Download Rabbi YY's New AppAccess thousands of Rabbi YY's classes - anytime, anywhere!
The Origins of Anxiety
G-d’s Impossible, Beautiful Plan for Creation
- October 7, 2014
- |
- 13 Tishrei 5775
Rabbi YY Jacobson
26 views
The Origins of Anxiety
G-d’s Impossible, Beautiful Plan for Creation
Rabbi YY Jacobson
- October 7, 2014
Summary:
It is feature of the Creation story that has been debated for literally millennia: The Torah gives not one, but two accounts of the story, and gives the Creator a different name in each. In the first chapter He is Elokim; in the second He is Havaye.
Our Sages explain, that two different energies were employed in Creation. He originally considered to create the universe with His strict sense of justice (Elokim). In the end, say the Sages, He actually created it with a more compromising sense of compassion.
But what could this possibly mean? Why did G-d start out with one plan, only to abandon it? And if the verse clearly says, when using the name of midas hadin, that “G-d created”, how can the Sages claim that was nothing more than a plan?
The extraordinary solution of the Sefas Emes explains how the initial plan for creation indeed lives on in the human psyche. The sermon explains the origin of our anxiety and why we are always frustrated when we observe imperfection. Healthy, productive, rewarding marriages have been derailed by the most insignificant of details. A couple might be on a vacation on some beautiful tropical island, spending a few glorious days in paradise, but if they get into a fight? Then it’s all over - that’s all they can think about. In fact, researchers who spend time with couples charting the amount of time they spent fighting and interacting positively found that in order for a marriage to thrive, there must be five times more positive interaction than negative ones
Through the fascinating findings of modern cognitive science, we learn how to view the competing forces of idealism, perfectionism, compromise, and flexibility. Finally, some of these insights are employed to understand a strange Talmudic dispute, and a baffling claim by the school of Shammai.
The sermon tells the story of one man who stopped the German Blitz from defeating Britain in 1940. How did he do it? By developing an appreciation for imperfection. He said: “Give them the third best to go on with; the second best comes too late, the best never comes.”
As we begin a new year, and we take on resolutions for a new beginning, the first two chapters of Genesis provide a blueprint for how to navigate the paradox of wanting to conquer the world and realizing that we can’t even conquer our drinking or eating addiction.
To Kvetsch
A Jewish man in a hospital tells the doctor he wants to be transferred to a different hospital.
The doctor says "What's wrong? Is it the food?"
"No, the food is fine. I can't kvetch."
"Is it the room?"
"No, the room is fine. I can't kvetch."
"Is it the staff?"
"No, everyone on the staff is fine. I can't kvetch."
"Then why do you want to be transferred?"
"Over there I can kvetch!"
Two Accounts
Bible critics have often used the opening chapter of the Hebrew Bible to “prove” that the text had multiple authors. The most glaring example was the first two chapters of the Torah. In the first chapter, G-d is called “Elokim.” In the second chapter, He acquires a new name: Yud-Hei-Vuv-Hei, Havye, which we pronounce as: A-do-noi.
The opening verse of the entire Torah, Genesis 1:1, reads:
בראשית א, א: בְּרֵאשִׁית בָּרָא אֱלֹהִים אֵת הַשָּׁמַיִם וְאֵת הָאָרֶץ.
In the beginning Elokim, G-d, created the heavens and the earth.
But then, the second chapter of Genesis reads:[1]
בראשית ב, ד: אֵלֶּה תוֹלְדוֹת הַשָּׁמַיִם וְהָאָרֶץ בְּהִבָּרְאָם בְּיוֹם עֲשׂוֹת יְהֹוָה אֱלֹהִים אֶרֶץ וְשָׁמָיִם.
These are the chronicles of the heaven and the earth, having been created on the day that Hashem Elokim, the Lord G-d, made earth and heaven.
At first, only the name Elokim is used, but just a few lines into second chapter, we suddenly learn of a new player in the cosmos! Suddenly G-d is referred to by his ineffable four letter name, the Tetragrammaton, or Havaye, as it is sometimes referred to. Now He is Hashem Elokim!”
Obviously, the Bible critics argue, these two chapters were authored by two separate people. They miss the point. The Bible was not meant to serve only as a factual chronicle of ancient tales, but as a blueprint for human living. If paradox, tension and contrasts are intrinsic to human existence, they must pervade the pages of the Bible, whose tales and stories are to be understood also as metaphors embodying the timeless journeys of the ambiguous human spirit.
Instead of approaching the Bible with intellectual subtlety and existential depth, many critics employed shallow and narrow methodology to judge the Bible, depriving themselves and us of its profound richness.
Justice and Compassion
The great 11th century French biblical commentator Rashi, quotes the 2000 year old Midrash Rabbah,[2] examining the above inconsistency, millennia before the school of bible criticism was founded.
רש"י בראשית א, א: ברא אלקים—ולא אמר ברא ה', שבתחלה עלה במחשבה לבראתו במדת הדין, ראה שאין העולם מתקיים, הקדים מדת רחמים ושתפה למדת הדין, היינו דכתיב (להלן ב, ד) ביום עשות ה' אלקים ארץ ושמים:
The two names of G-d in question—the Tetragrammaton Havaye and the name Elokim—represent two modes in which G-d operates the universe. The name Havaye connotes “midas harachamim,” the attribute of compassion, empathy, and flexibility. The name Elokim represents “midas hadin,”” the characteristic of justice, strictness, perfectionism. One is the Divine Standard of Justice, the other the Divine Standard of Mercy. The use of these names is always deliberate, and matches the context in which it is used.
This, say the rabbis, is the reason for the name change G-d undergoes in the first two chapters of Genesis. G-d, explain the sages, first intended to create the world according to His Standard of perfection and Justice, with the name Elokim. That is why that name is used in the opening verse of Genesis: “In the beginning Elokim created heaven and hearth.” Then He saw the world won’t survive; so He decided on option two: to employ His Standard of Mercy. That is why in the second chapter, the new name, Hashem, is employed.
Two Questions
Yet their explanation is completely incomprehensible. For starters: The Torah states, “In the beginning Elokim CREATED heaven and earth.” It does not say, that Elokim intended to create heaven and earth; it states that Elokim actually did so. How can the sages seemingly distort the simple reading of the verse?
What is more, why would G-d have to change his mind? I change my mind when I realize (or my wife shows me…) that I have misjudged a situation. Sometimes I am dumb and when I am smart enough to realize how dumb I am, I change my mind. Granted. But why is the infinite Creator changing His mind? Are we to think that G-d also makes mistakes (c”v)? He planned on doing one thing, and then He realized, it won’t work out, so He chose an opposite path?
The Explanation of Sefas Emes
It was the great Chassidic master Rabbi Yehuda Aryeh Leib Alter (1847-1905), the second Rebbe of Ger, known as the Sefas emes, who provides a lovely and profound insight.[3]
וקשה דהא כתיב ברא, משמע שכך הוא, ואיך כ' רש"י שכך עלה במחשבה. ותו וכי יש ח"ו שינוי במחשבת הבורא יתברך? אמנם באופן זה ברא הבורא יתברך להיות רצון ומחשבת האדם לעשות הכל ע"פ מידת הדין ממש כרצונו יתב'. הגם כי בפועל אי אפשר לעשות ממש כרצונו יתב' מטעם שעולם העשי' אין בו השלימות וצריך להשתתפות מדה"ר, עם כל זה השיתוף בא ע"י המחשבה והרצון לעשות כרצונו יתברך וכו'.
When the Torah says that Elokim created Heaven and Earth, and the Sages explain that to mean that it was G-d’s plan to create the world that way, they did not mean that He did not do so in actuality. What they meant was that G-d, by planning to create the world with the attribute of ideal and perfect justice, actually created our condition to follow the same pattern: We, too, plan to create perfect and ideal realities.
The Ambition for Perfection
Who of us does not have to deal with the dissonance between our dreams and our reality, between our plans and its execution? Before any undertaking, or any event, we crave and aim for perfection. It might be planning for a dream wedding, or for a perfect Bar Mitzvah or Bat Mitzvah, the best website, a perfectly streamlined company, or organization, a flawless home, or looking Mr. Right. We spend months, even years, dreaming, planning, calculating and saving.
Almost all of us entertain these images of perfection. And in real life, reality almost never lives up to it. That’s the funny thing about dreams: they aren’t real. There is no such thing as perfect person, or spouse, or teacher, or contractor, or bar mitzvah, or business. You are not perfect, nor are your employees, your partners, your programmers, and your investors.
We know this to be the case, but we still get frustrated. Regardless of past experience, and for all of our cynical understanding of the ways of the world, we will continue to position ourselves for inevitable disappointment.
After an event is over, once your company or website is functioning, or after you’ve delivered a speech or performance after weeks of preparation, all you think about are the things that went wrong. How many mistakes you made, or all the things you forgot to mention, and how far off schedule you were. You will be furious with the caterer who served the soup lukewarm, or forgot to deliver the meat to the last table. You are upset at the florist, who forgot the tulips; and you are upset at yourself for forgetting an important detail.
At a kosher restaurant, the waiter was walking from table to table, asking one question: Is anything alright?...
On one of the airlines, every time New Year and Chanukah season arrive, the captain announces: we welcome all of you to the airplane. To all those who are sitting, happy new year; to all those who are standing—happy Chanukah.
A young woman went to her doctor complaining of pain.
"Where are you hurting?" asked the doctor.
"You have to help me, I hurt all over", said the woman.
"What do you mean, all over?" asked the doctor, "be a little more specific."
The woman touched her right knee with her index finger and yelled, "Ow, that hurts." Then she touched her left cheek and again yelled, "Ouch! That hurts, too." Then she touched her right earlobe, "Ow, even THAT hurts", she cried.
The doctor checked her thoughtfully for a moment and told her his diagnosis, "You have a broken finger."
Negativity Bias
This fixation on perfection, hard wired into our brains as it is, can take a heavy emotional and psychological toll. Psychologists have observed time and time again, that the mind is drawn to perceiving and responding more strongly to negative events than positive ones. A few years ago, researchers at Ohio State University, led by psychologist Rick Hanson, measuring electrical activity in the brain - the cerebral cortex, to be more precise - discovered that when shown a series of positive and negative images, people will invariably have stronger reactions to the negative images.
This effect, termed “negativity bias” by cognitive scientists explains why negative events always seem to bother us more than positive one. We pay attention more to bad news in the papers. Who wants to only hear good news?!
Healthy, productive, rewarding marriages have been derailed by the most insignificant of details. A couple might be on a vacation on some beautiful tropical island, spending a few glorious days in paradise, but if they get into a fight? Then it’s all over - that’s all they can think about. In fact, researchers who spend time with couples charting the amount of time they spent fighting and interacting positively found that in order for a marriage to thrive, there must be five times more positive interaction than negative ones.[4]
But if all we care about is perfection, and living some dream life, then the second we don’t meet that expectation, then we may as well throw it all out the window. Never mind that no-one is perfect, or that marriages take hard work, or that even the most beautiful beaches have that annoying sand that gets stuck in your shoes. It has to be just right!
Where does this attitude come from?
Copying G-d
According the Sfas Emes, this is all a result of the opening verse of Genesis. “In the beginning Elokim created heaven and earth,” as the Rabbis explain, “in the beginning G-d, Elokim, had the initial thought of creating a universe with the attribute of Elokim, perfect idealism.” What this means is this: G-d created the world in a way that THE INITIAL THOUGHT AND PLANNING of every endeavor should be governed by “midas hadin,” by an ideal, uncompromised, perfect vision of reality. G-d planned the world to be perfect, and by doing so, He created a world in which we too plan it to be perfect. Our tendency for perfection is a vestige of the earliest stirrings of Creation: We mirror G-d. We start every project with an idealised vision of our goal, because that is what G-d did. His plan for the world was of an ideal universe; and man created in His image nurtures the same sentiments: Our plan of any goal is infused by a desire for perfection.
Silverberg goes to consult a world-famous specialist in NY about his medical issues.
"So, doctor, what do I owe you?"
"My fee is $20,000," replies the physician.
"But that's impossible!?"
"OK, then -- in your case, " the doctor replies, "I suppose I could adjust my fee to 15,000 dollars."
"15ks for one visit!? Absurd!"
"Alright, then, can you afford 10k?"
"Who even has that kind of money?"
"Look," says the doctor, becoming quite irritated, "Just give me 5000 and
get out of here."
"I can give you two hundred dollars most," says Silverberg. "Take it or leave it!"
"I don't understand you," says the doctor. "Why did you shlepp all the way to the most expensive doctor in all of the US?"
"Listen, Doctor," Silverberg tries to explain, "When it comes to my health, nothing is too expensive!"
G-d’s Change
But of course, G-d did not stop there. After implanting this image of perfection into creation, he then incorporated the Divine Standard of flexibility and understanding. He combined this idealism with a spirit of compromise, and plasticity. The plan for creation was Elokim, Din, perfection; the reality of creation was governed by Haveya, by G-d’s attribute of plasticity and flexibility.
As a result, we too must embrace this innate disparity: In the planning stages, we employ the attribute of Elokim: We aim for the heavens. In reality, we ought to embrace the art of flexibility—embracing the truth that in an imperfect world, no dream is materialized in full perfection.
This is a critical second step. How many times have we thought to ourselves, or heard from our kids: Oh well, I’ll never get it right anyways, so why even try in the first place?
Or as Aristotle put it: Perfection is the enemy of progress. Those of us who wait for perfection, wait for eternity. Those of us who can’t forgive imperfection, are forever anxious and frustrated.
Learn from G-d: Plan for the ideal, aim for the heavens. But embrace imperfection as part of our journey to bring wholeness to a fragmented and flawed world.
Pony vs. Manure
Peter Robinson, the speechwriter responsible for President Ronald Reagan’s famous “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!” speech, wrote for two US presidents and spent a fair amount of time with them as well. In his admiring memoir of Reagan, he recalls a joke that the president was particularly fond of:
The joke concerns twin boys of five or six. Worried that the boys had developed extreme personalities — one was a total pessimist, the other a total optimist — their parents took them to a psychiatrist.
First the psychiatrist treated the pessimist. Trying to brighten his outlook, the psychiatrist took him to a room piled to the ceiling with brand-new toys. But instead of yelping with delight, the little boy burst into tears. “What’s the matter?” the psychiatrist asked, baffled. “Don’t you want to play with any of the toys?” “Yes,” the little boy bawled, “but if I did I’d only break them.”
Next the psychiatrist treated the optimist. Trying to dampen his outlook, the psychiatrist took him to a room piled to the ceiling with horse manure. But instead of wrinkling his nose in disgust, the optimist emitted just the yelp of delight the psychiatrist had been hoping to hear from his brother, the pessimist. Then he clambered to the top of the pile, dropped to his knees, and began gleefully digging out scoop after scoop with his bare hands. “What do you think you’re doing?” the psychiatrist asked, just as baffled by the optimist as he had been by the pessimist. “With all this manure,” the little boy replied, beaming, “there must be a pony in here somewhere!”
Radar and the Cult of the Imperfect
Sir Robert Watson-Watt (1892-1972), was a Scottish physicist credited with the development of radar in England. He was a brilliant inventor and pioneer of radar technology, who propounded an idea he referred to as the “Cult of the Imperfect”.
As military technology began to advance at a dizzying pace in the years following World War One, British intelligence officers soon realized the unprecedented threats that had come to face their island. In their estimate, the recent development of military aircraft meant that an enemy aircraft might be able to enter English airspace, drop a payload of munitions, turn around and leave all before an English plane had a chance to even get off the ground in order to engage it. After all, it was only 20 minutes by air to fly over the English Channel - the plane would even be able to return to its own base by then! Bombers could already fly above the range of anti-aircraft guns, so the only solution would have been to maintain a fleet of aircraft in the air at all times, a strategy that would have made for an enormous drain on the country’s military resources.
Enter Watson Watt. Watt, a descendant of the great inventor James Watt—after whom the “watt” unit of energy is named—realized that aircraft might be able to be detected at great distance, by bouncing radio waves off of them. In 1935, he wrote a secret memorandum to the British War Office, with his proposal. Just a few short years later, by the start of the War, the British had built a system of 19 radar radio towers along the coast, all before the Germans had realized what they were for.
Watson was criticized because of the inferior quality of his radar, which was of low frequency. He had limited resources and time and decided to develop what he can. Watson-Watt spoke of the importance of accepting the imperfect: “Give them the third best to go on with; the second best comes too late, the best never comes.” Or as they say today, “Done is better than perfect.”
Comes 1940. The German Blitz threatened all of Britain. The superior Luftwaffe of Nazi Germany would take the British Isles. It was the imperfect radar of Watson that managed to stop the Germans. It remains a feat marveled at by military and government organizers until today.
The Place of Perfection
Why then did G-d have to start off with the Standard of ideal perfection? Why start off posturing with rigid idealism if you’re bound to compromise anyway?
Because the story of Creation in its two opening chapters offers us a full example of how we are to live our lives. To live, one first needs to dream. Our dreams should be big and aspirations grand. At first, at least, we try aim for the strictest and loftiest standards; to be and to do the best that we can.
Then, we must have the maturity to understand that in reality, perfection doesn’t always play out so well. There must be that sense of rachamim, of compassion, the ability to compromise and adapt to real life. As we proceed and accomplish the goals we have set for ourselves, the good that we do must be recognized for what it is, and celebrated for it, not undermined for what it is not.
But all the while, the initial vision must be kept alive. That the vision has not become anything more than that is no cause for despair. Perhaps it is only ever destined to remain as such: The image of perfection, if only kept at the back of our minds, inspires us to push on, to aspire to greater heights; to not become totally satisfied with mediocrity, or settle into complacency. In time, our realities, though based on an awareness and acceptance of imperfection and mistakes, can inch slowly towards those guiding hopes and expectations.
The Rebbe’s Visions
I think of the Rebbe. His visions were grand: Change the world. Reach every Jew. Reach every human being. Don’t stop. Bring Moshiach! And yet if he would have waited for perfection, where would we be today?
If he would have waited for each of his shluchim, ambassadors, to be perfect, to be fully worthy of the mission—oy, would I be standing here today? As much as he aimed for the highest, he embraced the lowest! As much as he demanded and pushed for the infinite, he appreciated every move in the right direction, and every project as imperfect as it was, and each person trying to so something even if far from perfection.
Yet he never stopped teaching that we can do more. Life is the eternal tension between what can be and what is; between G-d’s initial thought and His actual creation.
Crabbing
Professor Victor Frankl (1905-1997) once addressed a large group of students. He said to them that he recently took up flying lessons and he learnt from his flight instructor a concept that pilots call “crabbing”. The definition of the word ‘crab’ in the context of flight “is a maneuver in which an aircraft is headed partly into the wind to compensate for drift.”
It means this: If your flight destination is a particular point say in the east, you should aim towards the north of that destination, so that you will land at your actual destination. If you aim at your destination, the cross winds will cause you to land south—lower—of your destination.
Frankl quoted the great German writer Johann Wolfgang von Goethe: “Treat a man as he appears to be, and you make him worse. But treat a man as if he were what he potentially could be, and you make him what he should be.”
If we take man as he really is, we make him actually worse. For there are powerful “winds” that can derail us of our course. But if we overestimate man, if we aim the peg for much much higher, than we promote him to what he really can be.
Optional:
Better Not Created
This understanding of the tension between realism and perfectionism also helps to explain a strange Talmudic passage[5]
ת''ר שתי שנים ומחצה נחלקו ב''ש וב''ה הללו אומרים נוח לו לאדם שלא נברא יותר משנברא והללו אומרים נוח לו לאדם שנברא יותר משלא נברא נמנו וגמרו נוח לו לאדם שלא נברא יותר משנברא עכשיו שנברא יפשפש במעשיו ואמרי לה ימשמש במעשיו.
For two-and-a-half years, the School of Shammai and the School of Hillel debated. These said, "It is better for man not to have been created than to have been created"; and these said, "It is better for man to have been created than not to have been created."
Better to not have been created? Is it possible to envision a Judaism that views the creation of man as a negative phenomenon? Isn’t the basis of the Jewish faith the belief that human life is a meaningful, purposeful and joyous endeavor?
It seems difficult to reconcile what seems to be a depressingly cynical view of life with everything we know of Judaism.
Elsewhere, a detail in the account of Creation is said to have prompted another sharp debate between the schools of Shammai and Hillel, also recorded in the Talmud.[6] The earlier verse - actually the first - refers to G-d creating the “heavens and the earth,” implying that the heavens came first. The later verse - in the second reading - refers to, “the chronicles of the earth and the heavens.” So which is it?
ת''ר ב''ש אומרים שמים נבראו תחלה ואח''כ נבראת הארץ שנאמר בראשית ברא אלהים את השמים ואת הארץ וב''ה אומרים ארץ נבראת תחלה ואח''כ שמים שנאמר {בראשית ב-ד} ביום עשות ה' אלהים ארץ ושמים.
Our Rabbis taught: Beth Shammai say: Heaven was created first and afterwards the earth was created, for it is said: In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
Beth Hillel say: Earth was created first and afterwards heaven, for it is said: In the day that the Lord God made earth and heaven.
These two pieces of Talmud are directly related. It is a question of focus. For the School of Shammai, the heavenly, perfect, platonic ideal is the focus. That’s what comes first. Perhaps it is an unrealistic attitude, and maybe this vision is so ideal that is non-existent. But that that’s where the mind’s eye ought to be. We must never make peace with the imperfections, and the problems of the world. Rather, seek out those imperfections, and try to repair them, and to elevate them to your loftier vision.
Not that it is better to not be created. Instead, read: “That which is not created, is better.” That which is not created is to be the focus of our aspiration.
But the School of Hillel provides an important corrective to this perspective: That which is created is best. Never forget to cherish and embrace what we have, and what we have accomplished. This is the reality we have, and the one we must work with. Be prepared to have rachamim; have some compassion, be prepared to compromise. If we are to live in this world, and try to have any effect on it, we must first embrace it.
A New Beginning
In a way, on Shabbos Bereishis, as this Shabbos is referred to, is when the year starts in earnest. After the intense spiritual energy of the High Holidays, and the unbridled joy of Sukkos and Simchas Torah, now we can finally settle in to the cycle of normal life. Our return to the beginning of the Torah, and the account of the very beginnings of Time and Creation, prompts us to consider our own new beginning. We might lay out some goals and objectives for the coming year, or recommit ourselves to becoming to people we would like to be. And it starts this Shabbos. As the saying goes, “As one sets out on Shabbos Bereishis, so do they set out for the entire year.”
As we make our resolutions for a new awesome year, we ought to recall both these names and visions of G-d: Our vision must be as grand as can be. Do not settle for small things. Aim for the greatest. In all aspects. Yet do not get frustrated and beat yourself up with setbacks and imperfections. Embrace each movement, as imperfect as it may be, and move on! [7]
It’s like that Jewish optimist who was sitting with the Jewish pessimist. The pessimist sighs, half to himself, and half to his optimist friend.
“Oy,” he says, “things couldn’t be any worse.”
“Sure they could!” says the optimist.
- Comment
Class Summary:
It is a feature of the Creation story that has been debated for literally millennia: The Torah gives not one, but two accounts of the story, and gives the Creator a different name in each. In the first chapter He is Elokim; in the second He is Havaye.
Our Sages explain, that two different energies were employed in Creation. He originally considered to create the universe with His strict sense of justice (Elokim). In the end, say the Sages, He actually created it with a more compromising sense of compassion.
But what could this possibly mean? Why did G-d start out with one plan, only to abandon it? And if the verse clearly says, when using the name of midas hadin, that “G-d created”, how can the Sages claim that was nothing more than a plan?
The extraordinary solution of the Sefas Emes explains how the initial plan for creation indeed lives on in the human psyche. The sermon explains the origin of our anxiety and why we are always frustrated when we observe imperfection.
Healthy, productive, rewarding marriages have been derailed by the most insignificant of details. A couple might be on a vacation on some beautiful tropical island, spending a few glorious days in paradise, but if they get into a fight? Then it’s all over - that’s all they can think about. In fact, researchers who spend time with couples charting the amount of time they spent fighting and interacting positively found that in order for a marriage to thrive, there must be five times more positive interaction than negative ones
Through the fascinating findings of modern cognitive science, we learn how to view the competing forces of idealism, perfectionism, compromise, and flexibility. Finally, some of these insights are employed to understand a strange Talmudic dispute, and a baffling claim by the school of Shammai.
The sermon tells the story of one man who stopped the German Blitz from defeating Britain in 1940. How did he do it? By developing an appreciation for imperfection. He said: “Give them the third best to go on with; the second best comes too late, the best never comes.”
As we begin a new year, and we take on resolutions for a new beginning, the first two chapters of Genesis provide a blueprint for how to navigate the paradox of wanting to conquer the world and realizing that we can’t even conquer our drinking or eating addiction.
Summary:
It is feature of the Creation story that has been debated for literally millennia: The Torah gives not one, but two accounts of the story, and gives the Creator a different name in each. In the first chapter He is Elokim; in the second He is Havaye.
Our Sages explain, that two different energies were employed in Creation. He originally considered to create the universe with His strict sense of justice (Elokim). In the end, say the Sages, He actually created it with a more compromising sense of compassion.
But what could this possibly mean? Why did G-d start out with one plan, only to abandon it? And if the verse clearly says, when using the name of midas hadin, that “G-d created”, how can the Sages claim that was nothing more than a plan?
The extraordinary solution of the Sefas Emes explains how the initial plan for creation indeed lives on in the human psyche. The sermon explains the origin of our anxiety and why we are always frustrated when we observe imperfection. Healthy, productive, rewarding marriages have been derailed by the most insignificant of details. A couple might be on a vacation on some beautiful tropical island, spending a few glorious days in paradise, but if they get into a fight? Then it’s all over - that’s all they can think about. In fact, researchers who spend time with couples charting the amount of time they spent fighting and interacting positively found that in order for a marriage to thrive, there must be five times more positive interaction than negative ones
Through the fascinating findings of modern cognitive science, we learn how to view the competing forces of idealism, perfectionism, compromise, and flexibility. Finally, some of these insights are employed to understand a strange Talmudic dispute, and a baffling claim by the school of Shammai.
The sermon tells the story of one man who stopped the German Blitz from defeating Britain in 1940. How did he do it? By developing an appreciation for imperfection. He said: “Give them the third best to go on with; the second best comes too late, the best never comes.”
As we begin a new year, and we take on resolutions for a new beginning, the first two chapters of Genesis provide a blueprint for how to navigate the paradox of wanting to conquer the world and realizing that we can’t even conquer our drinking or eating addiction.
To Kvetsch
A Jewish man in a hospital tells the doctor he wants to be transferred to a different hospital.
The doctor says "What's wrong? Is it the food?"
"No, the food is fine. I can't kvetch."
"Is it the room?"
"No, the room is fine. I can't kvetch."
"Is it the staff?"
"No, everyone on the staff is fine. I can't kvetch."
"Then why do you want to be transferred?"
"Over there I can kvetch!"
Two Accounts
Bible critics have often used the opening chapter of the Hebrew Bible to “prove” that the text had multiple authors. The most glaring example was the first two chapters of the Torah. In the first chapter, G-d is called “Elokim.” In the second chapter, He acquires a new name: Yud-Hei-Vuv-Hei, Havye, which we pronounce as: A-do-noi.
The opening verse of the entire Torah, Genesis 1:1, reads:
בראשית א, א: בְּרֵאשִׁית בָּרָא אֱלֹהִים אֵת הַשָּׁמַיִם וְאֵת הָאָרֶץ.
In the beginning Elokim, G-d, created the heavens and the earth.
But then, the second chapter of Genesis reads:[1]
בראשית ב, ד: אֵלֶּה תוֹלְדוֹת הַשָּׁמַיִם וְהָאָרֶץ בְּהִבָּרְאָם בְּיוֹם עֲשׂוֹת יְהֹוָה אֱלֹהִים אֶרֶץ וְשָׁמָיִם.
These are the chronicles of the heaven and the earth, having been created on the day that Hashem Elokim, the Lord G-d, made earth and heaven.
At first, only the name Elokim is used, but just a few lines into second chapter, we suddenly learn of a new player in the cosmos! Suddenly G-d is referred to by his ineffable four letter name, the Tetragrammaton, or Havaye, as it is sometimes referred to. Now He is Hashem Elokim!”
Obviously, the Bible critics argue, these two chapters were authored by two separate people. They miss the point. The Bible was not meant to serve only as a factual chronicle of ancient tales, but as a blueprint for human living. If paradox, tension and contrasts are intrinsic to human existence, they must pervade the pages of the Bible, whose tales and stories are to be understood also as metaphors embodying the timeless journeys of the ambiguous human spirit.
Instead of approaching the Bible with intellectual subtlety and existential depth, many critics employed shallow and narrow methodology to judge the Bible, depriving themselves and us of its profound richness.
Justice and Compassion
The great 11th century French biblical commentator Rashi, quotes the 2000 year old Midrash Rabbah,[2] examining the above inconsistency, millennia before the school of bible criticism was founded.
רש"י בראשית א, א: ברא אלקים—ולא אמר ברא ה', שבתחלה עלה במחשבה לבראתו במדת הדין, ראה שאין העולם מתקיים, הקדים מדת רחמים ושתפה למדת הדין, היינו דכתיב (להלן ב, ד) ביום עשות ה' אלקים ארץ ושמים:
The two names of G-d in question—the Tetragrammaton Havaye and the name Elokim—represent two modes in which G-d operates the universe. The name Havaye connotes “midas harachamim,” the attribute of compassion, empathy, and flexibility. The name Elokim represents “midas hadin,”” the characteristic of justice, strictness, perfectionism. One is the Divine Standard of Justice, the other the Divine Standard of Mercy. The use of these names is always deliberate, and matches the context in which it is used.
This, say the rabbis, is the reason for the name change G-d undergoes in the first two chapters of Genesis. G-d, explain the sages, first intended to create the world according to His Standard of perfection and Justice, with the name Elokim. That is why that name is used in the opening verse of Genesis: “In the beginning Elokim created heaven and hearth.” Then He saw the world won’t survive; so He decided on option two: to employ His Standard of Mercy. That is why in the second chapter, the new name, Hashem, is employed.
Two Questions
Yet their explanation is completely incomprehensible. For starters: The Torah states, “In the beginning Elokim CREATED heaven and earth.” It does not say, that Elokim intended to create heaven and earth; it states that Elokim actually did so. How can the sages seemingly distort the simple reading of the verse?
What is more, why would G-d have to change his mind? I change my mind when I realize (or my wife shows me…) that I have misjudged a situation. Sometimes I am dumb and when I am smart enough to realize how dumb I am, I change my mind. Granted. But why is the infinite Creator changing His mind? Are we to think that G-d also makes mistakes (c”v)? He planned on doing one thing, and then He realized, it won’t work out, so He chose an opposite path?
The Explanation of Sefas Emes
It was the great Chassidic master Rabbi Yehuda Aryeh Leib Alter (1847-1905), the second Rebbe of Ger, known as the Sefas emes, who provides a lovely and profound insight.[3]
וקשה דהא כתיב ברא, משמע שכך הוא, ואיך כ' רש"י שכך עלה במחשבה. ותו וכי יש ח"ו שינוי במחשבת הבורא יתברך? אמנם באופן זה ברא הבורא יתברך להיות רצון ומחשבת האדם לעשות הכל ע"פ מידת הדין ממש כרצונו יתב'. הגם כי בפועל אי אפשר לעשות ממש כרצונו יתב' מטעם שעולם העשי' אין בו השלימות וצריך להשתתפות מדה"ר, עם כל זה השיתוף בא ע"י המחשבה והרצון לעשות כרצונו יתברך וכו'.
When the Torah says that Elokim created Heaven and Earth, and the Sages explain that to mean that it was G-d’s plan to create the world that way, they did not mean that He did not do so in actuality. What they meant was that G-d, by planning to create the world with the attribute of ideal and perfect justice, actually created our condition to follow the same pattern: We, too, plan to create perfect and ideal realities.
The Ambition for Perfection
Who of us does not have to deal with the dissonance between our dreams and our reality, between our plans and its execution? Before any undertaking, or any event, we crave and aim for perfection. It might be planning for a dream wedding, or for a perfect Bar Mitzvah or Bat Mitzvah, the best website, a perfectly streamlined company, or organization, a flawless home, or looking Mr. Right. We spend months, even years, dreaming, planning, calculating and saving.
Almost all of us entertain these images of perfection. And in real life, reality almost never lives up to it. That’s the funny thing about dreams: they aren’t real. There is no such thing as perfect person, or spouse, or teacher, or contractor, or bar mitzvah, or business. You are not perfect, nor are your employees, your partners, your programmers, and your investors.
We know this to be the case, but we still get frustrated. Regardless of past experience, and for all of our cynical understanding of the ways of the world, we will continue to position ourselves for inevitable disappointment.
After an event is over, once your company or website is functioning, or after you’ve delivered a speech or performance after weeks of preparation, all you think about are the things that went wrong. How many mistakes you made, or all the things you forgot to mention, and how far off schedule you were. You will be furious with the caterer who served the soup lukewarm, or forgot to deliver the meat to the last table. You are upset at the florist, who forgot the tulips; and you are upset at yourself for forgetting an important detail.
At a kosher restaurant, the waiter was walking from table to table, asking one question: Is anything alright?...
On one of the airlines, every time New Year and Chanukah season arrive, the captain announces: we welcome all of you to the airplane. To all those who are sitting, happy new year; to all those who are standing—happy Chanukah.
A young woman went to her doctor complaining of pain.
"Where are you hurting?" asked the doctor.
"You have to help me, I hurt all over", said the woman.
"What do you mean, all over?" asked the doctor, "be a little more specific."
The woman touched her right knee with her index finger and yelled, "Ow, that hurts." Then she touched her left cheek and again yelled, "Ouch! That hurts, too." Then she touched her right earlobe, "Ow, even THAT hurts", she cried.
The doctor checked her thoughtfully for a moment and told her his diagnosis, "You have a broken finger."
Negativity Bias
This fixation on perfection, hard wired into our brains as it is, can take a heavy emotional and psychological toll. Psychologists have observed time and time again, that the mind is drawn to perceiving and responding more strongly to negative events than positive ones. A few years ago, researchers at Ohio State University, led by psychologist Rick Hanson, measuring electrical activity in the brain - the cerebral cortex, to be more precise - discovered that when shown a series of positive and negative images, people will invariably have stronger reactions to the negative images.
This effect, termed “negativity bias” by cognitive scientists explains why negative events always seem to bother us more than positive one. We pay attention more to bad news in the papers. Who wants to only hear good news?!
Healthy, productive, rewarding marriages have been derailed by the most insignificant of details. A couple might be on a vacation on some beautiful tropical island, spending a few glorious days in paradise, but if they get into a fight? Then it’s all over - that’s all they can think about. In fact, researchers who spend time with couples charting the amount of time they spent fighting and interacting positively found that in order for a marriage to thrive, there must be five times more positive interaction than negative ones.[4]
But if all we care about is perfection, and living some dream life, then the second we don’t meet that expectation, then we may as well throw it all out the window. Never mind that no-one is perfect, or that marriages take hard work, or that even the most beautiful beaches have that annoying sand that gets stuck in your shoes. It has to be just right!
Where does this attitude come from?
Copying G-d
According the Sfas Emes, this is all a result of the opening verse of Genesis. “In the beginning Elokim created heaven and earth,” as the Rabbis explain, “in the beginning G-d, Elokim, had the initial thought of creating a universe with the attribute of Elokim, perfect idealism.” What this means is this: G-d created the world in a way that THE INITIAL THOUGHT AND PLANNING of every endeavor should be governed by “midas hadin,” by an ideal, uncompromised, perfect vision of reality. G-d planned the world to be perfect, and by doing so, He created a world in which we too plan it to be perfect. Our tendency for perfection is a vestige of the earliest stirrings of Creation: We mirror G-d. We start every project with an idealised vision of our goal, because that is what G-d did. His plan for the world was of an ideal universe; and man created in His image nurtures the same sentiments: Our plan of any goal is infused by a desire for perfection.
Silverberg goes to consult a world-famous specialist in NY about his medical issues.
"So, doctor, what do I owe you?"
"My fee is $20,000," replies the physician.
"But that's impossible!?"
"OK, then -- in your case, " the doctor replies, "I suppose I could adjust my fee to 15,000 dollars."
"15ks for one visit!? Absurd!"
"Alright, then, can you afford 10k?"
"Who even has that kind of money?"
"Look," says the doctor, becoming quite irritated, "Just give me 5000 and
get out of here."
"I can give you two hundred dollars most," says Silverberg. "Take it or leave it!"
"I don't understand you," says the doctor. "Why did you shlepp all the way to the most expensive doctor in all of the US?"
"Listen, Doctor," Silverberg tries to explain, "When it comes to my health, nothing is too expensive!"
G-d’s Change
But of course, G-d did not stop there. After implanting this image of perfection into creation, he then incorporated the Divine Standard of flexibility and understanding. He combined this idealism with a spirit of compromise, and plasticity. The plan for creation was Elokim, Din, perfection; the reality of creation was governed by Haveya, by G-d’s attribute of plasticity and flexibility.
As a result, we too must embrace this innate disparity: In the planning stages, we employ the attribute of Elokim: We aim for the heavens. In reality, we ought to embrace the art of flexibility—embracing the truth that in an imperfect world, no dream is materialized in full perfection.
This is a critical second step. How many times have we thought to ourselves, or heard from our kids: Oh well, I’ll never get it right anyways, so why even try in the first place?
Or as Aristotle put it: Perfection is the enemy of progress. Those of us who wait for perfection, wait for eternity. Those of us who can’t forgive imperfection, are forever anxious and frustrated.
Learn from G-d: Plan for the ideal, aim for the heavens. But embrace imperfection as part of our journey to bring wholeness to a fragmented and flawed world.
Pony vs. Manure
Peter Robinson, the speechwriter responsible for President Ronald Reagan’s famous “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!” speech, wrote for two US presidents and spent a fair amount of time with them as well. In his admiring memoir of Reagan, he recalls a joke that the president was particularly fond of:
The joke concerns twin boys of five or six. Worried that the boys had developed extreme personalities — one was a total pessimist, the other a total optimist — their parents took them to a psychiatrist.
First the psychiatrist treated the pessimist. Trying to brighten his outlook, the psychiatrist took him to a room piled to the ceiling with brand-new toys. But instead of yelping with delight, the little boy burst into tears. “What’s the matter?” the psychiatrist asked, baffled. “Don’t you want to play with any of the toys?” “Yes,” the little boy bawled, “but if I did I’d only break them.”
Next the psychiatrist treated the optimist. Trying to dampen his outlook, the psychiatrist took him to a room piled to the ceiling with horse manure. But instead of wrinkling his nose in disgust, the optimist emitted just the yelp of delight the psychiatrist had been hoping to hear from his brother, the pessimist. Then he clambered to the top of the pile, dropped to his knees, and began gleefully digging out scoop after scoop with his bare hands. “What do you think you’re doing?” the psychiatrist asked, just as baffled by the optimist as he had been by the pessimist. “With all this manure,” the little boy replied, beaming, “there must be a pony in here somewhere!”
Radar and the Cult of the Imperfect
Sir Robert Watson-Watt (1892-1972), was a Scottish physicist credited with the development of radar in England. He was a brilliant inventor and pioneer of radar technology, who propounded an idea he referred to as the “Cult of the Imperfect”.
As military technology began to advance at a dizzying pace in the years following World War One, British intelligence officers soon realized the unprecedented threats that had come to face their island. In their estimate, the recent development of military aircraft meant that an enemy aircraft might be able to enter English airspace, drop a payload of munitions, turn around and leave all before an English plane had a chance to even get off the ground in order to engage it. After all, it was only 20 minutes by air to fly over the English Channel - the plane would even be able to return to its own base by then! Bombers could already fly above the range of anti-aircraft guns, so the only solution would have been to maintain a fleet of aircraft in the air at all times, a strategy that would have made for an enormous drain on the country’s military resources.
Enter Watson Watt. Watt, a descendant of the great inventor James Watt—after whom the “watt” unit of energy is named—realized that aircraft might be able to be detected at great distance, by bouncing radio waves off of them. In 1935, he wrote a secret memorandum to the British War Office, with his proposal. Just a few short years later, by the start of the War, the British had built a system of 19 radar radio towers along the coast, all before the Germans had realized what they were for.
Watson was criticized because of the inferior quality of his radar, which was of low frequency. He had limited resources and time and decided to develop what he can. Watson-Watt spoke of the importance of accepting the imperfect: “Give them the third best to go on with; the second best comes too late, the best never comes.” Or as they say today, “Done is better than perfect.”
Comes 1940. The German Blitz threatened all of Britain. The superior Luftwaffe of Nazi Germany would take the British Isles. It was the imperfect radar of Watson that managed to stop the Germans. It remains a feat marveled at by military and government organizers until today.
The Place of Perfection
Why then did G-d have to start off with the Standard of ideal perfection? Why start off posturing with rigid idealism if you’re bound to compromise anyway?
Because the story of Creation in its two opening chapters offers us a full example of how we are to live our lives. To live, one first needs to dream. Our dreams should be big and aspirations grand. At first, at least, we try aim for the strictest and loftiest standards; to be and to do the best that we can.
Then, we must have the maturity to understand that in reality, perfection doesn’t always play out so well. There must be that sense of rachamim, of compassion, the ability to compromise and adapt to real life. As we proceed and accomplish the goals we have set for ourselves, the good that we do must be recognized for what it is, and celebrated for it, not undermined for what it is not.
But all the while, the initial vision must be kept alive. That the vision has not become anything more than that is no cause for despair. Perhaps it is only ever destined to remain as such: The image of perfection, if only kept at the back of our minds, inspires us to push on, to aspire to greater heights; to not become totally satisfied with mediocrity, or settle into complacency. In time, our realities, though based on an awareness and acceptance of imperfection and mistakes, can inch slowly towards those guiding hopes and expectations.
The Rebbe’s Visions
I think of the Rebbe. His visions were grand: Change the world. Reach every Jew. Reach every human being. Don’t stop. Bring Moshiach! And yet if he would have waited for perfection, where would we be today?
If he would have waited for each of his shluchim, ambassadors, to be perfect, to be fully worthy of the mission—oy, would I be standing here today? As much as he aimed for the highest, he embraced the lowest! As much as he demanded and pushed for the infinite, he appreciated every move in the right direction, and every project as imperfect as it was, and each person trying to so something even if far from perfection.
Yet he never stopped teaching that we can do more. Life is the eternal tension between what can be and what is; between G-d’s initial thought and His actual creation.
Crabbing
Professor Victor Frankl (1905-1997) once addressed a large group of students. He said to them that he recently took up flying lessons and he learnt from his flight instructor a concept that pilots call “crabbing”. The definition of the word ‘crab’ in the context of flight “is a maneuver in which an aircraft is headed partly into the wind to compensate for drift.”
It means this: If your flight destination is a particular point say in the east, you should aim towards the north of that destination, so that you will land at your actual destination. If you aim at your destination, the cross winds will cause you to land south—lower—of your destination.
Frankl quoted the great German writer Johann Wolfgang von Goethe: “Treat a man as he appears to be, and you make him worse. But treat a man as if he were what he potentially could be, and you make him what he should be.”
If we take man as he really is, we make him actually worse. For there are powerful “winds” that can derail us of our course. But if we overestimate man, if we aim the peg for much much higher, than we promote him to what he really can be.
Optional:
Better Not Created
This understanding of the tension between realism and perfectionism also helps to explain a strange Talmudic passage[5]
ת''ר שתי שנים ומחצה נחלקו ב''ש וב''ה הללו אומרים נוח לו לאדם שלא נברא יותר משנברא והללו אומרים נוח לו לאדם שנברא יותר משלא נברא נמנו וגמרו נוח לו לאדם שלא נברא יותר משנברא עכשיו שנברא יפשפש במעשיו ואמרי לה ימשמש במעשיו.
For two-and-a-half years, the School of Shammai and the School of Hillel debated. These said, "It is better for man not to have been created than to have been created"; and these said, "It is better for man to have been created than not to have been created."
Better to not have been created? Is it possible to envision a Judaism that views the creation of man as a negative phenomenon? Isn’t the basis of the Jewish faith the belief that human life is a meaningful, purposeful and joyous endeavor?
It seems difficult to reconcile what seems to be a depressingly cynical view of life with everything we know of Judaism.
Elsewhere, a detail in the account of Creation is said to have prompted another sharp debate between the schools of Shammai and Hillel, also recorded in the Talmud.[6] The earlier verse - actually the first - refers to G-d creating the “heavens and the earth,” implying that the heavens came first. The later verse - in the second reading - refers to, “the chronicles of the earth and the heavens.” So which is it?
ת''ר ב''ש אומרים שמים נבראו תחלה ואח''כ נבראת הארץ שנאמר בראשית ברא אלהים את השמים ואת הארץ וב''ה אומרים ארץ נבראת תחלה ואח''כ שמים שנאמר {בראשית ב-ד} ביום עשות ה' אלהים ארץ ושמים.
Our Rabbis taught: Beth Shammai say: Heaven was created first and afterwards the earth was created, for it is said: In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
Beth Hillel say: Earth was created first and afterwards heaven, for it is said: In the day that the Lord God made earth and heaven.
These two pieces of Talmud are directly related. It is a question of focus. For the School of Shammai, the heavenly, perfect, platonic ideal is the focus. That’s what comes first. Perhaps it is an unrealistic attitude, and maybe this vision is so ideal that is non-existent. But that that’s where the mind’s eye ought to be. We must never make peace with the imperfections, and the problems of the world. Rather, seek out those imperfections, and try to repair them, and to elevate them to your loftier vision.
Not that it is better to not be created. Instead, read: “That which is not created, is better.” That which is not created is to be the focus of our aspiration.
But the School of Hillel provides an important corrective to this perspective: That which is created is best. Never forget to cherish and embrace what we have, and what we have accomplished. This is the reality we have, and the one we must work with. Be prepared to have rachamim; have some compassion, be prepared to compromise. If we are to live in this world, and try to have any effect on it, we must first embrace it.
A New Beginning
In a way, on Shabbos Bereishis, as this Shabbos is referred to, is when the year starts in earnest. After the intense spiritual energy of the High Holidays, and the unbridled joy of Sukkos and Simchas Torah, now we can finally settle in to the cycle of normal life. Our return to the beginning of the Torah, and the account of the very beginnings of Time and Creation, prompts us to consider our own new beginning. We might lay out some goals and objectives for the coming year, or recommit ourselves to becoming to people we would like to be. And it starts this Shabbos. As the saying goes, “As one sets out on Shabbos Bereishis, so do they set out for the entire year.”
As we make our resolutions for a new awesome year, we ought to recall both these names and visions of G-d: Our vision must be as grand as can be. Do not settle for small things. Aim for the greatest. In all aspects. Yet do not get frustrated and beat yourself up with setbacks and imperfections. Embrace each movement, as imperfect as it may be, and move on! [7]
It’s like that Jewish optimist who was sitting with the Jewish pessimist. The pessimist sighs, half to himself, and half to his optimist friend.
“Oy,” he says, “things couldn’t be any worse.”
“Sure they could!” says the optimist.
Categories
Parshas Bereshis 5775
Rabbi YY Jacobson
- October 7, 2014
- |
- 13 Tishrei 5775
- |
- 26 views
The Origins of Anxiety
G-d’s Impossible, Beautiful Plan for Creation
Rabbi YY Jacobson
- October 7, 2014
Summary:
It is feature of the Creation story that has been debated for literally millennia: The Torah gives not one, but two accounts of the story, and gives the Creator a different name in each. In the first chapter He is Elokim; in the second He is Havaye.
Our Sages explain, that two different energies were employed in Creation. He originally considered to create the universe with His strict sense of justice (Elokim). In the end, say the Sages, He actually created it with a more compromising sense of compassion.
But what could this possibly mean? Why did G-d start out with one plan, only to abandon it? And if the verse clearly says, when using the name of midas hadin, that “G-d created”, how can the Sages claim that was nothing more than a plan?
The extraordinary solution of the Sefas Emes explains how the initial plan for creation indeed lives on in the human psyche. The sermon explains the origin of our anxiety and why we are always frustrated when we observe imperfection. Healthy, productive, rewarding marriages have been derailed by the most insignificant of details. A couple might be on a vacation on some beautiful tropical island, spending a few glorious days in paradise, but if they get into a fight? Then it’s all over - that’s all they can think about. In fact, researchers who spend time with couples charting the amount of time they spent fighting and interacting positively found that in order for a marriage to thrive, there must be five times more positive interaction than negative ones
Through the fascinating findings of modern cognitive science, we learn how to view the competing forces of idealism, perfectionism, compromise, and flexibility. Finally, some of these insights are employed to understand a strange Talmudic dispute, and a baffling claim by the school of Shammai.
The sermon tells the story of one man who stopped the German Blitz from defeating Britain in 1940. How did he do it? By developing an appreciation for imperfection. He said: “Give them the third best to go on with; the second best comes too late, the best never comes.”
As we begin a new year, and we take on resolutions for a new beginning, the first two chapters of Genesis provide a blueprint for how to navigate the paradox of wanting to conquer the world and realizing that we can’t even conquer our drinking or eating addiction.
To Kvetsch
A Jewish man in a hospital tells the doctor he wants to be transferred to a different hospital.
The doctor says "What's wrong? Is it the food?"
"No, the food is fine. I can't kvetch."
"Is it the room?"
"No, the room is fine. I can't kvetch."
"Is it the staff?"
"No, everyone on the staff is fine. I can't kvetch."
"Then why do you want to be transferred?"
"Over there I can kvetch!"
Two Accounts
Bible critics have often used the opening chapter of the Hebrew Bible to “prove” that the text had multiple authors. The most glaring example was the first two chapters of the Torah. In the first chapter, G-d is called “Elokim.” In the second chapter, He acquires a new name: Yud-Hei-Vuv-Hei, Havye, which we pronounce as: A-do-noi.
The opening verse of the entire Torah, Genesis 1:1, reads:
בראשית א, א: בְּרֵאשִׁית בָּרָא אֱלֹהִים אֵת הַשָּׁמַיִם וְאֵת הָאָרֶץ.
In the beginning Elokim, G-d, created the heavens and the earth.
But then, the second chapter of Genesis reads:[1]
בראשית ב, ד: אֵלֶּה תוֹלְדוֹת הַשָּׁמַיִם וְהָאָרֶץ בְּהִבָּרְאָם בְּיוֹם עֲשׂוֹת יְהֹוָה אֱלֹהִים אֶרֶץ וְשָׁמָיִם.
These are the chronicles of the heaven and the earth, having been created on the day that Hashem Elokim, the Lord G-d, made earth and heaven.
At first, only the name Elokim is used, but just a few lines into second chapter, we suddenly learn of a new player in the cosmos! Suddenly G-d is referred to by his ineffable four letter name, the Tetragrammaton, or Havaye, as it is sometimes referred to. Now He is Hashem Elokim!”
Obviously, the Bible critics argue, these two chapters were authored by two separate people. They miss the point. The Bible was not meant to serve only as a factual chronicle of ancient tales, but as a blueprint for human living. If paradox, tension and contrasts are intrinsic to human existence, they must pervade the pages of the Bible, whose tales and stories are to be understood also as metaphors embodying the timeless journeys of the ambiguous human spirit.
Instead of approaching the Bible with intellectual subtlety and existential depth, many critics employed shallow and narrow methodology to judge the Bible, depriving themselves and us of its profound richness.
Justice and Compassion
The great 11th century French biblical commentator Rashi, quotes the 2000 year old Midrash Rabbah,[2] examining the above inconsistency, millennia before the school of bible criticism was founded.
רש"י בראשית א, א: ברא אלקים—ולא אמר ברא ה', שבתחלה עלה במחשבה לבראתו במדת הדין, ראה שאין העולם מתקיים, הקדים מדת רחמים ושתפה למדת הדין, היינו דכתיב (להלן ב, ד) ביום עשות ה' אלקים ארץ ושמים:
The two names of G-d in question—the Tetragrammaton Havaye and the name Elokim—represent two modes in which G-d operates the universe. The name Havaye connotes “midas harachamim,” the attribute of compassion, empathy, and flexibility. The name Elokim represents “midas hadin,”” the characteristic of justice, strictness, perfectionism. One is the Divine Standard of Justice, the other the Divine Standard of Mercy. The use of these names is always deliberate, and matches the context in which it is used.
This, say the rabbis, is the reason for the name change G-d undergoes in the first two chapters of Genesis. G-d, explain the sages, first intended to create the world according to His Standard of perfection and Justice, with the name Elokim. That is why that name is used in the opening verse of Genesis: “In the beginning Elokim created heaven and hearth.” Then He saw the world won’t survive; so He decided on option two: to employ His Standard of Mercy. That is why in the second chapter, the new name, Hashem, is employed.
Two Questions
Yet their explanation is completely incomprehensible. For starters: The Torah states, “In the beginning Elokim CREATED heaven and earth.” It does not say, that Elokim intended to create heaven and earth; it states that Elokim actually did so. How can the sages seemingly distort the simple reading of the verse?
What is more, why would G-d have to change his mind? I change my mind when I realize (or my wife shows me…) that I have misjudged a situation. Sometimes I am dumb and when I am smart enough to realize how dumb I am, I change my mind. Granted. But why is the infinite Creator changing His mind? Are we to think that G-d also makes mistakes (c”v)? He planned on doing one thing, and then He realized, it won’t work out, so He chose an opposite path?
The Explanation of Sefas Emes
It was the great Chassidic master Rabbi Yehuda Aryeh Leib Alter (1847-1905), the second Rebbe of Ger, known as the Sefas emes, who provides a lovely and profound insight.[3]
וקשה דהא כתיב ברא, משמע שכך הוא, ואיך כ' רש"י שכך עלה במחשבה. ותו וכי יש ח"ו שינוי במחשבת הבורא יתברך? אמנם באופן זה ברא הבורא יתברך להיות רצון ומחשבת האדם לעשות הכל ע"פ מידת הדין ממש כרצונו יתב'. הגם כי בפועל אי אפשר לעשות ממש כרצונו יתב' מטעם שעולם העשי' אין בו השלימות וצריך להשתתפות מדה"ר, עם כל זה השיתוף בא ע"י המחשבה והרצון לעשות כרצונו יתברך וכו'.
When the Torah says that Elokim created Heaven and Earth, and the Sages explain that to mean that it was G-d’s plan to create the world that way, they did not mean that He did not do so in actuality. What they meant was that G-d, by planning to create the world with the attribute of ideal and perfect justice, actually created our condition to follow the same pattern: We, too, plan to create perfect and ideal realities.
The Ambition for Perfection
Who of us does not have to deal with the dissonance between our dreams and our reality, between our plans and its execution? Before any undertaking, or any event, we crave and aim for perfection. It might be planning for a dream wedding, or for a perfect Bar Mitzvah or Bat Mitzvah, the best website, a perfectly streamlined company, or organization, a flawless home, or looking Mr. Right. We spend months, even years, dreaming, planning, calculating and saving.
Almost all of us entertain these images of perfection. And in real life, reality almost never lives up to it. That’s the funny thing about dreams: they aren’t real. There is no such thing as perfect person, or spouse, or teacher, or contractor, or bar mitzvah, or business. You are not perfect, nor are your employees, your partners, your programmers, and your investors.
We know this to be the case, but we still get frustrated. Regardless of past experience, and for all of our cynical understanding of the ways of the world, we will continue to position ourselves for inevitable disappointment.
After an event is over, once your company or website is functioning, or after you’ve delivered a speech or performance after weeks of preparation, all you think about are the things that went wrong. How many mistakes you made, or all the things you forgot to mention, and how far off schedule you were. You will be furious with the caterer who served the soup lukewarm, or forgot to deliver the meat to the last table. You are upset at the florist, who forgot the tulips; and you are upset at yourself for forgetting an important detail.
At a kosher restaurant, the waiter was walking from table to table, asking one question: Is anything alright?...
On one of the airlines, every time New Year and Chanukah season arrive, the captain announces: we welcome all of you to the airplane. To all those who are sitting, happy new year; to all those who are standing—happy Chanukah.
A young woman went to her doctor complaining of pain.
"Where are you hurting?" asked the doctor.
"You have to help me, I hurt all over", said the woman.
"What do you mean, all over?" asked the doctor, "be a little more specific."
The woman touched her right knee with her index finger and yelled, "Ow, that hurts." Then she touched her left cheek and again yelled, "Ouch! That hurts, too." Then she touched her right earlobe, "Ow, even THAT hurts", she cried.
The doctor checked her thoughtfully for a moment and told her his diagnosis, "You have a broken finger."
Negativity Bias
This fixation on perfection, hard wired into our brains as it is, can take a heavy emotional and psychological toll. Psychologists have observed time and time again, that the mind is drawn to perceiving and responding more strongly to negative events than positive ones. A few years ago, researchers at Ohio State University, led by psychologist Rick Hanson, measuring electrical activity in the brain - the cerebral cortex, to be more precise - discovered that when shown a series of positive and negative images, people will invariably have stronger reactions to the negative images.
This effect, termed “negativity bias” by cognitive scientists explains why negative events always seem to bother us more than positive one. We pay attention more to bad news in the papers. Who wants to only hear good news?!
Healthy, productive, rewarding marriages have been derailed by the most insignificant of details. A couple might be on a vacation on some beautiful tropical island, spending a few glorious days in paradise, but if they get into a fight? Then it’s all over - that’s all they can think about. In fact, researchers who spend time with couples charting the amount of time they spent fighting and interacting positively found that in order for a marriage to thrive, there must be five times more positive interaction than negative ones.[4]
But if all we care about is perfection, and living some dream life, then the second we don’t meet that expectation, then we may as well throw it all out the window. Never mind that no-one is perfect, or that marriages take hard work, or that even the most beautiful beaches have that annoying sand that gets stuck in your shoes. It has to be just right!
Where does this attitude come from?
Copying G-d
According the Sfas Emes, this is all a result of the opening verse of Genesis. “In the beginning Elokim created heaven and earth,” as the Rabbis explain, “in the beginning G-d, Elokim, had the initial thought of creating a universe with the attribute of Elokim, perfect idealism.” What this means is this: G-d created the world in a way that THE INITIAL THOUGHT AND PLANNING of every endeavor should be governed by “midas hadin,” by an ideal, uncompromised, perfect vision of reality. G-d planned the world to be perfect, and by doing so, He created a world in which we too plan it to be perfect. Our tendency for perfection is a vestige of the earliest stirrings of Creation: We mirror G-d. We start every project with an idealised vision of our goal, because that is what G-d did. His plan for the world was of an ideal universe; and man created in His image nurtures the same sentiments: Our plan of any goal is infused by a desire for perfection.
Silverberg goes to consult a world-famous specialist in NY about his medical issues.
"So, doctor, what do I owe you?"
"My fee is $20,000," replies the physician.
"But that's impossible!?"
"OK, then -- in your case, " the doctor replies, "I suppose I could adjust my fee to 15,000 dollars."
"15ks for one visit!? Absurd!"
"Alright, then, can you afford 10k?"
"Who even has that kind of money?"
"Look," says the doctor, becoming quite irritated, "Just give me 5000 and
get out of here."
"I can give you two hundred dollars most," says Silverberg. "Take it or leave it!"
"I don't understand you," says the doctor. "Why did you shlepp all the way to the most expensive doctor in all of the US?"
"Listen, Doctor," Silverberg tries to explain, "When it comes to my health, nothing is too expensive!"
G-d’s Change
But of course, G-d did not stop there. After implanting this image of perfection into creation, he then incorporated the Divine Standard of flexibility and understanding. He combined this idealism with a spirit of compromise, and plasticity. The plan for creation was Elokim, Din, perfection; the reality of creation was governed by Haveya, by G-d’s attribute of plasticity and flexibility.
As a result, we too must embrace this innate disparity: In the planning stages, we employ the attribute of Elokim: We aim for the heavens. In reality, we ought to embrace the art of flexibility—embracing the truth that in an imperfect world, no dream is materialized in full perfection.
This is a critical second step. How many times have we thought to ourselves, or heard from our kids: Oh well, I’ll never get it right anyways, so why even try in the first place?
Or as Aristotle put it: Perfection is the enemy of progress. Those of us who wait for perfection, wait for eternity. Those of us who can’t forgive imperfection, are forever anxious and frustrated.
Learn from G-d: Plan for the ideal, aim for the heavens. But embrace imperfection as part of our journey to bring wholeness to a fragmented and flawed world.
Pony vs. Manure
Peter Robinson, the speechwriter responsible for President Ronald Reagan’s famous “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!” speech, wrote for two US presidents and spent a fair amount of time with them as well. In his admiring memoir of Reagan, he recalls a joke that the president was particularly fond of:
The joke concerns twin boys of five or six. Worried that the boys had developed extreme personalities — one was a total pessimist, the other a total optimist — their parents took them to a psychiatrist.
First the psychiatrist treated the pessimist. Trying to brighten his outlook, the psychiatrist took him to a room piled to the ceiling with brand-new toys. But instead of yelping with delight, the little boy burst into tears. “What’s the matter?” the psychiatrist asked, baffled. “Don’t you want to play with any of the toys?” “Yes,” the little boy bawled, “but if I did I’d only break them.”
Next the psychiatrist treated the optimist. Trying to dampen his outlook, the psychiatrist took him to a room piled to the ceiling with horse manure. But instead of wrinkling his nose in disgust, the optimist emitted just the yelp of delight the psychiatrist had been hoping to hear from his brother, the pessimist. Then he clambered to the top of the pile, dropped to his knees, and began gleefully digging out scoop after scoop with his bare hands. “What do you think you’re doing?” the psychiatrist asked, just as baffled by the optimist as he had been by the pessimist. “With all this manure,” the little boy replied, beaming, “there must be a pony in here somewhere!”
Radar and the Cult of the Imperfect
Sir Robert Watson-Watt (1892-1972), was a Scottish physicist credited with the development of radar in England. He was a brilliant inventor and pioneer of radar technology, who propounded an idea he referred to as the “Cult of the Imperfect”.
As military technology began to advance at a dizzying pace in the years following World War One, British intelligence officers soon realized the unprecedented threats that had come to face their island. In their estimate, the recent development of military aircraft meant that an enemy aircraft might be able to enter English airspace, drop a payload of munitions, turn around and leave all before an English plane had a chance to even get off the ground in order to engage it. After all, it was only 20 minutes by air to fly over the English Channel - the plane would even be able to return to its own base by then! Bombers could already fly above the range of anti-aircraft guns, so the only solution would have been to maintain a fleet of aircraft in the air at all times, a strategy that would have made for an enormous drain on the country’s military resources.
Enter Watson Watt. Watt, a descendant of the great inventor James Watt—after whom the “watt” unit of energy is named—realized that aircraft might be able to be detected at great distance, by bouncing radio waves off of them. In 1935, he wrote a secret memorandum to the British War Office, with his proposal. Just a few short years later, by the start of the War, the British had built a system of 19 radar radio towers along the coast, all before the Germans had realized what they were for.
Watson was criticized because of the inferior quality of his radar, which was of low frequency. He had limited resources and time and decided to develop what he can. Watson-Watt spoke of the importance of accepting the imperfect: “Give them the third best to go on with; the second best comes too late, the best never comes.” Or as they say today, “Done is better than perfect.”
Comes 1940. The German Blitz threatened all of Britain. The superior Luftwaffe of Nazi Germany would take the British Isles. It was the imperfect radar of Watson that managed to stop the Germans. It remains a feat marveled at by military and government organizers until today.
The Place of Perfection
Why then did G-d have to start off with the Standard of ideal perfection? Why start off posturing with rigid idealism if you’re bound to compromise anyway?
Because the story of Creation in its two opening chapters offers us a full example of how we are to live our lives. To live, one first needs to dream. Our dreams should be big and aspirations grand. At first, at least, we try aim for the strictest and loftiest standards; to be and to do the best that we can.
Then, we must have the maturity to understand that in reality, perfection doesn’t always play out so well. There must be that sense of rachamim, of compassion, the ability to compromise and adapt to real life. As we proceed and accomplish the goals we have set for ourselves, the good that we do must be recognized for what it is, and celebrated for it, not undermined for what it is not.
But all the while, the initial vision must be kept alive. That the vision has not become anything more than that is no cause for despair. Perhaps it is only ever destined to remain as such: The image of perfection, if only kept at the back of our minds, inspires us to push on, to aspire to greater heights; to not become totally satisfied with mediocrity, or settle into complacency. In time, our realities, though based on an awareness and acceptance of imperfection and mistakes, can inch slowly towards those guiding hopes and expectations.
The Rebbe’s Visions
I think of the Rebbe. His visions were grand: Change the world. Reach every Jew. Reach every human being. Don’t stop. Bring Moshiach! And yet if he would have waited for perfection, where would we be today?
If he would have waited for each of his shluchim, ambassadors, to be perfect, to be fully worthy of the mission—oy, would I be standing here today? As much as he aimed for the highest, he embraced the lowest! As much as he demanded and pushed for the infinite, he appreciated every move in the right direction, and every project as imperfect as it was, and each person trying to so something even if far from perfection.
Yet he never stopped teaching that we can do more. Life is the eternal tension between what can be and what is; between G-d’s initial thought and His actual creation.
Crabbing
Professor Victor Frankl (1905-1997) once addressed a large group of students. He said to them that he recently took up flying lessons and he learnt from his flight instructor a concept that pilots call “crabbing”. The definition of the word ‘crab’ in the context of flight “is a maneuver in which an aircraft is headed partly into the wind to compensate for drift.”
It means this: If your flight destination is a particular point say in the east, you should aim towards the north of that destination, so that you will land at your actual destination. If you aim at your destination, the cross winds will cause you to land south—lower—of your destination.
Frankl quoted the great German writer Johann Wolfgang von Goethe: “Treat a man as he appears to be, and you make him worse. But treat a man as if he were what he potentially could be, and you make him what he should be.”
If we take man as he really is, we make him actually worse. For there are powerful “winds” that can derail us of our course. But if we overestimate man, if we aim the peg for much much higher, than we promote him to what he really can be.
Optional:
Better Not Created
This understanding of the tension between realism and perfectionism also helps to explain a strange Talmudic passage[5]
ת''ר שתי שנים ומחצה נחלקו ב''ש וב''ה הללו אומרים נוח לו לאדם שלא נברא יותר משנברא והללו אומרים נוח לו לאדם שנברא יותר משלא נברא נמנו וגמרו נוח לו לאדם שלא נברא יותר משנברא עכשיו שנברא יפשפש במעשיו ואמרי לה ימשמש במעשיו.
For two-and-a-half years, the School of Shammai and the School of Hillel debated. These said, "It is better for man not to have been created than to have been created"; and these said, "It is better for man to have been created than not to have been created."
Better to not have been created? Is it possible to envision a Judaism that views the creation of man as a negative phenomenon? Isn’t the basis of the Jewish faith the belief that human life is a meaningful, purposeful and joyous endeavor?
It seems difficult to reconcile what seems to be a depressingly cynical view of life with everything we know of Judaism.
Elsewhere, a detail in the account of Creation is said to have prompted another sharp debate between the schools of Shammai and Hillel, also recorded in the Talmud.[6] The earlier verse - actually the first - refers to G-d creating the “heavens and the earth,” implying that the heavens came first. The later verse - in the second reading - refers to, “the chronicles of the earth and the heavens.” So which is it?
ת''ר ב''ש אומרים שמים נבראו תחלה ואח''כ נבראת הארץ שנאמר בראשית ברא אלהים את השמים ואת הארץ וב''ה אומרים ארץ נבראת תחלה ואח''כ שמים שנאמר {בראשית ב-ד} ביום עשות ה' אלהים ארץ ושמים.
Our Rabbis taught: Beth Shammai say: Heaven was created first and afterwards the earth was created, for it is said: In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
Beth Hillel say: Earth was created first and afterwards heaven, for it is said: In the day that the Lord God made earth and heaven.
These two pieces of Talmud are directly related. It is a question of focus. For the School of Shammai, the heavenly, perfect, platonic ideal is the focus. That’s what comes first. Perhaps it is an unrealistic attitude, and maybe this vision is so ideal that is non-existent. But that that’s where the mind’s eye ought to be. We must never make peace with the imperfections, and the problems of the world. Rather, seek out those imperfections, and try to repair them, and to elevate them to your loftier vision.
Not that it is better to not be created. Instead, read: “That which is not created, is better.” That which is not created is to be the focus of our aspiration.
But the School of Hillel provides an important corrective to this perspective: That which is created is best. Never forget to cherish and embrace what we have, and what we have accomplished. This is the reality we have, and the one we must work with. Be prepared to have rachamim; have some compassion, be prepared to compromise. If we are to live in this world, and try to have any effect on it, we must first embrace it.
A New Beginning
In a way, on Shabbos Bereishis, as this Shabbos is referred to, is when the year starts in earnest. After the intense spiritual energy of the High Holidays, and the unbridled joy of Sukkos and Simchas Torah, now we can finally settle in to the cycle of normal life. Our return to the beginning of the Torah, and the account of the very beginnings of Time and Creation, prompts us to consider our own new beginning. We might lay out some goals and objectives for the coming year, or recommit ourselves to becoming to people we would like to be. And it starts this Shabbos. As the saying goes, “As one sets out on Shabbos Bereishis, so do they set out for the entire year.”
As we make our resolutions for a new awesome year, we ought to recall both these names and visions of G-d: Our vision must be as grand as can be. Do not settle for small things. Aim for the greatest. In all aspects. Yet do not get frustrated and beat yourself up with setbacks and imperfections. Embrace each movement, as imperfect as it may be, and move on! [7]
It’s like that Jewish optimist who was sitting with the Jewish pessimist. The pessimist sighs, half to himself, and half to his optimist friend.
“Oy,” he says, “things couldn’t be any worse.”
“Sure they could!” says the optimist.
- Comment
Class Summary:
It is a feature of the Creation story that has been debated for literally millennia: The Torah gives not one, but two accounts of the story, and gives the Creator a different name in each. In the first chapter He is Elokim; in the second He is Havaye.
Our Sages explain, that two different energies were employed in Creation. He originally considered to create the universe with His strict sense of justice (Elokim). In the end, say the Sages, He actually created it with a more compromising sense of compassion.
But what could this possibly mean? Why did G-d start out with one plan, only to abandon it? And if the verse clearly says, when using the name of midas hadin, that “G-d created”, how can the Sages claim that was nothing more than a plan?
The extraordinary solution of the Sefas Emes explains how the initial plan for creation indeed lives on in the human psyche. The sermon explains the origin of our anxiety and why we are always frustrated when we observe imperfection.
Healthy, productive, rewarding marriages have been derailed by the most insignificant of details. A couple might be on a vacation on some beautiful tropical island, spending a few glorious days in paradise, but if they get into a fight? Then it’s all over - that’s all they can think about. In fact, researchers who spend time with couples charting the amount of time they spent fighting and interacting positively found that in order for a marriage to thrive, there must be five times more positive interaction than negative ones
Through the fascinating findings of modern cognitive science, we learn how to view the competing forces of idealism, perfectionism, compromise, and flexibility. Finally, some of these insights are employed to understand a strange Talmudic dispute, and a baffling claim by the school of Shammai.
The sermon tells the story of one man who stopped the German Blitz from defeating Britain in 1940. How did he do it? By developing an appreciation for imperfection. He said: “Give them the third best to go on with; the second best comes too late, the best never comes.”
As we begin a new year, and we take on resolutions for a new beginning, the first two chapters of Genesis provide a blueprint for how to navigate the paradox of wanting to conquer the world and realizing that we can’t even conquer our drinking or eating addiction.
Please help us continue our work
Sign up to receive latest content by Rabbi YY
Join our WhatsApp Community
Join our WhatsApp Community
Ways to get content by Rabbi YY Jacobson
Connect now
Please leave your comment below!