Parashat Shemot 5784 — 01/06/2024
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.
Shemot 1:1-6:1
Happy New Year to all!
Rambam continues with the fourth kind of attribute:
The fourth group of attributes is as follows. It is predicated of a thing that it has a relation to something other than itself. For instance, it is related to a time or to a place or to another individual, as for instance when you predicate of Zayd that he is the father of a certain individual or the partner of a certain individual or an inhabitant of a certain place or one who was at a certain time. Now this kind of attribute does not necessarily entail either multiplicity or change in the essence of the thing of which it is predicated. For the Zayd who is referred to may be the partner of Umar, the father of Bakr, the master of Khalid, a friend of Zayd, an inhabitant of such and such dwelling place, and one who was born in such and such a year.
This kind of attribute is clearly not applicable to Gd, as it involves a relationship with something outside of Gd, and there is nothing outside of Gd. Just as above we saw that it was impossible to compare Gd to anything else, so here it is impossible to ascribe a relationship between Gd and anything else. In both cases it comes down to the fact that there is no “else.” Further, since Gd is transcendental to both space and time, there can really be no relationship between Gd and anything that is bound within space and time. Rambam puts it this way:
There is no relation between Gd, may He be exalted, and time and place; and this is quite clear. For time is an accident attached to motion, when the notion of priority and posteriority is considered in the latter and when motion becomes numbered, as is made clear in the passages especially dealing with this subject. Motion, on the other hand, is one of the things attached to bodies, whereas Gd, may He be exalted, is not a body. Accordingly there is no relation between Him and time, and in the same way there is no relation between Him and place.
We get our conception of space from the relationship between objects (“A and B are separated by a meter”) and we get our conception of time from the motion of objects (“it takes a year for the earth to go around the sun”). Since there are no objects (“bodies” in Rambam’s terminology) in Gd, time and space can have nothing to do with Gd’s essence, and therefore they cannot be attributes of Gd, as they can be with Zayd and with the rest of us.
I might point out that this idea that “there is nothing but Gd” appears to be a rather extreme view. After all, we exist, don’t we? In Descartes’s words, I think, therefore I am. And we see other people and other objects, which appear to be separate and outside ourselves, and with which we can interact. More to the point, Scripture shows us that Gd does interact with creation.
This is an ancient argument, whether Gd is transcendental or immanent, and I believe the answer is, “it depends on your point of view/consciousness.” How so? If our point of view is Cosmic Consciousness, we associate ourself with Pure Consciousness, which has been established as the permanent, absolute state of consciousness that witnesses the changing values of relative creation both in our individuality and in the outside, objective world. In this case there is a dichotomy between the transcendent and creation – we experience the transcendent as absolutely separate from creation, the transcendent being who we are and creation going about its merry way according to the laws of nature.
This is not the ultimate state of consciousness however. In Unity Consciousness we do not perceive only our selves as infinite, unbounded Pure Consciousness, but we perceive that Pure Consciousness is the basis, the innermost value, of every object in the universe. Pure Consciousness is the all-pervading silent, but self-knowing, reality of life, and what we previously perceived as objective creation is nothing other than the transcendent’s inner, virtual dynamics. In other words, the transcendent is all that actually exists, and our perception (or mis-perception) that objects exist separate from the transcendent is just that, a limitation of our consciousness. I think we acknowledge that reality when we say ayn od milvado – there is nothing other than Gd.
I believe Rambam hints at this in a continuation of our passage:
It is clear at the first glance that there is no correlation between Him and the things created by Him. For one of the properties of two correlated things is the possibility of inverting the statement concerning them while preserving their respective relations. Now He, may He be exalted, has a necessary existence while that which is other than He has a possible [trans: or ‘contingent’] existence, as we shall make clear. There accordingly can be no correlation between them. As for the view that there is some relation between them, it is deemed correct, but this is not correct. For it is impossible to represent oneself that a relation subsists between the intellect and color although, according to our school, both of them are comprised by the same “existence.” How then can a relation be represented between Him and what is other than He when there is no notion comprising in any respect both of the two…
I think this passage makes the most sense in Unity Consciousness, where we perceive all things as Gd’s internal dynamics, as contained within Gd, or a microscopically thin crust on Gd’s “surface.” The only relation there can be between Creator and creation is then inclusion, but certainly nothing on the same plane of existence.
Finally, our fifth kind of attribute:
The fifth group of the affirmative attributes is as follows. A thing has its action predicated of it. I do not intend to signify by the words, “his action” the habitus of an art that belongs to him who is described – as when you say a carpenter or a smith – inasmuch as this belongs to the species of quality, as we have mentioned. But I intend to signify by the words, “his action,” the action that he who is described has performed – as when you say Zayd is the one who carpentered this door, built that particular wall, or wove this garment. Now this kind of attribute is remote from the essence of the thing of which it is predicated. For this reason it is permitted that this kind should be predicated of Gd, may He be exalted, after you have – as shall be made clear [in the next chapter] – come to know that the acts in question need not be carried out by means of differing notions subsisting within the essence of the agent, but that all His different acts, may He be exalted, are all of them carried out by means of His essence, and not, as we have made clear, by means of a superadded notion.
First, Rambam makes it clear that by “action” he is talking about specific actions – Zayd made this door – as opposed to a general category of action – Zayd is a carpenter. While we might consider Zayd’s status as a carpenter to be close to his essence. The essence of a human being, according to Rambam, is a rational, living thing. This is true for all human beings. In Zayd’s case, there is a more specific aspect of his profession. This is not as “essential” as being alive – Zayd could retire from carpentry and start a second career. Nonetheless, we say Zayd is a carpenter, indicating that it is part of the definition of at least this one human being. Specific actions, such as “Zayd made this door,” are not essential to who Zayd is, and instead of the verb “to be” (Zayd is a carpenter) we have an actual active verb (Zayd made this door.).
Now Rambam goes on to tell us that such a concrete act, which is not involved in the essence of the actor, can legitimately be predicated of Gd. Scripture is full of instances where Gd acts, either directly or indirectly, to guide the course of history. But this brings us back to the same problem as before – how can a transcendental Gd, who is beyond all time, space, change and motion, act in the world?
Here Rambam says something remarkable: “come to know that the acts in question need not be carried out by means of differing notions subsisting within the essence of the agent, but that all His different acts, may He be exalted, are all of them carried out by means of His essence, and not, as we have made clear, by means of a superadded notion.” In other words, since Gd is all essence and there is nothing that can be superadded to Gd, it must be that all action takes place within Gd’s essence. That means that the creation is not something outside of Gd, rather it is Gd’s internal, virtual dynamics – it is the fluctuations of Unity within its own nature. This is the understanding of the nature of life in Unity Consciousness. As the Bhagavad-Gita (IV:18) puts it, “He who in action sees inaction, and in inaction sees action is truly wise among men.” Such a person sees that deep inside every activity is the silence of Pure Consciousness, and within that Pure Consciousness are the virtual fluctuations that appear to us as the active creation. Or, as Moses put it (Deut. 4:35), ayn od milvado / There is nothing other than Gd.
***********************************************************************************************************************************
Commentary by Steve Sufian
Parashat Shemot
“Shemot” means “Names.” Gd is One with Infinite qualities, infinite names but we call Gd “HaShem,” the Name. Gd is beyond words, beyond names, so we call Gd” the Name” symbolizing that Gd is Infinite yet always One.
The parshah begins with telling the names of the twelve children of Israel: Reuben, Simon, Levi… There is nothing but Gd so Israel’s children are roles Gd plays and their names are Gd’s Names.
An example of the symbolism of “twelve” is the twelve cranial nerves in the physiology. These are responsible for many functions including equilibrium control, eye movement, hearing and facial sensation. From this standpoint, the twelve sons of Israel symbolize the whole range of functions of the physiology and of Gd as the Essence of physiology.
The story of the evolving nature of the human physiology and the Cosmic Physiology begins with
“A new pharaoh arose in Egypt who knew not Joseph.”
Joseph and his family brought Canaan (synchronicity, Wholeness) to Egypt (Mitzraim, restrictions). “Knew not Joseph” symbolizes “knew not Wholeness.”
This parshah concludes with Gd telling Moses that redemption is close at hand, redemption from the collapse of Wholeness in the awareness of the Egyptian people and several hundred years of slavery for the Children of Israel.
The pharaoh of Joseph’s time knew Joseph, and thus knew Wholeness and respected all representatives of Wholeness. When a pharaoh arose who knew not Joseph, it means he was lost in restrictions and could not see and respect Wholeness and its representatives.
As a result, this pharaoh saw Joseph and the Children of Israel as threats and not as blessings. He reduced them to slavery and began murdering the newborn males. Of course, for this to have happened, there must have been some diminishing of purity, of wholeness, on the part of the Israelite, not just ritual impurity but some diminishing of their “Loving Gd with all their heart, their soul, all their might” and some diminishing of their “loving their neighbor as their self, their Self.”
Again, remember that all souls are roles that Gd Plays, sometimes Revealing Wholeness, sometimes Hiding Wholeness. So it is not that the Israelites were to blame for their impurity, only that Gd Delighted in telling the story of life by diminishing the purity of Israelite actions at this time.
The most important lesson we learn in this parshah is to honor the “commandments of Gd, especially, “Thou shalt love the Lrd thy Gd with all thy heart, all thy soul, all thy might” and “Love thy neighbor as thy Self” so that we are always happy, loving and perceived that way by others. Then everyone, including the most powerful rulers and the most desperate criminals would always see us as friends and never even think of doing us harm.
When the Children of Israel in Egypt had been reduced to slavery and Pharaoh was murdering the male children, the cries of the Israelites rose to Gd and Gd decided the time for the Exodus had come the return to Canaan, to Wholeness.
Gd spoke to Moses from a burning bush, a bush that was not consumed by the flames, and told Moses that Gd will rescue the Children of Israel and lead them to a land flowing with milk and honey. Gd tells Moses to speak to Pharaoh to release the Children of Israel for three days to make offerings to their Gd in the desert. Gd also tells Moses that Pharaoh will refuse and that Gd will with a mighty hand perform miracles and then Pharaoh will let the Children of Israel go and they will leave and not go empty handed but with all the wealth of Egypt.
Moses asks Gd what name shall he tell the Children of Israel when they ask him who sent him.
Gd responds, “Ehyeh hasher Ehyeh”: I Will Be what I Will Be.” But Gd also says tell them the Gd of their forefathers, of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob has sent you so they will have confidence that Gd who rescued their forefathers will rescue them.
We can learn from this that Gd the Totality who “Will Be what I Will Be” cannot be interfered with and does answer prayers: Today, Gd will answer ours but perhaps our troubles are long-standing, like the slavery of the Children of Israel in Egypt. Then perhaps Gd will answer the prayers step-by-step, perhaps by sending us some person with wisdom, such as a business advisor, a teacher, a health professional, a rabbi or other spiritual teacher.to lead us out of our troubles. Some person who has a history of success.
Perhaps Gd will answer our prayers by giving us some flash of insight, which like the burning bush, continues, does not pass away, gives us confidence it is reliable advice we can act on.
Perhaps Gd will answer our prayers by giving us continual Awareness of Gd, of Wholeness, Gd’s Infinite Freedom : “I Will Be What I Will Be” This Direct Experience of Wholeness, All-in-All, restores us and makes us aware that the “I” we thought we were is really a role the One-and-Only I is playing and we Are this I, Forever Free.
We need to be alert and open for we do not know how Gd will answer our prayers and transform our problems into blessings.: Gd Will Be What Gd Will Be.
And we need to be the leaders of our own lives: we need to be our own Moses and to continue communicating with Gd—through prayer, through our good lives, through whatever means we have to “love Gd with all our heart and soul” and to “love our neighbor as our Self” so that through our love we become open to Gd’s Love, Gd’s Blessings, Gd’s restoration to us of our birthright: Oneness with the One, the “I will Be What I will Be”.
Baruch HaShem