Tzelem #3

We began our exploration of tzelem with a translation. The remoteness of Tzelem, as an expression of natural principle or "form" is palpable. Yehuda and Micha suggested model as a translation. Dan suggested essence Reb David suggested quality or property Hagyan suggested that which is pointed to by Yirmiyahu perek 18, and I suggested principle. Sensing the remoteness of a word signifying "natural form" I gave the explanation of "idea expressed in the world of external things" and gave background material from Einstein regarding reason incarnate in existence.

Clearly, in our time, as in Rambam's, it is not easy to isolate a meaning for the word "tzelem". It is interesting to note that Rambam explains the word tzelem, he does not himself give a single meaning to the word. The difficulty in understanding tzelem, according to Rambam, is our tendency to confuse "tzelem" (natural concept or principle) with "toar" (material character as in quality and quantitative structure).

Is this true? Do we really find in ourselves and those around us a tendency to confuse material character with underlying concept or principle? What is a world of form like? A world of material structure?

To bring out this idea of Rambam imagine the following gedanken experiment. A modern scientist has the opportunity to observe Adam harishon. Adam has just explored the animals in the garden and named them. He is preoccupied with the difference between the nefesh chaya as animal vs man.

What would the scientist think of Adam's scientific exploration? Would he think of what Adam saw in nature? What would he want to say to Adam? What would Adam say back? Which, if either of these people would be concerned with tzelem which with toar?