary of the Torah, (the first five books of the Old Testament).   A Spanish Jew by the name of Moses de Leon attributed the book to a 2^nd century Rabbi by the name of Shimon bar Yochai, but scholars are now in general agreement that de Leon penned the work himself. The practices and beliefs of 15^th century Kabbalists had much influence on Christian mystics and the Humanist movement (as well modern day New-Age Hollywood!) The Kabbalah school of thought attempts to explain the relationship between an unchanging external, mysterious YWEH (known as Ein Sof) and the mortal, finite universe, by seeking to define the nature of the universe and the human being, the nature and purpose of existence, and various other ontological questions.  Given, however that this article seeks to examine the influence of the Jewish mystics on the Early Christian Church, I will stick to sects of Jewish mysticism that took place between 500 BCE and 400 CE, that is, the Essenes and the Merkavah. 

3. Connections

            It is easy to find the similarities between the three Abrahamic religions.  The mere fact that they are categorized together under the same heading within world religions indicates enough of a resemblance to one another, even beyond their homogeneous beginnings.  It would not be new or even controversial for me to suggest a sequential, linear progression from Judaism to Christianity to Islam.   My research does not aim to reinforce these arguments, but rather to look deeper. What specific aspects of Judaism continue on into the Christian faith? It is here where I draw a distinction in that there are, as mentioned above, fundamental differences between the sects of Judaism at the time of Christ. I argue that the mystic sects of Judaism, (the Essenes and the Merkavah’s), are the factions of Judaism that influenced the formation and practices of early Christianity the most.  Specifically, there are three principal dimensions of early Jewish mysticism that are also primary in early Christianity.  These dimensions are an incorporation of the speculative, the experiential and the practical.   

3a. The Speculative

            The first dimension of the two religions is that of speculation, that is, the search for the absolute truth and revealed nature of the identity of God.  This speculation also includes a quest for both the cosmogony (origins) and the cosmology (organization) of the universe.  This dimension is most realized in the esoteric followers of both religions. 

            The centerpiece of the cosmogony of the identity of God in mystic Judaism is that God has a “body.”  This body is known as the Kavod of YHWH.[18] The esoteric interpretation of the Kavod is that of a vision of a divine form created by the invisible, formless God that is actually visible to the human eye.  This body of God can take the forms of light, clouds, angles, or be felt in just its presence, known as the Shekhinah (the Holy Spirit.)[19]  The Essenes believed that complete devotion to the sacred texts, abstinence from sex and certain foods, and communal prayer might bring the believer to the ultimate experience of the Kavod (which literally means “glory.”) The Kavod must be “experienced” or perceived, as it was believed at the time that no one could look directly at the face of God and live. This is illustrated in Moses’ encounter with God:

“So the Lord said to Moses, “While my Glory passes by I will put you in a cleft of the rock, and I will cover you with my hand until I have passed by; then I will take away my hand and you shall see my back. But my face shall not be seen.” [20]

            The concept of Kavod had a profound impact on the formation of the Christology’s of the early Christian Church.  John was the most prolific of writers in his belief that Jesus was the revealed Kavod descended here on earth.

John wrote in Chapter One,

14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.[21]

and again in Chapter 11, directly quoting Christ immediately following the resurrection of Lazarus,

                  38 Jesus, once more deeply moved, came to the tomb. It was a cave with a stone laid across the entrance. 39 “Take away the stone,” he said.“ But, Lord,” said Martha, the sister of the dead man, “by this time there is a bad odor, for he has been there four days.” 40 Then Jesus said, “Did I not tell you that if you believe, you will see the glory of God?”[22]

In total, John refers to the glory or Kavad of God revealed through Christ seven times in the Book of John.[23]   Paul also mentions Christ as the glorified image of God in

II Corinthians:

4 The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel that displays the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.[24]

And even in a more powerful way in Colossians:

            15 The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.[25]

Clearly, the concept of Kavod was a theologically fundamental principal of the esoteric Essenes that became a foundational key factor in the overall Christian understanding of the nature and identity of Christ.  Thereby, the speculation about the identity and nature of God and the search for absolute cosmogony and cosmology of God was carried from the mystics to the early Christians.  

3b. The Experiential          

            The quest for a direct encounter with a deity is the experiential dimension of both the mystic Jews and the early Christians. The Jewish mystics sought not only knowledge of God, but also an esoteric experience with him.  This is clear in the apocalyptic literature of both religions. Second Temple eschatology relates that the mystical, the belief in the immediate and direct experience of God, is an important part of the last days. This religious experience, an encounter with God that is an act of revelation itself, results in the devotee’s immediate personal transformation and the uncovering of God’s mysteries.  According to War of the Sons of Light against the Sons of Darkness, (one of the scrolls found of the Dead Sea Scrolls, or Qumran Scrolls), the Essenes were awaiting the cataclysmic struggle between the Sons of Light (themselves) and the Sons of Darkness (everybody else).  This battle was to occur not only between the earthly beings, but also joining them would be the cosmic forces of good and evil, and would signal the end of days.   

Paul wrote in detail of the faithful who experienced Christ’s spirit.  He felt these Christians could start their transformation into the image of God while still on earth but that the complete transformation would only occur after death.  Paul states in Romans:

10 But if Christ is in you, then even though your body is subject to death because of sin, the Spirit gives life because of righteousness. [26]

This is but one example of many (thousands) of references to the Holy Spirit altering or affecting the Early Christians.

 For these mystical Jews and Christians, experiencing a vision of the Kavod, (the Image of the Glory of God), stamped God's image on the soul. Words used to describe these experiences included "glorified," "exalted," or "angelic." The apocalyptic literatures describe believers clothed in shining white garments, as angels worshiping God before his throne, transformed into beings of fire or light, and enthroned with God's name or image.[27]   This is but one example of many shared concepts between the apocalyptic literatures of the mystics of Judaism (such as The Apocalypse of Abraham and The Testament of Levi) and the book of Revelation in the Christian Canon. Comparisons could also be made between cosmic revelations such as descriptions of heaven, hell and events at the end of time, as well as several symbolic symbols such as hands, bowls, scrolls, angels, or dragons.[28]  Once again, we see an important concept of the mystics carried into the essential framework of early Christianity.

 It is important to note, that in the cases of both religions, this shift of thought to experiencing God in the present may have been due to failed eschatological expectations.  Hopes for the long awaited battle between the forces of light and the forces of dark for the mystics, and the imminent return of Christ for the Christians had not gone as previously thought.  Moving these hope for the future to actual experiences of the present made the reward of Kavod available to all believers, and a possible reality.

3c. The Practical

            The most obvious shared dimension between the Jewish mystics and the Early Christians was that of their shared practical application of their experiences in order to effect change.  This was illustrated in their communal practices, which served as an avenue for mystical transformation.  Examples of these practices included asceticism (denying oneself of worldly pleasures), initiation rites (such as Circumcision for the Jews and Baptism for the Christians), washing (such as foot washing for Christians and purification rituals for the Jews), the anointing of the body and hair with sacramental oil, spirit possession, sexual asceticism, and sacramental ritual behavior, (such as the Passover meal and the Eucharist.) The transformation of the mystical ideals into the sacramental rituals of the early Christian Church and the “Gnostic” schools is fascinating. The sacraments seem to normalize the mystical, making the presence of God regularly available to believers. Baptism, anointing, and the Eucharist all involve the integration of the Holy Spirit and the Christ into the soul. These rituals were understood as the vehicle that elevates and transports the person into the sacred realm so that he or she can come into the very presence of God. This is the ultimate combination of the speculative theology experienced through the practical; and once again illustrates how the mystics of Judaism influenced the early Christians.

            While it is clear to me that many practices and beliefs of Christians are directly taken from the practices and beliefs of the Jewish mystics, it remains unclear to me if Christianity was a continuum of the Jewish mystic sect of the Essenes, (with the addition of the long-awaited Messiah), or a completely new religion that merely borrowed a few key dimensions from the Essenes. What, if anything did the other non-mystic Jewish sects contribute? How many of the Essenes converted to Christianity in comparison to the other Jewish sects? Was Jesus himself an Essene? All of these remain topics for further research.  However, there is arguably no question that the Jewish faith and specifically the mystics of Judaism influenced the theology, framework and Christology of the Christian Church.

___________________________________________________________________________________References

O'Donnell, James. "Augustine’s Confessions: An Electronic Edition." The STOA Consortium. The STOA Consortium, 1992. Web. 03 Mar 2012. <http://www.stoa.org/hippo/>.

Barclay, Joseph. "The Talmud." Sacred Texts. London1878. Web. 6 Mar 2012. <http://www.sacred-texts.com/jud/bar/bar000.htm>.

Rapaport, Samuel. "Tales and Maxims from the Midrash." Sacred Texts. George Routledge & Sons Limited, 1907. Web. 10 Mar 2012. <http://www.sacred-texts.com/jud/tmm/tmm00.htm>.

Kimball, Christopher V. "The Tanach." Sacred Texts. Westminster Hebrew Institute, 20 OCT 2006. Web. 06 Mar 2012. <http://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/tan/index.htm

Whiston, William. The Works of Josephus: Complete and Unabridged. 5th. 1. Peabody, Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers, 1985. Print.

Brown, Robert K., and Phillip W. Comfort. The New Greek-English Interlinear New Testament. UBS 4th Edition;Nestle-Aland 26th Edition. Munster/Westphalia: Tyndale, 1990. Print.

McGinn, Bernard. The Essential Writings of Christian Mysticism: Origen: Commentary on the Song of Songs. New York, New York: Random House, 20006. Print.

McGinn, Bernard. The Essential Writings of Christian Mysticism: Gregory of Nyssa: the Life of Moses. New York, New York: Random House, 2006. Print.

Abelson, Joshua. Jewish Mysticism. First Published in 1913: Forgotten Books, 2008. Print.

Underhill, Evelyn. Mysticism. 12th.Lexington, KY: 2011. Print.

Dennis, Rabbi Geoffrey. The Encyclopedia of Jewish Myth, Magic and Mysticism. 1st ed. Woodbury. MN: llewellyn Publications, 2011. Print.

Whiston, William. The Works of Josephus: Complete and Unabridged. 5th. 1. Peabody, Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers, 1985. Print. “Antiquities of the Jews.”  pp. 274, Book Xiii, Chapter V, Section 9.

Coleson, F.H.. "The Contemplative Life." Early Jewish Writings. pp. 53, 206. 2011. Web. 15 Mar 2012. <http://www.earlyjewishwritings.com/text/philo/book34.html>.

E. Wolfson, "Yeridah la-Merkavah: Typology of Ecstasy and Enthronement in Ancient Jewish Mysticism," in R. Herrera (ed.), Mystics of the Book: Themes, Topics, and Typologies (New York: Lang, 1993) pp. 13-44

---

[1] O'Donnell, James. "Augustine’s Confessions: An Electronic Edition." The STOA Consortium. The STOA Consortium, 1992. Web. 03 Mar 2012. <http://www.stoa.org/hippo/>.

[2] Barclay, Joseph. "The Talmud." Sacred Texts. London1878. Web. 6 Mar 2012. <http://www.sacred-texts.com/jud/bar/bar000.htm>.

[3] Rapaport, Samuel. "Tales and Maxims from the Midrash." Sacred Texts. George Routledge & Sons Limited, 1907. Web. 10 Mar 2012. <http://www.sacred-texts.com/jud/tmm/tmm00.htm>.

[4] Kimball, Christopher V. "The Tanach." Sacred Texts. Westminster Hebrew Institute, 20 OCT 2006. Web. 06 Mar 2012. <http://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/tan/index.htm

[5] The Pentateuch, or the First Five books of the Hebrew Old Testament.

[6] Whiston, William. The Works of Josephus: Complete and Unabridged. 5th. 1. Peabody, Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers, 1985. Print.

[7] Brown, Robert K., and Phillip W. Comfort. The New Greek-English Interlinear New Testament. UBS 4th Edition;Nestle-Aland 26th Edition. Munster/Westphalia: Tyndale, 1990. Print.

[8] McGinn, Bernard. The Essential Writings of Christian Mysticism: Origen: Commentary on the Song of Songs. New York, New York: Random House, 20006. Print.

[9] McGinn, Bernard. The Essential Writings of Christian Mysticism: Gregory of Nyssa: the Life of Moses. New York, New York: Random House, 2006. Print.

[10] Abelson, Joshua. Jewish Mysticism. First Published in 1913: Forgotten Books, 2008. Print.

[11] Underhill, Evelyn. Mysticism. 12th.Lexington, KY: 2011. Print.

[12] Dennis, Rabbi Geoffrey. The Encyclopedia of Jewish Myth, Magic and Mysticism. 1st ed. Woodbury. MN: llewellyn Publications, 2011. Print.

[13] Abelson, Joshua. Jewish Mysticism. First Published in 1913: Forgotten Books, 2008. Print.

[14] Whiston, William. The Works of Josephus: Complete and Unabridged. 5th. 1. Peabody, Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers, 1985. Print. “Antiquities of the Jews.”  pp. 274, Book Xiii, Chapter V, Section 9.

[15] Coleson, F.H.. "The Contemplative Life." Early Jewish Writings. pp. 53, 206. 2011. Web. 15 Mar 2012. <http://www.earlyjewishwritings.com/text/philo/book34.html>.

[16] Kimball, Christopher V. "The Tanach." Sacred Texts. Westminster Hebrew Institute, 20 OCT 2006. Web. 06 Mar 2012. <http://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/tan/index.htm

[17] Abelson, Joshua. Jewish Mysticism. First Published in 1913: Forgotten Books, 2008. Print. pp. 36-37.

[18] Exodus 33, Isaiah 6, Leviticus Rabbah 1:14

[19] Dennis, Rabbi Geoffrey. The Encyclopedia of Jewish Myth, Magic and Mysticism. 1st ed. Woodbury. MN: llewellyn Publications, 2011. Print. pp. 108

[20] Exodus 33:22-23

[21] John 1:14

[22] John 11:38-40

[23] 1:14; 2:11; 11:40; 12:23, 28, 41; 13:32; 17:1-5, 22-23.

[24] II Corinthians 4:4

[25] Colossians 1:15

[26]  Romans 8:10

[27] E. Wolfson, "Yeridah la-Merkavah: Typology of Ecstasy and Enthronement in Ancient Jewish Mysticism," in R. Herrera (ed.), Mystics of the Book: Themes, Topics, and Typologies (New York: Lang, 1993) pp. 13-44

[28] Dennis, Rabbi Geoffrey. The Encyclopedia of Jewish Myth, Magic and Mysticism. 1st ed. Woodbury. MN: llewellyn Publications, 2011. Print. pp. 18