Search This Blog

Sunday, February 14, 2010

Why Learn Gemara - Part VII - Unity, Multiplicity, Unity

It seems that the major objection people have to learning Gemara is that it is simply too confusing. Remarkably, our Sages were aware that the Talmud Bavli in particular is quite confusing – calling it “darkness” – and suggested that one’s love of Hashem is measured by one’s willingness to go through this darkness (Tanchuma, Noach #3). What benefit is there to seeing the “great light” through such bitter darkness?

R. Hutner (Pachad Yitzchak, Channukah #3) presents us with a further quandary: “Sometimes the nullification of Torah is its very subsistence (Menachot 99b), as it says: “’[the tablets] which you broke’ – Congratulations that you broke them!” The breaking of the tablets was an act of upholding the Torah through nullifying it. Yet, our Sages have said: “If it were not for the breaking of the tablets the Torah would have never been forgotten from Israel (Eruvin 54a).”Thus, we see that through the breaking of the tablets there was an outcome of forgetting the Torah.” We learn from here a wondrous insight: It is possible for the Torah to grow through forgetting the Torah to the extent that one can receive a “congratulations [from Hashem]” because of this forgetting! Go out and see what the Sages said: “Three hundred halakhot were forgotten during the mourning over Moshe and Otniel ben Kenaz returned them through intellectual analysis [pilpul]” –and these words of Torah of intellectual analysis which returned the halakhot are Torah itself which grew only through forgetting the Torah! Furthermore, the entire enterprise of disagreement in halakha is only an outcome of the Torah being forgotten. Nevertheless, the Sages said that “these make pure and these make impure, these disqualify and these permit, these allow and these obligate…These and these are the words of the Living G-d.” Thus, all of the differences of opinion and changing of stances which build the Torah and glorify it are an outcome of forgetting the Torah.

According to R. Hutner we see the light through the darkness; the Torah is built through forgetting! In order to understand this he points us in the direction of that beautiful and mysterious teaching of Sages: “Elu v’Elu Divrei Elokim Chayyim – These and These are the Words of the Living G-d.”

R. Meir ibn Gabaai (Avodat ha’Kodesh,Takhlit ch. 23), in explaining the principle of "Elu v'Elu writes: "At Sinai, all faces of the halakha emanated from God. On each level there was both a positive and a negative face which was presented. At that time, each prophet affixed on the view which was consistent with his spiritual level."

This is hinting to a geometric model of Torah. In our three-dimensional world we understand that one object can have many faces – a cube has six faces, the dodecahedron has twelve faces, and the icosahedron has twenty faces . But what kind of object has forty-nine faces (or forty-nine times two), or seventy faces, or six-hundred-thousand faces (Vilna Gaon, Shir ha'Shirim 5:10)! For this we must reach up to the fourth (or even higher) dimension where one object can have many, many faces. For example, a cube in the fifth dimension has eighty faces. Below is an example of five-dimensional cube.



R. Meir ibn Gabbai continues: "This is reiterated in the Midrash of R. Shimon b. Yochai. There it is stated that everything came from unity and will again return to unity. In the interim we are obligated to understand all of the different views of the Torah. Yet, because we do not have the knowledge of the 50th level which shows why and how two disparate views can be held simultaneously, we rule in accordance with one view, which becomes the halakha. The reason that we must learn all of the views is because our task is to create in the physical world the unity which exists on the 50th level and this can come about only when the totality of views is understood.”(Translated by R. Nachman Cohen, Mirrors in Eternity, pg. 442)

We can, therefore, understand why the Bavli is so confusing and why forgetting Torah has a positive aspect to it as well - it allows us to reveal the many, many faces of Torah that would have otherwise never been seen! In other words, the light of Torah has always existed in potential. Moshe saw in a vision how this light would be actualized (Megilah 19b; Tosfot Yom Tov, Hakdama l'Mishna; R. Shlomo Elyashiv, Ha'Deah, II, pg. 86a), yet it is the mission of the Jewish people to reveal this great light in its full grandeur. This process can be compared to how one might study a great piece of art. At first a person sees a masterpiece and is full of inspiration. Then, in hope of deepening one's understanding of the piece they study art history and theory for many years. During this time they lose that inspiration; however, the wise man has eyes in his head. In the end, he will return to that masterpiece and see it in a completely and utterly different way (heard in the name of R. Lichtenstein).

This approach lends new meaning to the ideal of "Torah Lishma." R. Kook, in Orot ha'Torah (2:1), writes: "The idea of "Torah lishma" means for the sake of Torah, that the existence of wisdom, the will of Hashem, should be [revealed] in actuality...All that a person learns in Torah brings from potential to actual the existence of wisdom from the aspect of his soul. Certainly, the light which is created through his connection to Torah will not be the same as the light created from another person's connection. Therefore, he literally builds the Torah while he learns..."

Tuesday, February 9, 2010

Models of Torah - Part VI.5

(In addition to last post, see Pri Eitz Chayim, Sha'ar Hanhagat ha'Limud 4:2 [quoted by Bezalel Naor, A Kabbalist's Diary, pg.233])

Saturday, February 6, 2010

Models of Torah - Part VI - Torah as Worlds, Galaxies and Universes

Some of this post is speculative so please feel free to argue or add to it...


As we approach the Messianic era[i] scientists and philosophers not only discuss worlds and galaxies, but universes and dimensions as well. Some hypothesize that our universe[ii] is but one of the infinite yet interconnected universes that make up a multiverse or omniverse; reality consists of higher and lower planes (and branes!) and multiple dimensions.[iii]

Kabbalistic literature, albeit in a different sense, has described four general universes through which the Divine light is filtered.[iv] These are defined as different dimensions of reality with their own unique properties of space, time, and being.[v] Asiah, the Universe of Action, is the universe with which we are immediately familiar physically and spiritually. Yetzira, the Universe of Formation, is the plane of feeling and song - of angels. B'riah, the universe of Creation, is the dimension of thought and mind.[vi] Atzilut, the world of Emanation, is the world of the Divine, without any concealment.[vii]

These four universes correspond to the four levels of the Torah, PaRDeS (p'shat, remez, d'rash, sod).[viii] Each dimension of Torah is its own universe with its own laws:

P'shat corresponds to Asia in that it's method of interpretation must conform to the logical categories of Asia. The logic of Asia dictates that an interpretation of a text is constrained by literary and cultural context, [ix] principles of human psychology and the laws of time and space.[x] This method of interpretation occurs in a Nefesh-state-of consciousness,[xi] and can be compared to a realistic painting.

Remez corresponds to Yetzira, the universe of emotions and song, since Remez views the text as musical notes,[xii] as symbols intuiting something much greater. There is no connection between the symbol and that which it symbolizes.[xiii] This method of interpretation occurs in a Ruach-state-of-consciousness, and can be compared to an Impressionistic painting.

D'rash corresponds to B’riah[xiv] as it is rule-based interpretation, flowing from the associations of the intellect, but which nevertheless does not conform to the constraints of the linear thinking of P'shat.[xv] Furthermore, it uncovers the “sub-conscious” of the text. This method of interpretation occurs in a Neshama-state-of-consciousness, and can be compared to a Cubist painting.

Sod corresponds to Atzilut as it discusses that universe - interpreting the Torah and the events and laws recorded therein from the perspective of the highest spiritual reality.[xvi] This method of interpretation occurs in a Chaya-state-of-consciousness, and can be compared to an Abstract painting.

Each of these universes contains mansions, or self-contained worlds and galaxies. The Torah, too, is not only composed of Universes, but it also contains infinite worlds and galaxies within each Universe. As R. Hutner writes[xvii]: “Since Hashem looked into the Torah and created the world, therefore, all the seventy[xviii] ways of understanding the Torah have a corresponding seventy worlds parallel to them. Hence, every understanding of Torah reveals a corresponding world that is attuned to that understanding of Torah. Therefore, what one learns in Torah through p’shat confers a happening of p’shat in the world of p’shat[xix]...this is the foundation regarding all the ways in which Torah is learned."[xx] However, as much a each interpretation is its own world, sometimes interpretations are variations on the same theme and thus form a galaxy, an orbit of worlds around a sun.

Indeed, Reality is a multiverse yet it is a unity. "What is below is above." So too the Torah - each level is a higher abstraction of the previous,[xxi] and each level informs the other.[xxii]









[i] See the Lubavitcher Rebbe and Rabbis Yitzchak Ginsburgh, Moshe Shatz, Joel david Bakst, and Herman Branover
[ii] http://www.etymonline.com/
1589, "the whole world, cosmos," from O.Fr. univers (12c.), from L. universum "the universe," noun use of neut. of adj. universus "all together," lit. "turned into one," from unus "one" (see one) + versus, pp. of vertere "to turn" (see versus). Properly a loan-translation of Gk. to holon "the universe," noun use of neut. of adj. holos "whole"
[iii] For example, see Clifford Pickover, Michio Kaku, Fred Wolf, Bernard Carr, and Alex Vilinkin
[iv] Nefesh ha’Chaim, 1:12
[v] R. Steinsaltz, A Thirteen Peddled Rose, pg. 3, based on Sefer Yetzira.
[vi] Souls (and Seraphs) are from B’riah
[vii] See Siddur ha’Mekubalim on how the four universes are reflected in the Siddur. In short, Birchot ha’Shachar are in Asiah, Pesukei d’Zimra are in Yetzira, Shema is in B’riah, and Shmoneh Esrei is in Atzilut.
[viii] Ohr Gedaelyahu, Breisheit 5b quoting the Sefas Emes (Thanks to R. Yaakov Shlomo Weinberg for this source). This applies to all works written b’Ruach ha’Kodesh. R. Yaakov Elman (Modern Scholarship in the Study of Torah, pgs. 242-250) quotes many sources that maintain the view that a work written with Divine inspiration contains multiple levels of meaning (Pardes, Shivim Panim etc.), especially R. Yonasan Eibescheutz (Urim veTumim, kitzur tekafo kohen, nn.123-124), R. Tzadok ha'Kohen (Machesevet Charutz 6a-b), and R Yisrael Dov Ber of Zledniki (Shereit Yisrael 6c).. See Avakesh for a discussion of this.
[ix] One aspect of this is the original intent of the author. Although this is debatable according to Post-Modernists, a) I think it is the common-sense approach, b) interpretations not like the original intent of the text have their place in other methods of interpretation (such as Remez).
[x] However, the events described in the Torah sometimes only occurred in a higher world. R. Dessler (Michtav M'Eliyahu 1: pg 308, based on Maharal, Gevurot Hashem, Second Introduction; see R. Micha Berger here and here) gives examples of miraculous events in the Torah which only occurred in a higher world: a) Yaakov’s “Kefitzat ha’Derech; b) The sun standing still; c) the sea splitting.Also see Ramchal and Leshem on Ma’aseh B’reisheit which is discussed here.
With this said, if one's view of reality is flat then even their p’shat reading of Tanakh will make little or no sense. They will try to force the miraculous into the three dimensions that their senses perceive and bizarre interpretations follow.

[xi] Da’at Hashem, pgs. 349-374 discusses partially that Pardes also corresponds to Naran Ch”y (the five levels of the soul). See Eitz Chayim, Sha’ar Hanhagot ha’Limud, Chapter 1. However, see Sha’ar ha’Gilgulim, Hakdama 18.
[xii] I heard in the name of Shlomo Katz that ReMeZ is ZeMeR backwards. As pointed out above, Pesukei d’Zimra is in Yetzira.
[xiii] R. Hirsch on the beginning of Mishpatim gives the famous analogy of a student’s notes to a lecture regarding d’rash. Also see R. Kook, Kadama l’Eyn Aya for a discussion of Remez.
[xiv] R. Hutner (quoted below) and R. Dessler (Michtav M'Eliyahu 1: pg 308) use this to explain Ta’anit 5b which states “Yaakov did not die” – this is only true in the world of Derash/B’riah.
[xv] Maharal, Be’er ha’Golah, Be’er Shlishi, compares the Torah to a tree. P’shat is the root but d’rash reveals the many-sides of the tree. He relates this to his conception of “Elu v’Elu.” See here and here on Cubism.
[xvi] This level of reality is not written in the Torah except in code. The Maharal, Gevurot Hashem, Chapter 17, explains that this is why the Torah does not explicitly recount how the maidens of Pharoah’s daughter died – they only died a spiritual death. This also explains why olam ha’bah, which occurs in the higher planes, is not mentioned in the Torah explicitly but it is mentioned in Remez, Derash, and Sod.
[xvii] Pachad Yitzchak, Pesach, Ma’amar 52:3. Thanks to R. Yaakov Shlomo Weinberg for the translation.
[xviii] The Vilna Gaon writes that there are forty-nine approaches to the written Torah and seventy approaches to the Oral Torah (Shir haShirim 2:4) and that within the seventy approaches there are six-hundred thousand more approaches (Shir haShirim 5:10).
[xix] R. Hutner calls this world a “world of p’shat” while I’m connecting it to “Asiah.”
[xx] R. Tzadok takes it further - an innovation within one creates an innovation in the other. See the lectures of R. Yaacov Haber for how this played out in Jewish intellectual history. One might wonder if an innovation in Remez only cause an innovation in Yetzira, or does this innovation have a parallel in all of the universes.
[xxi] See Shiurei Da’at, Dor Haflaga for an example of this.
[xxii] Vilna Gaon, Mishlei 5:18, and R. Menachem Mendel of Shklov’s note on Mishlei 2:9

Monday, February 1, 2010

Why Learn Gemara -Part VI: Torah as a Revelation of the Divine Presence

כְּתָב-לְךָ אֶת-הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵלֶּה: כִּי עַל-פִּי הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵלֶּה, כָּרַתִּי אִתְּךָ בְּרִית--וְאֶת-יִשְׂרָאֵל

The spirituality hovering above and buried within the Torah has been called many names: Light,[i] Divine flow,[ii] Transcendence,[iii] or most commonly, the Shechinah (Divine presence).[iv]

The entire Torah is but one Name of Hashem, one manifestation of the Divine.[v] The Holy One has a dwelling place within the infinitude[vi] of the four amot of halaka,[vii] and when one sits and learns the Shechinah is with him,[viii] kissing his words…[ix]

"The study of Torah has a great cathartic impact upon me. It is rooted inthe wondrous experience I always have when I open up a gemara. Somehow,when I open a gemara, either alone or when I am in company, when I teachothers, I have the impression -- don't call it hallucination -- I have theimpression that I hear soft footsteps of somebody, invisible, who comes inand sits down with me, sometimes looking over my shoulder. The idea is not a mystical idea -- the mishna in avos, the gemara in Brachos says yachid sheyoshev v'osek batorah, shechina shruya. We all believe thatthe nosein hatorah, the One who gave us the Torah, has never deserted theTorah. And He simply accompanies the Torah; wherever the Torah has a rendezvous, an appointment, a date with somebody, He is there.

"It is a total, all-encompassing and all-embracing involvement -- mind and heart, will and feeling, the center of the human personality -- emotional man, logical man, volunteristic man -- all of them are involved in the study ofTorah. Talmud torah is basically for me an ecstatic experience, in which one meets G-d. And again I want to say that whatever I told you now is not just mysticism or, due to my mystical inclinations; it isn't so. The gemara says so -- chazal have equated talmud torah with revelation, and the great event, the drama of Jewish [living] is reenacted, and restaged,and relived, every time a Jew opens up a gemara. (Rav Yoseph Ber Soloveitchik; Also see Family Redeemed, Torah and Shechina; See here for an interesting discussion of this passage)

****
In this context the Ran[x] explains the dual purpose of halakha. Indeed one aspect of the halakha, let us call it Mishpat ha’Ivri, is to maintain an organized and well-functioning society. Generally halakha accomplishes this task but there are times when a king or the court itself must override the norm in order to uphold order.[xi] However, the higher-order function of halakha, even the civil laws, is to facilitate the manifestation of the Shefa ha’Eloki, the Shechinah.


This point taken together with another axiom of the halakhic system leads to radical conclusions. The Ran[xii] maintains that we are emphasizes many times that we are obligated to follow the rulings of the Sages even if we think it is wrong and even if it is objectively – from G-d’s perspective – wrong. “” In other words, the Jewish Sages determine how the Shechinah will manifest in this world![xiii]

****

With this principle we can understand a famous statement of the Sages.[xiv] “Why was the Beit ha’Mikdash destroyed? Because they did not say Birkat ha’Torah before learning (B”M 85b).” How are we to understand this enigmatic statement?

The Midrash Rabbah[xv] reveals to us the true purpose of the Beit ha’Mikdash. It gives an analogy of king who gives his daughter away in marriage but finds in difficult to part with her. He tells his son-in-law to build a small room in their home so that he can come and visit. So too Hashem has difficulty in parting with the Torah[xvi] so he gives it to us and tells us to build a small room where he can visit. In other words, the entire purpose of the Beit ha’Mikdash was to provide a dwelling place for the Shechinah so that she may be near those who learn Torah.

The Midrash implies that Hashem gave the Torah to Israel just like a father gives away his daughter; control is relinquished and given to a new entity. Thus, this Midrash hints to the great radical teaching of Judaism – Israel controls how the Divine teaching and presence is manifested in this world. However, since Hashem loves His Torah and wants to be “near” it we are commanded to build a small dwelling place for Him.

Therefore, when we stopped learning, and especially in a way that shows our control over Torah – through innovating new interpretations[xvii] - then there was no reason for the Beit ha’Mikdash to stand (and, as Israel transgressed the three cardinal sins, there were plenty of reasons for it not to stand!).

Now we return to Birkat ha’Torah. The Tz’lach (end of Brachot) writes that Birkat ha’Torah transforms Torat Hashem to Torato (Tehillim 1). In other words, every morning we reassert our great gift and privilege - our control over the Torah. And when we control the Torah Hashem desires to be reconnected with it. “Why was the Beit ha’Mikdash destroyed? Because they did not say Birkat ha’Torah before learning.”
------------------
[i] “The Rabbis said (Chagiga 12a): ‘By the light which G-d created the first day, Man could see from one end of the world to the other.’ Rejoined the Ba’al Shem Tov: ‘And where did He hide that light? In the Torah!” (Zemach Zedeq, quoted in Siddur Maharid, translated by Bezalel Naor in “Lights of Prophecy”)
[ii]Rabbeinu Nissin Gaon, Derashot ha’Ran, Drush #11
[iii] One rendering of the word Kedusha. For sources in Chazal, see Eliyahu Zuta Parsha 10; Mishnat R. Eliezer Parsha 13; Otzar ha’Midrashim, pg. 79.
[iv] Are all of these descriptions of the same thing? Is “light” equivalent to “Shechina”? I would argue that “light” means consciousness. For example, see Zohar 1:30b-21a; Yedid Nefesh 1:2; Maharsha on Chagiga 12a (sources quoted in Sarah Yehudit Shneider, You Are What You Hate, pg. 310).Therefore, every little step towards knowledge is a step towards truth…Hashem Elokeichem Emet.

[v] The obligation to recite Birkat ha’Torah stems from the verse “When I call out in the name of Hashem, they will ascribe greatness to G-d.” R. Yosef Gikatilla in Sha’arei Orah explains that indeed the entire Torah are names of G-d, but they are all united in the root of Shem Hashem. Also see R. Kook, Orot ha’Torah .
[vi] Shiurei Da’at, vol. 1, Darkah shel Torah.
[vii] Brachot 8a
[viii] Avos 3:6;Chelek Gimmel 118a
[ix] Nefesh ha’Chaim, Sha’ar Dalet, Chapter 12 (based on Hakdamat ha’Zohar)
[x] Derashot ha’Ran, Dursh #11. Also see Rambam, Moreh Nevukhim 3:27 and R. Bachya, Hakdama l’Torah. Also see Ramchal, Hakdama l’Messilat Yesharim.
[xi] See Sanhedrin 46a and Yevamot 90b. Aish quotes the Shelah ha’Kadosh (Shnei Luchot HaBrit, Shoftim 101a) “Justice, justice shall you pursue. It says "Justice" twice. The first is directed to the judges who judge in accordance with Torah law. There is a second "justice" for compromise or emergency decrees, which are done occasionally by a prophet or king, in order for the world to exist. Therefore, the verse concludes that you may live, and inherit the land which the Lord your God gives you. As the Sages said "Jerusalem was destroyed only because they gave judgments therein in accordance with Biblical law."
[xii] Drush # 3 and 7, based on B”M 59b and 86a
[xiii] The Ran himself may not agree to this formulation since he maintains that even though all opinions were given to Moshe at Sinai there is still an objective “heavenly Shulkhan Arukh.” Therefore he is bothered by the possibility that the Sages sometimes ruled mistakenly and it could be dangerous to one’s spiritual health. In my formulation this wouldn’t be a question – everything that the Sages decided determine what is spiritually healthy. See Sh”ut Chavot Yair.
[xiv] The following is based on R. Asher Weiss, Michat Asher, Hakdama l’Bava Batra.
[xv] Terumah 33:1; Also see Ramban, beginning of Terumah. This gives new meaning to Avos 3:6;Chelek Gimmel 118a
[xvi] This refers to “Torah ha’Keduma” which is found in many statements of the Sages (and later Kabbalists)
[xvii] Zohar, Balak