|
Parashat Bereisheet
Essays and Articles:
|
This is the Book of the Chronicles of (Spiritual) Man
Translated from Hebrew by S. NAthan l'ilui nishmat Esther bat mordechai
Judaism sees no value in the history of events, but rather only in a history which describes the chronicles of human spiritual development. One significant perspective that runs like a crimson thread through the Torah is a spiritual history, describing the route traveled by man, from the Creator, to the universe, and back to God.
If in the primal beginning, bereisheet,man descended as a heavenly, pure being who drew his sustenance exclusively from the Godly source, who had no need to relate to the world in order to receive from it but rather only and solely in order to give to it, nevertheless he very quickly discovered the earthly source, and coveted it: “And the children of God saw the daughters of man, etc.” It was rather too late when he discovered the high price he must pay for showing such interest in earthly involvement – an involvement so extreme as to place his very existence in doubt: “No longer will My spirit dwell within the human being, etc.”
Yet on the other hand, man annexed the earthly property to himself – broad territories of connectedness and activity, which continued increasingly to broaden until he himself became a property of the earth, a prisoner of earthliness. As this process accelerated, it created a need to increase man’s ability to apply his Godly quality to the new landscape, and to sanctify it. To meet this need, an ever-increasing need grew for adding halachot. Thus appendixes to sifrei halacha were added, and are continually being added, in the present and in the future. The source of Godly shefa was pushed aside in favor of the halachic source, and with this, a change took place in the very character of avodat Hashem.
From a passively obedient creature, man became a taker of initiative and a taker of responsibility – for his own opinions, his own halachic decisions, and his own actions.
As we pointed out in Parashat VeZot HaBracha, Moshe, the faithful shepherd, felt the need to buttress the human source, to immunize it toward the new upheaval.
We have referred in the past to three stages of human development: “And God created the human in His image, in the image of God He created him, etc.” (1:27) Yet later, (2:4) “these are the chronicles of the heaven and the earth…and God formed the human, dust from the earth,” and yet further on (5) “this is the book of the chronicles of the human, etc.”It would appear that in this Parasha a process of qualitative, spiritual development is taking place rather than a process of historical events.
Here then is the solution to the problem, to the question posed by those of little faith, who accuse the spiritual leaders of Orthodox Jewry of having failed to read the map of the impending holocaust. What Jabotinsky saw, they failed to see. He was the one who made the rounds of the vast Jewish settlements in Eastern Europe and attempted to persuade millions of Jews to escape. Yet because of his lack of spiritual authority, the masses did not heed his warnings. If the spiritual leaders had only joined their voices to his call, their combined call would have been effective – and then the holocaust would have been prevented – so holocaust survivors bitterly claimed.
The eternal answer to this tragic question must be brought out in the open. It is not an answer that is comfortable to hear, and it is doubtful it will be accepted, because it derives from a premise that points solely to a Torah perspective, and has no counterpart or corresponding equivalent in terms of natural logic.
Similar to the comparison between Hanuka and Purim, on Hanuka the Jews faced a spiritual danger whereas on Purim they faced an existential, material danger. The people of Israel tends to view the threat of shmad – literally destruction, but refers to abandonment of Judaism – as far graver than any bodily threat. Therefore Hanuka wields a much greater weight than Purim.
According to the criteria of this weight, we can compare the communist threat to the Nazi threat: The Torah leaders feared communism far more than the threat of physical shmad by the evil Nazis, may their name be erased.
Only isolated individuals would have been able to reach the land of Israel, and they would have been devoured there by a population hostile to Judaism. Only an aliya of Torah Jews in great numbers could have halted the spiritual shmad that was raging rampant in the land of Israel. But the gates were locked to them. They were also locked in the United States and in every new place. The only tragic option that remained open to them was dying al kidush Hashem. No other choice was available. We see then that the features that determine history are spiritual rather than material.
A number of examples from Parashat Bereisheet illustrate these points: “For if you will improve it…” This incomprehensible pasuk seems to mean that you will rule it. The Creator is giving you the control button within the labyrinth of the yetser, revealing to Kayin that control over the yetser is given into his hands, meaning: If you wish to express your ability to create in existential reality, you will have to reinforce your ability to control.
A History of Sin
Many ask, in what way did Kayin sin, that his offering was not accepted? He was the first human in creation who took the initiative of bringing a thanks offering to his Creator. Hevel learned it from Kayin.
It would seem, following the Rambam in Moreh Nevuchim, that Kayin’s sin was in choosing – as his destiny – to work the land. “Mother earth,” all the pagans cry longingly who have created an idolatry out of the earth, to the point of sacrilegiously rejecting their heavenly source, and viewing the earth as the source of the existence. It is truly so; the earth does indeed have the power to enslave and to limit human beings.
After all, the majority of spilled blood and wars that have raged through human history have been based on conquering the land of the adversary. It turns out that mother earth likes to quench her ever-growing thirst with the blood of her children. The first to trade his Godly source for the earthly source was Kayin, and therefore he was punished with detachment from the earth. For Adam HaRishon’s sin as well, the earth was punished for the same reason. “Cursed is the earth because of you, etc.” The Rambam focuses on the sin specifically. It was on par with the weight of the sin of Nadav and Avihu, who offered an alien fire. Kayin made the earth a medium for avodat Hashem despite the fact that, as mentioned, Adam HaRishon was to have drawn kedusha only from the higher source, and not from the earthly source. Therefore, in the offering that Kayin brought from the earth there was more harm than good. This explanation seems appropriate to the Rambam’s opinion, which views Kayin’s sacrifice as deficient.
Hevel chose the destiny of shepherd, a destiny that enables movement and flexibility without the gripping enslavement to mother earth. His offering of a living creature contained a direct expression relating to the true source, to the One Who gives life to all the living.
Woman: Another example is the development and the changes that took place in the connection with woman. At the first stage, man was created as male and female, in one undivided unit. Hazal describe it as one dual-faced unit. They do not necessarily mean Siamese twins, that is to say two bodies that are separate in their structure but joined at a specific point. Rather it seems to describe a single human unit that appeared male from one angle, and female from another angle – a single unit, capable of both begetting and giving birth, an independent cycle that embodied both possibilities, both giving and receiving, through a total blurring of identities between giver and receiver – without any of the gap, opposition, contradiction, or tension created normally between a giver and a receiver when they occupy two separate positions.
After they were separated, out of the gap that was formed, all manner of creepy crawly creatures came, who live off the sickening mold that forms on negative human relations, which are the single source of all negative midot and of the ruin of the universe.
Here it would be appropriate to ask, what was the reason that the One Who formed man wished to separate those fastened-together entities, if the predictable result would be the ruin of man. “Each thing opposite the other did God make.” From the separation, a source of good was created in the world as well, and chief among all good things was the principle of reciprocity, without which man could never have reached his destiny as a servant of God on the track of partner and ally to the Creator of the universe. A second element that came out was the ability to love, which is an entirely human creation, yesh mi’ayin. Love is the queen of creativity – the ability to overcome separateness and hostility and all negative midot whose source is man, to transcend to the dimension of height, and from there to look down upon the survival mechanism – from the perspective from which the Creator of the universe looks down on the universe, but not mother earth. A third element: The ability to learn and to practically apply the Godly ideal, through the connection with the woman, as a preparation and as a prerequisite for molding the balance between freedom and belonging, with freedom existing within belonging as with Avraham.
“And He made belts for them.” Does human nakedness testify to an asset or to a deficiency? There can be no denying that the original nakedness was a natural feature of the most perfect handiwork of the Creator. Then the Creator of the universe Himself in all His glory added “leather coats and dressed them.” This was the first human clothing on earth.
Let us not forget that prior to the clothing that the Creator appended to them they had made belts for themselves out of fig leaves. What is the difference between the belts that they sewed for themselves and the leather coats made for them by the Creator?
A belt gives a framework, defines, and also prevents change, freezing the personality into a fixed position, of permanent character, if limited and unchanging. A coat of leather comes to protect the body from dangers, temptations, and all other threats of extinction that man requires in order to protect his existence. Clothing protects but limits, determines features, and prevents their change or continued development. Clothing is also a symbol, an address, a sign testifying to the nature of the owner of the clothing, to his sincerity or to his unjustified conceit. All depends on the nature and form of the clothing. Clothing is belonging yet it also proclaims the freedom of its wearer, and his personal taste.
“Leather coats” according to Hazal were a natural clothing fully suited to the owner of the clothing. God determines and grants fitting definition to every individual by giving him appropriate clothing. “God clothes the naked.” The belt, however, a man chooses for himself. A belt guards and offers additional strength, within the framework of hishtadlut, the effort which man is commanded to invest in order to strengthen and to control himself. Besides meaning belted, hagur means armed, for when a man girds on his sword, he hangs it upon his belt.
Can clothing be changed? Is it possible to return to the condition of Adam HaRishon before the sin, and to strip off one’s clothing? Apparently not for any extended period of time. The attempt to strip off one’s clothing can end by removing the garment together with the skin of one’s flesh, and perhaps even with the loss of the image entirely, like Michelangelo who collapsed exhausted and unconscious at the feet of the sculptural creation he had toiled over for weeks on end, never once bathing or even changing his clothing. When they removed his socks, they were so stuck to his skin that that came off as well.
Clothing or the lack thereof has added social / political volume to these mad days we live in. Fascist strut about in uniform while liberals expose themselves. The root of evil is embedded in a disconnection between freedom and belonging. Nationalists espouse only belonging, and liberals espouse only freedom. Just so is the varied yet also complicated connection between the earthly side and the heavenly side, yet this grants man the opportunity to participate in a creative manner in the management and rule of creation.
The description of the evolution of avodat Hashem, as it moves from the Godly source to the human source, runs like a crimson thread from the beginning of the Torah to its end, from Noah until Avraham, who marched on his own powers and discovered the Torah on his own, and on to Moshe who brought the Torah down to Yisrael. Yet this evolution holds also the danger of split: One can distance oneself from the Godly source, and become over-involved with the earthly source, one can grow egocentrically evasive within one’s own personality, and occasionally one can dedicate oneself through addiction to the Godly goal while severing oneself from any earthly-human focus.
Such were Nadav and Avihu whose focus upon the earthly source caused over-involvement. Such were Moshe and Aharon who struck the rock instead of speaking/commanding it. Such was Kayin, who served the earth at the expense of serving God. Such is the generalized split in two directions of God’s service: The way of hoshiya na, “Pray save,” versus the way of hatsliha na, “pray, grant success.” Thus with the two major requests, the two pillars of prayer/worship. One: “God, be helping to me,” and the other, the prayer that is a yearning for dvaikut, for: “God’s nearness is good to me.” With the first, the worshipper intends to use the means at his disposal, and he requests of his Creator that He help him actualize the potential (that he possesses) to express his service of God. With the second, the servant desires for himself the sheltering in the shade of the shechina’s wings to the point of self-effacement. This effacement distances the servant from focusing on his own powers. It is needless to point out that this way holds no need for investment of effort in the details, because there are no details here from the realm of means, but only dedication/addiction and devaikut to the goal.
|
|