Beyond The Senses: A Chapter In Metaphysics

Another Look At The Theory Of Divine Names

     We will now return to the problem of the numerous divine names.  Rihal compares this to the sun.  The sun is far away, but it is reflected in many different houses.  There is only one sun, but its rays are many.  Imagine different houses with different colored window panes.  In this case, the light of the sun is perceived in many different ways.  There is only one sun, but the sun's rays are discerned differently in each location.  This is an interesting model to explain the existence of so many divine names.  God has one name, just as there is only one sun.  However, the many variations we see are the result of our different perceptions.  Although the thing itself is one, everyone sees it differently.  Similarly, we attribute many titles to God; yet, His essential unity remains intact.  Different people perceive different colors even thought there is only one sun.  Imagine a theater in which we use different spotlights.  One option is to use a different spotlight for each color.  However, there is another technique.  The spotlight always displays the same light, but we use a system of filters in order to achieve the desired effect.  Alternatively, imagine that the changes take place not because of the existence of filters, but because we put on different pairs of glasses.  The many variations do not emanate from the source, but from the glasses we are wearing.  This teaches us that having many titles does not imply that God is not one.  God has one name, but this unity is perceived in many different ways.

     [If we examine this example in light of modern science we will realize that the two cases are not really alike.  Today, we understand that we perceive different shades of light because white light is actually a combination of all the colors, and is not itself a single color.  The unity of white light is perceived since it is a combination of all the colors.  This example would be appropriate if the sun itself was imperceptible to the senses, and only its rays shone in different colors.  Then the true light could not be perceived at all, and only the colors, the result of the activity of the filters, would be visible.

     This idea is upheld by a number of modern-day scientists.  One common theory teaches that that certain elements, such as electrons, cannot be perceived; yet, we can and do discern their results.

     In any case, we must learn from here to be cautious with the examples we bring; examples are soon outdated.]

A Philosophical Walk About The Room

These ideas moved Rihal to develop a unique philosophical theory.  He teaches that what we experience through our senses is not exactly identical to what exists in reality.  Let us explain this by means of a comparison.  Assume that we used to wear special glasses which distort reality.  We know that we had a picture of reality, but it was not accurate.  We too perceive a reality, but the portrait is not faithful to the original.  On the other hand, we must realize that filters do exist.  We do not have the ability to see other wave lengths besides visible light, such as infra-red or ultra violet.  If we could see infra red, we could perceive that when two people approach each other, one can very slightly penetrate into the other.  This is because the heat of infra red spreads a little beyond the boundaries of the body.  Let us take another example: if we could "see" electricity, the whole world would look completely different; we would see that all of space is filled with waves, and a new colorful ocean would appear to us, which would block our view of anything beyond it.  The opposite is also true, for we cannot perceive shorter waves either, such as X-rays.  This means that the world we experience is not actually the real world.  It is strained through filters and is processed by our senses.  Our senses do this, apparently for our own good, so that we can function in the world.  We perceive a small fraction of reality, but it is a useful fraction, which aids our ability to survive, support ourselves and function in the world.

     Another example will emphasize the difference between the two approaches.  Various attempts have been made to create three dimensional films.  To see them successfully one must use special glasses.  If we were to take off the glasses we would see strange things, which would not create the  impression of three dimensions.  If we put them on again, we will feel or "see" the third dimension.  So too, in reality, the sensory world that we experience is the result of a particular pair of glasses - the mechanism of our senses.  The information we receive helps us in our daily lives, but it does not show us the true essence of the things around us.  However, perhaps what we have seen until now is not the end of the story.  Perhaps reality can be perceived in a totally different way.  This is Rihal's assumption.  According to this approach, our sensory perceptions conceal something which lies beneath them, but is not identical to them.  This is the reality which is perceived by the prophets.  To illustrate this we will use one of Rihal's examples.

     Imagine that we are drops of water in a river.  Each of us knows of the existence of other drops, but none of us knows the river.  However, the river contains not only its current state but also its past and its present.  According to this approach, beneath the biography of the river lies a different reality.  The reality which we perceive with our senses, is merely one expression of that hidden reality.  The same is true with man.  We can perceive man from the outside and obtain a series of images which show us the traits belonging to him at various times.  However, there is something concealed behind all these pictures.  We will call the hidden reality the essence.  Our senses are built to perceive the traits.  If we could perceive the essence, not the traits, we would "see" the world totally differently.  We would not see people, things, events, but rather the essence which is harbored beneath the sensory perceptions.  The is the way a prophet perceives reality.

     We can examine a human being minutely, we can even take X-ray pictures of him, and yet remain far from his essence.  A doctor can give a complete physical description of his patient, and yet know nothing about him.  The prophet views the same reality from a completely different perspective, a perspective beyond time and place.

     According to Rihal's description, the prophet looks with an inner eye, which sees beyond the externals and penetrates the essence of reality.  Rihal uses another model, also taken from our visual world.  The relationship between our vision of reality and that of the prophet is comparable to the relationship between a person with impaired vision and a person whose vision is excellent.  The vision impairment can cause the sufferer to be unable to focus his vision; each of his eyes presents a different picture to his brain, and he cannot merge them to create the real picture of reality.  Sensory perception is a type of vision impairment.  In contrast, the prophet sees the true reality.  He cannot directly demonstrate the correctness of his perception to us, because of our impairment; only a prophet can bear witness for another prophet.  However, the Torah's signs of a true prophet can help us determine that he does indeed see the essential reality.

(This lecture was translated by Gila Weinberg.)