צלם #6 Experiencing objective detachment (hitbodedut)

Now that we have explored the notion of Active intellect as an ideational force in theory, we can proceed toward the experience of active intellect in the story of Adam naming the animals. In the words of Ralbag:

The objective of this story (Adam and Chava's naming) is to educate us in the instruments God gave to Adam to bring about his success as a intellectual psyche (nefesh), this being the success that is the basis of eternal life.

It seems the instruments are the means of focusing intuition on gaining wisdom-apprehension of Chochmas Hashem. This intuition seems similar to a “light bulb” going off in ones head or to lightening or the flash of light on a revolving sword which is periodically visible and then hidden again.

Many have spoke of intuition in these terms, yet there seems to be something more to it. Success in intuition demands objective detachment which seems to be a dramatic accomplishment. There is

immense difficulty in attaining objective detachment (hitbodedut) from the subjective character of the other psychic powers that the intellect needs for its proper function. We have already explained, in the first part of Milchamot Hashem, that this success occurs when man gains intellectual apprehension of the system of real things their order and consistency to the extent of his ability and that it is in this manner that his mind can gain eternal life. The major area in which the secrets of existence will become known is our immediate environment- of course insofar as it is a reflection of the universal order. The remote parts of the universe as well as what is prior to them (angels) will be apprehended more feebly...

What is this “objective detachment” that Ralbag speaks of? Why is attaining it so difficult? Where do we see this difficulty in our own lives?

The answer to these questions forms the basis of the story of Adam naming the animals. The key lies in appreciating the process we undergo in attaining our insights. As was the case with Newton, we begin with a sensory experience of the particulars of this world. Without paying attention we naturally “process” this raw data, seeking a universal knowledge. What we dont necessarily realize is that we use certain “tools” in this process. As mentioned in “De Anima”, the human mind begins its development bereft of any ideas, it being under the influence of the Active intellect that influences it to intellectual apprehension via the senses, the power of imagination and memory. We have sensory tools that input data, we have an imagination that determines which aspects of sensory data we will focus on and the ability to remember what we have sensed. Take the apple of Newton. No doubt there was an experience of seeing an apple that was inputted by the senses. At this point though, focus and context became key. What did Newton focus on? The food properties of the apple framed in the context of eating? The missile properties framed in terms of teasing? Or the property of mass framed in terms of body?

In a sense each of these framings could have been seen in the same apple. Which of these would be chosen would lead to radically different results. Focus on the food properties could lead to a calculation of whether the person should eat the apple. These could be based on hunger or perhaps law. Who owns this apple. Is it lawful to eat it? So too in terms of missile. Do I have the legal right to tease my friend?
Each of these occurs in a specific mentality, a ego perspective limited to myself and my specific environment. It is a subjective framework organized around me. Newton took a dramatically different focus, seeing the apple in a totally different context. His framework did not revolve around the practical issue of his own material good, or any persons material good. He saw the apple in a theoretical framework. This framework is an objective one, detached from the subjective ego framework of food and missile. It is very difficult to maintain precisely because it is in our nature to see things as they relate to ourselves, as instruments of man we are subjectively involved with like food and missiles, not as objective realities like bodies that are related by attraction without direct reference to ourselves. We can well imagine the choice of focus that this involves for all of us. This choice is the basis of Adam and the naming- to be seen in the next posting if all goes well with this one.