לפני השכינה

In your earlier question Matt, you asked regarding :כאילו עומד לפני השכינה
1) Is it ki'ilu because tefilah is, in a sense, artificial? In order to be mispaleil, a person must first yifnei libo mi'kol ha'machshavos. In other words, he must withdraw from the associated world of his own pursuits and see himself in light of the shem Hashem.

2) Also, what is the mashal of lifnei?

In my answer to you regarding "כאילו עומד לפני השכינה" I posted a mashal of the Rambam. I would like to develop that Mashal a little further for you, drawing out the two issues that you raised, 1)withdrawing from the associated world and 2)being "lifnei ha-shechina".

A king is in his palace, and all his subjects are partly in the country, and partly abroad. Of the former, some have their backs turned towards the king's palace, and their faces in another direction; and some are desirous and zealous to go to the palace, seeking "to inquire in his temple", and to minister before him, but have not yet seen even the face of the wall of the house.

Matt, in your question you speak of the difficulty for a person to withdraw from their associated Machshavos. In the Mashal this difficult withdrawal is portrayed through clarifying the sense of "place". The palace is certainly a place in the sense of location- a circumscribed area in material space, yet this sense hardly captures the essence of a palace as the seat of sovereignty. The location of the palace is instrumental to a higher purpose, a relationship with the person of the sovereign. The choice to situate oneself in this place is reflective of the level of maturity in the subjects relationship with the sovereign.

In essence the sovereign can be viewed in two frameworks: 1) as an inspiration of mind and judgment for the intellectual community 2) as source of power for the practical community. It is in the selection of the principle by which to conceive of sovereignty that the maturity of the subject is measured and his choice of placement relative to the palace will be determined.

The immature subject lives in his own world, the associated world you speak of Matt. The interests here are highly provincial, purely practical in focus and utterly disconnected from the mind- policy and strategic vision of the sovereign. For example, the military policy of the sovereign is viewed as an exercise of power, a local opportunity to make money assembling a weapons system, a boon to the economy. This in turn has its meaning as Joe, John and Sally making raises, needed steps toward buying a dream house or a new TV. While the location of the immature subject is certainly circumscribed, his immaturity does not lie in the small town location in which his body is to be found. It is rather in his smallness of mind, preoccupation with the power to buy his dream house and his tv as the ultimate organizing principle of his world that is the source of the immaturity. It is this principle which causes the face of such a person to turn away with disinterest from the palace.

The more mature subject has intellectual interests that cause him to relate to the intellectual activity underlying the exercise of power. This subject relates to the sovereign as a mind, not a power. They gravitate toward the decision making area, like Mordechai or Daniel. They seek to "inquire in the temple", to participate in the stimulating intellectual life behind the policy-the mind trust, the intellectual community surrounding the king. The desire to be in the place of the king, indicates the subjects identity as a mind yearning for intellectual relationship to the king.

The Rambam of course, uses this mashal for a deeper purpose as well. The thinker is in many ways similar to the subject of the king. The framework in which his identity is forged will similarly depend upon the thinkers view of sovereignty or causality. Let us take the example of Newton. Like the subjects of the king, Chochmas Hashem can be related to provincially, or in a more mature way. Awareness of "gravity" as a force- the cause of motion in the material world can be viewed as an end in its own right. The value could be in getting a PHD, perhaps extending the idea gravity to a spaceships orbit, the idea of DNA to a useful drug. This view leads to a provincial identity and a distinterest in seeking the sovereign on his own terms as mind, interest focusing instead on taking the sovereign as a source of power. The immature thinker wants the same sorts of things as an immature subject. As the subject directs the military policy of the king to practical concerns, so too the immature thinker directs the gift of mind to practical ends, he lacks interest in shifting his focus to a higher plane. His interest in thought is limited to the daled amos of his physical self- the provincial associated world of dream house and TV.

The more mature thinker however, is curious beyond his provincial world. His interest in gravity is deeper, going to the phenomenon of mind itself. His primary interest is not in the sovereign's power, in application of the principle of gravity to attain greater power of possession. Rather he wonders about the sovereign as source of mind. He is interested in the ultimate application of gravity to be sure, but his interests move beyond the provincial material world itself. His mind grapples with the world of ideas. What is the meaning of the idea of gravity arising in his mind? What is the cause of the human mind moving from potential knowing to actual knowing? What is the relation of the idea of gravity to a material planet in motion. How can a planet without mind be moved by an intellectual principle. It is this interest in causality per se which shakes this thinker from the comfort zone of explaining his provincial expression of idea as a source of motion.