Wednesday, December 31, 2008

The mashal for a Golem

I think that this is the most fundamental mashal for the golem. What is it talking about?

באר עמוקה מלאה מים והיו מימיה צוננין ומתוקים וטובים ולא היתה בריה יכולה לשתות ממנה, בא אדם א' וספק לה חבל בחבל משיחא במשיחא ודלה ממנה ושתה התחילו הכל דולין ושותין, כך מדבר לדבר ממשל למשל עמד שלמה על סודה של תורה דכתיב (משלי א) משלי שלמה בן דוד מלך ישראל ע"י משלותיו של שלמה עמד על דבר תורה

There once was once a deep well, full of water that was cold, sweet and good. But there was no one who could drink from it. A person came along who connected many ropes one to another and drew water from the well and everyone else began drawing water as well. In the same way, by moving from one principle to another and from one metaphor to another Shlomo arrived at the secrets (hidden first principles) of Torah. This is what is meant by the statement: "The metaphors of Shlomo son of David- by means of his metaphors he arrived at the principles of Torah.

Tuesday, December 30, 2008

Diologue with Sean about "אור"

The following is a slightly edited discussion with Sean.

Hi Rabbi Sacks,
This is Sean O'Neill.
Lately I've had a question on my mind that concerns something that I won't need to think much about for a few years. I just can't understand how to work it out, though, and it's nagging at me.

Here's the question:
How does one raise a child with both true ideas - like Torah mi'Sinai - and the ability to think independently - that is, to be able to evaluate and, if necessary, cast away ideas objectively? To me, the two seem to conflict. Thanks for reading, Rabbi. Have a good week.


גל עיני ואביטה נפלאות מתורתך: תהלים קיט, יח

119:18 Open my eyes, that I may observe the wonders of your law.

RS

Interesting question Sean. Isn't this a question about any education though, rather than being specific only to education in the art of living?

Sean

I think you're right. That definitely seems to be the case. Is the question then how does one help build another's ability to objectively evaluate ideas and think independently and simultaneously give the person ideas?

RS

Lets put on our "farmer" hats shall we? It is more like growing a plant. The seed has the natural power to grow in the right environment, the gardener must make sure to expose the seed to the best environment possible (earth, water and of course above all sun).

Sean

I'm going to put my farmer hat on and chew on a wheat stem while I think about that analogy for a little bit.

RS

Don't forget to picture yourself in your fathers ecosystem world, where rain and snow, weather and crops are all interconnected.




Monday, December 29, 2008

Response to Carolyn: reading zoom

א בְּנִי, אִם-תִּקַּח אֲמָרָי; וּמִצְו‍ֹתַי, תִּצְפֹּן אִתָּךְ.
ב לְהַקְשִׁיב לַחָכְמָה אָזְנֶךָ; תַּטֶּה לִבְּךָ, לַתְּבוּנָה.
ג כִּי אִם לַבִּינָה תִקְרָא; לַתְּבוּנָה, תִּתֵּן קוֹלֶךָ.
ד אִם-תְּבַקְשֶׁנָּה כַכָּסֶף; וְכַמַּטְמוֹנִים תַּחְפְּשֶׂנָּה.
ה אָז--תָּבִין, יִרְאַת יְהוָה; וְדַעַת אֱלֹהִים תִּמְצָא.
ו כִּי-יְהוָה, יִתֵּן חָכְמָה; מִפִּיו, דַּעַת וּתְבוּנָה.


גל עיני ואביטה נפלאות מתורתך: תהלים קיט, י


In reaction to my post on storytelling and metaphor, Carolyn asked the following question.

Carolyn

I'm not clear on exactly how you are suggesting we use the metaphor in zooming. Could you elaborate a bit further?

Thanks.


Dear Carolyn,

You are absolutely correct in your focus on self experimentation as the essence of the previous post. Theoretical discussion about experimentation cannot substitute for actually experiencing how an experimental observation changes as it becomes knowledge. There will be plenty of time after overcoming the resistance to doing the zoom to explore the theoretical basis of the experiment גל עיני ואביטה נפלאות מתורתך.

How, you ask, is this zoom to be accomplished? As I mentioned in the post on storytelling, we want to coax the immature nefesh out of a default framework. In the metaphor it was an immature default way of framing one's experience of adversity that was dealt with . Adversity does not necessarily need to be represented as a destructive force, like a storm attacking us, even though we default into representing it in our rock -like hearts as such. In the metaphor you will notice a narrator guiding one's reflection on the experience.

I wonder if you have had the experience of going to the seashore and seeing a rock out at sea, and watching the waves crashing against the rock? And you might wonder about the waves. Where they come from and why they appear one after the other .... endlessly. Why the rock has to put up with the waves.

Waves are the result of storms far out at sea......the storms have disappeared but the waves they caused are still crashing in... long after... and the bigger the storm, the bigger the waves that roll in.

Every book and storytelling is in essence a narrator guiding the nefesh screen. Notice the narrator in my depiction of the nefesh screen.

Zoom-Control and The Cosmic and Social Environments

Picture a map of the universe, rather than just Earth, that can zoom in or out.

Zoom in galaxy by galaxy as in a planetarium show.

Zoom in noticing the wonderful, precise motion reflecting gravity in all bodies of the universe.
This "noticing" is a feeling, a sense that a universal law- Malchus shamayim - is the governing principle underlying the steady orbits of all parts of the universe. It will probably require some careful slowing down of the orbits to sense their regularity and orderliness. Yet we have seen this orderliness modeled many times in museums and planetarium shows. We react to this governing principle with an ahava feeling at the “good” in the sense of lawful order and harmony underlying the Creator’s Craft in all parts of the universe. At the intergalactic, galactic and planetary “zooms” the governing principle of Malchus shamayim is natural and easy to keep in focus.

Zoom in to the solar system and see it as an ecosystem sustaining life. Note that this ecosystem itself depends upon gravity.
If gravity did not move the Meoros hagedolim, there would not be night and day on aretz. There would be no evaporation of water and no rain. There would be no heat or growth of vegetation. No seasons. There would be no atmosphere or air without gravity. All of this causal focus is natural at all levels up to the planetary level of zoom. This causal focus corresponds to the basic account of G’s craft in creating planet Earth as the cradle of life in the “big picture” framework of the first perek of brayshees. Zoom control allows us to seek ohr as in “gravity” or “ecosystem”. This “seeking”, as mentioned, is done through feeling or internal dialogue as shown by my narration (notice the steady orbits, notice the ecosystem, notice the ecosystem’s need for gravity).

My instruction therefore is to extend the narration from cosmic zoom to yourself considering an adversity. Choose an adversity from your life, losing money, being yelled at -whatever. What I am suggesting is to experiment with zooming in from the cosmic environment, following my narration. Then Zoom in all the way to yourself as a person who is dealing with adversity. Then follow the narration of constant rock as if it were me.
Feel the anger or whatever immature default reaction you could have from a personal space framework and the alternative cosmic framework.

Sunday, December 28, 2008

Metaphor and storytelling

Following in the footsteps of R Moskowitz, I offer a simple explanation and a general example of metaphor or storytelling as a way of organizing memory to educated action. I do this because the mechanisms of educating the immature nefesh are similar and are much easier to see, even though the message is not necessarily so deep. Yet, in Hallel and elsewhere we see Creation personified in the exact same way as this metaphor. Mountains dancing with joy etc. The basic strategy is to coax the immature nefesh into considering that it has a variety of frameworks in which to interpret an experience, not just the one it is first emotionally attracted to.

Categorization is a basic feature of life
No creature, however primitive, can survive very long unless it can deal with issues such as: 'Is this the kind of situation where I eat this, escape from it, mate with it, look after it, ignore it … ?'.
Since situations don't come with neat labels that say 'Eat me!' or 'Escape from me!', this implies some kind of pattern recognition, and hence some kind of comparison: 'Is this new situation that is emerging just now more like an 'edible' situation, like a 'dangerous' situation …' or whatever.
For simple organisms, this kind of categorization may be little more than the ability to respond to a few chemical or physical triggers, but more complex organisms can make much 'cleverer' categorizations. For instance, the part of a frog's brain that analyses vision is organized in several layers. One responds to fixed patterns of light and shade – e.g. the fixed features of the frog's pond. Another responds to small, fast-moving, patterns of light and shade – e.g. flies that the frog eats. Another responds to large, slow-moving, patterns – e.g. larger animals that eat frogs. So frogs can 'compare' their views of a situation in terms of these three kinds of analysis specially evolved to meet the frog's key needs. As you go up the evolutionary tree, the pattern-handling gets cleverer and cleverer.
Another kind of 'comparison' that begins to appear in more complex animals is mimicry - e.g. young animals learn by mimicking older animals. There is growing evidence of brain mechanisms specifically concerned with 'mirroring' what others are doing (indeed it has been suggested that such mechanisms may be involved in human 'empathy').
These kinds of pre-human pattern recognition, categorization, comparison, mimicry, and such like are not 'metaphor' or 'analogy' in the human sense. In any case, we don't yet understand enough of the brain mechanisms underlying human use of metaphor to make bold statements about 'where metaphor comes from'. But it is a plausible guess to suggest that human use of metaphor and analogy has evolved from pre-human capacities such as these, much transformed by being mediated through language.

The following metaphor reframes "adversity" as being what makes people stronger, that experience teaches and shapes you, and that you can choose to view adversity as a valuable rather that destructive situation . Approach the metaphor as a zoom experience- don't rush to define its message. Use the metaphor to view an adversity in your own life as either as a destructive or beneficial experience. After the experience is accomplished as a visualization, there will be plenty of time to define what we have observed as a separate mental act.

Which framework is the better one to see adversity. The first, angry rock,("Why the rock has to put up with the waves") or the second peaceful rock ("I wonder if that rock enjoys the waves, and celebrates before every storm")? Why? What in the metaphor guides us to the answer?

Constant Rock

I wonder if you have had the experience of going to the seashore and seeing a rock out at sea, and watching the waves crashing against the rock? And you might wonder about the waves. Where they come from and why they appear one after the other .... endlessly. Why does the rock has to put up with the waves?

Waves are the result of storms far out at sea......the storms have disappeared but the waves they caused are still crashing in... long after... and the bigger the storm, the bigger the waves that roll in.

And I remember a particular rock.... it was protecting the shore behind it .... breaking the waves, defending, deflecting, reshaping, reforming... Maybe you recall a similar rock?.....that looked as if it had been there forever .... solid and strong... and every wave that came surged against it .... broke up with a roar and then withdrew eventually...... Some waves were so large they submerged the rock .... other waves were just ripples that splashed and were gone .... again and again the rock met the wave, became one with it, taking on its shape... the wave hugs the rock and the rock moulds to the wave.... until the rock and the wave are one, understand each other, became part of each other... some waves come in with a great roar and a crash with foam flung high... other waves roll gently round the base and drain away with a gentle laughing gurgle.

But every wave ... large or small .... was absorbed and quickly the water ran off .... leaving the rock as it always had been... solid ... strong.... constant.

And many years later I went back to see that rock. The waves had sculpted it... had changed it... its shape better suited its position.... the waves made it better at protecting the coast... but still it was the same rock... in a way that rock had learned from the waves... learning to absorb sometimes and to deflect other times...

And I wonder if that rock enjoys the waves, and celebrates before every storm.... because with the storm comes that sense of mastery based on enduring long exposure.... a deep rooted confidence... that comes from knowing that whatever comes can be dealt with .... knowing it is capable of handling anything.... knowing that each wave makes it stronger... a confidence that needs to be reminded and refreshed....

Because always ... after every wave... the water drains away... and the rock remains .... serene.... unchanged.... learning from wind and water and sun and storm...

And in a way the rock is grateful... after every storm.... the waves wash away a little but deposit some things as well... and with the ebbing of every wave... the rock knows tranquility... and experiences its own strength reaching right down to the foundations. And it's good to know that each wave... no matter how fierce it seems... will retreat ....and leave nothing more than a ripple in the sands of memory...

Steady and constant, strong and sure.... the rock can carry on. Because tomorrow a new day brings warm sunshine and bright sea air... the rock is constantly renewed.... constant in an inconstant sea.

Friday, December 26, 2008

David Rinde- path to Mitzvos # 6

The following is an "anatomy of Torah" by David Rinde that he asked me to comment on. I asked him if we could post it, because it will be a very powerful tool in our development as "golems". There is an incompleteness in the principles that is extremely useful to reflect on as another step in moving toward the palace.

We were talking about the Rambam’s division of Torah into Torah SheBichtav (TSB), Torah SheBaal Peh (TSBP), and Talmud (T). I had never understood what was what; I kind of spaced out last year for this/was confused enough that other points occupied my thoughts at the time so that I never really understood the anatomy. However, I think I picked up more than I had thought, because over the course of my conversation with Johny I was able to put together a unified theory to explain what all the parts are, and consequently what a person should be trying to do with and between them.

The model I emerged with says that TSB is comprised of philosophical principles and mitzvos, TSBP is the study of analyzing these mitzvos and seeing their Chumash principles on a basic level, and T is a more advanced study of the mitzvos (and the principles that emerge from them) by studying the mitzvos in their more refined form as expressed through their specific halachik definition.

Other benefits and priorities are attached to these as well, and a person should not treat them as strictly linear in progression, though there should be a gradual movement starting with TSB to TSBP to T, with all the expected overlap and back and forth. Examples of some other benefits of studying halachah (i.e. T) even before reaching the level of this kind of advanced analysis of mitzvos would include 1) practically knowing what to do to technically fulfill your chiyuv, 2) amassing a cache of facts for the advanced analysis just as one amassed the facts of miztvos before engaging in the more basic TSBP analysis of miztvos, and 3) training the mind to perform all kinds of analysis from the most basic to the most advanced.

My response:

כג כִּי נֵר מִצְוָה וְתוֹרָה אוֹר וְדֶרֶךְ חַיִּים תּוֹכְחוֹת מוּסָר

Dear David,

I agree with the unified theory you presented in this piece, in principle. I say in principle because, in its current state, your theory lacks the dimension needed for application in a real world engagement of the world. This difficulty is,of course, a typical one it corresponds to the method of teaching used in all skilled crafts. The theoretical principles grasped by the eye of the soul are taught in one way, the practical principles that identify principles as they present in real world entities are taught in another way.

In medicine for example , your "anatomy" is of the theoretical kind-the medical school in the textbook. There would be a representation of a body with a bunch of names attached that the students would learn to assign formulaic names to. We can hear the voice of the lecture- this is the liver-it is part of the digestive system. Its function is to remove toxins from the blood stream.

As true as this school-presentation of anatomy is, in principle, it lacks the experience of real world bodies needed for application. There is a distinct amount of seeing actual bodies in hospitals, becoming experienced in the phenomenon of how bodily systems present themselves, that is needed to make these "principles" as they present themselves in real world environments. In addition to formulated principles, the experienced doctor has a map that allows the eye of the soul to naturally and quickly classify the parts of the world it confronts through the eyes of the body. This experience of seeing principles as they are actually embedded in real world bodies is a kind of memory, a carefully crafted memory that lends itself to classification of bodies in real-time.

It is this distinction in the two aspects of the development of Chochma awareness that your anatomy fails to emphasize David. It is this understanding of the need to develop an expert classification memory that explains the division of Torah into a set of legal formulae and a literary companion reader. It is the role of the literary reader to enable the principle to be grasped as they exist embedded in real world objects recognized by the senses. It is this type of study which allows yesodos / first principles (what you call "philosophy") and a taxonomy or classification system to arise.

The first principles are to be found primarily in perek 1-2 of Brayshees, I will identify them in another post,perhaps the next one. The classification extends from seeing mitzvot in bichtav through baal peh as case studies or "Mishnayot". The final combination of principles and classification into a synthesized thought system is Talmud.


Thursday, December 25, 2008

Rambam's prescription for the golem

Rambam has an interesting term for people such as ourselves who have "awoken" to the light of Shechina. The term he uses is "golem" which refers to a raw material- ie an immature Nefesh. The immature Nefesh grasps, in principle, that there is a source to the Mada we see expressed in the Craft of Creation. He knows that there is a set of luminous Shechina principles embedded in the D'varim of Mesorah. However, the golem is able to apply this general principle only in certain ideal areas. In certain select areas of life he engages the world through a clear framework based on solid application of principles. In other areas his application is weak or distorted. Yet other areas are under the sway of habit, the golem is not yet reflective about these areas at all. This is very much like a student of craft. In the idealized dojo under highly standardized ideal environments, he recognizes the opportunity to punch or block. In the street the same karate golem will be bewildered and fall into ineffective fighting habits. So too the Doctor. In ideal textbook presentation he will recognize a disease and prescribe a cure. In the hospital he will have "eyes that see not" once again.

A Modern Orthodox Jew might have a good grasp of principles such as Torah U'mada. However, his habits of talmud torah might be highly restricting. The modern golem never asks himself how he will implement his grand ideal of Torah U'madah by listening to a Drasha before Musaf once a week.

A religious Zionist will have a clear sense of the imperitive of not relying on miracles. It is indeed a blessing to have tools such as a military. But again what of Talmud torah as the basis of Ahavaso and Yiraso?

The challenge for the Golem is to extend his basic insight to a full scale method of recognizing his environment and calculating the response to engage the world. In this he is ,once again, much like the student of any practical craft. He must be guided along a sure path of Mesorah, starting with a clear sense of two things. A) The all encompassing dependence of Creation upon the design of the divine Craftsman. B) A sense of how man's development fits in to this design as a craft of engaging the world, a service within the design of the Craftsman.

Unlike the woodcutter who serves through arbitrary action to please an authority, the golem realizes that his service is to choose to be a reflective part of a system governed by law. To progress, he must have the story of Creation formulated into a model of the world that helps him identify ohr principles applicable in the frameworks he will find himself in. This model of the world will be the foundation,yesod, of all laws because each law will gain its meaning and purpose as an instrument of properly engaging the world as illuminated by the Ohr of the Mesorah. Just as the engineer sees opportunity to build buildings via application of the model of the world of Physics to building materials, the doctor applies the model of Chemistry and biology to the human body, the golem moves toward application of the model of Creation to his immature Nefesh learning how to find its place in the world.

We are now in the position to understand the absolute priority Rambam's assigns to yesodei ha-torah on the path to Mitzvot.

וראיתי לחלק חיבור זה לארבעה עשר ספרים:

ספר ראשון. אכלול בו כל המצוות שהן עיקר דת משה רבנו, וצריך אדם לידע אותן תחילת הכול--כגון ייחוד שמו ברוך הוא, ואיסור עבודה זרה. וקראתי שם ספר זה ספר המדע.

I saw fit to divide this composition into 14 books:

The first book: I will include in this all the Mitzvot that are the essence of the Das- system of Moshe our teacher, which a person must know prior to anything such as the unity of his name and the prohibition of idolatry. I named this book: The book of The Knowledge.

In this statement Rabbenu Moshe articulates the basis for an emergence from being a mindless woodcutter projecting his personal material good as the organizing principle of Creation. In its stead lies the unity of His name, the Ohr of Mada able to be applied to every area as causal principles, if we choose to seek the names of things like our Forbear Adam the first.

Wednesday, December 24, 2008

Seeing the world in a new “light”

Last post we noted the difficulty of a boor awakening to the luminous principles of Shechina. As we said today in Hallel (tehillim 115:4-8):

Their idols are silver and gold, the work of men’s hands. They have mouths, but they speak not. They have eyes, but they see not. They have ears, but they hear not. They have noses, but they smell not. They have hands, but they feel not. They have feet, but they walk not, neither do they speak through their throat. Those who make them are like them; yes, everyone who trusts in them.
The external symbol of the idol is a reflection, an artistic projection of the internal personal space orientation of the boor. The sense that the world must be governed by my personal pleasure is the boor's very "map" of interpreting the data from his senses. It is this underlying god fantasy which is projected on the idol, that causes the boor's senses to fail him. The boor "sees" women- but not for what they truly are. He "sees" food, entertainment children friends, an entire world of resources, all orbiting around the "good" of his desired personal space. He has eyes but, since everything he sees is interpreted via the lens of his fantasy good- he sees not. How is such a Nefesh, so remote from the palace as it labors in the forest, to gain access to the eye of the soul, thereby bringing human eyes online to interpret the world through the light of Chochma?

In answering this question, let us consider our methods. It is always a difficult challenge to keep a proper balance between formulation of abstract principles luminous to the theoretical mind vs. exemplifying these in ways that are interpretable to the practical intellect. In keeping with my commitment to the wise KB, let us move more toward the side of practical interpretation. The key to transcending the god fantasy is actually the focus of the story of Adam. Having listened to his wife, choosing to interpret his world via the god fantasy, Adam is given divine therapy to aid in recognizing cheyt and teshuva.

3:17 To Adam he said,“Because you have listened to your wife’s voice, and have eaten of the tree, of which I commanded you, saying, ‘You shall not eat of it,’ cursed is the ground for your sake. In toil you will eat of it all the days of your life. 3:18 It will yield thorns and thistles to you; and you will eat the herb of the field. 3:19 By the sweat of your face will you eat bread until you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken. For you are dust, and to dust you shall return.”

In essence, since we lack the power to realize our god fantasy, enormous frustration and failure will necessarily result from its pursuit. The man who cannot accept the causal reality of his material vulnerability- who has no yiras cheyt, will constantly see thorns and thistles. The man who sees not will necessarily fall and hurt himself badly. If only he could accept his material limitations, so succinctly summarized by Hashem: For you are dust, and to dust you shall return.

It is this teshuva aided by frustration, pointed to by Mishlei chapter 1 as well, that is the basis of Mussar. The light of Chochma is personified as a voice of mesorah calling to man as he hides in the illusion of his secure artificial creation- the city. Do we really believe we can create an artificial environment that will remove us from the consequences of ignoring Causality- having no fear of cheyt?

Wisdom calls aloud in the street. She utters her voice in the public squares. She calls at the head of noisy places. At the entrance of the city gates, she utters her words: “How long, you simple ones, will you love simplicity? How long will mockers delight themselves in mockery, and fools hate knowledge? Turn at my reproof. Behold, I will pour out my spirit on you. I will make known my words to you. Because I have called, and you have refused;I have stretched out my hand, and no one has paid attention; but you have ignored all my counsel,and wanted none of my reproof; I also will laugh at your disaster. I will mock when calamity overtakes you; when calamity overtakes you like a storm, when your disaster comes on like a whirlwind; when distress and anguish come on you.Then will they call on me, but I will not answer. They will seek me diligently, but they will not find me; because they hated knowledge, and didn’t choose the fear of Hashem.

When the calamities are seen as real, when one's personal plan has been dashed yet again, there comes the final straw. One's confidence in the unexamined "plan" cracks and the quiet voice of Chochma is finally heeded.

2:23 It happened in the course of those many days, that the king of Egypt died, and the children of Israel sighed because of the bondage, and they cried, and their cry came up to God because of the bondage. 2:24 God heard their groaning, and God remembered his covenant with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob. 2:25 God saw the children of Israel, and God knew.

The moment arises when the call of Chochma, long suppressed and ignored, comes to the fore. For one whose parents and Rabbeim and forebears had some recognition of Shechina, the thought arises: perhaps the wisdom of the species is greater than my own dream. Perhaps there is something to the wisdom of the ancients; the illuminating principles of the Mesorah model of the world. This is the very first premise of Mishlei.
1:7 The fear of Hashem is the beginning of knowledge;
but the foolish despise wisdom and instruction.
1:8 My son, listen to your father’s instruction,
and don’t forsake your mother’s teaching:
1:9 for they will be a garland to grace your head,
and chains around your neck.
1:10 My son, if sinners entice you, don’t consent.
At this point the immature nefesh becomes open to letting go of personal space and a 'copernican revolution' begins. The immature nefesh begins to yearn, not for a model of Aretz that secures his god fantasy, but for one that brings his senses online. He sees the need to reinvent himself through yiras hashem, step after step starting with replacing his personal orbit with a Chochma orbit, his own artificial melacha with the melacha of Hashem. He only dimly understands what a world in Chochma orbit means, it is in some way going to be a world, as depicted by the mashal of Creation, a world whose chaos is removed by tzedek, an Ohr of law in matter. Nonetheless, a new reader of Torah is now born. From the vantage point of Chochma a new light is shed on reading which points to a new nimmus, a series of reformulations of the relationship of self to environment that is the path to Mitzva. Each of these reformulations will involve teshuva, seeing one's frustrations and failures in a new light. At the center of all of them however, one Copernican revolution towers above as the principle of all teshuva and hope: one looks to Creation and sees, at least in small ideal areas, reflections of Hashem's mighty causality that extends to our world, as indicated in Brayshees.

אֶשָּׂא עֵינַי, אֶל-הֶהָרִים-- מֵאַיִן, יָבֹא עֶזְרִי ?
עֶזְרִי, מֵעִם יְהוָה-- עֹשֵׂה, שָׁמַיִם וָאָרֶץ

Tuesday, December 23, 2008

The Path to Mitzvot V: awakening to Shechina

אֶשָּׂא עֵינַי, אֶל-הֶהָרִים-- מֵאַיִן, יָבֹא עֶזְרִי ?
עֶזְרִי, מֵעִם יְהוָה-- עֹשֵׂה, שָׁמַיִם וָאָרֶץ

I would like to summarize the gains we have made in “Shechina” as a critical step on the "awakening" needed prior to beginning the path of Mitzvot. The easiest way to do this will be to retrace the steps we made in thinking about Shechina. First of all let us define Shechina as the cause of human development into a mind as expressed by conforming to truth in thought and action. This process of coming to this definition began with Matt's question and reached its conclusion with the spectrum of development caused by Shechina , beginning with the absolutely mindless "hewer of wood" and ending with the absolutely mindful Yehoshua. What we need to note in this process are two things:

1) The need for a paradigm, an educational mesorah by means of which the light of "Shechina" is made conscious to the people so that they can research natural sciences like Physics and act wisely through the application of natural science to crafts like medicine. We see because we sit on the shoulders of giants.

2) The formulation of "Shechina" as an ideational force, organizing society in a cultural direction of actualizing mind. This social revolution begins with a fundamental transformation in mentality of the people regarding the model of the world in which they see themselves. The boor is locked in the darkness of a model of the world limited to personal tangible space. As we saw in the zoom this formulation of the world is useful only for focus on pleasures / pains one recognizes with the senses (attractive people,foods,possesions) -this model must be overcome. Because of this anti insightful world the boor is absolutely mechanistic, like a material body, acting on the basis of a physical law of attraction he is unconscious of and cannot change. In the place of the boors imprisoning dark age model there must arise a renaissance model full of light of knowledge. This model allows for "Shechina" a dynamic mindful awareness of ideas that illuminate man's place in the world and facilitates research in all areas, from natural sciences like physics and chemistry to human sciences like medicine, art and psychology.

Now to the path to Shechina.

Part 1 Matt's question about “Shechina"

The question

Rabbi Sacks,

The question I wanted to ask you is: What is shechinah? Specifically, what does the Rambam mean by the requirement of "ki'ilu omeid lifnei ha'shechinah" in hilchos tefilah?

I remember discussing this idea during the summer. I also remember it having something to do with chochmas Hashem as an organizing force in society. I also remember your analogy to the Renaissance. But that's about it. Any help would be much appreciated.

The answer

Yes Matt, Shechina is Chochmas Hashem as known by man in a way that it creates a living dynamic mesorah in thought and action. This is known generally as the idea of a "paradigm" the insight of a great man that illuminates the community. Einsteins thought created the community chochma experience of Physics. PHD students guide their intuition for research via this illuminating thought. They depend upon Einsteins thought for a sense of what "thinking" and "thought" and "lawfull universe" are.

In that sense Einstein enabled shechina, a state of relationship of mind to the world of idea, to have concrete meaning as a phenomenon and end we can organize our lives around. It is for this reason we think of Shechina resting in the camp. The "camp" is the community mind. In a dark age the wisdom of the wise is lost, therefore our connection to shechina is obscured and the value of our research wanes becoming mere scholastic pedantry. It is for this reason I compared Shechina to the renaissance, a time when scholasticism ended and a new dynamic mesorah of chochma was born.

Part 2 Matt's elaboration on “Shechina"

The term "shechinah" refers to chochmas Hashem as a dynamic, organizing force in human society. The Chochmas Hashem which governs the all of the motion and change in the universe is the same Chochmas Hashem which governs human life-motion and development.

The difference is that whereas Chochmas Hashem governs the rest of the universe mechanistically (i.e. through the systems of natural law), man's life-motion and development are governed through knowledge and bechirah to live in accordance with that knowledge (i.e. through the system of Torah law - the regimen that develops man from a potential mind into an actual mind).

Man's development from an animal to a tzelem Elokim is caused by and proceeds in accordance with his knowledge and bechirah. In order to develop, man must know what a human being is, what his developmental path consists of, what developmental tools are at his disposal, and how to implement them; then he must choose to do so. All of this knowledge is contained in the Torah, for those who know how to understand and implement it correctly.

Part 3 Comment on Matt's elaboration on “Shechina"

I would like to reiterate the two points I made in the introduction before building upon Matt's excellent elaboration.

Point #1
It is critical to note the "mesorah" dimension of Shechina. We do not relate to Chochmas Hashem directly, rather this
Chochma dwells among us via the communicated insight or "paradigm" of the Masters, in our case- Moshe Rabbenu and Rambam. We see because we sit upon the shoulders of giants.

Point #2
As in the case of the Renaissance, there is not an infinite continuum to knowledge-rather there is a distinct "beginning" to Shechina. Ayn Boor Yireh Chet refers to the fact that a "hewer of wood" is not guided by Chochma in any fundamental aspect of conducting his life and has no connection with Shechina whatsoever. Indeed this was the case in pre Renaissance Europe. Far from being organized around Chochma awareness, all thought centered around either superstition and magic or dead Scholasticism.

Rabbi Sacks gave an excellent analogy to Shechinah: the Renaissance. During the Renaissance, chochmah-awareness pervaded all of Europe and transformed all aspects of the culture. People became aware that the entire universe is governed by Chochmah. The scientific revolution of the renaissance overturned long-time assumptions about the way the world works; religious dogma was held to rational scrutiny; politics was reexamined and subjected to rigorous analysis; medicine was approached as a science, rather than a mass of superstitious remedies; even art was transformed through the application of mathematical principles. This awareness of Chochmah was not limited to the elite scholars, but extended to the common man as well. All people recognized Chochmah as an organizing force in the society, and it is this type of community-wide recognition of Chochmah as a dynamic, organizing force which Chazal refer to as "Shechinah."

The boor has not yet begun the path to Mitzvot, because he lacks the fundamental experience of seeing Chochma in any aspect of his life. The boor is locked in his personal space, he sees a world of opportunities to pleasure or pain himself. At most he can arouse himself from his preoccupation with immediate pleasure pain by the threat of death of a power real or imagined. the hewer will cut wood to buy beer or bow to his idol to gain a cure for a disease. To do Mitzvot is to choose to increase the application of Chochma to more and more areas. Lacking any experience with Chochma and therefore without Yiras Hashem the boor is stuck. Given a world of boors then, how does the path to Mitzvot begin? How does an awareness of a Chochma centered universe arise in a psyche absolute committed to an opposing model centered around ones boorish pleasures and pains? How do eyes which see not and ears that hear not get turned on? How does a nefesh screen utterly focused on a world of women, beers and football see the apple of Newton in a new light of Chochma? How does the redemption of the boor occur? These questions were already answered in my post on
Tuesday, July 31, 2007 Torah's place in Redemption and the Quest for Malchus Shamayim part 1-4.

In short, it was Makot Mitraim which shattered the boorish attachment to personal space. The people "saw" a new phenomenon- Yad Hashem- a causal force, understandable through the paradigm of Moshe, that governed the big picture of Shamayim va-aretz including their part, zooming in to the time and place of Yam Suf.

The question we need to ask is what does the path look like? What is the experience of actualizing as a mind once one is no longer a boor. What is it like to begin the process of moving through the stages of closeness to the palace, once one is awakened to the reality of Yad Hashem? This requires a theory of education, one that at least outlines the process of transformation. This is the next post.



Sunday, December 21, 2008

Path to Mitzvot IV-avodah zoom

Method: I approach the bracha as a nefesh seeking human tov consistent with Brayshees. I intend to zoom into our little frameworks in Aretz from the astronauts higher cosmic perspective of universe. In so doing I will see the enslaving tendency to view Aretz as subject to our power in that specific area that the Brachot of the morning attempt to address. I will zoom in to Earth at various speeds until I find this specific framework of “getting up in the morning” I want to explore as the particular aspect of the processes in matter that are me. As I guide my nefesh screen upon this focus land masses and oceans, mountain ranges great forests –identifying features of continents come into view. As I reflect I use the d’varim of the first perek of brayshees as my narrator.
The "bechira" challenge of default life
I immediately realize that my actual experience of Tov is contrary to that indicated by Brayshees. As I zoom in toward My Yishuv a world of resources awaiting my design and soevereignty - my melacha- to attain reality. Indeed, in my yishuv, it is our divine right to impose our chosen name upon the resources of the world to attain eternity of fame. We wake up in the morning not to seek knowledge, but to “live life”. As I zoom in closer and closer on a typical 7 AM Monday, I see a social world whose potential needs much “tikkun”.
Sensory knowledge approach
For the people I see, waking up in the morning is an ordeal whose major focus is drinking coffee and taking a shower. I see people smacking their snooze buttons, grumbling, whining , protesting the invasion of blissful sleep. In every possible way the comfort of sleep is preserved, blankets are pulled over heads to block light, night and sleep rescued from the onslought of day and work. How easily I can identify, pop into their experience and feel it myself!
In essence "waking up" is a struggle to establish focus of nefesh on whatever ones "day" of production motion, the projecting of nefesh power to change environments that the “day” is going to be about. We resist the work part of day as long as we can, but in the end the survival urge prevails over the urge for pleasure. We rush out of bed "late" yet again. The person transitions into "schedule mode" they must rush to the mission of school or work.

But is work or school a human purpose? Is it a tov consonent with “Va-yar Elokim Ki Tov'? Obviously not. As I see the hordes of newly showered and caffeinated people march, in vast lines of traffic, to work and school, I clearly note that the “day” will be seeking nothing more than kavod- hevel ends meaningful only in a human centered world that contradicts the essential message of “Va-yar Elokim Ki Tov'. I see students exhorted to study to “get ahead” to “get into college” or “to make a name for themselves”. I see workers exhorted by their leaders to focus on the task, team project or corporate vision. The workers and students have been dreading this the entire commute. They plunge into their "work day" nonetheless, cursing out the hated talking heads, teachers managers leaders, even as they somewhat buy into their vision. Why else trudge along, doing the bidding of the task masters? After all is there anything else, any mission other than the life we already live? How easy it is to pop into their experience,feel their anger and despair. They don't realize the choice that is right in front of their noses. This vision they are stuck in make sense only if I limit myself to the zoom dreamed up by talking heads like Heryshef who believe the resources of aretz can be made into an eternal testament to their name. I can choose not to see things this way, to see them instead through the lens of Brayshees. But what is the manner to do this? How do I bring back the cosmic perspective into my morning routine, liberate myself from slavishly implementing the dream of the "stars"?

אֶשָּׂא עֵינַי, אֶל-הֶהָרִים-- מֵאַיִן, יָבֹא עֶזְרִי ?
עֶזְרִי, מֵעִם יְהוָה-- עֹשֵׂה, שָׁמַיִם וָאָרֶץ


The Mitzva as a "bechira" instrument
It is from this vantage point that I approach the instruments of hashkama baboker.
סדר התפילה
1 לעולם יהא אדם ירא שמיים בסתר, ומודה על האמת, ודובר אמת בלבבו; ישכים ויאמר, ריבון כל העולמים--לא על צדקותינו אנחנו מפילים תחנונינו לפניך, כי על רחמיך הרבים. מה אנו, מה חיינו, מה חסדנו, מה צדקנו, מה מעשינו, מה נאמר לפניך, ה' אלוהינו. הלוא הגיבורים כאין לפניך, ואנשי השם כלא היו, וחכמים כבלי מדע, ונבונים כבלי השכל. כי כל מעשינו תוהו, וימי חיינו הבל לפניך; כמו שכתוב בדברי קודשך--ומותר האדם מן הבהמה אין, כי הכול הבל.
2 אבל אנחנו עמך, בני בריתך: בני אברהם--אוהבך, שנשבעת לו בהר המורייה; זרע יצחק--עקידך, שנעקד על גבי מזבחך; עדת יעקוב--בנך, בכורך, שמאהבתך שאהבת אותו ושמחתך ששמחת בו, קראת אותו ישראל וישורון.
3 לפיכך אנו חייבין להודות לך, ולשבחך ולפארך, ולרוממך וליתן הודיה ושבח לשמך. חייבין אנו לומר לפניך בכל יום, ערב ובוקר--שמע, ישראל: ה' אלוהינו, ה' אחד. אשרינו, מה טוב חלקנו, מה נעים גורלנו, מה יפה מאוד ירושתנו. אשרינו, שאנו משכימין ומעריבין ואומרין--שמע, ישראל: ה' אלוהינו, ה' אחד.
4 אתה הוא קודם שנברא העולם, ואתה הוא אחר שנברא העולם; אתה הוא בעולם הזה, ואתה הוא לעולם הבא; אתה הוא ראשון, ואתה הוא אחרון. קדש את שמך הגדול והקדוש, בעולמך; ובישועתך, תרים ותגביה קרננו. ברוך מקדש את שמו, ברבים

The answer - Avoda Zoom

The answer lies in an old post I hereby repost for this purpose. The hewer fits himself into the arbitrary service of an employer in a project he immaturely wants to ignore, so as to not have to leave the life of shiftless eating and drinking because tomorrow we die. Rather than learn to use his mind to make his own plan and order his day around it, he seeks an easy way out, doing a rote action that will guarantee minimal resources from an arbitrary authority. So too the doer of Mitzvot without focus. Such a one seeks minimal acceptance by religious authorities socially or perhaps by an arbitrary "God". But he lacks the maturity to see Mitzvot as tools of understanding the "Shechina plan" man's place in nature and the tools to develop in it. In essence we remain hewers of wood until we break free from security born of fitting into the plan of an arbitrary authority. The manager is somewhat more mindful than the garbage worker, but the fundamental braekthrough has not yet occured. The fundamental question has not been asked. Is my lifestyle reflective of the Chochma that is the source of all motion, or is it the product of some humans dream? Am I honestly breaking free from the arbitrary dreams of Pharaohs and seeking Shechina or am I getting security by fitting in? It is this question that Rambam poses. Is my Avoda linked to the source of all lawfull motion or is it more like the mindless action of the hewer of wood? Is my tefilla a "plan" that reflects an understanding of lawfull motion or an empty prattling to a magical force that does not exist? Read the next post with this question of Rambam in mind.

Hewers of wood- the definition

In the previous post, we noted that one who loses focus on Shechina while doing avoda, regardless of the specific Mitzva he is engaged in, is sorely lacking in development.

if we perform the commandments only with our limbs, we are like those who are engaged in digging in the ground, or hewing wood in the forest, without reflecting on the nature of those acts, or by whom they are commanded, or what is their object. We must not imagine that [in this way] we attain the highest perfection; on the contrary, we are then like those in reference to whom Scripture says, "you are near in their mouth, and far from their heart" (Jer. xii. 2).

Clearly, through the analogy of the "hewer of wood" Rambam seeks to ease us into understanding avoda through the Mitzva system. But who is this mysterious lowly "hewer" and what does his lack as a human being tell us about avoda
through the Mitzva system?

"Hewer of wood" - the context

In a previous post on Shechina, we noted the paragraph of the "hewer" comes in a chapter about Shechina. If we focus on the paragraph before, also in part III Chapter LI, we will see who the hewer is. The framework in which the "hewer" is presented is that of the relationship to 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.

As we noted in the post on Shechina, this notion of "place" is reflective of people's maturity in relationship to the Sovereign. The more "theoretically minded" people view the sovereign as a mind, they yearn to become instruments of the king"ministering" before the king part of the mindtrust of the kingdom. The more practically minded people view the king as an arbitrary power, as such they have no interest in changing their identities to be "ministering before the king" they are more interested in harnessing his policies to make money in their own daled amos.

The spectrum of subjects

In light of this we can identify a spectrum of subjects to the king. The spectrum corresonds to the mindfulness of the subject, apprehension of Shechina as the driving force in life and the determining factor in all decisions. One's place in the hierarchy of state corresponds to one's desire and ability as a mind to comprehend the "strategic plan" of the sovereign and serve as an instrument of execution. At the one extreme are the the subjects of the true king, Yehoshua whose entire identity is wrapped up in knowing Shechina plan through apprentecing to Moshe. Yehoshua had no interest in his "daled amos" per se. He lived to see the world through the wisdom of his master Moshe. As such Yehoshua would go anywhere to be before his master, in the palace functioning as his arms and legs in fighting Amalek or executing whatever else needed to be done. Yehoshua is a theoretical mind first and foremost and therefore seeks to function in that place and manner that maximizes his involvement with the Chochma plan for society-Shechina- as it is best known- ie through Moshe.There is no seperate "daled amos" of a Yehoshua hardly to speak of. Yehoshua sees a world with the potential to become in harmony with the strategic Shechina vision. Yitro is another example of this. In pursuit of the highest knowledge of the plan, the Daled amos of Midian had no meaning or pull whatsoever. He was of running to experience the Shechina as best known to Moshe in the desert.

At the other extreme are those who have nothing but their personal space, they have no sense of the strategic vision moving society to speak of. As opposed to seeking a relationship to the sovereign that maximizes access to the shechina vision and minimizes personal interests they are the opposite. The hewer of wood is not a mind seeeking to implement an understanding of "a plan" like Yehoshua. He has never had experience of a plan. He exists to implement purely physical tasks decided by an arbitrary master. In exchange for this simple minded relationship to the arbitrary power the hewer of wood is fed or given money to feed himself. He is the most absolute "menial worker'- strong back no mind. In opposition to Yehoshua the hewer is absolutely attached to his territory. He cannot conceive of life outside of his place, he cannot leave his Midian for anything.

So how is this hewer a good analogy to one who loses focus in Avodat Mitzvot?

Hewers of wood- the definition

In the previous post, we noted that one who loses focus on Shechina while doing avoda, regardless of the specific Mitzva he is engaged in, is sorely lacking in development.

if we perform the commandments only with our limbs, we are like those who are engaged in digging in the ground, or hewing wood in the forest, without reflecting on the nature of those acts, or by whom they are commanded, or what is their object. We must not imagine that [in this way] we attain the highest perfection; on the contrary, we are then like those in reference to whom Scripture says, "you are near in their mouth, and far from their heart" (Jer. xii. 2).

Clearly, through the analogy of the "hewer of wood" Rambam seeks to ease us into understanding avoda through the Mitzva system. But who is this mysterious lowly "hewer" and what does his lack as a human being tell us about avoda
through the Mitzva system?

"Hewer of wood" - the context

In a previous post on Shechina, we noted the paragraph of the "hewer" comes in a chapter about Shechina. If we focus on the paragraph before, also in part III Chapter LI, we will see who the hewer is. The framework in which the "hewer" is presented is that of the relationship to 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.

As we noted in the post on Shechina, this notion of "place" is reflective of people's maturity in relationship to the Sovereign. The more "theoretically minded" people view the sovereign as a mind, they yearn to become instruments of the king"ministering" before the king part of the mindtrust of the kingdom. The more practically minded people view the king as an arbitrary power, as such they have no interest in changing their identities to be "ministering before the king" they are more interested in harnessing his policies to make money in their own daled amos.

The spectrum of subjects

In light of this we can identify a spectrum of subjects to the king. The spectrum corresonds to the mindfulness of the subject, apprehension of Shechina as the driving force in life and the determining factor in all decisions. One's place in the hierarchy of state corresponds to one's desire and ability as a mind to comprehend the "strategic plan" of the sovereign and serve as an instrument of execution. At the one extreme are the the subjects of the true king, Yehoshua whose entire identity is wrapped up in knowing Shechina plan through apprentecing to Moshe. Yehoshua had no interest in his "daled amos" per se. He lived to see the world through the wisdom of his master Moshe. As such Yehoshua would go anywhere to be before his master, in the palace functioning as his arms and legs in fighting Amalek or executing whatever else needed to be done. Yehoshua is a theoretical mind first and foremost and therefore seeks to function in that place and manner that maximizes his involvement with the Chochma plan for society-Shechina- as it is best known- ie through Moshe.There is no seperate "daled amos" of a Yehoshua hardly to speak of. Yehoshua sees a world with the potential to become in harmony with the strategic Shechina vision. Yitro is another example of this. In pursuit of the highest knowledge of the plan, the Daled amos of Midian had no meaning or pull whatsoever. He was of running to experience the Shechina as best known to Moshe in the desert.

At the other extreme are those who have nothing but their personal space, they have no sense of the strategic vision moving society to speak of. As opposed to seeking a relationship to the sovereign that maximizes access to the shechina vision and minimizes personal interests they are the opposite. The hewer of wood is not a mind seeeking to implement an understanding of "a plan" like Yehoshua. He has never had experience of a plan. He exists to implement purely physical tasks decided by an arbitrary master. In exchange for this simple minded relationship to the arbitrary power the hewer of wood is fed or given money to feed himself. He is the most absolute "menial worker'- strong back no mind. In opposition to Yehoshua the hewer is absolutely attached to his territory. He cannot conceive of life outside of his place, he cannot leave his Midian for anything.

So how is this hewer a good analogy to one who loses focus in Avodat Mitzvot?

Wednesday, December 17, 2008

Experiencing Nefesh- repost

Before I answer the question on the "hewers of wood" I would like to reconsider the idea of nefesh zoom. At certain points in time, after a proper developmental period has been completed, I will repost certain pieces that I think we are ready to see with new eyes. I posted this piece on nefesh zoom in June, 2008.

By Yehuda Rapoport

The following is the result of some collaborative work I did with Rabbi Sacks on the phone. Rabbi Sacks said to me, "This should be viewed as the first step toward collating this years postings into a book. The objective is to create a book that would be able to initiate a reader into our method. This would free this web site to focus on applications resulting from independent learning as opposed to initiation into learning."

Table of Contents

A. Establishing a “Path”
B. First steps in discovering Kochos ha-Nefesh
C. The “Nefesh Screen” and Zoom-Control
D. Zoom-Control and The Cosmic and Social Environments
E. Radak-Zoom


A. Establishing a “Path”

In discussion with R. Rapoport, it became clear that underlying his questions, as well as the questions of R. Maroof, there lies a deeper desire for a training system in thought. In keeping with the analogy of Alfarabi, a training system would be similar to the art of boxing in which one trains following a well worn path of practising techniques moving stage by stage from novice to expert. Obviously, one cannot demand of a new art the same stability of path one would expect from one that has had the benefit of being tested on generations of students. Nonetheless, a fundamental breakthrough can now be achieved.


B. First steps in Rediscovering Kochos ha-Nefesh

As in every art, the key to training lies not in the rote doing of technique, but rather, as Bruce Lee puts it, in understanding technique."Understanding technique” means reflecting on how techniques enhance the nefesh’s natural ability to engage the world in attaining its ends. Enhancing the nefesh’s ability obviously presupposes a clear sense of the natural abilities – ie the kochos- by which the nefesh engages the world. Therefore the heart and soul of understanding technique lies in a metaphor or mashal of the kochos ha-nefesh from which the techniques can organically emerge.

Alfarabi speaks of an organic process in which the nefesh uses its kochos to distill universal principles or well-defined “dvarim” from descriptions that first arise in sensory experience of the particulars of our world. The techniques of logic develop this natural ability of nefesh to transition from description to definition. If you recall, the central impetus for "doing words with Radak" was my realization that contrary to Alfarabi’s depiction of kochos hanefesh, my own thought was disconnected from sensory experience. In this overly formal strategy there was no natural ability to derive principles from sensory experience. Obviously, in the absence of a first intuitive mashal of the kochos ha-nefesh, no training in technique can occur. It was here that the need to rediscover kochos ha-nefesh became apparent.
After all these years, it is now time for the next generation mashal of kochos hanefesh that can accomodate the full gamut of thought operations.


C. The “Nefesh Screen” and Zoom-Control

What I propose is a mashal of a “nefesh screen” to make the experience of kochos ha-nefesh conscious and communicable. Like a computer, the nefesh screen represents information coming from a variety of sources. What makes the computer and nefesh screen so useful is their power to manipulate representations. To experience this power of manipulating representations let us start with a tool - the zoom-control. By “zoom” I mean the control of magnification (as in a camera’s zoom lense). As many of you know this is one of the most potent Sechel tools on the nefesh screen. It is best thought of as an extension of google Earth.


D. Zoom-Control and The Cosmic and Social Environments

Picture a map of the universe, rather than just Earth, that can zoom in or out.

Zoom in galaxy by galaxy as in a planetarium show.

Zoom in noticing the wonderful, precise motion reflecting gravity in all bodies of the universe.
This "noticing" is a feeling, a sense that a universal law- Malchus shamayim - is the governing principle underlying the steady orbits of all parts of the universe. It will probably require some careful slowing down of the orbits to sense their regularity and orderliness. Yet we have seen this orderliness modeled many times in museums and planatarium shows. We react to this governing principle with an ahava feeling at the “good” in the sense of lawful order and harmony underlying the Creator’s Craft in all parts of the universe. At the intergalactic, galactic and planetary “zooms” the governing principle of Malchus shamayim is natural and easy to keep in focus.

Zoom in to the solar system and see it as an ecosystem sustaining life. Note that this ecosystem itself depends upon gravity.
If gravity did not move the Meoros hagedolim, there would not be night and day on aretz. There would be no evaporation of water and no rain. There would be no heat or growth of vegetation. No seasons. There would be no atmosphere or air without gravity. All of this causal focus is natural at all levels up to the planetary level of zoom. This causal focus corresponds to the basic account of G’s craft in creating planet Earth as the cradle of life in the “big picture” framework of the first perek of brayshees. Zoom control allows us to seek ohr as in “gravity” or “ecosystem”. This “seeking”, as mentioned, is done through feeling or internal dialogue as shown by my narration (notice the steady orbits, notice the ecosystem, notice the ecosystem’s need for gravity).

The theoretical sechel considers the images as exemplars that are useful to attaining more universal truth or Emes. Einstein and Newton, as we know, purposefully used the zoom control to create scenarios useful to the theoretical sechel’s quest to discover these universal truths of emes.

Zoom in to the level of man’s yishuv.
Once we go past the planetary level to the political-yishuv-level of zoom our causal focus of malchus shamayim begins to fade. At a certain stage of zoom we are no longer able to maintain our causal focus upon Earth as a planet, a part of the universe governed by malchus shamayim. At a certain point a new governing principle of social environment will kick in that dispels the causal focus.

Zoom in to see countries, cities and neighborhoods.
Notice skylines, city centers and institutions. These social sytstems are governed not by gravity but by visions of great men and historical cultural forces. As you pass Yankee stadium, think of Babe Ruth and the power of his bat.

Zoom past the ruins of the twin towers.
Think of the struggle beween the Christian and Islamic civilization.

Zoom past aiports and think of international travel, tourism and commerce.
As you approach your home an even more personal governing principle emerges. You see things in terms of your own personal desires. This framework is decidedly proprietary- my house, my street, my friends. As we zoom in closer we come to ourselves. We can see ourselves as if from a satellite doing things. We can also enter the most personal space of all- our own bodies and see the world through our eyes and feelings as we pursue our ends. We can also enter another person’s character and imagine their feelings and the world they see. At this point our focus shifts from seeing theoretical order as in gravity, to seeing ends or a good we personally wish to attain.

Zoom in and out until you feel the point of view where the organizing principle of animal possesion or malchus Adam ends and the organizing principle of malchus shamayim begins. Is it at the city level? The continent? The planet perhaps?


E. Radak-Zoom

If you recall, the stickman was a metaphor designed to facilitate thinking about scenarios man could be put in. The stickman could be pictured sitting, walking, loving or whatever word Radak gave. In essence, stickman was a tool limited to the zoom of personal space.
I will now show how zoom-control can be used to understand these same practical goods by rooting them in the everyday experience of giving a “speech”.

We all have experience getting ready for an important speech. We rehearse the speech beforehand. In our mind’s eye we zoom from our current actual place and transport to the hall where the speech will be. At times we take the point of view of the audience at other times we see ourselves speaking from the dais and listen carefully to ourselves. A really experienced speaker would have a whole repertoire of personalities to test his speech upon. He would “enter” their various mentalities, noting to himself how they would react. So and so would think this was illogical, so and so would feel that part is too harsh etc etc. We zoom in on people’s expressions and listen to or feel their reactions. We also zoom on ourselves. We watch ourselves listen to ourselves. We enter our own character and feel our feelings. We modify our speech to more effectively express our idea or impact the audience. This zoom ability does not end once the speech begins. We shift in and out of our bodies watching ourselves modifying our speech based on crowd reaction. In reality, this experience of zoom control is an exemplar of the kochos ha-nefesh that is experienced all the time more or less consciously.

Monday, December 8, 2008

Hewers of wood- the problem

In Shiur we dealt with the following Rambam from Chapter LI. The issue we raised was the analogy between the one who does Mitzvot by rote and "a hewer of wood" or a "digger of ditches".
if we perform the commandments only with our limbs, we are like those who are engaged in digging in the ground, or hewing wood in the forest, without reflecting on the nature of those acts, or by whom they are commanded, or what is their object. We must not imagine that [in this way] we attain the highest perfection; on the contrary, we are then like those in reference to whom Scripture says, "you are near in their mouth, and far from their heart" (Jer. xii. 2).
What is the meaning of this analogy? In what way is "a hewer of wood" or a "digger of ditches" a particularly apt analogy for one who does Mitzvot improperly?

To answer this question we must first note Rambam's sense of what Mitzvot are. It is this point that Rambam establishes before the analogy.Rambam characterizes Mitzvot, as a method of service or avoda, of a very particular sort:
We must bear in mind that all such religious acts as reading the Law, praying, and the performance of other precepts, serve exclusively as the means of causing us to occupy and fill our mind with the precepts of God, and free it from worldly business; for we are thus, as it were, in communication with God, and undisturbed by any other thing.
It seems that the Mitzvot are best thought of as extensions of the core elements of Avoda-Talmud Torah and Tefilla, the two sorts of Avoda that directly bring us into contact with Chochmas Hashem, or to be more precise Shechina. This point is made in the sefer hamitzvot regarding tefilla, which tellingly is defined as Avoda.

היא הציווי שנצטווינו לעבדו יתעלה. ונכפל הציווי הזה כמה פעמים ואמר
"ועבדתם את ה' אלקיכם" (שמות כג, כה);
ואמר "ואתו תעבדו" (דברים יג, ה);
ואמר "ואתו תעבד" (שם ו, יג);
ואמר "ולעבדו" (שם יא, יג).
ואף על פי שגם הציווי הזה הוא מן הציוויים הכללים - כמו שביארנו בכלל הרביעי - הרי יש בו ייחוד, כי הוא ציווי על התפילה.
ולשון ספרי:
"ולעבדו - זו תפלה".
ואמרו עוד: "ולעבדו - זה תלמוד".
ובמשנתו של ר' אליעזר בנו של ר' יוסי הגלילי אמרו:
"מנין לעיקר תפילה בתוך המצוות?
מהכא: את-ה' אלקיך תירא ואתו תעבד" (שם ו, יג).
ואמרו: "עבדהו בתורתו, עבדהו במקדשו"-
Clearly Avoda is first and foremost tefilla (Mikdasho) and talmud torah (Toraso). This point is also directly made by Rambam in the Moreh, in his choice of examples of Mitzvot in which a person fails to remain focused or "in communication with God ".
If we, however, pray with the motion of our lips, and our face toward the wall, but at the same time think of our business; if we read the Law with our tongue, whilst our heart is occupied with the building of our house, and we do not think of what we are reading;
Why then is a person who fails to remain focused in his Avoda compared to a "a hewer of wood" or a "digger of ditches"? What exactly is a "a hewer of wood" or a "digger of ditches"?

Feel free to ask questions about this "problem" part #1, so that we can proceed to the "answer" part #2, with greater clarity.

Thursday, December 4, 2008

Rabbi Joshua Maroof wrote:

Can you explain why the Rambam distinguishes between knowledge of emet v'sheqer on one hand, and the knowledge of "tov vera" or "mefursamot" pursued after the sin of eating the fruit? Why is inquiry into the tov and ra, conventional morality and propriety, etc., associated with involvement in pleasures?

A universal principle is applicable to a certain framework of objects. In the most general sense these objects can be divided into theoretical and practical ones. The theoretical ones are true, which is to say applicable to things per se not as instruments or human possessions (Alfarabi, principles of existing things). Practical principles are applicable only to the framework of human interaction with the environment insofar as it is in fact instrumental to man.

The mind that is free and actual, cares about principles per se as they are in the world, as in naming animals. Such a one cares about the potential to express principles per se. The mind that is preoccupied with itself focuses on the practical human environment, in a sense imprisoning itself in a limited framework. This is the world of tov vara ie which ignores principles per se only caring about understanding of the potential of things to be used by man. The immature man, the one who eats of the fruit of the tree, whether it be grape, sweet fig or wheat chooses to preoccupy itself with the fantasy of an independent framework of human instrumentality and hide from the reality that man is but a subsystem of creation. This is hiding from G.

It is this point which the story of the chet brings out. Adam obviously could have Mitzva before the chet- he had one. Having a Mitzva, however, is not the same as morality or the realm of good and evil - the "apparent truths" as Rambam calls them.

This faculty Adam possessed perfectly and completely. The right and the wrong are terms employed in the science of apparent truths (morals), not in that of necessary truths, as, e.g., it is not correct to say, in reference to the proposition "the heavens are spherical," it is "good" or to declare the assertion that "the earth is flat" to be "bad": but we say of the one it is true, of the other it is false. Similarly our language expresses the idea of true and false by the terms emet and sheker, of the morally right and the morally wrong, by tob and ra'.

It seems from Rambam that pre chet Adam was capable of a Mitzva that was a necessary truth -an Emes. What kind of Mitzva is a necessary truth, like the heavens being spherical rather than morally right ? If we look at the Mitzva that Adam , in fact , was given we see it was exactly of this sort-true rather than good. It was due to Man's essential nature that this Mitzva was given. Man, as a mind , is an entity involved in thought about eternal truths as in naming animals that are eternally reflections of genetics. Man is not an entity that occupies himself with facts useful only for an animal pleasure. It is in this sense, I think, that Chazal say the tree was a grape vine. To occupy oneself with intricate details of wine and notes etc is to lose ones essence as a mind seeking eternal truths- on that day you shall surely die. The pre chet Mitzva was then itself an eternal truth, a direct inference that limiting oneself to preoccupation with pleasurable facts is in truth eternally contradictory to man's own eternal essence as a rational animal.

Monday, December 1, 2008

Response to Carolyn and Moonlight

Dear Carolyn and Moonlight,
I think it is premature to answer your questions directly. Rather, let us clarify the principle upon which the previous post was built. This requires that we retrace our steps back to Matt's original question.
The pasuk Matt quotes from the beginning of the Mishne Torah
מְשֹׁךְ חַסְדְּךָ, לְיֹדְעֶיךָ; וְצִדְקָתְךָ, לְיִשְׁרֵי-לֵב תהילים לו,יא indeed implies two separate relationships to Hashem- Matt wishes to know what these two relationships are. However, what we should explore first is a prior question, implicit in the overall statement of our master Rabbenu Moshe. Whatever יֹדְעֶיךָ and יִשְׁרֵי-לֵב are, it is clear that the baal tehillim is engaged in a sort of tefilla. He is requesting from Hashem to bestow good upon man or more specifically: "draw חַסְדְּךָ and צִדְקָתְךָ on the respective elements of mankind". We noted this guidance to first orient oneself to Chochmas Hashem through the prism of tefilla long ago, when we first noted it as the first lesson of Ralbag in his Hakdama to the Torah.It is this tefilla orientation to Chochmas Hashem that our master, Rabbenu Moshe, is guiding us to adopt prior to talmud torah utilizing his Mishne Torah.
Rabbenu Moshe drives this lesson home in the Moreh Nevuchim, once again in part III chapter LI where he gives the mashal of the servants whose "faces" are either turned to seek the sovereign or away from the sovereign.

We must bear in mind that all such religious acts as reading the Law, praying, and the performance of other precepts, serve exclusively as the means of causing us to occupy and fill our mind with the precepts of God, and free it from worldly business; for we are thus, as it were, in communication with God, and undisturbed by any other thing. If we, however, pray with the motion of our lips, and our face toward the wall, but at the same time think of our business; if we read the Law with our tongue, whilst our heart is occupied with the building of our house, and we do not think of what we are reading; if we perform the commandments only with our limbs, we are like those who are engaged in digging in the ground, or hewing wood in the forest, without reflecting on the nature of those acts, or by whom they are commanded, or what is their object. We must not imagine that [in this way] we attain the highest perfection; on the contrary, we are then like those in reference to whom Scripture says, "you are near in their mouth, and far from their heart" (Jer. xii. 2).

I will now commence to show you the way how to educate and train yourselves in order to attain that great perfection.

The first thing you must do is this: Turn your thoughts away from everything while you read Shema‘ or during the Tefilláh, and do not content yourself with being devout when you read the first verse of Shema, or the first paragraph of the prayer. When you have successfully practised this for many years, try in reading the Law or listening to it, to have all your heart and all your thought occupied with understanding what you read or hear.

Path to Mitzvot III- Matts question


Matt asks

Dear Rabbi Sacks,
In the introductory pasuk of Sefer ha'Mada, משוך חסדך, ליודעיך; וצדקתך, לישרי לב , what is the difference between יודעיך and ישרי לב, and why are the former the recipients of חסד and the latter the recipients of צדק?

Every mind receives the light of knowledge to the degree that it "turns its face" to see it. The
ישר לב has turned his face in the sense of ordering his derech in accord with derech hashem to the degree of halacha (the first stage of Ralbag in hakdama). He sees the principle via a legal prism known to mankind -(tzedek) and therefore receives tzedaka from the Sovereign.


This sounds formal and I am not happy with it. Ask questions so we can bring this idea to life.