[Avodah] Praying to angels

[Micha Berger]

On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 3:37pm IDT, R Danny Schoemann wrote:
: While we believe that Hashem is everywhere, we also say our tefillos
: go "up" to be heard. For a whisper or thought to go anywhere it needs
: intermediaries if it's to go anywhere.

This is the antinomy of Transcendence vs Immanence.

R' Aryeh Kaplan ("Jewish Life - Summer '74") describes it with the
following mashal:
    A very good analogy would be trick glasses in which the right lens
    is red and the left is green. Therefore, if a person wearing such
    glasses looks at a white paper, he sees it as red with his right
    eye, and as green with his left. If he looks at it through both
    eyes he sees some psychedelic mixture of red and green, but under
    no conditions can he perceive the color white.

And creating the stone so heavy even He can't lift it:
    The attributes of action would say that He can create such a stone,
    "G-d is omnipotent and can do all things." The negative attributes
    would indicate that such a stone could not exist.

Interestingly, it's the derakhim that stress Immanence, though, that pay
more attention to the mechanics of the mal'akhim. (E.g. chassidus.) Not
sure what to make of that.

RDS, contues:
: Vaguely parallel to talking on the phone; I'm talking directly to you,
: yet there are thousands of pieces of "machinery" helping my voice
: along.

And on Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 12:09pm EDT, R Zev Sero replied:
: This is explicit in gemara and halacha: we are told that while the
: tefila of a minyan, or of an individual during the Aseret Yemei Teshuva,
: goes directly to its destination, the tefila of an individual during the
: year must be conveyed by mal'achim, who don't understand Aramaic, and
: therefore can't convey those passages in the tefila.  What exactly this
: means isn't clear to me, but it's there in all the sources, black on
: white.

: The problem with this is that mal'achim are not supposed to have
: bechira.  Indeed, the definition of shituf is the belief that the
: powers above, such as the sun and moon or the mal'achim, have the
: bechira not to convey Hashem's blessings to us, and therefore have
: to be cajoled, or even bribed, in order to do so, just as is the
: case with a king's ministers and servants....

This is the difference between Machnisei Rachamim and "H' sefasai
tiftach". If the mal'akh is just machinery, why aren't I asking Hashem
for His assistance in getting them to work right, just as I do for my
lips and tongue? I wouldn't ask the phone for help. Asking the mal'akhim
goes beyond the gemaros which assert they are involved.

: So where does that leave us with "machnisei rachamim" and "shlosh
: esre midot"?  All I can say is that this was dealt with over the
: centuries by those well above my pay grade, and the overwhelming
: majority concluded that it should be said.  My bottom line is that
: if R Amram Gaon and R Shrira Gaon wrote to say it, it can't be wrong.

Not sure why the 13 middos are included. I assume this is a reference to
something in a piyut that I missed. As middos of how Hashem acts toward us
that we should emulate (cf Tomer Devorah), where is the implied middleman?

All your bottom line shows is that it's appropriate RAG and RSG. What
about for someone who can't resolve the question? If I personally can't
see how the prayer isn't shituf, am I allowed to say it? What would my
kavanah be?

GCT and :-)@@ii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             A person lives with himself for seventy years,
micha at aishdas.org        and after it is all over, he still does not
http://www.aishdas.org   know himself.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                            - Rav Yisrael Salanter