The Light of the “Three Weeks”

During the summer, there are three weeks when the Jewish world traditionally goes into mourning. Though many harsh events have occurred during this time throughout Jewish history, the period is primarily bracketed by two tragedies. The first is the Roman breach of the walls of Jerusalem 70CE, which happened on the Hebrew date of the 17th of Tammuz. The second is when the Roman army destroyed the Holy Temple by setting it ablaze, a mere three weeks later on the Hebrew date of the 9th of Av.

On these two days themselves, able-bodied Jews traditionally fast. During the three week span between these dates a variety of mourning practices are observed. 

As was his way to see the positive in everything, the late Lubavitcher Rebbe shared with us that these three weeks do not simply have to be seen as a spiritual “black out”. We can actually fill this period with positive vibes. Behind the perceived darkness, lingers the very light of the Messiah. This period is particularly auspicious to tap into that light. Therefore, among his followers he transformed these three weeks into a program of study about the Messiah and matters related to the messianic era; to focus more on preparation for the redemption. 

This was a paradigm shift away from the previous view, as it looks to the future rather than the past. Of course, the same customs apply and what’s read in Synagogue does not change. However, he showed the way by demonstrating how to change our attitudes towards this period. Yes, we can change our attitudes!

In the perspective of the “three weeks” I was raised with we also mentioned the messianic era. But mostly this period was focused on the sorrows of the past. If anything, any mention the messianic era was employed in the service of intensifying our sense of sorrow and even our sense that we were helpless victims tossed about in the stormy seas of exile and persecution. In my subjective experience, the mention of the Messiah was like someone dangling a candy before a starving child and taunting, “Not yet, not yet...”. Why? Just so the child can experience the painful cravings of hunger all the more.

The Rebbe flipped all this on its head. He encouraged using these three weeks as a means to look forward to the redemption and use it as a program to prepare for an amazingly glorious future. He employed this period’s referencing of the past only to induce a heightened sense and appreciation for the future we are preparing for and looking forward to - not to emotionally self flagelate, but to positively anticipate.

Unlike the old approach which looked to the future to intensify our sense of sorrow over the past, the Rebbe taught us to look to the past to appreciate why we are working for the future ~ and maybe even to enhance the taste of the future in the present. Those preparing the Sabbath meals get to taste from its delicious foods even while it's still Friday afternoon.

----------------O--------------

A "Gimmel Tammuz" Dream

Someone I know shared a dream:

A Caribbean man, from either Jamaica or Haiti, was a natural intuitive. He accepted his gift as divinely given and dedicated his life to using it to advise people - guiding them through their journey in time. 

He was the kind of person whom can be seen in town fairs offering spiritual services from a makeshift booth. His tools of trade were various, drawn from his culture: herbs, incense, cards, colored candles, etc. He'd travel from fair to fair; city to city, town to town, outpost to outpost - reaching as many people as he could.

One day, by the vibes of his very own intuition it dawned upon him that the next step on his journey was to join the Jewish People. Being already learned in the Bible and spiritually sensitive, his conversion journey under the auspices of Lubavitch was relatively smooth. Before long, he was a card carrying member of the Lubavitch community and devoted to the Rebbe.

With surprising ease, he adapted his vocation to Judaism as well. Gone were his previous tools of trade. He spoke the language of pure monotheism. When advising, he dressed his insights in words of Torah, mostly Scripture (as that is what he was most familiar with). 

When clients approached, he opened a partition, which opened rather dramatically. It opened as a widening circle, much like the aperture of a camera or the pupil of the eye. 

One sunny day, at a fair, he opened his dramatic partition. Confidence beamed from his face. Suddenly, he saw the Lubavitcher Rebbe approach his booth. The expression on his face went from confident to worried, as if a dark cloud swept across the bright sun.

He cringed and wondered, "Does the Rebbe not approve of my vocation? I tried to make it kosher. If I can't do this then what can I dedicate my life to doing?"

When the Rebbe came face to face with him, to his surprise nothing he was anxious over was even mentioned. The Rebbe asked pleasantly but with authoritative bearing, "Why aren't you quoting more from my teachings and from teachings about the Messiah?"

With that a wave of relief came over him. He realized that his Rebbe did not come to chastise, but to lovingly advise. The Rebbe dropped on his lap a very effective tool, one so obvious that it was utterly overlooked.

***************************

The dreamer wondered, "Why the Lubavitcher Rebbe couched his message in a story and did not relate it to me directly?"

He wondered and wondered, but no immediate answer arrived. Then a few days later, a possible answer dawned on him.

The dreamer is a sensitive person who has emotional trouble handling criticism. For him, it comes off as rejection; either actual or potential.  Possibly, the Rebbe was being sensitive to his emotional needs and shielded him (a) by communicating the message to a third party, namely the dream character, and (b) by having the dream character model for him how to appropriately react.

Upon realizing why a dream character might have been used as his proxy, a wide smile broke out across his face.

---------------------O------------------

The Soul of Sabbath

My grandparents lived in the L.A. San Fernando Valley. During their final years, I made several trips from the United States East Coast to visit with them. During one of those trips I found Sabbath hospitality about a mile or so away from their home. Not being allowed to drive on the Sabbath, I took a long walk that Sabbath afternoon to see them. I didn't mind the walk. The weather was pleasant and the sites were interesting. 

Upon arrival at my grandparents' home, I was greeted by a young woman visiting from Lithuania, the daughter of one of the household aids. She was studying to be an attorney and was spending time with her mother during school break. She expressed surprise that I had just taken such a long walk, when I could have simply driven. Knowing that she's an "attorney in training" and values law, I shared with her the following. 

The laws of a country do not merely restrict their citizens; they also create a structure which allows for a particular atmosphere - one where a person can viscerally experience the country's ideals, values, culture, beliefs, etc. Successful laws end up creating a particular "feel on the streets", a vessel alive with a society’s spirit. Similarly, the restrictions of the Sabbath are not merely a set of "do not does". Rather, they are structural devices which allow for an atmosphere of peace, tranquility, holiness and contact with the divine. By these restrictions a "body" is formed which allows in a particular kind of soul of holiness, one which is alive and pulsates within the hearts of the Sabbath observant.

The concept resonated well with her and she smiled with appreciation.

Later on, it dawned on me that this concept does not only apply to the Sabbath, but to all of the "do not does" of the Torah. They are structural devices which allow in particular spiritual lights, affording them entry into our lives. 

-----------------O------------------

Unifications

Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan obm wrote an essay which explains the underlying dynamics of unifications ("Yichudim", in Hebrew). Unifications happen when spiritual forces combine and unify in response to physical occurrences. In their most ideal form, these physical occurrences are the performance Mitzvahs (Torah precepts). If accompanied by certain kinds of Kabbalistic meditations, all the better. In his explanation, Rabbi Kaplan employed a principle popularized by Rabbi Yehuda Lieb Ashlag concerning the difference between how space works in the physical realm and the spiritual realms. In physical space, unrelated entities can move into each other's proximity. When they do, they're said to be close. When they move away from each other they're said to be distant. 

Spiritual space works differently. Its measure of space resembles psychological distance and closeness. Psychologically speaking, two people who share a lot in common are said to be close. Two people who do not share much in common are said to be more distant. So too in spiritual space, entities who more closely resemble each other orientations, styles and goals are said to be closer to each other. Entities who less closely resemble each other's orientations, styles and goals are said to be more distant from each other. 

Everything in the physical realm extends from some sort of soul in the spiritual realms. There is nothing in the physical universe which is not somehow “ensouled”. It's just a question of soul level. For example, the Midrash relates that every blade of grass has an angel causing it to grow. This angel is the blade of grass' spiritual counterpart, its soul. Even a rock has a soul, projecting it into existence. Of course, it's a more limited, lower, soul than one which imparts life to a plant.

When humans bring together physical entities, ideally to do a Mitzvah, they also bring together the spiritual counterparts of these entities. This is true even if these spiritual forces are very distant from each other. Think of the physical side of an entity as a kind of handle extending into the physical realm, which humans can wield. When an entity is moved by its handle the rest of the entity, trailing into the spiritual realms, gets pulled along. So, once the physical sides of entities are brought together, their spiritual sides draw closer and unify regardless of the inherent spiritual distance between them. Once unified, their union gives birth to blessings, which flow down into the physical realm in various forms of benefit for earthbound life. 

The above is a general adaptation and summary of what Rabbi Kaplan explained. Soon after reading his essay, I did an experiment to see what would happen if I tried to unify my own inner spiritual forces by physical acts; namely, with how I studied for accounting exams in college. 

I reasoned to myself that since the brain is the seat of the soul's illumination, my mental capacities are spiritual; at least, in relation to the rest of my body and the rest of what's physical. So, after studying a chapter in the textbook, I performed most of my remaining study by solving practice questions relating to the chapter, counting on physical practice to weave together and integrate what by now had a presence in my mental faculties.  

When a fellow student marveled at how well I grasped the material, I shared with him my secret. I explained to him that actual practice brings together more mental abilities than studying does alone. Of course, one needs to begin by studying. The information needs to be introduced into the brain. But after that initial step, learning by doing is a more powerful approach.

Later on, I also applied this principle to daily meditation - though I had not planned to. At the time, I lived in South Florida. I wanted to meditate in nature. The only problem was that I couldn't simply sit still in one place. The mosquitoes liked me too much! Ouch! More accurately they loved me, kissed me incessantly. I discovered that to be out in tropic nature, I had to on the move or I would be instantly discovered. So, I conducted my meditations by walking the nature trails in a local park, one which extended from the mangrove ecosystem. What I discovered was that the act of walking seemed to help the flow of spiritual insights which I encountered during these sessions.

Some years later, I had to modify my meditative practices again. Sometimes, my opportunities to meditate occurred during the day, when I was out in public. I discovered that the conversation I carry on with God, as the core of my meditative practice, can be done on paper as well. 

Till today I often bring a notebook to a cafe', sip coffee and if asked, share that I am writing my diary - well, in a sense I am. Again, I notice a more frequent access to my depth of self and insights than I would get if I carried on that conversation in my mind alone or even if I had engaged in it verbally (a grade more physical).  The overt physical act of writing is apparently successful in bringing together inner forces of my soul. 

Rather recently, I began to wonder whether there is more to initiating unifications than bringing together physical entities; like an arm, pen and paper. Rabbi Shneur Zalman of Liadi was fond of relating that the angels Michael and Gabriel have very opposite orientations. Michael conveys God’s kindness and Gabriel His severity. Yet, both come together to coordinate and collaborate in honor of God. This seems like a unification initiated from above rather than from below. Interesting. 

This gets me wondering, perhaps even when humans initiate unifications from below, the real unifications really happen from above; as they still require God to stamp His blessings on them from above. I would expect that most dispatches of Michael and Gabriel are really in response to human behavior. Yet, Rabbi Shneur Zalman of Liadi credits their unification to their joint yearning to fulfill God's will, without referencing human behavior. It seems that God alone factors in human behavior when dispatching these angels. It's their yearning to carry out His will, which then in turn motivates them to unify and act.

Accordingly, it makes sense to me that though doing unifications set off identifiable processes whose stages can be "mechanically" charted and explained by those in the know, like so much else (health, livelihood, success, etc.) they really depend on God's blessing to proceed. The presence of identifiable processes is just there so humans can relate and participate. Otherwise, they would be deprived of their co-creative roles, essential to the goals of their creation.

-------------O------------

Above Below

Nothing gets to exist physically without first existing spiritually.

Everything you physically see started off as a spiritual force, still extending from it.

From what spiritual level did it emerge?

Well...that's a different story.

Just remember that not everything that flies is necessarily a bird.

------------O----------

God’s Perfection - שלמות

The topic of God’s Perfection, שלמות, seems to have eluded philosophical treatment by the classic Jewish mystics and philosophers. It’s as if it were simply an accepted given, maybe even axiomatic. At times it was referred to as an idea lingering in the philosophical background. An example of this is Rabbi Moshe Chaim Luzzatto’s "The Way of God" where he mentions God is Perfect. Then based on this assertion builds his argument that God's benevolent giving must also be Perfect, for the Perfect One behaves perfectly. However, he never goes through the steps to prove that God is Perfect. Quite to the contrary, he uses it as the foundational axiom for what he’s trying to prove.

Surprisingly it seems like God’s Perfection was treated as even more axiomatic than other sensitive topics, such as His Oneness. Honestly, when I first realized this I found it quite puzzling. In truth, I cannot claim to have encountered every available page of holy texts dealing with the “Big Questions” nor can I claim memory of all that I have already read. Yet, somehow I am left with the general impression that God's Perfection has been simply assumed. If you, my reader, happen to discover a holy text where it’s proven, please let me know either via email or comment to this essay (on my blog).

Perhaps, the classic Jewish sages beheld an attitude of reverence that only Perfection truly befits God’s Holy Majesty. Still, even the most sentimental of attitudes bear a latent logic. Isn’t this part of what keeps the psychology profession busy?

It's possible that in the past when everyone identified with a religion of one sort or another, the Jewish sages felt no need to explain why God is considered Perfect. Nobody would imagine that they worshiped One less than Perfect. Among the masses, this attitude may have not been entirely driven by reverence. There may have been personal pride mixed in there too, as if their choice of worship reflected back on their own self image.

Yet, since there was universal agreement, there was no need for the idea to be proven. It was safe to philosophically let go of. Plus, if necessary, the ideas stood ripe to serve as the very basis of a theological argument – like Rabbi Luzzatto did. In contrast, there was a need to explain an idea like the Jewish version of God's Oneness. Both neighboring faiths were hawking their Jewish populations - seeking to wrest converts. The Christians tried to draw Jews towards their notion of a trinity and in Muslims countries the Jews had to demonstrate that they were on at least equal monotheistic footing. In such cultural climates, Jews needed to be well informed about their notion monotheism and trained to argue for it.

Today, we are no longer live in an age of universal religious affiliation. Accordingly, there’s not necessarily an automatic reverence for God’s Perfection. Perhaps, it’s time has to unpack the latent logic underlying the reverent assumption of God's Perfection.

The mystic in me asks, "Faith is so beautiful and precious. It often engages the highest and brightest of what it means to be a soulful human being. Why engage in the work of transforming a precious matter of faith into logic?"

There are two related reasons why. The first I heard from Rabbi Leibel Shapiro of Miami Beach, Florida. God wants us to serve Him with all of our faculties. This includes our minds as well. Therefore, we are encouraged to engage our minds in His service whenever possible to.

The second reason is because the mind is a vessel to receive illumination from the soul.  The more the mind is engaged in spiritual thought, the more illumination from the soul comes streaming into contact with the biological organism - fostering deeper contact and union between the spiritual and the physical.

One need not worry. The reservoir of faith will never be depleted by the transformation of cherished beliefs into concrete logic. It's not like a species in danger of extinction. If anything answers lead to more questions which bring humans face to face with new areas of faith, never before considered. So, paradoxically answering “Big Questions” can actually enlarge the reservoir of faith.

It's with this spirit that I engage in attempting to explain logically why God is Perfect. Reality is designed in a way that everything seems to have a polar opposite. Examples of such include male/female, day/night, light/dark, work/rest, proton/electron, matter/anti-matter, good/evil...I think you get the idea. Similarly, as part of this sweeping overall pattern, imperfection needs to have its opposite too - Perfection.

Since "Perfection is not of this world", one must conclude that flawless existence is elsewhere.  What we have in this world is, at best, a series of cause and effect events designed to compensate for flaws.   However, to immediately identify God as that "Perfect opposite" might be too fast of a jump.

So, let's slow down and consider a different question first. Is God Infinite? The standard answer for a believer is, "Yes". However, as Rabbi Moshe Schatz shared with me that there were some classical Kabbalists who felt uncomfortable calling God, “Infinite”. They felt that even such an expansive term for God might be inadequate because He is then being referred to as the opposite of something else, namely finite reality. And how can He ever be compared to anything else!

However, even some of these Kabbalists occasionally referred to God as Infinite.

What might have they meant? I do not think they were making reluctant concessions to the conventions of language. I think what they meant was that God is "at least Infinite", if not so much more than that. Another way to say this is that while Infinity might not necessarily be Him, it certainly is "of Him".

Similarly, to say that God is Perfect might run into the same problem as saying He's Infinite. At least, the word Infinity bears a silver lining, as it's not directly descriptive. The word Infinite means, “Not finite". It's pointing to God by way of elimination; stating who He's not rather than Who He is.

In contrast, the word Perfect, and its Hebrew corollary שלמות, are direct descriptions. One could in theory substitute the Perfect for Flawless – i.e. not flawed. However, it does not follow with the Hebrew word, שלמות, which the sages used.

In conclusion, my thoughts are that by the principle of opposites, imperfection has a polar opposite, Perfection, somewhere in reality. Is it God? I think that God is "at least Perfect", if not so much more than that. In other words, Perfection is "of God". However, for simplicity's sake conventional believers proclaim, "God is Perfect!"

---------------------O-------------------

Dual Approach

The Torah sometimes describes to God in human terms - such as having human features, like “eyes”, or human sensations, like enjoying pleasing fragrances. These human like descriptions are called is academic English, “Anthropomorphisms”.

The word anthropomorphism means ascribing human traits, character, thinking, emotions and behaviors to a non-human entity. Since God is indivisible and invisible, there is no way to describe Him to a human being. So, anthropomorphic descriptions serve as a kind of shorthand to ease communication about God for human ears.

Traditionally there are two approaches to understand the Torah’s system of anthropomorphic language. One is the Maimonidean approach. The other is a Kabbalistic approach.

To the Maimonides all such descriptions are strictly metaphors which mean that God has all the abilities humans have (plus Infinitely more), but without needing to resort to a body or any other form. Accordingly, a statement that “God sees” means that He’s aware, as one endowed with eyes would be (and Infinitely more so). So, it’s not that He has “eyes”. Rather, He has an awareness that humans would rely on eyes to gather. The same notion applies to the statement, “God hears” or any other similar statement.

The Kabbalistic approach employs a different take. The human styled descriptions of God in the Torah are assigned to the spiritual realms and not to God Himself.

The spiritual realms are a long chain of realms or worlds which span between God’s Infinite Light and the physical universe. Spiritual light pass through these realms on their way down to the physical realm. As this light threads through each realm, it grants life to the structure of the realm and to all of its inhabitants - serving as a soul.  Along the chain, these multiple realms successively filter and weaken the light, so that it’s suitable for the next realm down. The process continues and repeats until the light reaches our physical universe, lodged at the very bottom of the chain.

So, for example, God has “eyes”. He really “possesses” them! They just happen to have a differentiated presence in the spiritual realms and not directly in His Being. Roughly speaking, it’s like the difference between having brains and money. Though one possesses both, brains are in one’s person and money’s in the bank account.

Since the Kabbalistic approach focuses on the spiritual realms and not on God Himself, it allows for more flexibility of interpretation. It becomes much less problematic to say that such human styled descriptions edge closer to being literal. Though such descriptions are not nearly as literal as they sound, they do not need to be immediately swept away as strictly metaphoric either.  

There are actual forces distributed throughout the spiritual realms which behave as parallels to human thoughts, feelings, organs, sensations and actions. Think of the way genes parallel organs or TV waves parallel the picture they’ll present on screen. The human gene which gives rise to the eye does not look like a tiny “eye”. Similarly, the TV wave affecting a picture on a tree on a screen does not already look like a tree of sorts. Similarly and even more so, the spiritual forces which serve as God’s “eyes” do not look like ghosted eyes, or the like. They are precursors which carry from their realms elements necessary to formulate a desired manifestation in physical realm.

God set up these forces to be interactive with human behavior. For example, if a human looks kindly on others and behaves in a more giving way, the “eyes above” are awakened and the person may experience a greater level of supervision by God. Plus, the “hand of kindness” above is also awakened the person may experience kind turns of events.

Truthfully, both the Maimonidean and Kabbalistic approaches co-exist and happen in concert. They absolutely reconcile. The Maimonidean approach is addressing God’s Being, while the Kabbalistic approach is addressing the manifestation of His light within the zone of His creation - be it spiritual or physical.

So, while these forces in spiritual realms are activated another dynamic also occurs; namely, God is aware and behaves in ways that humans rely on organs for. For example, while the “eyes” of the spiritual realms are roused awake, God is also absolutely aware in a way that one endowed with sight would be (and Infinitely more so) - independently of what occurs in the spiritual realms. He does not need a series of spiritual realms to filter or process experiences for him. Also, He could have chosen to relate to humanity without the whole interface of spiritual realms. Though Kabbalah offers reasons why He chose such an interface, Kabbalah also teaches that He is not at all bound by such a choice and can override it at will.  

(To be clear an interface is not an intermediary. An interface is a means which facilitates direct interaction between two entities – like a phone line. An intermediary is a third party who serves as an indirect means of interaction between two parties – such as diplomat, broker, attorney or bureaucrat.)

This reconciliation can serve as one of the probably many examples where Medieval Jewish philosophy and Kabbalah can work together in absolute harmony. If examined with the right set of eyes, each brings along its piece of puzzle to complete the picture. Such harmony of complementary ideas shouldn’t be surprising, as both streams of thought are Torah.

----------------------O---------------------