The Dynamics of Spiritual Growth (2)

 

Last week we noted that Chazal's insistence on the reality of the "yetzer tov" runs counter to a mainstream view in modern psychology, which claims that morality exists in man because his primary instinctive needs undergo various modes of transformation until they express themselves as moral behavior.  We have not yet dealt fully with the question: What difference does it make?

 

I think the answer becomes clear when we consider the internal significance of the moral demands implicit in Torah ethics, as opposed to the more primary human activities.[1] Take, for example, a person who eats to satisfy his hunger.  The connection between eating and the desired result is simple; acting it out requires nothing more than instinctive action.  On the other hand, religious action requires the fulfillment of a mitzva because of the Divine imperative.  This is a major intellectual effort, and assumes a relatively advanced level of emotional development and maturity.  It requires consciousness of one's place in the world vis-a-vis the Creator, belief in man's purpose in life, and identification with the ideal which the mitzva represents.  Intelligent perception of the framework in which I live (family, society, the world) creates awarenesses and needs of an order totally different from my basic instincts.  It generates the need to be held accountable, the need for responsibility, for the fulfillment of expectations of oneself, and for redemption.  These are inclinations based on intelligence.  The inclinations of the non-believer are based more on instincts.

 

The world of Jewish ethics, as projected by our sources, makes no sense on the assumption that egotism is man's only option.  Modern man perceives correctly that "sublimated" self-interest can never explain the heights of idealism and self-sacrifice that are the goal of Mussar, and chooses to ignore the reality - that such "incomprehensible" heights have indeed been demonstrated in Jewish history, and for that matter, world history as well.  He opts for the easy way out, and interprets his life as a succession of gratifications, interrupted by the efforts to attain them.  The result is stunted spiritual growth.  Any discussion of ethical ascent falls on deaf ears, because of the lack of the emotional apparatus necessary to absorb it meaningfully.  The result of this is the glaring disparity - apparent to all - between man's intellectual and technological prowess on the one hand, and the primitiveness of popular culture on the other.

 

Can the typical person of our time make sense of the following passage from Rav Kook (Mussar Avikha, introduction, part 3)?

 

Prayer is an important indicator through which one may know if he is really purifying his heart, as his Creator, blessed be He, desires.  Therefore one must take great care not to be drawn by his own desire for physical pleasures, such as food and drink, because then physical nature will be ingrained in him so that he will not feel that he misses the true, sacred things, and then he will forfeit prayer - which is basic to service of God.  For if he comforts himself with being to able to eat and be satisfied and other such vanities, he cannot imagine when he says the "Aleinu" prayer that the world will be perfected in the kingdom of God and the idols will be destroyed and the wicked will turn to God, because what harm can idols do to one whose heart and eyes are given over to filling his stomach with delicacies?

 

     Rav Kook means what he says.  The above citation was written as a practical guideline.

 

AN EDUCATIONAL DEBATE

 

In recent years, religious educators have been struggling to counter the tidal wave of individualism that engulfs our generation.  Among some of them I find a trend, which concerns me greatly, towards excessive "limud zekhut" - furnishing an ideological justification for the current state of spiritual "infantile paralysis," which I described above.  Individualism is assumed by them to be a spiritual boon, and the necessity of adapting to the new generation's outlook is seen as an asset.  Listen to Rav Elisha Aviner speak of the current preoccupation with the self:

 

In the past, the cultivation of the inner spiritual selfhood had been the reserve of our spiritual giants... Rav Kook testifies that he himself took this path: "I am always searching for what is within my own soul." This path, which in the past was reserved only for special people, is now demanded of the masses.  What caused the change? Based on a principle mentioned by Rav Kook in several places ... we can explain that the change has been caused by the ascent (i.e. spiritual progress) of the masses.  In the past, the masses contented themselves with disciplined allegiance to values with which the leaders of the generation charged them, and loyalty to traditional ideals.  Their "I" achieved hardly any expression, because of its (the "I"'s [E.K.]) weakness and superficiality.  Man was insufficiently "enlightened" and unaccustomed to advanced moral feelings.  For this reason, actualization of the "I" might have aroused the animal within man.  For the sake of their spiritual upbringing, the masses were told to forego the "I," nullify themselves at the feet of great individuals, and put into practice the values which were placed before them.  But the accelerated cultural progress of mankind has caused a change in the human consciousness as well, especially in regard to awareness of the self.  What in the past was a vital need of special individuals is now the necessity of the many.[2] 

 

     In fairness, the foregoing is excerpted from a rather lengthy presentation.  But all the same, it expresses a quite common, and with all due respect, incorrect assessment (to my mind) of our current situation.

 

What further disturbs me, however, is that even educators who don't concur with the above opinion seem to have been influenced by the prevailing conception of human nature.  Here, for example, is part of a presentation which takes issue with Rav Aviner.  Rav Eliezer Scheinwald has a less idealized attitude towards "self-realization:"

 

"Self-realization" is a cultural trend which directs all personal resources towards maximal personal success (as opposed to the advancement of society), personal status and higher professional and economic achievement.  These will supposedly grant the individual pleasure, satisfaction, and a sense of fulfillment.  The term "self-realization" is misleading because it includes the word "self" ("atzmi") which in Hebrew also connotes spiritual uniqueness, the aim of actualizing the profound, spiritual core of the personality.  "Self-realization," on the other hand, is about "needs"... and the sources of personal motivation - the drive for success.[3]

 

On the one hand, I certainly identify with this more realistic analysis of the vogue of obsessive "self-realization." But I hope I won't be considered picayune for taking one of the formulations here to heart.  In the passage, "self-realization" is connected with "needs," "motivation" and  "drives," leaving the impression that aims unconnected with "self-realization" are chafing, externally-imposed tasks, in the spirit of Rav Aviner's description ("masses being told to forego the 'I'").  I think it important for us to be very clear on this point.  Our aim is for the individual to LIVE the need for service to others; to loathe the prospect of a life experientially concerned only with the next meal or the next million dollars; to feel within himself the greatness - and the smallness - implied by the Divine imperative to man.  The need for higher living is not only to be objectively assessed, but subjectively experienced.  Our claim is that THIS is human nature.

 

Hence, I would agree more with the formulation of Rav Yaacov Ariel:

 

The Divine command does not stand outside of man, and is not opposed to human conscience.  On the contrary, the human conscience is the copy and internalization of the absolute, eternal Divine... When we say that the educator has an obligation to educate, we do not mean that the command is forced upon both himself and the student from without.  It is autonomous.  Both the educator and the pupil have a soul created in the Divine image which strives to do good, and therefore the obligation of the educator is to reveal the good in the personality of the pupil, to encourage him to overcome his weaknesses... The command is not heteronomous; it wells up from within the person... [4]

 

CONCLUSIONS AND APPLICATION: MUSSAR AND THE RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE

 

All of this propels us to a certain conclusion about Mussar.  It must be lived, not only learned.  Progress in Mussar is intertwined with the religious experience.  In our time, the religious person needs to discover and reinforce his capacity to distance himself from his instincts, to be truly concerned with what is truly important.  He needs to overcome the lure of sophisticated superficiality posed by the environment (which we discussed last week).  To do all this, we must look for ways to open ourselves experientially. 

 

I know that I risk being misunderstood when recommending the religious experience as a way of awakening our higher inclinations.  We live in an age when the religious experience has been, to a great extent, "hijacked." It has come to be associated with people in search of a "high," and who value religion to the extent that it gives them the states of bliss and higher consciousness that they seek.  But this is not the experiential element that I have in mind.  This view is as essentially egotistic as any other lifestyle typical of our times (though more refined), and has nothing to do with those "covenantal" values (to return to our familiar categories) which modern man cannot grasp. 

 

I am referring rather to the experience of the absolue moral claim that God makes on our lives, His demand that we surrender ourselves completely - and soulfully - to the tasks with which He charges us, the realization that there is a voice within us that echoes this demand and knows how true and just it is.  Joy is certainly important in our world-view, but primarily as a commandment, a moral imperative - not merely an egotistical goal.  This is the perspective from which the Mussar literature habitually castigates externalized religious practice, and views what the prophet describes - "They have honored Me with their mouth and lips but their heart is far from Me, and their fear of Me has become as people's customary obligation" (Yeshayahu 29:13) - as being close to catastrophic. 

 

We are understandably awed by Rav Soloveitchik's stark description: [5]

 

The religious act is primarily an experience of suffering.  When a person meets God, he is summoned to self-sacrifice, which is expressed in the struggle with primitive passions, breaking of the will, acceptance of a transcendental burden, foregoing excessive worldly pleasures, intermittent withdrawal from the sweet and pleasant and surrender to the bitter and the strange... Bring your sacrifice! That is the main command given to the man of religion...

 

     But being awed is not the same as being "turned off." Our ability to realize that this is a suffering which purifies and enriches, a suffering which we need, is a mark of our maturity.

 

Are there ways of "doing" this? Are there methods which encourage the growth we desire? From here we turn to practice.  Knowing the centrality of learning within Judaism, we will not be surprised to see that study - as in "learning Mussar" - is an important element in our quest.  On the other hand, we will have to find ways of overcoming the insulation which separates mind from soul.  Be-ezrat Hashem, this will be the next leg of our journey.

 

 

FOOTNOTES:

 

[1] The following example is based on the article by Feuerstein and Feuerstein quoted in our previous lesson.

[2] Rav Elisha Aviner, in Idealism and Self-Realization, ed. Ze'ev  Karov, El-Ami 5759 (1999), pp. 21-22.

[3] Rav Eliezer Scheinwald, "Education Towards Self-Realization or 'Komemiyut,'" ibid., p. 27.

[4] Likutei Shoshanim, shiur no. 9, note 3.

[5] "On Love of Torah and Redeeming the Soul of the Generation," in Be-sod Ha-yachid Ve-hayachad, Pinchas Peli ed., Orot Publishing, Jerusalem 5736, p. 427.