 |
|
|
RAV KOOK'S
LETTERS By Rav Tamir
Granot Lecture #11b:
Letter 44,
Section E – Theology – Part 2 Rav Kook's Innovation: The
Malkhut of "Consciousness" Rav Kook's innovation can be
understood as an interpretation of one sentence from the Alter Rebbe: "To be a
world... a complete universe and a separate thing by
itself." It can thus be asked: Is the world
indeed "separate," or is it part of a monistic singularity? Are we part of the
Divine or an independent universe? RSZ explained that independence stems from
the delimitation of reality in space and time. But we know that space and time
are not categories of reality, but categories of reason, forms of perception! We
do not perceive space and time within reality as objective facts; we perceive
reality from within the rational forms of space and time (this is a summary of
Kant's teachings on this issue). This opposition in the description of
the nature of space and time – as categories of reality (as they were apparently
understood by RSZ) or as categories of perception (in the formulation of Kant
and Rav Kook) – allows us to better understand the profundity of the idea that
RSZ expresses about reality being the source of the sefira of
Malkhut. Malkhut, Rav Kook explains, is not a function of ontology
but a function of epistemology; the product of Malkhut is not reality in
which there are space and time but a consciousness that contains the
transcendent categories of space and time. Before this consciousness, reality
was an undifferentiated singularity. Malkhut, as explained, requires
alterity – but this alterity is subjective, not objective. Thus, human
consciousness, which is essentially subjective (the existence of the "I" – the
existence of independent subjects), is the offspring of Malkhut. Since we
have consciousness, we do not merely exist as part of reality, we also perceive
it from the outside via our consciousness. The subject who is external
(transcendent) to reality contemplates it from within his own consciousness and
expresses his separateness from it. There is "me" and there is reality outside
of me. This effectively explains the
statement of the Zohar that Malkhut has nothing of its own (see
the explanation): Malkhut is only consciousness, a form of perception –
it is not substance – but it determines our perception of reality. The world
that we contemplate from within our Malkhut-consciousness is the world of
subjective consciousness, created to allow for our subjective existence as
distinct from the monistic Divine world. From this perspective, Kantian
epistemology and kabbalistic epistemology as explained by Rav Kook are identical
in that they agree that we only recognize phenomena – the world as it appears in
our consciousness – and not the world as it exists outside our
consciousness. Between Kant and Rav
Kook The major difference
between our epistemology and Kant's is in the relation toward reality beyond
consciousness. Divinity is the
source of consciousness, and it therefore cannot be directly comprehended.
Consciousness, which allows us to recognizes ourselves as independent subjects,
forces us into its patterns of thought (space, time, multiplicity) and does not
allow for direct recognition of the Divine. The error of both
paganism and non-Jewish monotheism rests on this point. Since they attempted to
perceive Divinity through reason, they were forced to define it – to turn it
into a comprehensible entity. The attempt to grasp Divinity through
consciousness turned Divinity into something outside of it – since consciousness
is always directed toward that which is outside it. Consequently, Divinity must
be considered as an object, as perfect an object as it can
be. How do we relate to
Divinity? We have already seen one perspective on how we relate to the Divine in
the previous shiur: we relate to it through its manifestations in the
limited reality. We recognize that the entire multiplicity that our
consciousness perceives is essentially Divine unity that our reason and
perception grasp as multiplicity: But God is beyond all
reality of which any sense or idea can enter within us, and anything that is
beyond all sense and idea of ours is, in our estimation, null and void, and the
mind cannot
come to rest on what is null and void [i.e., we cannot grasp Divinity
directly, as one grasps an object]... We must show the way
into the banquet hall – through the gate. The gate is Divinity that is expressed
in the world, in the world in all its beauty and majesty, in every soul and
spirit, in everything that lives and crawls, every plant and flower, every
nation and kingdom, the sea and its waves, the panorama of the heavens and the
glory of its luminaries, the capabilities of all living things, the ideas of
every writer, the imaginings of every poet, the insights of every thinker, the
emotions of all who feel, and the stormy courage of every
hero... When the longing for
this light reaches its highest point, it begins to draw a great abundance of
light from the hidden light that it deep within it, and it is expressed from
deep within it, since everything draws light from the highest source, and all
the worlds and everything within them are nothing but expressions that appear to
us as individual sparks of that higher expression of light, but when they are
all a single unit, a single revelation, in which all beauty, light, truth, and
goodness is contained (Orot, Zeronim, ch.
1). On the other hand, we
know that Divinity (the Name of Havaya in the Tanya's terminology)
is the source of everything, and even though the source is not directly
comprehensible ("the source of all is the incomprehensible Infinite"),
nevertheless, the idea that all of the multiplicity within reality is rooted
within the perfect Divine Being – and that even our consciousness itself, which
projects the world's multiplicity to us, is an offshoot of the Divine unity –
fills us with great joy as well as intense striving to become exalted and to
approach the greatness of Divine goodness, which is the source of
everything. Kant, whose thought
was still rooted in the pagan world, claimed that the object, the world beyond
consciousness, has no meaning for us. He understood this object – being – as the
external data of consciousness.[1] We, on the other
hand, understand that this "object" is not outside consciousness, but is its
source. Consciousness is what "casts us out" to contemplate the world from a
transcendent dimension. As I noted in the
explanations to the letter, this is also how the various names for the
sefira of Malkhut can be explained. Malkhut is the "I"
(ani) because it is the root of subjectivity. Prior to Malkhut,
there is a straightforward, monistic unity that is impossible to speak of from
outside; after Malkhut, there is "ani," me, the perceiver, and you
(ata) the object of perception. Therefore, the kabbalists say that
Malkhut is "ani," but from the perspective of the ani, God
(Tiferet) is "Ata." Malkhut generates differentiation, an
awareness of duality. Malkhut is also called "this" (zot) because
the forms of perception of Malkhut are the categories of space and time,
the categories through which concrete existence – "this" – is perceived!
Malkhut is also "the moon" because the tzimtzum within it enables
the perception of existence that cannot be grasped without it, just as the moon
allows us to contemplate the sunlight that cannot itself be
perceived. I wish to conclude
this shiur with an important passage from Part II of Orot
Ha-Kodesh, a segment in which Rav Kook most clearly articulates the
theological alternatives and the web of relations between them. So as to avoid
repetition, we will present the section as is and explain it in the notes. There
are several new insights here beyond what we have already learned, and I hope
that they will be understood by learning the passage itself and through the
clarifications in the notes.
Summary Through
Rav Kook's words in the letter, we have attempted to understand the foundations
of his epistemology and theology. We were also able to understand why we do not
need Kant, except perhaps for his language and concepts. Moreover, we have
understood why Kant's wisdom, although it touches on the truth, does not get to
the root of the matter, which can be drawn specifically from Jewish
sources. |
LinksCourses 5772 16 courses S.A.L.T. - 5 minutes of Torah
KMTT - Daily audio shiur Keshet - Hebrew audio
Donations
Yeshivat Har Etzion
|