שם ומלכות

Recently was involved in an argument culminating in my being accused of wrongdoing in front of about 100 people, not my brightest moment. In any event, it's a funny thing really. At that moment, while you're being yelled at by someone with 100 onlookers bending their ears, you're really helpless. There's no way to defend yourself. There's no way to share the prior sequence of events and informational context with the onlookers, no way to coordinate or convey your set of information with theirs (the accuser himself knew he was distorting events but the onlookers have no way of knowing). In short there is no way to express your Truth. Your שם is completely vulnerable and exposed to manipulation and distortion with nothing that you can do about it.

My insight being this:  שם is the one part of a person that's not immediately within his existential control. You could be truly good, truly Just within yourself and someone can still distort your image and action as that of a monster. Similarly to what I discussed  here. Hence then the ספירה of מלכות, being true emergent expression of existential self, is directly an issue of שם and directly כנגד those sins which most endanger שם i.e. לשון הרע ומוציא שם רע.

Note then the common theme throughout תהלים of לשון הרע and שמירת הלשון.

Hence the לשון מדברת גדולות of תנא דבי ר' ישמעאל in ערכין being equivalent to the ג' חמורות since it's כנגד the רגל רביעי of מלכות.

Note then that חילול השם is unique in it's being a demand on the external resultant image that is produced, not a commandment of one's own inner existential integrity as are all other מצוות. Hence אחד שוגג ואחד מזיד בחילול השם. Hence a better understanding of ר' ישמעאל in the Sifra that while the ג' חמורות בצנעא are יעבור ואל יהרג [because all parties involved know that the act performed is not true to the person's inner רצון], it's דוקא חילול השם ברבים which is יהרג ואל יעבור -- because ultimately in the eyes of the onlookers, Creation's true nature is being betrayed, and that is something that cannot be allowed. See further here.

Hence it's easy to understand how שבועת שקר is more חמור than נדר despite the fact that נדר is of a greater  level (as is the seeming contradiction in the zohar)-- it's specifically the realm of שם שמים which can be so often distorted and betrayed, it then being that much more vulnerable, hence the greater response of עונש in return.

And so then it's in a world of asymmetric information among separate entities (עולם של פירוד) in which such horrific accusations, distortions, and manipulations can be made. Starting from that point of שם, expression, and reputation --- ומשם יפרד והיה לארבעה ראשים. Hence the evolution of שם with negative connotations in english-- Shame.

[ומתוך דברינו מובן "וענשו אותו מאה כסף" דמוציא שם רע בבחינת מ"ה ה' אלקיך שואל מעמך ובבחינת מאה אדניה של מלכות]

[ואולי ניתן לומר בתוך מתק לשונו של הרמב"ם ריש הל' יסודי התורה "יסוד היסודות ועמוד החכמות לידע שי"ש ש"ם מצוי ראשון" דהיינו ישות ההויה של יהו' ושם ומלכות של ה' אחרונה, שביחד מהווים יהו"ה]

Existential vs Empirical/Physical -- Examples

I see often people having a difficult time with the distinction I make between Existential vs Empirical/Physical perspectives of reality; how they can often give exact opposite descriptions of reality and yet at-one-and-the-same-time be completely in harmony and agreement,  so I thought to attempt a list of examples to shed more understanding on what I mean. A sort of summary compilation of what much of this blog has dealt with throughout.

First part, כדי לשבר את האזן, will be examples of everyday life being used as משל for the above mentioned distinction and second part will be actual Torah examples showing, hopefully persuasively, that the Torah (and particularly I would argue תורה שבכתב) talks in terms of existentialist perspectives of reality, not empirical/physical ones as we're accustomed.

I Common Comparisons as משל

1. Every company in the stock market has a book value that can be determined based on the fundamentals of it's assets, liabilities, etc. Despite the fact that a company can go through an entire accounting period with absolutely no change in it's fundamental book value, that same stock price will fluctuate regularly and often wildly divergently from it's book value. From an "existentialist" perspective the stock value for quarter 'x' was maybe $2 throughout. From an "empirical" perspective the stock value will be a long list of each daily price transaction, maybe $1, maybe $10.
2. Similarly Real Estate value. An "existentialist" will evaluate the home based on the value of the raw materials only (cement, wood, appliances, etc). Public sentiment and it's location in relation to the surrounding environment being irrelevant. The 'existential'/fundamental value of the building being the same whether situated in Beverly Hills or the Sahara. מה שאין כן viewing it empirically.
3. A parent could often times argue and conflict with their child (say for example, refusing to allow the child to go on a class trip). Empirically we would say the parent is fighting with their child; 'existentially' we would describe the situation by the essence of it's dynamics and say the parent is protecting and showing love for the child.
4. Music and Cinematography. In their fundamental essence, they are a large collection of successive, discrete, separate and static units of information but empirically we grasp them as fluid emergent "moving" phenomena.
5. "A loves B" is a fundamental, 'existential' definition. It tells you what IS, but nothing of how it manifests physically. From the above statement you have no idea whether it means A gave B a kiss, donated his kidney, had sexual relations, yelled at, etc. In other words, an existentialist description is specifically removed from the gritty physical details of how existential phenomena ultimately manifest themselves into a physical world. From an existentialist frame of reference, those details are marginal.
6. "You raped me!" from an existential viewpoint, could be true even if I wasn't physically raped but the underlying essence of what rape is was present i.e. you forced me to have a conversation with you against my wishes, you violated my sense of intimacy/trust, etc

II Torah Examples

• If קידושין is an existential bond (ויצאה והיתה) [and not what's commonly translated as marriage], then the degree of emotional connection or physical connection between the couple is irrelevant. A man could be מקדש a woman one moment and then move to the other side of the world and live there for the next 30 years and she'll remain the exact same degree an אשת איש regardless
• In wanting to convey a definition/description of a personality existentially, there is little need to give biographical detail as to the majority of his life. The Torah can give over the essence of who אברהם is by giving a few limited paragraphs of his life events-- the earliest one starting from when he was 70 years old! There is no need or desire from an existentialist Torah perspective to write an Artscroll biography book on any Tanach personality. (see example 5 above)
• as in example 6 above, an existentialist talks in terms of the essential essence of an act's meaning, even if not actually physically carried out-- וילך ראובן וישכב את בלהה. Similarly all of the examples חז"ל mention in כל האומר פלוני חטא אינו אלא טועה וכו
• Once a person has forfeited his purpose and justification to exist I can refer to him existentially as "dead" -יומת המת- even if he's physically breathing and functioning.   Similarly, someone whose existential essence embodies universal eternal Truths of Creation and Existence is very much alive, even if physically dead. ובניהו בן יהוידע בן איש חי
• Existentially, a person exists starting משיצא ראשו ורובו של ולד even though from an empirical/physical perspective the fetus is very much alive with a beating heart seconds before birth as well. Similarly, on the other side of the life cycle--  physically, you may call someone dead the moment they cease bodily function whereas existentially, it's no different than killing a חתן בחופתו.
• Since דם נדה is defined existentially (יהיה, בהויתו יהא) it therefore is מטמא both לח ויבש, whereas otherwise we'd go by the physical parameter of moistness as a gauge for when it's considered to still be capable of impacting and affecting an external reproductive world.
• Existential perspective will see "Effect" as preceding "Cause". See here.
• Existential Truths will dictate eventual empirical events to manifest those said Truths inevitably, one way or another. אם החרש תחרישי בעת הזאת רווח והצלה יעמוד ליהודים ממקום אחר וכו. The empirical players are variables in an overall existential equation, see here.
• Existential perspective will not have gerunds in it's vocabulary. A physical action without an 'Existing Being' performing it does not exist. see here.
• As physical beings, our ultimate source of existential identity is hidden from us (אין), whereas empirically we are entirely defined sexually in regard to our interaction with the external world (אות). See here.
• If I tell you someone IS existentially evil --  הוא אחשורוש ברשעו מתחלתו ועד סופו  it's irrespective of time (usually). I don't need to have documented the life of אחשורוש, from birth to death, to testify to the fact that he never helped an old lady across the street. Physical acts of good emanating from existential evil is ultimately evil.   Similarly you see this derasha of הוא in many places in gemara. מס' ערכין being one example of many--  ר' יהודה אומר אפי' עני והעשיר וחזר והעני נותן ערך עשיר מ"ט דר' יהודה אמר קרא (ויקרא כז) ואם מך הוא מערכך עד שיהא במכותו מתחלתו ועד סופו

I'll stop here but there are many more examples in the Torah of this point. This Existential/Empirical distinction is fundamental to the Torah, as is the imperative to understand the interconnection and harmony between them in my opinion... ותן לחכם ויחכם עוד

ז' ימים של עשרת ימי תשובה

See שער הכונות הקדמת דרושי ראש השנה that the concept of each day of עשרת ימי תשובה bringing forgiveness for each day of the week was originally said in the context of תשובה with fasting...

עי' בשער הכונות הקדמת דרושי ראש השנה דתיקון ימי השבוע בכל אחד מז' ימי עשרת תשובה נאמר בעשיית תשובה תוך צום ותענית...

עוד יחוד ג' והוא בעשרת ימי תשובה אמר לי ה"ר משה גאלאנטי ששמע ממוז"ל שאם האדם יתענה בז' ימים שבין ר"ה ליוה"כ ויעש' בהם תשובה גמורה כל יום מהם מכפר על כל העונות שחטא כל ימיו ביום שכיוצא בו. כיצד הרי שחל יום א' של ז' ימי תשובה הנז' ביום א' של השבוע והתענה בו ועשה תשובה בו הנה הוא מכפר על כל עבירות שעשה האיש ההוא בכל ימיו ביום א' שבכל שבוע מכל ימי חייו. ואם התענה ועשה תשובה בכל ז' הימים ההם יתכפרו לו כל עונותיו שעשה כל ימיו

כאילו מלמדה תפלות

סוטה כ עמוד א - ר"א אומר כל המלמד בתו תורה <כאילו> לומדה תפלות ר' יהושע אומר רוצה אשה בקב ותפלות מט' קבין ופרישות. ובגמ'-- אמר ר' אבהו מ"ט דר"א דכתיב אני חכמה שכנתי ערמה, כיון שנכנסה חכמה באדם נכנסה עמו ערמומית וכו'... מאי קאמר ר' יהושע הכי קאמר רוצה אשה בקב ותיפלות עמו מתשעת קבין ופרישות

The word תפלות being somewhat unclear as to it's exact meaning yet seemingly understood as something loosely connected to sexuality and sexual promiscuity. That notwithstanding it still remains unclear how תפלות is related to the word תפל which means blandness of taste and spice (תבלין) as in פת תפל of איוב ו or more fundamentally as something not fully developed as in יחזקאל יג כ ועיין מצודות ציון שם....

לענ"ד being that תורה in it's essence is a description of existential reality and not an empirical one, a woman who is naturally predisposed to an empirical world of process and cause/effect is by definition constrained to translating and interpreting all Torah information by way of empirical nature... evolutionary biology... the fundamental drive of spreading genes and self, i.e. sexuality. By definition, anything in terms of interaction with an external world must ultimately be defined in terms of sexuality as faintly mentioned in regard to אות. 

It's only a man who is naturally predisposed in relating to existential dimensions of reality per se that can learn תורה in it's proper "tasty" (בראתי תורה תבלין) and developed form. Hence כל המלמד בתו תורה כאילו מלמדה תפלות.

ונכון הוא

[Note also then, beautifully, the word תפלה  being a defining and assessment specifically of how an empirical world (חיי שעה) ought to be, sharing then the same letters, besides being כולו ענין של ייחודים as well...]

[Note also Torah standing conferred upon women specifically by way of their intimate relations-- אשת חבר כחבר, and not by intellectual expertise of the knowledge per se]

זוהר פנחס רלו ע"ב-- יו"ד דא רזא דברית וכו' יו"ד דא איצטריך דלא יתעדי כלל מגו תפלה דיד, דלא יעביד פרודא, וכל חדוה דילה בהאי י' איהו, יו"ד דא בדכורא איהו, ולא בנוקבא, איהו צדיק ואיהי צדק ובגין כך אתקריבת בהדה ומאן דרחיק ליה מאתר דא רחיק הוא מעדונא דעלמא דאתי.    בדכורא איהו צדיק ואיהי צדק בלא יו"ד, איהו איש ואיהי אשה בלא יו"ד, ובגין כך חדוה דילה לאתקרבא בה ולאתעדנא בהדה וכו'... ועל דא כתיב כי מכבדי אכבד

[And see the Malbim's (16/35) distinction of ערום from חכם, insofar as his character to "go for what he wants" independent of the abstract principles themselves, related to our אני חכמה שכנתי ערמה above as well.]

[ולא נתן תפלה לאלקים (איוב א) עדיין צריך עוד עיון...]

הוה

Note a puzzling thing: the word הוה, being essentially 75% of the שם המפורש, has in fact a negative connotation of שבר and tribulation as in יחזקאל ז) הוה על הוה) [even having the same vowelization!]... The only explanation in my mind being the loss of the 'י' as mentioned here.

If so we have an additional difficulty to resolve-- the word used for the Present term-- הווה , it being the only one of the three tenses bereft of a י...

לענ"ד the Present being in it's very essence (by virtue of it's being standalone and devoid of חיבור i.e. devoid of context) chaotic and ambivalent, hence frustrating and painful; contrary to a sequential chronological Past (היה) or an envisioned unfolding Future (יהיה).

יהו"ה-- היה הווה ויהיה

Chazal say (source?) the meaning of יהו"ה being היה הווה ויהיה -- presumably from the 3 vowelizations of שב"א, חול"ם, וקמ"ץ.  The beginning שב"א for future e.g. יהי אור, the חול"ם used for present e.g הווה, עושה  ; and קמץ for past e.g. היה, נהיה.

Problem is though, Chazal should state the order opposite:  יהיה הווה והיה as per the vowelization...

לענ"ד from the perspective of Mankind, Creation's processes are leading up towards ultimate Existential completion, hence היה הווה ויהיה but from the perspective of Primal Existence/ יהו"ה, an existentialist perspective, the ultimate future final result of what remains is your point of origin, how could you begin from things which "are-not"?; what remains are the particular processes by which Existence shall manifest itself but one way or another, those existential Truths will manifest. Hence from an existentialist perspective the effect exists before the causes that bring it about --- רווח והצלה יעמוד ליהודים ממקום אחר ואת ובית אביך תאבדו. As R' Matis Weinberg explained in Frameworks Pr' Hukat.

.....In the same way then that mathematical truths precede and are pre-determined even before the selection of the particular causal data that bring them about, as for example x + y = 20. The result will be 20, no matter what 'x' you choose.

It is interesting then, following this line of thinking, that the שם of צבאות follows a different order, namely: Future, Past, Present... וצע"ע

אגרת רבן יוחנן בן זכאי

אגרת רבן יוחנן בן זכאי 

I have nothing to say. Everyone has to read it for themselves. Be prepared for a lot of gematria in מספר קטן. Many thanks to LG for showing this to me.

If the online hebrew calendar conversion works correctly, the hebrew date of authorship Kislev 3813 - כסלו ג' תתיג comes out to approx the 10th of November 52 C.E.

אגרת רבן יוחנן בן זכאי provided by HebrewBooks.org