Skip to content


Parashat Shelach 5781 — 06/05/2021

Parashat Shelach 5781 — 06/05/2021

Beginning with Bereishit 5781 (17 October 2020) we embarked on a new format. We will be considering Rambam’s (Maimonides’) great philosophical work Moreh Nevukim (Guide for the Perplexed) in the light of the knowledge of Vedic Science as expounded by Maharishi Mahesh Yogi. The individual essays will therefore not necessarily have anything to do with the weekly Torah portion, although certainly there will be plenty of references to the Torah, the rest of the Bible, and to the Rabbinic literature. For Bereishit we described the project. The next four parshiyyot, Noach through Chayei Sarah, laid out a foundational understanding of Vedic Science, to the degree I am capable of doing so. Beginning with Toledot we started examining Moreh Nevukim.

Bamidbar 13:1-15:41
I’d like to turn now to the sources of Rambam’s political philosophy. Ultimately, through the Islamic philosophical tradition, this traces back to both Aristotle and Plato, and of course directly draws ideas from Torah and Torah tradition. Needless to say, in tracing Rambam’s influences, Prof. Pines is trying to place him in an overall cultural context in order better to understand the meaning of his work, and is not implying that Rambam had no creative input into the development of philosophy.

Prof. Pines first considers Aristotle’s approach:

Aristotle takes the existence of human society for granted, much as he does the existence and the order of the cosmos. It is a primary datum accounted for by man’s being a political animal, as are other animal species, i.e., by man’s social instinct. It is clear that this explanation is designed to bring home the superfluity of further inquiry rather than to indicate an efficient cause of human society that would, even if only ideally, be prior to it (a method that is employed, to cite but one instance, in the social theories that take as their starting point the isolated human being). Nor does Aristotle’s political doctrine posit for the city an end that transcends society and man as a political animal. When Aristotle says that “while: the polis came into existence for the sake of life, it exists for the sake of the good life” (Politics 1252b30; Rackham), he doubtless has in mind a good political life in a flourishing and civilized city, but not the highest way of life – this being the theoretical life, i.e., that of the philosopher. The perfect philosopher, who has outgrown, as in Aristotle‘s view he can and should do, the need for intellectual companionship, belongs to the city only in so far as he has to provide for his physical necessities. Qua philosopher, he is self-sufficient. In fact, allowing for differences of vocabulary, Aristotle seems to have anticipated Epicurus’ discovery that the life of the philosopher was a private life, with which civic activities had no intrinsic connection either in fact or in theory.

The first point to be made here is that Aristotle appears to be taking an empirical approach to the fact that human beings live in society. That is, we observe that the virtually all human beings live in societies of some size and go from there, rather than positing as a first principle that humans are social animals. Second, he takes a utilitarian view of society, that it is there to provide for one’s physical needs, to create a “good life,” where one can be creative, make a living, marry and have children, a nice house, two cars in the garage, a chicken in every pot, etc.

This is contrasted with the life of the philosopher, who is basically solitary, only interacting with others out of necessity to make sure he has food and clothing, but living the life of the mind to the greatest extent possible. It is interesting to note in this regard that Maharishi’s teacher, Guru Dev, lived a solitary life for decades:

For the greater part of his life he lived in quiet, lonely places, the habitats of lions and leopards, in hidden caves and thick forests, where even the mid-day sun frets and fumes in vain to dispel the darkness that may be said to have made a permanent abode in those solitary and distant regions of Vindhyagiris and Amarkantakas (mountain ranges).

I believe that the reason that Aristotle’s view of the philosopher as essentially solitary can be understood on two levels. First, on the level of Cosmic Consciousness, the Self is identified with Transcendental Consciousness, which is silent and completely separate from all activity. The life of the city goes on – in fact the life of all creation goes on – while he is the uninvolved witness of it all. On the level of Unity Consciousness, the Self, the Transcendental Consciousness which had seemed to be separate from activity, is now experienced as all-comprehensive, and all activity is its internal dynamics. One is essentially solitary because one’s Self is all that there is.

Plato, who was Aristotle’s teacher, takes a very different view of the relationship between the individual and society, and especially between the philosopher and the society in which he lives. I believe this approach is closer to the Jewish view, but I will defer that discussion till next week, and then add some commentary from Vedic Science.

*************************************************

Commentary by Steve Sufian

Parashat Sh’lach Lecha

“Sh’lach” means “send”; “lecha” means “for you, for yourself.”

This parshah gives an opportunity to explore the nature of Moses’s self, the nature of our self, the nature of the Self, Gd, who is the Self of All beings.

Gd says “send for yourself spies” to Moses, and Rashi, the most quoted commentator on Torah, interprets it as meaning, (paraphrasing) “Not at my command, but if you feel to do it for yourself, then send spies.”

Why did Moses send spies at all? Why did he not just trust Gd’s promise that Gd would be with the Children of Israel and they would conquer? By sending spies, he was creating a separation between Gd and himself.

And in our own life, we can ask, “Why do we keep our distance from Gd, by making Gd an object rather than the Essence of our Soul”.

The answer to the second is easier than the answer to the first because we know ourselves first hand: We don’t choose to create a distance between ourselves and Gd: this distance is already there since we are born with it; we are not born experiencing ourselves as Omnipresent, Omniscient, Omnipotent. We exercise caution in our lives because we know there is a possibility that our spontaneous thoughts and feelings may not accurately resonate with Total Reality.

This caution is equivalent to sending spies for ourself.

But wait! There’s nothing but Gd. Gd is All. Everyone, every thought, every decision, every action is Gd. So, it was Gd within Moses that produced the thoughts and the decision and the action to send spies.

And in our lives, it is Gd within our thoughts, that guides us to every decision, including the decision to be cautious, to seemingly keep Gd at a distance, an object, rather than the Sole Subject, the Sole Knower, Sole Actor, Sole Being expressing as all the individualities, such as ours.

Despite Gd’s promise that he will support Israel and no enemy will stand before them, ten of the spies say it will not be safe to enter Canaan: the Children of Israel will not be able to defeat the current inhabitants. Fortunately, two trust Gd and say it will be safe.

The people are terrified by this report of the ten and they believe them despite the efforts of two of the spies and Moses to reassure them that Gd’s promise is true: they will be able to safely enter Canaan, the Promised Land.

Gd then declares that because of this bad behavior the Children of Israel will have to spend 40 years in Midbar, the desert.

Why did Gd put the thoughts into the spies minds that caused them to bring a false report? Why did Gd put the thoughts into the people’s minds that caused them to believe the spies and not Moses, the trusting two spies or Gd?

One way to look at this is to consider “40” as a symbol of fulfillment: 40 days of the Flood, 40 days Moses spent on the mountain receiving Torah (twice), 40 the age at which Isaac and also Esau married.

“Forty” is 4 times 10: four for the Four Worlds, different stages in the manifestation of Creation, and ten for the Ten Sefirot, 10 fundamental Qualities of Gd, within Gd.

But why 40 years, not 40 days or forty minutes, 40 seconds? What is the symbolism of a year?

A day is a full rotation of the Earth around its own axis: a year is a full cycle of the Earth rotating around the Sun.

The Earth symbolizes mundane, material existence and the Sun symbolizes celestial, divine existence.

Egypt (“Mitzraim”) means “boundaries, limits, restrictions.”  “Midbar” means “desert, wilderness, barrenness,” but, symbolically, transcendence.

“Canaan”, the Promised Land, means “synchronicity, integration,” the integration of boundaries and transcendence, the land where our ancestors and we can experience Gd’s Presence fully.

The goal of human life, the mission of our life, is to return to Full Awareness of the reality that All is One: this is the Promised Land, Full Integration of boundaries/limits and Transcendence, Freedom. This is the experience of Gd’s Presence, not in the duality of Gd and human, but the Oneness within which all details, all beings, exist.
This Land is not the modern state of Israel or any nation, any physical place. This Land is the State of Awareness in which we experience ourselves as Complete Synchronicity, All-in-All.

How can we experience this?

By transcending through whatever range of techniques we have, including our traditional daily prayer routine, to whatever extent we can; and then acting in the field of boundaries so that gradually, transcendence comes to pervade all the boundaries, dissolving their nature as limits and restoring them to their nature as conduits through which Wholeness Acts and as Flows within Gd, All-in-All.

So, let’s rise to experience the spies, Moses, Egypt, Israel, all the planets and all the stars and all the space between them and within them, all diversity as expressions of our own Self, the One Self, Gd, Consciousness, above duality/diversity.

Our religion, especially Love as the center of our religion, helps. Helps greatly!

Baruch HaShem