The Golem and Jewish legends

The conceptual matrix of the golem is inseparable from the narrative of the creation of man. In the book of Genesis, the first man is fashioned from the dust of the ground (adamah), then animated by the divine breath. This sequence — inert matter first, animation second — provides the very model for any creation of an artificial being: the human who creates a golem imitates, on a lesser scale, the creative gesture of the Divine.

Rabbinic literature explicitly exploits this analogy. A celebrated passage of the Talmud of Babylon, in the tractate Sanhedrin (38b), evokes Adam at the stage when he was still nothing but a shapeless mass, a golem stretched from one end of the world to the other before receiving his soul [Talmud de Babylone, Sanhedrin]. The term thus designates the intermediate state between raw matter and the fully constituted being.

Even more decisive for the later legend is another passage from the same tractate Sanhedrin (65b), where it is reported that the amora Rava created a man and sent him to Rav Zeira; the latter addressed him in speech but, as the man could not respond, Rav Zeira understood that it was an artificial creature and ordered him to return to his dust [Talmud de Babylone, Sanhedrin]. The same passage reports that Rav Hanina and Rav Oshaya studied the Sefer Yetsira on the eve of the Sabbath and thereby created a calf which they ate. These accounts, stripped down and lapidary, establish the founding elements: the creation of a being by a sage, its constitutive muteness (a sign of the imperfection of human creation compared to divine work), and the recourse to the powers of language and letters [Encyclopaedia Judaica].

The absence of speech in Rava's creature becomes, in the tradition, a recurring theological motif: only the Divine confers speech and the rational soul (neshamah); man, even the holiest, can produce only a living but mute automaton. This limit marks the uncrossable boundary between human creation and divine creation [Scholem, On the Kabbalah and Its Symbolism].

The text that grounds the properly technical dimension of the golem is the Sefer Yetsira, the "Book of Formation" or "of Creation," a brief and enigmatic work whose dating remains debated (between the third and sixth century according to the dominant hypotheses of scholars). This treatise sets forth a cosmogony in which God creates the world through the ten sefirot and the twenty-two letters of the Hebrew alphabet, combined, weighed, and permuted. Language there is not an instrument for describing reality, but the very fabric from which reality is woven [Sefer Yetsira ; Scholem, Kabbalah].

From this conception flows a practice: if the world was created by letters, then mastery of their combinations (tzerufim) confers an analogous creative power. The medieval commentaries on the Sefer Yetsira, notably those arising from the circle of the Hassidei Ashkenaz (the Pious of Germany, twelfth–thirteenth centuries) such as Éléazar de Worms, develop detailed prescriptions for the creation of a golem: kneading virgin earth, fashioning a human form, then reciting according to precise rules the combinations of letters associated with the divine name, turning each letter of the alphabet with the letters of the Tetragrammaton and the vowels [Idel, Golem: Jewish Magical and Mystical Traditions on the Artificial Anthropoid].

Moshe Idel has shown that these techniques often reflected less a desire to manufacture a servant than a mystical and initiatory experience: the creation of the golem constituted a rite of passage attesting that the adept had truly assimilated the secrets of creation. The subsequent destruction of the creature, through recitation of the letters in reverse order, was an integral part of the ritual [Idel, Golem]. It is in this context that the famous motif of the word emet (אמת, "truth") inscribed on the golem or on its forehead appears: by erasing the letter aleph, one obtains met (מת, "death"), which annuls the creature [Scholem, On the Kabbalah and Its Symbolism]. This detail, late in its systematic association with the forehead of the clay figure, would become one of the most enduring emblems of the legend.

Before the legend became fixed in Prague, several accounts attribute the creation of golems to sages of central and eastern Europe. Tradition thus records anecdotes linked to Ashkenaze kabbalists, and one of the earliest historical figures associated with a golem is Rabbi Élie de Chełm (Eliyahu Ba'al Shem, sixteenth century), in Poland. According to these accounts, the golem he is said to have fashioned grew to monstrous proportions, becoming a threat, forcing its creator to destroy it by tearing away the Name inscribed upon it — the mass of clay then collapsing upon him [Idel, Golem; Encyclopaedia Judaica].

These traditions are significant because they predate the attribution to the Maharal and already contain narrative elements — uncontrolled growth, danger, the necessary deactivation — that would later migrate to Prague. The historian must here hold together two registers: on one side, the documented existence of these historical figures; on the other, the legendary and orally transmitted character of the wonders attributed to them. The encounter between the archive (which attests to the men) and Memory (which attributes miracles to them) defines precisely a zone of intersection [Idel, Golem].

The motif of the golem as domestic servant, protector, or even force that overflows its master thus gradually grew richer. It carries a deep ambivalence: the creature manifests the power of the sage, but also the possible pride of one who presumes to imitate the Creator, and the risk that the work escapes its author's control. This moral ambivalence — which would later resonate with the figures of Frankenstein and the sorcerer's apprentice — is inscribed very early within the Jewish tradition itself [Scholem, On the Kabbalah and Its Symbolism].

Judah Loew ben Bezalel, the Maharal, was a major historical figure: a Talmudist, philosopher, pedagogue, and leading rabbinical authority in late sixteenth-century Prague, the author of a considerable theological body of work, and buried in the city's old Jewish cemetery. His reputation as an exceptional sage and his supposed proximity to the court of Emperor Rodolphe II made him a natural magnet for legends.

Yet — and this is one of the most firmly established points in modern scholarship — nothing in the Maharal's own writings, nor in contemporary or immediately subsequent sources, connects him to the creation of a golem. The association of the Maharal with the Golem of Prague does not appear in the sources until the late eighteenth century, and above all in the nineteenth century, nearly two hundred years after his death [Scholem, On the Kabbalah and Its Symbolism; Idel, Golem]. Gershom Scholem emphasized that this attribution is late and rests on no foundation in the rabbi's historical biography [Scholem].

The legend as we know it tells that the Maharal created a golem, often called Yossele (or Josef), to defend Prague's Jewish community against accusations of ritual murder and the violence that accompanied them. The golem patrolled, foiled conspiracies, and then — its task accomplished, or having become uncontrollable — was deactivated and its remains deposited in the attic (genizah) of the Altneuschul synagogue, where no one would dare ascend. This narrative core combines ancient motifs (animation through the Name, the danger of the creature, deactivation) with a new function: the collective protection of a persecuted community [Encyclopaedia Judaica].

The historian will therefore characterize this chapter as a conjectured intersection: a real historical figure, but a legendary attribution whose precise origin and motivations remain largely a matter of hypothesis — perhaps the desire, in a context of resurgent antisemitism, to endow the past with a supernatural protector.

The decisive turning point in the crystallization of the Prague Golem came in 1909, when Rabbi Yudel Rosenberg published in Hebrew a collection entitled Nifla'ot Maharal ("The Wonders of the Maharal"), which he falsely presented as a rediscovered ancient manuscript, written by the Maharal's son-in-law. It is in reality a work of fiction composed by Rosenberg himself [Idel, Golem; academic research on Yudel Rosenberg].

It is this book that fixes the essential elements of the canonical narrative widespread today: the motif of protection against ritual murder accusations, the golem's name, the rituals of animation and deactivation, and the Prague setting. The work's success was considerable and its inventions were quickly received as an immemorial tradition, illustrating a frequent phenomenon: a recent literary creation retroprojected into a distant past and perceived as ancestral folklore [Idel, Golem].

In parallel, German-speaking culture seized upon the theme. Gustav Meyrink's novel Der Golem, published in 1915, transposes the motif into a dreamlike and unsettling Prague, making the golem a psychic and fantastical figure rather than a communal protector. In cinema, the director and actor Paul Wegener devoted several films to the subject, including the celebrated Der Golem, wie er in die Welt kam (1920), a major work of German Expressionism that lastingly imposed the visual image of the clay creature [history of Expressionist cinema]. These works profoundly influenced the Western imagination of the artificial creature, from Frankenstein's monster to the automata and robots of science fiction.

The golem is not merely a narrative: it is an operator of thought. In the Jewish tradition, it interrogates the boundary between the human and the divine, between matter and spirit, between the creative word and the silence of the creature. It raises the question of the creator's responsibility toward what he has summoned into being — a theme whose urgency modernity, in the age of artificial intelligence and robotics, has rediscovered. Many contemporary commentators see in the golem a prefiguration of the ethical debates surrounding artificial beings [Sherwin, The Golem Legend: Origins and Implications].

On the religious level, the legend also conveys a lesson of caution: the creation of the golem, in the kabbalistic sources, remains an act reserved for the greatest sages, hedged with warnings, for it flirts with hubris. The mute creature perpetually recalls that only God bestows the speaking soul [Scholem; Idel].

On the cultural level, the Golem of Prague has become an emblematic figure of the city's identity and tourism, a symbol of Jewish resistance in the face of persecution, and an inexhaustible source of inspiration for literature, theater, comics, and cinema. The figure now circulates far beyond Judaism, yet it retains, for those who know its layers, the Memory of its mystical origins — that of a millennial reflection on the power of letters and the limits of human creation [Sherwin; Idel, Golem].

The history of the golem is that of a long displacement: from a concept (the formless matter of Psalm 139) toward a mystical experience (the techniques of the Sefer Yetsira and the Hassidei Ashkenaz), then toward a communal legend (the Ashkenazic sages, Élie de Chełm), and finally toward a modern myth (the Maharal of Prague, fixed by Rosenberg in 1909 and disseminated by Meyrink and Wegener). At each stage, the motif was recharged with meaning: the power of letters, the pride and limits of man, the protection of a threatened people, the anguish of the creature that escapes its master.

The lesson of historical research is twofold. On the one hand, the golem is authentically rooted in the oldest and most profound Jewish thought. On the other hand, its most celebrated form — the protector of Prague animated by the Maharal — is a late formation, whose archive in no way attests to any connection with the historical rabbi. Recognizing this distinction does not diminish the legend: on the contrary, it reveals how a community shapes its Memory, how fiction becomes tradition, and how a mass of clay can carry, across the centuries, the weight of a people's hopes and fears.