Appendices to the Discussion of Letter 44, Section E (2)
RAV KOOKS
LETTERS
By Rav Tamir
Granot
Lecture #10b:
Appendices to
the Discussion of Letter 44, Section E
Appendix A:
On the Epistemology of Immanuel Kant
The
works of Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) continue to have tremendous impact on
thinking about human consciousness, and his metaphysics and ethics constitute a
cornerstone of all modern thought.
Kant
attempted to understand how man takes in and understands his surrounding
reality. We see the computer screen in front of us, feel the clothes we are
wearing, etc. At first glance, we perceive reality as it truly is. But reality
is disloyal and problematic, and what we perceive as existing is not absolutely
the way we perceive it. For example, science claims that the world is composed
of atoms and that tremendous distances separate between their various particles;
when we see a table, however, we do not see this tremendous collection of
particles, nor do we see through the table, which, according to the above,
should be transparent (due to the tremendous distance between the particles). So
what do we really see? To what extent do we see the thing as it truly is? Does
what we see as a table really exist in this form?
The
light that we see is really a wave of photons, to which we attribute a color
red, green, or something else depending on the frequency of its vibrations.
Color is an invention of the human brain; the wave itself is only the movement
of particles. Moreover, we only see a narrow spectrum of light wavelengths, and
other creatures can see other waves of various frequency and
intensity.
If
so, what do we see - reality or merely a coarse translation of it? In Kants
language, we are asking about the difference between ontology (the thing as it
really is) and epistemology (the thing as perceived by our
consciousness).
This,
however, is only the first problem. Let us presume, according to Kants method,
that there is a God, who is perfect and powerful and who is concerned with the
existence of all reality, and that we perceive that God as existing. If that God
verifies that we perceive reality as He wishes for us to perceive it, we will
never know what really exists and what does not exist; we always receive what
God wants us to perceive. How, then, will we know if existence really exists?
Perhaps Gods decision merely causes us to think that it
exists?
We
must not forget that we take in reality through our senses, which translate what
they absorb from the outside on our behalf. The sense of sight translates
certain waves into the image that the brain receives; the sense of hearing
translates other waves into a note, and so forth. What is the relationship
between the image or the note portrayed in the brain and reality? The senses
translate the external input, they make changes, and send it on to the brain.
But the brain also processes-translates (in a manner that we do not fully
understand) the data that it receives and transforms the sensual data into
concepts/images. How precise is this process?
These
and similar questions have been debated by many philosophers (and scientists)
for generations. Whenever someone proposes a solution, others point out its
flaws. They demonstrated, for example, that while experiencing a dream, one does
not know whether or not it is real. Perhaps we are always dreaming
The film
The Matrix shows the degree to which it is impossible to determine the truth
or deception of sensory input.
We
can clarify this dilemma through a simple allegory. Let us presume that we are
sitting in a sealed room and know nothing of the existence outside the room. Our
knowledge of the outside world is fed completely by devices inside the room:
television, radio, other media, meteorological equipment, etc. We can thus live
for a long time thinking that we know what is going on outside. But suddenly a
question arises in our mind - how do we know that these devices are reliable?
How would we know if they transmit reality as it really is? What transformation
does reality undergo in them? Regarding the latter question, we can provide a
simple answer we can dismantle the device and see its operational transmission
mechanism. Then we can know what kind of transformation there was, but we still
could not know what really exists outside because we simply cannot go outside;
we are at the mercy of the devices.
Kant
explained that our reason is akin to such a sealed room that we cannot leave. We
are absolutely certain that there is something outside, but we depend on the
devices for the particular manner of perceiving them. It is impossible, Kant
explained, to really know what exists in the world as such. The things as they
are (the ontology of the world) remain unidentifiable and unknowable because, on
their way to us, they undergo too many alterations and because they are ruled by
numerous factors that we do not know about (God, the matrix, or anything
else).
The only
thing that we can become aware of in an unmediated fashion is our reason.
Consciousness of reality is, as we said, mediated, and we therefore have no
certainty with regard to it - but we are capable of investigating what our
reason is. This essentially is the critique of reason
that Kant made his lifes work both the aspects related to science and
metaphysics and the aspects related to ethics (practical
reason).
We
are familiar with the two categories upon which human thought is premised,
categories that man cannot escape working inside of. It does not matter if these
categories exist or not, if they are artificially contrived or the world is
actually like that man must operate in this way. These
categories are time and space.
We
take in reality as something that progresses through time we cannot escape
that. Every event is absorbed in relation to other events on the basis of time.
Crazy people might confuse the concept, but the present discussion is not about
the insane, but rather those among us who are trying to live in the
world.
Try
to ignore the concept of time once to imagine a world without time. It is
impossible. More precisely, it is impossible to conceive of it through our
imaginations, since we operate within time at every
instant
We
may say that we grasp the concept of an hour. We know when to get to work or
school, or determine what hour of the day it is based on the suns location.
These are all temporal phenomena;
they are not time itself, that mysterious pattern by virtue of which we can
grasp all of these things. I do not know anything about time, upon which I base
everything! What is time itself? You can show me numerous phenomena, but this
does not explain the ability of each of us to understand time. What is that
ability? How are we able to comprehend the world as working in time? Note that
each time that I ask about time, I obtain temporal phenomena, and that there is
nothing in this world that we do not do within time constraints. Every action
occupies time, every thought takes time. I cannot think about anything that does
not require that it be linked to time. But all of these grasp temporal
phenomena. The thing itself time is incomprehensible to us; it merely
defines reality for us. In other words, time is what allows us to work and live
in the world, it precedes anything that we can think about, it enables us to act
and think and as such we cannot think about it or operate on it, only within
it.
The
same applies to the concept of space. Everything is perceived as existing in
space. We are incapable of neutralizing it. We cannot place things inside things
(even the word inside entails a spatial relationship). Again, any question
about the substance of space will be answered with spatial phenomena. Space
itself is something that defines our ability to think and act in the world. We
always act within a special perception that we do not understand. We can always
explain phenomena, point out the surrounding room. But what is space in general,
that infinite thing that we exist within and constantly act within? This is hard
to explain.
Our thought
is premised upon time and space. We perceive everything within their
rubric.
Note
that neither of these categories can be proven. We cannot prove the existence of
time or space we are simply incapable of thinking otherwise. Moreover, these
categories form the basis of our thought. Neither time nor space can be pointed
out; only spatial and temporal phenomena (this table, an hour ago
). Indeed, the
general thing characterized by the words time and space is not grasped or
controlled by us; it is the basis for our thought. It does not exist in our
world, but our world is perceived through thoughts formed by time and space.
Such categories are called transcendent categories.
Another
category of thought that is very important for the premise of scientific
research is causality. All empirical science (based on scientific
experimentation) presumes that there is a causal link between various phenomena,
and scientific legality presumes the consistency of these links. If we
reconstruct the same act under the same exact conditions, the same result will
occur. British philosopher David Hume challenged the empiricist stream of
thought. Causality is hypothesis, he argued. It cannot be proven; perhaps it is
a mistake. Kant responded to Humes question in this way: causality is also a
category of thought a category through which we grasp
reality.
Kant
defined his philosophy as a second Copernican revolution. The first revolution
was the discovery that the sun does not revolve around the Earth, but that the
Earth revolves around the sun. The second revolution was that perception does
not depend on reality (that what we perceive is what we know), but that reality
depends on perception (what we perceive is subject to the categories of
reason).
Appendix B: Several Kabbalistic Concepts
The
Seven Sefirot
Below
is a concise summary of the structure of the seven emotional sefirot (the
seven lower sefirot). The graph shows the general structure of the
sefirot with important parallels, followed by a brief explanation of each
of them.
Right
line: The pillar of
kindness |
Middle
line: The
pillar of Torah |
Left
line: The
pillar of prayer |
D.
Chesed Love Avraham |
|
E.
Gevurah Awe Yitzchak |
|
F.
Tiferet Compassion Yaakov |
|
G.
Netzach Trust Moshe |
|
H.
Hod Innocence Aharon |
|
I.
Yesod Truth Yosef |
|
|
J.
Malkhut Baseness David |
|
Chesed:
The
interior of Chesed is love. In the body, Chesed corresponds to the
right hand, and the figure that represents it is Avraham. Chesed is the
most general of the virtues of the heart it opens them and accompanies them
(since all of the virtues of the heart are forms of relating to others, and the
essence of good relations with others is chesed). The features of
Chesed grow and extend from above to below.
Gevura:
The
interior of Gevura is awe. In the body, Gevura corresponds to the
left hand, and the figure that represents it is Yitzchak. Gevura is
characterized by meticulous precision, which is also a type of intense
sensitivity to detail, and by powerful justice. Gevura restrains the
expansion of Chesed, and in its interior it has an ascending movement,
going upwards.
Tiferet:
The
interior of Tiferet is compassion. In the body, Tiferet
corresponds to the body itself (and sometimes to the heart), and the figure that
represents it is Yaakov. Tiferet is the center of all the emotional
sefirot: it combines and balances Chesed and Gevura, and
this is its splendor. The Torah, which shines a measured light (a combination of
Chesed and Gevura), corresponds to
Tiferet.
Netzach:
The
interior of Netzach is trust (as in self-confidence that leads to taking
initiative, which stems in holiness from trust in God, Who gives you the
strength to create wealth). In the body, Netzach corresponds to the
right leg (or right kidney), and the figure that represents it is Moshe.
Netzachs subject is victory (which is sometimes expressed in
contentiousness), eternity, and organizational ability (conducting
work).
Hod:
The
interior of Hod is innocence (that is, seriousness and honesty, whose
opposite is cynicism). In the body, Hod corresponds to the left leg (or
left kidney), and the figure that represents it is Aharon. Hod is
manifested in confession, thanksgiving, admission of the truth (even without
understanding it through reason), and the surrounding light of majesty and
beauty. Hod is also a weak point and an opening for
evil.
Yesod:
The
interior of Yesod is truth (in the sense of the drive for validation and
actualization). In the body, Yesod corresponds to the circumcision, and
the figure that represents it is Yosef. All matters of procreation and sexual
purity belong to Yesod. Yesod is called the tzaddik,
foundation of the world.
Malkhut:
The
interior of Malkhut is baseness. In the body, Malkhut corresponds
to the mouth, and the figure that represents it is David, the sweet singer of
Tzimtzum
The
sefiriotic Kabbala of the Rishonim originated in the Zohar
of R. Shimon bar Yochai and culminated with the summaries of R. Moshe Cordovero,
the last kabbalist before the Arizal. The Arizal reintroduced four
principles into Kabbala, corresponding to the four letters of
the Tetragrammaton: Tzimtzum (corresponding to the yud),
Shevira (hey), Partzuf (vav), and Birur
(hey). In this context, we will explain only Tzimtzum, which is
the principle that we currently need.
In
the doctrine of the Rishonim, Divine power and creation in general are
seen as developing from the Creator Himself. The Arizal revealed that in order
to create creatures and reveal Divine powers that relate to these creatures in
the world there was a need to create a space that was free of the presence of
Gods infinite light, since a finite creation cannot proceed directly our of
Gods infinity. The principle of tzimtzum is the creation of a space free
of Gods (revealed) presence, which constitutes the place of creation. The
place of creation the empty space formed by the initial Tzimtzum (and
by subsequent acts of Tzimtzum) serves as the tool within which the
Divine powers that illuminate this creation are enclothed. The letter yud
of the Tetragrammaton alludes to the manifestation of the precise and restricted
light of God after the hiding of the infinite light.
This website is constantly being improved. We would appreciate hearing from you. Questions and comments on the classes are welcome, as is help in tagging, categorizing, and creating brief summaries of the classes. Thank you for being part of the Torat Har Etzion community!