The Meanings of the Directions

 

 

INTRODUCTION

 

            In the last two lectures, we examined the position of the Torah and that of Chazal on the issue of directions. We presented two contradictory approaches:

 

1. The Shekhina is in the west – According to this approach, the Shekhina was located in the west from the beginning of creation, that being its ideal location. In support of this approach, we discussed the orientation of the structure of the Mikdash and the service therein, both of which are directed toward the west. In corresponding fashion, we saw that when the Shekhina departs, it does so toward the east.

 

            In addition to presenting the various Scriptural proofs for this assertion, we dealt with its spiritual significance and suggested two possible explanations: 1) This orientation stands in opposition to that of the idol worshippers; 2) It reflects the prostration of the host of heaven before God, with the High Priest serving as the representative of all of creation.

 

2. Elokei Kedem – According to this approach, the ideal appearance of the Shekhina is in the east. According to this approach, God is conceived as "the God of the east" and as "the easterly one of the world," the place from which light issues forth into the world, the site of the rising of the sun. In corresponding fashion, we saw that various sources point to the west as the nape of the world.

 

            The spiritual significance of this understanding is that there is an essential connection between the meaning of the directions of east and west, and the natural appearance of the light of the sun in the east and its setting in the west. The created world in its natural state faithfully reflects the site of the Shekhina's appearance.

 

            According to this understanding, we must understand what the orientation of the Mikdash comes to express. How are we to understand the fact that the entrance is situated on the east side, which appears to be superior, whereas the most sanctified spot is found on the west side, the nape of the world?

 

            It might be suggested that according to this approach, the appearance of the light in the east is indeed the uppermost point, and the Mikdash is oriented as it is so that it should be illuminated by the sun. According to this understanding, the east signifies not only the place where the light first appears, but also the direction in which it shines.[1]

 

THE SHEKHINA IN THE WEST OR GOD OF THE EAST

 

            How can we explain the relationship between these two understandings? Several explanations may be proposed:

 

1. As we saw at the end of the previous lecture, R. Hirsch explains that the Divine presence first appeared in the east. According to him, in the wake of Adam's sin, the Shekhina moved to the west, and as a result of this removal, we face westward. The Mikdash is oriented toward the west, in hope and prayer that the Shekhina will return to its source, to its primal place.

 

According to this explanation, originally there was no separation between the place where the light first appears and the place of the Shekhina. It was only in the wake of the sin that the Shekhina moved westward, to the direction opposite that of the light. In this sense, the orientation of the Mikdash expresses repair, atonement, and repentance.

 

2. Firstborn versus selection: Another possible explanation distinguishes between the Divine presence's original appearance and its appearance in practice. The original and highest appearance was indeed in the east, and it contained the most perfect potential. But its revelation in actual practice is in the west, and this side expresses revelation that involves selection.

 

            According to this, the east side expresses the perfect potential of the firstborn, which embraces the essence of everything, the point of beginning which includes all. In contrast, the west side expresses the revelation in practice, which follows from human selection.

 

3. Another resolution of the aforementioned contradiction requires that we explain the expression "Shekhina in the west" in a borrowed sense.[2] The word "west" according to this explanation comes to express the direction of sunset, the direction opposite that of the appearance of light. The phrase, "Shekhina in the west," indicates that the Shekhina is not subject in any way to the laws of nature. Accordingly, the west in this sense expresses the superiority of the revelation of the Shekhina to the natural world.

 

4. Another possible answer[3] is that the west is not only the direction of sunset, but the place where the entire course of the day comes to an end. According to this, the west embraces everything, and it comes to express the fact that the Divine presence includes both the sunrise and the appearance of the sun in the east, as well as the sunset of the world, the lowest possible level.[4]

 

5. In light of what has been said here, there might be room to discuss two levels of God's presence in the world. The first level is that which reveals itself in the east; this is the highest level, which is connected to the appearance of the light.[5] The west, on the other hand, reflects the Divine presence that is closer to this world and to nature.[6]

 

            According to this understanding, there is Divine revelation on both sides, and so there is no contradiction. We are dealing with two different levels, with different intensities of revelation. It is not a question of ideal and after the fact; there is room for each side in accordance with its measure, for the source of the illumination and for the illuminated side.

 

TIME AND PLACE

 

            Our question may be connected to the dimension of time. As is well known, the Rishonim differ regarding the beginning of time in creation. They disagree about whether the day begins at night, in accordance with the plain sense of the text, "And there was evening and there was morning, the first day," or whether the day begins with morning (thus, for example, the position of the Rashbam).

 

            It is reasonable to assume that those who maintain that the day begins at night would say that the Shekhina in the west is the primal and highest reality, for in the evening the sun sets in the west. In contrast, those who maintain that the day begins in the morning would say that the original and highest reality is in the east, and for that reason the light issues forth into the world from there.

 

            It is interesting to note that in practice there are two systems regarding this point. On the one hand, outside the Mikdash, and for purposes of law, the day begins in the evening. On the other hand, the day in the Mikdash begins in the morning, and night follows day.

 

            Perhaps this difference points to different approaches inside the Mikdash and outside of it. Outside the Mikdash, the fundamental understanding is that the Shekhina is in the west, whereas in the Mikdash, the primal understanding is that in the beginning, the primal location of the Shekhina was in the east. In practice, we face west, and one of the explanations for this is what R. Hirsch said that in the wake of the sin, the Shekhina moved to the west.

 

SUMMARY

 

            The question of directions is an exceedingly broad topic, and we have limited our discussion to the bare essentials.

 

            In the framework of our lectures, we did not discuss the orientation of the vessels themselves in the Mikdash, apart from the analyses of R. Hirsch and R. Munk regarding the sides of the altar. This is intimately connected to the vessels themselves, and so we shall leave this for next year's lectures.

 

            There are other issues as well that we did not expand upon at length. For example, we did not expand upon the original meaning of the issue of the Shekhina in the west regarding the direction of prayer. What is the relationship between the disagreement between R. Yishmael and R. Akiva (Bava Batra 25b) regarding whether the Shekhina is in all places or in the west? Similarly, the following passage in Berakhot remains to be explained:

 

If one is standing outside the land, he should turn mentally towards Eretz Yisrael… If he stands in Eretz Yisrael, he should turn mentally towards Jerusalem… If he is standing in Jerusalem, he should turn mentally towards the Mikdash… If he is standing in the Mikdash, he should turn mentally towards the Holy of Holies… If he was standing in the Holy of Holies, he should turn mentally towards the seat of the kaporet. If he was standing behind the seat of the kaporet, he should imagine himself to be in front of the seat of kaporet. Consequently, if he is in the east, he should turn his face to the west; if in the west, he should turn his face to the east; if in the south, he should turn his face to the north; if in the north, he should turn his face to the south. In this way, all Israel will be turning their hearts towards one place. (Berakhot 30a)

 

            Are we dealing with two historical stages, or is there a disagreement here whether prayer should be directed toward the west or towards Mount Moriya?

 

            We similarly did not relate to the Tosefta in tractate Megila, which states:

 

Synagogue entrances must only be opened to the east.[7] For we find that the Heikhal opened to the east, as it is stated: "But those that encamp before the Mishkan toward the east, before the Ohel Mo'ed eastward." (3:14)

 

            What is the relationship between the Tosefta and what we said in the previous lectures?

 

The idols that were removed from the Temple in various different periods were destroyed in the Kidron valley (e.g., in the case of Asa [I Melakhim 15:13] and Chizkiyahu [II Divrei Ha-yamim 29:16]). Did this stem from practical needs, as the Kidron valley was closest to the Temple, or is it significant that the Kidron valley runs east of the Temple and leads to the Dead Sea? Is this connected to what Chazal say in several places that idols must be brought to the Dead Sea? Does the fact that in the future fresh water will issue forth from the Mikdash and water the Dead Sea or the valley of Shittim (Yechezkel 47, Zekharia 14, Yoel 4) serve as a repair for the idols that were taken to the Dead Sea?

 

What is the spiritual meaning of the location of the tribes in their encampments around the Mishkan and of the order in which they journeyed in the wilderness? Does this order accord with the order of the tribes in the stones of the breastplate, and what is its significance?

 

SUMMARY OF THIS YEAR’S LECTURES

 

            This is the final lecture in this year's series. Over the course of the year, we examined various aspects of the structure of the Mishkan and the spiritual meaning of the same. Let us briefly review the topics that we discussed:

 

• We began by distinguishing between the various names given to the structure (Mishkan, Mikdash, Ohel, Ohel Mo'ed and others).
• We continued with an examination of the relationship between the various parts of the structure (courtyard, Ohel Mo'ed, Holy and Holy of Holies).
• We saw the correspondence between the High Priestly garments and the curtains of the Mishkan, and between the garments of the ordinary priest and the linen curtains of the courtyard.
• We proposed various divisions of the structure, and the meaning of each.
• We related to the correspondence between the structure of the Mishkan and the conditions of the wilderness. We considered the various colors and materials of the Mishkan and their significance. We touched upon the idea of peace in the Mikdash and among those who serve there and upon the dimension of unity that is revealed there.
• We ended with the issue of the directions.

 

It is our intention to continue next year with a study of the vessels of the Mishkan and their meaning.

 

(Translated by David Strauss)

, full_html