Redemption and the Cycles of Existence (1)

Redemption

 

We will now begin a new topic: redemption.  As we shall see, redemption is multi-faceted.  Redemption is the triumph of good over evil.  This means that if we could catalogue the tragedies, we could also catalogue the redemptions, or to be more exact, the various dimensions of redemption.  We will allow ourselves to do just that.  But how does one make a catalogue of troubles?  What principle ought we to use in constructing this catalogue?  I have chosen the concept of area as a guiding principle.  We will define the central areas of life, and we will subsequently identify the elements of suffering and evil within each area.

 

The Four Cycles And Ideals

 

To illustrate this, picture a square representing the cosmos, and inside it three circles, one inside the other: humanity is the large circle, inside it is the circle representing the Jewish nation, and inside it, the circle representing the individual.  These are the four worlds in which we live and act.  Granted, we have ignored secondary circles that exist inside the big circles, sub-systems that we belong to such as the family.  Nevertheless, we will simplify the problem and speak of four circles: the cosmos, humanity, the nation, and the individual.

 

     This division will help us understand the principles of Judaism.  In the Ethics Of The Fathers, Rabban Shimon Ben Gamliel teaches us that "The world rests on three things: on justice, on truth and on peace."  And indeed, it seems to me that this means that Judaism has three ideals.  As an individual, my ideal is truth; as a nation, the ideal is justice, and as humanity, the ideal is peace.  But not only in humanity.  Peace is also an ideal of the cosmos - we speak of "He Who makes peace in on high."

 

These are three values that must guide us in the various circles of our existence.  In my opinion, an additional value must be added to the list.  This value is freedom.  It has three distinct aspects to it: freedom for the individual, for the nation and for all of humanity.

 

1.  Individual, personal freedom; free choice.

2.  Freedom in society; the freedom experienced by slaves emerging from slavery.

3.  Freedom of a nation among nations.

 

Our lives are guided by many values, which come into conflict with each other.  Conflicts can be divided into two types: horizontal and vertical.  How does the individual live within society?  How do the nation and nationalism find their place within humanity?  What is the relationship between all of humanity and the cosmos?  How do we fulfill all three ideals at the same time: truth, justice and peace?  These are the vertical relationships.  However, there are also horizontal conflicts between ideals.  For example, every Israeli knows that the big dream that we share is peace.  However, this is an oversimplification, because what we truly want is freedom and peace.  We are looking for freedom for society, which will not, God forbid, become a house of slavery, but we are also looking for justice, and justice means that each individual is granted the right to his minimal needs.

 

     Our century has been torn between two ideologies in the shadow of a threatening conflict, a conflict that was symbolized by the iron curtain which divided the world in two.  This was the conflict between the ideology, on the left of the curtain, which believed that in order to achieve justice one must forego freedom, and the right of the curtain, for whom freedom was so important that social justice may be ignored for its sake.  The first group created a throng of people, with a secret police to maintain order; whereas the others pronounced freedom to be so great and holy that man is even free to die of hunger in the street, and no one will convince him otherwise.

 

     History has proven that when ideologies are put into practice, they abandon much of their content.  In any case, I have given this introduction to illustrate the need for synthesis, this time between justice and freedom.  This need exists on all levels.  The Torah teaches that we must strive towards the ultimate synthesis.  On the one hand, the Torah emphasizes that man is free.  The image of God is freedom.  We learned this from the Rambam, the Maharal and Rav Kook.  They reiterated the idea of freedom as our divine trait in various ways.  Every one of us has this divine spark within him.  Judaism champions freedom.  On the other hand, it is clear that it does not agree with certain approaches which believe in freedom without limits or boundaries.  This is because we also believe in truth.  Here we reach the great conflict which we all feel, the conflict between freedom and truth.  Judaism teaches us to strive towards a synthesis between freedom and truth.  This is the most difficult task.

 

     I will illustrate this simply, using Chaim Potok's book, 'My Name Is Asher Lev.'  In this work, we read of a young boy, growing up in a family with many problems.  The child, who is very talented artistically, is encouraged by his family, and even the family's Rebbe encourages him to continue painting.  The young man develops his talent and eventually exhibits his art work in a show.  His parents come to the exhibit and are astonished to see that the central painting is of a crucifixion, a fundamental component of the Christian faith.  However, in the painting the protagonists have been changed and in it, his father is crucifying his mother.  The content is clear: the artist wanted to express his feelings.  Whether he was justified is not the issue at hand.  What is important, is that he chose an exclusively Christian medium to express it.

 

     My first thought when I read the story was bitter disappointment because the hero and the artist had another option: he could have painted his father SACRIFICING his mother.  Or he could have used a different form of martyrdom, in which Jewish history is well-versed.  However, the author wanted to express the problem of the artist who refuses to be bound by any limitations.  The artist speaks in the name of absolute freedom of expression, which becomes his ultimate value.  We could accept this if we believed that freedom was the only value.  However, we are convinced that at least one value stands on par with freedom, which we cannot measure against freedom: truth.  And we allow ourselves to approach the artist in the name of this truth and say: Do not use this image.  Use an image of your own, not only because the image you have used has difficult historical associations, but also because this image is connected to something we have fought against in the name of truth, and to which we are justifiably opposed.  We have given the artist a difficult task, but he may not ignore the dilemma.  A person who creates a synthesis and is finding his way between freedom and truth does not betray freedom.

 

     This dilemma is not limited to religious content alone.  We are faced with similar dilemmas every day in all areas.  In the name of freedom and artistic expression, anything can be sanctioned.  I have heard someone describe an imaginary Roman play, in which the director used a slave as one of the actors in order to express the suffering of slavery.  However, in order to make the drama more thrilling, the director cut off the slave's hand, not as a theatrical action, but in reality.  This artist was not satisfied with art as an imitation of life; he wanted his art to occur in reality.  Similarly, we find artists who think that art expresses itself in tattoos or various types of body mutilations, to the extent of castration.  It is no secret that there exist underground films which document immoral acts culminating in actual murder.  What would be the opinion of the artist about this freedom and this art?  Clearly, there is a practical question about the limits of artistic expression.  This is an issue which is under debate.  However, we cannot help but cry out in protest against those who speak in the name of freedom and neglect the call of truth.

 

(This lecture was translated by Gila Weinberg.)