[Avodah] Tiqun Olam

[Micha Berger]

On Mon, Sep 07, 2009 at 10:33:19PM +0300, Michael Makovi wrote:
...

(I am under the impression RMM enjoys a good argument, and am writing
this post accordingly. If I misjudged, my apologies.)

How many things can I disagree with in one post?

1- The subject line. "Tiqun olam" has to do with making a malkhus
Shakkai. Which may very well be acheived by ethics and fiscal honesty
to the world vekhol tosheveha. But even so, that's not what Tiqun olam
actually is. In post-Ari qabbalah, it has to do with broken keilim and
metaphysical forces.

: Inter alia, Levine says, "In line with this approach, Hirsch reverses
: the traditional view of the highest goal of religious life: holiness.
: We are accustomed to viewing holiness, the experience of the numinous,
: as the very acme of religion. For Hirsch, however, holiness is but a
: means of preparing us for the end purpose which is the life of service
: to mankind.... Rabbi Moses Chaim Luzzato provides a sharp antithesis to
: the Hirschian view...."

This might be "holiness", it certainly is Rudolph Otto's definition, but
if so it has nothing to do with qedushah.

Qedushah is something done, a decision and a dedication, not an
experience. "Qedoshim tihyu" is an imperative. "Qadeish es atzmekha bema
shemutar lakh". Or, from my translation of the haQdamah to Shaarei
Yosher:

    BLESSED SHALL BE the Creator, and exalted shall be the Maker, Who
    created us in His "Image" and in the likeness of His "Structure",
    and planted eternal life within us, so that our greatest desire should
    be to do good to others, to individuals and to the masses, now and in
    the future, in imitation of the Creator (as it were). For everything
    He created and formed was according to His Will (may it be blessed),
    [that is] only to be good to the creations. So too His Will is that
    we walk in His ways. As it says "and you shall walk in His Ways" --
    that we, the select of what He made -- should constantly hold as
    our purpose to sanctify our physical and spiritual powers for the
    good of the many, according to our abilities.

    In my opinion, this whole concept is included in Hashem's mitzvah
    "Be holy, [for I am Holy]."...

What is qedushah? To be set aside for the purpose of imitating Hashem by
being good to His creatures.

Let's look at the Ramchal's definition (MY pereq 26):
    HOLINESS IS TWO-FOLD. Its beginning is labor and its end reward; its
    beginning, exertion and its end, a gift. That is, it begins with
    one's sanctifying himself and ends with his being sanctified...
    In the end, the Holy One Blessed be He leads him upon the path that
    he desires to follow, causes His Holiness to rest upon him, and
    sanctifies him, thus enabling him to maintain a constant intimacy
    with Him, the Blessed One...
    In fine, Holiness consists in one's clinging so closely to his God
    that in any deed he might perform he does not depart or move from
    the Blessed One, until the physical objects of which he makes use
    become more elevated because of his having used them, than he
    descends from his communion and from his high plane because of his
    having occupied himself with them. This obtains, however, only in
    relation to one whose mind and intelligence cling so closely to the
    greatness, majesty and Holiness of the Blessed One that it is as if
    he is united with the celestial angels while yet in this world....

Your thesis is contrary to the first chapter of each of MY and Derekh
Hashem, where the Ramchal lays out the "experience" part of human
existence as being in olam haba, with the purpose of olam hazeh being
entirely to "prepare on erev Shabbos". Qedushah in this world, even
according to the Ramchal, is in acting in commitment to Hashem.

According to the Meshech Chokhmah, all qedushah derives from human
activity. There is no such thing as an inherently holy place or object.
E.g. his explanation of cheit ha'eigel as being based in the error
that Benei Yisrael thought Moshe's qedushah was intrinstic. And
the lesson of the breaking of the luchos is that even something
carved by HQBH Himself has no qedushah if not a focus of avodah.
See http://www.vbm-torah.org/archive/modern/20modern.htm for R' Elyakim
Krumbein's longer discussion with numerous examples.

Even qabbalah's discussion of is'arusa dele'eilah is about holiness
awakened from above *that inspires man to respond*, in contrast to
is'arusa delesata where man awakens the qedushah from below. (Kind of like
"hashiveinu H' eilekha venashuva" vs "shuva Eilai veAshuva eileikhem".)

This isn't a small distinction. Otto is speaking from a Xian perspective,
where salvation is viewed as a gift. We work from the position where
man partners with G-d to redeem himself.

So, back to RHIL's point... Did RSRH make a serious reversal, or is it
not much of a chiddush at all?

3- Where do he and the Ramchal differ? RSRH and RSS emphasize the BALC
in qedushah. The Ramchal makes BALC a precondition to qedushah. One
had to pass through the rest of Mesilas Yesharim. He already zahir in
monitoring his middos (pereq 1), chose the right friends (pereq 5),
emulated Avraham rushing to feed guests (pereq 7), scrupulously honest
in speach and ethical in business (pereq 11), etc...

If I would characterize the difference, the Ramchal has us emulating G-d
in order to have a relationship with Him, whereas the other sources I
brought have us in relationship with Him so that we are able to carry
out His Plan in emulation of the Creator.

Not a "sharp antithesis" at all.

: The following is an excerpt from an essay I am writing on this subject,
: comparing Rav Hirsch to the Kuzari on the subject of morality and tiqun
: olam....

4- Then it would have been nice to see the quotes from the Rihal and
RSRH that show this contrast. As it is, your snippet doesn't really
prove your point; it's twice removed extrapolation from the sources.

...
:     Apparently, the first Noachide command would not mandate strict
:     monotheism of the Jewish sort, but rather, would prohibit gross
:     heathenistic worship. In like wise, Hertz says (The Pentateuch, p.
:     759, on Deuteronomy 4:19),

: 	[I]dolatry was for them [viz. the Jews] an unpardonable offense;
: 	and everything that might seduce them from that Divine Revelation
: 	was to be ruthlessly destroyed. Hence the amazing tolerance
: 	shown by Judaism of all ages towards the followers of all other
: 	cults, so long as these were not steeped in immorality and
: 	crime. [Emphasis in original.]

5- Al davar achas ha'olam omeid: al gemilus chassadim?

All three amudim are listed among the 7 mitzvos, where they include the
3 yeihareig ve'al ya'avor. See the Maharal, Derekh H' 1:2. (AZ is the
denial of Avodah; gilui arayos is the service of man's lower calling as
opposed to Torah; and shefichas damim

And once you're done expanding geneivah and retzichah into 18 tolados,
and arayos includes some basic BALC, what is being added?

You mention the problem bot don't resolve it:
:     Elsewhere, Berger remarks (Alex Ozar, "An Interview With Rabbi Dr.
:     David Berger", YU Commentator, issued December 17, 2007),
: 	And this raises larger issues about whether in order to get
: 	into olam haba a non-Jew has to get a hundred on his exam. Does
: 	he need a perfect score on the sheva mitzvos in order to have a
: 	helek la-olam haba? Now I suppose that a straightforward reading
: 	of most discussions of this matter would be yes. You have to
: 	observe all of the sheva mitzvos, not six out of seven.

Why then is AZ listed among the 7, and why is it dinei nefashos for
nachriim as well? Why is it assur for them to make a pesel even one
that represents a monotheistic Creator, or for others to worship? Why
an issur against sheim Hashem lashav?

:                                                           However,
: 	there is a teshuva of Rav Yaakov Emden, and you get a similar
: 	impression from a piece by the elder Rav Henkin, and this
: 	appears to be Rav Ahron Soloveichik's position, that indicates
: 	that the observance of the moral commandments is sufficient and
: 	that mistakes with respect to the understanding of God would
: 	not keep you out. Sinners, Jews and gentiles, are not punished
: 	forever but rather achieve a restored state.

RAS's position is that a non-Jew can be a "tinoq shenishba" WRT emunah,
but not WRT ethics. After all, the 7 mitzvos's BALC demands should be
self-evident. It's not that monotheism is optional, or only has value
as a derivative of the resulting ethics. It's that the person raised in
a pagan culture can't be judged accountable for his polytheism.

So yes, lemaaseh, it may mean suspending judgment (by non-dayanim). But
not for the reasons given at all. You're quoting apologetics designed
to emphasize Judaism's Humanism and taking it as definitive of the
value system.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Nothing so soothes our vanity as a display of
micha at aishdas.org        greater vanity in others; it makes us vain,
http://www.aishdas.org   in fact, of our modesty.
Fax: (270) 514-1507              -Louis Kronenberger, writer (1904-1980)