|
Parashat T'saveh
Rav Haim Lifshitz
Essays and Articles:
Go to
Hebrew site
|
The Union
of Object and Subject and the Dynamics that Mediate Them
Clothing as an
Encounter Between Object and Subject
Translated
from Hebrew by S. NAthan
l'ilui nishmat Esther bat mordechai
“ ‘And I will dwell among b’nei Yisrael.’
In order that I will dwell among them.” But Rabi Avraham said, ‘for I did
not take them out of the land of Egypt except in order that I would dwell
among them.’ And he has interpreted well. And if this is so, there is in
this matter a great mystery, because according to the plain meaning of the
thing, the Presence of the Shechina in Israel is a need of the ordinary
one, and not a need of the Higher One."
Meaning, God has no need of a Mishkan.
Rather, all of Israel have need of the Presence of the Shechina among
them. The Presence, and that which causes it, are “a need of the ordinary
one, and not a need of the Higher One.” We find then that it is man who
ascribes value to the Presence, because the reason for the Presence, and
the cause for it, is the “need of the ordinary one and not the need of the
Higher One.” With all the Mishkan’s being the Presence of the Higher, the
existence of this Presence receives its justification from the need of the
ordinary one, and with the termination of this need of the ordinary one,
or, should the ordinary one be unable to bear it because he is not worthy
of it, there will no longer be any justification for the presence of the
Shechina.
Thus one may not ascribe the sanctity of
the Higher to the objects of the Mishkan – despite their being Godly
Presence – and certainly one may not ascribe autonomous sanctity to them,
as mystical/magical tendencies try to make of them.
Nevertheless, granting solely subjective
value to the Mishkan’s accessories of sanctity, partakes of desecration as
well. We have two choices: Either we ascribe an objective value as a
Godly Presence to the human being who intends for the sake of heaven,
being that he has attached himself to his Godly source, and has done a
mitsva for the sake of heaven to the extent of total self (ego)-sacrifice
and self (ego)-nullification, or we ascribe a value of sanctity to the
accessory of sanctity, being that it has entered the framework of mitsva,
and now serves as an expression of it, and grants tangible substance to
the act of mitsva, and to the intention of the one doing the act of
mitsva.
It is difficult to imagine the bigdei
k’huna deviating from their natural function as clothing: Surely they
cover nakedness and provide warmth for the body. However, the tsits
and the urim v’tumim cry out for meaning, being totally devoid of
any of the natural functions of ordinary clothing. Of the tsits,
the Ibn Ezra writes: “And know that in the two apertures that are at the
brain on the forehead, there the power of the five senses are joined, and
there is the power of image (imagination) and it is there that thought
begins.” According to the Ibn Ezra, the tsits connects the power
of the imagination and rational thought with the Godly source that the
tsits represents (kodesh laHashem).
We have before us a “garment” since it was
worn on the forehead of the kohen gadol, yet it does not play the
role of mere clothing, nor even of ornament. Rather, it serves as a
connector between the intelligence of the ordinary and the intelligence of
the Higher.
Even more manifest than the tsits,
and directly representing the dimension of height in man, were the urim
v’tumim. “And you shall place upon the ‘hoshen hamishpat’ the
urim v’tumim, and they will be on Aharon’s heart, when he comes
before God.” See Ramban: (pasuk vav) “Rabi Avraham thought to be
clever on the issue of urim v’tumim, and said that they were the
work of an artisan, silver and gold, [Ibn Ezra emphasizes that only the
urim were the work of an artisan, but not the tumim.] and he
went on at length in this matter, thinking they followed the forms made by
the star masters, which can follow the thoughts of the asker. But he has
said nothing at all. [It is not clear from pasuk vav that this is
what the Ibn Ezra is saying.] Rather they were as Rashi says: The shem
ham’forash was to be found among the folds of the hoshen. But
they are a mystery that was handed down to Moshe from the Mouth of the
Powerful, and he wrote them in sanctity [a subject that was transformed
into an object] or they were the work of heaven.”
There were other sacred names of God –
besides the letters appearing on the urim v’tumim – within the
letters of the shem ham’forash. “By their power, the heart of the
cohen would become perfect [an object rather than a subject] in
knowing the matter of the letters that lit up before his eyes, because
when he would think upon the names of the urim and they would light
up, he would immediately go back and think upon the names of the tumim,
and while the letters were still lighting before his eyes, the thought
would enter his heart that the combination should come up as ‘Yehuda’, and
this is one of the levels of ruah hakodesh, and it is lower than
prophecy, and higher than bat kol, which they would use in bayit
sheni, after prophecy and ceased and the urim v’tumim
had ceased, as our masters have mentioned.” (Ramban)
Bat kol versus n’vua: Bat
kol is born of the connection between heaven and earth. It is the
direct intervention by heaven in earthly affairs. N’vua is the
intervention by heaven in earthly affairs by way of a human being who
serves solely as the conduit. Ruah hakodesh is the product of a
human being who has been transformed from a subject to an object.
Here the object serves – so to speak – as a
thing containing sanctity, but only ‘so to speak’ because its power does
not derive from its own autonomous quality, because it has none. An
object, any object, enjoys no autonomy at all. Every heftsa shel
mitsva, object of mitsva – each of the tashmishei k’dusha,
accessories of sanctity – holds a unique function, and is uniquely
destined to assist a human beings to express his objective Godly quality,
if he uses it because he was so commanded, and if he follows the
instructions of halacha, and does so for the sake of heaven with
devotion. The purer the subjective use of the heftsa shel mitsva,
the more the subjective user is transformed into a Godly object. It is
this destiny that is the purpose of human existence.
After the hurban, in the
post-Destruction era, in our own era of hester panim, hiddenness of
the Face [of God], it is in every man’s power to attain this sacred
destiny – if he will but fulfill his Godly mission, and on condition that
he carry it out with devotion, and
subject himself to the instruction of
halacha.
Clothing or any other accessory of physical
matter, that has been defined by halacha as an accessory of sanctity, as
tashmishei k’dusha – and this includes one’s own physical body
within the framework of a mitsva – can serve as a Godly object.
The dynamic at work in the transition from
subject to object is expressed in one’s personal sense of existence. A
person who senses himself as the center of existence as yet mired in his
survival mechanisms. His attitude to the Creator of the universe is as to
an instrument that has been designed to serve his own selfish needs, and
he falls into the category of a subject that lacks an objective value.
If he senses himself as a bearer of Godly
Presence, and his sense of existence aspires and craves to become a Godly
Presence, a sanctifier of God’s Name, then he himself is transformed into
Godly Presence and into a heavenly source of bounty whose blessings are
fulfilled and realized, in the sense of “and be blessing.” He then
becomes no longer dependent upon the physical laws of nature. Rather they
become subservient to his authority, as indicated with Rabi Hanina ben
Dosa.
“And you will see them and you will
remember.” This imperative applies not to the tsitsit but to the
t’chelet. The Gaon’s custom was not to kiss the tsitsit, in
keeping with the Bet Yosef and the Mahari, as well as other poskim
who were concerned with the problem of ascribing sanctity to an object –
meaning, all the abovementioned.
Go To Top
|
|