Parashat Teruma 5786 – 02/21/2026
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 25:1-27:19
Rambam continues discussing the idea of the soul as motivating force for the movement of the being that possesses it:
For every being endowed with a soul moves because of a certain nature or because of a mental representation. I mean here by the expression “nature” the seeking to attain what agrees with one and the flight from what disagrees. Now it makes no difference whether the mover, in this, of the being endowed with a soul is outside that being- as in the case of an animal fleeing from the heat of the sun or betaking itself when it is thirsty to a place where there is water – or whether that mover is an imagination – for an animal is moved also through imagining what disagrees and agrees with it. Now the sphere is not set in motion with a view to fleeing from what disagrees with it or with a view to seeking to attain what agrees with it. For it moves away from the point toward which it had moved, and it moves toward every point from which it had moved away. Furthermore if the motion of the sphere were because of this, it would follow necessarily that the sphere, at some time, must reach the point toward which it was moved and come to rest. For if it was moved in order to seek to attain something or in order to flee from something, and it must be remembered that this end can never be achieved – then consequently a motion of this kind would be in vain. In consequence this circular motion can only come about in virtue of a certain mental representations, which determines the sphere’s moving in that particular way.
It appears that Rambam is delineating several layers of functioning of the soul. The simplest level is that of an animal (incidentally, the root of the word “animal” is anima, Latin for “soul”), “seeking to attain what agrees with one and flight from what disagrees. This is virtually instinctual behavior, and of course there is an obvious evolutionary benefit to such behavior. It is found even in single-celled organisms, which propel themselves down chemical gradients away from chemicals that are harmful to it and towards chemicals that support its life (e.g. nutrients). Those organisms that have this ability survive preferentially, and those that do not, die preferentially. The situation is similar, if more complex in practice, with all cases of biological evolution – the ability to seek out the “agreeable” and avoid the opposite is life-supporting and is enhanced by the imperative to survive and reproduce.
Dr. Tony Nader has extended this idea of responding to the environment even to inanimate objects, such as a rock. The rock will fall if not impeded. In some way it “feels” the pull of the earth and reacts to it. In the case of the rock, Rambam would object that this is not indicative of a soul, but rather the nature of earthly things to return to earth; he thus distinguishes between the motion of inanimate (“no soul / anima”) and animate (“with soul / anima”) objects. Dr. Nader distinguishes between them in degree, rather than in kind. Rocks have very limited consciousness, amoebas have somewhat greater consciousness, animals greater and human beings greater.
Rambam explains that the motion of the sphere is neither natural motion nor motion toward or away from a particular object of desire (or repulsion). The sphere’s motion is circular, and it therefore moves continually towards and then away from every single point on its orbit. If it had a natural resting place (like a stone on the earth) then it would get to that point and then come to rest, like the stone on the earth. Similarly, if its motion were directed towards or away from any particular thing / point, then that motion would never achieve its effect, as it returns over and over again to the same point.
Rambam therefore concludes that the motion of the sphere “can only come about in virtue of a certain mental representations, which determines the sphere’s moving in that particular way.” That is, the sphere apparently has a mind and presumably an intellect, and can make the rational choice to move in a circular path. It appears that Rambam (and presumably Aristotle) imputes a human-like consciousness to the sphere. This is interesting if we assume that this kind of mental activity depends on a human nervous system. Clearly, the sphere does not have a human nervous system, so if it has human-like consciousness, this lends some credence to the notion that consciousness is primary and the creation, including the nervous systems that reflect it are created from consciousness.
Rambam continues:
Now there is no mental representation without an intellect. In consequence the sphere must be endowed with an intellect. Again, not everyone who has an intellect with which he represents a certain notion to himself and who has a soul in virtue of which he is able to move, moves while representing something to himself. For mental representation alone does not necessitate motion, as has been explained in the first philosophy and as is clear. For you can find with regard to your own self that you may represent many notions to yourself and be capable of moving toward them, and yet not move toward them in any way before a desire for the notion you had represented to yourself is necessarily produced in you. Thereupon you move in order to obtain what you had represented to yourself. Accordingly it likewise is clear that the soul, in virtue of which there is the motion, and the intellect, by which the object is represented to oneself, are not both of them together sufficient to account for the coming-about of such a motion until desire for the notion represented is conjoined with them.
Rambam has introduced a third factor, beyond natural motion and beyond the intellect, and that is the will. It is not enough that one automatically moves towards something desirable. One must have a desire, an inclination in one’s consciousness that actually makes the object desirable. In other words, it appears that the only intrinsic qualities that are either attractive or repulsive are things that are necessary for or harmful to life. Further than that, there is only the mental construct (“mental representation”) of something as desirable that makes it so, and may motivate us to go get it. As Rambam goes on to state, the ultimate desirable is Gd, and it is through this desirability that Gd moves the sphere and thereby moves all creation. But we will leave that consideration until next week, Gd willing.
***************************************
Commentary by Steve Sufian
Parashat Terumah (from the archives)
Terumah” means “gift” or “offering.” In this parshah , Gd asks our ancestors to give a gift of an offering from their heart and then He gives the Great Gift of detailed instructions for building the Mishkan, a place where certain rituals (yagya?) are performed to create specific results in the environment. The commentators, from the Talmud on, all point out that Torah says Gd dwells in the human heart and soul, not in the Mishkan. The detailed instructions make it clear that this Sanctuary is an expression of the same pattern that is present in the universe and in the human body. In the human body, for example, Gd created 248 limbs which correspond to the 248 positive commandments of the Bible – in the Mishkan, there were 48 beams, 100 hooks and 100 loops.
Obviously, Gd is Everywhere, Omnipresent – He dwells everywhere so this statement “may dwell in their midst” means that the harmony between their open hearts and the Mishkan created in part by their offerings will be so great it will resonate with the personalities and physiologies of all who enter, even our ancestors who just a few days before were terrified by the sound of the Lord’s voice.
Neither modern synagogues – for example, Beth Shalom – nor modern homes seem to be built according to the plan of the Mishkan so what can we do in order to be aware of Gd’s dwelling within our synagogues, our homes, our minds, feelings, egos, bodies?
The key seems to be in Gd’s command to Moses:
“Speak to the children of Israel, and have them take for Me an offering; from every person whose heart inspires him to generosity, you shall take My offering.”
By behaving with generosity to all, we make offerings to Gd because “love thy neighbor as thyself – Self — “is inextricably intertwined with “love the Lrd, thy Gd, with all thy heart, with all thy soul and with all thy might”.
Another way to make offerings to Gd and to be aware of Gd’s Presence is through the daily prayers of our religion: waking, morning, afternoon, evening and bedtime. These have the value of opening our hearts even though we may be fatigued or stressed and the Joy of Gd’s Presence enters into the words and to our awareness.
A third way is to come to our synagogue or to connect to services through Zoom: personally, I feel magnetically drawn to our synagogue, especially to the Torah Scrolls and so I come regularly.
Whatever way we can offer to Gd, let us offer and let us be fully aware of Gd’s Presence dwelling within us and around us.
Baruch HaShem