Showcasing Shechinah: hashgachah hotspots and Western Wall idolatry

The chapter of Judaism Reclaimed which relates to parashat Terumah examines the concept of Shechinah (God’s “earthly dwelling”), a term with biblical roots but which has come to be viewed predominantly as a mystical phenomenon. The theological problems inherent in placing God within the framework of space and time were the subject of a recent post, which quoted King Shlomo as having said: “But will God indeed dwell on the earth? Behold! The heaven and the heaven of heavens cannot contain You -- much less this temple that I have erected”. Maharal expands upon this theme, writing that God “indeed fills the Earth” -- but that anyone who claims that all places are equally suited to worshipping Him attacks a core tenet of the Torah – that our ability to relate to God fluctuates in accordance with the limiting physical variables of time and place.

In Moreh Nevuchim, Rambam understands this reference to God’s “dwelling” in a particular place to mean that it becomes subject to a permanent heightened hashgachah (Divine Providence). Rambam’s explanation presents a challenge to those who opt for a minimalist interpretation of Rambam’s view of Divine Providence, a subject we deal with at length in earlier chapters.

Judaism Reclaimed proceeds to develop this theory of Shechinah as a “hashgachah hotspot” with particular reference to the explanations of Ramban and R’ Yehudah Halevi for the differential between the land of Israel and the rest of the world, before noting that the same idea can be applied to providential fluctuations within the concept of time. Several examples are brought to support the proposition that an intensification of hashgachah is a double-edged sword; while it provides an opportunity for a more profound relationship with God, it also acts as a catalyst to trigger a more direct and drastic response to any wrongdoing.

The chapter concludes with an examination of a radical and controversial claim made by a Jewish philosopher, Yeshayahu Leibowitz, that “the idea that a specific country or location has an intrinsic “holiness” is an indubitably idolatrous idea” and that the Western Wall should therefore be destroyed as an idolatrous shrine. Leibowitz cites in support the comments of Rabbi Meir Simchah of Dvinsk in his Meshech Chochmah where he asserts that “There is no difference for all Torah matters either in regard to place or time…Do not think that the Sanctuary and the Temple are holy objects in their own right…”.

On the basis of our analysis in this chapter we suggest that, while it is true that no country or building which attracts hashgachah is intrinsically holy, it nevertheless does undergo a form of metaphysical metamorphosis from God’s choosing to “rest His Shechinah” there. For the duration of the Shechinah residing in such a place, the heightened hashgachah manifests itself as a very real concept of holiness—widespread throughout the Torah—to the extent that some label it a “core tenet of Jewish faith”.

The danger which must be rigorously guarded against is that people will gradually begin to revere such places and artefacts as being holy in their own right and accord them supernatural powers distinct from those of God. We note prophetic protestations against such wrongful attribution of supernatural powers to places and their rituals. In such a scenario, we conclude, Leibowitz might be justified in labelling such a belief in sanctity of worldly matters as idolatry.

First posted to Facebook 26 February 2020, here.

Where on earth is the "Kevod Hashem"?

On two occasions in the book of Bemidbar, the nation is involved in some form of frantic rebellion against God – or at least again his appointed leaders. As the mutinies of Korach and the Spies reach fever pitch, order is suddenly and dramatically restored by the “Glory [Kevod] of God” appearing to the entire nation.

The mysterious notion of a tangible “Kevod Hashem” features elsewhere in Tanakh and appears repeatedly in our prayers – but how is it to be understood? Is Kevod Hashem some form of tangible spiritual entity? Where is it to be found?

We are accustomed to the notion of God’s kavod “filling the entire world” – our daily kedushah prayer includes Yeshayah’s declaration that “melo chol ha’aretz kevodo”. But if such kevod Hashem indeed fills the entire universe then how can it said to appear suddenly mid-mutiny in order to restore order among the Israelites?

The extended Kedusha that we recite on Shabbat recounts that this question also troubles God’s ministering angels: “His kavod fills the world [yet] His ministering angels ask of each other “Where is the place of His kavod?!”” The resolution appears to be that his kavod is to be found among “am hameyachadim shemo” – the nation which perceives and declares his Oneness.

Radak explains in his commentary to Yeshayah’s declaration that “God has created everything, and those who are able to perceive God will glorify Him for this [yechabeduhu ba’alei sechel]”. Consistent with Rambam’s interpretations of this verse in Moreh Nevuchim, Radak is shifting the emphasis from kavod as a tangible spiritual entity to a description of humans recognizing and internalizing the nature of God’s existence. It would seem that while God’s kavod potentially fills the entire world – since all aspects of Creation can be said to point to a Creator – this kavod only exists in practice when and where humans perceive and declare God’s existence.

As Judaism Reclaimed analyses, Rambam categorically rejects as heretical the notion that God or divinity can enter into the limiting physical frameworks of space and time. Biblical verses which purport to describe God in this manner are therefore interpreted, in line with the ancient footsteps of Targum Onkelos, to be describing our perception and relationship with God. (Interestingly, Rambam does however consider it legitimate – if not entirely accurate – to understand kevod as a form of “created light” – an understanding which appears to have been favoured by other commentators such as Sa’adiah Gaon).

The extended kedushah prayer can be seen to reflect Rambam’s approach to kevod Hashem. Such kavod does not occupy any fixed place that the ministering angels can point to – rather it is to be found among the am hameyachadim shemo who use their tzelem Elokim – their God given intellect to recognise, internalise and develop a relationship with Him.

A further chapter of Judaism Reclaimed examines how such a recognition of God is not universally proclaimed and is central to the historical role of the Jewish nation. When pagans contemplated the world, they saw a multiplicity of concepts and forces which appeared to be in conflict with one another in the natural world. This they rationalised in terms of there being a multiplicity of deities, each with limited powers and spheres of influence, who engage in battle with one another where their interests come into conflict or their limited spheres of influence overlap. Aristotle, by contrast, contemplated the multiple ‘forms’ that make up the universe, understanding that there must be a single simple source from which they all emanate. This source, however, he viewed as being a natural and constant First Cause, eternally limited to its role of constantly producing the physical universe. In the modern era, atheists have concocted complex theories of multiverses and eternally self-perpetuating cycles of Big Bangs and contractions in order to explain what at first glance appears to be a precisely and finely-tuned universe.

From Avraham and the pagans, Rambam and Aristotle through to Rabbi Sacks’s disputes with New Atheists, Judaism has always stood at the forefront of the battle to declare and accept God’s governance of the world. These declarations have firmly rejected the various competing rival theories which have emerged at different historical junctures, gained popularity and then departed from serious theological and philosophical reckoning. It is this role of the Jewish nation which is concretised in the Kedusha prayer depicting us as the am hameyachadim shemo – the nation whose mission it is perpetually to recognise and declare God’s Oneness and governance of the world. The nation therefore among whom God’s kavod can be found.

The book of Bemidbar describes the formative years of our young nation in which it was being trained for its upcoming mission as God’s chosen people. This crash course required a more intense providential guidance – certain fundamental truths had to be supernaturally imposed on the nation. For this reason, when they rebelled in the episodes of the Spies and Korach, God’s kavodhad to make itself clear to them. Rather than emerging from the free choice of humans to meditate upon and perceive God, He made Himself clear and apparent in order to keep the emerging nation from rebelling against Moshe’s leadership and their destiny in the Land of Israel.

Subsequent generations of Jews, however, are guided by the phrase ברוך הוא אלקינו שבראנו לכבודו"” – “Blessed is He our God who created us for His kavod – our mission as God’s nation is to perceive, internalise and declare to the world His Oneness and governance.

First posted to Facebook 25 June 2023, here.

Where on Earth is God?

Yesterday’s Torah reading introduces us to a concept which is theologically challenging yet fundamental to our faith: that God can “dwell in our midst”. While the notion of God dwelling in a nation’s midst would seem to be conferring some sort of benefit on them, its precise meaning is complex and elusive. As the wise King Shlomo succinctly summarised during his dedication of the first Beit Hamikdash:

"Can God really dwell on earth? ... the heaven and the heaven of heavens cannot contain You, and surely not this Temple that I have built!" [Melachim I 8:27] 

The answer is indicated both in the continuation of Shlomo's speech (“But may you turn to the prayer … that Your servant shall pray towards this place”) and by God's subsequent response. God's 'residing' in a particular location represents, metaphorically, the notion that people’s prayers will be answered there, thereby making His existence more tangible to them.The Maharal (G.A. Bereishit 6:6) restates the problem before elegantly expanding upon this theme, explaining that God indeed 'fills the Earth' and cannot be confined to a specific place. One who claims, however, that all places are therefore equal to worship Him is attacking a core tenet of the Torah: the principle that God designates as 'holy' certain places in which He enables people to relate to Him more easily. Maharal’s statement highlights the tension that prevails between our awareness of God's infinity on the one hand, and the Torah's assertions that our ability to experience and relate to Him fluctuates in accordance with the limiting physical variables of time and place. 

In an almost “Maimonidean”-type manoeuvre, the Maharal clarifies that God’s dwelling in our midst does not imply any change in God – rather the “intervening screen” which typically diminishes our ability to perceive Him which is partially removed. This process, which is referred to biblically in terms of a relationship between God and His nation, evolves in Midrashic and Tannaitic Hebrew into a noun: “Shechinah” which is taken to denote God’s Presence in a particular place. 

Rambam’s presentation of this concept in the first section of Moreh Nevuchim focuses on the heightened providential opportunities that such a “divine dwelling” affords. One manifestation of this is the differential between the Land of Israel which “God’s eyes are always upon” [Devarim 11:12] and the rest of the world. Our analysis may help to clarify a perplexing statement of the Gemara that "anyone who lives outside the Land of Israel is considered not to have a God". Derashot HaRan (4) explains that a person who lives outside Israel distances himself from God's direct providence. In doing so, he forfeits the benefit of the special hashgachah-based relationship with God that only living in Israel can convey. Relatively speaking, therefore, such a person can be considered “not to have a God.” 

It is an important principle of Judaism that the opportunity to do good breeds a commensurate negative potential to do evil, and this principle manifests itself clearly in the 'residing' of the shechinah. While an increased concentration of hashgachah affords people an opportunity to enhance their perception and relationship with God, it is accompanied by the commensurate threat of a more direct and drastic response to any wrongdoing. This idea is used by Rabbeinu Nissim (Ran) in connection with God's sending an angel to oversee the Jewish People's journey to the Land of Israel in place of His personal direct Providence, which had governed the Jews’ progress until the sin of the Golden Calf.

The Netziv (Bemidbar 11:1), provides further examples of this principle, contrasting the immediacy of the punishment suffered by the 'mitonenim' (complainers) in the desert when compared to the relatively distant threatened punishments which would be visited upon the nation in the event of them sinning described in the book of Devarim. The Netziv deduces that this is due to a differential in the concentration of shechinah and hashgachah between that which existed in the desert at the time of the mitonenim, (whose complaints were "in the ears of God"), and the ‘regular’ hashgachah which would be present once the Jews had entered the land. 

Varying concentrations of shechinah or hashgachahmay also help us to explain the severe punishment meted out to Nadav and Avihu for bringing “strange fire” before God. The verse emphasises that their sin was committed “before God”, which indicates the presence of a heightened degree of the shechinah and an increased level of hashgachah. For this reason, the divine decree against them was both immediate and severe. Perhaps this is the real significance of the words "bikrovai ekadesh" (“among those close to Me will I be sanctified”): that God will be sanctified by the evidence of hashgachah among those closest to Him. This can be contrasted with the punishment received by King Uzziah in the late first Mikdash period for the same sin — the bringing of an unauthorised ketoret offering. Uzziah received punishment through the affliction of tzaraat, not death, because there was a reduced level of hashgachah after the inauguration of the Mishkan.

There is a tradition that "veshachanti betocham" refers not only to the shechinah residing in the Mishkan, but also alludes to each individual's mission to develop himself into a Mikdash within which the shechinah can reside. This teaching can be viewed consistently with Rambam's principle that the level of Providence that a person is capable of receiving is directly dependent on the extent to which he has developed his character and intellect. 

In Rambam’s understanding, as a person becomes more righteous, he gradually minimises the extent to which he is governed by forces of nature; through this process he becomes subject instead to God's direct hashgachah, which guides and facilitates his continued development. However, just as the direct hashgachah on a national level causes the nation to be judged more severely should they sin, so too an individual upon whom the shechinah resides is judged "kechut hasa'arah", causing him to be judged severely even for more minor infractions.

This reciprocal relationship between God and humanity is pointed out by Rambam in the closing stages of his Moreh Nevuchim where he writes that

“…the intellect that overflows towards us and is the bond between us and Him, may He be exalted. Just as we apprehend Him by means of that light which He caused to overflow towards us – as it says “In Your light do we see light” (Tehillim 36:10) – so does He, by means of that same light examine us; and because of it He, may He be exalted, is constantly with us, examining us from on high”. [3:52]

See more at www.TalmudReclaimed.com.

First posted on Facebook 18 February 2024, here.