Skip to content


Parashat Vayikra 5782 — 03/12/2022

Parashat Vayikra 5782 — 03/12/2022

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.

Vayikra 1:1-5:26

We began our discussion of quantum mechanics last week by noting that the probabilistic interpretation of quantum mechanics comes from an attempt to localize (measure a particle) what is inherently a non-local phenomenon (a wave, be it light or the electron wave function). The evolution of the wave function is perfectly deterministic, but the outcomes of repeated attempts to measure the position of the particle are randomly distributed, with the probability of measuring any particular position given by the amplitude of the wave function at that position. We have asked nature a question that is based on a false assessment of reality. Nature answers as best she can, while rolling her eyes at our blindness.

We also pointed out that this shift from a well-determined wave function to probabilistic distribution of measurement results takes place only when we make measurements of the system. Measurement, we saw, is an instance of the process of observation which connects the observer (the consciousness of the scientist, or, more broadly, the collective consciousness of the scientific community or of the human species) and the object of observation. It appears that consciousness has entered physics! We will return to this point shortly.

I’d like to return now to quantum entanglement. This discussion was begun by Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen in a 1935 paper where they proposed a thought experiment involving two electrons with opposite spins along any axis. (Electrons have an intrinsic angular momentum called “spin,” which has two states: +½ [“spin-up”] and -½ [“spin-down”], when measured against any axis. An electron can be in a combination of the two states, but when you go to measure the spin the combination “collapses” into either the up or down state, with probability given by the percentage weighting of each of the two states in the wave function for that particular electron.) If particle A is measured with the “spin-up” property along any axis, particle B will always be measured with spin-down, because the total system has spin = 0 (+½ + -½ = 0). But how does particle B know what spin value was measured for particle A??

To put the problem into starker relief, suppose the two electrons are sent flying in opposite directions at close to the speed of light. At some distance on either side of our apparatus are spin detectors. In the rest frame of the electron-pair generator and the two detectors, if the detectors are the same distance from the pair generator (on opposite sides), then the spins of particles A and B will be measured at the same time. Even in this case, the two spins will always be opposite to one another, even though no signal can pass between the two electrons, as they are too far away for light to travel between them in the small time difference between the measurements (ideally there is zero time between them). Einstein called this “spooky action-at-a-distance” (spukhafte Fernwirkung – sometimes German is as neat as Yiddish). We appear to have a kind of causality that violates all the laws of causality that we learned from Special Relativity!

At first attempts were made to resolve this paradox by assuming that there were additional properties of the electrons which were inherently not measurable, but controlled the “collapse” of the wave function, and guaranteed opposite measurements at the two ends of the experiment, without a signal’s having to pass between them. Bell showed that such a theory leads to contradictions with the measured results (a link is in last week’s post), and recently, very careful measurements have borne out Bell’s calculations. It appears that the correlation between the two electrons is on the level of the wave function itself, and that this correlation is therefore inherently non-local.

This is certainly another blow to our ordinary idea of causality. We think of cause-and-effect as an inherently local phenomenon. Even action at a distance (e.g., the attraction of opposite electrical charges) is mediated by a field, which has laws of its own. The first charge produces a field that propagates to the position of the second charge, which then reacts to it at its location. This intuition is made explicit in quantum field theory, where the interaction of two electrons is mediated by virtual photons’ being emitted by one and absorbed by the other.

In the case of quantum entanglement, however, the wave function of the system, which is where the correlation resides, is inherently non-local. When the wave function “collapses,” the whole thing collapses, all at once. How does one part know how another part is collapsing when they are too far apart for any signal to transit from the one part to the other? Obviously, when we run into a conundrum like this, it is a sure sign that we are thinking about the problem in the wrong way. We need a new paradigm that is inherently non-local, but appears local at scales where quantum effects are not important – i.e., the time, space and energy scales of common, everyday human experience.

The opposite of a localized conception of reality is one in which reality is a unified whole, evolving according to its own internal dynamics. What appears to us in the waking state of consciousness as disparate entities interacting with one another, one phenomenon causing another phenomenon, is in fact nothing other than the largest system imaginable interacting with itself. We in fact are part of that system, but from the perspective of waking state, we cannot perceive ourselves as such. Next week I want to look at two approaches to describing this wholeness and relate them to Maharishi Vedic Science.

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

Commentary by Steve Sufian

Parashat Vayikra

“Vayikra” means “and He Called.” Gd called to Moses to describe to him the Five Offerings — “Offerings” in Hebrew is “korbanot” which means “draw near.” The Five Offerings (Korbanot):
1. Fire: to atone.
2. Meal: a gift from one whose life is dedicated to generosity.
3. Peace: made when making peace with others by dedicating one’s life to Gd.
4. Trespass: to compensate for unintentional infringement on others’ rights.
5. Sin: to pay in full the debt of one’s unintentional failures and weaknesses, failures of one’s personality.

“Atonement” means “at-Onement” – restoring our awareness so we remember that we are a fascinating role that Gd is Playing within Gd. What we really offered when we offered the physical offerings in the days of the Tabernacle in the Wilderness and of the First and Second Temple was ourselves: we offered the limits of ourselves to Gd to dissolve them in the Fire of Love so as to restore us to Wholeness, Oneness, Fulfillment.

This is what we do today when we use prayers instead of physical offerings: we offer our limits to Gd to Dissolve them in the Fire of Love and to Restore us to Wholeness, Oneness, Fulfillment. And this is what we do today, whether formally praying or in the midst of the rest of the activities of our life: Through our right actions in any way, we draw near: we draw near with our innocence, our naturalness, our kindness, our gratitude. We draw near with our simple, easy life that seeks to be in attunement with Gd and Gd’s Will, seeks to easily (but quickly!) return to Primordial Oneness, beyond the duality of Gd and soul, the Oneness within which all multiplicity exists as expressions.

Ahhh! Little by little: and Suddenly! Home free! Home!

Baruch HaShem.