INSIGHT 5770 - #15
RUCHNIYOT
Rabbi Yaakov Kamenetsky, Emet L’Yaakov,
Shemot 13:15 poses an interesting question. Quoting from Sforno that a bechor, first born male, is redeemed in order to allow him to do
regular work (avodat chol as
distinguished from avodat hakodesh,
sacred work), Rav Yaakov wonders why we then make a seudah, a celebratory meal, on the day that we perform this pidyan haben. Before this redemption,
the child would seem to have been on a higher level, fully devoted to holiness
-- so why would we celebrate what would seem to be a reduction in status, evidenced
by this new allowance to be involved in the regular, the mundane, the secular? Rav
Yaakov answers that the goal of Torah is not marked by the realm of total
spirituality, total ruchniyot, but by
the unified realm that combines the spiritual with the physical, a union of ruchniyot and gashmiyot. We celebrate the pidyan
haben precisely because, with the redemption allowing him to undertake
regular activities, the child is now able to strive towards his true purpose in
the unified realm of the physical and the spiritual existent in this world. While Rav Yaakov’s words include
certain new perspectives regarding this concept,1 the
idea that Torah incorporates both the physical and the spiritual realms would
seem to be a basic one familiar to even novices to Torah study. Our avodah, service of God, is through
physical action; for example, we eat and drink in the performance of many mitzvot. It was not surprising to see
Rav Yaakov refer to the distinction in Jewish karbanot, sacrifices, as a significant illustration of this
principle. Rather than totally offering, i.e. burning, an animal on an altar,
many sacrifices, including the korban
Pesach, are consumed, either by the priests or the priests and those who
offered the sacrifice. What Rav Yaakov may be adding, in further applying this
concept to the specific case of pidyan
haben, is the idea that this is not just a response to a given reality but
is, in fact, the ideal. Physical mitzvot
are not just attempts to raise up and find value within our physical existence
because we are, after all, physical beings. We were intentionally created with
a physical dimension because the Divine ideal is for us to achieve this unity
of ruchniyot and gashmiyot. It is this, Rav Yaakov is informing us, which we
celebrate at a pidyan haben. The further challenge, though, is
defining exactly what we mean when we use these terms. What is this special
value of the unity of the physical and the spiritual that we are to experience
when we enjoy a tasty Shabbat meal
or, in the time of the Temple, when individuals ate the delicious roasted meat
of the korban Pesach? We may also ask: what, in fact, is ruchniyot? To many people, spirituality
is precisely marked by the absence of interest in or concern for the physical.
It is for this reason that many religions specifically define their spiritual
constructs by such absences. The spiritual person is the one who, for example,
lives in poverty, a reflection of an absence of ability or interest in acquiring
physical possessions or, even goods and services. Proper ruchniyot, though, cannot reflect such a definition of spirituality
for ruchniyot must be able to connect
to gashmiyot in order to reach the
ultimate Divine goal; how could a spirituality defined by the very absence of a
physical dimension connect with this very physical dimension? In any event, to
contemplate a goal of a unity of the spiritual and physical realms, we do need
to first define what we mean by these terms, most importantly, what we mean by ruchniyot. One approach to defining ruchniyot, usually associated with those
of a philosophical bent such as Rambam,
is that the spiritual dimension is basically the intellect, most intently the
knowledge of God. Thought within this perspective is the bastion of the
spiritual. This view, however, while it does not present the same problems as
the above voiced definition of spirituality, also would present difficulties in
defining an ideal in the unity of the physical and the spiritual. While the spiritual
is not defined by the absence of the physical, it nonetheless has no projected
connection to the physical. The concern is simply that the physical, which
would include the world of drives and emotions, can negatively affect the
intellectual fortitude of an individual and, as such, it demands attention. To
negate the physical is not the answer as this process itself can also have
negative repercussions on the intellect. The goal must be to somewhat satisfy
the physical in a manner that would ensure that it does not negatively affect
the intellect. This, to those like Rambam, is the exact purpose of action mitzvot – to satisfy, respond to and
control human physical drives so that they do not negatively affect one’s
thoughts. Yet, in contradistinction to what would seem to be implied within the
perspective presented by Rav Yaakov, the goal within this view is still not,
and inherently cannot be, a unity of ruchniyot
and gashmiyot. Some understand spirituality in
terms of an altered state of consciousness, essentially a certain feeling.
Within this perspective, indeed the physical can be perceived as potentially
able to connect to the spiritual realm if physical objects or acts can be used
to create this state.2 This is indeed the way
that some understand what the Torah means by a unity of ruchniyot and gashmiyot,
that the physical can be transformed to yield a spiritual result rather than a
physical result. As such, with the proper concentration the act of eating a
sandwich can yield the same spiritual state as prayer. The challenge is,
though, that this act of eating a sandwich no longer functions within its own
inherent parameters. For advocates of this perspective, this may not be a
problem; in fact the inherent transformation may be what the Torah desires. The
fullness of the physical perspective, however, is lost. One could contend that
the physical effects of eating a sandwich should also be part of this unity of ruchniyot and gashmiyot, Rabbi Benjamin Hecht e-mail Footnotes 1 See, also, Emet L’Yaakov, Bereishit 2:4B. 2 In that certain physical
items, such as drugs or alcohol, can directly cause certain feelings, some even
see a further connection between the spiritual and the physical in such direct
causal effects. I have chosen, though, not to pursue this specific perspective
in this Insight.
Return to top |
© 2006 NISHMA