1. Introduction Tolkien scholarship has historically advanced along two dominant axes. The first is Christian theology and the second is Northern European mythology. Both are legitimate and productive. Tolkien’s Catholic faith permeated every aspect of his life, and his engagement with Beowulf and Norse mythology has been philologically established. Yet this dual focus tends to render certain structural patterns in the Legendarium invisible. This article argues that a significant portion of those patterns bear a striking structural resemblance to the Jewish mystical tradition, specifically to Lurianic Kabbalah.

The methodological boundary must be stated clearly from the outset. There is no biographical evidence that Tolkien directly consulted Kabbalistic texts or the Zohar. His surviving correspondence contains no such reference. The argument here is more cautious and perhaps more interesting. Two traditions, each unaware of the other, arrived at similar structural answers to the same cosmic questions. The medieval Christian theology Tolkien knew so deeply had itself partly absorbed Jewish mysticism. Kabbalistic ideas filtered into Christian scholasticism through Neoplatonism, and from there into the texts Tolkien read throughout his life.

A critic may ask whether Neoplatonism can already account for these patterns and why Kabbalah needs to enter the picture at all. The answer lies in what Neoplatonism cannot account for. The apophatic withdrawal of God as a precondition for creation, the concept known as tzimtzum, has no precise structural equivalent in Augustine or Aquinas. The concept of evil as an active structure that imprisons divine sparks rather than a mere privation of good is absent from the Thomistic framework. The insistence that repair is collective, partial, and never completed within history, which Tikkun Olam describes, stands in direct tension with Christian soteriology, where a single act of redemption is sufficient and complete. These are not minor variations. They are the load-bearing joints of Tolkien’s narrative, and Neoplatonism alone cannot hold them.

2. Tolkien’s Philosophical Foundations

Scholar John Halsall has argued that a broad Christian Neoplatonism runs as an underestimated thread throughout the Legendarium. He demonstrates that Tolkien’s cosmogony was shaped by the tradition of Augustine, Boethius, Pseudo-Dionysius Areopagita, and Thomas Aquinas. Academic studies published at Cambridge have shown that the concept of cosmic harmony in the Ainulindale was derived almost directly from Plato’s Timaeus and Aquinas’s commentary on that dialogue.

This connection matters for the article’s central argument. Both Neoplatonism and the Thomistic tradition that elaborated it share significant points of overlap with Jewish Neoplatonic sources, particularly with the Kabbalistic thought that spread across medieval Europe. Tolkien may not have sought out this intersection consciously, but the tradition that formed him already carried it within itself.

It is also worth noting that Tolkien’s understanding of evil resists simple categorization. Augustine defined evil as the privation of good, privatio boni. Halsall argues, however, that Tolkien does not limit himself to this framework and depicts evil as a more pervasive and active force. This is the precise point at which the Neoplatonic inheritance proves insufficient. In Kabbalistic thought, evil is not mere absence but an active structure containing imprisoned sparks, a formulation that maps far more closely onto what Tolkien actually constructs.

3. Tzimtzum and the Ainulindale

In the sixteenth century, Isaac Luria posed the question of creation in a new way. If Ein Sof, the infinite God, fills all things, how was the space opened in which creation could exist? His answer is the concept of tzimtzum. Before creating, God contracted within Himself. This withdrawal is not annihilation but self-limitation. Creation did not begin with God’s expansion; it began with God’s stepping back. God’s absence became another form of His presence.

In Tolkien’s Ainulindale, Iluvatar does not expand to create. He conceives the Ainur, grants them music, and then withdraws. Throughout the Silmarillion, Iluvatar’s direct intervention occurs only a handful of times,........

© The Times of Israel (Blogs)