(כו) וַיֹּ֣אמֶר אֱלֹהִ֔ים נַֽעֲשֶׂ֥ה אָדָ֛ם בְּצַלְמֵ֖נוּ כִּדְמוּתֵ֑נוּ וְיִרְדּוּ֩ בִדְגַ֨ת הַיָּ֜ם וּבְע֣וֹף הַשָּׁמַ֗יִם וּבַבְּהֵמָה֙ וּבְכׇל־הָאָ֔רֶץ וּבְכׇל־הָרֶ֖מֶשׂ הָֽרֹמֵ֥שׂ עַל־הָאָֽרֶץ׃ (כז) וַיִּבְרָ֨א אֱלֹהִ֤ים ׀ אֶת־הָֽאָדָם֙ בְּצַלְמ֔וֹ בְּצֶ֥לֶם אֱלֹהִ֖ים בָּרָ֣א אֹת֑וֹ זָכָ֥ר וּנְקֵבָ֖ה בָּרָ֥א אֹתָֽם׃ (כח) וַיְבָ֣רֶךְ אֹתָם֮ אֱלֹהִים֒ וַיֹּ֨אמֶר לָהֶ֜ם אֱלֹהִ֗ים פְּר֥וּ וּרְב֛וּ וּמִלְא֥וּ אֶת־הָאָ֖רֶץ וְכִבְשֻׁ֑הָ וּרְד֞וּ בִּדְגַ֤ת הַיָּם֙ וּבְע֣וֹף הַשָּׁמַ֔יִם וּבְכׇל־חַיָּ֖ה הָֽרֹמֶ֥שֶׂת עַל־הָאָֽרֶץ׃ (כט) וַיֹּ֣אמֶר אֱלֹהִ֗ים הִנֵּה֩ נָתַ֨תִּי לָכֶ֜ם אֶת־כׇּל־עֵ֣שֶׂב ׀ זֹרֵ֣עַ זֶ֗רַע אֲשֶׁר֙ עַל־פְּנֵ֣י כׇל־הָאָ֔רֶץ וְאֶת־כׇּל־הָעֵ֛ץ אֲשֶׁר־בּ֥וֹ פְרִי־עֵ֖ץ זֹרֵ֣עַ זָ֑רַע לָכֶ֥ם יִֽהְיֶ֖ה לְאׇכְלָֽה׃ (ל) וּֽלְכׇל־חַיַּ֣ת הָ֠אָ֠רֶץ וּלְכׇל־ע֨וֹף הַשָּׁמַ֜יִם וּלְכֹ֣ל ׀ רוֹמֵ֣שׂ עַל־הָאָ֗רֶץ אֲשֶׁר־בּוֹ֙ נֶ֣פֶשׁ חַיָּ֔ה אֶת־כׇּל־יֶ֥רֶק עֵ֖שֶׂב לְאׇכְלָ֑ה וַֽיְהִי־כֵֽן׃ (לא) וַיַּ֤רְא אֱלֹהִים֙ אֶת־כׇּל־אֲשֶׁ֣ר עָשָׂ֔ה וְהִנֵּה־ט֖וֹב מְאֹ֑ד וַֽיְהִי־עֶ֥רֶב וַֽיְהִי־בֹ֖קֶר י֥וֹם הַשִּׁשִּֽׁי׃ {פ}
(26) And God said, “Let us make humankind in our image, after our likeness. They shall rule the fish of the sea, the birds of the sky, the cattle, the whole earth, and all the creeping things that creep on earth.” (27) And God created humankind in the divine image, creating it in the image of God— creating them male and female. (28) God blessed them and God said to them, “Be fertile and increase, fill the earth and master it; and rule the fish of the sea, the birds of the sky, and all the living things that creep on earth.” (29) God said, “See, I give you every seed-bearing plant that is upon all the earth, and every tree that has seed-bearing fruit; they shall be yours for food. (30) And to all the animals on land, to all the birds of the sky, and to everything that creeps on earth, in which there is the breath of life, [I give] all the green plants for food.” And it was so. (31) And God saw all that had been made, and found it very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day.
(ז) וַיִּ֩יצֶר֩ יְהֹוָ֨ה אֱלֹהִ֜ים אֶת־הָֽאָדָ֗ם עָפָר֙ מִן־הָ֣אֲדָמָ֔ה וַיִּפַּ֥ח בְּאַפָּ֖יו נִשְׁמַ֣ת חַיִּ֑ים וַיְהִ֥י הָֽאָדָ֖ם לְנֶ֥פֶשׁ חַיָּֽה׃ (ח) וַיִּטַּ֞ע יְהֹוָ֧ה אֱלֹהִ֛ים גַּן־בְּעֵ֖דֶן מִקֶּ֑דֶם וַיָּ֣שֶׂם שָׁ֔ם אֶת־הָֽאָדָ֖ם אֲשֶׁ֥ר יָצָֽר׃
(7) God יהוה formed the Human*the Human I.e., the progenitor of the species and the point of origin for human society. Heb. ha-’adam; trad. “man.” In the eyes of ancient Israel, the typical initiator of a lineage was male, and so the first human being would also have been imagined as male. See further the Dictionary under ’adam. from the soil’s humus,*soil’s humus Heb. ‘afar min ha-’adamah, rendered to emulate the wordplay with Heb. ha-’adam “the Human”; more precisely, “loose dirt from the soil.” NJPS “dust of the earth.” blowing into his nostrils the breath of life: the Human became a living being. (8) God יהוה planted a garden in Eden, in the east, and placed there the Human who had been fashioned.
(טו) וַיִּקַּ֛ח יְהֹוָ֥ה אֱלֹהִ֖ים אֶת־הָֽאָדָ֑ם וַיַּנִּחֵ֣הוּ בְגַן־עֵ֔דֶן לְעׇבְדָ֖הּ וּלְשׇׁמְרָֽהּ׃ (טז) וַיְצַו֙ יְהֹוָ֣ה אֱלֹהִ֔ים עַל־הָֽאָדָ֖ם לֵאמֹ֑ר מִכֹּ֥ל עֵֽץ־הַגָּ֖ן אָכֹ֥ל תֹּאכֵֽל׃ (יז) וּמֵעֵ֗ץ הַדַּ֙עַת֙ ט֣וֹב וָרָ֔ע לֹ֥א תֹאכַ֖ל מִמֶּ֑נּוּ כִּ֗י בְּי֛וֹם אֲכׇלְךָ֥ מִמֶּ֖נּוּ מ֥וֹת תָּמֽוּת׃ (יח) וַיֹּ֙אמֶר֙ יְהֹוָ֣ה אֱלֹהִ֔ים לֹא־ט֛וֹב הֱי֥וֹת הָֽאָדָ֖ם לְבַדּ֑וֹ אֶֽעֱשֶׂה־לּ֥וֹ עֵ֖זֶר כְּנֶגְדּֽוֹ׃
(15) God יהוה settled the Human in the garden of Eden, to till it and tend it. (16) And God יהוה commanded the Human, saying, “Of every tree of the garden you are free to eat; (17) but as for the tree of knowledge of good and bad, you must not eat of it; for as soon as you eat of it, you shall die.” (18) God יהוה said, “It is not good for the Human to be alone; I will make a fitting counterpart for him.”
(כא) וַיַּפֵּל֩ יְהֹוָ֨ה אֱלֹהִ֧ים ׀ תַּרְדֵּמָ֛ה עַל־הָאָדָ֖ם וַיִּישָׁ֑ן וַיִּקַּ֗ח אַחַת֙ מִצַּלְעֹתָ֔יו וַיִּסְגֹּ֥ר בָּשָׂ֖ר תַּחְתֶּֽנָּה׃ (כב) וַיִּ֩בֶן֩ יְהֹוָ֨ה אֱלֹהִ֧ים ׀ אֶֽת־הַצֵּלָ֛ע אֲשֶׁר־לָקַ֥ח מִן־הָֽאָדָ֖ם לְאִשָּׁ֑ה וַיְבִאֶ֖הָ אֶל־הָֽאָדָֽם׃ (כג) וַיֹּ֘אמֶר֮ הָֽאָדָם֒ זֹ֣את הַפַּ֗עַם עֶ֚צֶם מֵֽעֲצָמַ֔י וּבָשָׂ֖ר מִבְּשָׂרִ֑י לְזֹאת֙ יִקָּרֵ֣א אִשָּׁ֔ה כִּ֥י מֵאִ֖ישׁ לֻֽקְחָה־זֹּֽאת׃ (כד) עַל־כֵּן֙ יַֽעֲזׇב־אִ֔ישׁ אֶת־אָבִ֖יו וְאֶת־אִמּ֑וֹ וְדָבַ֣ק בְּאִשְׁתּ֔וֹ וְהָי֖וּ לְבָשָׂ֥ר אֶחָֽד׃
(21) So God יהוה cast a deep sleep upon the Human; and, while he slept, [God] took one of his sides*sides Heb. ṣela‘ot, trad. “ribs.” Cf. 1 Kings 6.34; Exod. 25.12; 26.20, 26–27, 35; 30.4. and closed up the flesh at that site. (22) And God יהוה fashioned the side that had been taken from the Human into a woman, bringing her to the Human. (23) Then the Human said,
“This one at last
Is bone of my bones
And flesh of my flesh.
This one shall be called Woman,*Woman Heb. ’ishshah; so trad. More precisely in context, “a (female) member of the human species.” See next note and the Dictionary under ’ish.
For from a Human*a Human More precisely, “the (formerly lone) member of the human species.” NJPS “man”; trad. “Man.” See the Dictionary under ’ish. was she taken.” (24) Hence a man*man So trad.; Heb. ’ish. Contrast the previous verse. leaves his father and mother and clings to his wife,*wife So trad.; Heb. ’ishshah (with possessive suffix). Cf. the previous note and contrast the previous verse. so that they become one flesh.
Introduction to Lonely Man of Faith
“Beyond the question of how Rabbi Soloveitchik himself understood the historical loneliness of the man of faith when he wrote this work approximately 50 years ago, there is the question of its contemporary relevance. Is today’s man of faith lonely in the same way? Is the dialectical balance Rabbi Soloveitchik advocates challenged more by an ascendant Adam I or by an overreaching Adam II? At the time he wrote, The Lonely Man of Faith, Rabbi Soloveitchik was concerned with Adams I’s encroachment upon Adam II, but other situations would call for ensuring that the reverse does not occur.
In fact, over the course of his career Rabbi Soloveitchik himself shifted the emphasis of his concern. Early in his career, he took issue with those who saw man only as a spiritual being; later in his career, he took issue with those who saw man solely as a natural being. Although the dialectical tensions presented in Halakhic Man and in Lonely Man of Faith are not identifical, it is noteworthy that in the former, Rabbi Soloveitchik’s main dispute is with otherworldliness of homo religiosus, while in the later his major despite is with Adam I’s despiritualization of man. When one espouses a dialectical philosophy, changing circumstances may demand a changing emphasis, but nevertheless it is critical that one keep in mind the dialectic in its fullness. Thus in applying Rabbi Soloveitchik's thought, one must reassess which side of the dialectic he posits requires strengthening today. It may turn out that it is the same element Rabbi Soloveitchik fet the need to highlight in his time and place, or it may turn out that it is the opposing element; in either case, the dialectical whole, and the value system it expresses, retains its cogency and significance.” Soloveitchik, J. D. (2012). The lonely man of faith / Joseph B. Soloveitchik ; with a foreword by Reuven Ziegler. Maggid Books.
“Beyond the question of how Rabbi Soloveitchik himself understood the historical loneliness of the man of faith when he wrote this work approximately 50 years ago, there is the question of its contemporary relevance. Is today’s man of faith lonely in the same way? Is the dialectical balance Rabbi Soloveitchik advocates challenged more by an ascendant Adam I or by an overreaching Adam II? At the time he wrote, The Lonely Man of Faith, Rabbi Soloveitchik was concerned with Adams I’s encroachment upon Adam II, but other situations would call for ensuring that the reverse does not occur.
In fact, over the course of his career Rabbi Soloveitchik himself shifted the emphasis of his concern. Early in his career, he took issue with those who saw man only as a spiritual being; later in his career, he took issue with those who saw man solely as a natural being. Although the dialectical tensions presented in Halakhic Man and in Lonely Man of Faith are not identifical, it is noteworthy that in the former, Rabbi Soloveitchik’s main dispute is with otherworldliness of homo religiosus, while in the later his major despite is with Adam I’s despiritualization of man. When one espouses a dialectical philosophy, changing circumstances may demand a changing emphasis, but nevertheless it is critical that one keep in mind the dialectic in its fullness. Thus in applying Rabbi Soloveitchik's thought, one must reassess which side of the dialectic he posits requires strengthening today. It may turn out that it is the same element Rabbi Soloveitchik fet the need to highlight in his time and place, or it may turn out that it is the opposing element; in either case, the dialectical whole, and the value system it expresses, retains its cogency and significance.” Soloveitchik, J. D. (2012). The lonely man of faith / Joseph B. Soloveitchik ; with a foreword by Reuven Ziegler. Maggid Books.
|
Four discrepancies |
Chapter 1 |
Chapter 2 |
|
1. Adam creation |
Adam was created in the image of God |
Adam was fashioned from the dust of the ground and God breathed into his nostrils the breath of life |
|
2. Adam duty |
Adam received the mandate from the Hashem to fill the earth and subdue it |
Adam was charged with the duty to cultivate the garden and to keep it |
|
3. Male & female |
Male and female were created concurrently |
Adam emerged alone, with Chava appearing subsequently as his helpmate and complement |
|
4. G-ds name |
Only the name E-lohim |
Hashem = the Tetragrammaton |
Adam I and Adam II in LMOF
Soloveitchik, J.B. (1965, Summer). The lonely man of faith. Tradition, 7(2), 5-67.
According to Zeigler’s interpretation of the Rav “Adam 1 and Adam II seem to start at the same point: both are motivated by their encounter with the cosmic, both search for Gd and both try to realize their full human potential, but because of their different needs, attitudes and goals, they approach these tasks in very different manners, so they end up in very different places” p. 133
Ziegler, R. (2012). Majesty and humility : the thought of Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik. Urim Publications, & Maimonides School.
Soloveitchik, J.B. (1965, Summer). The lonely man of faith. Tradition, 7(2), 5-67.
According to Zeigler’s interpretation of the Rav “Adam 1 and Adam II seem to start at the same point: both are motivated by their encounter with the cosmic, both search for Gd and both try to realize their full human potential, but because of their different needs, attitudes and goals, they approach these tasks in very different manners, so they end up in very different places” p. 133
|
Adam I Qualities |
Adam II Qualities |
|
Technical Creative Conqueror Productive Constructive Rational Pragmatic Scientific Creator Majestic Engages in creative work to emulate G-d This worldly minded Victory minded Success over cosmic forces Bold Aggressive |
Spiritual Reflective Redeemer Relational Meaningful Faithful Personal Moral Seeker Humble Engages in questioning - asking why Lives a redeemed existence Lonely seeking companionship Contemplating time of past, present, & future Created alone Seeking companionship |
|
Zeigler: “main objective, the cultivation of his humanity, in the attainment of dignity”. Explains for Adam I, life is about to: raise above nature; utilitarian motivation; boldly aggressive in approach; asks how not why; concerned with functionality, order, balance, and beauty; ethic of victory; master nature. p. 133-134 -> community of majesty |
Zeigler: “Adam II also seeks to fully realize his humanity, but he interprets this in terms of attaining redemption. The rav draws a series of contracts between dignity and redemption. While dignity is a social quality of the surface personality, redemption is an existential state of the integer personality. Redemption is attained by control over oneself, dignity by control over ones surroundings; redemption expresses itself in surrender to G-d, dignity in defense of nature; redemption is characterized by retreat, dignity by advance. The contract between advance and retreat should clue us in to the fact that the dialectical oscillation between these two modes of living is a cathartic process.” surrender to G-d, intimate relationship with G-d, asks why the world exists (not how it functions), and to seek out G-d, covenant not natural experience of G-d p. 135 -> community of faith / covenantal commitment p. 139 |
David Brooks: Should you live for your résumé ... or your eulogy?
Within each of us are two selves, suggests David Brooks in this meditative short talk: the self who craves success, who builds a résumé, and the self who seeks connection, community, love -- the values that make for a great eulogy. Can we balance these two selves? Perhaps, once we know them both.
TEDTalks is a daily video podcast of the best talks and performances from the TED Conference, where the world's leading thinkers and doers give the talk of their lives in 18 minutes (or less). Look for talks on Technology, Entertainment and Design -- plus science, business, global issues, the arts and much more.
https://youtu.be/MlLWTeApqIM?si=KNPYPeYqL7E3fEzA
Within each of us are two selves, suggests David Brooks in this meditative short talk: the self who craves success, who builds a résumé, and the self who seeks connection, community, love -- the values that make for a great eulogy. Can we balance these two selves? Perhaps, once we know them both.
TEDTalks is a daily video podcast of the best talks and performances from the TED Conference, where the world's leading thinkers and doers give the talk of their lives in 18 minutes (or less). Look for talks on Technology, Entertainment and Design -- plus science, business, global issues, the arts and much more.
https://youtu.be/MlLWTeApqIM?si=KNPYPeYqL7E3fEzA
Explaining the Dialectic of Adam I and Adam II
Modern Man Develops the Adam I side of his personality and neglects the Adam II side: “I believe that, true to his general approach, the Rav maintains both these conceptions in dialectical tension. Perhaps we can state it differently: victory and defeat are of equal value. Majesty and humility are two basic facets of the human personality, and neither can be denied. The oscillation between the two is endless” (Zeigler, p. 61) Ziegler, R. (2012). Majesty and humility: the thought of Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik. Urim Publications, & Maimonides School.
Modern Man Develops the Adam I side of his personality and neglects the Adam II side: “I believe that, true to his general approach, the Rav maintains both these conceptions in dialectical tension. Perhaps we can state it differently: victory and defeat are of equal value. Majesty and humility are two basic facets of the human personality, and neither can be denied. The oscillation between the two is endless” (Zeigler, p. 61) Ziegler, R. (2012). Majesty and humility: the thought of Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik. Urim Publications, & Maimonides School.
The covenantal community - Bein adam l’amo
The experience of Jewish unity in 5784
Rabbi Shalom Rosner story as told by Rabbi Elon Soniker
The experience of Jewish unity in 5784
Rabbi Shalom Rosner story as told by Rabbi Elon Soniker
Logotherapy
Mans Search for Ultimate Meaning
“Therefore man is originally characterized by his search for meaning rather than is search for himself. The more he forgets himself - giving himself to a cause or another person - the more human he is. And the more he is immersed and absorbed in something or someone other than himself the more he really becomes himself.” p. 84-85
“Religion is not an insurance policy for a tranquil life, for maximum freedom from conflicts, or for any other hypogenic goal. Religion provides man with more than psychotherapy ever could - but it also demands more of him” p. 80
Frankl, V. E. (2000). Man’s search for ultimate meaning / Viktor E. Frankl ; foreword by Swanee Hunt. Perseus Pub.
Mans Search for Ultimate Meaning
“Therefore man is originally characterized by his search for meaning rather than is search for himself. The more he forgets himself - giving himself to a cause or another person - the more human he is. And the more he is immersed and absorbed in something or someone other than himself the more he really becomes himself.” p. 84-85
“Religion is not an insurance policy for a tranquil life, for maximum freedom from conflicts, or for any other hypogenic goal. Religion provides man with more than psychotherapy ever could - but it also demands more of him” p. 80
Frankl, V. E. (2000). Man’s search for ultimate meaning / Viktor E. Frankl ; foreword by Swanee Hunt. Perseus Pub.
Rav Shagar on the Holocaust:
Suffering Without Meaning: Rav Shagar on the Unsayable Trauma of the Holocaust
“When tragedy strikes, believers typically ask, “What does this mean?”[1] The Holocaust denies all possibility of asking such questions, because it represents a total shattering of the world and its cultural construction. It falls outside the constructive world, the world of discourse.”
https://levimorrow.wordpress.com/2020/04/20/suffering-without-meaning/
Suffering Without Meaning: Rav Shagar on the Unsayable Trauma of the Holocaust
“When tragedy strikes, believers typically ask, “What does this mean?”[1] The Holocaust denies all possibility of asking such questions, because it represents a total shattering of the world and its cultural construction. It falls outside the constructive world, the world of discourse.”
https://levimorrow.wordpress.com/2020/04/20/suffering-without-meaning/
Rav Shagar on Sukkot: The Happiness of the Impoverished
“The Torah’s happiness of grace and peace is one possibility of happiness for a person standing before his Gd, both more generally and on Sukkot specifically. However, as we shall see the religious personality is not necessarily a happy personality, and therefore the character of the happiness of the holiday can take on a much different meaning.
At times, the religious individual may draw his resources specifically from sadness, melancholy, and tragedy, which bring him into contact with the infinite and absolute. Rav Soloveitchik put it like this “catharsis of religious life consists exactly;ly in the awareness of the long interludes during which man finds himself in infinite distance from God… Those long periods of black despair (hesder panim) contain the cathartic element which cleanses and redeems religious life”.
Rav Soloveitchik describes a religious archetype that we might call manic depressive, moving between ecstatic happiness and a self perception of greatness on the one hand and a deep depression and pessimistic inner anguish on the other hand. However it would be a mistake to think that this depression suppresses or hinders the happiness and greatness. The happiness and sense of fullness draw on their intensity specifically from the melancholy, the nostalgia, and the black bile” p. 44 on Sukkot *Rabbi Soloveitchik, “Catharsis”, in Confrontation and Other Essays (Jerusalem, 2015), 60 and see also 34. In his testimonial “I certainly have tendency toward elegy, religious melancholy… a wave of paradoxical sadness shot through with silent joy washes over my consciousness, and I feel saved and redeemed” (idem., Divrei Hashkafa [Jerusalem, 1992], 135-136).
Gershon, Shimshon. Living Time: Festival Discourses for the Present Age. Maggid, 1 Aug. 2024.
“The Torah’s happiness of grace and peace is one possibility of happiness for a person standing before his Gd, both more generally and on Sukkot specifically. However, as we shall see the religious personality is not necessarily a happy personality, and therefore the character of the happiness of the holiday can take on a much different meaning.
At times, the religious individual may draw his resources specifically from sadness, melancholy, and tragedy, which bring him into contact with the infinite and absolute. Rav Soloveitchik put it like this “catharsis of religious life consists exactly;ly in the awareness of the long interludes during which man finds himself in infinite distance from God… Those long periods of black despair (hesder panim) contain the cathartic element which cleanses and redeems religious life”.
Rav Soloveitchik describes a religious archetype that we might call manic depressive, moving between ecstatic happiness and a self perception of greatness on the one hand and a deep depression and pessimistic inner anguish on the other hand. However it would be a mistake to think that this depression suppresses or hinders the happiness and greatness. The happiness and sense of fullness draw on their intensity specifically from the melancholy, the nostalgia, and the black bile” p. 44 on Sukkot *Rabbi Soloveitchik, “Catharsis”, in Confrontation and Other Essays (Jerusalem, 2015), 60 and see also 34. In his testimonial “I certainly have tendency toward elegy, religious melancholy… a wave of paradoxical sadness shot through with silent joy washes over my consciousness, and I feel saved and redeemed” (idem., Divrei Hashkafa [Jerusalem, 1992], 135-136).
Gershon, Shimshon. Living Time: Festival Discourses for the Present Age. Maggid, 1 Aug. 2024.
Rabbi Shagar on Sukkot: A Third Party to Intimacy
"Rabbi Joseph B Soloceitchik’s essay, The Lonely Man of Faith, provides another perspective on faith. Rabbi Soloveitchik distinguishes between two types of communities, the “natural community: and the “community of faith”. The social ties of the first community are essentially functional. The members collaborate in work and creativity, relating to each other only technically and instrumentally. In contract, the partnership of the second sort of community is not limited to work alone, but expand to include partnership in “being”:
“To be: is a unique in-depth experience which only Adam the second is aware of and it is related to any function or performance. To be means to be the only one, singular and different, and consequently lonely. For what causes man to be lonely and feel insecure is not the awareness of his uniqueness and exclusiveness? The I is lonely … because there is no one who exists like the I and because the modus existential of the I cannot be repeated, imitated, or experienced by others. (LMOF, p. 40-41)
Rabbi Soloveitchik further teaches that only existential companionship can redeem the main of faith from the torment of his existential loneliness. In this sort of companionship not only laboring hands join together, but also hearts and experiences. This companionship creates a shared faith, a covenant between God and man. Standing together before God leads to existential companionship. Partnership redeems the lonely man of faith, removing him from the existential loneliness that shuts him in and isolates him within himself, “offering him the opportunity to communicate, indeed to commune with, and to enjoy genuine friendship.” (LMOF, p. 40-41) (Shagar, p. 55)
Gershon, Shimshon. Living Time: Festival Discourses for the Present Age. Maggid, 1 Aug. 2024.
"Rabbi Joseph B Soloceitchik’s essay, The Lonely Man of Faith, provides another perspective on faith. Rabbi Soloveitchik distinguishes between two types of communities, the “natural community: and the “community of faith”. The social ties of the first community are essentially functional. The members collaborate in work and creativity, relating to each other only technically and instrumentally. In contract, the partnership of the second sort of community is not limited to work alone, but expand to include partnership in “being”:
“To be: is a unique in-depth experience which only Adam the second is aware of and it is related to any function or performance. To be means to be the only one, singular and different, and consequently lonely. For what causes man to be lonely and feel insecure is not the awareness of his uniqueness and exclusiveness? The I is lonely … because there is no one who exists like the I and because the modus existential of the I cannot be repeated, imitated, or experienced by others. (LMOF, p. 40-41)
Rabbi Soloveitchik further teaches that only existential companionship can redeem the main of faith from the torment of his existential loneliness. In this sort of companionship not only laboring hands join together, but also hearts and experiences. This companionship creates a shared faith, a covenant between God and man. Standing together before God leads to existential companionship. Partnership redeems the lonely man of faith, removing him from the existential loneliness that shuts him in and isolates him within himself, “offering him the opportunity to communicate, indeed to commune with, and to enjoy genuine friendship.” (LMOF, p. 40-41) (Shagar, p. 55)
Gershon, Shimshon. Living Time: Festival Discourses for the Present Age. Maggid, 1 Aug. 2024.
Sivan Rehav Meir - Carrying the Torah with Us
“How do we return to our everyday routine? Tishrei is a busy, eventful month, wth Rosh Hashana, the Fast of Gedalia, the Ten Days of Teshuva and Selihot, Yom Kippur and Sukkot - but now what?
We are given the formula for going forward on the last day of this unique period of time. Our sages relate that after all the festivals, G-d says to the nation of Israel “it is not easy for me to part from you. Stay with Me just one more day” So here we are; we stayed. But this day too will soon be over, and what then? It is for this reason the day is called Simhat Torah. It is the day we receive an answer to how to return to our daily routine and yet retain the high of Tishrei. The secret to doing this is in our connection to the Torah.
On the last days of the festivals, we complete the book of Deuteronomy and begin the book of Genesis without missing a beat. The Torah portion of the week will continue to accompany us throughout the year. At the end of the Tishrei festivals, we need not detach and disengage, but instead we can use inspiration of these holidays to incorporate Torah learning into our routine. After all, learning has been in the DNA of our people since we first appeared on the world stage thousands of years ago. We are people of the book. It is not only our children who are returning to school. All of us are beginning to learn anew - from the beginning. Have a good year.” (Meir p. 43-44)
Rahav, S., & Siskin, Y. (2022). Days are coming : a journey through the Jewish year / Sivan Rahav-Meir ; translated by Yehoshua Siskin. Maggid Books, an imprint of Koren Publishers Jerusalem, Ltd.
“How do we return to our everyday routine? Tishrei is a busy, eventful month, wth Rosh Hashana, the Fast of Gedalia, the Ten Days of Teshuva and Selihot, Yom Kippur and Sukkot - but now what?
We are given the formula for going forward on the last day of this unique period of time. Our sages relate that after all the festivals, G-d says to the nation of Israel “it is not easy for me to part from you. Stay with Me just one more day” So here we are; we stayed. But this day too will soon be over, and what then? It is for this reason the day is called Simhat Torah. It is the day we receive an answer to how to return to our daily routine and yet retain the high of Tishrei. The secret to doing this is in our connection to the Torah.
On the last days of the festivals, we complete the book of Deuteronomy and begin the book of Genesis without missing a beat. The Torah portion of the week will continue to accompany us throughout the year. At the end of the Tishrei festivals, we need not detach and disengage, but instead we can use inspiration of these holidays to incorporate Torah learning into our routine. After all, learning has been in the DNA of our people since we first appeared on the world stage thousands of years ago. We are people of the book. It is not only our children who are returning to school. All of us are beginning to learn anew - from the beginning. Have a good year.” (Meir p. 43-44)
Rahav, S., & Siskin, Y. (2022). Days are coming : a journey through the Jewish year / Sivan Rahav-Meir ; translated by Yehoshua Siskin. Maggid Books, an imprint of Koren Publishers Jerusalem, Ltd.