HANANYA GOODMAN

GEOMANCY TEXTS OF RABBI SHALOM SHABBAZI

We will examine Shalom Shabazi's geomancy text, Sefer Goralot Ha-

Hol,l and attempt to reconstruct its functional role within a cultural,
performative context. Our geomancy texts, written probably near the
end of the 17th century, fall collectively within the genre of prevalent
astrological, esoteric divination texts. As far as we know, Sefer Goralot
Ha-Hol and an insertion into Hemdat Yamim, Parashat Shoftim,
constitute his only literary contribution to the subject of geomancy. And
yet, Sefer Goralot Ha-Hol as a reference work, a handbook, is written
with such unusual clarity and organization regarding the method and
terminology of geomantic practice, that it stands out as unique among
the other Jewish geomantic jottings found peripherally here and there in
various manuscripts from the same period.
A peculiar aspect of the geomancy text found in one manuscript
version of H emdat Yamim is that Shabazi stops in the middle of his
commentary to engage in sod ha-nequddot which he learned from sofre
hochmat Hoddu, the sages of India.2 Shabazi's Sefer Goralot Ha-Hol is
very typical of standard Arabic geomancy texts, and Shabazi quotes the
Arabic equivalents of geomantic figures.' The precise set of extant

Shalom Shabazi, Se/er Goralot Ha-Hol, in: Saadyah Hoze, ed., Se/er Toldot Ha-
Rav Shalom Shabazi, Jerusalem, 197211973, pp. 46-66.
2 Shalom Shabazi, Hemdat Yamim: Midrash "al Hamishshah Humshe Torah' Jerusa-
lem 197611977, Volume 2, page 304, column one, line 33, after the words "dalet
yesodot ...' is the position of the geomancy insertion found in the manuscript ver-
sion, kindly provided by Professor Yosef Tobi. The text was probably written in the
latter part of the 17th century. A number of manuscript versions of Hemdat Yamim
contain geomancy insertions. Noteworthy is the absence of such textual interrup-
tions in Shabazi's other works. Breaking the text to engage in geomancy or other
diversions appears to be highly uncharacteristic. I am entirely indebted to Professor
Tobi for introducing me to this material and I wish to express my gratitude.
3 Toufic Fahd, "Khatt" in Et, Leiden 1978, Vol. 4, pp. 1128-1130; Emilie Savage-
Smith and Marion B. Smith, Islamic Geomancy and a Thirteenth-Century Divinitory
Device, Malibu, CA, 1980; M.B. Smith, The Nature of Islamic Geomancy with a
Critique of a Structuralist Approach, Studia Islamica 49 (1979), pp. 5-38.
34 Hananyah Goodman

sources which exerted the greatest influence on his text has yet to be
determined, but we don't need to extend our comparative analysis
beyond the available Arabic geomantic texts prevalent at the time. And
although the kabbalistic, mystical "mind set" may have permeated Sha-
bazi's consciousness, we see no evidence of the tell-tale signs of the
sefirot, or anything else kabbalistic. Geomancy and kabbalah do share
in common esoteric codes requiring expert decoding and they both as-
sume an underlying connectedness in all things but we will find closer
affinities with astrological than with kabbalistic, esoteric texts."
Let us attempt now to reconstruct the cultural experience of per-
forming geomancy as found in Sefer Goralot Ha-HoC This work starts
out with setting three conditions for practice: In the first condition the
questioner must state his question clearly, preferably written down so
that there are no doubts about what is at issue. The second condition
requires that the questioner must direct his question and his whole being
in prayer to Heaven in order to obtain an answer. For this purpose Sha-
bazi gives us a formulaic prayer to say before beginning the geomancy
session. He recites a kind of standardized nusah tefillah before the
geomancy and then proceeds with his analysis. Apparently he felt no
need to justify his use of geomancy but simply to explain its operative
principles and practice. The opening prayer links the entire forthcoming
process to God, the source of all answers, all reason, all creation, all
greatness and kindness. It is though this prayer that the entire procedure

4 On Shabazi's relationship to kabbalah see: Yosef Tobi, 'Iyyunim bi-Megilat Teman,

Jerusalem 1986. Erich Brauer, Ethnologie des jemenitischen Juden, Heidelberg
1934, pp. 351-355. Moshe Hallamish, ed., The Kabbalah in Yemen at the Beginning
of the Seventeenth Century: Sefer Segulloth and Sefer Lehem Shelomo, Ramat Gan
1984 (Hebrew). For background on Jewish geomancy, see: Ludiwig Blau, "Lots",
Jewish Encyclopedia 8, New York/London 1934, pp. 187-188; Moses Gaster, "Di-
vination (Jewish)", Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, ed. James Hastings, New
York 1961, Volume 4, pp .. 806-814. I was unable to locate analytic treatments of
Jewish geomancy texts, such as those contained in the manuscript index listed under
goralot in the Jewish National and University Library in Jerusalem. This subject
deserves further exploration. See: Gabriel Bar'el, "Rav pe'alim - madrikh li-rfu'ah
'amamit be-maroqomehe-me'ah ha-tesha'< esreh, in: Yissakhar Ben-'Ammi (ed.),
Mehqarin be-Tarbutam shel Yehude Zefon-Afriqa, Jerusalem 1991, pp. 211-232.
5 For an excellent survey of anthropological approaches to divination, see: Philip M.
Peek, African Divination Systems: Non-Normal Modes of Cognition, in: Philip M.
Peek, ed., African Divination Systems: Ways of Knowing, Bloomington 1991, pp.
193-212; George K. Park, Divination and its Social Contexts, Journal of the Royal
Anthropological Institute 93 (2) (1963), pp. 195-209.
Geomancy Texts of Rabbi Shalom Shabazi 35

is presumably "charged" with value for the diviner and the questioner.
Here we see the interplay of the divination and legitimizing prayer.
Prayer is employed to solemnize attitudes toward the diviner and toward
his practice amongst his public, and even to solemnize his own attitudes
toward himself as a professional and toward God his creator. The third
condition requires that the ambiance and environmental conditions must
be clear and calm for the geomancy to be effective. For example, it
should not be done when there are clouds or when taking the cattle out
to pasture.
Having established the right conditions for practice it is necessary to
prepare the equipment to perform the geomancy. Shabazi probably used
a box or square area of sand or a chalk and slate to make his nequddot,
rows of dots. After the initial rows are produced in the sand, one then
transfers the results to a separate piece of paper or side of another
manuscript, as seen in H emdat Yamim.
Geomancy starts with a need to make a difficult decision, to solve a
problem or to overcome the urgent need to know what will happen to
our lives. In Shabazi's Yemen there were plenty of life decisions to
make. For example, Shabazi may have had to make the critical decision
as to when and if to meet with the ruling authorities of the time. Should
he meet with them? When is the opportune or auspicious time? How
shall he receive a clear answer to his question if traditional tefillah or
halakhah have not provided him with the decisive direction he needs to
move forward? Where shall he turn? One option was geomancy.
We may also assume that in addition to his own personal use of
Goralat ha-Hol, other members of the community came to Shabazi for
decisions. These people anxiously sought a non-arbitrary mechanism,
an island of order in a world of uncertainty, in which the divine would
communicate an unequivocal answer to a specific question. Shabazi was
approached for help because he already had a reputation as a zaddiq in
tune with higher realms and he was known to perform this geomancy
and give answers. It was known that he helped many people in the past
and that he could perform miracles.
Among the questions which Shabazi may have undertaken to answer
through his prayerful geomancy were: how long will one live, will one
better one's present position, is it time to enter into a business venture,
should one take a dangerous journey, is the rumor true or false, is it
36 Hananyah Goodman

possible to locate a hidden treasure or lost object, is one side stronger in

a war or conflict, will a child be born or not.
Shabazi had at his disposal several methods of decision-making and
problem-solving and I believe he took all of them seriously and prac-
ticed them with true faith and conviction. There was traditional prayer
in which to make requests of God to answer every day needs. There
were communal authorities and courts to make halakhic decisions about
every facet of daily behavior. There were Shabazi's prophetic poems
projecting hopes and desires about God, redemption and the future of
the Jewish people. And yet here we have this geomancy as one more
means of seeing concretely into the immediate personal future.
Once the question and the relationship between the questioner and
Shabazi had been established, we may begin to look at the next stage of
performing a geomantic session." Shabazi himself, or the reader of the
text, would write out the questions as specifically as possible, make a
row of random dots, and think clearly of the question. A total of sixteen
rows of dots were arbitrarily jotted out on the sand, quickly and mecha-
nically, from right to left without counting. The temptation of anticipat-
ing or counting the dots must be avoided since this could cause the un-
conscious manipulation of the geomantic exercise. God must be allowed
to work automatically through the performer. In this sense, the geoman-
cer must be a medium of divine influence allowing the hand to inno-
cently channel signs from above. Only afterwards, does one apply the
detailed interpretive technique outlined in Shabazi's Goralot Ha-Hol.
It is here that we begin the mechanical process of counting each row
of dots and making notations of the result. If the total for a row is an
odd number of dots, then mark down one dot and if the total contains an
even number of dots, then mark down two dots. These binary notations
are then grouped together in clusters of four. That is, there are four
groups each with four binary sets. The figure produced we will call a
geomantic table. These four primary clusters determine the final result
and they are called immahot.
It is interesting to note at this point that we have moved from an
essentially oral enterprise to a fixed, predictable, linear, graphic framing

6 For the most readable exposition on the practice and interpretation of geomancy,
see: Stephen Skinner, Terrestrial Astrology: Divination by Geomancy. London
1980.
Geomancy Texts of Rabbi Shalom Shabazi 37

technique which moves our attention from complex, difficult living re-
alities to simplified, manipulated signs and symbols. The anthropologist
Jack Goody critiques this process when he says, "The result is often to
freeze a contextual statement into a system of permanent oppositions,
an outcome that may simplify reality for the observer but often at the
expense of a real understanding of the actor's frame of reference. And
to regard such tables as expressions of an underlying structure is to
mistake metaphor for reality."
Now we proceed quickly to the formation of the four geomantic
figures placing them side by side with the first one on the right. From
these four immahot, occupying positions I through 4 in the table, the
remaining figures in the table are reproduced as follows: The figure for
position 5 is formed by taking the top row of marks in the immahot
from right to left and writing them as a column from top to bottom. The
ones for positions 6, 7 and 8 are obtained similarly by taking the se-
cond, third, and fourth rows respectively, in the immahot, always going
from right to left and turning them into columns. The figures thus pro-
duced and placed in position 5 through 8 are called banot.
For position 9 a figure is produced in an entirely different way. Here
only the first and second immahot are used and they are in a sense
added together. Starting with the top row, the marks of the two figures
are combined. If the sum is even, then two dots are placed in the top
row of the new figure; if the sum is odd, only one dot is put there. By
adding in this way the dots for the second row of the new figure are
determined, and likewise the number of dots for rows three and four.
All the remaining figures are formed by combining a previously deter-
mined pair of figures. Finally, when one has obtained the figure for po-
sition 15 from those occupying positions 13 and 14, the final figure, the
one in position 16, is found by combining in this same manner the
figures in positions 15 and 1, and this completes the formation of the
geomantic table.
One forms the figures required for judging the outcome of the
divination, the four mothers, four daughters, four nephews, right wit-
ness, left witness, and the judge. The judge gives a general answer to
the question as to whether the matter will come to a good or bad end. If
the judge's figure is compatible with the first mother, and the other
figures generally on the right hand side of the chart, then one can expect
38 Hananyah Goodman

a good outcome with benefit to the questioner. If however the judge

agrees in nature with the daughters, and those figures to be found gene-
rally on the left hand side of the geomantic chart, then matters are likely
to go against the questioner and in favor of the enemies as signified by
the left witness.
If the divination still provides conflicting answers with the judge in
15, it is possible to construct a reconciler or supreme judge, which is
constructed by adding together the first mother in 1 and the judge in 15.
The reconciler is consulted only if there is no clear answer. One does
not go to the reconciler if one does not like the answer. Each figure has
a name and various meanings which are then used to interpret the
arrangement of houses (battim) and the final resulting figure. Shabazi's
text is a well organized handbook, a reference book which elaborates
the semantic fields for each geomantic result. It makes various correla-
tions with the classic elements of fire, air, earth and water, the astro-
logical planets, angels and parts of the body.
Finally, it appears we have now obtained our answer. But have we?
Have we, as Goody suggested, mistaken metaphor for reality and ignor-
ed the questioner'S needs, his frame of reference? It would seem not, for
the relationship between client and diviner, between question and an-
swer, is mediated by a further oral dialogue. That is, the process returns
to its oral origins where the context and complexity of the problem were
dramatically situated. Shabazi brings his knowledge of the complexities
of human nature to the questioner and he integrates it with the highly
general results of the geomancy.
This therapeutic negotiation is critical to our understanding of the
effectiveness, and if you will, the accuracy, of the geomantic process. It
is this final intuitive process of the diviner, as well as a recognition of
the entire performance, which is often overlooked by functionalists and
positivists. It is perhaps then a little less important to know how such a
system actually worked than to understand how of necessity it must
have been supposed to work by its participants. If the results of the
geomancy are doubtful, one may try again to come up with an interpre-
tation which is finally meaningful to the questioner. In the final analy-
sis, the geomancy has succeeded in deciding and sanctioning a course of
action which otherwise would have left the questioner in confusion.
Let me try to analyze what I believe to have been the underlying
Geomancy Texts of Rabbi Shalom Shabazi 39

processes of performance in Shabazi's Sefer Goralot Ha-Hol. We have

gone from an anxious, confused questioner to a focused question, to a
master diviner Shabazi, to a seemingly arbitrary jotting hand in the
sand, to a highly rigid method of analysis, to a final judgment and
answer which can then be "reconciled" to a highly labile, fluid, abstract
metaphysical, interpretative scheme used by the diviner to answer the
question, to an authoritative relationship between a dependent client
and a miracle-working zaddiq, to a satisfied questioner.
Whether performed in private or in public, these alternations bet-
ween rigidity and fluidity, these psychospiritual movements between
resolution and conflict, must have produced valued results for the com-
munity which believed in the efficacy of the zaddik as geomancer. Psy-
chologically, the questioner was taken from uncertainty to certainty and
final judgment. Sociologically, the decision gave legitimization to the
problem, social acceptability to the participants and provided an objecti-
fied framework for problem-solving.
Now, some final observations:
1. I believe we should take seriously the existence of Shabazi's
geomancy and the clarity with which it was presented to his readers.
2. If we look at Shabazi's literary output in Hemdat Yamim and the
Diwdn from the point of view of the details of his geomancy handbook
and performance, we may discover new symbolic dimensions derived
from his geomancy.
3. I believe Shabazi was not perceived by contemporaries as a charis-
matic charlatan who influenced others through clever manipulating of
esoteric knowledge and therefore granted disproportionate value by
naive and anxious followers.' Rather, Shabazi was a man of exceptional
wisdom and learning, a medium of divine knowledge. The geomantic
performance was effective because there was a dynamic relationship
between seeker and sage, and not simply because a diagnosis was ren-
dered. A maximalist interpretation of Shabazi's self-perception would
see him as a hero/prophet while a minimalist view of his self-percep-
tions would see him as a fortune teller. I would say he was somewhere
between the two.

7 Dov Noy, R. Shalom Shabazi be-Aggadat ha-r Am shel Yehude Teman, in: Bo'i
Teman, ed., Y. Ratzaby, Tel Aviv 1967, pp. 106-133.
40 Hananyah Goodman

4. To the Yemenite Jews of the 17th century, geomancy was an aid in

decision making and it articulated their approach to the sources of
moral deliberation. When halakhah was not forthcoming with a deci-
sion, then people would rely on their hachamim and alternative sources
of information and authority, such as astrology and geomancy.
5. Different forms of divination are used to make different kinds of
decisions. A comparison of Shabazi' s geomancy with the prophetic po-
etry of the Diwdn would tend to suggest that Goralot Ha-Hol was used
for questions of immediate personal need while his poetry was used to
express his aspirations for immediate collective redemption." It would
be interesting to look at the Diwiin and Hemdat Yamim from the pers-
pective of the symbolism found in GoralotHa-Hol. In any case, it ap-
pears that Shabazi's poetry took off in a passionate direction where
halakhah's redemptive function reached its limit. Likewise, his geo-
mancy took off in a concrete, fulfilling mode, complementing tefillah's
general revelatory capacities to answer pressing questions. Shabazi had
at his disposal techniques for transcending the more traditional modes
of communicating with the divine; these alternative techniques were
customary for the Yemenite culture of the 17th century.

8 For a good perspective on the range of Shabazi's literary output, see: Reuben
Ahroni, Yemenite Jewry: Origins, Culture and Literature, Bloomington 1986, pp.
89 ff. .