Important Post at Lamalikra.

I have been following this excellent blog for several years and the latest post is amazing. I highly recommend it to anyone who reads Hebrew.

Without In Any Way Moving a Body: A Change in Perspective - The Welfare of The Body and The Soul.

Rambam at the end of MN 1:24 makes a fascinating statement that opens a very intriguing view of Imitato Dei.  The chapter discusses the word Halicha – going as it refers to God. The word at times is used in the context of leaving or going away.

“And just as the withdrawal of providence is referred to as the hiding of the face – as in the dictum: And as for Me, I will surely hide my face – it also is referred to as going, which has the meaning to turn away from a thing. Thus Scripture says:  I will go and return to my place.”

As discussed in my previous post on MN 1:23, when we say that God is leaving, we are saying that a person has lost his connection with God, thereby subjecting himself to the random flow and ebb of events. He no longer acts in conformity with providence – Hashgacha.

At other times the word Halicha is used in the context of the spread of a thing. It is similar to the word Yetziah discussed in the earlier chapter, where it means that God’s decree is spreading out.

“As for its dictum, and the anger of the Lord was kindled against them, and he went away, the two significations subsist together in the same passage. I mean the signification of a withdrawal of providence referred to by means of the term “turning away”, and the signification of a spread, diffusion, and manifestation of a thing. I mean to say it was the anger that went and extended toward the two. For this reason Miriam became leprous as white as snow.”

Rambam is talking about the story in Bamidbar 12.

ט  וַיִּחַר-אַף יְהוָה בָּם, וַיֵּלַךְ.	9 And the anger of the LORD was kindled against them; and He departed.
י  וְהֶעָנָן, סָר מֵעַל הָאֹהֶל, וְהִנֵּה מִרְיָם, מְצֹרַעַת כַּשָּׁלֶג; וַיִּפֶן אַהֲרֹן אֶל-מִרְיָם, וְהִנֵּה מְצֹרָעַת.	10 And when the cloud was removed from over the Tent, behold, Miriam was leprous, as white as snow; and Aaron looked upon Miriam; and, behold, she was leprous.
יא  וַיֹּאמֶר אַהֲרֹן, אֶל-מֹשֶׁה:  בִּי אֲדֹנִי--אַל-נָא תָשֵׁת עָלֵינוּ חַטָּאת, אֲשֶׁר נוֹאַלְנוּ וַאֲשֶׁר חָטָאנוּ.	11 And Aaron said unto Moses: 'Oh my lord, lay not, I pray thee, sin upon us, for that we have done foolishly, and for that we have sinned.
יב  אַל-נָא תְהִי, כַּמֵּת, אֲשֶׁר בְּצֵאתוֹ מֵרֶחֶם אִמּוֹ, וַיֵּאָכֵל חֲצִי בְשָׂרוֹ.	12 Let her not, I pray, be as one dead, of whom the flesh is half consumed when he cometh out of his mother's womb.'

Miriam’s error of comparing Moshe with other prophets, her not discerning the difference between his type of prophecy and the kind of prophecy other prophets experienced, disconnected her from providence. It was such a fundamental misunderstanding of how humans interact with God that she was no longer acting in accordance with providence – Hashgacha. She was therefore left to the vagaries of nature and no longer in control of her destiny, a kind of death represented by the leprosy that appeared on her hand. That change in status is the spread of the decree of God, His will at creation of what a “living” human being is, one who fully employs his free will by taking control of his destiny.[1]

Having established that the term Halicha – whether in its connotation of God “going away” or the “spreading out of God’s decree” – does not have any physical implication, Rambam, in a surprising aside, turns to a human mitzvah and applies the same idea.

“The term going is also applied figuratively to living a good life[2], without in any way moving a body. Thus it says: And you shall go in His ways(Devarim 28:9); After the Lord your God you should go(Devarim 13:5); Come and let us walk in the light of God (Yeshayahu 2:5).”

We are talking about the eighth positive commandment.

המצווה השמינית

הציווי שנצטווינו להדמות לו ית' כפי יכלתנו, 

והוא אמרו:
"והלכת בדרכיו" (דברים כח, ט). וכבר כפל ציווי זה ואמר: "ללכת בכל-דרכיו" (שם יא, כב), ובא בפירוש עניין זה:

"מה הקב"ה נקרא רחום - אף אתה היה רחום;
הקב"ה נקרא חנון - אף אתה היה חנון;
הקב"ה נקרא צדיק - אף אתה היה צדיק;
הקב"ה נקרא חסיד - אף אתה היה חסיד" - זהו לשון ספרי.

וכבר כפל צווי זה בלשון אחר ואמר: "אחרי ה' אלקיכם תלכו" (שם יג, ה), וגם בפירושו בא, שעניינו להתדמות למעשים הטובים ולמידות הנכבדות שבהם מתואר יתעלה על דרך המשל - יתעלה על הכל עילוי רב

How does one implement practically the Mitzvah of Imitato Dei by being merciful, righteous “Without in any way moving a body”?

The issue becomes even more baffling when we realize that these actions are reciprocal and fall under the rubric of social Mitzvot. Society cannot function without certain ethical rules that are reciprocal in the sense that by treating well your neighbor, he will do the same to you keeping the peace and maintaining a healthy society. This should therefore not be seen as a theological Mitzvah, Bein Adam Lamakom, but rather a humanistic one, Bein Adam Lacheveiro. Indeed Rambam in MN 3:27 makes the point that there are two categories of Mitzvot- those that are aimed at “the welfare of the soul” and those that are meant to deal with the “welfare of the body”.

“As for the welfare of the body, it comes about by their improvement of the ways of living one with another.… Know that between these two aims, one is indubitably greater in nobility, namely the welfare of the soul – I mean the procuring of correct opinions – with the second aim – I mean the welfare of the body – is prior in nature and time. The latter aim consists in the governance of the city and the well-being of the states of all its people according to their capacity.”  

It is clear that the Mitzvot that deal with our relationship with the other, are only intermediate goals that help us achieve the ultimate goal of correct theology –“the welfare of the soul”. However, at the end of the Moreh, in chapter 3:54, where Rambam ends his philosophical Magnum Opus with the exhilarating description of the purpose of man in this world, he presents these same Mitzvot as the end goal, seemingly even higher than “the procuring of correct opinions”.

“…For when explaining in this verse the noblest ends, he does not limit them only to the apprehension of Him, may He be exalted…. But he says that one should glory in the apprehension of Myself and in the knowledge of My attributes, by which he means His actions. … He means that it is My purpose that there should come from you loving-kindness, righteousness, and judgment in the earth in the way we have explained with regard to the thirteen attributes: namely, that the purpose should be assimilation to them and that this should be our way of life.”  

In this presentation, emulating God by acting with kindness and righteousness is the ultimate goal and not just an intermediate stage that paves the way for intellectual excellence – the ultimate goal. How are we to understand these seemingly contradictory presentations?

I believe that this seeming contradiction is an important key to Rambam’s thought. Generally, it is accepted that Rambam sees intellectual excellence as the goal of humankind. Perfected man is the intellectual one who contemplates his existence and its relationship with God and his creation. Nothing can be farther from the truth. Rambam’s theology is very much action oriented.

At first blush, it would seem that the social aspects of interpersonal interaction are of paramount importance. However, if looked at carefully, it is more tactic than strategy. When I give alms to a poor man, I acknowledge that fate may put me at some future time into the same predicament and I hope that fellow man will reciprocate. By making Tzedakah – the giving of alms – a Mitzvah, a required social behavior, this improves the odds that this will be the case.  The same applies to all the other Mitzvot categorized as bein Adam lacheveiro. These laws are expedient and make for a healthy society but there is no long-term plan other than the perpetuation of this society or social system. It is in a way narcissistic. Indeed, such an organized, healthy and lawful society has a better chance for it to have individuals who attain great intellectual excellence and perfection, but again that is very narrowly focused on the self, whether the individual or the community. However, an understanding of our personal existence and its relationship to the rest of the universe, a universe created by God with wisdom and purpose, makes us act with a vision that encompasses the whole of our existence. That same Mitzvah of Tzedakah is no longer done with an expectation of reciprocity, but because it is integral part of how God runs His world. By doing the mitzvah, we are fulfilling God’s will and the role he wants us to play in His universe and are responsible for the consequences these actions may bring. By emulating Him, we are partaking in His creation.

Is there a practical aspect to this difference in perspective? It is impossible for us to personally point to the difference without it being experiential and looking at the long-term consequences which may be more than one lifetime. In other words, we would have to reach the pinnacle of perfection and act accordingly, to understand the practical implications of this changed perspective. However, the Torah illustrates it very vividly in the story of the Egel, the golden calf, and Moshe’s reaction to it. When Moshe was confronted with the people straying to the Egel after their experience at Sinai he was at a total loss. How was he to proceed and forestall future repeats of the incident? If the Sinai experience was not enough to wean the people from idolatry, what would?

יב  וַיֹּאמֶר מֹשֶׁה אֶל-יְהוָה, רְאֵה אַתָּה אֹמֵר אֵלַי הַעַל אֶת-הָעָם הַזֶּה, וְאַתָּה לֹא הוֹדַעְתַּנִי, אֵת אֲשֶׁר-תִּשְׁלַח עִמִּי; וְאַתָּה אָמַרְתָּ יְדַעְתִּיךָ בְשֵׁם, וְגַם-מָצָאתָ חֵן בְּעֵינָי.	12 And Moses said unto the LORD: 'See, You say unto me: Bring up this people; and Thou hast not let me know whom Thou wilt send with me. Yet Thou hast said: I know thee by name, and thou hast also found grace in My sight.
יג  וְעַתָּה אִם-נָא מָצָאתִי חֵן בְּעֵינֶיךָ, הוֹדִעֵנִי נָא אֶת-דְּרָכֶךָ, וְאֵדָעֲךָ, לְמַעַן אֶמְצָא-חֵן בְּעֵינֶיךָ; וּרְאֵה, כִּי עַמְּךָ הַגּוֹי הַזֶּה.	13 Now therefore, I pray Thee, if I have found grace in Thy sight, show me now Thy ways, that I may know Thee, to the end that I may find grace in Thy sight; and consider that this nation is Thy people.'

Rambam in MN 1:54 explains this request as follows;

“The second request which he [Moshe] put first is that He should let him know His attributes. … This was Moshe’s ultimate object in his demand, the conclusion of what he says being: that I may know thee, to the end that I may find grace in thy sight and consider that this nation is thy people. That is, a people for the government of which I need to perform actions that I must seek similar to thy actions in governing them”.   

The attributes that Moshe focuses on are mercy, righteousness and other similar ones that are seemingly interpersonal social behavior. Indeed, they are but the perspective that Moshe takes in their performance is a universal one, one focused on the whole universe and the role and place he and the people have in it, emulating God’s ways in governing His world. The results of Moshe’s actions and teachings are still very much meaningful today three thousand years later. That is the real understanding of the eighth positive commandment -  והלכת בדרכיו . The outward act does not change; it is mercy and righteousness but with a different perspective, without in any way moving a body.

---

[1] For a further discussion, see my article here . Also, see Rambam at the end of Hilchot Tume’at Tzara’at 16:10 where he begins the presentation as Lashon Hara and subtly transits to theological error. That Halacha warrants further treatment as time will allow.

[2] Pines notes in a footnote that literally the translation should be “to going (or walking) a good or virtuous life”.

Providence and Chance - Calamity and Calamity.

Learning MN1:23, we get an interesting insight into Rambam’s understanding of Providence. For a thorough treatment of Divine Providence, see my article in Hakirah here 

The chapter deals with the word Yetziah – going out as it is used in Tanach with reference to God. As God is not a body, is immaterial, how can there be movement from one place to another? Rambam explains that

“The term is applied figuratively to the manifestation of things that are in no way a body… meaning the propagation of the matter… Every mention of going out occurring in Scriptures with reference to Him conforms to this figurative use. ”

Rambam uses a verse in Yeshayahu 26:21 as the central example of this usage. To understand Rambam we have to read this verse in context. Starting at chapter 24, we have a collection of prophecies about the destruction of the land and the subsequent glorious reconstruction and return of its righteous inhabitants. The prophet foretells the calamities that are coming and offers a mixture of hope and advice on how to survive the coming storm. Our verse, the second in a two-verse prophecy, reads:

כ  לֵךְ עַמִּי בֹּא בַחֲדָרֶיךָ, וּסְגֹר דלתיך (דְּלָתְךָ) בַּעֲדֶךָ; חֲבִי כִמְעַט-רֶגַע, עַד-יעבור- (יַעֲבָר-) זָעַם.	20 Come, my people, enter into your chambers, and shut your doors about you; hide yourself for a little moment, until the indignation passes.
כא  כִּי-הִנֵּה יְהוָה יֹצֵא מִמְּקוֹמוֹ, לִפְקֹד עֲו‍ֹן יֹשֵׁב-הָאָרֶץ עָלָיו; וְגִלְּתָה הָאָרֶץ אֶת-דָּמֶיהָ, וְלֹא-תְכַסֶּה עוֹד עַל-הֲרוּגֶיהָ.  {פ}	21 For, behold, the LORD goes out of His place to visit upon the inhabitants of the earth their iniquity; the earth also shall disclose her blood, and shall no more cover her slain. {P}

 Rambam comments:

“Thus: For, behold, the LORD goes out of His place, that is His decree, which at present is hidden from us, will become manifest.”

God does not go out. There is a missing subtext in the verse, the word “decree”. God’s decree is going to take effect thus “go out”.

“I refer to the coming into being of something after its not having existed, for everything that comes into being from God is attributed to His decree.”

Lest you think that God decrees in real time, in other words reacts to circumstances and acts when He deems it necessary, Rambam explains that the decree refers to God’s will at creation[1]. In other words, there is a natural system of cause and effect that conforms to God’s original will.

“Thus: By the word of the Lord were the heavens made and all the host of them by the breath of His mouth (Tehilim 33:6).In this verse God’s acts are likened to those that proceed from kings, whose instrument in giving effect to their will is speech. However, God does not require an instrument by the means of which He could act for His acts are accomplished by means of His will alone; neither is there any speech at all as shall be made clear.”

God does not speak nor does He decree or do any such things; God wills, where will is one with His essence and things come into being. That is how the heavens came into being and all they contain. Similarly, Rambam reads the verses in Yeshayahu as telling us that as a consequence of the misdeeds of the people a calamity is about to befall them. That calamity is foreseeable and is indeed foreseen by Yeshayahu’s prophecy which he acquired by contemplating the iniquities of his contemporaries and their naturally resulting consequences. Those who understand this on their own or accept his warning can therefore protect themselves by hiding out and lying low “until the indignation passes”. It is important to realize that this perspective of seeing events in a cause and effect system is only a perception on our part. One has to look at events and interpret them by seeing the larger picture of how they came into being to arrive at that conclusion. It is not necessarily self-evident[2].

“Inasmuch as the term going out as we have made clear, was figuratively applied to the manifestation of an act of God – for scriptures says: For, behold, the LORD goes out of His place – the term returning (Shiva) is figuratively applied to the cessation of such an act likewise brought about in virtue of God’s will.”

Rambam now addresses a related term often used in connection with God – returning. When someone leaves a place at times he returns – so too the metaphor when we talk about God. If going out is the manifestation of an act of God, returning is the cessation of such an act. The verse that exemplifies this is from Hoshea 5:15 –

טו  אֵלֵךְ אָשׁוּבָה אֶל-מְקוֹמִי, עַד אֲשֶׁר-יֶאְשְׁמוּ וּבִקְשׁוּ פָנָי:  בַּצַּר לָהֶם, יְשַׁחֲרֻנְנִי.

15 I will go and return to My place, till they acknowledge their guilt, and seek My face; in their trouble they will seek Me earnestly:

The prophet castigates Israel (the Ten Tribes) and foretells their destruction. In the case of the Ten Tribes, however, there are no survivors or any who protect themselves from the onrushing disaster. The prophet’s warning is not heeded.

“…the signification of which is that the indwelling that had been among us has been removed. This removal is followed by a privation of providence as far as we are concerned.”

It is remarkable that both the former verse and this verse talk about calamities but the one in Yeshayahu is seen as providence – Hashgacha – while the one in Hoshea is seen as the removal of providence.

“For a privation of providence leaves one abandoned and a target to all that may happen and come about, so that his ill and weal come about according to chance. How terrible is this threat!”

When the prophet is ignored, the people are caught off-guard and chance rules there is no possibility of taking control and trying to save a remnant. The destruction becomes total. It is only when they acknowledge their guilt, and seek My face that providence returns and redemption may ensue.  The punishment of abandonment, of being left to chance even with its possibility of good, is worse than knowing about the coming bad times. Knowledge gives one a chance to protect oneself. The calamity that befalls us unbeknownst drowns out the good times completely.

Reading this brings to mind pre-Holocaust Orthodox European Jewry where the majority ignored the signs of doom on the horizon. Instead of pushing for immigration to Palestine and America, mainstream Orthodox Jewish leadership insisted on staying put. It was only the few, the minority that heeded Rav Kook and his follower’s call in the Twenties and Thirties to come to Eretz Israel. It was only the few prescient and those pushed by the pogroms and anti-Semitism that had the foresight to come to America. The European Jewish leadership sadly did not put any effort into building up Torah in America or Israel[3] and prepare a place of refuge. However, clearly, it was not a total privation of providence. The few were enough to have a remnant rebuild and grow again. History repeats itself. 

It is interesting to note that Narboni, one of the classical commentators of the Moreh, though cryptic, apparently reads this piece the way I explained it here. Abravanel  strongly disagrees but his reading is extremely forced.     

---

[1] The basis for this reading is the choice of the verse to explain speech. There are endless verses that attribute speech in this context to God but Rambam chose the one about creation – the coming into existence of the heavens.

[2] See MN1:8 for the meaning of “place” as it refers to God. God leaving His place is thus an interpretation of perceived occurrences and our perception of God as changing “place”. We see Him as an active rather than a passive Deity while in truth He is neither.

[3] With the exception of Rav Chaim Ozer Grodzinsky who sent Rav Karelitz, the Chazon Ish  to Israel. Better late than never.  

Uncertainty and Knowing God and His Ways.

Responding further to Evanston Jew’s (EJ) questions in a comment thread earlier this month:


You say the Torah is the mind of God. How does God have a mind? He doesn’t have a body. Is God more than the mind of God?

Since God has no body, He therefore cannot have a mind as EJ points out. The only way we human can try, and I emphasize, “Try” to decipher God’s overall blueprint for our existence, is by contemplating our environment and ourselves and try to make sense of it. From our perspective, we say that we are searching for God’s mind. We know rationally that God does not “think”, want, wish, have thoughts, emote or do any of the things we humans do, as that would indicate change, qualities that cannot exist in a unique transcendental entity. We however cannot imagine that the results we observe could come about from any entity that does not “think” the way we do; we therefore refer to it as the “mind” of God or Chochmato in philosophical discourse.
This brings us to the next question:

How does love of God equal knowledge of science and/or God? What is knowledge of God?


Love is a feeling that results from intimacy. We love a loved one because we know that person intimately. That differentiates love from lust between man and woman. We cannot try to know God, who does not exist in the sense we know existence, except by observing the results of His actions. Recognizing that there is a First Cause, a non-contingent entity, there is only one way to get some inkling about that entity, by understanding to the extent we can, the results of His actions by observing these results. Understanding our environment and ourselves, the results of His actions [please remember “action” is a human term for how these kinds of results can come about], is the only hope we have of getting to know God. This is not easy and requires discipline, personal self-improvement to overcome our natural narcissistic tendencies and developing our capacity for objectivity. As we acquire more and more knowledge, we become more intimate with God and love develops.

האל הנכבד והנורא הזה--מצוה לאוהבו וליראה ממנו, שנאמר "ואהבת, את ה' אלוהיך

ונאמר "את ה' אלוהיך תירא

והיאך היא הדרך לאהבתו, ויראתו: בשעה שיתבונן האדם במעשיו וברואיו הנפלאים הגדולים, ויראה מהם חכמתו שאין לה ערך ולא קץ--מיד הוא אוהב ומשבח ומפאר ומתאווה תאווה גדולה לידע השם הגדול, כמו שאמר דויד "צמאה נפשי, לאלוהים--לאל חי"

(Hilchot Yesodei Hatorah 2:1)

Do we become one with knowledge by knowing the sum total of true beliefs or only a subset, like all true mathematical sentences? What about knowing the names of our children? Optional?


Medieval thinkers understood that knowledge becomes one with the mind and the mind with knowledge. We have a different understanding of how our brain works. However, we still believe that knowledge transforms the human mind from potentially knowing to in-actu knowing. That transformation is described as becoming one with knowledge. Maybe knowing the names of our children is not transformational, but knowing them certainly is.

Do you believe istakel beoraisa oobaraw almaw? [translation: He looked into the Torah and created the world]. Do you accept oraisa vehakadosh borachhoo chad hoo [translation: Torah and God are one] and ditto for yisrael veoraisa [translation: Yisrael and Torah are one]?


These quotes are Zoharic and like all Midrashim cannot be taken literally. These are concisely presented statements of medieval thinkers such as Ramban and Rambam, told in a metaphoric language and these contain a lot of thought in few words. Accepting the idea that Torah encompasses all knowledge [not only Halacha, as contemporary Yeshivot want us to believe], it is not far fetched when Torah is seen as God’s blueprint. It being God’s blueprint makes it one with God whose mind cannot be differentiated from His essence. Yisrael, the committed Torah learners, Torah in its broad sense of course, as they do what they are meant to do, become one with that knowledge. I know that readers will react by saying aren’t the “secular” scientists the ones who developed our understanding of our environment? How can you credit the Torah and those who learn it for the advances in science? The way I see it, myths of antiquity and idolatry and their followers, were a major barrier to open minded inquiry. When one can explain a phenomenon as magical, there is no further need to investigate; indeed investigation is dangerous as it might upset the magical powers that use their esoteric knowledge as tools of control. The core of Halachik Torah is the fight for the abolition of idolatry. The people that practice the Torah, in their human frailty, at times seem to be supporting and going in the wrong direction but then, every so often a person like Rambam appears on the scene and nudges us back onto the right path. It is only because of that partially successful fight against superstition and idolatry that western civilization, greatly influenced by the Judaic culture via its misguided offshoots, Islam and Christianity, made the strides that brought us modern science and empiricism.

In closing, I would like to explain my emphasis on the word “try”, conveying a tentative sense to our knowledge of God and His world and the importance of not deluding ourselves that we have all the answers or even some of them. In Mishlei 16:4-5 we read:



ד כֹּל פָּעַל יְהוָה, לַמַּעֲנֵהוּ; וְגַם-רָשָׁע, לְיוֹם רָעָה. 4

Each act of the Lord has its own end; even the wicked for an evil day.

Rambam in MN3:13 comments on this verse:

The words, " Each act of the Lord has its own end "express therefore the same idea as the following verse, "Everything that is called by my name: I have created it for my glory, I have formed it; yea, I have made it" (Isa. xliii. 7); that is to say, everything that is described as My work has been made by Me for the sake of My will and for no other purpose.

The idea is that in observing that what God made, a person contemplates His will. Lest a person think that he has apprehended God and His will in this contemplation, Shlomo Hamelech immediately warns us –

ה תּוֹעֲבַת יְהוָה, כָּל-גְּבַהּ-לֵב; יָד לְיָד, לֹא יִנָּקֶה. 5

Every one that is proud in heart is an abomination to the LORD; my hand upon it! he shall not be unpunished.



In other words, do not think and act with certainty based on that contemplation. Humans do not have the ability to really apprehend HKBH’s ways, they can try and as long as they are aware of their limitations, they can act with caution and humility. The certainty of the zealot is an abomination to HKBH.

Actions and Knowledge - Decision Making.

 Responding to my comments on the excellent blog Three Jews, Four opinions Evanston Jew posed a few questions which require a more thorough treatment than on a comment thread. Here are the first two: (I rearranged their sequence for clarity)

1. Knowledge=Chochma=wisdom= science= all the sciences +philosophy+ theology. You say in your second comment, "learning Torah encompasses all the sciences etc." Is encompasses the same as identical, and is knowledge, wisdom, science contained in or synonymous with Torah?

2. How can understanding the science of chemistry or evolution predict or give us a picture where the universe is headed. Are you referring to truths like one day the sun will implode or the universe will expand forever? Do you know where the universe is headed?

Let me do the Jewish thing and begin with a question; how does one know whether his or her next act is  good or bad? We all agree that every action has a consequence whether trivial or momentous, so we would have to look at the outcome resulting from that act. As I get older and also more introspective, I can see how actions I took decades ago had consequences which I can tie in with specific decisions I made then. Some of those outcomes are good, others are pretty bad and it is clear that in those cases I could have done things differently for a different and better outcome. But even assessing now, so many years later, whether the outcome was good or bad is not so simple. The bad may be just a transition and as those who are affected by that decision continue on their path, we might find out that things evolved for the best and the same goes for the currently apparent good. In fact, many consequences of my actions may only become clear after I am long gone, maybe even a few generations down the road. As I look back on the things I did, the decisions I made, I have to say that all were pretty much like shooting darts in the dark. There was no real long-term impact assessment or study made before deciding. I based my decision on my instinct, my impulses, and my emotional state at the time and whatever logic I could muster up. Is there a way to improve our decision making so that it has the desired outcome in the long term? But what is the “desired” outcome? Isn’t that a problem too? Different people, based on their state of mind, culture, emotional state, personal bias and a slew of other factors will see different things as good and bad outcomes. Is there an objective criterion?

There really is no good answer to these questions because we are human and our perspective is very limited. But there are ways we can improve our decision-making and broaden our horizon. First, we have to define “good” and “bad” so that we can establish what a “desired” outcome is. Then we have to understand what the consequence of each action is. The most difficult task though is to understand ourselves and overcome our impulses and biases so that we can come to an objective conclusion rather that a subjectively self-indulging one. To achieve all this we need to acquire a lot of knowledge. We have to understand the world we live in, physics, chemistry, biology, sociology, psychology, mathematics and all the other sciences including metaphysics and theology that try to explain how things function in our world. It is only then that we can hope to develop an understanding of “good” and “bad”, desired outcome and the actions that will bring those about. Clearly, no one person, not even one generation of humankind can achieve all this in one lifetime. This requires years, civilizations, many peoples and trial and error.

Rambam tells us in Hilchot Yesodei Hatorah 4:13

 ואני אומר שאין ראוי להיטייל בפרדס, אלא מי שנתמלא כרסו לחם

ובשר; ולחם ובשר זה, הוא לידע ביאור האסור והמותר וכיוצא בהן משאר המצוות. 

ואף על פי שדברים אלו, דבר קטן קראו אותם חכמים, שהרי אמרו חכמים דבר גדול

מעשה מרכבה, ודבר קטן הוויה דאביי ורבא; אף על פי כן, ראויין הן להקדימן: 

שהן מיישבין דעתו של אדם תחילה, ועוד שהן הטובה הגדולה שהשפיע הקדוש ברוך

הוא ליישוב העולם הזה, כדי לנחול חיי העולם הבא.  ואפשר שיידעם הכול--גדול

וקטן, איש ואישה, בעל לב רחב ובעל לב קצר

Pardes are the sciences while Havayot דאביי ורבא are the rules of self-discipline in both action and thought that are the underlying reason of לידע ביאור האסור והמותר וכיוצא בהן משאר המצוות.

Rambam also tells us in Hilchot Talmud Torah 1:12 in a discussion on how one should organize the day and learn Torah and its various components והעניינות הנקראין פרדס, בכלל התלמוד. In other words Pardes, the sciences including metaphysics, are categorized as Talmud, as part of the core of the Mitzvah of Talmud Torah.

The purpose of acquiring all this knowledge and working on self-improvement is to try our best and I keep on emphasizing, “try our best”, to figure out how to act properly and responsibly and to assess “good” and “bad” objectively by understanding ourselves and our environment. This is the idea behind the Mitzvah of Vehalachta Biderachav – to follow in God’s path so poignantly and concisely expressed in Breishit 18:18-19

  וְאַבְרָהָם--הָיוֹ יִהְיֶה לְגוֹי גָּדוֹל, וְעָצוּם; וְנִבְרְכוּ-בוֹ--כֹּל, גּוֹיֵי הָאָרֶץ.

Seeing that Abraham shall surely become a great and mighty nation and all the nations of the earth shall be blessed in him

  כִּי יְדַעְתִּיו, לְמַעַן אֲשֶׁר יְצַוֶּה אֶת-בָּנָיו

וְאֶת-בֵּיתוֹ אַחֲרָיו, וְשָׁמְרוּ דֶּרֶךְ יְהוָה, לַעֲשׂוֹת צְדָקָה

וּמִשְׁפָּט--לְמַעַן, הָבִיא יְהוָה עַל-אַבְרָהָם, אֵת אֲשֶׁר-דִּבֶּר,

עָלָיו.

For I have known him, to the end that he may command his children and his household after him, that they may keep the way of the LORD, to do righteousness and justice; to the end that the LORD may bring upon Abraham that which He hath spoken of him.'

Avraham realized that to know what is the desired effect – “to the end that the LORD may bring upon Abraham that which He hath spoken of him” – he had to first figure out what to “keep the way of the LORD” means. The result of that contemplation was “to do righteousness and justice”. It is with that understanding that Avraham could foresee the outcome at Sdom. When Lot decided to move there the basis of his decision was very mundane – (Breishit 13:10)

י  וַיִּשָּׂא-לוֹט אֶת-עֵינָיו, וַיַּרְא

אֶת-כָּל-כִּכַּר הַיַּרְדֵּן, כִּי כֻלָּהּ, מַשְׁקֶה--לִפְנֵי שַׁחֵת

יְהוָה, אֶת-סְדֹם וְאֶת-עֲמֹרָה, כְּגַן-יְהוָה כְּאֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם,

בֹּאֲכָה צֹעַר.

10 And Lot lifted up his eyes, and beheld all the plain of the Jordan, that it was well watered every where, before the LORD destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, like the garden of the LORD, like the land of Egypt, as one goes unto Tzoar.

I am sure there were signs of the upcoming destruction, as Sdom lies directly on a fault at the edge of a major tectonic plate there must have been earlier less devastating tremors etc… and Lot chose to ignore them because of the short-term gain he saw in the fertility of the land. The “desired outcome” that Lot was seeking was not in accord with Derech Hashem. It was a selfish and narcissistic short-term decision. Avraham on the other hand realized the mistake Lot made and Lot, a student of Avraham, came to that realization just in time to barely save his own skin. Lot’s earlier decisions to join Avraham show his conflicted personality and the imperfect decisions this brought about. It is those early decisions that resulted generations later in the two nations Amon and Mo’av.

So answering Evanston Jews questions, yes all knowledge that leads to our better understanding of our universe, world and society falls under the rubric of Talmud Torah as it helps in our acting responsibly for the long term. The Halachik part of the Torah is only one of the components of Talmud Torah albeit an important one, because it gives us the tools to assimilate the other knowledge and use it constructively. And yes, knowledge and information are crucial in our decision making and for us to know how to act. Does knowledge lead to perfect action, are we always right if we act with knowledge, of course not. We are human and the best we can do is try our best by getting to know as much as we can about ourselves and the world we live in.

I will address Evanston Jews other questions which are related to his first question in a follow up post as I have reached my self-imposed limit on posts lengths and have indulged in a little digressing to Parshanut.  

  

A Great Person Sees A Doctor.

In a recent post on the excellent blog Bein Din Ledin there was a discussion about the two opposing positions of Rambam and Ramban on whether it is appropriate to seek help from a doctor, when one is ill. I discussed this several years ago here where I showed that each of these great Rishonim followed their own understanding of how the world operates as a result of HKBH’s will. What I found disturbing is the quote from Rav Dessler who suggests that Rambam and Ramban do not disagree but rather are talking about two different people at different levels of perfection. Ramban is talking about the truly perfect human being who relies completely on HKBH who should not use doctors but rely on God’s intervention to heal him when sick. Rambam is talking about a regular person who of course cannot rely on a miracle to save him. Such a person and these people are the majority of the population, should go to doctors and doctors are for them. I find this kind of “synthesis” very disturbing and counterproductive. Rav Dessler’s interpretation suggests that there are no binding natural laws, that a perfected person can transcend these laws and live according to a different reality. Once a person truly relies on God, he no longer is bound by nature. BTW, this is the general consensus in the Yeshiva world that real religiosity is total reliance on HKBH and any slack in that belief is at the root of all the evil that befalls Klal Israel. (I believe that this belief, in the sense it is presented, is at the root of all the bad things we currently witness in our community.) RD implies that Rambam would agree with that statement. In my opinion, he is trivializing a great thinker and does not even give justice to Ramban’s approach. In this post, I will analyze Rambam’s position and show why RD is wrong. In a following one, I will present Ramban’s position.
Rambam in his Pirush on the Mishna clearly states that anyone who suggests that King Chizkyahu hid the Sefer Refuot because he did not want people to avail themselves of it, when sick, instead of praying to God, is a fool impugning evil deeds to great people.

ואתה שמע הפסד זה המאמר ומה שיש בו מן השגיונות ואיך יחסו לחזקיהו מן האולת מה שאין
ראוי ליחס כמותו לרעועי ההמון וכמו כן לסיעתו שהודו לו

You must understand how faulty this idea is, how much nonsense it contains. How could they attribute such evil to Chizkyahu, when it does not befit the lowest of the populace to do such a thing? How much more to [attribute such evildoing] to his retinue [of sages] who supposedly agreed with him.

Rambam is unequivocal in stating that this idea is not only nonsense but also evil. Rambam’s world is the reality of material existence that we live in and human beings, with their unique ability, must study it, understand it and by doing that decipher God’s will at creation and act in accordance with that will. It is axiomatic in Rambam’s world that “good” is not necessarily that which makes a particular person happy and “bad” is not that which makes him unhappy. “Good” is continuity and existence and “bad” or “evil” is destruction and any action that might lead to it. We are not talking just about the existence or destruction of the individual, but rather that of his current family and future descendants, the community present and future, all of humanity present and future and even our world and its future. When man was created with his special ability of freedom of thought and choice, the creation of the world was completed. It now had a component that could alter and make changes and adjustments to it as needed. It now had the tools for its long-term survival as a planet for human habitation. We believe that this happened as a result of God’s will, a will whose ultimate purpose and goal we cannot and should not try to understand. It would be a futile quest. However, we do know that God wants it to exist forever and that He has given humankind the responsibility to see to it that it does.

כח וַיְבָרֶךְ אֹתָם, אֱלֹהִים, וַיֹּאמֶר לָהֶם אֱלֹהִים פְּרוּ וּרְבוּ וּמִלְאוּ אֶת-הָאָרֶץ, וְכִבְשֻׁהָ; וּרְדוּ בִּדְגַת הַיָּם, וּבְעוֹף הַשָּׁמַיִם, וּבְכָל-חַיָּה, הָרֹמֶשֶׂת עַל-הָאָרֶץ. 28

And God blessed them; and God said unto them, 'Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that creep upon the earth.'

This verse reads as a command to initiate an ongoing process without any timeline or end point. It is a constant responsibility that goes on forever. Man must multiply so that he can subdue and dominate his surroundings. Part of that dominion and subjugation is to understand the world we live in, its physics, chemistry, biology and all sciences that pertain to it. It is in this process of thinking that man discovers God, His will and ways, and learns how to emulate them.

המצווה השמינית
הציווי שנצטווינו להדמות לו ית' כפי יכלתנו, והוא אמרו:
"והלכת בדרכיו" (דברים כח, ט). וכבר כפל ציווי זה ואמר: "ללכת בכל-דרכיו" (שם יא, כב), ובא בפירוש עניין זה:
"מה הקב"ה נקרא רחום - אף אתה היה רחום;
הקב"ה נקרא חנון - אף אתה היה חנון;
הקב"ה נקרא צדיק - אף אתה היה צדיק;
הקב"ה נקרא חסיד - אף אתה היה חסיד" - זהו לשון ספרי.
וכבר כפל צווי זה בלשון אחר ואמר: "אחרי ה' אלקיכם תלכו" (שם יג, ה), וגם בפירושו בא, שעניינו להתדמות למעשים הטובים ולמידות הנכבדות שבהם מתואר יתעלה על דרך המשל - יתעלה על הכל עילוי רב.

This is the eighth Mitzvat Asseh. The first example of emulating of God is

"מה הקב"ה נקרא רחום - אף אתה היה רחום
Just as God is merciful, so you be merciful.

What exactly is merciful?

“We see, for example, how well He provides for the life of the embryo of living beings. How He endows with certain faculties both the embryo itself and those who have to rear it after its birth, in order that it may be protected from death and destruction, guarded against all harm, and assisted in the performance of all that is required [for its development]. Similar acts, when performed by us, are due to a certain emotion and tenderness called mercy and pity. God therefore, is said to be merciful.” (MN1:54)

Isn’t healing others and ourselves by developing and administering medicines that prolong life and existence, what emulating God in this context mean? Is it not what Rambam means when he says, “Similar acts, when performed by us, are due to a certain emotion and tenderness called mercy and pity”? It is a Mitzvat Asseh thus a-priori obligation that commands us to follow in God’s ways and give or take medicines when sick. Doing nothing and relying on God, according to this approach is not an option, it is sinful and wrong and probably even borders on apostasy.
So where does prayer come into play? What does the prophet mean when he criticizes King Assa for turning to doctors without praying?

דהי”ב טז יב
גם בחליו לא דרש את ה’ כי ברופאים

When we decide how to act based on our understanding of the healing sciences, we want to make sure that it is the correct decision long term, that it fits in with HKBH’s will for the continuity of the whole. We acknowledge the human limitations of not seeing beyond the immediate and in that humble moment, we turn to God to help us overcome our own failings that may influence our decision. It is only in this state of realism and humility than we can hope to make the correct decision and act properly. It is in this state of true self-analysis that we can hope for an answer to our prayer. King Assa was criticized for not acknowledging his humanity, his human limitations.

The greater the man the greater is his understanding of the human frailty and the greater his humility.

ג וְהָאִישׁ מֹשֶׁה, עָנָו מְאֹד--מִכֹּל, הָאָדָם, אֲשֶׁר, עַל-פְּנֵי הָאֲדָמָה. {ס} 3

Now the man Moses was very meek, above all the men that were upon the face of the earth.--

The paradigm of a perfect human being was the humblest. He too would have turned to medicine when sick after acknowledging his limitations and praying for guidance.
Shabbat Shalom.

Mumbai, the Holtzbergs A"H and Some Thoughts on Hashgacha (Divine Providence).

A close friend of mine was in Mumbai two weeks ago and visited with the Holtzbergs A”H on Wednesday, exactly a week before the tragic events begun. He was debating whether to stay on for another week for business reasons finally deciding to leave, thus possibly saving his life. This got me into thinking and rereading some pertinent chapters in MN.

Rambam MN3:17 writes:

“For I do not believe that it is through the interference of Divine Providence that a certain leaf drops [from a tree], nor do I hold that when a certain spider catches a certain fly, that this is the direct result of a special decree and will of God in that moment. It is not by a particular Divine decree that the spittle of a certain person moved, fell on a certain gnat in a certain place, and killed it; nor is it by the direct will of God that a certain fish catches and swallows a certain worm on the surface of the water. In all these cases the action is, according to my opinion, entirely due to chance, as taught by Aristotle. … It may be by mere chance that a ship goes down with all her contents, as in the above-mentioned instance, or the roof of a house falls upon those within. But it is not due to chance, according to our view, that in the one instance the men went into the ship, or remained in the house in the other instance: it is due to the will of God, and is in accordance with the justice of His judgments, the method of which our mind is incapable of understanding.”

Let us analyze the case of the falling leaf. Wind is a natural occurrence. That a leaf drops when wind blows is another natural event. Both of these events have nothing to do with chance. They are predictable results of the natural system of cause and effect put into place at creation .The winds result from variable temperatures and thus air pressure on different expanses of the earth. These are natural events that exist within nature and allow for the existence of life on earth. Theoretically, this event could be predictable. A powerful enough computer, a well-developed mathematical model of probability with adequate data input of all the variables should be able to foresee this event. Looking at the world this way it is pretty much deterministic. However, the fact that a “certain” leaf, this specific leaf falls is the result of pure chance. The natural event is not chance; the particular entity impacted by the event that is present at that particular moment in that particular place is chance. No cause and effect is involved in the choice of that entity. Looking at chance in this case, it can be said that it is spontaneous, there being no outside sentient influence on that particular leaf. The wind blew and that leaf just happened to be there.

In the case of the man who spits and kills a gnat with his spittle, a variant is introduced. This particular gnat is where it is because in its quest for food or protection from the environment it arrived at that particular place at that exact moment. The initial act or movement it undertook was natural, a result of the survival instinct all creature are endowed with. The gnat however could have gone slightly to the right or the left, the fact that it was exactly here where the spittle fell at that exact moment is purely chance. The man too spat to clear his throat, a natural act of self-indulgence and comfort. It is no different from the gnat’s instinct for survival. The man too could have chosen to spit a little to the right or the left and the fact that he spat at the exact moment the gnat was here at the exact spot is too pure chance.

Now let us look at the sinking ship. The wind that caused the storm is a natural event and as we said earlier, has nothing to do with chance and is theoretically predictable. The fact that this ship is present at that place at that time however, has to do with the decision of the sailor to place it there and we will talk some more about that a little further. In this case, the sailor’s sentience plays a part in the event’s outcome, the sinking of the ship. However, as far as the ship itself is concerned, this particular ship being where it is can be ascribed to chance which in this case is non-spontaneous; it comes from the outside - the sailor. What about the sailor himself? The passengers? Here things get a little more complicated.

Sentience in man is no different from the survival instinct in any other creature. Sentience is just a tool that developed in man to make up for other deficiencies he has compared to other creatures and is necessary for his survival. The normal decision process is no different from the gnat’s choice of place and time, though maybe a little more sophisticated. A man has the ability to assimilate data about his environment and depending on his sophistication, predict that a storm is brewing and avoid entering the area. His decision to go or not to go is based on self-preservation and is just an added tool that a man has, to use for that purpose. It all is part of the natural system that governs our universe and is ascribed to God who created the system.

“As regards phenomena produced regularly by natural causes, such as the melting of the snow when the atmosphere becomes warm, the roaring of the sea when a storm rages.... Events caused by man's freewill, such as war, the dominion of one nation over another, the attempt of one person to hurt another, or to insult him are ascribed to God….” (MN2:48)

The day-to-day decisions that people make using their mind and freewill that are necessary for their personal wellbeing and survival are seen as being natural just as wind and rain are. They are also ascribed to God who established these natural laws at creation. But that is only if the decision is based on personal survival and narcissistic self-preservation. If only the personal interest is taken into consideration, even if it encompasses others such as family and children, it is no more than a natural process some of which are subject to chance. However when a man develops the potential that comes with sentience, the ability to think beyond the immediate, beyond the self, when he can look at the whole of creation and act according to the insights he gains from this contemplation, he takes nature into his own hands and controls it. A man who tries to “read the mind of God”, who searches for Him and tries to understand His ways no longer acts with only self-preservation in mind. He acts in a way that fulfills the role he sees for himself as part of God’s universe. Chance does not play a role when he acts in this way. Chance has a place in the normal acts of self-preservation but not in the actions of a man that works towards the loftier goal of emulating God. Hashgacha – Divine Providence (as opposed to Providence) is a word that is used to describe the state a person is in when he acts towards these higher goals. In Hebrew, the word Hashgacha is the opposite of Mikreh – attention or watchfulness versus chance or randomness.

“If man frees his thoughts from worldly matters, obtains knowledge of God in the right way, and rejoices in that knowledge, it is impossible that any kind of evil should befall him while he is with God and God with him. When he does not meditate on God, when he is separated from God, then God is also separated from him; then he is exposed to any evil that might befall him, for it is only that intellectual link with God that secures the presence of Providence and protection from evil accidents…. It is now clearly established that the cause of our being exposed to chance, and abandoned to destruction like cattle, is to be found in our separation from God.” (MN3:51)

The sailor and the passengers in the example of the sinking ship made a decision to board it at this time, to this destination and to brave the storm. The question is on what basis was the decision to travel made? If it was done for personal interests, without trying to “read God’s mind” and act accordingly, they are subject to chance. Their death is tragic and senseless. On the other hand, if the decision was based on “knowledge of God in the right way”, no evil can befall them. Their death, tragic as it is, was not in vain. It was at the service of the greater good.

Looking at my friend’s visit to Mumbai and his timely departure, his decision to leave was induced by a combination of rational thought, emotion and instinct totally unrelated to the unfolding events. He could have gone on this trip a week later and be caught up in the events. He was lucky. He can ascribe his departure to God who gave him the ability to think and act freely, but I do not think that we can refer to this as Hashgacha.

On the other hand the Holtzbergs A”H, unquestionably led a life of “knowledge of God in the right way”. The fact that they are tragically dead, “it is due to the will of God, and is in accordance with the justice of His judgments, the method of which our mind is incapable of understanding.” The good they did in their lifetime, short as it was, affected many over the years. Lives have been changed thanks to them and generations will be affected by that. The result of their hard work will remain for a long time among the people who knew them.

מג
הַרְנִינוּ גוֹיִם עַמּוֹ, כִּי
דַם-עֲבָדָיו יִקּוֹם; וְנָקָם יָשִׁיב לְצָרָיו, וְכִפֶּר
אַדְמָתוֹ עַמּוֹ.

43 Sing aloud, O ye nations, of His people; for He doth avenge the blood of His servants, and doth render vengeance to His adversaries, and doth make expiation for the land of His people.


Shabbat Shalom

Avraham's Prophetic Vision - Sdom's Destruction.

(I recommend that Breishit Chapters 18 and 19 be read before reading this post.)

The story of Avraham and the angels has generated a lot of controversy among the Rishonim. The discussion centers round Rambam’s famous statement that this is a report of a prophetic vision rather than a real life occurrence. Rambam in MN 2:42 as usual, is a little cryptic and I will try to flesh him out. After explaining that whenever the presence of an angel is mentioned in the text in any part of the story, it must be a prophetic vision, Rambam brings the following example:

“This important principle was adopted by one of our Sages, one of the greatest among them, R. Hiya the Great (Bereshit Raba, xlviii.), in the exposition of the Scriptural passage commencing, "And the Lord appeared unto him in the plain of Mamre" (Gen. Xviii.). The general statement that the Lord appeared to Avraham is followed by the description in what manner that appearance of the Lord took place. Avraham at first saw three men and ran whereupon they spoke and were spoken to. R. Hiya, the author of this allegorical explanation, says of Avraham’s words, "My Lord, if now I have found grace in thy sight, do not, I pray thee, pass from thy servant," were spoken by him in a prophetic vision to one of the men; he says in fact that Avraham addressed these words to the greatest of these men. Note this well, for it is one of the great mysteries [of the Law].”

Rambam reads the scriptural text as follows –

א וַיֵּרָא אֵלָיו יְהוָה, בְּאֵלֹנֵי מַמְרֵא; וְהוּא יֹשֵׁב פֶּתַח-הָאֹהֶל, כְּחֹם הַיּוֹם.

1 And the LORD appeared unto him by the plains of Mamre, as he sat in the tent door in the heat of the day.

This verse is an introduction stating that Avraham, sitting in the heat of the day got lost in thought and experienced a prophetic vision. It must be a vision, as God is not physical and can only be “seen” in the mind’s eyes. The rest of the story is a description of that vision. Thus, when Avraham speaks, his mind sees him as speaking and when the “angels” speak, it is Avraham’s mind that hears them speak. In other words, Avraham was contemplating how HKBH runs the world and during that cogitation, he became aware of the imminent destruction of Sdom. Rambam brings an interesting proof to his position.

ג וַיֹּאמַר: אֲדֹנָי, אִם-נָא מָצָאתִי חֵן בְּעֵינֶיךָ--אַל-נָא תַעֲבֹר, מֵעַל עַבְדֶּךָ.

3 and said: 'My lord, if now I have found favor in your sight, pass not away, I pray thee, from thy servant.

This verse is the subject of a Halachik discussion in Massechet Shevuot 35b that revolves around who we understand is: אֲדֹנָי - “my lord”. One way of understanding is that as Avraham was contemplating some aspect of HKBH, he moved away to thinking about more mundane matters, such as his childlessness. He therefore, in his vision, begged God forgiveness for being distracted and promised to return soon to the subject at hand. According to this interpretation, אֲדֹנָי is the name of God and therefore has certain Halachik requisites when written in a Sefer Torah. The other way of interpreting it is that Avraham was talking to the “angels” in his vision begging them not to bypass him. According to this understanding, the word אֲדֹנָיis translated “my lord” and has no special requirements when written. This interpretation however is problematic. The word אֲדֹנָיis singular as is the rest of the sentence while there were three “angels”. Rav Hiya addresses it and explains that Avraham spoke to the greatest among them. The way Rambam quotes Rav Hiya, where is the proof that the men were angels and therefore Avraham was having a prophetic vision? Furthermore, what caused Rambam’s excitement and why did he see in this apparently innocuous statement one of the “great mysteries of the Law”?

Rav Hiya’s comment is preserved in Midrash Raba Breishit 48:3 (Theodor- Albeck Edition page 486) –

ויאמר אדני אם נא מצאתי חן תני ר' חייא:
לגדול שבהן אמר: זה מיכאל.

The Midrash adds two crucial words זה מיכאל – namely the angel Michael - which Rambam omitted. These kinds of omissions are quite common in Rambam who expects us to check his sources and fill in the blanks. Although there could be a deeper reason, I believe this to be a didactic method where Rambam sees his role as a teacher who prods his students to think. What is however the meaning of “greatest” among them? How did Avraham know who was the “greatest? The Gemara in Yoma 37a says that the middle person is the leader by convention. But I believe there is much more to this.

In MN2:6 Rambam explains that angels are a general description of the various forces and concepts that regulate our existence. Among other things –

“Rather do all these texts state plainly that all this – including the various parts of that which exists and even the creation of the limbs of animals as they are – has been brought about by the intermediation of the angels. …that God has placed in the sperm a formative power which produces and shapes the limbs, and that this power is called "angel," or that all forms derive from the act of the Active Intellect, and that the latter is the angel, the Prince of the World, frequently mentioned by our Sages…”

In other words, the laws and forces of nature that are responsible for the existence of the physical world are at times, referred to as “angel”. This particular “angel” responsible for physical existence and its continuity, is referred to by the rabbis as The “Prince of the World”. Interestingly Rav Kafih refers us in his notes to Pirkei D’Rabbi Eliezer chapter 27 where the “Prince of the World” is identified with the angel Michael.

Putting all these pieces together, we get the following picture. Avraham was sitting in contemplation thinking about God and trying to apprehend Him through His creations – our world. As he was considering the forces of nature that cause things to exist and observing natural phenomena, he came to realize that an impending cataclysmic disaster was about to happen nearby, in Sdom. He arrived at that conclusion in a flash of revelation which came in the form of a vision where the forces took on the form of the three “angels”. Interpreting the vision, Avraham understood that the middle one represented the “greatest” of the three, namely “Michael the Prince of the World” who represents the natural laws and forces responsible for nature. The vision had a little side theme where Avraham’s conviction that he was about to have a son with Sarah, was reinforced. As Abravanel explains Rambam, the rest of the story including the part of Lot’s escape and his wife turning into a heap of salt, are all part of the vision. Avraham realized the magnitude of the upcoming event and struggled with how to understand God’s justice in light of such general disasters that sweep up the evil and the righteous. The vision that Lot unlike the rest of the town, though reluctantly, will finally realize that escape was the only solution, is I understand an answer to that question. If one is sufficiently attuned to one’s surroundings and can overcome their greed, laziness and paralysis that cloud man’s objectivity, many times he can predict and foresee these natural disasters. If ten people in town are righteous, in other words, able to foresee and accept the impending disaster, they might convince the whole town to escape. Unfortunately, in his vision, Avraham saw that only Lot would have the necessary prescience. The vision comes to an end and the disaster unfolds.

כז וַיַּשְׁכֵּם אַבְרָהָם, בַּבֹּקֶר: אֶל-הַמָּקוֹם--אֲשֶׁר-עָמַד שָׁם, אֶת-פְּנֵי יְהוָה.

27 And Avraham got up early in the morning to the place where he had stood before the LORD.

כח וַיַּשְׁקֵף, עַל-פְּנֵי סְדֹם וַעֲמֹרָה, וְעַל-כָּל-פְּנֵי, אֶרֶץ הַכִּכָּר; וַיַּרְא, וְהִנֵּה עָלָה קִיטֹר הָאָרֶץ, כְּקִיטֹר, הַכִּבְשָׁן.

28 And he looked out toward Sodom and Gomorrah, and toward all the land of the Plain, and beheld, and, lo, the smoke of the land went up as the smoke of a furnace.

Reading the story in this manner there is no question that all this was a vision. Furthermore, it teaches deep and important lessons about the meaning of Divine Providence, man’s role in it, God’s justice, righteousness and man’s freedom to act responsibly or irresponsibly. The text becomes a treatise on philosophical issues of great importance and relevance to our religious thought and practice.

An Interesting Comment on the Previous Post

An email comment on my last post that I thought worthwhile enough to publish. (With permission and slight editing).

On a micro level- Galgalim (spheres) or nature, seem to have Bechira. An atom can split on its own but for some reason doesn't without us causing it. The more we study science the more we yet have to explain the rules of science but we are always left with a question on why it chooses to work this way instead of another. As soon as we think we figure it out, we find another aspect that seems to be random. This will be a process that will always exist in man’s search for an explanation or understanding how things work. This choosing of nature to work one way versus another or randomness is what the Rambam calls Bechira. This is a much higher level than we are because at the end of the day it is doing solely the Ratzon hashem. Moshe was much closer to that level because whatever Moshe did was in fact Ratzon hashem. Even though on a micro when Moshe hit the rock or the mitzri it seemed like it was his decision and choice and that G-d may seem to have been angry at Moshe (when he hit the rock). The end result was that he did Ratzon hashem. When the water flooded the world in the Mabul or the sea split for the Jews may seem as nature choosing a dif direction. The end result is Ratzon hashem.

At the end of the day the macro is only Ratzon hashem and on the micro what we interpret as Bechira whether in nature or in ourselves is also Ratzon hashem. The difference is that in nature it is more difficult to see Bechira (on a micro level) unless you study science or are a theologian. That is why it is on a higher level than Bechira of man. Moshe was closer to that level of Bechira.

Who Needs Doctors?

In this week’s Parsha, Bechukotai, Ramban (Vaykra 26:11) discusses the blessings that the Torah promises to those who follow its ways. He then touches upon the issue of using doctors to heal us.

רמב"ן ויקרא פרק כו

והכלל כי בהיות ישראל שלמים והם רבים, לא יתנהג ענינם בטבע כלל, לא בגופם, ולא בארצם, לא בכללם, ולא ביחיד מהם, כי יברך השם לחמם ומימם, ויסיר מחלה מקרבם, עד שלא יצטרכו לרופא ולהשתמר בדרך מדרכי הרפואות כלל, כמו שאמר (שמות טו כו) כי אני ה' רופאך. וכן היו הצדיקים עושים בזמן הנבואה, גם כי יקרם עון שיחלו לא ידרשו ברופאים רק בנביאים, כענין חזקיהו בחלותו (מ"ב כ ב ג:

Generally, when the majority of the Jews are perfect, they are not under the sway of natural laws, neither as to their body nor as to their land, neither as individuals nor as a group. For God will bless their bread and water, thereby removing illnesses from among them to the point they will never need doctors or their medicines as it says “for I God am your healer”. That is how the righteous behaved at the time of prophecy, they sought out prophets rather than doctors as Chizkyahu did when they became sick because of a particular transgression.

Ramban had explained earlier that sicknesses result when the land is cursed producing fruits that cause sickness while when God blesses it, the food itself is medicinal. Thus if a majority of the people are righteous the produce of the land is blessed and sickness is eliminated. Ramban is consistent with his understanding that science is an illusion. Observable phenomena are a result of, either the indirect control of God via spirits or other such supernatural powers, or, as in the case of the Jews in their land, God’s direct intervention. He then makes a famous statement:

ומה חלק לרופאים בבית עושי רצון השם

What place do doctors have in the house of those who fulfill God’s will?

אבל ברצות השם דרכי איש אין לו עסק ברופאים

When God approves of a man’s ways, doctors have no place with him.

In general, Ramban sees the use of medicine as a concession and a human weakness. Righteous people would never avail themselves of doctors nor would they need to.

In Massechet Pessachim, the Mishna says that Chizkyahu destroyed the Book of Healings. Rambam proposes two possibilities as the reason. Either the book contained magical potions which are nonsensical harming people who used them instead of good medicine. Another possibility is that it contained poisons that people used to harm others. It is because of one of these reasons that Chizkyahu decided to destroy it. Rambam is not satisfied and continues:

פירוש המשנה לרמב"ם מסכת פסחים פרק ד

ולא הארכתי לדבר בענין זה אלא מפני ששמעתי וגם פירשו לי ששלמה חבר ספר רפואות שאם חלה אדם באיזו מחלה שהיא פנה אליו ועשה כמו שהוא אומר ומתרפא, וראה חזקיה שלא היו בני אדם בוטחים בה' במחלותיהם אלא על ספר הרפואות, עמד וגנזו. ומלבד אפסות דבר זה ומה שיש בו מן ההזיות, הנה ייחסו לחזקיה ולסיעתו שהודו לו סכלות שאין ליחס דוגמתה אלא לגרועים שבהמון. ולפי דמיונם המשובש והמטופש אם רעב אדם ופנה אל הלחם ואכלו שמתרפא מאותו הצער הגדול בלי ספק, האם נאמר שהסיר בטחונו מה', והוי שוטים יאמר להם, כי כמו שאני מודה לה' בעת האוכל שהמציא לי דבר להסיר רעבוני ולהחיותני ולקיימני, כך נודה לו על שהמציא רפואה המרפאה את מחלתי כשאשתמש בה. ולא הייתי צריך לסתור פירוש זה הגרוע לולי פרסומו.

I talk about this at length because I heard and was also told that Shlomo composed this book of healing to be used by sick people. It was a very effective medical treatise and worked as predicted. Any sick person that turned to it and followed its instructions was healed. As Chizkyahu realized that instead of turning to God when sick, they used the medicines recommended in the book to heal themselves, he decided to destroy it. Besides this making no sense and being a fantasy too, they also accuse Chizkyahu and his group of perpetrating a stupidity that one would not expect from the lowest among the masses. According to their idiotic and erroneous imagination, a hungry person that eats bread, relieving his great pain, demonstrates that he does not rely on God? O fools that they are! The same way I thank God when I eat for having provided me things that alleviate my hunger and thus sustain me, so too do I thank Him for having provided me with the cure to my illness that is available for my use. It should not have been necessary for me to negate this explanation if not for the fact that it is so widespread!

The contrast between Ramban and Rambam’s understanding is jarring. As we saw to Rambam, understanding the sciences is the way to finding God. It shows His greatness and omniscience. Ramban on the other hand sees science as deflecting from God. The repetitiveness of what we consider to be natural law is an illusion. If we look carefully, we will see that there are powers that influence things at whim. While all the other nations are under the auspices of the stars and the spirits, we, the Jewish people, when in our land, are under the direct control of God. If we follow His laws, nothing bad can happen to us. That obviously miraculous providence is the greatest proof for the existence of God, the Creator.

The implications of these two world views are immense and affect how we are to understand providence, reward and punishment, prayer and generally, what the meaning of Mitzvot is.