----------------
Heaven's agenda is on earth!
Tuesday, August 14, 2012
Monday, August 13, 2012
The Lightest Yoke
Rebbe Nachman of Breslov taught that everyone carries a yoke. While no one is exempt, a slight freedom of selection is granted. The wise select the lightest yoke of all - the yoke of reverence for the Creator's will.
Sunday, August 12, 2012
Lunar Illumination
On the fourth day of creation, the two great luminaries (sun and moon) were created. The moon complained to the Creator that it's inappropriate for two rulers to share a single crown, i.e. for the two main luminaries to be equally large and bright. The Creator then asked the moon to remedy the situation by shrinking her size and luminosity. The moon balked, feeling that it’s unfair for her to suffer just for having raised a valid issue. To pacify her, the Creator offered a few concessions: allowing her to inhabit the daytime sky, referencing her orbit to guide the Jewish calendar and having saintly people named for her. She rejected these offers. The first two, she claimed lacked exclusivity. During the day the sun will render her light irrelevant and the Jewish calendar also references the sun’s orbit. To the third offer, she silently expressed her displeasure. The Creator felt for her pain and instituted that on every new moon, a goat sacrifice be brought on His behalf in the Holy Temple as atonement for having diminished her. Once diminished, the moon's light has been reduced to mere reflection of the sun's radiance. However, in the future messianic age the moon will regain her original stature and once again function as a full luminary in her own right. ~ Adapted from Babylonian Talmud, Chullin 60b and commentaries.
The sun and moon are the sky’s romantic couple. The sun is the male and the moon is the female. In a sense, this is a story about all couples on all levels. All of creation works on the principle of “couples” - male/female polarity. This is true both for the earthly realm and for all the spiritual realms as well. In Jewish mysticism the traditional definition of male and female is giver and receiver. The entire vast span of creation works on a system of magnetism between male giving and female receiving forces. From this perspective, gender is a role and not a fixed identity - a verb and not a noun. Any entity can be female in one setting and male in another. It all depends on whether the entity at that moment is primarily receiving or giving.
However, it seems that Jewish mysticism only identifies gender by giver and receiver roles only as long as the moon remains shackled in her diminished state. Once liberated, the giving and receiving roles are exposed as mere masks cleverly layered over a higher more underlying definition of male and female. Underneath these masks, the male role is to reflect the Creator’s Infinity, while the female role is to reflect His Oneness. These higher roles were lurking beneath the surface all along - throughout history. They just operated behind the scenes.
As demonstrated logically in my earlier writings, the Creator’s Oneness and Infinity are really the same exact concept - just expressed differently. A logical description of one notion automatically ends up describing the other notion. Perfect Oneness ends up describing Perfect Infinity and Perfect Infinity ends up describing Perfect Oneness.
In short, Judaism understands Perfect Infinity as “no boundaries” and Perfect Oneness as “no parts”, i.e. total seamlessness. Since boundaries have parts and parts have boundaries, every finite entity has parts and every composite entity is finite. Conversely, a Being devoid of boundaries will be devoid of parts and a Being devoid of parts will be devoid of boundaries. Hence, the Being with no parts and the Being with no boundaries is the same Being. There can be only One such Being because the condition of having no parts and no boundaries means that the Being takes up all of reality and does not leave room for any other entity.
Admittedly, these descriptions of Perfect Infinity and Oneness go very far to explain why we can’t understand Him - as the human mind is only designed to grasp fragmentation. While pointing the way towards understanding Him, these explanations create an encounter with the limits on the human ability to mentally process what’s beyond the finite and segmented. They leave us with no true understanding about Whom the Creator actually is. At best, we end up with an understanding of Whom He isn’t.
Though Perfect Infinity and Oneness in their pristine state describe the same Being, when these states enter the relatively imperfect realms of creation they diverge, even on the highest of spiritual realms. The reason for the divergence is because the creation, marked by fragmentation and finiteness, can’t hold onto these pristine states as a seamless whole. The creation is like a broken mirror. Even while reflecting a whole image, at best, a broken mirror can only provide a piecemeal reflection. As a result of this condition, inside the created realms everything bears imperfection. All single entities exhibit parts and all vast expansive entities exhibit boundaries.
In this setting, maleness turns into a tendency towards outward expansion and femaleness into a tendency towards inward contraction. The outward male tendency is a reaching towards vastness and is the creation’s imperfect reflection of Infinity. In contrast, the female tendency is a contraction that reaches further inward and is the creation’s imperfect reflection of Oneness. Another way to spot reflections of Infinity and Oneness in the creation is via the concepts of quantity and quality. Quantity tends to be a focus on outward expansion - spreading out by adding more and more. Quality tends to be a focus on inward contraction - discovering higher value in less.
Of course nothing is totally male or female. This is already guaranteed just by the fact that in their Source, Oneness and Infinity are the same reality. Therefore, their lower reflections retain a reminder of the original Male/Female seamlessness by ensuring that every male contains some female and every female contains some male. Consequently, every male expansion will be marked by some female contraction. Without the introduction of quality that comes with a female inner contraction, the outer expansion falls apart.
Imagine a company making great expansive strides into many new markets without a commensurate strengthening of internal operations. Obviously, such a situation can’t indefinitely produce success. To avoid getting stretched too thin, the company needs to enhance the quality of its internal operations.
The flip side is also true; every female contraction contains some male expansion. For example, picture a woman seeking to enhance her inner self by expanding her family and/or her circle of close friends. Sometimes such personal life expansions lead to expansions in physical property as well to accommodate the new scale.
With a clearer understanding of male and female, we can now return to the story of the the sun and moon. Essentially, the story is about the male and female descent into giver/receiver roles, a saga which continues until the moon’s dramatic liberation allows male and female to emerge as twin reflections of Infinity/Oneness. Understanding their story properly, requires clarifying the distinction between each of their lights. The sun and moon’s light must be distinct; otherwise, this leads to several issues: (1) each would render the other redundant (2) doing the exact same job is purposeless and (3) there would be no gender differentiation, identifying one as male and the other as female?
I groped for the distinction between the lights while I wrote my landmark essay called, “Future Couple”. In that essay, I had offered several possibilities which mainly focused on identifying the unique feature of the moon’s light during the messianic era. Yet, none of my own suggestions truly satisfied my heart. So I left them on the page, as a collection of mere passing considerations. With the tides of time, arrived greater clarity and “as a cork ready to pop”, I felt an inward urge to essay my newly pent up understanding of lunar illumination and by extension all that’s feminine.
The purpose of the sun’s light is more obvious to us than the purpose of the moon’s light. The sun light’s primarily illuminates our outside world, allowing us to clearly see as we need to. However, other than offering a pale drop of light into a looming nocturnal sea of darkness, what’s the moon’s real purpose?
Unlike the sun’s light, the moon’s light primarily illuminates our inner world, our inner space. When compared to the sun, the moon barely has a presence in outer space, not so much because she’s been diminished, but, rather because her main work is within inner space by illuminating our personalities and emotions. While the sun emits physical light, the moon projects emotional light. These celestial roles simply extend from the notion that maleness reflects Infinity and femaleness reflects Oneness. As an inevitable outcome of this paradigm, the role of the sky’s male, the sun, is to illuminate the vastness of outer life, while the role of the sky’s female, the moon, is to illuminate the compacted zone of inner life.
This matches up very well with the main influence western astrology ascribes to the moon. Wherever the moon appears on a western astrological chart, she’s usually channeling a flow of emotional abundance into a certain area of life. Not surprisingly, people born during the zodiac sign of the lunar dominated crab are considered very sentimental.
The presence of a strong emotional side to the celestial crab also compatible with Jewish astrology, which ascribes the power of sight to the Hebrew month of Tammuz; the month associated with this zodiac sign. In Jewish astrology, the twelve powers associated with the zodiac signs are primarily soul powers. Given this context, it’s likely that the power of sight isn’t primarily referring to earthly sight, but, rather to “soul sight” - viewing with one’s inner self.
With both inner and outer sight being of equal importance, both lights should have an equal presence in our lives. If so, why did the moon beg for inequality? Quite possibly she was concerned that if both lights were on equal footing, they’d compete for humanity’s attention. By her reaction, it is evident that she wanted to give primacy to the richness and spirituality of inner life over the largely mundane involvements with the outer world. On the surface, her concern seems valid. Spiritual growth touches on the whole purpose of creation. Worldly endeavors should not outpace devotional activities.
It seems like the Creator agreed with her general concern. However, not with the solution she had hoped for. The Creator might of had a concern of His own that a humanity wrapped up in a rich inner life would, at best, pay only cursory attention to outer life. He wanted His world developed and such efforts require focus on outer life. Besides, humanity’s very first test took outer focus - as the snake and the tree were both entities outside of Adam and Eve. If passed, the sun and moon would have immediately reverted to equal stature. In theory, the diminishment was going to be immediately remedied.
However, this didn’t happen. The test wasn’t passed and the moon remained in her diminished state. In her reduced state her spiritual vibes radiated too softly to reach people with as much impact as the more obvious radiation of her solar counterpart. As a result, among humans inner life became passively secondary to the overriding demands of the outer world, such as earning a livelihood and raising children.
With our inner emotional signals overtaken by a sea of outer stimuli, it is often difficult to truly hear the voice of one’s heart. At times, a person has to tune into very refined inner subtlety in order to truly hear. This helps explain why settings designed to draw out deeper and more intimate emotions, often rely on a combination of decreasing unwanted outer stimuli and managing wanted outer stimuli, compatible with the emotions trying to be reached. For example, think of a delicately crafted Japanese garden or a well planned art museum. With such techniques, humans allow for a taste of the moon’s future role in the present.
In the future era, the moon will regain her full stature. Her signals will be strengthened. Consequently, focusing on inner life will be considered at least as valuable as focusing on outer life. It will be an era marked by people deeply caring for each other and placing special emphasis on the art of prayer. For many it will be their very first taste of what it means to truly care for another and to really pray. During this upcoming era, the Creator will demonstrate His Love for humanity as never before. He’ll show them special favor by sharing with them fresh divine mysteries and bringing them into the sacred emotional space of a uniquely special relationship with Him.
--------------------------------------------O-------------------------------------------
The sun and moon are the sky’s romantic couple. The sun is the male and the moon is the female. In a sense, this is a story about all couples on all levels. All of creation works on the principle of “couples” - male/female polarity. This is true both for the earthly realm and for all the spiritual realms as well. In Jewish mysticism the traditional definition of male and female is giver and receiver. The entire vast span of creation works on a system of magnetism between male giving and female receiving forces. From this perspective, gender is a role and not a fixed identity - a verb and not a noun. Any entity can be female in one setting and male in another. It all depends on whether the entity at that moment is primarily receiving or giving.
However, it seems that Jewish mysticism only identifies gender by giver and receiver roles only as long as the moon remains shackled in her diminished state. Once liberated, the giving and receiving roles are exposed as mere masks cleverly layered over a higher more underlying definition of male and female. Underneath these masks, the male role is to reflect the Creator’s Infinity, while the female role is to reflect His Oneness. These higher roles were lurking beneath the surface all along - throughout history. They just operated behind the scenes.
As demonstrated logically in my earlier writings, the Creator’s Oneness and Infinity are really the same exact concept - just expressed differently. A logical description of one notion automatically ends up describing the other notion. Perfect Oneness ends up describing Perfect Infinity and Perfect Infinity ends up describing Perfect Oneness.
In short, Judaism understands Perfect Infinity as “no boundaries” and Perfect Oneness as “no parts”, i.e. total seamlessness. Since boundaries have parts and parts have boundaries, every finite entity has parts and every composite entity is finite. Conversely, a Being devoid of boundaries will be devoid of parts and a Being devoid of parts will be devoid of boundaries. Hence, the Being with no parts and the Being with no boundaries is the same Being. There can be only One such Being because the condition of having no parts and no boundaries means that the Being takes up all of reality and does not leave room for any other entity.
Admittedly, these descriptions of Perfect Infinity and Oneness go very far to explain why we can’t understand Him - as the human mind is only designed to grasp fragmentation. While pointing the way towards understanding Him, these explanations create an encounter with the limits on the human ability to mentally process what’s beyond the finite and segmented. They leave us with no true understanding about Whom the Creator actually is. At best, we end up with an understanding of Whom He isn’t.
Though Perfect Infinity and Oneness in their pristine state describe the same Being, when these states enter the relatively imperfect realms of creation they diverge, even on the highest of spiritual realms. The reason for the divergence is because the creation, marked by fragmentation and finiteness, can’t hold onto these pristine states as a seamless whole. The creation is like a broken mirror. Even while reflecting a whole image, at best, a broken mirror can only provide a piecemeal reflection. As a result of this condition, inside the created realms everything bears imperfection. All single entities exhibit parts and all vast expansive entities exhibit boundaries.
In this setting, maleness turns into a tendency towards outward expansion and femaleness into a tendency towards inward contraction. The outward male tendency is a reaching towards vastness and is the creation’s imperfect reflection of Infinity. In contrast, the female tendency is a contraction that reaches further inward and is the creation’s imperfect reflection of Oneness. Another way to spot reflections of Infinity and Oneness in the creation is via the concepts of quantity and quality. Quantity tends to be a focus on outward expansion - spreading out by adding more and more. Quality tends to be a focus on inward contraction - discovering higher value in less.
Of course nothing is totally male or female. This is already guaranteed just by the fact that in their Source, Oneness and Infinity are the same reality. Therefore, their lower reflections retain a reminder of the original Male/Female seamlessness by ensuring that every male contains some female and every female contains some male. Consequently, every male expansion will be marked by some female contraction. Without the introduction of quality that comes with a female inner contraction, the outer expansion falls apart.
Imagine a company making great expansive strides into many new markets without a commensurate strengthening of internal operations. Obviously, such a situation can’t indefinitely produce success. To avoid getting stretched too thin, the company needs to enhance the quality of its internal operations.
The flip side is also true; every female contraction contains some male expansion. For example, picture a woman seeking to enhance her inner self by expanding her family and/or her circle of close friends. Sometimes such personal life expansions lead to expansions in physical property as well to accommodate the new scale.
With a clearer understanding of male and female, we can now return to the story of the the sun and moon. Essentially, the story is about the male and female descent into giver/receiver roles, a saga which continues until the moon’s dramatic liberation allows male and female to emerge as twin reflections of Infinity/Oneness. Understanding their story properly, requires clarifying the distinction between each of their lights. The sun and moon’s light must be distinct; otherwise, this leads to several issues: (1) each would render the other redundant (2) doing the exact same job is purposeless and (3) there would be no gender differentiation, identifying one as male and the other as female?
I groped for the distinction between the lights while I wrote my landmark essay called, “Future Couple”. In that essay, I had offered several possibilities which mainly focused on identifying the unique feature of the moon’s light during the messianic era. Yet, none of my own suggestions truly satisfied my heart. So I left them on the page, as a collection of mere passing considerations. With the tides of time, arrived greater clarity and “as a cork ready to pop”, I felt an inward urge to essay my newly pent up understanding of lunar illumination and by extension all that’s feminine.
The purpose of the sun’s light is more obvious to us than the purpose of the moon’s light. The sun light’s primarily illuminates our outside world, allowing us to clearly see as we need to. However, other than offering a pale drop of light into a looming nocturnal sea of darkness, what’s the moon’s real purpose?
Unlike the sun’s light, the moon’s light primarily illuminates our inner world, our inner space. When compared to the sun, the moon barely has a presence in outer space, not so much because she’s been diminished, but, rather because her main work is within inner space by illuminating our personalities and emotions. While the sun emits physical light, the moon projects emotional light. These celestial roles simply extend from the notion that maleness reflects Infinity and femaleness reflects Oneness. As an inevitable outcome of this paradigm, the role of the sky’s male, the sun, is to illuminate the vastness of outer life, while the role of the sky’s female, the moon, is to illuminate the compacted zone of inner life.
This matches up very well with the main influence western astrology ascribes to the moon. Wherever the moon appears on a western astrological chart, she’s usually channeling a flow of emotional abundance into a certain area of life. Not surprisingly, people born during the zodiac sign of the lunar dominated crab are considered very sentimental.
The presence of a strong emotional side to the celestial crab also compatible with Jewish astrology, which ascribes the power of sight to the Hebrew month of Tammuz; the month associated with this zodiac sign. In Jewish astrology, the twelve powers associated with the zodiac signs are primarily soul powers. Given this context, it’s likely that the power of sight isn’t primarily referring to earthly sight, but, rather to “soul sight” - viewing with one’s inner self.
With both inner and outer sight being of equal importance, both lights should have an equal presence in our lives. If so, why did the moon beg for inequality? Quite possibly she was concerned that if both lights were on equal footing, they’d compete for humanity’s attention. By her reaction, it is evident that she wanted to give primacy to the richness and spirituality of inner life over the largely mundane involvements with the outer world. On the surface, her concern seems valid. Spiritual growth touches on the whole purpose of creation. Worldly endeavors should not outpace devotional activities.
It seems like the Creator agreed with her general concern. However, not with the solution she had hoped for. The Creator might of had a concern of His own that a humanity wrapped up in a rich inner life would, at best, pay only cursory attention to outer life. He wanted His world developed and such efforts require focus on outer life. Besides, humanity’s very first test took outer focus - as the snake and the tree were both entities outside of Adam and Eve. If passed, the sun and moon would have immediately reverted to equal stature. In theory, the diminishment was going to be immediately remedied.
However, this didn’t happen. The test wasn’t passed and the moon remained in her diminished state. In her reduced state her spiritual vibes radiated too softly to reach people with as much impact as the more obvious radiation of her solar counterpart. As a result, among humans inner life became passively secondary to the overriding demands of the outer world, such as earning a livelihood and raising children.
With our inner emotional signals overtaken by a sea of outer stimuli, it is often difficult to truly hear the voice of one’s heart. At times, a person has to tune into very refined inner subtlety in order to truly hear. This helps explain why settings designed to draw out deeper and more intimate emotions, often rely on a combination of decreasing unwanted outer stimuli and managing wanted outer stimuli, compatible with the emotions trying to be reached. For example, think of a delicately crafted Japanese garden or a well planned art museum. With such techniques, humans allow for a taste of the moon’s future role in the present.
In the future era, the moon will regain her full stature. Her signals will be strengthened. Consequently, focusing on inner life will be considered at least as valuable as focusing on outer life. It will be an era marked by people deeply caring for each other and placing special emphasis on the art of prayer. For many it will be their very first taste of what it means to truly care for another and to really pray. During this upcoming era, the Creator will demonstrate His Love for humanity as never before. He’ll show them special favor by sharing with them fresh divine mysteries and bringing them into the sacred emotional space of a uniquely special relationship with Him.
--------------------------------------------O-------------------------------------------
Thursday, July 26, 2012
Wombs of Paradise
The wombs our mothers carried us in and the childhood they tried to give us, is in some sense an extension of paradise.
Thursday, July 19, 2012
A Thought:
This is what I share with people who wonder why I enjoy studying, "Just like food, every internalized thought conveys its own taste".
Sunday, July 8, 2012
Two Thoughts of Faith
The following two ideas that I had learned some 25 years
ago from Rabbi Saadia Gaon’s Philosophical work the “Book of Beliefs &
Opinions” (circa 6th or 7th Century) had
inspired my faith in moments of doubt:
A) Addressing those who question whether the world has a
Creator, Rabbi Saadia wrote that if the world created itself before it existed,
it was not yet present to create itself. On the other hand, if the world
created itself after it already came into existence, what’s the point in
creating what already exists? Since either way the world couldn't create itself, it has to have a Creator.
B) Addressing those who question the belief in a soul, Rabbi Saadia wrote that nothing can give what it can't access. One who denies the
existence of a soul is really claiming that non-consciousness gave rise to
consciousness. Since non-consciousness
can’t access consciousness, it can't make a being conscious.
Therefore, the source of consciousness has to be elsewhere, i.e. a soul.
Thursday, July 5, 2012
His Being & Ways :
The Talmud suggests imitating the Creator’s ways as a pathway to spiritual growth. This suggestion can be traced to the verse, “...you shall walk in His ways.” (Deuteronomy 28:9) The Talmud explains that what this means to us is,”Just as He’s kind, so you be kind. Just as He’s compassionate, so you too be compassionate.” (Shabbat 133b)
Mystically speaking, imitating His ways works on the cosmic principle of similarity and dissimilarity. The way we draw closer to the Creator is by becoming similar to Him. The more our behavior resemble His, the closer we become. The reason why imitation bonds us to Him has to do with what closeness and distance means in spiritual space; a different notion of space than pervades our physical realm.
What’s the spiritual notion of space? It’s based on how similar or dissimilar entities are to each other. If two items are similar they’re close. If they are dissimilar then they’re distant. Psychological distance and closeness works the same way. A friend in a distant country can feel really close, while a next door neighbor, with little in common, can feel very distant. The reason why spiritual space is experienced psychologically is because our minds are continuous with our souls - the self that participates in spiritual reality.
The closeness or distance between two entities is variable and can change over time. By becoming more similar, they draw closer and increase their alignment with each other. If similarity between them becomes extreme, they can come so close that they actually become each other - merging into a single identity. In such deep states of closeness, they can actually channel each other. This is why when two people identify closely with each other, deeply love, they might become telepathic and know what the other is thinking. In the highest expressions of soul union, it’s beyond being two people in deep communion, but, a oneness of core being. Here the couple is exposed to be a single merged identity - like two arms of the same body/soul.
Attempts to imitate the Creator work the same way, except the bond is not between two equals or near equals, like two spirits or two people. It’s a bond between the finite and the Infinite. This widens the gap to seemingly unbridgeable proportions. Surprisingly, much of the dynamics of the relationship on the human side is similar to any other relationship. Its just cosmically complicated to explain why a relationship with the Ultimate of Existence should be so “human friendly”, when the dissimilarity between them is so extreme and ought to be fundamentally unbridgeable.
As with any other relationship based on sharing similarities, imitating the Creator’s ways is a human attempt to draw closer to Him. Surprisingly, a real relationship grows as a human’s deeds more closely match the Creator’s, forming an alignment which allows access to spiritual lights normally associated with the Creator alone. Knowingly or unknowingly, the person channels these lights into the earthly realm, where they transform into life enhancing blessings - quite possibly in a wide variety of areas that touch human life. For example, by giving alms to the needy, one is imitating the Creator’s kindness. S/he not only brings immediate relief to a needy person, but, also taps into a system spiritual lights which channel further blessings into the world.
The ease of this relationship is entirely amazing! In all honesty, there should be no pathway for human deeds to be considered similar to the Creator’s. When held up against the Infinite, the finite is entirely inadequate. Expecting a finite being’s deeds to resemble what the Infinite Being does should be more outlandish than expecting fire and water to blend. In reality, no matter how good and kind-hearted a human being is, it is impossible to mirror the perfection of the Creator's deeds. If examined realistically, it becomes self evident that a true resemblance between them doesn’t even begin.
So how do humans imitate the One Who is too perfect to imitate and ultimately, impossible to imitate?
The only possible answer can be because the Creator plays along. He carries out all the dynamics necessary to make the relationship work. He doesn’t meet His partner halfway. He meets His partner all the way. It’s on this basis that the sages accepted imitation as a legitimate path for spiritual growth - even on the very tiny scale attainable by humans.
Adapted for a contemporary audience, the following is an old Jewish parable designed to explain how the Creator meets the person all the way:
A little boy shuffles himself along in a motorless toy car, imagining that he’s behaving just like his daddy. “Weeeeeee … I’m driving like daddy!”, He exclaims.
His daddy gets really excited that his boy wants to be just like him. So what does daddy do?
He gets behind the car and while running at top speed, pushes it with all his might, allowing his boy to imagine that his efforts are really paying off. He’s now a real driver!
What did the boy do? He only tried to imitate his daddy in his own playful way. However, daddy was deeply touched by his son's sentiment. So he took over and turned his son's yearning into something closer to real. Now both are excited!
Our imitation of His ways are like the child in the toy car. Our efforts only do something because they excite our Divine Daddy to give a running push!
Granted this magic happens when we imitate His ways. However, can this same magic also happen when we attempt to imitate His Being? Can imitating His Being also become a legitimate path to attain closeness to Him? Is it even reasonable to expect as possible, given the Whom He is and whom we are?
Here are several considerations:
(A) The Bible and Talmud's absence of direct comment about attaching oneself to Him by imitating His Being, is not an automatic indication that the path is not available. It’s just silence, not necessarily anything more.
(B) Since behavior is secondary to being, what one does is secondary to whom one is. So if imitating His ways brings closeness to Him then certainly imitating His Being should do so even more. If what's secondary to Him elicits closeness, then certainly what's primary to Him should. And if He can play along with the dynamic of one, He can play along with the other - for ultimately, regardless of spiritual dynamics, He decides what brings one close to Him.
(C) Deeper yet, in His Oneness - all is seamlessly present. Therefore, there's no separation in Him between deeds and Being. They’re a single continuum. The noun (Being) and verb (actions) are One. Therefore, both modes of imitation should bring us into contact with Him.
How do we imitate His Being?
To begin formulating “how”, we first need to examine what can be humanly known about His Being. Otherwise, our efforts can end up misguided. There’s no way to describe the Creator. Just as it's impossible for a human hand to grasp a thought, it's impossible for the human mind to grasp the Creator. The hand is simply not a tool for grasping thought. So too, the mind is simply not a tool for grasping the Creator. In this spirit, a Medieval Jewish poet mused, "If I knew Him, I'd be Him. If I’d be Him, I’d cease being me."
We can only know of Him based on what He has shared about Himself. Besides His own Beingness, He shared through prophets and sages that He's One and Infinite. Surprisingly, both concepts shed almost no light on Him, but, do wonders to shed a lot of light on the fundamentals of why we can’t grasp Him.
Oneness means that He's absolutely seamless. His Being contains no parts or pieces - exhibiting a complete absence of multiplicity. Since we ourselves are the fruits of fragmentation, our minds are designed to segment. So every entity we think of as “one” can be further segmented. Its a condition we can’t escape. By contrast, His Being is totally indivisible. In fancy English His perfect state of Oneness is called a “non-composite Oneness”. Which makes Him the only entity in all reality that’s honestly One or as the sages write “perfectly One”. Every other entity called “one” is merely borrowing the term “one” to ease communication.
Just like His Oneness is most perfect, so too is His Infinity. Infinity means possessing no beginning, middle or end - truly Unlimited!
Both His Oneness and Infinity ultimately end up meaning the same thing. Which isn't surprising given that His Oneness is non-composite. The complete absence of parts or pieces, means there’s nothing to introduce borders; hence, no beginnings, middles and ends.
Also, there's no room to say that there are two separate realities going on inside Him, like Infinity being one reality and Oneness another. Such a notion would violate the overall seamlessness of non-composite Oneness. So as with everything about Him, both Infinity and Oneness has to be seamlessly One and the same reality - Infinity has to be Oneness and Oneness has to be Infinity.
As can be seen, the human mind cannot truly wrap itself around either the concept of Oneness or Infinity. At best, it can describe what they’re not: (a) no pieces or parts and (b) no beginnings, middles and ends. These descriptions don’t build an exact matching image in our minds. They only boggle our minds with the knowledge of why such images can’t even begin to take hold. If we try imagining perfect Oneness, our contrived mental image will be exposed as composite. If we try imaging absolute Infinity, our expansive mental image won’t escape somehow having a beginning, middle and end.
So what's the "toy car" people bring out to try to mirror His Being, whether as Oneness or as Infinity? His Oneness can be imitated by people gathering into a state of unity with each other. Obviously, humans sharing connection with each other, is not at all a true mirror of the Creator's Oneness. The Creator's Oneness is not physical and as mentioned above is free from any parts or pieces, i.e. non-composite. When we unify, we have no choice but to end up a unity of parts.
Yet, human unification very slightly tilts in the direction of Oneness. As mentioned earlier any imitation of the Creator is by definition highly imperfect. Still, even a tiny human tilt towards Oneness, works to affect the needed imitation.
If His Oneness can be tilted towards by people unifying then His Infinity can be tilted towards by having a large group, for Infinity is about largess. The more the group expands, the more it tends in the direction of Infinity. Again, this is only like the "toy car". However, the Divine Daddy gives a running push and atmosphere around and within the group is flavored with a taste of Divine Vastness and Oneness.
During this season known as the three weeks between the Jewish fast days of the 17th of Tammuz and the 9th of Av, we're reminded of how we're waiting for people to make the choice to unify and openly care for each other in a vast group, with oneness/largess below mirroring Oneness/Infinity above. While this season provides a nice impetus, the message is fully applicable all year long.
////////////////-------------////////
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)