In order to connect the idea of צלם to Adam's naming of the animals I will translate Ralbag's introduction to the story.
Ralbag's intro to Adam's naming
The objective of this story (perek 2 of Adam'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.
We will now introduce a theme that unifies every aspect of the story until “Adam knew his wife Chava” (Breishees 4,1). 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. This influence in intellectual apprehension of the deep secrets of existence is similar to lightening or the flash of light on a revolving sword which is periodically visible and then hidden again. This similarity results from the 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...
It was also shown in De Anima that the imaginative power and the power of desire are the cause of motion in animals be it moving towards an object or away from it. This occurs when the imagination pictures a certain tangible thing, thereby arousing the power of desire moving the animal to approach the tangible thing or flee from it. Since in this way a man can be drawn into the orbit of physical pleasure which remove him from his proper course of development, it is the power of desire that is the Yetzer Hara and it is the imagination that controls it. It is therefore clear that the imagination can function in two separate frameworks- either as a means of proper development of man or as a means of removing him from this path of proper development...
It is also clear that much of human apprehension, are not human per se but rather are common, in a certain framework, to animal apprehension. This is the area of good and evil, that is to say recognition of
1)the pleasant and unpleasant which is considered “good”
2)the beneficial and the damaging
3)the proper and improper
each of which is considered to be good and evil in the opinion of some...
Now all these things, though they are products of intellectual apprehension via the use of the senses in a certain framework... do not lead to the success of the soul.
My Blog List
-
-
-
-
Long time no see13 years ago
-
הדרן עלך קנקן חדש והדרך עלן14 years ago
-
Sean O'Neil17 years ago
-
-
6 comments:
Rabbi Sacks,
Maybe you can help me with a problem I'm having. When I read a passage of the Ralbag like this, it's almost like it's written in a different language. I understand the individual words, but I feel the need for a peirush on each sentence and paragraph. In fact, if we were to read this together in our Shabbos chaburah, I imagine you would pause after every couple of sentences and say, "In other words . . ." I need those other words!
Perhaps I'm just not used to the Ralbag's style. I experience the same frustration when I read Aristotle. If I were in Aristotle's shiur, I would constantly be leaning over and asking my neighbor, "What is he talking about?" His manner of speech is far too high-falutin' to be real to me, let alone comprehensible. (When I read Socrates, on the other hand, I may not grasp what he is trying to do, but at least I can understand his words and feel like he is talking to me.)
Of course, I am ready to admit that this is just a deficiency in my own mind. I obviously can't expect every author's choice of words to correspond to my own level of intellect or style of speech. Or maybe I'm just being lazy.
That is why I am not asking you to write a commentary on this passage of the Ralbag, but that you help me to understand the cause of my inability to understand. I want to be able to read the Ralbag on my own, and I realize that I won't learn how to do that if I constantly expect you to spoon-feed his ideas to me. I'd much rather learn how to overcome the difficulties I'm having, and the first step is to understand them.
Matt
Perhaps we could strike a compromise. In class I respond to visual data of confusion. Please identify specific elements that are unintelligible. The way to become proficient in Ralbag is to enter the world as he sees it. This requires to see element after element and see it his way. If you identify the element you dont see, I can arrange the world that the element is in so you can see it.
I have actually been waiting for someone to make Matt's comment. I think this blog could be a very effective format for gainig ability. Dont hold back,identify any unintelligible element. For those who followed the discussion beween myself and RW in Matts blog will know that this can be very effective.
Rabbi Sacks,
Sounds good. Let's start with the Ralbag's description of the human mind as "being under the influence of the Active intellect that influences it to intellectual apprehension via the senses, the power of imagination and memory."
What is the Active Intellect? How exactly does it act on the human intellect? How does this view of the operation of the mind differ from the modern view, which doesn't involve the notion of an Active Intellect? What role do the senses, imagination, and memory play in intellectual apprehension? What limits do they impose on our ability to apphrehend knowledge?
Perhaps after I understand these ideas, then the analogy to the revolving sword will make sense.
Rabbi Sacks,
What is the Ralbag’s idea of “success of the soul” such that apprehension of what is considered “good and evil” would not lead to this “success”?
Can you connect the dots on how the Ralbag's comments relate to Adam's naming of the animals and Tzelem?
RW
RW
Just hang in there, as soon as I take care of the general questions about active intellect I'll connect it to naming animals and good vs evil in a separate post.
Post a Comment