<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
RLL:<br>
<br>
<<What was Hashem's intent for the world? We can say as a
truism that He created the world according to His intent. His intent
<i class="moz-txt-slash"><span class="moz-txt-tag">/</span>was<span
class="moz-txt-tag">/</span></i> the blueprint for Creation. So
when the midrash says that He used the Torah as a blueprint for
Creation, the meaning seems to be that the Torah contains and
reflects Hashem's intent for all of Creation.>><br>
<br>
The midrash I mentioned (BR 1:1) is commenting on the Biblical
passage about primordial Hochmah (Mishlei 8:22ff). It offers
several explanations of "Vaehyeh etzlo amon"(Mishlei 8:30) Here's a
loose translation of the relevant bit: "Another explanation - -
amon means uman (craftsman). The Torah says: I was the tool of
God's craft. Generally when a king builds a palace he builds it,
based not on his plans (da'as - - maybe intentions would be better?)
but based on the plans of the architect. The architect builds it,
not on his da'as, but based on blueprints (diptharot), and he has
tablets (pinkasot) to tell him how to build the rooms. In the same
way God looked at the Torah and created the world."<br>
<br>
The problem is that, based on your reading, the metaphor is
backwards. The Bible describes hochmah as prior to the world "Kedem
mifalav me'az"(8:22). The midrash is emphasizing that priority:
architects build buildings from blueprints, they don't draw
blueprints from preexisting buildings. And of course it's a lovely
metaphor for Philo's Logos, the home of the Platonic ideas. But
based on your explanation the midrash shouldn't cite that passage in
Mishlei, and it shouldn't cite the analogy of the architect. It
should say that God modeled the Torah on the world, and that the
world was prior to the Torah.<br>
<br>
So, I repeat: how do you understand the words of the midrash?<br>
<br>
David Riceman<br>
</body>
</html>