Rambam deals with a misfortune - the death of a young daughter.

Further to my last post “who is Satan?” http://yediah.blogspot.com/2007/02/who-is-satan.html my friend Rabbi Buchman reminded me about the following excerpt of a letter Rambam wrote to his pupil R. Yosef ben Yehudah. It is published in R. Shailat’s edition of the Iggerot page 262. I am not a very good translator so here goes more or less a paraphrase.

“I already advised you about the death of the young daughter[1] God should accept her death as a Kapparah. My son, do not mourn or be depressed on neither a male nor a female. God knows, and the truth is as I will say, that a person that understands things does well when he focuses on humankind rather than the individual[2]. I am not saying that this attitude is perfect but it is the most acceptable and is the cause of the least anxiety. There is no choice for a person wishing to understand our well designed existence that was labeled by its Creator “Tov Me’od” – very good – but to concentrate and see the good in the happenings of the whole of humankind rather than trying to see it in the occurrences in the life of each individual. I hope that when you will receive the chapters of the Moreh Hanevuchim dealing with this issue, you will understand this better with God’s help”.

Apparently Rambam wrote this letter while he was still composing the MN, which he published in sections. It confirms our understanding of his attitude towards the misfortunes in our day-to-day life.

It is interesting to contrast this letter with an earlier one (page 228) regarding the death of his brother and his reaction to it. There too, though he admits to depression, illness and still being disconsolate eight years after his death, he consoles himself with the study of Torah and general knowledge. To be translated at a later date.


[1] Although there are different opinions R. Sheilat believes it is Rambam’s daughter.
[2] I translated it as I understand this sentence in the context though it is a little forced. See r. Sheilat’s note that the letter is only available in a poor translation and not in its original Arabic.

Who is Satan?

I have worked very hard on this post and I publish it with much trepidation. It is very easy to be philosophical about human suffering especially when it is about someone else's pain. It is also easy to pontificate when it is impersonal. However I believe it is a subject that needs to be addressed. The whole book of Iyov was written with that issue in mind. I believe the Rabbis who put Iyov's existence into doubt were telling us that it can only be discussed in an impersonal way. It is however a suggested personal contemplation for the sufferer in the hope that it will mitigate his pain. Please take it in that vein and not as a sermon Chas Vechalila.


Satan, Mal’ach Hamavet - angel of death and Yetzer Hara are synonyms. Rambam is very enraptured with this insight.

“…listen to the following useful instruction given by our Sages, who in truth deserve the title of "wise men"; it makes clear that which appears doubtful, and reveals that which has been hidden, and discloses most of the mysteries of the Law. They said in the Talmud as follows: R. Simeon, son of Lakish, says: "The adversary (Satan), evil inclination (Yetzer Hara), and the angel of death, are one and the same being." Here we find all that has been mentioned by us in such a clear manner that no intelligent person will be in doubt about it. It has thus been shown to you that one and the same thing is designated by these three different terms, and that actions ascribed to these three are in reality the actions of one and the same agent.”(MN3:22)

What is the great insight and what makes it so praiseworthy?

There is a concept that is common to all medieval thinkers that is very difficult to translate into our contemporary way of thinking. It is the idea of Matter and Form. Already in antiquity the idea of Form meant different things to different philosophers. While Plato saw it as a mental construct of “the permanent reality that makes a thing what it is, in contrast to the particulars that are finite and subject to change. Each form is the pattern of a particular category of thing in the world; thus, there are forms of human, stone, shape, color, beauty, and justice. Whereas the physical world, perceived with the senses, is in constant flux and knowledge derived from it restricted and variable, the realm of forms, apprehensible only by the mind, is eternal and changeless.” Aristotle saw it as “the arrangement or organization through which such elements (matter) have become the thing in question”. (Britannica Concise Encyclopedia)

I believe Plato’s understanding is easier to translate into our language though Aristotle’s approach can also be interpreted similarly. I can visualize the “idea” of a tree, for example, as always being out there even when the tree itself no longer exists. All the science that goes into a tree growing is there before and after the tree. It is eternal and changeless. It exists even without a human being around who apprehends it with his mind. In fact it was there before a human understood it just like Relativity existed before Einstein described it. Every physical entity from the simplest to the most complex has its “idea”, its underlying science. In other words everything we know and we will ever know and experience in the physical world we live in, is potentially out there in the form of a scientific concept. This is what Rambam refers to as Form.

Form as described starts of as a potential and is actualized in matter. Matter is the actualization of Form, which is the idea behind it. Of course it is difficult to visualize a concept without a mind that conceptualizes it. This issue is a discussion that falls in the philosophical realm of the mind–body connection and problem. Let us, for this discussion sake, simplify and say it is God’s mind that conceptualizes the science underlying existence. I will return to it in my discussions of Hashgacha and Yediah.

In terms of eternity therefore, while Form is eternal and unchanging, matter is temporal and always changing. Matter comes into existence, not having been extant before nor is it after it no longer exists. Destruction and death is a necessary quality of matter.

When discussing the story of Adam and Chava, Rambam differentiates between truth and falseness and good and bad. “Through the intellect man distinguishes between truth and falsehood. This faculty Adam possessed perfectly and completely. Fine and bad belong to the things generally accepted as known, not to those cognized by the intellect.” (MN 1:2) Good and bad are terms that are subjective categorizations that we use in describing our relationship with physical existence. Existence is good while destruction is bad. It is a relative and subjective assessment. On the other hand our intellectual quest in understanding our physical existence is an objective analysis which can be either true or false. The human intellect is thus the potential that is actualized in physical reality in the same manner Form is actualized in matter.

In the story of Iyov, which is the subject of the chapter of MN I quoted; Satan is contrasted with Bnei Ha’elohim. Rambam understands the story as a description of reality. The Bnei Ha’elohim represent the Form of existence, the concept, while Satan is matter. The word Lehityatzev, to stand firmly, is always used with the Bnei Ha’elohim while only the second time with Satan. Form is eternal while Satan, matter, is temporal.

Iyov had suffered great losses and was despondent. His suffering was related to his physical existence and not to his intellect. Rambam notes that Iyov is described as a just man –“It is remarkable in this account that wisdom is not ascribed to Job. The text does not say he was an intelligent, wise, or clever man; but virtues and uprightness, especially in actions, are ascribed to him.” Virtue and uprightness deal with Good and Bad, relative and subjective matters that focus on our day-to-day physical well-being. It does not address Truth and Falseness which are the realm of wisdom. Human suffering is always related to the physical part of existence, to life and death, good and bad. It is only when Satan, the symbol of matter and the physical reigns that bad things happen. Understanding this does not mitigate the pain but puts it in a proper perspective. The perceived injustice and unfair suffering, is related to the temporal, our physical existence, while our intellectual self remains intact eternally and can only be affected by truth and falseness.

I believe that there is an even deeper message here. As I discussed in my earlier posts on Hashgacha, it is only when man takes the long-term view that Providence comes into play. The examples we use are the Avot who had a long-term goal of building a nation of seekers. If the long-term goal is reached, the tribulations and pain suffered along the way are retrospectively much easier to understand and deal with. The individual while he is acting, doing and living can only do his best, use his intellect in trying to understand the meaning of life and what is his role in the history of humankind and existence and act accordingly. That way of thinking in itself helps in mitigating the inevitable pain and suffering of our physical existence.

“This lesson is the principal object of the whole Book of Job; it establishes the foundation for the belief and the drawing attention to the inference to be drawn from natural matters, so that we should not fall into the error of imagining His knowledge to be similar to ours, or His intention, providence, and rule similar to ours. When we know this we shall find everything that may befall us easy to bear; mishap will create no doubts in our hearts concerning God, whether He knows our affairs or not, whether He provides for us or abandons us.”(MN3:23)

When we contemplate another person’s misfortune it is crass to minimize it by being philosophical. It is wrong and shows a lack of empathy and caring. However for the person that goes through the trauma, the sufferer, this is a way of dealing with the misfortune. By energizing himself, being introspective and acting on it, there is the possibility of growth and better long-term outcome.

יב וַיהוָה, בֵּרַךְ אֶת אַחֲרִית אִיּוֹב--מֵרֵאשִׁתוֹ; וַיְהִי לוֹ אַרְבָּעָה עָשָׂר אֶלֶף צֹאן, וְשֵׁשֶׁת אֲלָפִים גְּמַלִּים, וְאֶלֶף צֶמֶד בָּקָר, וְאֶלֶף אֲתוֹנוֹת.
12 So the LORD blessed the latter end of Job more than his beginning; and he had fourteen thousand sheep, and six thousand camels, and a thousand yoke of oxen, and a thousand she-asses.
יג וַיְהִי לוֹ שִׁבְעָנָה בָנִים, וְשָׁלוֹשׁ בָּנוֹת.
13 He had also seven sons and three daughters.
יד וַיִּקְרָא שֵׁם הָאַחַת יְמִימָה, וְשֵׁם הַשֵּׁנִית קְצִיעָה; וְשֵׁם הַשְּׁלִישִׁית, קֶרֶן הַפּוּךְ.
14 And he called the name of the first, Jemimah; and the name of the second, Keziah; and the name of the third, Keren-happuch.
טו וְלֹא נִמְצָא נָשִׁים יָפוֹת, כִּבְנוֹת אִיּוֹב--בְּכָל הָאָרֶץ; וַיִּתֵּן לָהֶם אֲבִיהֶם נַחֲלָה, בְּתוֹךְ אֲחֵיהֶם.
15 And in all the land were no women found as fair as the daughters of Job were; and their father gave them inheritance among their brethren.
טז וַיְחִי אִיּוֹב אַחֲרֵי זֹאת, מֵאָה וְאַרְבָּעִים שָׁנָה; וירא (וַיִּרְאֶה), אֶת בָּנָיו וְאֶת בְּנֵי בָנָיו--אַרְבָּעָה, דֹּרוֹת.
16 And after this Job lived a hundred and forty years, and saw his sons, and his sons' sons, even four generations.
יז וַיָּמָת אִיּוֹב, זָקֵן וּשְׂבַע יָמִים. {ש}
17 So Job died, being old and full of days. {P}

How dogmatic is Rambam's dogma? A review of an article by Eli Gurfinkel.

I just received the latest issue of Da’at #60 and read a very interesting article by a doctoral student Eli Gurfinkel “Maimonides – Between Dogmatism and Liberalism”. He is addressing the issue of the famous 13 Ikarim and the many problems that critics over time had with this supposed[1] Rambam innovation. After listing all the different important beliefs Rambam sets out in his different writings he comes up with a list of 17 dogmas. He then places them all on a table[2],[3] where he lists 16 of them and where Rambam discusses them. Although I have some problem with the choice of sources he decides to list, skipping many important citations, he does bring home that Rambam seems to be inconsistent regarding what is dogma. This issue is old and has been discussed by both Rambam’s classic commentators and the moderns.

Mr. Gurfinkel proposes a very intriguing idea and I think it is probably correct, though I would like to think about it some more. He suggests that there are according to his count at least 17 dogmas or necessary beliefs and they are all meant to be accepted. However what they mean is up to interpretation. Some have more room for interpretation than others, others have to be accepted but what exactly they mean can only be known after much study and contemplation while others are understood differently by different people at whatever stage of development they are. He even suggests that there some beliefs that Rambam himself is not sure exactly how to define. He is using as an example the three mentioned in his Pirush Hamishna[4] where he says that when we find an argument in matters of Hashkafah, we cannot decide who is right, as it is something that belongs to God.

This seems to fit very nicely with the following two citations in MN.

MN 1:35 –

“Those who are not sufficiently intelligent to comprehend the true interpretation of these passages in the Bible, or to understand that the same term admits of two different interpretations, may simply be told that the scriptural passage is clearly understood by the wise, but that they should content themselves with knowing that God is incorporeal, that He is never subject to external influence, as passivity implies a change, while God is entirely free from all change, that He cannot be compared to anything besides Himself, that no definition includes Him together with any other being, that the words of the Prophets are true, and that difficulties met with may be explained on this principle. This may suffice for that class of persons, and it is not proper to leave them in the belief that God is corporeal, or that He has any of the properties of material objects, just as there is no need to leave them in the belief that God does not exist, that there are more Gods than one, or that any other being may be worshipped.”

Even the unintelligent or those at earlier stages of development have to be taught that God is Incorporeal, unchanging, unique, cannot be compared to other physical beings, that prophecy is true and that there are explanations to the problems one might face when confronted with these beliefs in the process of learning. Note that the exact meaning of what some of these beliefs are is left open.

In MN 3:28 he says:

“IT is necessary to bear in mind that Scripture only teaches the chief points of those true principles which lead to the true perfection of man, and only demands in general terms faith in them. Thus Scripture teaches the Existence, the Unity, the Omniscience, the Omnipotence, the Will, and the Eternity of God. All this is given in the form of final results, but they cannot be understood fully and accurately except after the acquisition of many kinds of knowledge. Scripture further demands belief in certain truths, the belief in which is indispensable in regulating our social relations: such is the belief that God is angry with those who disobey Him, for it leads us to the fear and dread of disobedience [to the will of God]. There are other truths in reference to the whole of the Universe which form the substance of the various and many kinds of speculative sciences, and afford the means of verifying the above-mentioned principles as their final result…”

What I like about this explanation is that it is simple, logical and flows with the way I understand Rambam’s developmental approach to religion. It is not set in stone and dogma but a subject of study and discovery. Torah and Judaism are a lifetime project for individuals and an eternal study and development for generations of humans. There is however a core belief system that one has to adhere to in that developmental process. There was only one Avraham who started from scratch and it is our job to finish the work he began.

I would love to hear your thoughts.




[1] My term.
[2] He shows that the first two, Existence of God and His unity, are discussed in all the following writings: MT Hil Yesodei Hatorah (YH) Chapters 1-4, Hilchot Teshuvah (HT) Ch. 3 to 8, Iggeret Teiman (IT), Iggeret Techyat Hametim (ITH) and MN 3:28[2]. Non Physicality of God and eternity is not mentioned in the IT and ITH, creation of the world and exclusive service only in YH, Prophecy, Moshe’s prophecy, TMS, eternity of the Torah in all except MN 3:28, God’s providence and His knowing everything in MN 3:28, HT and YH. He them lists Reward and Punishment as mentioned only in MN3:28 which is surprising as it is discussed extensively in HT, Mashiach he lists in YH and HT (I am not sure where in YH), Techyat Hametim in HT and ITH, Israel as a special nation in IT and freedom of choice in HT.
[3] The 17th being the existence of angels which is mentioned in MN 3:45 is not listed here for some reason, although repeatedly mentioned in the article.
[4] Sotah 3:3, Sanhedrin 10:3, Shavuot 1:4.

May one just simply believe? Emunah Peshutah as a Commandment and as Idolatry.

Is there a place for Emunah Peshutah in Judaism? I know that it is a theology proposed by Rav Nachman of Breslov. I am not well versed in his writings but from the little I have read I suspect that it is much more complex than meets the eye. I also suspect that the Emunah Peshutah that is bandied around by his contemporary followers is not what he had in mind. Be it as it may, the popular understanding of this idea is that it is a goal to work on oneself not to ask questions, ignore reality and deny our rational capacity. Just accept that there is a God that may or may not be physical, that sometimes gets angry at other times not, He is one but we do not exactly know what that means (one God or unique?) and so on. This latter version of Emunah Peshutah is anathema to everything Judaism was meant to teach the world and us and according to Rambam contravenes the second commandment, Lo Y’heyeh Lecha elohim acherim.

The Ten Commandments start with two Mitzvot. The first is the positive command Anochi Hashem Elokecha which Rambam in Hilchot Yesodei Hatorah defines as the obligation to “know” (not just believe) that God is 1) the First Cause, 2) if He did not exist nothing else would 3) if nothing else existed, He would, 4) He is the only ultimate truth, 5) He is the force that makes the universe move (in Aristotelian parlance moves the Spheres). These are quite complicated concepts and require a lot of study and contemplation to grasp them. This type of positive commandment means that one has to spend a lifetime, if necessary, until one arrives at the understanding of these concepts about God. In other words it is a constant obligation on us.

The second Mitzvah is Lo Y’heyeh Lecha elohim acherim Al Panay. Rambam defines this Mitzvah together with the first in Hilchot Yesodei Hatorah 1:6. After telling us that one has to “know” the concepts covered by the first mitzvah, one who thinks that there is a different God, (different than the concepts listed above) transgresses the negative commandment of Lo Y’heyeh and is “Kofer Be’ikar”, errs in the most fundamental dogma (literally “root”) because this is the great dogma (root) that everything depends upon.

[ו] וידיעת דבר זה מצות עשה, שנאמר "אנוכי ה' אלוהיך" (
וכל המעלה על דעתו שיש שם אלוה אחר, חוץ מזה--עובר בלא תעשה, שנאמר "לא יהיה לך אלוהים אחרים, על פניי"
וכפר בעיקר, שזה הוא העיקר הגדול שהכול תלוי בו.

Rambam holds that one who has a concept of God that does not agree with those listed above transgresses this Mitzvah and denies the most important and fundamental ideas of Judaism.

In MN 1:36 Rambam defines the words Kefirah as follows: “by "infidelity" (Kefirah) I mean the belief that a thing is different from what it really is”. He goes on to say: “How great, then, must be the offense of him who has a wrong opinion of God Himself, and believes Him to be different from what He truly is, i.e., assumes that He does not exist, that He consists of two elements, that He is corporeal, that He is subject to external influence, or ascribes to Him any defect whatever. Such a person is undoubtedly worse than he who worships idols in the belief that they, as agents, can do good or evil.”

On the one hand Rambam expects us to “know” all these difficult concepts and at the same time he warns us that if we have incorrect concepts of God we are transgressing a commandment. These ideas are very complex and take a lot of study and contemplation, sometimes years. What are we to do until we get there?

In MN 1:35 Rambam discusses what we should teach children and beginners in general about God and the educational impact of our teaching.

“That God is incorporeal, that He cannot be compared with His creatures, that He is not subject to external influence; these are things which must be explained to every one according to his capacity, and they must be taught by way of tradition to children and women, to the stupid and ignorant, as they are taught that God is One, that He is eternal, and that He alone is to be worshipped. Without incorporeality there is no unity, for a corporeal thing is in the first case not simple, but composed of matter and form which are two separate things by definition, and secondly, as it has extension it is also divisible. When persons have received this doctrine, and have been trained in this belief, and are in consequence at a loss to reconcile it with the writings of the Prophets, the meaning of the latter must be made clear and explained to them by pointing out the homonymity and the figurative application of certain terms discussed in this part of the work. Their belief in the unity of God and in the words of the Prophets will then be a true and perfect belief.”

We are supposed to teach children and beginners to accept that God exists, cannot be influenced, He is incorporeal and unique. We explain to them the last two as they are easier to grasp. As they grow in understanding and are confronted in their learning with texts that seem to contradict what they were taught, they are introduced to the philosophical discourse and the ways of interpretation. It is almost as if there is an intentional contradiction between what the Torah asks us to accept and believe and the different narratives within it. By confronting them a person develops to the point that he “knows” the first Mitzvah of Anochi and the five principles it incorporates. The negative commandment is thus the tool that helps us keep the positive commandment of knowing God. This is the Emunah Peshutah that we have as we start our quest, as opposed to the one touted by some segments of our community. This Emunah Peshutah is also not a goal but the first step in Avodat Hashem. It is also the belief of those who do not have the capacity to understand.

Those who are not sufficiently intelligent to comprehend the true interpretation of these passages in the Bible, or to understand that the same term admits of two different interpretations, may simply be told that the scriptural passage is clearly understood by the wise, but that they should content themselves with knowing that God is incorporeal, that He is never subject to external influence, as passivity implies a change, while God is entirely free from all change, that He cannot be compared to anything besides Himself, that no definition includes Him together with any other being, that the words of the Prophets are true, and that difficulties met with may be explained on this principle. This may suffice for that class of persons, and it is not proper to leave them in the belief that God is corporeal, or that He has any of the properties of material objects, just as there is no need to leave them in the belief that God does not exist, that there are more Gods than one, or that any other being may be worshipped.”

Not everyone has the capacity to “know”. Those who do not, we ask to believe and accept. Usually the people who do not have the intellectual capacity to learn the philosophical discourse are also not bothered by the questions. Emunah Peshutah, accepting things on belief, suffices for them.

This kind of Emunah Peshutah is not only acceptable, it is mandatory and fulfills the obligations imposed by the negative commandment of Lo Y’heyeh Lecha. The popular one contravenes it.

Ramban on Hashgacha Pratit - Individual Providence.

As discussed in earlier posts http://yediah.blogspot.com/2007/01/acquiring-providence-arduous-task-part_11.html Rambam understands Hashgacha to be a function of a person getting close to God by learning His ways and, emulating them and thus partaking in His running of the universe and its inhabitants. Clearly only those who apprehend God enjoy this special status, each to his level, while those who do not are subject to the laws of nature and chance.

Surprisingly Ramban seems to be saying the same thing. Especially in his Pirush on Iyov 36:7, after explaining his position in words that echo Rambam in MN 3:18 and 51, he ends by saying that the Rav (Rambam) explained this well in his Sefer Hamoreh. (I could not find this Ramban online. I suggest that the reader look it up as I will be addressing it indirectly throughout this post.)

Ramban first lays out his position in Breishis 18:19 on the verse:
יט 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.
19 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.'

רמב"ן בראשית פרק יח פסוק יט

והנכון בעיני שהיא ידיעה בו ממש. ירמוז, כי ידיעת השם שהיא השגחתו בעולם השפל, היא לשמור הכללים. וגם בני האדם מונחים בו למקרים עד בא עת פקודתם. אבל בחסידיו ישום אליו לבו לדעת אותו בפרט, להיות שמירתו דבקה בו תמיד, לא תפרד הידיעה והזכירה ממנו כלל. כטעם לא יגרע מצדיק עיניו (איוב לו ז). ובאו מזה פסוקים רבים, כדכתיב (תהלים לג יח) הנה עין ה' אל יראיו, וזולת זה:

Paraphrasing:

Knowing Avraham is meant literally. God’s knowledge of the world manifests itself in His watching over the generalities. People are also left to chance until their time of judgment arrives[1]. As to His righteous, he watches over every detail of their life constantly, He never takes His attention from them keeping them in mind always. He proceeds to bring proof texts one of which is the Passuk in Iyov I mentioned earlier.

Ramban thus agrees that only the righteous deserve personal Hashgacha. However we have to remember Ramban’s worldview and his understanding of nature and chance. To him nature is a front for reality. Reality is the constant interference of either the stars as servants of God in the day-to-day occurrences in the lives of the general population or God himself in the lives of the righteous Jews. The stars do not react to good deeds; they are indifferent and act according to their own agenda. God on the other hand is a just judge and rewards those that serve Him well by keeping His Mitzvot. Punishment means reverting to the control of the stars. To Ramban, science is the study of the recurring phenomenon. The fact that things seem to run in a pattern is deceiving. At any moment things can and may change without reason. Science is therefore a very mediocre way of understanding nature, how things are being run and predicting future events. Metaphysics which includes necromancies, magic and all spiritual studies as well as the knowledge of God, are the real sciences (magic and necromancies forbidden by the Torah although they are real and work). He therefore comments in his Torat Hashem Temimah (page 155 Chavel Hebrew edition) that the amount of hard work needed to learn sciences is not worth the effort. There is therefore no direct cause and effect between man’s action and Providence. Good and bad things that happen to a person do not relate directly and result from his actions. There is only an indirect relationship. Just by acknowledging God by keeping his Mitzvot[2], man is thrown under His direct aegis and no harm can befall him miraculously. It is when man forgets to acknowledge God that he reverts to the control of the stars and chance. That is the meaning of God knowing Avraham. Avraham having chosen to follow God’s ways came under His direct protection.

Thus in the context of the verse, this statement of knowing Avraham has two meanings. In addition to protecting Avraham and his family from the forthcoming cataclysm because of his way of life, God also wants to share the destruction of Sodom with him because He knows that he will learn and teach his children God’s ways.

רמב"ן בראשית פרק יח פסוק יח[3]

כי ידעתי בו שהוא מכיר ויודע שאני ה' אוהב צדקה ומשפט, כלומר, שאני עושה משפט רק בצדקה, ולכך יצוה את בניו וביתו אחריו לאחוז דרכי

By being part of this process, observing even partaking in God’s cogitation, Avraham will learn how God acts towards Sodom and teach this insight to his children. It is not by contemplating nature but rather by experiencing God’s direct involvement that one learns His ways. Although the destruction of Sodom seems to be a natural event, Avraham is made privy to the reality that God is involved constantly and acts justly rewarding the good (Avraham) by protecting them and punishing the evil. God’s justice is further highlighted by the way He arrives at His verdict during His discussions with Avraham. That is the lesson that Avraham will pass on to his children.

A careful read of Ramban in Iyov highlights the difference between these two giants. Although Ramban paraphrases Rambam, he subtly adapts him to fit his own understanding of how the world is run. After explaining that those who are close to God are protected, he addresses the fact that at war soldiers are called up, the fearful are sent home and all the preparations before battle we see in Tanach. After all if they are following God’s orders why do they need to prepare themselves? Who needs armies? This question could only be asked if natural events are really miraculous and cannot be predicted. Ramban in fact answers that the only reason these preparations are needed is because most people cannot be constantly in touch with God. Had they been they would have won all battles with their bare hands and minimal numbers. In Rambam's worldview this question would not even come up.

Although both Ramban and Rambam agree that only the righteous are subject to God’s providence, they have two different ideas of what providence is. Rambam sees it as an understanding of nature and God’s ways where the good outcome is a direct result of one’s actions. Ramban sees it as the indirect result of following God’s Mitzvot which when followed properly makes one acknowledge God’s existence and miraculous ways in running things. One who does this is rewarded by falling under God’s direct aegis and from then on all is miraculous. The implications of these two different outlooks are far reaching and cover almost every aspect of Judaism from prayer to Ta’amei Hamitzvot. (I will address Rambam’s reading of the verse in Breishit 18:19 in a future post as this one is already much too long.)

As I compare Rambam to Ramban in these areas, I am again amazed and puzzled at why Ramban’s approach has nowadays become mainstream Judaism while Rambam is relegated to a few intellectuals. One would think that with the advances in sciences and the better understanding of how our universe operates, Rambam’s view would prevail. I guess it is easier to believe that by being meticulous in rituals, following every Chumra, one buys a ticket into God’s club rather than taking responsibility for one’s actions and their direct consequences.










[1] Exactly the meaning of these last two words is a little unclear.
[2] The purpose of keeping Mitzvot is just that – acknowledging God. (See the last Ramban in Parshat Bo quoted in my earlier post).
[3] The following quote is just the pertinent segment in a different interpretation of this verse.

Of Rocks, Water and Miracles.

This week’s Parsha does not lack interesting stories and one could spend a whole year just analyzing Kryat Yam Suf, Mann, Amalek, the “sweet wood” and the “Water Rock”. I would like to focus in on the latter.

The people were about to enter the desert and were quite restless and concerned first regarding the availability of food and then about the lack of water. They were still uncomfortable with Moshe and as I quoted Rashba in my earlier post http://yediah.blogspot.com/2007/01/skepticism-is-jewish-thing-and-healthy.html
they remained skeptical of his abilities until Sinai. Responding to the quasi uprising, God told Moshe to go find a rock at Chorev and hit it with the staff he used in Egypt and water will flow. That is the plain reading of the story. As with every story in Chumash, there is much more than meets the eye. I would like to focus on this verse: (Shemot 17:6)

ו הִנְנִי עֹמֵד לְפָנֶיךָ שָּׁם עַל-הַצּוּר, בְּחֹרֵב, וְהִכִּיתָ בַצּוּר וְיָצְאוּ מִמֶּנּוּ מַיִם, וְשָׁתָה הָעָם; וַיַּעַשׂ כֵּן מֹשֶׁה, לְעֵינֵי זִקְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל.
6 Behold, I will stand before thee there upon the rock in Chorev; and thou shall smite the rock, and there shall come water out of it that the people may drink.' And Moses did so in the sight of the elders of Israel.

Since when does God stand on a rock? What does this mean? It behooves us to try to understand what standing means when referred to God. The usage of the word Tzur translated as Rock is also intriguing. Rambam addresses the latter in MN 1:16:

“THE word Tzur (rock) is a homonym. First, it denotes "rock," as "And thou shall smite the rock" (Tzur) (Exod. xvii. 6).”

Clearly the word is understood literally as a physical rock. However a rock takes on a central role in a different context: (Shemot 33:21)

כא וַיֹּאמֶר יְהוָה, הִנֵּה מָקוֹם אִתִּי; וְנִצַּבְתָּ, עַל-הַצּוּר.
21 And the LORD said: 'Behold, there is a place by Me, and thou shall stand upon the rock.

In Moshe’s quest for an understanding of God he is told to stand on a rock (See Ramban ad locum[1]). In this context how does Moshe’s standing on a rock promote his understanding of God? Rambam addresses this in MN1:16:

“It is next employed to signify the quarry from which the stones are hewn; comp. "Look unto the rock (Tzur) whence ye are hewn" (Yeshayahu 51:1). From this latter meaning of the term another figurative notion was subsequently derived, meaning “the root and origin" of all things… It is in the latter sense that the Almighty is called "rock," He being the origin and the efficient cause of all things besides Himself… Again, "And thou shall stand upon the Rock" (Exod. xxxiii. 21), i.e., be firm and steadfast in the conviction that God is the source of all things, for this will lead you towards the knowledge of the Divine Being. We have shown (chap. viii.) that the words "Behold, a place is with me" (Exod. xxxiii. 21) contain the same idea.”

In his quest for an understanding of God, Moshe is told to contemplate Him as the source of everything. The way I understand it is that El Shaday is the apprehension of God as First Cause. By analyzing cause and effect in nature one arrives at an Entity, referred to as El Shaday, that only causes but is not the effect of a cause. Tzur, on the other hand, is the contemplation of the effects caused by this Entity, in other words God’s creation. It is through that contemplation that one can learn of God’s ways and emulate them. At that same event Moshe was asking for guidance on how to lead the people[2] and also asked to know God’s essence. He was told that this type of contemplation is productive in understanding how to lead. In addition it is also a contemplation of what God is not which is the closest one can come to God. All we observe about our existence and surroundings are God’s creations, not His essence. When God said to Moshe “Behold there is a place by Me” must therefore not be understood literally. God has no place and in the context a physical place seems quite irrelevant at least at first blush. In MN 1:8 Rambam explains:

“But you must understand that the word makom has the same signification in the passage "Behold, a place (makom) is with me" (Exod. xxxiii. 26). It signifies a rank in theoretical speculation and in the contemplation of the intellect – not that of the eye; this being in addition to its literal meaning alluding to a local place that was to be found on that mountain on which the separation and the achievement of perfection came to pass.”

Rambam understands the verse to mean that Moshe was directed into the type of speculation and contemplation that I described earlier. Rambam does not negate the literal meaning of place. On the contrary in this context there is a need for isolation when one speculates about these issues. The words thus have a double meaning. Moshe was told to go to a place, a rock, and in his isolation, contemplate whence everything came from and who caused it to be. That is the meaning of speculating about “rank”, the First or highest in the system of cause and effect.

The word Omed as in our verse הִנְנִי עֹמֵד לְפָנֶיךָ שָּׁם עַל-הַצּוּר, בְּחֹרֵבwhich literally means stand has several additional meanings and we need to figure out which fits in the context. In MN 1:12, Rambam suggests it means getting up in contrast to sitting down. This is a literal variant of standing. When used in reference to god in this context, it implies what we perceive as action – changing from apparent inactivity to activity. In MN1:13 he suggests that when it is used in the context of God, it should be seen as permanence. When someone moves one changes constantly while standing in contrast can be seen as permanence, no longer changing. In MN 1:15 he compares Omed to Nitzav as in וְנִצַּבְתָּ, עַל-הַצּוּר which we saw earlier, means that Moshe is entreated to be firm and steadfast.

“The phrase "stood upon it" indicates the permanence and constancy of God, and does not imply the idea of physical position. This is also the sense of the phrase "Thou shall stand upon the rock" (Exod. xxxiii. 21). It is therefore clear that Nitzav and ‘amad are identical in this figurative signification. Comp. "Behold, I will stand (‘Omed) before thee there upon the rock in Chorev" (Exod. xvii. 6).”

Both Omed and Nitzav in the context of these verses cannot refer to a physical position. The interesting point here is the comparison. Although ostensibly one verse refers to Moshe and the other to God, they both mean the same thing. In both cases it is Moshe who apprehends God as permanent and constant.

Coming back to our story, where Moshe is confronted with the dilemma of a whole people going into the desert without water, he realizes that the solution is in finding an anomaly in nature to solve the problem. The Mishna in Avot 5:5 enumerates the ten things that were created Friday afternoon, the last day of Creation. All are unusual natural events, each being unique occurring once in History. Among those listed is the “Well” which the Rabbis connect with this event. This was when Moshe discovered the unique anomaly that kept them watered during their sojourn in the desert[3]. Another one listed in the Mishna is the Mann, another unique anomaly that kept them fed during the same sojourn. The Mishna is telling us that these anomalies were embedded in nature at Creation, discovered and taken advantage of by Moshe at the appropriate time, an outlook on miracles that I have discussed many times. As Moshe made these discoveries, he internalized not only the physical but also just as importantly, the ontological aspects of this anomaly. He apprehended a greater understanding of God, how He has structured the natural world and His relation to it.

Interestingly, although coming from a completely different perspective regarding the essence of nature, Ramban makes a comment that is quite similar. (This was brought to my attention by R. Koppel Schwartz in his Yekev Ephraim; in fact his comment got me thinking resulting in this post).
רמב"ן שמות פרק יז פסוק ו

(ו) הנני עומד לפניך שם על הצור בחורב - בעבור כי הפלא במים במקום הזה עתה היה קבוע, שיהיה הבאר עמהם כל ימי המדבר כדברי רבותינו (במדב"ר יט כה), בעבור זה נגלית עליו השכינה במקום ההוא, כמו שאמר במן (לעיל טז ז) ובקר וראיתם את כבוד ה', בעבור היותו פלא קיים:

Just as the Mann, an anomaly that existed for 40 years, made people realize that God is the creator, so too the continuity of the other anomaly, the supply of water, did the same. Ramban also understands the appearance of God on the rock as something that people apprehend and not an actual placement. The interesting thing though is that Ramban sees the word Omed as referring to the longevity of the anomaly, which to him is identical with God’s presence. Constantly seeing the wondrous keeps God in front of one’s eyes. He has a different take than Rambam but in a similar thought process.



[1] רמב"ן שמות פרק לג פסוק כא

(כא) הנה מקום אתי - בהר הזה אשר שכינתי שם:
ונצבת על הצור - שהוא בהר, כמו שנאמר (לעיל יז ו) הנני עומד לפניך שם על הצור בחורב:
Ramban notices the word Hatzur which indicates a specific rock and also connotes familiarity with it. There is no evidence that Rambam agrees with that. The choice of this homonym is intriguing.

[2]
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.'

[3] It goes against my grain to conjecture what the anomaly could be. My first thought was an underground aquifer, but that would not be an anomaly. Maybe the access to it could be. I prefer however to leave both the Be’er and the Mann as mysteries.

Miracles as human psyche - a possible understanding of Rambam.

I was reading an article by Professor Tzvi Langerman and he brought to my attention two interesting comments by Rambam on free will and prophecy. In Shemona Perakim chapter 8 he discusses why Pharaoh was punished although the Torah repeats several times that God hardened his heart. He explains that part of punishment is the temporary removal of free will just as Yerovam had his hand paralyzed and the people of Sodom’s eyesight were removed. The way I understand removal of free will is that one becomes so entrenched in a position that he cannot see any other possibility. Pharaoh was so committed to thwarting the exodus of the Jews that he could not conceive changing direction. No amount of logical argument could sway him. How does that compares to Yerovam who’s hand was frozen and paralyzed stretched out towards the prophet who foretold the demise of his brand of religion (see Melachim 1:13)? How does it compare with the blindness of the people of Sodom?

It gets more intriguing when we read Rambam in MN 2:32, where he explains his understanding of prophecy that it is the result of study and contemplation following preparations in self-improvement. Theoretically anyone that goes through the proper preparatory regime prophesizes however not everyone does. He explains it as follows:

“For we believe that, even if one has the capacity for prophecy, and has duly prepared himself, it may yet happen that he does not actually prophesy. It is in that case the will of God [that withholds from him the use of the faculty]. According to my opinion, this fact is as exceptional as any other miracle, and acts in the same way. For the laws of Nature demand that every one should be a prophet, who has a proper physical constitution, and has been duly prepared as, regards education and training. If such a person is not a prophet, he is in the same position as a person who, like Jeroboam (1 Kings Xiii.), is deprived of the use of his hand, or of his eyes, as was the case with the army of Syria, in the history of Elisha (2 Kings Vi. 18).”

First note how he replaces the Sodom people with the camp of Aram (Syria). But even more striking is his seeing the withholding of prophecy as a miracle comparing it to the paralysis of Yerovam’s hand. He goes on to explain that the withholding of prophecy is a natural result of outside circumstances. In this chapter he touches on it and in MN 2:36 he expands:

“Imagination is certainly one of the faculties of the body. You find, therefore, that prophets are deprived of the faculty of prophesying when they mourn, are angry, or are similarly affected. Our Sages say Inspiration does not come upon a prophet when he is sad or languid. This is the reason why Jacob did not receive any revelation during the period of his mourning, when his imagination was engaged with the loss of Joseph. The same was the case with Moses, when he was in a state of depression through the multitude of his troubles, which lasted from the murmurings of the Israelites in consequence of the evil report of the spies, till the death of the warriors of that generation.”

What is common to all these examples is the human psyche element. Just like Pharaoh’s hardening of the heart can be seen as his entrenchment in an untenable position, so too can we understand Yerovam’s frozen hand as the result of internal conflicts. The Gemara in Sanhedrin 101 – 102 depicts Yerovam as a very complex person with many virtues. The Rabbis discuss in detail what did him in. As usual they were able to discern ambiguity in the way the story in Tanach relates to him.

Similarly the blindness of either Sodom people or Aram could be seen as the result of possibly some kind of hypnotic state brought about by the angels or the prophet (Elisha). The army of Aram that came to take Elisha followed him blindly to Shomron. Somehow Elisha convinced them to follow him. In the case of the sodomites it would seem that Rambam had a similar point of view. Especially as we know Rambam sees that whole episode with Lot and the angels as Avraham’s prophetic dream. That makes it even more telling that even in a prophetic dream Avraham saw the blindness as a natural event.

Rambam is consistent minimizing miracles wherever he can. Where did the hagiography that we hear so much about nowadays about great Tzadikkim and Talmidei Chachamim performing miracles that would put Moshe’s to shame come from? Even Rambam has suffered from this malaise as he is depicted in popular literature.

Miracles: Ramban and Rambam - two opposing views.

Continuing with the comparison of the theology of the two great medieval Jewish thinkers, Rambam and Ramban, I would like to contrast their respective understanding of miracles.

Ramban’s view: As we saw earlier Ramban sees nature as a manipulated system. To the general population of the world, the non-Jewish, the stars control and run nature. The Jewish population[1], the one that follows the Mitzvot, God controls directly through a constant series of hidden miracles which also feel like nature. In reality every minute happening in the life of a Jew is the result of a specific decision of God. (The same goes for the non-Jew just replacing God with the stars as His intermediates.) It just so happens that normally things follow a certain pattern which cloaks the involvement of the spiritual and disguises itself as nature. That is just an illusion. That illusion is unmasked when the unexpected happens. The unexpected being unquestionably the result of a specific decision of a thinking entity, proves that what we see as a pattern is in reality not so. The miraculous, the unexpected, the anomalous proves without any doubt that God (or some other power such as the stars) is needed constantly to decide on every little occurrence whether it seems to have a pattern or not. The fact that God has the power to override the decision of the stars is what makes Him the superpower, the ultimate arbiter. It is only because He so desires that the stars run things. They are just His servants. Ramban sees this power to control every little detail constantly, as the greatest attribute of God. When the Torah says
יב וְעָבַרְתִּי בְאֶרֶץ-מִצְרַיִם, בַּלַּיְלָה הַזֶּה, וְהִכֵּיתִי כָל-בְּכוֹר בְּאֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם, מֵאָדָם וְעַד-בְּהֵמָה; וּבְכָל-אֱלֹהֵי מִצְרַיִם אֶעֱשֶׂה שְׁפָטִים, אֲנִי יְהוָה.
12 For I will go through the land of Egypt in that night, and will smite all the first-born in the land of Egypt, both man and beast; and against all the gods of Egypt I will execute judgments: I am the LORD.
Ramban comments that the gods of Egypt are the stars that control it. God took away their power to control the Egyptians. It is just this ability to overrule stars that proves that “I am the Lord”.[2]

Rambam’s view: Rambam argues that a perfect Creator does not need to constantly adjust things. It is demeaning to God to see Him as unable to set things in motion making sure that everything will fall in place at the right time and moment. In fact there is an underlying predeterminism in the universe. It is part of the conundrum of how man can have Bechira (freedom of choice) when God knows the future. Rambam addresses this by arguing that God’s knowledge is just a word we use for lack of a better one. The question therefore is only a problem relative to our perspective but in reality it is like comparing two completely different concepts. (I have posted on this a little and will address more in the future). Therefore from God’s perspective everything that will happen has already happened. The universe follows natural rules set down by God at creation. The singularities which are what we see as miracles have been set in place and it is up to humans to find out about them and use them. A prophet is such a man, who through the study of physics coupled with metaphysics, senses or knows about the upcoming singular event and takes advantage of it. That is what happened at Kryat Yam Suf and all the other miracles.[3] From this perspective miracles have just the opposite effect; they make one question God’s omnipotence. It is therefore a good idea to try to explain them as natural events. Thus Rambam’s comment in MN 2:29:

“He made it part of these properties [nature], that they should produce certain miracles at certain times, and the sign of a prophet consisted in the fact that God told him to declare when a certain thing will take place, but the thing itself was effected according to the fixed laws of Nature. If this is really the meaning of the passage referred to, it testifies to the greatness of the author, and shows that he held it to be impossible that there should be a change in the laws of Nature, or a change in the will of God [as regards the physical properties of things] after they have once been established. He therefore assumes, e.g., that God gave the waters the property of joining together, and of flowing in a downward direction, and of separating only at the time when the Egyptians were drowned, and only in a particular place… It is said there: R. Jonathan said, God made an agreement with the sea that it should divide before the Israelites: thus it is said, "And the sea returned to its strength when the morning appeared" (Exod. xiv. 27). R. Jeremiah, son of Elazar, said: Not only with the sea, but with all that has been created in the six days of the beginning [was the agreement made]: this is referred to in the words, "I, even my hands have stretched out the heavens, and all their host have I commanded" (Isa. xlv. 12); i.e., I have commanded the sea to divide, the fire not to hurt Hananya, Mishael, and Azaryah, the lions not to harm Daniel, and the fish to spit out Jonah. The same is the case with the rest of the miracles.”

As we can see Rambam and Ramban come from two opposite directions. Ramban lives in a miraculous world. Sciences are just illusions and patterns can be discerned. But the underlying laws that make things happen will never be discovered. They just do not exist. Rambam disagrees. Man has to learn about his environment and harness it to the point that he can use even the irregular and unexpected to his advantage.

So far we have seen how the two points of view of these greats affect the understanding of Providence and Miracles. We still need to look at Olam Haba and Techyat Hametim.

On a personal note again, I have a hard time accepting Ramban’s worldview and fit it into our contemporary understanding of science and nature. Rambam’s approach requires hard work to translate his understanding of nature which is based on Aristotelian Science to our contemporary one. It is doable though. For the life of me I cannot fathom how to deal with Ramban’s worldview in the same context. Ironically it is Ramban’s approach that is accepted nowadays by a majority of Orthodox Jews. It therefore cannot be ignored. That is why I got interested in Rav Kook’s thought. From the little I have read he seems to try to address it. As I read I will periodically share some insights.


[1] Ramban goes even farther and assigns EY as the place where God really runs things. It is another discussion but results from this position of his.
[2] רמב"ן שמות פרק יב פסוק יב

ועל דעתי ירמוז הכתוב לשרי מעלה, אלהי מצרים, כענין יפקוד ה' על צבא המרום במרום ועל מלכי האדמה על האדמה (ישעיה כד כא). והנה השפיל מזלם ושרי המזלות שעליהם. והכתוב ירמוז ויקצר בנעלם:


[3] For a thorough discussion of Rambam’s position see my article at Hakirah http://hakirah.org/Vol%203%20Guttmann.pdf

Acquiring Providence - an arduous task. Part 2.

In my last post on Hashgacha I presented Rambam’s 5 groups that make up the different levels of development that people have to go through to be able to aspire to the highest level, that of prophets. (In total there were eight groups including the prophets. The first two groups are either uninterested or misguided, leaving us with five developmental groups and one utopian.) Group 3 and 4, the first step of development, involve keeping the commandments. Unlike popular understanding that the ultimate goal is to keep the Mitzvot to their minutest detail, here we see that as only a first level stepping-stone to proper understanding. I am not ready here to address Ta’amei Hamitzvot but we already get a sense from Rambam that they are to be seen as part of a development process and not a goal in themselves. Clearly besides pure knowledge, the highest moral and ethical standards are required, if one wants to act on his conclusions about God and his world. Without that strong grounding, personal bias and desires will mislead. Keeping the commandments in the Torah, studying their intricacies and applying the laws to daily life, teach the discipline, moral and ethical underpinnings as well as the theological axioms needed for becoming a bona fide prophet. (I am talking only about the Mitzvot part of the Torah and the study of the Halachot themselves. The Torah itself is much broader and encompasses other necessary areas of knowledge such as metaphysics.) Looked at from this perspective,

י רֵאשִׁית חָכְמָה, יִרְאַת יְהוָה--
10 The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom;

takes on a different meaning. It is a vital component without which all this intellectualization cannot be transformed into action.

Group 6 is made up of those who take the study of Torah a step further. They “have plunged into speculation concerning the fundamental principle of religion”, in other words are trying to understand the meaning behind the Mitzvot and the theology they represent and at the same time are also involved in learning the sciences and observing the universe that surrounds them. As Rambam explains in MN 1:34:

“We can only obtain a knowledge of Him through His works; His works give evidence of His existence, and show what must be assumed concerning Him, that is to say, what must be attributed to Him either affirmatively or negatively. It is thus necessary to examine all things according to their essence; to infer from every species such true and well-established propositions as may assist us in the solution of metaphysical problems. Again, many propositions based on the nature of numbers and the properties of geometrical figures, are useful in examining things which must be negated in reference to God, and these negations will lead us to further inferences. You will certainly not doubt the necessity of studying astronomy and physics, if you are desirous of comprehending the relation between the world and Providence as it is in reality, and not according to imagination.”

The sciences are the way of translating the theology one gets from the Torah into imagination free concepts about God.

Those that try to understand the underlying logic of the Mitzvot, addressing the existential issues of life and speculate in philosophy, theology and metaphysics belong to Group 7. When these people are so connected and have absorbed that knowledge making it an integral part of their self, they have approached the level of man qua man, the ultimate human – a prophet.

“The true worship of God is only possible when correct notions of Him have previously been conceived. When you have arrived by way of intellectual research at knowledge of God and His works, then commence to devote yourselves to Him, try to approach Him and strengthen the intellect, which is the link that joins you to Him… For it is said, "To love the Lord your God, and to serve Him with all your heart and with all your soul" (Deut. xi. 13), and, as we have shown several times, man's love of God is identical with His knowledge of Him. The Divine service enjoined in these words must, accordingly, be preceded by the love of God. Our Sages have pointed out to us that it is a service in the heart, which explanation I understand to mean this: man concentrates all his thoughts on the First Intellect, and is absorbed in these thoughts as much as possible. … It has thus been shown that it must be man's aim, after having acquired the knowledge of God, to deliver himself up to Him, and to have his heart constantly filled with longing after Him.” (MN 3:51)

It is the people in this last group that enjoy the full force of Providence. Their actions are guided by “correct notions”; they are emulating God’s actions, which they have understood after arduous preparation. They have acquired high levels of ethical and moral standards, they have developed their intellect to its highest capacity and their actions are guided by these considerations. Their actions fit seamlessly into the fabric of the universe and its continuity.

Providence is a function of man’s actions.

Acquiring Providence - an arduous task. Part 1.

This is the first in several posts on this subject. It is impossible to fully discuss this issue in one manageable post so please bear with me and read them together as I write them. I also suggest you have MN 3:51 open next to you while reading these posts.

When I was writing the posts on Providence, this little voice kept on nagging me. A person that decides he is partaking in God’s creation, setting goals that are also God’s could be quite dangerous. There were quite a few megalomaniacs in the History of humankind that perpetrated Genocide and other abominations using this argument. The point is how does one know that he is doing the right thing? That he is interpreting correctly what he is observing especially if it leads to actions whose results, many times, are assessable only after long periods of time? Clearly it is crucial that one follow a very controlled process of observation and analysis to insure as much as possible that one arrives at a correct understanding. Rambam in MN 3:51, a key chapter in the Moreh, explains the process at length. He introduces the chapter as follows:

“… explaining the worship as practiced by one who has apprehended the true realities peculiar only to Him after he has obtained an apprehension of what He is; and it also guides him toward achieving this worship, which is the end of man, and makes known to him how providence watches over him in this world until he is brought over to the bundle of life.”

Rambam says that this chapter will teach someone who has reached a level of understanding of God and His ways, how to proceed to the next step and act based on this information (worship) which is the goal of a man’s life. (Note: the goal is to act, not stop at the philosophizing.)It also will describe how Providence relates to such a person and his eventual death and the passage to the “Bundle of Life” (Tzror Hachaim). All these things, worship, apprehension, Providence, death and reaching the “Bundle of Life” are interconnected.

This chapter is quite complex and has many parts. The first part addresses the learning process per se. Rambam uses a metaphor of a palace with a king residing at the center in a great throne room. To enter the room one must pass through corridors that abut at an entrance door. People are floating around the palace and all over the city facing in every direction, some are going away, others are coming closer, the usual busy street. Then there are those who are outside the city itself. (Much has been written about this metaphor and interpretation. I am proposing my own reading which is a composite of the various commentaries I have read.)

Here are the groups in order from the least developed to the highest level. I understand that Rambam is depicting the process of learning and how a person is viewed at each stage of development.

Group 1: Those outside the city represent man as tabula rasa with untapped potential. It is those who have not reached any level of inquiry and completely lack any interest in understanding what they observe if they even do so.

Group2: Those inside the city with their back to the palace, walking away, are those who have inquired and arrived at erroneous conclusions. They came to them on their own or follow others who have done so. These people, the more they stay with their ideas, the further they get from the palace. The fact they entered the city, have speculated and erred makes them dangerous as they have the potential to become the megalomaniacs I described earlier.

Group3: Those inside the city facing the palace but have never seen the palace itself, are the plain folk who follow the Law blindly, “the ignoramuses who observe the commandments”. The way Rambam describes them they know there is a palace but do not know where to find it. The way I read this is that they believe that by doing the Mitzvot alone they are doing a good deed but have no clue why.

Group 4: Those inside the city at the wall of the palace walking all around it are “the jurists who believe true opinions on the basis of traditional authority and study the law concerning the practices of divine service, but do not engage in speculation concerning the fundamental principles of religion and make no inquiry whatever about the rectification of belief.” Note how these people, the jurists, are not even aware that one has to find the entrance to the palace. They are happy just walking around it.

Group 5: Those inside the city and walking around the palace looking for its entrance are the people who are aware that one must find the key and are willing to go through the arduous task of preparatory study. They are at the stage of accumulating information and observations but have not come yet to the stage of analyses.

Group 6: This group is composed of those who passed the palace’s entrance and are roaming in its corridors. This group is the most startling as Rambam assigns to it two seemingly different people. First he includes in this group those that “have plunged into speculation concerning the fundamental principle of religion”. He then includes those that “have understood the natural things”, those who have started analyzing all the information and observations they have accumulated. They are into scientific research and understanding the physical world. What we have here are two separate people, a theologian and a scientist, both partners in the search for God. I see this as parallel tracks that have to be pursued in the search for existential answers. One cannot reach next level without following both tracks simultaneously.

Group 7: Those who entered the inner chamber, the throne room, comprise this group. Again Rambam portrays two separate people that slowly merge into one, confirming my understanding of group 6. First he portrays someone who “has achieved demonstration to the extent that that is possible, of everything that may be demonstrated; and who has ascertained the divine matters to the extent that that is possible, everything that may be ascertained; and who has come close to certainty in those matters in which one can only come close to it”. [1] It is not clear whether he refers to someone who has been dealing with the “fundamentals of the law” that he mentioned in the earlier sentence, or he includes general knowledge. But later he places at the same level one that “has achieved perfection in natural things and has understood divine science”. I believe he sees theology, physics and metaphysics as the necessary components for entering the king’s chamber.

Group 8: This is the culmination of all this development process. It is those who sit in the king’s council. “There are some who direct all their mind toward the attainment of perfection in the divine sciences, devote themselves entirely to God, exclude from their thought every other thing, and employ all their intellectual faculties in the study of the beings, in order to derive from them a proof with regard to Him so as to know in every possible way how God rules all things; they form the class of those who are present in the king’s council, namely, the class of prophets.”

The last group, the utopian man, the one that has developed his potential must go through a rigorous process of development. From tabula rasa to a renaissance man, having a fully rounded education comprising theology, science and metaphysics, only such a person may feel comfortable in deciding what is God’s will.

To summarize: The learning process starts with man following commandments by rote (group 3) joining group 4 who are the general learned yeshiva person and their Rashei Yeshiva and Possekim. Stopping here does not even bring one to the level of knowing that there is a door to look for. Sciences and metaphysics combined with Torah knowledge so that one can keep the commandments leads one to his goal.

Much more to come on this subject.






[1] It is very important to note the caveats on the limits of knowledge in these descriptions.

Providence - practical implications.

The practical implications of the understanding of Hashgacha / Providence I proposed in my last post is that man can take control of his life or chose not to. He can act to satisfy his instinctual urges and live for the moment or act in a more meaningful way playing a constructive role in God’s universe. This explains an aspect of the Adam and Chava metaphor. Man’s ideal goal is to partake in creation and play a positive role in the continuity of the universe.

טו וַיִּקַּח יְהוָה אֱלֹהִים, אֶת-הָאָדָם; וַיַּנִּחֵהוּ בְגַן-עֵדֶן, לְעָבְדָהּ וּלְשָׁמְרָהּ.
15 And the LORD God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to till it and to watch it.

Losing this focus is seen as being thrown out of the ideal place and left to random chance.

“When, however, Scripture says of Adam, "He changed his face (panav) and thou sent him forth" (Job 14:20), it must be understood in the following way: On account of the change of his original aim he was sent away… our text suggests that Adam, as he altered his intention and directed his thoughts to the acquisition of what he was forbidden, he was banished from Paradise: this was his punishment; it was measure for measure. At first he had the privilege of tasting pleasure and happiness, and of enjoying repose and security; but as his appetites grew stronger, and he followed his desires and impulses, (as we have already stated above), and partook of the food he was forbidden to taste, he was deprived of everything, was doomed to subsist on the meanest kind of food, such as he never tasted before, and this even only after exertion and labor, as it is said, "Thorns and thistles shall grow up for thee" (Gen. iii. 18), "By the sweat of thy brow," etc., and in explanation of this the text continues, "And the Lord God drove him from the Garden of Eden, to till the ground whence he was taken." He was now with respect to food and many other requirements brought to the level of the lower animals: "You shall eat the grass of the field" (Gen. 3:18). Reflecting on his condition, the Psalmist says, "Adam unable to dwell in dignity was brought to the level of the dumb beast" (Ps. 69:13)." May the Almighty be praised, whose design and wisdom cannot be fathomed."”(MN1:2)

The banishment from Eden, ideal life, is because of man’s absorption in feeding his own personal physical needs, ignoring the bigger picture. The picture I get in my mind is that the universe was created by God as a self-perpetuating entity –

“The book which enlightened the darkness of the world says therefore, "And God saw everything that He had made, and, behold, it was very good" (Gen. 1:31). Even the existence of this corporeal element, low as it in reality is, because it is the source of death and all evils, is likewise good for the permanence of the Universe and the continuation of the order of things, so that one thing departs and the other succeeds. Rabbi Meir therefore explains the words "and behold it was very good" (tov Me’od); that even death was good in accordance with what we have observed in this chapter.” (MN3:10)

Even death can be seen as good if it results in permanence of the Universe. The word “good” is synonymous with continuity. It is up to each man to figure out how he can contribute and he has the choice to join Creation and act constructively or be indifferent and lead a meaningless life. In religious parlance, that would mean choosing between Hashgacha, namely constancy, and Mikreh, randomness.

“Those who approach Him are best protected, and "He will keep the feet of his saints"; but those who keep far away from Him are left exposed to what may befall them; there is nothing that could protect them from what might happen; they are like those who walk in darkness, and are certain to stumble.” (MN 3:18)

The only way man can approach Him is by knowing His ways as it is the most man can expect to know about Him.

The paradox is that the individual never knows for sure whether his conclusions are correct, whether the actions he undertakes based on those conclusions will be constructive in the long term. It is even more paradoxical because a contemporary observer cannot judge whether the actions of this individual were constructive. It is only much later that all the consequences of a particular action can be assessed and judged. The best that we can do is to constantly remind ourselves to evaluate all our actions with the long-term view in mind. Rambam in MN 3:51 -

“Also the providence of God watching over them [the patriarchs and Moshe] and their posterity was great. When we therefore find them also, engaged in ruling others, in increasing their property, and endeavoring to obtain possession of wealth and honor, we see in this fact a proof that when they were occupied in these things, only their bodily limbs were at work, whilst their heart and mind never moved away from the name of God.”

It is when we look back at the accomplishment, “the providence of God watching over them”, of these four, the patriarchs and Moshe, that we have proof that all their actions were goal oriented and therefore under Divine Providence.

“I think these four reached that high degree of perfection in their relation to God, and enjoyed the continual presence of Divine Providence, even in their endeavors to increase their property, feeding the flock, toiling in the field, or managing the house, only because in all these things their end and aim was to approach God as much as possible. It was the chief aim of their whole life to create a people that should know and worship God… The object of all their labors was to publish the Unity of God in the world and to induce people to love Him; and it was on this account that they succeeded in reaching that high degree; for even those [worldly] affairs were for them a perfect worship of God. But a person like me must not imagine that he is able to attain this degree of perfection.”

The last sentence is fascinating. Rambam reveals his own inner thoughts and self-image. Although looking back from our perspective, Rambam affected Judaism deeply for generations; he was full of doubt about his contribution. Apparently the patriarchs themselves had the same doubts about their actions and their long-term impact. That explains the repetitive assurances that we find in the prophetic visions of the Avot. They always reviewed their actions and questioned whether they were correct and effective in accomplishing their goal for generations to come. That is also the meaning of Zchut Avot starting in Egypt –

כד וַיִּשְׁמַע אֱלֹהִים, אֶת-נַאֲקָתָם; וַיִּזְכֹּר אֱלֹהִים אֶת-בְּרִיתוֹ, אֶת-אַבְרָהָם אֶת-יִצְחָק וְאֶת-יַעֲקֹב.
24 And God heard their groaning, and God remembered His covenant with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob.

and repeated many times over in the Torah and Neviim. Failure would reflect poorly on the patriarchs. It would raise questions about the meaning of their life’s work. The Torah is confirming and Moshe is joining them in their vision for the future of their progeny and ultimately humankind. When we say in our prayers every day “Vezocher Chasdei Avot” it means we are joining them in their vision to bring about a perfect world – “Umevi Go’el livnei vneihem” and all that as part of God’s creation – “Lema’an Shemo Be’ahavah”.

Much more to come on this subject of Hashgacha / Providence.
Shabbat Shalom.

Providence - an acquired state.

In my earlier post I ended up with two components of providence; freedom of choice of a kind that is universal and extant in all living. We also saw that Reward and Punishment is a direct result of an action; it is the consequence of any act.

(If the reader wants to verify my understanding of Rambam, the following chapters in MN are pertinent and should be read carefully: 3:17-18-51.)

If Reward and Punishment is a consequence of an action it should theoretically apply to all things that act, all living things. Why then do we not find the idea of Reward and Punishment in the Torah for any living thing other than man? Why are we permitted to slaughter animals for food? What did the animal do wrong to deserve that? This question really supports the understanding of Aristotle that what we consider a consequence of Divine will is nothing more than pure randomness. There is no empirical impetus for differentiating between humans and animals. The sentience of man just increases the randomness of his actions, adding a component to man’s decision process. Animals are impelled by their natural instincts and suffer the consequences thereof while man is restrained or pushed by his ability to think, which makes it more difficult to predict how he will act.

Because there is no empirical evidence for his position, Rambam introduces his understanding of Hashgacha with a strong proviso:

“My opinion on this principle of Divine Providence I will now explain to you. In the principle which I now proceed to expound I do not rely on demonstrative proof, but on my conception of the spirit of the Divine Law, and the writings of the Prophets. The principle which I accept is far less open to objections, and is more reasonable than the opinions mentioned before.”(MN3:17)

It is how Rambam understands the ontological point of view of the Torah and the prophets. The importance of this statement cannot be minimized. What it says is that all observe the same phenomena; we see things happening in exactly the same way, the interpretation of the event, the perspective from which we look at it, are different and fit with the total teachings of the Torah and prophets.

Before we go further we need to define exactly what the word Hashgacha, usually translated as Providence, really means. When discussing Aristotle’s position earlier in chapter 17, Rambam states:

“In short, the opinion of Aristotle is this: Everything is the result of management which is constant, which does not come to an end and does not change any of its properties, as e.g., the heavenly beings, and everything which continues according to a certain rule, and deviates from it only rarely and exceptionally, as is the case in objects of Nature. All these are the result of management, i.e., in a close relation to Divine Providence.”

Divine Providence is constancy. When there is no randomness and things are predictive, it is considered to be under Divine Providence. The movements of the stars are predictable and therefore are considered under Divine Providence. Of course this assessment is based on Aristotelian physics. We now know that things are different and there is randomness there too especially over long periods of time. The idea though remains that Hashgacha / Providence refers to predictable events. Rambam in fact contrasts Hashgacha with randomness:

“But that which is not constant, and does not follow a certain rule, as e.g., incidents in the existence of the individual beings in each species of plants or animals, whether rational or irrational, is due to chance and not to management; it is in no relation to Divine Providence. Aristotle holds that it is even impossible to ascribe to Providence the management of these things.”

We can summarize by saying Hashgacha / Providence is the opposite of randomness. Humans who have free will and choice are therefore the most random entities in the universe followed by animals and other living things according to Aristotle.

Rambam sees it quite differently. Once man is able to understand the universe created by God and extrapolate from that the direction it is headed, or in religious parlance, understand the will of God and wants to partake in that endeavor, his actions are no longer random. They are goal oriented and therefore predictable.

“Divine Providence is connected with Divine intellectual influence, and the same beings which are benefited by the latter so as to become intellectual, and to comprehend things comprehensible to rational beings, are also under the control of Divine Providence, which examines all their deeds in order to reward or punish them.”

It is incumbent on man to develop his intellect to the point where he understands the will of God. At that point he no longer acts in a random fashion. Hashgacha which is the opposite of randomness takes over. He becomes predictable and as he achieves his goal, that achievement is his reward. However if man does not develop his potential, he is left to randomness just like all other living entities. That is his punishment. Intellect and its proper use leads to predictable goal oriented behavior and consequent outcome. That is Hashgacha / Providence which therefore affects only humans who use their intellect constructively. Other living things remain under the influence of randomness, their natural state.

The problem is that it is not a simple matter to know with certainty what the will of God is. It will sometimes take more than a lifetime, many lifetimes and generations, before we find out if the understanding and consequent actions of a particular individual were correct. Reward and Punishment is no longer just how an individual fares in his own physical well-being. It takes on a macro view. It is the impact that a life has that counts. I understand that to be the unknown that Rambam refers to; “and is in accordance with the justice of His judgments, the method of which our mind is incapable of understanding”. The good outcome of an individual’s action is the only evidence whether he acted correctly. That is why we find even our patriarchs like Yaakov full of doubt about their actions and goals as the Rabbis say it “Shema yigrom hacheit”. It is also why Rambam sees Moshe and the patriarchs as the paradigms of people who were blessed with Hashgacha. After all their actions are still felt thousands of years later by their descendants, their goal of building a nation that knows God still evolving.

“All that is mentioned of the history of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob is a perfect proof that Divine Providence extends to every man individually.”

It therefore makes sense that Providence is a function of the correctness of a person’s understanding and consequent actions.

“The relation of Divine Providence is therefore not the same to all men; the greater the human perfection a person has attained, the greater the benefit he derives from Divine Providence. This benefit is very great in the case of prophets, and varies according to the degree of their prophetic faculty: as it varies in the case of pious and good men according to their piety and uprightness. For it is the intensity of the Divine intellectual influence that has inspired the prophets, guided the good in their actions, and perfected the wisdom of the pious. In the same proportion as ignorant and disobedient persons are deficient in that Divine influence, their condition is inferior, and their rank equal to that of irrational beings: and they are "like unto the beasts."” (MN3:18)

And again Rambam sees Moshe and the patriarchs as the paradigm of perfect recipients of Divine Providence:

“Consider how the action of Divine Providence is described in reference to every incident in the lives of the patriarchs, to their occupations, and even to their passions, and how God promised to direct His attention to them. Thus God said to Abraham, "I am thy shield" (Gen. 15:1); to Isaac, "I will be with thee, and I will bless thee" (ibid. 26:3); to Jacob, "I am with thee, and will keep thee" (ibid. 28:15); to [Moses] the chief of the Prophets, "Certainly I will be with thee, and this shall be a token unto thee" (Exod. 3:12); to Joshua, "As I was with Moses, so I shall be with thee" (Josh. 1:5). It is clear that in all these cases the action of Providence has been proportional to man's perfection.”

We can sum up that Hashgacha / Providence is a state a person acquires through his intellect and proper actions. It is only a posteriori, when the consequences of these actions are evaluated, that we know the correctness of the original act. However every human has the potential to emulate God and partake in acts that have long-term constructive goals – or under the umbrella of divine Hashgacha / Providence.

Reward and Punishment - Miraculous or natural?

Popular understanding of Reward and Punishment is that it has no direct cause and effect correlation to man’s action but is rather divine reward or punishment for his deeds. Man does his thing and if he is worthy God protects him. It assumes no causal relationship between a man’s action and the consequences of that action. If I keep the Mitzvot, wear a talit Katan that has a proper size, check my mezuzah periodically, put a filter on my tap, am extremely machmir on Kashrut and so on, I am protected and no harm will come to me. These good deeds accumulate points and God weighs them on His fine and mysterious scale and offsets them against all my other deeds and if they outweigh the bad deeds I am safe. In fact if I do all these things I am allowed to cheat a little, steal a little, never mind Goyim, Jews too as I have this great store of Mitzvot that will surely outweigh these little perversions of mine.

This thinking is the bane of our society and the root of many of the ills in our community. It is pure superstition and does not belong in Jewish thought. It is a reversion to idolatry or as I prefer to think of it a remnant of idolatry that has not yet been eradicated completely even after 3000 years. Bribing the deity is what Avodah Zara is all about. Just read the prophets starting with Hoshe’a and ending Malachi.

Rambam introduces Hashgacha as follows:

“I will show you [first] the view expressed on this subject in our prophetical books, and generally accepted by our Sages. I will then give the opinion of some later authors among us, and lastly, I will explain my own belief.” (MN 3:17)

Rambam tells us that here are three possible understandings of Hashgacha in Jewish thought; one found in the prophetical books also accepted by “most”[1] of our sages; another accepted by later scholars and thirdly his own opinion. This is intriguing already and apparently a subject not clearly defined by the Mesora. But as we will see there are several components that are unanimous in all versions diverging only in the details but as they say the devil is in the details.

Here is the common ground:

“It is one of the fundamental principles of the Law of our Teacher Moses, and of those who follow the Law, that man has an absolute ability to act. According to this principle man does what is in his power to do, by his nature, his choice, and his will; and his action is not due to any newly created thing for his benefit. (Free will is not because of anything special in man such as his ability to think – DG[2]). All species of irrational animals likewise move by their own free will. This is the Will of God; that is to say, it is due to the eternal divine will that all living beings should move freely, and that man should have power to act according to his will or choice within the limits of his capacity. Against this principle we hear, thank God, no opposition on the part of our nation.”

What hits us at first is the universality of free will to all living species, man and animal. It would seem that a sentient being’s free will should operate differently than a non-sentient being. The answer is that there are two kinds of free will. The one generally discussed when we talk about Bechira, clearly not universal, is the choice between right and wrong which requires a higher level of thought and is therefore sentience dependent. The other one to which Rambam refers to here is choices that we have on a daily basis, crossing the street or not, eating this apple as opposed to the other and other such continuous decisions. This freedom of choice is common to all living things sentient and non-sentient. This understanding of this type of free will is unanimous “in our nation” and note Rambam’s sigh of relief about that! (Unfortunately nowadays Rambam’s relief is misplaced. The opposite view is very close to popular belief.)

The second view that is common ground:

“Another fundamental principle taught by the Law of Moses is this: Wrong cannot be ascribed to God in any way whatever; all evils and afflictions as well as all kinds of happiness of man, whether they concern one individual person or a community, are distributed according to justice; they are the result of strict judgment that admits no wrong whatever. Even when a person suffers pain in consequence of a thorn having entered into his hand, although it is at once drawn out, it is a punishment, for some action of his, that has been inflicted on him, and the least pleasure he enjoys is a reward for some action; all this is meted out by strict justice; as is said in Scripture, "all his ways are judgment" (Deut. 32:4); we are only ignorant of the working of that judgment.”

If you assume that this reward or punishment is other then causal read on.

“We, however, believe that all these human affairs are managed with justice; far be it from God to do wrong, to punish any one unless the punishment is necessary and merited. It is distinctly stated in the Law, that all is done in accordance with justice… Our Sages declare it wherever opportunity is given, that the idea of God necessarily implies justice; that He will reward the most pious for all their pure and upright actions, although no direct commandment was given them through a prophet; and that He will punish all the evil deeds of men, although they have not been prohibited by a prophet, if common sense warns against them, as e.g., injustice and violence.”

Pure and upright actions not commanded by a prophet and evil deeds that common sense warns against are things man does for his survival and the survival of the species, what we call natural law. Included are rules that society sets to protect one individual from another, to allow for peaceful coexistence among men. Breaking those rules wreaks havoc with a society, retaliation is to be expected and the consequences are inevitable. It may take a day, month, years and even several generations but eventually the consequence catches up with the wrongdoer or his progeny. It also includes self-control for health reasons, protecting the environment and pretty much every human act that is necessary for survival. The same consequence that Aristotle sees as random we see as Divine justice. The consequence does not change just the interpretation. Clearly Reward and Punishment is not some kind of Divine and supernatural concept. It is a purely natural one. God is seen as being the original cause of existence and in that role Reward and Punishment is ascribed to Him.

What have we so far? Man’s actions are left to him and his actions have consequences. We have not addressed Hashgacha as yet. Next post will bring this third component into play and Hashgacha will start to be fleshed out.








[1] As translated by R. Kafih. Schwartz notes that the Arabic word can be translated in different ways. Rambam seems to have been a little vague intentionally.
[2] I understand Rambam to mean this. R. Kafih understands it to refer to some Muslim thinkers that believed that every little change is specifically created for that action. ShemTov in his commentary seems to agree with R. Kafih.

Jacob's Ladder - God, Prophecy, Providence and History.

This post is going to be longer and more complicated than the usual ones I write. The subject is however very important to my mind and covers many aspects of Jewish thought; providence, prophecy and History. I therefore ask you to kindly bear with me.

This Shabbat we read Yaakov’s dream of the ladder and the angels. In his introduction to the Moreh Rambam uses it as an example of a prophesy that is given in a metaphor where every word has meaning. He compares it to another prophesy where the general message has meaning while the details are not necessarily important.

Here are the pertinent verses:

יב וַיַּחֲלֹם, וְהִנֵּה סֻלָּם מֻצָּב אַרְצָה, וְרֹאשׁוֹ, מַגִּיעַ הַשָּׁמָיְמָה; וְהִנֵּה מַלְאֲכֵי אֱלֹהִים, עֹלִים וְיֹרְדִים בּוֹ.
12 And he dreamed, and behold a ladder set up on the earth, and the top of it reached to heaven; and behold the angels of God ascending and descending on it.
יג וְהִנֵּה יְהוָה נִצָּב עָלָיו, וַיֹּאמַר, אֲנִי יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵי אַבְרָהָם אָבִיךָ, וֵאלֹהֵי יִצְחָק; הָאָרֶץ, אֲשֶׁר אַתָּה שֹׁכֵב עָלֶיהָ--לְךָ אֶתְּנֶנָּה, וּלְזַרְעֶךָ.
13 And, behold, the LORD stood beside him, and said: 'I am the LORD, the God of Abraham thy father, and the God of Isaac. The land whereon thou lie, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed.
יד וְהָיָה זַרְעֲךָ כַּעֲפַר הָאָרֶץ, וּפָרַצְתָּ יָמָּה וָקֵדְמָה וְצָפֹנָה וָנֶגְבָּה; וְנִבְרְכוּ בְךָ כָּל-מִשְׁפְּחֹת הָאֲדָמָה, וּבְזַרְעֶךָ.
14 And thy seed shall be as the dust of the earth, and thou shall spread abroad to the west, and to the east, and to the north, and to the south. And in thee and in thy seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed.
טו וְהִנֵּה אָנֹכִי עִמָּךְ, וּשְׁמַרְתִּיךָ בְּכֹל אֲשֶׁר-תֵּלֵךְ, וַהֲשִׁבֹתִיךָ, אֶל-הָאֲדָמָה הַזֹּאת: כִּי, לֹא אֶעֱזָבְךָ, עַד אֲשֶׁר אִם-עָשִׂיתִי, אֵת אֲשֶׁר-דִּבַּרְתִּי לָךְ.
15 And, behold, I am with thee, and will keep thee whithersoever you go, and will bring thee back into this land; for I will not leave thee, until I have done that which I have spoken to thee of.'

Here are Rambam’s words in the introduction and I will append the explanation to each segment by connecting each with MN 1:15 where Rambam explains what he meant here.

“The word "ladder" refers to one idea: - In MN 1:15 “This ladder all may climb up who wish to do so, and they must ultimately attain to knowledge of Him who is above the summit of the ladder”. The ladder is a metaphor for the process a prophet uses to find God and learn His ways. Metaphorically this type of thinking presents as climbing.

"Set up on the earth" to another "and the top of it reached to heaven" to a third: - In MN 1:15 a cryptic few words: “the upper end of which reached to heaven, while the lower end touched the earth”. I understand that as a metaphor of the direction of thought needed in the search for God. The prophet starts with the earthly, the physical, the sciences – Biology, Chemistry, Physics, Astronomy etc… and in the process as he goes along the question of God and His role in all this takes shape.

"Angels of God" to a fourth: - There are two possible interpretation of the word Alav in the text; on him (Yaakov) or on it (the ladder). In MN 1:15 “It must be well understood that the term "upon it" is employed by me in harmony with this metaphor. “Angels of God" who were going up represent the prophets. That the term "angel" was applied to prophets may clearly be seen in the following passages: "He sent an angel" (Num. 20:16); "And an angel of the Lord came up from Gilgal to Bochim" (Judges 2:1)."

"Ascending" to a fifth; "descending" to a sixth; - Again in MN 1:15: “How suggestive, too, is the expression "ascending and descending on it"! The ascent is mentioned before the descent, inasmuch as the "ascending" and arriving at a certain height of the ladder precedes the "descending," i.e., the application of the knowledge acquired in the ascent for the training and instruction of humankind. This application is termed "descent," in accordance with our explanation of the term Yarad”. The purpose of the prophet’s search for God is to learn from His ways how to lead and teach people. (See also MN 1:54 for a similar understanding in Moshe’s question to God וְעַתָּה אִם-נָא מָצָאתִי חֵן בְּעֵינֶיךָ, הוֹדִעֵנִי נָא אֶת-דְּרָכֶךָ). The search for God is not just an empty intellectual quest but has the purpose to teach correct leadership and behavior.

To better understand the significance of the order of ascent followed by descent, we turn to MN 1:10 where Rambam discusses the terms Yarad and Alah when in that specific order: “When it pleased the Almighty to grant to a human being a certain degree of wisdom or prophetic inspiration, the divine communication thus made to the prophet and the entrance of the Divine Presence into a certain place is termed (yeridah), "descending," while the termination of the prophetic communication or the departure of the divine glory from a place is called ‘Aliyah, "ascending."Whenever "Alah" comes after "Yarad" it means that the prophet disconnected from God however when it is the reverse, "Alah" before "Yarad" it connotes the opposite, a connection to God. That is the meaning of his comment that here the ascent is before the descent. It depicts the climb towards and connecting with the Divine rather than the completion of the process.

"The Lord stood upon it" to a seventh: - MN 1:15 -“And, behold, the Lord stood upon it" (Gen. 18:13), i.e., God was stably and constantly "upon it," namely, upon the ladder”. The idea here is that God is unchanging and is not affected by anything or anyone.

So what do we have so far? A ladder that is a metaphor for the path one takes when speculating about God to learn from Him the way He runs the world and consequently emulates Him. We also know that this information is stable and unchanging.

Now let us look at the whole picture. Why are the angels plural if it is a metaphor for the mind of the prophet? Furthermore there are at least four as there is more than one going up (Olim) and more than one going down (Yordim). Midrashim quoted by Rambam confirm it and say that there are four angels. In addition in the vision at some point all four must have met at the same point, the ones going up and the ones going down. (The assumption based on the text is that each pair operates in tandem). What are these four angels? There are many interpretations of this Rambam and I like the one that sees the angels as the four composites of the earth; the inorganic, the vegetative, the animal and the human. Rambam quoting the Midrash which says each angel takes up a third of the world, while the four together make up the world plus a third, confirms that. When seen from a physical standpoint, humans are part of the animal kingdom. However humans also have the capacity to grasp abstract non-physical concepts, to understand and apprehend things outside the physical universe. When looking at what the world is composed of we therefore have the three physical entities, inorganic, vegetative and animal, which together comprise the physical world while the human capacity adds a third non physical component to it. Thus all together they make up world plus a third.

The prophet in his speculation about existence contemplates the components of his surrounding and as he ascends the ladder he finds the unchanging God who has willed everything. He learns from this how the world operates and deduces what his role in this whole is. He descends back to physical reality and applies this information, which includes both physical elements and non-physical ones, metaphysical and theological ones, in his interaction and leadership of people.
What did Yaakov apprehend as it applies specifically to himself?

[ג] הדברים שמודיעין לנביא במראה הנבואה--דרך משל מודיעין לו, ומיד ייחקק בליבו פתרון המשל במראה הנבואה, ויידע מה הוא: כמו הסולם שראה יעקוב אבינו, ומלאכים עולים ויורדים בו, והוא היה משל למלכייות, ושיעבודן

Rambam sees the dream as a metaphor for the subjugation of the Jewish people by the nations. Yaakov’s exile because of Eisav’s jealousy is a forerunner of the Jewish people’s fate among the nations of the world. Yaakov thus saw the tribulations and risks that Galut brings. The survival of his descendants as a nation will depend on their attachment to HKBH. It is there, among the nations where
, וּפָרַצְתָּ יָמָּה וָקֵדְמָה וְצָפֹנָה וָנֶגְבָּה; וְנִבְרְכוּ בְךָ כָּל-מִשְׁפְּחֹת הָאֲדָמָה, וּבְזַרְעֶך that they will influence the civilizations they live with and bring to them the knowledge of the existence of a transcendental God.

Maintaining a focus on the objective of looking for the ultimate truth which is nothing other than God is the key to understanding providence. Providence is not something bestowed on a person; it is a quality that a person acquires if he has clear goals that go beyond his immediate physical sustenance. Yaakov’s goal was to create a nation that knew God and spread His knowledge through their search for Him.

“Consider how the action of Divine Providence is described in reference to every incident in the lives of the patriarchs, to their occupations, and even to their passions, and how God promised to direct His attention to them. Thus God said … to Jacob, "I am with thee, and will keep thee"” (MN 3:18)

“The Patriarchs likewise attained this degree of perfection; they approached God in such a manner that with them the name of God became known in the world… I think these four reached that high degree of perfection in their relation to God, and enjoyed the continual presence of Divine Providence, even in their endeavors to increase their property, feeding the flock, toiling in the field, or managing the house, only because in all these things their end and aim was to approach God as much as possible. It was the chief aim of their whole life to create a people that should know and worship God. "For I know him, that he will command his children and his household after him" (Gen. 18:19). The object of all their labors was to publish the Unity of God in the world and to induce people to love Him; and it was on this account that they succeeded in reaching that high degree; for even those [worldly] affairs were for them a perfect worship of God.” (MN 3:51)

The famous Jacob’s ladder is thus a metaphor for all the basic issues a Jew confronts daily, finding God, understanding Prophecy, Providence (Hashgacha), Galut, its purpose and ultimately the meaning of worshiping God. Rambam Hilchot Melachim 11:11-13 gives us an historical insight in how this process of being among the nations worked:

יא אבל מחשבות בורא עולם--אין כוח באדם להשיגם, כי לא דרכינו דרכיו ולא מחשבותינו מחשבותיו. וכל הדברים האלו של ישוע הנוצרי, ושל זה הישמעאלי שעמד אחריו--אינן אלא ליישר דרך למלך המשיח, ולתקן את העולם כולו לעבוד את ה' ביחד: שנאמר "כי אז אהפוך אל עמים, שפה ברורה, לקרוא כולם בשם ה', ולעובדו שכם אחד" (ראה צפניה ג,ט).
יב כיצד: כבר נתמלא העולם כולו מדברי המשיח, ומדברי התורה ומדברי המצוות, ופשטו דברים אלו באיים רחוקים, ובעמים רבים ערלי לב; והם נושאים ונותנים בדברים אלו, ובמצוות התורה--אלו אומרים מצוות אלו אמת היו, וכבר בטלו בזמן הזה, ולא היו נוהגות לדורות. ואלו אומרים דברים נסתרות יש בהם, ואינן כפשוטן, וכבר בא משיח, וגילה נסתריהם.
יג וכשיעמוד המלך המשיח באמת, ויצליח וירום ויינשא--מיד הם כולן חוזרין ויודעים ששקר נחלו אבותיהם, ושנביאיהם ואבותיהם הטעום

It is the conflict itself with Judaism, the clash of civilizations that brings about a dialogue though mostly confrontational, that keeps the question of God and what God means at the forefront. That dialogue will ultimately result in the whole world accepting the Unique God, the ultimate truth.