Biblical Inconsistency and Rabbinical Readings

I am presenting this week a sample from my upcoming Chumash with the Rogatchover Gaon's commentary translated and annotated. Enjoy.

Bereishit 1:20

Overview – The Rogatchover raises an inconsistency that the Talmud asks, about whether birds were created from water or from land. He then proposes a novel answer, based on the Rambam’s assertion that there are creatures that are both water and air based animals.

 וַיֹּאמֶר אֱלֹהִים--יִשְׁרְצוּ הַמַּיִם, שֶׁרֶץ נֶפֶשׁ חַיָּה; וְעוֹף יְעוֹפֵף עַל-הָאָרֶץ, עַל-פְּנֵי רְקִיעַ הַשָּׁמָיִם

“Let the waters produce swarms of living creatures and birds that fly. And let fowl fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.”

The Rogatchover:

 דעוף יעופף. עיין חולין דןן כ״ז, ע״ב א, ולשיטת הרמב״ם ז״ל דיש מין 

שהוא דג וגם עון 6, כמבואר בםה״מב ובהל׳ מא״ם פ״ב ג, י״ל ת ה ר״?

כאן ד. ואכמ״ד.

 “Look in Chullin page 27b. And according to the Rambam’s opinion that there is a species that is a fish as well as a bird, as is explained in Sefer Hamitzvot and Hilkhot Maachalot Issurim chapter two, we can say that that is the intent here. And this is not the place to elaborate.”

The Background:

In verse 20 it says “Let the waters produce swarms of living creatures and birds that fly.”

The Talmud in Chullin 27b asks, in verse 20 it states that birds were created from water, yet in chapter 2 verse 19 the Torah says:

וַיִּצֶר יְהוָה אֱלֹהִים מִן-הָאֲדָמָה, כָּל-חַיַּת הַשָּׂדֶה ואֵת כָּל-עוֹף הַשָּׁמַיִם, וַיָּבֵא אֶל-הָאָדָם, לִרְאוֹת מַה-יִּקְרָא-לוֹ; וְכֹל אֲשֶׁר יִקְרָא-לוֹ הָאָדָם נֶפֶשׁ חַיָּה, הוּא שְׁמוֹ. 

“God had formed out of the ground every beast of the field and every bird of the sky”

The implication here is that birds were formed from the earth. Which was it, were birds formed from the waters or from the earth? The Talmud answers that in fact birds were created from mud which is a mixture of earth and water. Thus, the Torah attributes birds as being land-formed creatures as well as being sea-formed creatures.

Chullin 27b:

ועוד שאלו כתוב אחד אומר ויאמר אלהים ישרצו המים שרץ נפש חיה ועוף יעופף אלמא ממיא איברו וכתיב (בראשית ב) ויצר ה' אלהים מן האדמה כל חית השדה ואת כל עוף השמים אלמא מארעא איברו אמר לו מן הרקק

“He put to him further this question: One verse says. And God said: Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and let birds fly above the earth, from which it would appear that birds were created out of the water; but another verse says. And the Lord God formed out of the ground every beast of the field and every bird of the air, from which it would appear that they were created out of the earth? He replied: They were created out of the mud.”

The Innovation:

There is a dispute amongst the Rishonim whether one can receive numerous sets of lashes (malkot) for the same act. For example, the prohibition of wearing wool and linen together (shaatnez) is stated twice. If one transgresses this injunction do they receive two sets of lashes or only one set for the one act?

The Rambam holds that one can never receive numerous sets of lashes for a doubled prohibitory clause. He states this with some force in Sefer Hamitzvot- mitzvah lo saaseh (negative prohibition) #179:

וכבר נתבאר ביטול דבר זה, ושאין לוקין שתי מלקיות על לאו אחד בשום פנים, כמו שביארו בגמרא חולין.

“This idea has no merit, as our Sages have explained in tractate Chullin that one can never receive two sets of lashes for a single prohibition.”

Several other Rishonim argue with the Rambam, most vocal among them the Ramban (in Sefer Hamitzvot loc. cit.). They argue that one can receive numerous sets of lashes for the same act.

This argument is brought to fore in the Talmud. In Makkot 16b the Talmud discusses one who eats a creature called the putisa. The putisa is a sheretz. A sheretz is a type of creature that we would conventionally term an insect. The sheretz has special laws concerning one who touches it and the resultant ritual impurity (tumah) that they receive. As well the Torah forbids eating any sheretz. The Torah first states the prohibition generally (twice in fact), and then enumerates a specific injunction against eating a land, sea, and air sheretz.

The law as stated in Makkot is that this person receives four sets of lashes for eating this crawling creature. Rashi and most other Rishonim learn that the reason one receives four sets of lashes is because the Torah says twice a general prohibition regarding eating a creature, and twice states a prohibition to eat a land based creature (which according to them is what the putisa is classified as). Thus for each clause one receives lashes ending in four measures of punishment for the four infractions.

The Rambam however is forced to learn this law in a very different style since he holds that one does not receive multiple sets of lashes for a doubled prohibitory injunction.

Instead, he holds that the reason one receives four measures is because this creature called the putisa is a land, sea and air creature all at once since it lives in all three environments. Therefore one receives three sets of lashes for the three different prohibitions of eating a land, sea and air creature. (The fourth set is for the infraction of eating a non-kosher fish.)

The first source of the Rambam’s position on the putisa is in Sefer Hamitzvot- mitzvah lo saaseh (negative prohibition) #179:

מצות ל׳׳ת קעט

״כי הנה יתכן שיהיה דג ושיהיה שרץ המים, וכמו כן יהיה עוף

ויהיה שרץ המיס, וכמו כן יהיה עוף ושרץ העוף. מהו פוטיתא, שהוא עוף שרץ

העוף ושרץ הארץ ושרץ המים, ולפיכך׳ חייבין עליה ארבע מלקיות״.

“This is the putisa, which is a bird, a sheretz ha'of (an air creature), a sheretz ha'aretz (an earthbound creature), and a sheretz hamayim (a water creature), and one therefore receives four sets of lashes for eating one.”

The second source is in Hilkhot Maachalot Assurot Chapter 2 Halakha 23:

הרי שהיתה הבריה משרץ העוף ומשרץ המים ומשרץ הארץ כגון שהיו לה כנפים והיא מהלכת על הארץ כשאר שרצים והיתה רבה במים ואכלה לוקה שלש מלקיות

“The following laws apply if a particular creature is [included in the categories of] a flying crawling animal, an aquatic crawling animal, and a crawling animal of the earth, e.g., it has wings, it walks on the earth like other earthbound crawling animals, and it reproduces in the water. If one eats it, he is liable for three sets of lashes.”

[It should be noted that the Raaved argues with this most emphatically loc. cit.:

כתב הראב"ד ז"ל המאסף הזה אסף דברים שאינם בעולם שלא שמענו מימינו נמלה גדלה במים ולא שרץ העוף גדל במים

“The compiler gathered ideas here that simply don’t exist in this world and that we have never heard of- that there should be a land creature living in the sea or an air creature living in the sea!?”]

Enter the Rogatchover who threads all this together and resolves the apparent biblical contradiction with ease as follows:

According to the Rambam there is a creature that is a sea and air animal we can say that our verse (1:20) is only talking about air creatures that are also sea creatures. Therefore the verse states:

 וַיֹּאמֶר אֱלֹהִים--יִשְׁרְצוּ הַמַּיִם, שֶׁרֶץ נֶפֶשׁ חַיָּה; וְעוֹף יְעוֹפֵף עַל-הָאָרֶץ, עַל-פְּנֵי רְקִיעַ הַשָּׁמָיִם

“Let the waters produce swarms of living creatures and birds that fly. And let fowl fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.”

The waters are producing the birds here because the verse is speaking about the amphibious birds that also dwell in the water. Interestingly this would explain the anomalous terminology used in this verse for life, namely,  שֶׁרֶץ נֶפֶשׁ חַיָּה. The term sheretz is employed here, a strange choice of words and not one used elsewhere for describing life. According to the Rogatchover it is in fact, a most precise choice of linguistic style. This is because the verse is speaking about a sheretz that lives in the water as well as the air.

Whereas the verse in 2:19,

וַיִּצֶר יְהוָה אֱלֹהִים מִן-הָאֲדָמָה, כָּל-חַיַּת הַשָּׂדֶה ואֵת כָּל-עוֹף הַשָּׁמַיִם, וַיָּבֵא אֶל-הָאָדָם, לִרְאוֹת מַה-יִּקְרָא-לוֹ; וְכֹל אֲשֶׁר יִקְרָא-לוֹ הָאָדָם נֶפֶשׁ חַיָּה, הוּא שְׁמוֹ. 

“God had formed out of the ground every beast of the field and every bird of the sky”

which attributes birds as being formed from the earth and having nothing to do with water is referring to all regular birds.

What's so special about this generation of Jewry?

This essay explores 3 ideas:

1. The relevance of Yetziat Mitzraim (the Exodus from Egypt) to modern man.

2. The value of “limitation” in one’s personal life.

3. The significance of the current generation of Jewry over all preceding generations.

CHAPTER ONE

The bible states “Just as in the days of leaving Egypt [there was miracles], so too [when Moshiach comes] there will be miracles”.

The Zohar asks, somewhat uncharacteristically, a textual question. We know that the Jews left Egypt in one day, if so, why does the verse employ the usage of plural “days” instead of the singular “day”?

The answer offered by Chassidus is the following:

Leaving Egypt is not, as one would suppose, a one and done event. Instead it is an ongoing process in one’s personal life. The Hebrew word for Egypt is Mitzrayim. The word Mitzrayim is etymologically similar to the word Meitzarim. Meitzarim means limitation. Thus Yetziat Mitzrayim would compute into Yetziat Meitzarim, meaning breaking free of one’s own shortcomings. The exodus of Egypt would be more properly translated as the exodus from one’s own Egypt. 

Practically speaking this means that quite often in a Jew’s daily service of God, they may experience an unwillingness to engage in what God requests of them. Obviously this unwillingness can rear its ugly head at any time. Yet when a Jew breaks free from their limitations and smashes this wall of obstruction and performs the act that God desires, they have experienced their own intimate exodus from Egypt.

Clearly then Yetziat Mitzrayim is not a historical event that transpired in the murky eons of the past but rather a shockingly relevant and current experience that needs to be accessed and engaged in on a daily basis.

Chassidus then develops this concept further. Not just is the Exodus a static daily exercise, but it is in fact an accelerating experience. Breaking one’s limitations becomes a catalyst for spiritual maturation necessitating the transcendence of increasingly refined and mature personal limitations. In other words if on Sunday they surpassed themselves beyond what they thought possible and gave a thousand dollars to charity, then on Monday their new boundary is giving a thousand and one dollars to charity; that is the new limitation that they must transcend.

Not just is this true on an individual scale, but in fact it applies to the world as a whole. Starting from our creation as a people on Mount Sinai, each era of Jewry has been engaging in progressively deeper and more powerful refinement of the world. As the coarse battlegrounds of yesterday turn into the standardized norms of today, today’s battles revolve around yet more refined areas of the human experience that need to be purified and transcended. Paving the way for tomorrow’s as of yet unimagined horizons.

[Steven pinker has recently published a book called "The better angels of our Nature". He describes it as follows: We’ve all had the experience of reading about a bloody war or shocking crime and asking, “What is the world coming to?” But we seldom ask, “How bad was the world in the past?” 

In this startling new book, the bestselling cognitive scientist Steven Pinker shows that the world of the past was much worse. With the help of more than a hundred graphs and maps, Pinker presents some astonishing numbers. Tribal warfare was nine times as deadly as war and genocide in the 20th century. The murder rate of Medieval Europe was more than thirty times what it is today. Slavery, sadistic punishments, and frivolous executions were unexceptionable features of life for millennia, then suddenly were targeted for abolition.  Wars between developed countries have vanished, and even in the developing world, wars kill a fraction of the people they did a few decades ago. Rape, battering, hate crimes, deadly riots, child abuse, cruelty to animals—all substantially down.] 

Thus the whole of Jewish history can be seen as a generational chain spiraling into the heavens and bringing increasingly loftier gradations of holiness into this world. The climax of this will be in the times of Moshiach when the ultimate transcendence of all human limitation will be realized as God will reveal Himself to us in all his glory.

CHAPTER TWO

According to our analysis that each generation is increasingly mature and spiritually sensitive, our current era should be the most advanced and developed in history. Yet we see that in fact, it is quite the opposite.

What is our area of expertise that surpasses previous eras of Jewry? Is it Talmudic scholarship and halakhik knowledge?  Not likely. Whereas in the past, knowing all of Shas (an acronym for all 60 volumes of the Talmud), was simply a prerequisite for entry into higher level study groups and yeshivot, today one would be hard pressed to find 50 rabbis who know the entire Talmud cold. Additionally, the evolution of Torah study is structured in a way that the authority of each generation of the tradition has increasingly less legislative power and credence. Tannaim ,earlier Talmudists, trump Amoraim ,later Talmudists, and Achronim, rabbinic scholars from roughly 1600 and on, cannot generally argue with Rishonim, rabbis from roughly 1000 to 1600.

Nor is it sainthood or stronger leadership; not for nothing has this post-holocaust generation been called a “dor yasom”, an orphaned generation.

Neither is it our camaraderie or strong Jewish unity. Unfortunately, Judaism has never been more fractious with so many divisions and groups.

Can we even find one Mitzvah in which we shine over all preceding generations? And even if we could, would that justify classifying our era as more refined then all of the generations of Jews who came before us?

That’s just within Judaism. But the world at large has changed as well. The secularism of modern technological man combined with society’s utter embrace of the flesh and material pleasures have produced an environment of immeasurable temptation and seduction. Add to that the accessibility and ease with which such secularism and materialism is obtained thanks to modern technology and current attitudes of acceptance and individualism, and one begins to imagine the challenges facing the 21^st century spiritual-religious Jew. 

Chassidus answers this in a spectacular way. Indeed we possess nothing that other generations did not do better and stronger with more widespread participation. Rather the secret ingredient that we have that no other era had, is precisely our weakness. Our depth lies in our shallowness. Our superiority is in our inferiority.

Meaning, despite it all we serve Him with strength and devotion. We still believe in God and seek to fulfill his divine plan for the world called Torah and Mitzvot. The immutable faith and commitment found in the 21^st century spiritual-religious Jew is truly astonishing and shocking.

This then is our profundity and innovation within Judaism. We are a living testament to its versatility and timeless truth. At the end of the day, Chassidus says, we are basically serving God without limitation. To withstand all the trials and tribulations facing us today and to remain Torah-true Jews is to invest oneself in Judaism without qualification or limitation.

Halakhic Miracles

An interesting angle on the discussion of miracles within Judaism is the halakhic-legal application. There is a halakhic directive to make a blessing upon experiencing a miracle (Brachot –chapter nine). As such, there is a need to have a working halakhic-legal definition of what exactly constitutes a miracle so that the individual can know when they are obligated to make this blessing.

The Talmud however, does not define the precise boundaries of what is considered a miraculous event. What it does do, is give us examples of what it considers a miracle. For example, the Talmud (Brachot 54a) says that one must make a blessing when passing the place where our ancestors experienced a miracle. It then goes on to give two examples: the splitting of the sea and the place where the Jews fought (and won) Amalek. 

Clearly these two events are strikingly different in their type of miracle. As we discussed at length in the last few posts, there is a miracle that works within nature, and a miracle that transcends and doesn’t reckon with nature. These two examples typify these two class sets.

This would seem to imply that even when someone experiences an event that does not break the bonds of nature and is just not what we would expect (i.e. winning a war against a numerically and strategically superior force, such as Amalek), we still can, and are obligated to, make a blessing on the event.

The shulkhan arukh (orach chayim, siman 218, seif 9) brings yet another example that might obligate one to make a blessing on a miracle. The example is where one simply underwent a potentially life-threatening situation and was saved. Such as being robbed or falling off a ladder and the like. According to this we can isolate three class sets of experiences that can be considered halakhically a miracle.

1.       Complete miracle- i.e. something broke the laws of nature.

2.       Semi – miracle – i.e. something extraordinary happened that utterly defied what we would expect to play out naturally. Yet no law of nature was broken. This would be chanuka, the war of Amalek, purim etc.

3.       Dangerous situation – potentially life threatening that one was saved from. In this situation there is no breakdown of nature, not even something extraordinary, just what appears to be a commonplace occurrence. Yet this is, according to some authorities, considered a halakhic miracle.

The problem with this last class set is that there is an entirely different blessing that one is supposed to make on being saved from a potentially life threatening situation. It is called birkhat hagomel, the blessing of beneficence. Thus if one crossed the sea and went through a storm, or travelled through a desert they must say a blessing of gomel. This would seem to indicate that a dangerous situation is not halakhically classified as a miracle since it already falls under a different category of gomel or grace. As a result this last class set is hotly disputed by the earlier commentaries.

What is most interesting is that these three halakhic categories exactly parallel the three categories that Chassidic thought delineated. The open dominant miracle, the integrated miracle and the non-recognizable miracle.

Although the earlier commentators (Rishonim) debated the issue, the final ruling as it has been codified by the later commentators (Achronim) is that one makes a blessing on a miracle only where a breakdown of nature has occurred. 

A Chassidic Unified Theory

Last week we explained how it is conceptually possible to have a merging of the natural and the divine in one fluid system. In this week’s essay we will explore the ramifications of asserting that our earthly natural system of reality contains divine energy and influence.

Chassidic thought asserts several core concepts that can all perhaps be seen to revolve around one central axis. Among them are the following:

1.       Divine providence – hashgacha pratit : Chassidus asserts that every single occurrence that takes place is governed and orchestrated by G-d. From a fish eating plants on the seabed to the fall of communism, everything is ultimately presided over by G-d.

2.       Purpose of creation – dirah betachtonim: Chassidus posits that the purpose of creation is that G-d wants us to create for him a “dwelling place” here in the physical realm. This is in direct contrast to most other strands of Jewish thought which place the emphasis of the divine intent on spirituality or other considerations. See my post for more on this.

3.       Divine “goodness” – ein ra yored milmala: Chassidus asserts that ultimately there is nothing bad or harmful that comes from above. Any occurrence in one’s life that seems filled with pain, sorrow and/or darkness, is in fact something profoundly beneficial and constructive. In fact, precisely because of the depth of its “goodness”, it is percieved as destructive instead of constructive. This is obviously a viewpoint that requires a comprehensive explanation to understand its coherency and cogency.

4.       Awakening of the dead – techiyat hameisim : Chassidus uncharacteristically  takes the Ramban’s (Nachmonides) position on this over the Rambam’s (Maimonides). The dispute is whether the final climax of existence will take place in a world of souls (Rambam’s postion) or a world with actual physical bodies (Ramban’s position). Chassidus takes the latter position.

5.       Supremacy of action – maaseh ikar: Chassidus places incredible emphasis on physical mitzvoth, asserting that a physical act of a mitzvah connects one to a deeper place of divinity then learning Torah does. This is dealt with at some length in Professor Naftali Lowenthal’s “The Apotheosis of Action in Early Habad”printed in the Daat Journal #18.

6.       Supremacy of limitation – kadmo ha’heder: Chassidus takes the position that the ability of G-d to exist in limited and imperfect ways is in fact, a deeper expression of his omnipotence then His ability to exist in infinite and perfect ways. Hand in hand with this is the idea that concealment can reflect a deeper level of G-dliness then revelation.

7.       Supremacy of the recipient – maalas ha’mekabel : a similar strand of thought is that the recipient is in fact greater than the giver. Chassidus pinpoints this in several places. The (latent and eventual expression of) supremacy of woman over man, action over contemplation and speech over thought.

8.       Supremacy of nature over the miraculous – the subject of our last couple posts’.

While many of these points have been dealt with at length (most notably, purpose of creation in Rabbi Faitel Levin’s “Heaven on Earth” and supremacy of action in Lowenthal, above) there has yet to be written a unified theory clarifying the conceptual underpinnings of each of these radical positions and how they derive one from the other. Perhaps there is no core pillar from which springs forth each of these positions, and instead each position is taken on a case by case basis. But given the intertwinement of most of Chabad thought, it appears probable that there is a key concept behind all these positions.

What we can do is isolate several ideas common to all the positions taken above. Firstly, the idea that there is something innately holy about the material realm. Secondly, the idea that reality is often the inversion of our perception and opposite what we might think.

In next week’s post we will start clarifying the diversity of Jewish thought on the concept of miracles and nature. Stay tuned.

Miraculous Nature : Part Three

We will now turn to nature itself. Is the sun rising in the morning a miracle? Is nature by itself a system that is in essence miraculous? If that is so then what does a miracle even mean? If everything is miraculous then it becomes superfluous and nonsensical to talk about a miracle as something separate from the ordinary workings of nature. 

If nature is not miraculous and the laws of nature are set in place by G-d and then given free rein then doesn’t that mean that there is a system of reality outside of the divine? A principle that Chassidic thought surely denies.

Chassidut actually subscribes to both sides of the coin. There are elements of nature that are miraculous i.e. non-natural. And there are elements that are entirely natural and ordinary. What we perceive as nature is a system that seamlessly blends both these elements of the divine and the mundane.

Let’s explore this a bit more. In essence there are two things about nature that are unnatural. One is the very existence of an ordered system of reality, in fact of any reality at all. This is more a statement about creation then it is a statement about miracles. In other words all we know from existence is that there is a G-d who created this universe. The reason we know this is because of the principle brought in Jewish philosophy called ein davar oseh et atzmah or “no being can create itself”. Therefore existence implies creation by Something. We don’t know if that Something is interested in this world and gets involved with the workings of man but we know He is there.

[This is only further amplified by Chassidut’s understanding of creation ex nihilo. Namely, that creation by definition is a constant and ongoing process. Since, in order for something other then Him to exist, it requires a powerful and consistent act of creation to bring it forth against the overwhelming truth of His existence. A topic of its own.]

The second unnatural element in nature is its unceasing strength. If nature was happenstance and not a product of the divine will, then one would expect a slow decreasing of it’s strength. This is because it is a basic fact of existence that over time items break down and lose strength. Suns die, planets stop spinning, people age, corpses decay; you get the picture. If that is the case then we should see a deterioration of the system of nature. Instead however, we see that nature is just as strong as it was thousands of years ago.

Therefore, we can know through reflection and contemplation, that there is a limitless divine energy in the system of nature giving it existence and force. It is this divine energy that maintains the system and enlivens it; to the extent that it never decreases in strength.

[It is important to bear in mind that the limitless energy is only in the system of nature as a whole. To each specific detail in nature comes a limited measure “amount” of divine energy to give it existence. The force we call gravity, has a specific amount of divine energy giving it power and applicability. This is so for several reasons, most notably that it is impossible for a limited framework (the force of gravity) to contain within it an unlimited energy. Therefore clearly the limitless energy is in nature as a whole. In the klal and not in the prat.]

This then is the paradigm we were seeking. A blend of limitation and infinite, nature and miracle, ordinary and supernatural. The blend is so complete and the intertwinement so absolute that one cannot even see anything extraordinary about nature. It seems to be a self-sustaining, self- generating closed system of forces and rules. Yet behind it all is the divine, the supernatural, the unlimited.

If this is so, then consider the implications that arise from this. We explained in last week’s post about the integrated miracle, the following:

“Counter-intuitively, a dominant miracle by definition contains a lesser lower level of divinity then an integrated miracle. This is because in order for an integrated miracle to occur there must be incredibly deep and lofty levels of divinity involved. Why is this? Think about the implications of an integrated miracle occurring. You have a situation in which the divine and the mundane are conversing and blending with each other. How is that possible? How can a finite system and an infinite system have any point of commonality and interaction between them? There is no starting point within which to engage in a shared dialogue.

The answer is that in order for this to occur there must be a third truly transcendent platform that facilitates a union between the infinite and the finite. This can only come from the essence of G-d Himself which is absolute and juggles the limited and the limitless all at once. For to be truly without limit means that one must be able to exist in limited forms as well. [A subject that deserves its own series of posts.] Therefore the integrated miracle must have some of the deepest levels of G-dliness involved, levels that are beyond even being defined as infinite, in order to bridge the limited-limitless divide.”

Now, if that is true about an integrated miracle then it is far more true for the system of nature itself. Because like we said last week, an integrated miracle at the end of the day is a miracle. Clearly, then, the blend is not complete.

However if there is an intertwinement of the natural and the divine within the system of nature itself, that then is setting the ground for an absolute synthesis, in which the natural and the supernatural merge seamlessly. So much so that one needs to reflect and ponder the inner workings of the system to realize that there is something transcendent about nature itself.

What follows is that the levels of divinity involved in our earthly realm and the system that governs it called nature, contains the essence of G-d Himself. For in order to have the two absolute opposites of nature and the divine merge so profoundly and utterly, there must be a third transcendent platform that facilitates this merging. This platform is G-d Himself for whom the natural and the supernatural are not opposites. They are simply different ways of expressing Himself.  Therefore He can mix the two and have a system which is natural and limited and yet unnatural and unlimited.

This is all just explaining how it is conceptually possible to have a merging of two absolute opposites into one fluid system. In next week’s essay we will explore the ramifications of saying that our earthly natural system of reality contains not just divinity but even something of the essence of G-d Himself.

Miraculous Nature : Part Two

In last week’s post we explored some of the basic ideas and terminology of miracles and nature within Chassidic thought. We explained that a miracle is asserting G-d’s authority and mastery over our physical seemingly autonomous reality. Within this itself there are two ways of expressing this divinity within the physical, in a revealed dominant manner and in a concealed integrated manner. The revealed manner is one of dominating nature. 

The concealed manner is one of dealing with the system of nature, acknowledging its legitimacy and working with the rules of nature to a certain extent; bending nature instead of breaking it. Each path has certain superiority in terms of communicating the absolute power and dominion that the divine has over the physical.

I just want to add two points as a continuation of last week’s post. Firstly, we explained that within the integrated category of miracle there is a subdivision of the “recognizable-integrated miracle” and the “non-recognizable-integrated” miracle. 

However there appears to be a subdivision even within the category of the open dominant miracle. There is the “completed dominant miracle” and the “continuous dominant miracle”. The completed dominant miracle is one where the miracle is open and dominant, clearly flouting the laws of nature but it is a one and done event. For example, G-d turning the Nile into blood. There was just one phenomenon that broke the laws of nature. The water turning into blood. 

After that one second of miracle there was now a river of blood that was flowing and behaving in accordance with nature.

Not so with the continuous dominant miracle. In this category the breaking of nature is a constant and ongoing event. Such as the sea splitting for the Jews when they were fleeing the Egyptians. G-d could have performed one extraordinary action of changing the very nature and molecular structure of the sea into water that naturally is vertical and inflexible. If that had occurred then a separate new miracle would be necessary to get the sea back to a flowing horizontal state instead of a rigid vertical one. G-d would have had to break this new nature of the water, a nature of vertical rigidity, to bring the sea back to its prior state. But this miracle didn’t occur within a completed framework. Instead it occurred within a framework of constant supernatural behavior. Every second the water stood required an entirely new and separate act of G-d to allow the water to ignore the rules of nature. 

This category is a much more invasive and overpowering one (from natures’ standpoint) since it is breaking nature anew every second instead of being a one-time intrusion.

The second additional point is: we explained that the advantage that the dominant miracle has is that it shows G-d’s mastery over the entire system of nature, expressing the fact that He can ignore the rules of nature at will. Conversely the advantage that an integrated miracle has is that it shows that G-d is not limited to ignoring nature when He wants to change something. Rather He can even work with nature and seduce, if you will, the system of nature to change course internally.

Perhaps an analogy to consider is one of an employer and employee. Imagine a boss tells one of his employees that from his perspective the next step the company must take is x. The employee’s perspective is that course x would be disastrous for the company and in fact course y must be pursued. The boss can then order his employee to implement course x or be fired. In this scenario the boss is expressing the dominance of his perspective by breaking the employees’ perspective and overriding it. A form of mastery to be sure, but not an organic ground-up approach. Rather what we have here is an externally enforced dominance. 

The other scenario is one in which the boss deliberates at length with his employee eventually convincing him that indeed course x is the wiser one. In this situation the dominance of the boss’s perspective is organic and from the ground up. It is dominant not just because it can steamroller the employee but more importantly because it took over the employee from within, eventually resonating with the employee and becoming so real that the employee himself embraces it. Two very different forms of strength and dominance.

This is all from the perspective of our reality, the natural. What about from the divine perspective? What are the differences between the dominant and the integrated miracle? From G-d’s perspective the two categories of miracles are extremely diverse in their meta-physical structure. Counter-intuitively a dominant miracle by definition contains a lesser lower level of divinity then an integrated miracle. This is because in order for an integrated miracle to occur there must be incredibly deep and lofty levels of divinity involved. 

Why is this? Think about the implications of an integrated miracle occurring. You have a situation in which the divine and the mundane are conversing and blending with each other. How is that possible? How can a finite system and an infinite system have any point of commonality and interaction between them? There is no starting point within which to engage in a shared dialogue.

The answer is that in order for this to occur there must be a third truly transcendent platform that facilitates a union between the infinite and the finite. This can only come from the essence of G-d Himself which is absolute and juggles the limited and the limitless all at once. For to be truly without limit means that one must be able to exist in limited forms as well. [A subject that deserves its own series of posts.] Therefore the integrated miracle must have some of the deepest levels of G-dliness involved, levels that are beyond even being defined as infinite, in order to bridge the limited-limitless divide.

The question that now needs to be addressed is the following. After everything is said and done how can we assert that there is a form of miracle that is integrated with nature since even after all the integration there is a point where nature says no and the miracle says yes. In other words you can bend nature all you want but at a certain point there is a negation of what the natural outcome would have been. Thus even the integrated miracle is not truly at one with nature.

Chassidut concedes this point and responds by holding up nature itself (removed from the concept of miracles) as the paradigm of a true synthesis between the divine and the natural.

This will be the topic of the next post. Stay tuned.

  

"Miraculous Nature" - Part One

OVERVIEW

The centrality of miracles within religion is not a new concept. If an omnipotent G-d exists then the possibility of a transcendent force breaking the laws of nature is obvious and apparent. What is not as apparent is if there is a comprehensive system within Jewish thought for understanding the interaction between the laws of nature and miracles. What are the mechanisms of this interaction. Are there different categories of miracles and what are the conceptual differences between them. When does G-d intervene and when does He not. Why would G-d intervene if he wants man to forge his own destiny and ultimate redemption.

All these are important questions. Yet it appears that a system and language was not fully developed for understanding this area of Jewish thought until recently. What follows is an analysis of the inner workings and intricacies of miracles as the concept has been developed by the Chabad masters. In later posts we will explore these same concepts from the perspectives of other Jewish thinkers and discover the differences that exist on this topic.

I want to put together a mailing list so please email me your email address if you want to know when a new post is up. Thanks for reading.

CHAPTER ONE

To begin we must first define our terms. A miracle means that according to the natural order of the world the outcome would have been x. Instead, the outcome was y and we are attributing this unnatural outcome to the intervention of the divine. Meaning there is an engagement and interaction between two systems of reality. How do these two systems connect? Or do they? What are the consequences of this connection?

To understand this we have to step back and examine the meta-physical structure of a miracle. A miracle in Chassidic thought means that there is a revelation of a level of G-dliness that transcends the physical world. It is this revelation that is the catalyst for the physical phenomena that we see on the experiential end. So there are two distinct elements here. There is a spiritual level descending into the material natural realm and revealing itself, what we will call the “divine end”. The second element is the physical result of this divine revelation, what we will call the “users end”. 

I.e. G-d places a certain degree and quality of life- force into nature to make it work and a miracle is when G-d takes out this degree of life-force and inserts a higher and loftier life- force into the world. Let’s consider a specific case such as when the sea of reeds split for the Jews. There was the normative level of divinity that is usually in the water giving it its existence and nature. This divine bundle of energy, if you will, gave the water its nature of flowing and being under the dominion of certain forces such as gravity, the pull of the moon and the currents flowing within it. The sea splitting and standing like a wall was the result of a transcendent life-force being inserted into the water, a life-force that was above the physical realm and thus not subject to its laws.

This is the first most basic level of a miracle, what we will call the “open dominant miracle”. Open because it is a revealed apparent miracle. “Dominant” because in this category there is no dialogue or engagement between the two systems (of nature and the divine). Rather the divine comes in and takes over, i.e. breaks the system of nature and doesn’t reckon with it.

Then there is what Chassidus calls the integrate miracle. An integrated miracle is a miracle that is not readily apparent to the perception of Man. An example of this would be the military miracle of Hanukkah. By Hanukkah there was no specific place where one could point and say there is the breaking of nature. What you had was a situation that was incredibly unlikely to the point of being impossible to believe. If one saw one weak person overwhelm one hundred battle hardened veterans they would be utterly shocked to the point that they would most probably feel that they had just witnessed an act of G-d. Yet nowhere was there an openly supernatural act occurring that was clearly beyond the realm of the natural. This is what Chassidus calls the “integrated miracle”.

An important point to bear in mind is that a dominant miracle is dominant because it is open and is open because it is dominant. The two concepts are bound together. If something is openly flouting the rules of nature then clearly it is not working with nature but rather breaking and dominating the system of nature. And so too with an integrated miracle. An integrated miracle is integrated because it is concealed and is concealed because it is integrated.

[Within this itself there are two categories. There is the “recognizable integrated miracle” such as Hanukkah where clearly something incredible and otherworldly took place. Then there is the “non- recognizable integrated miracle” where the miracle is so internalized within nature that it is not apparent at all that anything supernatural occurred. What the Talmud calls ‘ein baal hanes maker be’niso’ or “the master of [i.e. the one who experienced] the miracle does not even recognize his own miracle”. For the sake of clarity and conciseness this analysis will limit itself to the general category of the “recognizable integrated miracle”.]

The conceptual implication of this category (of the integrated miracle) is that there is a possibility of the divine system working with the natural system and not just ignoring it at will. I.e. G-d wanted the Jews to win over the Greeks- yet there are different ways they could have won. G-d could have rained down fiery hail on the Greeks as He did in Egypt. He could have stopped the sun as He did for Joshua. Yet the miracle took place within the system of nature and not outside its scope.

Obviously there was a bending of nature; but a breaking did not take place. Nature was manipulated and redirected instead of simply being ignored.

CHAPTER TWO

Chassidic thought asserts that the primary purpose of a miracle is to show that G-d is present and in charge. If that is the case then what innovation does each category of miracle bring to the table? I.e. do the two categories of the “dominant” miracle and the “integrated” miracle represent simply two different ways of achieving the same end result? Or are they actually two radically different paths resulting in two very different ends.

In fact they are two very different paths with two different ends. A dominant miracle expresses something that an integrated miracle could never express and vice versa. When G-d breaks nature He is showing that the system of nature is not something that he needs to deal with and redirect; rather the entire system has no say in the matter. The sea split not because the divine coaxed nature or redirected nature but rather because in the face of the divine there is no substance to nature that one would need to reckon with in the first place. Put simply the dominant miracle is expressing the negation of the natural order to the divine will.

Not so with the integrated miracle. The integrated miracle is expressing something quite different. This category is demonstrating that the divine is not just powerful because it can negate the natural order and overwhelm it. Rather the divine is so powerful that it can even bend nature to its will from within the system itself. Natural and yet supernatural. An act of G-d taking place from within rather than from without. Put simply the integrated miracle is expressing the vulnerability and compatibility of the natural order to the divine will.