Sunday, June 05, 2016

Creating Reality as Opposed to Simply Being Part of the Creation

This short essay is part of a collection of essays in a work-in-progress entitled "Prolegomena to a New Spiritual Psychology".

If our own thinking determines, or at least has a part in shaping the reality we live in, that is, in determining the nature of that reality, and is not just a sub-function of a pre-existing reality; if it is possible that we have a part in shaping reality, then there is no stronger argument for pursuing a spiritual life, a life of purpose and meaning, a religious life. Pursuing a religious life means choosing a trajectory towards the good, towards justice and morality, towards Adonai/God. This means that inwardly thru our beliefs and thoughts, and outwardly thru our acts of compassion, justice, and creativity, we are trying to build a human reality that reflects the Jewish conception of Adonai. But tho this conception is quintessentially Jewish, its fulfillment is in no way limited to Jews.

If we accept such a possibility and choose to pursue it, then faith alone is not sufficient. Nor are good works alone sufficient. If we are creating this reality through our thoughts as well as our deeds, then both our beliefs and our actions are critically important. Thus, to reject God or exclude God from our conceptions is to pursue an incomplete, broken, and ultimately dysfunctional model. Without God, one is inevitably left with the Machiavellian/Darwinian world of blind and random nature, devoid of any inherent ethics, justice, and purpose.

[A note on atheism:] While it is undeniable that one can be deeply and consistently ethical without actively believing in God, consistent ethical behavior (as opposed to situational, self-serving ethical behavior) ultimately rests on a belief in values that transcend personal needs and personal gain. And to believe in such “transcendental” values ultimately means our inner logic is founded on some sort of God idea. Many ethical atheists prefer not to pursue the logic of their beliefs, but in the end their atheism really rests on a religious, God-based foundation. Ideas such as “for the good of society” or “for the good of humankind” or “for the good of the earth” are all ways of submerging God into one’s beliefs without having to acknowledge God.

Thursday, May 05, 2016

Designing the Madeleine Amulet

This 2 minute video shows the design stages in the production of an illuminated amulet, The Madeleine Amulet. It also describes the conceptual foundations of the images I developed for the amulet.


Tuesday, April 26, 2016

Eternal Jew: walking the 18 blessings

Composing The Atternen Juez Talen, I conceived a scene in which the events he experiences reflect the 18 blessings of the Sh'monah Esray. "Sh'monah Esray" means "18", and it is one of the names of a core part of Jewish liturgy comprised, originally, of 18 blessings (19 blessings now).

So, here's our hero on the road from Tiberias (Tiveria) to Khazaria (north of the Black Sea) and the year is about 1150 CE. To make his passage easier he and his wife Butkoel (a shortened form of Batsheva Kol Tov) try to become anonymous by taking on the role of shepherds.

This stage in their journey emulates the Kedusha, the third of the 18 blessings. In the Kedusha one reaches the pinnacle of holiness, elevated to angelic levels of awareness....

(A note on the format:
I have translated the poetry and converted it into prose to help the reader navigate my modified (dare I say, elevated) English. Thus, a prose paragraph in "old" English followed by the same text as poetry in metaEnglish.)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The border on the Seljuk lands is like a desert nomad’s cloak -- ill kept and full of gapin’ holes. Seljuk Syria, that’s our goal. A two day haul thru dried out streams, wadis where branches of long dead oaks reach from their graves to pluck your eyes.

     The border on the Seljouk lanz
     Iz like a dezzert nomadz kloek --
     Ill kept an fule a gapen hoel.
     Seljouk Sureyah, thats ar goel.
     A tu2 day hawl thru dry owt streemz,
     Woddeez ware branchen a long ded oek
     Reech frum thaer graven tu pluk yur iy.

And not two weeks after that, and we’ve acquired our kingly robes to seem the shepherds we must be. Hooded cloaks of felted wool -- like walking ovens in the sun; fur-skin boots packed with felt to ease the blistering rocky road -- a rancid stench soon reeked from them; each a staff to walk by the way and help convince hungry wolves to tear necks in other folds; and naturally a willow switch to help convince a head-strong goat to join his happy flock again.

     An nor a tu2 week after that
     An we akwiyerz ar keenglee robe
     Tu seem the shepperz we mus be.
     Houded kloeks a felted wool --
           Like wokken uvvenz in the sun;
     Fer-skin boots pakt with felt
     Tu eez the blisterres rokkee rode --
           A ransid stench soon reeken them;
     Eech a staf tu wok by the way
     An help kunvins the hungree woolv
     Tu taren neks in uther foelz;
     An nacherlee a willo swich
     Tu help kunvins a hed-streng goet
     Tu join iz happee flok aggen.

Soon enough we become like goats ourselves. We see the world thru a goat’s eyes: tufts of weeds and low-hung leaves direct their path, movin’ at the slowest pace of twelve distracted, hungry beasts. Any patch of dusty turf allures their dull and beasty eyes. Passin’ this rich and varied world our eyes serve only our yammerin’ guts; a berry here, a nut there, a dusty weed looks succulent; in a death-dry wadi, a puddle of mud now appears like a cup of wine.

     Soon ennuf an we bekum
     Like goet arselz. See the werl
     Thru goetee iy: tufs a weed
     An lo-hung leevz derrekter path,
     Muven at the slowwes pase
     Uv twelv distracken, hungree beests.
     Ennee pach a dustee terf
     Allorz thaer dul an beestee iy.
     Passen this richen vareyes werl
     Ar iyz serv nor ar yammerree guts;
     A baree heer, a nut thaer,
     A dustee weed louks sukyulen;
     In a deth-dry woddee, a puddel a mud
     Now appeern like a kup a wine.

Come to a village without a name. Just one dusty lane lined by walls; the mud plaster crumblin' in piles, or cracked and buckling from the mudbrick core. Behind the walls and at open gates dogs bark; children too. Comes a young mother, babe at breast, hardly a tooth in either mouth. Sees us and slams and bolts her gate. I hears her spit three times and croak, “Accurst, accurst, accurst, a jinn! This home be rid of satan and sin.” Weren’t sure if she meant us or her, but the goats got the message and scurried on, and we too scampered, goatfully.

     Kum tu a villij withowten name,
     Jes wun dustee lane liend by wawlz;
     The mud plaster in krumbellee pielz
     Or krakt an bukkelz frum the mudbrik kor.
     Behien the wawlz an open gaet;
     Dogz a bark, an childer too.
     Kumz a yung muther, babe at bres,
     Hardlee a toothen eether mow.
     Seez us; slammen a boelter gate.
     I heerz her spit three tiem an kroek,
           “Akkerst, akkerst, akkerst; a jin!
           “This hame be rid uv saten sin.”
     Wernt shor if she meen us or her,
     But the goets got the messij an skerree on
     An we too skamperz goetfulee.

Passed a well along the road. Butkoel turns off to look in it; turns the handle, and disgusted says, “Broke and corroded all this place.”

     Past a wel allong the roed.
     Butkoel ternz of tu louks in it;
     Ternz the handel, a disgusted say,
           “Brake an kerroden in its plase.”

Passed some ruins in a rocky field. Didn’t notice till the goats all stopped to nibble clover by the rubble of a wall. Behind, on a patch of mosaic floor: a Roman caesar stands by his throne; his foot on the head of a local king. And this graffiti etched beside:“Zion, your abusers won’t endure. Their ruin will be swift to come, and sure."

     Past sum ruwenz in a rokkee feel.
     Didden notis til the goets awl stops
     Tu nibbel klover by a rubbeld wawl.
     Behien, on a pach uv mozayek flor:
     A romen sezer stanz by iz throne.
     A fout on the hed uv a lokel keeng.
     An this graffetee echen besiedz:
           “Ziyon, yur abyuzerz woen endor.
           “Thaer ruwen iz swif tu kum on shor.”

*Stopped beside a church along the way. Well, we squatted on our heels and listened to them pray.* (*-* California Dreamin'.) Psalms and supplications, like sobbin’ wails, then a preacher’s voice like a crackin’ whip replacing the sobs with his pounding fist. “Our curse will resound as long as we live, against you, Zengi**, warlord and dog. Our mouths will spit, and our tongues will sneer, and our hands will lay snares in your fields and stumbling blocks in your blind ways, until you tremble and until you fall. And we will drive you out of our world. Cursed are you, Zengi dog.” (** The Zengi were local Turkic governors serving the Seljuks, soon to be overthrown from within by Saladin.)

     *Stops besiedz a cherch allongen way.
     Waal, we skwotten on ar heelz an lissen tu em pray.*
                         *-* Mommahz an Poppahz, “Kallaffornee Dreemen”
     Salmen suplakkatenz, like sobben waelz,
     Then a preechennes vois, like a krakken wip
     Replasen a sobz with the pownded fist,
           “Ar kers iz rezownd az long az ar livz
           “Aggens yu, Zengee* wor-lorren dogz.
                         * Lokel Terkish govvannerz serven the Seljouks,
                          an soon tu be overthrone frum within
                          by Salladdin.
           “Ar mowz ar spit an ar tung iz sneer
           “An ar han iz lay a snare in yur feelz
           “An a stumbellen blok in yur blienden wayz
           “Until yur trembelz an until yur fawlz
           “An we wil drive yu owten ar werl.
           "Kerst ar yu, Zengee dog.”

Such a Kedusha is what we heard sittin’ in the shade and walking by the way. Inverted like Dante's climb thru hell, the World of Light reversed in our atoms, and we, once angels, now with animal eyes. There we wept, aware of ourselves.

     Sech a Keddueshah* az we ar herd
                         * Therd blessen uv Shmonah Esray,
                         holenes uv the Lor az experen by Hem aenjelz
     Sitten in the shade and wokken by the wayz,
     Invertenz like Dontayz klime thru helz,
     The werlz uv lite in Addom reverst,
     An we, wuns aenjel, with annammel iyz.
     Thaer we wept, awware uv arselz.

Thursday, April 21, 2016

Another book conservation project

I recently took on a project to restore a lovely book of international folktales collected by Danny Kaye in the early 1950's. The book's cover was breaking away from the book body, but fortunately the paper and sewing were in good condition. Here are a few pictures, showing the book before, during, and after conservation.

As part of the project, I also produced a pdf booklet, showing a more complete collection of images of the conservation process. The whole project took about 10 hours, altho producing the booklet consumed more than 3 of those hours.

Front cover, before and after. Not a huge change. Pencil marks and spots removed, and stains made less noticeable.



The bottom of the spine was quite worn. Matching and replacing/repairing this fabric would not have generated any structural enhancements, and it would have been difficult, time consuming, and costly, so it remained undone. Choices, eh?


The cover's edges were very worn on the bottom and front, and the corners had become rounded and mushy.



I stabilized the corners and edges, and restored the color (more or less) using non-fugitive India ink. In a one step process, the ink, made of shellac, seals and hardens the mushy edges, while adding color. With a little experimentation I produced a combination of colors that matched the existing cover papers fairly well.



Inside, the hinges were splitting, exposing old, deteriorated gauze, which was all that still held the book body in the cover. The end papers (the "Starry Night" design), naturally, were ripped the length of the boards. The edges were all crinkled and squirreled up, but fortunately, with a little care, I was able to unravel them. The results weren't bad.



Once I cut the gauze, I could get at the inner spine of the book, first to clean out the old, acidic paper, gauze, and crud, then to build a new hinge, using unbleached muslin and Japanese paper.






Naturally, attaching the new hinge can be a bit tricky and stressful, but all went well. The book is now firm, tight, and structurally sound. Storing it in an acid-free box would further enhance its longevity.

Sunday, April 03, 2016

Drash on Shemini, butterflies, and elephants

Drash on Shemini, butterflies, and elephants
23 Adar II, 5776
Shemini, Viyekra/Leviticus 9:1 - 11:47


Todays’ portion is Shemini. ‘Shemini’, '8', refers to the 8th day in the consecration of the Mishkan, the portable sanctuary. This sidrah is usually known for its two mysteries: the death of two of Aaron’s sons, Nadav and Avihu, while lighting incense; and the laws of Kashrut concerning what animals can and can’t be eaten. Neither the reason for the death of Aaron’s sons, nor the reasons not to eat certain animals are explained, and they remain much discussed mysteries to this day.


Since you can find plenty of discussion about those two topics all over the place, I decided to focus on other matters: an extremely minor detail with a butterfly effect, and an elephant in the room.


Butterfly FX:


We read that if a small animal like a mouse or chameleon dies and falls on something, that something will become impure: verse 11:35 (Fox translation):
“Thus, anything upon which their carcass falls shall be tamei, unclean. An oven or 2-pot stove is to be demolished; they are tamei and they shall remain tamei for you. (Thus they cannot be made pure, tahor again.)


Well, a chameleon falling on your oven can be a problem, right? Really! An oven or stove is a major appliance and no one wants to have to destroy the whole thing, take the parts out to the hazmat dump (so they don’t make anything else impure), and then have to go out to some over-crowded, under-pleasant strip mall to buy a new one.


Well, the sages of old were discussing this very problem, and in the process they created one of the most famous, conceptually remarkable, and literarily brilliant midrashim of all time (a real butterfly effect, eh?). We know this midrash now as “The Oven of Akhnai.” It goes something like this:


We have been taught: Say a man made an oven out of separate coils of clay, placing one upon another, then put sand between each of the coils; such an oven, R. Eliezer said, is not susceptible to defilement, while the sages declared it susceptible.


So what’s the issue here? [My answer: an oven’s an expensive piece of equipment; is it possible to make one that can be fixed rather than replaced. But the real problem here becomes a disagreement that leads to a power struggle between the sages...]


            It is taught: On that day R. Eliezer brought forward every imaginable argument, but the sages did not accept any of them. Finally he said to them "if the Halakhah (body of Jewish law) agrees with me, let this carob tree prove it!" Sure enough, the carob tree was uprooted (and replanted) a hundred cubits away from its place. "No proof can be derived from a carob tree," they retorted.
            Again he said to them, "If the Halakhah agrees with me, let the channel of water prove it!" Sure enough, the channel of water flowed backward. [Visualize frowning and yawning as the sages respond...] "No proof can be derived from a channel of water," they rejoined.
            Again he urged, "If the Halakhah agrees with me, let the walls of the house of study prove it!" Sure enough, the walls tilted as if to fall. But R. Joshua rebuked the walls saying, "When disciples of the wise are engaged in a halakhic dispute, what right have you to interfere?" Hence, in deference to R. Joshua they did not fall, and in deference to R. Eliezer they did not resume their upright position; indeed, they are still standing aslant.
            Again R. Eliezer said to the sages, "if the Halakhah agrees with me, let it be proved from heaven!" Sure enough, a divine voice (bat kol) cried out, "Why do you dispute with R. Eliezer, with whom the halakhah always agrees?" But R. Joshua stood up and protested, "It (the Torah) is not in heaven" (Deut. 30:12). We pay no attention to a divine voice because long ago at Mount Sinai You wrote in the Torah, "After the majority must one incline" (Exod. 23:2).
            R. Nathan met the prophet Elijah and asked him "What did the Holy One do in that moment?" Elijah: "He laughed, saying 'My sons have bested Me; My sons have bested Me.'"


So we have here a number of remarkable phenomena. Perhaps most importantly, the rabbis override the Voice of God, and are allowed to get away with it! Also of great interest, we have an assertion of democratic principles that even Jefferson or Paine might not have been so bold as to make. What else do we have here?


Let me answer this through an example. Suppose we are sitting around arguing matters of Torah. Reb Ramon, our hazan, declares that we need to add Musaf to our Shabbat prayers (we don’t do Musaf at Shirat haNefesh). The rest of us disagree. Reb Ramon makes lots of arguments but we blow them off. Finally he says, if God wants us to institute Musaf, let that oak tree prove it by jumping across the street. What do we do? We immediately pull out our cell phones and dial 911 to get an ambulance for Ramon who must be having a breakdown. When we’re working in realtime, adults don’t usually suspend their disbelief.


Elephant FX:


And so, may I introduce to you Ganesh, the elephant in the room. When reading holy texts we are inclined to suspend our disbelief.


In today’s portion, verse 9:23, we read (using Fox’s translation):
... and the Glory of Adonai was seen by the entire people. And fire went out from the presence of Adonai and consumed, upon the slaughter-site, the Olah offering and the fat parts. When all the people saw, they shouted and flung themselves on their faces.


We read this and what do we say? “Oh yeah, I’d have thrown myself down too. Wow. Amazing!”


Two verses later at 10:2 the text describes the demise of Nadav and Avihu:
And fire went out from the presence of Adonai and consumed them (Nadav and Avihu), so that they died, before the presence of Adonai...


We read this and what do we say? “Whoa. Why did God kill them?”


Or, way back in Beraysheet/Genesis we read, “God said to Abraham, kill me a son...” (Reb Dylan’s translation) and we think, ‘How could God demand such a thing?’ Etc, Etc.


We read this book, almost every one of us, like fundamentalists. We read the text, and believe it is true and accurate, and events happened just like what’s written; we believe people said just what’s written; and we believe God talked in human language and said exactly what’s written. Are we out of our minds?


But to mention this, of course, is virtually blasphemous. It got Rabbi Avuya excommunicated for questioning God’s justice, and it got Spinoza excommunicated for questioning the truth of the Torah. Nowadays, of course, we don’t get excommunicated (at least in most congregations), but if we’re asking these questions, we’re almost certainly not spending much time reading Torah (why bother?). We probably don’t come to shul more than a couple of times a year, if that (again, why bother?). Indeed, we probably have no use for religion or God whatsoever.


This is a dilemma! Indeed, it has 70 faces just like the Torah. It’s important now for you, the reader, to try to articulate what the problem is, before you read the four ways I articulate it.


My articulations:
1.         Living in a world of suspended disbelief causes us to become non-credible to many adults, and more troubling, to our children, whose minds are awaking to the productive rigors of evidence-based thinking (multiple sources of evidence or repeatability). On the other hand, if we reject the verity of the Torah, we ultimately reject the foundation of Jewish thought, Jewish practice, Jewish community, Jewish identity. But what if you feel like me: to be a Jew is a privilege and an honor! Throwing out the Torah is not an option.
2.         We are compelled to ask, ‘why are things different these days?’ Why did God talk to people long ago, but not to us? Are we the problem? Is Torah the problem? Is God the problem? I’m guessing most people would say the problem is the Torah. Is it possible to redeem this Torah? Is it possible to make it believable once again? But it needs to be more than believable; it needs to be insightful. Is that possible? But it needs to be more than insightful; it needs to be inspirational, even to a sceptic, even to our kids, if it is to stand as a genuine holy book, and if it is going to continue to be as life-changing and as world-changing now as it was in the past.
3.         How do we create and teach the intellectual and spiritual tools to help us more directly experience and understand God? What are we God-believers doing to open the doors of perception? If God is real we should be able to repeatably open those Divine doors, at least a crack. We’re not doing that now at all. Prayer, for all of its many virtues, is not a tool that can help us to experience God, in my opinion. It may help reinforce our faith; cool our overheated brains; help us develop concentration skills; teach us spiritual and religious insights; help us build community. But I have almost never seen it open the doors of perception
4.         And finally, this corollary problem overlaps our problems with text and God: is God an active agency for justice in the world today? Is there a Divine causality behind all the good and the bad that happens in the world? Is God an active force turning history? The traditional answer is, “absolutely; unconditionally; in everything!” But we moderns then ask, “where was God during the Shoah? And if not then, when?”


Let me offer up a couple of ideas that may help us begin to address these problems.


First: over a half century ago Erik Erikson proposed the theory of the psycho-social stages of human development, a theory that has since become virtually canonical. I think we can use Erikson’s model to postulate stages of growth in human civilization. I would suggest that we, as a civilization, are emerging from childhood into a kind of early adulthood. In our childhood we may have been happy and satisfied to believe in a God that is near, loving, and always enforcing the rules. We were largely credulous, and we had, if I can mix religious metaphors, a Santa Claus view of God. It appears that civilization is growing beyond that now, although, obviously, not uniformly. A more sophisticated understanding of God and the value of faith is concurrently beginning to emerge, although people who have abandoned religion are rarely aware of this.


Second: how can we talk about God if we’ve never really, honestly experienced God? I have no patience for, nor interest in hand-me-down versions of spiritual awakening. People that claim that God surely exists need to provide personal credentials that are more than a collection of feel-good experiences or curious coincidences that have been invested with “the intentions of God.” Consider this quote from Cormac McCarthy’s, The Crossing:
“He heard the voice of God in the murmur of the wind in the trees. Even the stones were sacred. He was a reasonable man and he believed that there was love in his heart. There was not! Nor does God whisper through the trees. His voice is not to be mistaken. When men hear it they fall to their knees and their souls are riven and they cry out to Him and there is no fear in them but only that wildness of heart that springs from such longing and they cry out to stay his presence for they know at once that while godless men may live well enough in their exile those to whom he has spoken can contemplate no life without him but only darkness and despair.”
While McCarthy doesn’t seem to understand that there are many ways to experience the Divine, and many degrees of intensity in this experience, his demand for authenticity in asserting that experience is compelling.


Third: have our spiritual senses grown dull? If so, we need to be teaching ourselves and our children how to sharpen those spiritual senses, and how to appreciate the complexity of what we call God. We need to develop in ourselves a more nuanced, multi-faceted understanding. But we also need to hone our innate ability to sense the subtle workings of God in this world. Every civilization that has emerged on this planet has been grounded in a sense of the Divine. This stands as compelling evidence that we have an innate sense of God and spiritual matters within us. Therefore, if we can make 100 tons of metal fly, we should surely be able to develop tools, physical and mental, to help us discern, even if dimly, the Divine within and beyond us.


Finally, our children need to know that God isn’t going to step out of the sky to tell them what to do. Neither will God come down and spank them when they’re bad. We don’t now have the sensitivity and skill, and we may never have it, to comprehend Divine causality as it works in this world. In any case, harking back to the McCarthy quote above, we may be able to live and thrive in this world with no religion and no sense of God, but our lives will be deeply enriched by a knowledge of our Divine Essence, and we will surely be immeasurably transformed if we have the privilege to experience that Essence in its power and grandeur. Of that I am certain, having been, myself, greatly transformed!


Let us therefore turn our energies to help develop the skills to sense the Godness embedded in this world.



Two out-takes:


So, it seems we stand in two worlds, often at the same time. Now, that wouldn’t be such a big problem if we didn’t care that so many people have walked away from religion, and if we didn’t care about our children walking away from our faith, our traditions, our sense of calling, our community, our identity. But we care. I hope we care. Anyway, I for one, care!


So how then do we tell the story of God talking to our ancestors in such a way that it is still believable, and doesn’t sound like folklore and fairy tale? How do we tell it, not with a stick – ‘you have to understand things THIS way or you’re bad’ – but with real and convincing insight? So how do we read this book in a new way that doesn’t rely on suspending belief, but actually inspires belief? What do we do? You tell me.

Thursday, March 24, 2016

Wednesday, March 16, 2016

The Madeleine Amulet, complete

Having just completed the Madeleine Amulet/Shiviti, I am creating a full video of its creation, from conception to birth, but in the meantime, here's a sneak peak, a 15 second video spiraling around the completed shiviti.
For those who do not know the term "shiviti" (which I spell shivvetee), it is a Hebrew word meaning "I have set" or "I have placed". Line 8 of Psalm 16 states, "Shivvetee Uddoniy l'negdee tammeed": "I have set God before me always." And thus the word got transferred to the object, in reverence of the Divine.


video

Friday, February 19, 2016

Drash on Torah portion Tetzaveh

A drash (an exploration, an essay) on the parashah Tetzaveh to be delivered at Congregation Shirat HaNefesh, 2/20/2016; 11 Adar 1, 5776.

But before I start, for those who are not familiar with Jewish practice, Jews divide the Torah into portions, known in Hebrew as sidrot (singular: sidrah). They are also known as parshiot (singular parashah). The two terms are interchangeable. There are 54 sidrot, and they are read sequentially thru the year, one every week. We begin with the creation story on the holiday of Simchat Torah, and parashah by parashah, complete Deuteronomy one year later.

Let’s begin with a thought experiment.
Imagine you are Moshe (Moses) and God has just instructed you to write the Torah. Naturally, the first thing you do is go to the local stationary store down near Sinai to buy a notebook to start recording things. Once you’ve got your  notebook, what do you do?

If I can give you a little direction on what I’m thinking about here, and naturally, there are other ways to address this problem, but what I’m thinking about is this: what kind of information does Moshe need to write this book? Or, if you prefer, what information did the later writers and editors need? (My question isn’t, ‘who wrote the Book?’ My question is, ‘what information were they interested in reporting?’)  I’m asking you to address the problem of “what are the pieces of this book?” What kinds of texts have been compiled into it? Torah isn’t just laws and mitzvot dictated by God or God’s agents here. It’s a lot more than that. What kinds of documents and oral histories does Moshe need to collect, and where does he get them?
{To the reader; at the end of this drash you can find a partial answer, much of which was compiled in a former drash I wrote on sidrah VaYekhel}

Well, we can see this is a multi-textual document, but I don’t think anyone would argue that Torah is primarily a cookbook or a text on dream interpretation or a map of Canaan and Sinai. What is Torah primarily?
{your thoughts?}
I would call it a marriage contract between us and God, but such a summary doesn’t do justice to the multi-textual nature of the contract.

If we can’t really agree on what Torah PRIMARILY is, can we at least agree on what the most important narrative/story is?
{your thoughts?}

How about this to try to hone in on some DEFINABLE measure of importance: what is the most important narrative based on the number of verses or pages devoted to it in Torah? What do you think that would be?
{your thoughts?}

Well, this is a bit crude, but based on the Kaplan Living Torah, the narrative that gets the most pages is... Here’s the breakdown:
Abraham story: .................................... 48pp; Lekh Lekha, VaYera, Khiya Sarah
Joseph story: ....................................... 46 pp; VaYishlakh, Miketz, VaYegash (less Tamar story)
Exodus story: ....................................... 72 pp; Shmot, VaEra, Bo, Beshallakh
Giving of the Law: .................................. 26 pp; Yitro, Mishpatim
Kinds of sacrifices/rituals: ....................... 30+ pp; ViYikra
Building the Mishkan and its parts: ............. 85pp; Terumah, Tetzaveh, Ki Tissa, VaYakhel

The building of the Mishkan and the making of all its sacred components gets decidedly more parchment real estate than any of the others. Surprising, eh? Why isn’t this obvious, and common knowledge?

Part of the reason is that the human mind is a narrative-creating engine. It’s what we do; it’s how we think; it’s how we organize and remember. We like stories and we need stories: Adam and Eve, Abraham and the 3 visitors, Eliezer and Laban, Dinah and Shkhem, Joseph in Egypt, Moses and the plagues, the golden calf. The building of the Mishkan, however, is not what we commonly call a narrative. It’s more like one of those indecipherable and aggravating booklets you get with a piece of furniture from Ikea. Or you can think of it as a set of blueprints; or as an art history lesson.

So tell me, why is the most extensive narrative unit in the Torah an art history lesson, and why is it almost always ignored?
{your thoughts?}

Last week everyone sitting in this synagogue agreed that this art history lesson gave clear instructions on how to create the Mishkan and it’s sacred objects. You said the instructions were clear so we didn’t have to worry about process, so that we could dive in and get to work. It was a brilliant interpretation. But, with all due respect, I totally disagree. The instructions are confusing; the materials are often inappropriate for their use; and there is hardly a single description of what the end products actually looked like. We have no idea what the keruvim looked like, or whether the designs in the woven walls looked like an oriental rug, an art deco pattern, a starry sky, a landscape, or a flat field of color, stripes, or polka dots.  Indeed, even Aaron’s robe, with its bells and pomegranates is argued about in the Talmud. Do the bells and pomegranates alternate around the fringe, or do they hang together as a unit. And we hear Moshe complain in frustration, “show me the candelabra; Your description is incomprehensible!”

All we have is an incomplete blueprint; a set of vague instructions. And we NEVER hear what the Mishkan ultimately looked like. Dare I suggest that THAT wasn’t what the authors (or the Author) was concerned with. I would postulate that the concern was not about end products, but to inspire a people to go out and build; go out and create; go out and take a chance and see what happens! That’s the direct opposite of what we commonly think Torah is trying to do. We commonly think it’s trying to direct us, constrain us, set a clear path for us to walk. Here we’re being told: it’s on you. Go figure it out yourselves.

Normally, a drash concludes in such a way that the congregation thinks, ‘aaah, of course, that’s how God wants me to behave’; or, ‘oooh, so that’s the meaning of that indecipherable word or that grammatically strange construction’; or, ‘hmmm, so that’s why bad things happen to good people’. Etc. Well, I don’t have a nice wrap-up to this drash. It’s more like one of those really aggravating TV shows that ends with the 3 contemptible words, “to be continued”. I’m much less concerned with having you come to neat, clear conclusions than in having you realize that this section, so often introduced as being boring, perhaps isn’t so boring, especially if you’re an artist, an art historian, or someone who values arts and crafts. Or someone who values creativity in general.

I urge you to re-read this series of sidrot with an understanding that this is perhaps as crucial and valuable a section of Torah as the giving of laws, or the telling of remarkable sagas, or the careful execution of sacred rituals. I want you to think about these parshiot and elevate them to their actual importance, an importance that the Torah makes clear by devoting so much time to them. This is not just some instruction manual from Ikea, l’havdil. Creative endeavors are one of the most essential defining features of being human, and not just being human, but being a spiritually and morally elevated human being. Creative endeavors are perhaps the most direct route from earth to God, from Babylon to Jerusalem, from our common, selfish, morally ambiguous state to a place of compassion, openness, and wisdom.

Shabbat Shalom.

Some answers to Question 1, above:

Question 1. What kinds of texts are compiled in this book?
cosmogony, cosmic origins
phylogeny, human origins
mythology of the origin of nations
genealogy
saga and history (inextricably intertwined)
contracts (eg purch of Machpelah)
poetry
dreams
blessings (Balaam)
mystical experiences
basic corporate (Bezelel) and judicial (Yitro) management trees
descriptions of sacrificial and other rites
legal rulings and precedents
census
job descriptions (most of Viyikra)
architectural blueprints
templates for furniture, weaving, cast and beaten metal objects
menus (Abe and 3 angels; Pesakh meal)
recipes (incense and anointing oil)
want-ad (for inspired craftsmen)
mapping, geography
geological surveys
field guides of flora and fauna
etc...}

From my drash on VaYakhel:
I believe Torah was consciously composed as a multi-document text.  It was not intended to have the traditional kind of singularity of perspective and subject found in most other sacred or literary texts. Torah was revolutionary in this way, along with its other revolutionary features:
1. its understanding of God's unity,
2. its ethical code that shattered all cultural norms of the day;
3. its establishment of a whole people as a priesthood;  and
4. its conception of history as having a direction and a purpose.
Torah casts its net over every detail of life and brings it into the sacred realm. Aside from encyclopedias, the only other document that I'm aware of with equal breadth, is... the Talmud, a worthy successor in the Jewish canon.

Thursday, February 11, 2016

Madeleine Amulet, nearing completion

Progress has been slow on this amulet for my granddaughter Maddy. No excuses. I'm the problem. Anyway, the gold is now done, except for some judicious cleaning, especially around Adonai, altho I will leave some errant fragments as little stars in the sky. Here are 4 images. Enjoy!





Friday, January 22, 2016

Venus, Ishtar, Inanna,2

The Innonna image featured in my previous post is now nearly completed. Here are a few images, focusing in on details...

The complete image:


Focusing in on her corona:




Focusing in on her genetically woven garments:




Monday, January 18, 2016

Venus, Ishtar, Inanna

I am working on my next, and probably the last image for my upcoming ebook, The Song ov Elmallahz Kumming, Bouk 3. Here it is emerging from the unconscious...

Venus/Innonna (Inanna), walking around her home, the Louvre:


I conjure you, Innonna, to come alive...


The image is not complete, altho the portraiture is done. Now the energy waves must be revealed.

Wednesday, December 16, 2015

Video: laying gold leaf

This 3 minute video shows me laying gold leaf on an amulet I'm making for my granddaughter, Madeleine. The voice-over provides explanations of what I'm doing, as well as some technical details that may be of use to craftspeople who want to learn about the process. The background music is entitled "Midnight in the Greenhouse" and was written and produced by Kevin MacLeod.


Thursday, December 10, 2015

ISIS: Rooted in Islam

ISIS: Rooted in Islam
Why Obama and most liberals fundamentally misunderstand Islam and ISIS


This essay will cover the following points:
1.   Islam and Enlightenment: Inherent Conflict
2.   Islam and the World: Shared Values
3.   A Review of Muslim-Majority nations and their Political-Social Center-points
4.   Selected Infographics


A Brief Introduction


The issue of terrorism and ISIS, a terrorist state, and their relationship to Islam is a fraught subject that walks through the minefields of bigotry and xenophobia on one side, and self-destructive ineptitude and delusion on the other. Anyone who walks this field will step on mines and antagonize people. I write this article to inspire discussion and a fuller understanding of the issues. Therefore, I welcome your amplifications and expansions of my topics and points, and your critiques. However, I am only interested in data-driven analysis. This article attempts to compile verifiable and reliable data. Too many of these discussions, including Obama's speech of 12/6/15, are nothing but fluff, emotion, and sermonizing, urging us to either play-nice with our friends (liberals) or punish those bad guys (conservatives).


This article first outlines three pillars of Islam that are in conflict with the Enlightenment, pillars that both Muslim and non-Muslim sources agree are foundational. Then I look at some shared values that will tend to ameliorate conflict, and which may eventually lead towards greater understanding and respect. Finally, I look at a wide range of Muslim-majority countries to assess the current state of Islamic ideology as reflected in political and social values.


A note on terminology:
First, I use the acronym ISIS, although ISIL is a valid alternative. Second, I talk about Islamist thought, Islamism, and Islamic fascism. They are all the same thing to me. Some may object to my use of "fascism," as this term is generally used to describe non-religious dictatorships and ideologies. However, Islam, unlike other major religious ideologies, is very forthright in integrating the political into the religious sphere. Therefore, I believe "Islamic fascism" can stand as a term that means "repressive, intolerant, fundamentalist Islamic ideologies applied to politics and social organization." I am NOT making the argument that Islamic governments are inherently fascist. Far from it. Islam has many faces, but like any political entity, it can incline to fascism. In this era, that inclination has become common, and therefore, many people, lacking historical perspective, imagine Islamic fascism to be normative.


1. Islam and Enlightenment: Inherent Conflict


When I say "Enlightenment" I am referring to the ideas of democracy, universal equality of individuals, and the endorsement of multi-cultural values without favoritism towards a specific ethnicity. As is only too obvious, these principles are incompletely realized even in the most "enlightened" communities and societies.


The Enlightenment, as it emerged in C18, posed a direct challenge to Christianity, Judaism, and Western monarchies, and led to a long history of violence and vitriol. While the West continues to struggle to implement full and well-functioning versions of enlightenment-inspired governments and social institutions, most regions of Islam are only now, for the first time, facing the confrontation with these principles. As we look across the Islamic world we can see it begin to struggle with the Enlightenment just as Christianity, Judaism, and Western monarchies did over the period 1792-1945.


Consider this excerpt from the Middle East Values Survey of 2013:
In the second half of the twentieth century, a dominant trend among the indigenous intellectual leaders portrayed an image of the West that was militarily aggressive, economically exploitative, and culturally decadent. They forewarned their audience against Western cultural invasion and conspiracies against Muslims. Such perceptions have gained considerable traction in the seven countries [in this study], as 85% of Egyptians, 80% of Iraqis, 64% of Lebanese, 30% of Pakistanis, 83% of Saudis, 54% of Tunisians, and 83% of Turks consider Western cultural invasion to be a very important or important problem. More liberal countries like Lebanon and Tunisia tend to be less concerned with Western culture.


This is why I don't see ISIS as a reaction to American policy in Iraq, western economic interests in the Middle East, and/or British and French colonialism. Its roots are much deeper and reflect the massive turmoil generated by Enlightenment principles in conflict with deeply entrenched and calcified medieval Islamic ideologies and models of government based on Islam. While ISIS is also a product of long standing internal Islamic conflicts, dysfunctional economies, and the power vacuums created by the meltdown or dismantling of inveterately dysfunctional governments, these problems simply add complexity to the underlying trajectory that has brought us worldwide terrorism, numerous implementations of Islamic fascism, and ISIS. That underlying trajectory is a product of the clash of Islam with the Enlightenment.


This conflict centers around three anti-Enlightenment pillars in Islam. Those pillars are:
1.   Dar al Islam and Dar al Harb
2.   Jihad
3.   Dhimma


Any understanding of Islam and its trajectories in world politics, including ISIS, requires a careful appraisal of these three pillars. When I say "pillars of Islam" I am referring to concepts that are embraced by the vast majority of religious Muslims in the world today. They are as essential to defining Islam as Messiah and Trinity are to Christianity.


Dar al Islam means "region of peace." Dar al Harb means "region of war." While there can be allegorical and metaphorical interpretations of these terms by liberal and mystical-minded Muslims, in main-stream Islam the terms are understood in a very literal sense. Dar al Islam is the place where Islam predominates. The rest of the world is the Dar al Harb, the region of war, were Islam does not yet predominate. [To verify this for yourself, you might begin at en.islamway.net, Dar Al-Islam And Dar Al-Harb: Its Definition and Significance.]


This is classic, medieval supersessionist thinking, identical to Christian supersessionism. It is the belief that Islam is the only true and correct understanding of God, and that Islam will, and must, prevail over all other religions. This view directly conflicts with the Enlightenment ideas of free-choice and religious relativity. [See the infographics at the end of this article, especially the two about tolerance for teaching other religions to children and tolerance for criticizing religious leaders.]


Jihad is probably the only one of the three pillars that is widely known outside of Islam. Like Dar al Islam, it can be interpreted as an allegorical or spiritual striving with self or with evil tendencies, but most Muslims in Muslim-majority countries understand this term literally. [Quoting from Wikipedia's article on Jihad: According to orientalist Bernard Lewis, "the overwhelming majority of classical theologians, jurists", and specialists in the hadith "understood the obligation of jihad in a military sense."[15] Javed Ahmad Ghamidi states that there is consensus among Islamic scholars that the concept of jihad will always include armed struggle against wrong doers.[16]] Jihad is the means whereby Dar al Islam will conquer Dar al Harb. Jihad elevates conflict and war to a holy obligation, to be pursued whenever it is politically and militarily feasible and expedient. It is the basis of Islam's "golden age of expansion" from 630-750 CE. You can see a map of this expansion here: Islam's Expansion.


Jihad is, ironically, the foundational principle of Islamic colonialism. I find it odd and hypocritical to hear and read rants by Muslims against Western colonialism, including Said's Orientalism, when, in reality, Islam has been a colonialist ideology from its origins. The principle of jihad, sadly, is a guarantee that conflict between Islam and the rest of the world will persist into any foreseeable future.


Finally, dhimma is the formal legal implementation of Islamic supersessionism over all non-Muslim peoples in the Dar al Islam. It is, quite literally, Islamic apartheid. While many Muslim scholars try to sugar-coat the dhimma, saying it established "protections" for non-Muslims under Sharia law, we have to ask, why would non-Muslims need to be protected, and from whom? Dhimmis who emerge from dhimmatude have a very different story to tell. From the horror stories of the Yazidis escaping ISIS, to the imprisonment of the founder of Bahai by the Ottomans, to personal and social histories of Jews and Christians who lived in Arab lands [see, for example, Dhimmis and Others: Jews and Christians and the World of Classical Islam, edited by Uri Rubin and David Wasserstein], dhimmatude as seen by its victims, its dhimmis, is oppressive and hateful.


Aspects of the dhimma are integrated into the law in many Muslim countries. They include such laws as: 1. the death penalty for any Muslim who converts, or who espouses atheism, and 2. strict controls, limits, or outright prohibitions on building or repairing churches, synagogues, and other non-Muslim religious buildings. The implementation of the dhimma by ISIS is but a more extreme version of these laws. Indeed, the onerous taxes, beheadings, and massacres by ISIS fit squarely into the long and troubled history of the dhimma in Islam.


A Few Sources:


'The Dhimma's Return', by Mark Durie (excerpted from his book, The Third Choice): http://www.newenglishreview.org/Mark_Durie/The_Dhimma's_Return/,
Bat Ye'or's The Dhimmi, V.S. Naipaul's Among the Believers, or search the internet on such terms as "dhimma" or "Islam and Copts/Yazidis/Bahai/Jews/Hindus/etc"


2. Islam and the World: Shared Values


While there is substantial reason to be pessimistic, Islam shares many core values with all the other major world religions and cultures. Muslim holy texts, beginning with the Koran, provide many and consistent endorsements for the Biblical Prophets, for Kings David and Solomon, for Jesus, and for many Jewish and Christian holy texts. Further, the ethical foundations of Islam are virtually identical with every other world religion. The primacy of compassion, hospitality, generosity, and peace provide a viable counter-weight to jihad and dhimma.


Just as Judaism and Christianity struggled with, and are still developing a common ground with Enlightenment principles [indeed, just today, 12/10/2015 a Vatican commission issued a new document declaring that Catholics should not try to convert Jews] , so we can expect, over the course of the coming 100-200 years, that Islam will find solid common ground with Enlightenment principles, and thus develop compatibility with multi-cultural values. But this will be a slow and non-linear process, just as it has been in the West.


3. A Review of Muslim-Majority nations and their Political-Social Center-points


The following terse comments are based on research using the following sources.
World Values Survey
http://www.worldvaluessurvey.org/WVSContents.jsp?CMSID=Findings
Religion, Society, and Politics in the Middle East, by Robert Lee and Lihi Ben Shitrit
http://www.cqpress.com/docs/college/Lust_Middle%20East%2013e.pdf
Middle Eastern Values Study: A Comparative Assessment of Egyptian, Iraqi, Lebanese, Pakistani, Saudi, Tunisian, and Turkish Publics
http://mevs.org/files/tmp/Tunisia_FinalReport.pdf
Pew Research Center: The World's Muslims: Religion, Politics and Society
http://www.pewforum.org/2013/04/30/the-worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-overview/
Pew Research Center: Chapter 1 (of above study): Beliefs About Sharia
http://www.pewforum.org/2013/04/30/the-worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-beliefs-about-sharia/


Morocco:
A monarchy. Among the most moderate countries on this list, but that belies the general tenor of society. The ruling party of the country, the PJD is a moderate Islamist party, and the prime minister is an Islamist. In other words, the general population is deeply conservative.


Algeria:
Wracked by a civil war through the 1990's between Islamists and a military dictatorship, a war that cost 150,000 lives, recent years have seen much less violence, but Islamism is still strong in this very conservative nation.


Tunisia:
Considered the most moderate Middle Eastern Islamic country, it started the "Arab Spring" and remains the only democratic survivor of that movement that was about as successful as the French Revolution. Even still, as of March, 2015, according to Hassan Mneimneh of the Middle East Institute: From Yemen to Syria, Afghanistan to Tunisia, the Islamist civil war is global. Three main protagonists are engaged in it in Tunisia, with distinctly different approaches on method and increasingly divergent views on the end goal.


Libya:
Shattered by an Arab Spring turned self-destructive, the country is a hotbed of Islamism and fundamentalist thinking.


Egypt:
The Sisi coup overthrew an elected government overwhelmingly represented by the Muslim Brotherhood. The Brotherhood, if you don't remember, is the father of modern Islamism and its many incarnations. ISIS and its like are now very active in the Sinai, and regularly orchestrate terrorist outbursts around this very conservative country. The Copts, an ancient Christian sect, are constantly under dhimmatude pressures.


Nigeria:
Boko Haram, an ISIS affiliate, has waged war in Northern Nigeria for 10 years. 17,000 dead and 2 million homeless, as this group attempts to subjugate non-Muslim Nigeria, while ruthlessly controlling the Muslim "region of peace".


Lebanon:
54% Muslim (half Sunni, half Shia) and 40% Christian, this country is divided along many fault lines, all active. The government has been usurped by Hezbollah, an extremist puppet of Iran, which runs its own government and army within the country. As the BBC reports (Five missing Czechs found in Lebanon, 2/1/2016), “Some areas of the Bekaa Valley, east of the capital Beirut, are notorious for lawlessness and drug trafficking.” Lebanon is also a Palestinian hotbed, where hundreds of thousands of Palestinians are confined to squalid, lawless refugee camps and denied citizenship. Don't look for moderation here any time soon.


Jordan:
Like Morocco, moderate on the surface, but with a seething fundamentalist undercurrent that probably represents 50% of the population. The Palestinian majority is disenfranchised by the Hashemite monarchy.


Syria:
Multiple ethnicities and Muslim sects had been ruthlessly ruled by a small Alewite minority for decades. That control continues to crumble after 5 years of civil war, now driven by a host of competing Islamist militias. Perhaps exhaustion, but not moderation will follow in the wake of this disastrous conflict in which hundreds of thousands have died.


Saudi Arabia:
Ruled by the Saudi family which follows an extremist version of Islam, Wahhabism, there may be dreams of moderation here, but the prevailing ideology is not very different from ISIS.


Turkey:
Once the paragon of a Muslim secular nation, the country took a sharp right turn in 2002, electing the AKP, an Islamist party that has slowly implemented a deeply conservative, anti-Western agenda. Traveling through Anatolia in 1977 I was stunned by the degree of conservatism that prevailed outside of the 3 main cities. I recorded those thoughts in a short story, 'A Pilgrimmage (sic) to Mecca', which I renamed 'A Pilgrimmage to Jerusalem' so as not to offend Muslim sensibilities. That conservatism has only expanded its hold since them. The country has harshly suppressed a Kurdish separatist movement and insurgency, at the cost of over 40,000 deaths, 4000 destroyed villages, and a half a million to a million Kurds forcibly evacuated. Outside of Istanbul and Ankara, don't look for moderation here.


Iraq:
I don't need to tell you about this disaster and the extremism that prevails through innumerable religious, ethnic, and social fault lines. Genocide and ethnic cleansing leave a deeply scarred society.


Iran:
Self-proclaimed leader of the rise of fundamentalist Islam since the revolution in 1977, this country has promoted anti-Western, anti-Semitic, anti-Zionist hatred and violence as a core organizing principle of its ideology. A secular, democratic undercurrent has been harshly suppressed, but Western optimists continue to hope for a successful counter-revolution. I share that hope without optimism.


Afghanistan:
Extremist to the bone. Period. And it has been like that for hundreds of years.


Pakistan:
Quickly rejecting a secular path after its establishment in 1947, Pakistan has progressively implemented the dhimma. Christians and other minority faiths and sects live in danger, having suffered numerous pogroms and suicide bombings. Blasphemy laws are commonly used to oppress the Christian minority along with liberal Muslims. Now, like Afghanistan, large tracts of this country are outside any central rule, and are governed by local Islamist warlords.


Bangladesh:
Aspires towards moderation.


Indonesia:
The most populous Muslim country in the world, it is a working, pluralist democracy. "Most Indonesian Muslims are probably conservative in their beliefs and practices, but don't think they need to vote for a Muslim party or politician to live in the society they prefer," said R William Liddle, a political science professor at Ohio State University, who studies Indonesia. (Al Jazeera, 12 May, 2014)


A Few More Sources:


World Almanac of Islamism:
http://almanac.afpc.org
Institute for Social Policy and Understanding: The Moroccan Path to Islamism,
http://www.ispu.org/pdfs/ISPU_Brief_MorPath-4.pdfThe Middle East Institute:
http://www.mei.edu/
MEMRI, The Middle East Media Research Institute:
http://www.memri.org/
Al Monitor, the pulse of the Middle East
http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/home.html


4. Selected Infographics:

Estimates of Islamist activity:














Wife Must Obey Husband - Percentage that Disagree

















Preferences for Women's Dress:





















Don't Teach Children Other Religions:

















Don't Criticize Religious Leaders:

















Don't Allow Criticism of Islam: